Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2014-08-19MINUTES OF THE 1,059T" PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, August 19, 2014, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 1,059'h Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Lee Morrow, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Scott P. Bahr Kathleen McIntyre R. Lee Morrow Carol A. Smiley Gerald Taylor Ian Wilshaw Members absent: None Mr. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, and Ms. Margie Watson, Program Supervisor, were also present. Chairman Morrow informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in tum, will hold its own public hearing and make the final determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City Council for the final determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected. If a petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan approval is denied tonight, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City Council. Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Commission become effective seven (7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning Commission and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their filing. The staff has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions, which the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the proceedings tonight. ITEM #1 PETITION 2014-07-02-10 MICHIGAN CREDIT UNION Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2014-07- 02-10 submitted by Stucky Vitale Architects requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(n)(3) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to construct and operate a credit union with drive-thm facilities (Michigan Schools and Government Credit Union) at 20595 Farmington Road, located on the southwest corner of Farmington and Eight Mile Roads in the Northeast 114 of Section 4. August 19, 2014 26525 Mr. Taormina: This is a request to develop the southwest corner property at Farmington and Eight Mile Roads. This is a vacant parcel. It previously contained a gasoline service station. The property is about 0.68 acres in area with 146 feel of frontage on Eight Mile Road and about 200 feel of frontage along the west wide of Farmington Road. Drive -up facilities are treated as a waiver use under Section 11.03 of the Zoning Ordinance and that is the reason for the public hearing this evening. The proposed credit union would be one-story in height and approximately 3,314 square feet in area. The rendered site plan shows the location of the building in relationship to the property lines. The building is situated near the center of the property. There is an overhead canopy that is located on the north side of the building, more or less at a 45 degree angle towards the intersection of Eight Mile and Farmington Roads. The building's main entrance is on the south side. The majority of the parking is on the south side of the property. There are a few additional spaces located on the west side. There will be two drive approaches servicing the site. There is one from Eight Mile and one from Farmington Road. This is a former gas station site, so there are additional curb cuts to the site right now, but those will be eliminated as part of the redevelopment. The zoning ordinance requires a minimum 60 fool building setback from the right-of-way. That would also apply to the overhead canopy. In this particular case, the setback of the canopy would be roughly 35 feel at its closest point to Eight Mile Road and only about 14 feel from Farmington Road. The location of the canopy would be nonconforming and require variances from by the Zoning Board of Appeals. This will also apply to one side of the building. The building itself is about 60 feel from the right-of-way of Eight Mile Road but only 34 feel from Farmington Road. So the building as well will require a setback variance. Just to put this into some perspective in terms of what previously existed on the site, the old gas station building itself was located roughly 40 feel from Eight Mile Road and 50 feel from Farmington Road. So that loo was nonconforming, and the canopy at its closest point was only 6 feel from Eight Mile Road and 40 feet from Farmington Road. So the canopy that used to exist for the previous gas station was much closer to the roadway than is proposed for this project. The drive-thru facilities would be provided on northeast side of the building. This will consists of three auto teller lanes as well as one ATM lane. Customer traffic would commence along the east side of the building via a 22 fool wide, one-way drive aisle, which is sufficient to accommodate two lanes for stacking of vehicles. Cars would be able to immediately exit onto Eight Mile Road via the existing site ingress/egress drive, or alternatively, they could loop back around the west and south August 19, 2014 26526 sides of the building and then exit from a new site driveway that will be on Farmington Road located on the southeast comer of the property. The traffic lanes serving the drive -up service facility are required to be at least 10 feet in width. You will recall at our study meeting, the plan presented at that time showed the drive-thm lanes 9 feet in width. The latest plan has been modified to widen those by an additional six inches. So it is still slightly less than what the ordinance requires, but it is an improvement over what we saw previously. The City Council can approve this modification. The overhead canopy would project off the northeast corner of the building and extend over the drive -up facility. That structure has dimensions of approximately 40 feel by 45 feet. The support columns are constructed out of brick and it has a prefnished flat metal panel roof. In terms of storm water runoff for this project, all of the detention would be handled underground in conformance with Wayne County storm water regulations. They are required to have a total of 18 parking spaces based on the square footage of the building. They are providing 22 parking spaces so that does conform to the ordinance. As far as landscaping, they are keeping some of the existing trees along both Farmington Road and Eight Mile Road, and then adding additional trees and other plantings both along the perimeter of the site as well as around the building foundation. Overall, the landscaping constitutes aboul23 percent of the site, which is about 7 percent more area than what the ordinance requires. Our minimum is 15 percent. Looking at the building itself and its appearance, you can see ifs primarily a masonry building. There is cast stone around the base of building, extending about two feet above grade. It is the same treatment for the columns for the canopy. Brick will be the primary exterior building material used on the face of the building as well as the support columns. There are some design elements that are within the brick itself. The trade colors for the credit union include the blue trim along the lop coping of the building. The roof mounted mechanical equipment would be concealed from public view with the use of corrugated metal wall panels. Overall, the height of the building is about 22 feet. Lastly, in terms of signage, the credit union would be allowed one wall sign 60 square feet maximum on the front of the building facing Eight Mile. Because this is a corner lot situated on two major thoroughfares, they are allowed a second wall sign facing Farmington Road at one-half the allowable area of the main sign. So they would be allowed a second wall sign at 30 square feel. They are also entitled to a ground sign at 30 square feel in area with a maximum height of 6 feel, setback 10 feel from the right-of-way. I believe the site plan shows a sign that can conform at least to the setback requirements. We don't August 19, 2014 26527 have any additional information regarding its size. The southwest comer is where the dumpster enclosure will be located. We have recommended conditions that will require the dumpster enclosure to match the materials on the building, and all proposed new lighting on the site would be limited to a maximum height of 20 feel as measured from grade to the top of those fixtures. Thank you. Mr. Morrow: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated July 23, 2014, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced planning petition. The existing parcel is assigned an address of 20595 Farmington Road, which should be used for any future comespondence regarding the proposed project. The legal description provided with the petition appears to be correct and is acceptable to this department. The petitioner does not indicate any proposed utilities connections on the submitted drawings, so we are unable to comment on any impacts the proposed project may cause to the existing systems. It should be noted that the parcel is currently serviced by a 12" sanitary sewer on the south side of parcel and a 12" water main along Farmington Road. Should the owner wish to utilize existing leads from these utilities to the proposed building, the leads will need to be televised to determine the condition, prior to any new connection. The site is currently serviced by storm sewer that connects to the Wayne County storm sewer system located within Farmington Road. The proposed development will need to meet the current Wayne County storm water ordinance, including detention, and be approved through the Wayne County permitting office. The owner is proposing to remove the existing approaches off of Farmington Road and replace them with one new approach near the southem property line. Once again, the owner will need to receive permits through Wayne County for this work." The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Civil Engineer II. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated August 1, 2014, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct and operate a credit union on property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Daniel Lee, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated July 31, 2014, which reads as follows: "1 have reviewed the plans in connection with the petition. 1 have no objections to the August 19, 2014 26528 proposal." The letter is signed by Joseph Bodos, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Morrow: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Seeing none, we will go straight to the petitioner. We will need your name and address for the record please. Mike Blanek, Stucky Vitale Architects, 27172 Woodward Avenue, Royal Oak, Michigan 48067. Deborah Fahrney, Michigan Schools and Government Credit Union, 40400 Garfield Road, Clinton Township, Michigan 48038. Mr. Morrow: Thank you. You've heard the Planning Director. Is there anything you want to add to his presentation? Mr. Blanek: As far as the presentation by Mark, it was excellent. I would just point out the materials on the building, it is a full face brick - slandard full back brick and stone. Elements that we're putting on there, along with the metal panel which is an aluminum panel system that we would use for that. Mr. Morrow: Let me just request, because we are on television, could you display that panel right where you are and point out what they are? Mr. Blanek: The brick is a full faced, earth toned brick with an element inside there as part of the aggregate. And then the stone is a cast product that would be at the base, two feet up as Mark had indicated, and then the metal, it's a prefnished metal panel that we use for the coping and the screening, and the window framing would be out of this material. Pretty much brick, stone and some metal. Mr. Morrow: Is that the same material you're going to use as the screening material on the roof? Mr. Blanek: That is correct. It will be a corrugated element but it will be the same color. Mr. Morrow: The same color. Mr. Blanek: Correct. And just to point out on the drive-lhru window, I know there was some concern about the width so we shrunk down our islands a little bit and added six inches to each lane to gel it to 9 fool 6. We're trying to keep the canopy and building as far away from the intersection as we can. As Mark indicated, we August 19, 2014 26529 are improving what was there before. Those canopies were a lot closer. If you look at the old plans, you can see there was a lot more encroachment into that setback. So our plan was to try to pull that back as tight as we can and make that an improvement to the current site. Mr. Morrow: And we appreciate that. Mr. Blanek: Thank you. So other than that, this is a prototypical branch that they've been building in other areas of Macomb and Oakland Counties. And their branding is that they like to keep the drive- lhru area and that ATM at the front part of the building as opposed to the rear. It's part of their branding. It's also for security, and visibility makes the members comfortable. When they go up to the ATM during the evening hours, they feel like they're visible from the comer so theyll use the branch freely without any concern for their security. Mr. Morrow: Why don't you tell us a little bit about your credit union and your growth? Ms. Fahrney: Sure. Absolutely. I'm Vice President of retail services for the credit union. We are a $1.5 billion credit union and asset size which puts us at 2 percent across the nation in the top 10 for Michigan. We have 11 branches, primarily in Macomb and Oakland Counties. We're really excited about the expansion further westward and south into Wayne County. This will be our first branch in Wayne County. We have 100,000 members and we live by a strong vision of helping our members enrich their financial lives and helping them with financial success. We're a really good community partner in terms of being involved in the communities in which we have branch locations, so we have a lot of efforts with school, fire, government entities within the communities that we serve and want to be a strong support system. We also maintain our branches to a high standard in that we don't lel branches gel worn down. We like to see them and the quality of the branches maintained and our branches thrive over a course of time so that we continue to build our membership in a community and that we continue to integrate into the community and increase involvement overtime. Mr. Morrow: You mentioned the people that you serve mainly. Is that a prerequisite or can somebody not connected with one of those organizations join? Ms. Fahrney: Sure. Our roots were founded in school and government. We actually started in a house across from Fraser High School with August 19, 2014 26530 three employees. So credit unions historically have a field of membership. Our field of membership and our roots were in school, government, municipality. Our charter at the moment says that anyone can join who attends school, has attended school, has a child that attends school, works at a school or a municipality, government entity, and we also have that anyone who lives in lower Michigan or is a retiree. So we find that there isn't an exclusivity relative to our field of membership and that we're able to serve a broad base of membership. Mr. Morrow: Okay. Thank you. Ms. Fahrney: You're welcome. Mr. Morrow: Does the Commission have any questions? Ms. Smiley: You mentioned your security and your lighting. What kind of lighting do you have around the drive-thm and the ATM? Mr. Blanek: The lighting is typically in the canopy concealed from view but shines straight down onto each lane and the ATM. Typically, all exterior lighting we like to use LED lighting because it's more energy efficient and the technology is much improved on that aspect as far as exterior lighting. Ms. Smiley: I would assume you have cameras out there. Mr. Blanek: Yes. There are cameras on the building as well as at the ATM just like you would typically see at an ATM. There's usually a camera built into that transaction area of the ATM. Ms. Smiley: What about lighting in the parking lots? Mr. Blanek: Since most of our parking is in the rear, we have a couple of lights toward that southern end. Again, we would maintain the 20 fool maximum height. It would be LED lighting, low profile for the housing for the light fixture itself. We'll do a photometric study and make sure it meets all the ordinance requirements that the city requires for that. Ms. Smiley: Thanks. My next question is, primarily do your clients use the drive-thm or are there a lot of them that come into the credit union? Ms. Fahrney: We find that our branches are very busy locations, and drive- lhru traffic for people that are coming home from work, it's very convenient to use drive-thru and ATM. We also have a large August 19, 2014 26531 number of people who do come into the credit union for service. So while there's more transactional activity through the drive- lhru, we do also have busy lobby traffic, probably busier than the typical, which is good for us. Ms. Smiley: And your hours would be? Ms. Fahrney: Our hours are 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Wednesday, 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, and 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Friday. Ms. Smiley: Thankyou. Mr. Wilshaw: Just to follow-up on some of Mrs. Smiley's questions on the credit union, how many employees would you have at this location? Ms. Fahrney: This location will start with eight employees. Since we do have Saturday hours, we like to make sure the lobby and drive-thru are adequately staffed to serve our members as well as provide needed security so we don't have a nominal amount of staff working in the office. So we will start with eight, and then we have a staffing model that we do evaluate staffing at our offices every six months to ensure that as we're growing, that we're meeting the needs and that we don't have long lines. So we do add staff as needed. Mr. Wilshaw: Sure. Excellent. The services that you would offer at this branch, are they the full services of your credit union as far as lending and investment services? Ms. Fahrney: Yes. Absolutely. We're a strong lender in Macomb and Oakland Counties and even during the recessionary period where other credit unions were pulling back and not lending. Michigan Schools and Government Credit Union is a strong lender. We continue to be a strong lender. This branch would be a full service branch as we have at our other offices offering all the services that you typically expect in terms of deposit accounts, lending services, and other types of products and services such as mortgages that a consumer would want. Mr. Wilshaw: Excellent. Because this site is a former gas station, is there any remediation work that needs to be done on this site prior to building? Mr. Morrow: So we'll modify that condition. It's not in our current resolution Mr. Taormina: We will fashion the language if that's the desire. August 19, 2014 26532 Mr. Blanek: The credit union has purchased the property recently, so all that remediation has occurred. All that documentation is available for viewing. Mr. Wilshaw: Excellent. I appreciate that. These small sites with a former gas station on them are difficult to find tenants for because of its size. Obviously, even with this proposal, there's some setback issues, but I think the Zoning Board will be able to work through those without any issues, and I think this is a great re -use of the site. Thank you. Mr. Taylor: Mark, other than the 9 fool 6 spaces and the setback, do they meet all the other requirements of the ordinance? Mr. Taormina: Yes. The only thing we don't have a full picture on yet is the signage. The resolution as we prepared it in addressing signage issues, only conforming signage would be approved with the petition and any additional signage would have to go before the Zoning Board of Appeals. So it doesn't preclude them from seeking additional signage. The renderings show three signs, although I'm not exactly sure on what elevations, but if there's a third sign, most definitely they will have to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals for that. Mr. Taylor: What you're going to do to the corner is certainly an improvement, and changing the driveways, which are always unsafe for gas stations, is going to make a big difference on that corner, and we appreciate you coming in. Mr. Blanek: Thankyou. Mr. Taormina: Just a thought on the signage. We've done this historically and maybe this is something you will want to consider in any approving resolution, and that is that they would essentially be allowed 90 square feet of total sign area. So if they want to have that in three signs, then the total area of all three shall not exceed 90 square feet. We've done that in other cases. So as long as the Council and the Zoning Board of Appeals agree, that way they keep the total area to within the ordinance limits, and what theyll need in terms of a variance is just the additional sign. As I look at the plan, it really sets itself up well for a sign on the west, north and east sides to gel full visibility from the intersection. Mr. Morrow: So we'll modify that condition. It's not in our current resolution Mr. Taormina: We will fashion the language if that's the desire. August 19, 2014 26533 Mr. Morrow: The Council and the Zoning Board will know that we're aware of it and have no problem with it. Mr. Bahr: Through the Chair to Mr. Taormina, is the sign or the architectural feature on the front, the M, does that count as a sign under our ordinance? Mr. Taormina: That's part of my concern. That's going to be a call from the Inspection Department. I suspect it will not be but I think they're also showing a sign adjacent to that emblem that would constitute a third sign. Mr. Bahr: Thanks. Mr. Morrow: Thank you, Mr. Bahr. I'm going to go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against the granting of this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, I'm going to close the public hearing and ask for a mo0on. On a mo0on by McIntyre, seconded by Taylor, and unanimously adopted, it was #08-04-2014 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on May 13, 2014, on Pefifion 2014-07-02-10 submitted by Stucky Vitale Architects requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(n)(3) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to construct and operate a credit union with drive-lhru facilities (Michigan Schools and Government Credit Union) at 20595 Farmington Road, located on the southwest comer of Farmington and Eight Mile Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 4, which property is zoned G2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Pefition 2014-07-02-10 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Architectural Site Plan marked Sheet SP1.1 prepared by Stucky Vitale Architects, dated August 18, 2014, as revised, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, except as modified below; 2. That the traffic lanes serving the drive -up service facilities shall be allowed to be nine feet six inches (9'-0") in width only if the len foot (10') requirement is waived by the City Council by means of a separate resolution by which two- thirds of the members of the City Council concur; August 19, 2014 26534 3. That the Landscape Plan marked Sheet LP1.1 prepared by Deak Planning & Design, dated July 17, 2014, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 4. That the Exterior Elevations Plan marked Sheet A2.1 prepared by Stucky Vitale Architects, dated July 17, 2014, as revised, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 5. That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for deficient building setbacks and any conditions related thereto; 6. That all light fixtures shall not exceed twenty feel (20') in height and shall be aimed and shielded so as to minimize stray light trespassing across property lines and glaring into adjacent roadway; 7. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals; however, the total area of all wall signs together shall not exceed 90 square feet; 8. That no LED lighthand or exposed neon shall be permitted on this site including, but not limited to, the building or around the windows; 9. That the three walls of the trash dumpster area shall be constructed out of the same brick used in the construction of the building or in the event a poured wall is substituted, the wall's design, texture and color shall match that of the building and the enclosure gates shall be of solid panel steel construction or durable, long-lasting solid panel fiberglass and maintained and when not in use closed at all times; and 10. That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time of application for building permits. Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed use complies with all of the general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; August 19, 2014 26535 2. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; and 3. That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Morrow: Is there any discussion? Mr. Wilshaw: If the maker of the motion would be supportive, I don't see any condition related to the dumpsler that we would normally have as far as the enclosure materials matching the building and also the gates being steel, which is our typical verbiage. Mr. Morrow: Does the maker of the motion and the supporter agree with that? Ms. McIntyre: That's fine Mr. Taylor: No problem. Mr. Morrow: No problem with that, so we have that amendment. Mr. Wilshaw: Thankyou. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. I think the Commission agrees it's a very fine plan for that corner. It will help us a lot. It's a gateway coming in from the north and welcome to Livonia. Mr. Blanek: Thankyou. Ms. Fahrney: If I may say thank you. We've built a lot of branches and working with the City of Livonia has been an excellent experience, and we really appreciate the planning process and how we've been able to move through that. We look forward to partnering with the community and, again, really appreciate the process that the City of Livonia has in place. Mr. Morrow: Thank you for those kind comments. Mr. Wilshaw: Good luck. August 19, 2014 26536 Ms. McIntyre: Welcome to Livonia. Ms. Smiley: They are very accurate. Our Planning Department is fabulous. ITEM #2 PETITION 2008-11-06-04 LANGUAGE AMENDMENT Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2008- 11-06-04 submitted by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #477-08, and Section 23.01(a) of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to amend Section 11.03 of Article XI of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to require waiver use approval of any business licensed pursuant to the Deferred Presentment Service Transactions Act, MCL 487.2121, et. seq. Mr. Taormina: It was on October 22, 2008, that City Council adopted resolution #477-08, refernng the question of whether or not the zoning ordinance should be amended to establish a separation requirement between check cashing stores, also known as .'payday lenders,' and SDD and SDM licensed stores. That referral was to the Planning Commission for action and recommendation. SDD and SDM refers to Specially Designated Distributor and Specially Designated Merchant licenses that allow retailers to sell either packaged beer and wine and/or spirts. The referral to the Planning Commission in 2008 was whether or not we should have a separation requirement between the two uses: check cashing stores and liquor or party stores. Draft ordinances amending the G7 and C-2 districts were submitted to the Planning Commission. A Public Hearing on Petition 2008-11-06-04 was held on January 27, 2009. Al that time, the original version of the amendment sought to establish a minimum 500 foot distance between check cashing stores and any SDD or SDM licensed business. The Planning Commission chose to table the item. They wanted additional information from our Law Department. Following receipt of the information, the Planning Commission again had a meeting to discuss the matter, but no further action was ever taken. So the item basically remains as a pending item. We went back and reviewed the meeting minutes, and what was suggested at that time, or what many of the Commissioners were thinking was that the City would have more control over the location of payday lenders if they were treated as a separate waiver use. The Council is now seeking a formal response on this item. Their renewed interest stems from a recent public hearing involving the rezoning of the northeast corner of Six Mile and August 19, 2014 26537 Farmington Roads from C-1 to G2. The concern is that a check cashing store could occupy a portion of the future building on this property, and that such a use would not be compatible or harmonious with the surrounding area. The current draft of the ordinance relies partially on a study of how other municipalities regulate payday lending businesses. What we found out is that many communities across the country treat them as a special land use, and in an effort to control the number and concentration of such stores, apply a minimum separation distance between them. As such, the proposed language before you stipulates that any business licensed pursuant to the Deferred Presentment Service Transactions Act, that is the statute that basically regulates payday lenders, would be restricted to a C-2 zoning district only and treated as a waiver use under Section 11.03. Furthermore, it would include a special requirement that no such stores be located within 1,320 feel from any other stale -licensed check cashing store. The 1,320 feel translates to a quarter of mile. That was what came out of the study meeting and thus that is how the prepared ordinance before you has been written. With that, I'll answer any questions. There is no correspondence related to this item. Mr. Morrow: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Ms. Smiley: I do have one. These check cashing stores, do they cash post- dated checks or are they like work checks? Is there a fee or a percentage? Am I understanding that? Mr. Taormina: It is a heavily regulated industry under this Deferred Presentment Service Transactions Act, and they are loans on checks that have not yet been drafted, and yes, they come with certain rates. I don't know enough about the statute to be able to tell you precisely how that is done. Ms. Smiley: But they are post-dated checks. They are like a loan. Mr. Taormina: Yes, that is correct. Ms. Smiley: They couldn't just walk in a bank and cash the check. They have to go to this special service. Mr. Taormina: These are businesses that specialize in making those loans ahead of the checks, with a fee obviously, and certain interest rates apply. I think how those rales are compounded and everything else is a major concern because there's been a lot of problems in the past, if you will, with these types of businesses. More importantly from a land use perspective is, what does it August 19, 2014 26538 mean to a retail area to have these types of businesses locale within them? Are they proper in the context of the neighborhood where they are situated. What type of concentration should there be for these stores if they begin to locale in one particular area. I think that's primarily the concern that the Council has expressed, and that's what we're attempting to regulate. This certainly would not prohibit them. It would allow those stores in the C-2 zoning classification for which we have ample number of C-2 spaces available, but in addition to requiring your approval and the Council's approval in reviewing those stores, there's an evaluation to determine that there's no other similar type businesses within a quarter mile distance from these. Ms. Smiley: Thankyou. Mr. Morrow: And you say they are highly regulated by statute? Mr. Taormina: Yes, they are. Mr. Wilshaw: Through the Chair to Mr. Taormina just to clarify, this is dealing with regulated payday lending stores as opposed to a convenience store that may offer a check cashing service where you just write a check and they cash it or a hotel that may cash it at the front desk. That's not part of this ordinance, correct? Mr. Taormina: That's correct. It's not part of this ordinance because it's not part of the statute. That's why we reference the statute in the ordinance, and it wouldn't have any impact on the ability of those retail stores being able to continue to offer that service. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. If you had a store that had multiple uses, say they were a check cashing store and a convenience store, as long as that store is providing that service in the regulated environment, this ordinance would apply to them. Mr. Taormina: That is correct. Mr. Wilshaw: Even if it's not their primary business. Mr. Taormina: If they fall under the statute, then they have to come before us under Sections 19.06 and 11.03. They would have to seek a waiver use from Planning and Council. Mr. Wilshaw: Sounds goods. Thank you. Mr. Morrow: Anyone else? Because it is the Planning Commission's petition, I'm going to go straight to the audience. Is there anybody in the August 19, 2014 26539 audience that wishes to speak for or against the granting of this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, I'm going to close the public hearing and ask for a motion. On a motion by Bahr, seconded by Wilshaw, and unanimously adopted, it was #08-45-2014 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on May 13, 2014, on Petition 2008-11-06-04 submitted by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #477-08, and Section 23.01(a) of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to amend Section 11.03 of Article XI of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to require waiver use approval of any business licensed pursuant to the Deferred Presentment Service Transactions Act, MCL 487.2121, et. seq., the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2008-11-06-04 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That any business license pursuant to the Deferred Presentment Service Transactions Act will be restricted to a C-2 zoning district and treated as a waiver use under Section 11.03; 2. That the proposed language amendment will provide the City with added control over the location of check cashing stores and thereby prevent an over concentration of such uses;and 3. That the proposed language amendment is in the best interests of the City and its residents. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. August 19, 2014 26540 ITEM #3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,058T"Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 1,058'^ Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on July 29, 2014. On a motion by Taylor, seconded by Bahr, and unanimously adopted, it was #08-46-2014 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 1,058th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on July 29, 2014, are hereby approved. A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following AYES: Taylor, Bahr, McIntyre, Smiley, Wilshaw, Morrow NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 1,059th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on August 19, 2014, was adjourned at 7:47 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Carol A. Smiley, Secretary ATTEST: R. Lee Morrow, Chairman