Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPUBLIC HEARING - 2018-07-30 - LANG - PET2018-05-06-03 CITY OF LIVONIA PUBLIC HEARING Minutes of Meeting Held on Monday, July 30, 2018 ______________________________________________________________________ A Public Hearing of the Council of the City of Livonia was held at the City Hall Auditorium on Monday, July 30, 2018. MEMBERS PRESENT: Laura Toy, President Jim Jolly, Vice President Kathleen McIntyre Brian Meakin Cathy White MEMBERS ABSENT: Scott Bahr, Brandon Kritzman OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Taormina, Director of Economic Development Paul Bernier, City Attorney Todd Zilincik, City Engineer Bonnie J. Murphy, CER-2300, Certified Electronic Recorder The Public Hearing was called to order at 7:15 p.m. with President Laura Toy presiding. This is a Public Hearing on Petition 2018-06-06-03 submitted by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Section 23.01(b) of Zoning Ordinance No. 543, as amended, proposing to amend Section 10.03 of Article X, Waiver Uses, C-1 District Regulations in order to allow for establishments having liquor licenses such as Class C, Tavern, Micro brewers and Brewpubs, to operative in conjunction with restaurants and other dining facilities. The Public Hearing is now open. There were five people in the audience. This matter will be heard on the Monday, August 20, 2018 Regular Meeting of Council. Toy: Mr. Taormina. Taormina: Thank you. This proposed language amendment would allow for on- premise consumption of alcohol within C-1 zoning districts. Currently, restaurants and other establishments licensed to serve alcohol are restricted primarily to C-2 zoning districts. The change would expand opportunities for smaller restaurants that are located in C-1 zones to obtain and operate several of the various categories of licenses that are available through the Michigan Liquor Control Commission to allow for on- premise consumption of alcohol. Some of these include Class C, Tavern licenses as well as small distiller and brew pub licenses. The amendment 2 was prompted by the owner of New-Five Shopping Center, Mark Canvasser, the shopping center is located at Five Mile and Newburgh Roads. This was on behalf of a prospective tenant who is considering opening a sushi style restaurant that would include either a Class C or a Tavern license. The use is currently not allowed at the shopping center as it is zoned C-1, Local Business. Similar to the SDD and SDM licenses, which allow for the sale of beer, wine, spirits and other alcohol products for consumption off-premises, the on-premise license would be treated as a waiver use subject to the Planning Commission and City Council approval. There are several special conditions that would apply to these licenses, including minimum separation distances from other similar licensed establishments, parks, churches and school buildings, and also limiting alcohol sales to no more than 35 percent of the total gross receipts of all sales. And that’s something that is unique to this particular license, it is really the desire to keep these within food service establishments as opposed to opening up the door for bars and those types of operations. However, in the case of Class C, a microbrewery, Council would still have the discretion to approve that that might not be connected to a full service food operation. The Planning Commission is recommending approval of this and with that, I’ll be happy to answer questions. Toy: So it has to be approved, is that what you’re saying? Taormina: For the most part, but again these are special requirements of a waiver use and City Council always has the option of waiving or modifying those special requirements via a super majority vote by separate resolution. Toy: So if I may, if a party store type of person comes in, if you will, and sells sandwiches at his or her deli counter or some type of food product, then it would be the determination by Council if they could have liquor as well. Taormina: That would probably fall under the category of the SDM. A better example might be a small restaurant or establishment in the C-1 District and adjacent to that is a C-2 zoned property that includes a restaurant with a Class C, so it’s within the separation distance of 1,000 feet. Let’s say it’s only 400 feet, Council can waive that 1,000 or modify that distance requirement and allow that second distance to be established. That’s where you have the discretion to waive or modify the standards that are identified. Toy: Are you getting a lot of requests, Mark? I know I’ve had one in the past. Taormina: We’ve had them before, yes, interestingly, and I had two in one week come by. We have Mr. Canvasser and another existing restaurant located on Plymouth Road had a similar inquiry and was actually at the point of filing an application and pursue the license but was told that they could not 3 do so and the property was rezoned and with rezoning of the property it is much more complicated than this option provides. Toy: Lastly then, are others doing this that are close to us around the state anywhere? Taormina: Zoning districts vary by municipalities so our C-1, C-2 are not the same type of districts. But many municipalities have similar local commercial retail districts and many do allow these licenses to be established within all their retail zones. There are many properties where the zoning might be C-1 and it’s indistinguishable from a property right next to it that is zoned C-2. It’s only the zoning that’s different between the two and it might be that it would be appropriate given the circumstances to operate this type of establishment within that C-1 zoned property under restricted conditions. We’re seeing some of restaurants coming in and asking for licenses to help booster their marketing sales and traffic, even though the sale of alcoholic beverages in those establishments amounts to a very small percentage of their total gross receipts. A good example would be the Indian Restaurant and the sushi restaurant that’s in the Key Bank Plaza near Six Mile Newburgh, in that plaza they have liquor licenses. They’re zoned C-2, but they’re small restaurants but they carry liquor licenses. Toy: Great. Council Vice-President Jolly. Jolly: Thank you, Madam President. We haven’t had, the last two City elections a large part of the conversation was with regards to what we are going to do with strip malls and how are we going to fill vacant ones and these are the ones that are held by brick and mortar retail that is no longer sustainable. I think it makes sense to give ourselves this option, we still have the purview to review whether or not we want an establishment to have the advantage of the waiver, so I’ll offer the approving resolution. Toy: Any others? McIntyre: I’m very supportive of this approach for all the reasons already mentioned and it will let us control over specific locations and each specific case. We know the trend away from retail alongside commercial and this just makes a lot of sense, it certainly doesn’t alter the nature of our community and with the guidelines in place with the 35 percent, I would support this. Toy: Councilmember White. White: Through the Chair to Mark, how are the wine shops that do regular wine tastings in the C-1 District, we had to waive that food requirement, right? 4 Taormina: So, party stores fall under separate licensing and the wine tastings that they do are conducted with a special permit from the MLCC on a limited time basis. They can conduct a certain number of wine tastings per year. So if a party store now wanted to convert to a bar and serve alcohol on a regular basis, that would be a completely different transformation, you’d have full control whether or not to allow that. And if food is not going to be a part of that operation, then you can decide if that’s appropriate. White: I really had in mind that wine shop that used to be off Haggerty, I don’t know if it’s still open, it’s not an occasional thing, wine is a big part there. Taormina: That was a unique situation because they were a retail wine store, wine club, and they came to us originally to have a Class C license, but downgraded to the Tavern and restricted to only wine and beer technically even though wine, I believe our resolution might have restricted it to only wine, I can’t recall but there was a lot of discussion about that. That is C-2 zoned property and they carry a full Class C license in connection with what is basically a retail outlet store and wine club. White: So if we had another similar type operation come in trying to come into a C-1 zone, we could do it under this amendment as long as we waive that part? Taormina: Yes, you could. White: Thank you. Toy: Anyone else? Go right ahead, Councilman Meakin. Meakin: What about transfers, if a business has another license in another area and goes to C-1, can they transfer it in without having to come before Council? Taormina: You know, that’s a great question and the answer is yes, they can do that these days, unless you restrict that transfer by a condition of the approval which we now do on a somewhat regular basis involving business operations where we’re concerned about how that transition takes place between one operation to another. We’re doing that regularly right now with car dealerships, with other Class C licensed establishments, with day care operators, so I think that’s something that you would be dealing with on a case by case basis but it is possible. Meakin: It concerns me a little bit because the MLCC has taken away a lot of authority away. 5 Taormina: The answer to that is yes, they have, especially in the case of transfers, but they we retain a lot of control via our zoning regulations, which I think is critical and that we continue to do so. Meakin: And has there been any talk about making, including other business categories besides just food? Taormina: You mean in terms of whether or not --- you know, entertainment, the issue of entertainment might be one you might want to address as well. Any type of entertainment permits are permissible under this. There’s a few. There’s outdoor service. There’s extended hours, I believe. There’s certain entertainment, whether it’s dancing, those are additional permits that are granted by the MLCC and oftentimes when we review these, we inquire as to what the intentions are and if it’s something you want to restrict or limit you can place that as part of the waiver use resolution, regardless of whether or not the MLCC issues a permit for it, unless they have the zoning approval or if it’s prohibited under the zoning approval, then it’s something they will not be able to conduct. And we see that in some instances, gas stations in fact, took advantage of the change in State law and obtained a Specially Designated Distributor License when they became available when the State law changed. But they cannot activate those licenses without first going through our zoning approval process. Meakin: I’m also concerned about spas getting liquor licenses. You’re sitting there getting your pedi, with a glass of wine, I believe some of them are doing that already but they’re just not doing it legally, this would allow them to do it legally. Is that something that this body could waive? Taormina: If you wanted to, if they petitioned you to do that, again at your discretion if you would consider something like that. But I can tell we’re going to be faced with a petition it really won’t apply in this case, it’s a C-2 zoned property, but it is an indoor golf activity. So it’s an indoor recreational activity, golf simulators, where they will have alcohol sales as part of that operation, but that is completely within Council and the Planning Commission’s discretion. Meakin: As long as Council has the final authority over the zoning waiver? Taormina: Yes, you do. Meakin: Thank you. Toy: Councilwoman McIntyre. 6 McIntyre: I think the possibility again is everything, because we have safeguards in place and it’s on a case by case basis but there may be other businesses that we can’t foresee or think of right now where it might make perfect sense. So to have some sort of ability to serve food or beer and wine, I think this is well-written and seems to give us appropriate flexibility but yet again gives us total control over approving it in each instance so I’m very comfortable with it. Great question, Brian, and thank you, Mark. Toy: Thank you. Anyone else before we leave and go to the audience? Anyone from the audience wishing to address this item this evening. Taormina: I can just add to Mr. Meakin’s point regarding the other permits, maybe we will work with the Law Department to clarify Council’s control of those items at the time of approval. Toy: Certainly, thank you. Anyone else coming up from the audience? We have one resolution, I believe? Murphy: We have an approving resolution by Vice President Jolly. Toy: Okay, if there’s no others we will close that and that will be heard on th Monday, August 20. As there were no further questions or comments, the Public Hearing was declared closed at 7:30 p.m. SUSAN M. NASH, CITY CLERK