Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-03-02-05_7-Eleven_Minutes2 (2) UNAPPROVED MINUTES 1 MINUTES OF THE 1,104th PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA ________________________________________________________________ On Tuesday, April 11, 2017, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 1,104th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Ian Wilshaw, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Glen Long Betsy McCue Carol Smiley Kevin Priddy Ian Wilshaw Members absent: Sam Caramagno, Peter Ventura Mr. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, and Ms. Margie Watson, Program Supervisor, were also present. Chairman Wilshaw 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 turn, 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 C ommission 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 #2 PETITION 2017-03-02-05 7-ELEVEN/MOBIL Ms. Smiley, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2017-03-02-05 submitted by 7-Eleven, Inc. and Fazal & Khurram Corporation requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(r) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to utilize an SDM liquor license (sale of packaged beer and wine) in connection with the operations of a convenience store (7-Eleven) and gas station (Mobil) at 29321 Eight Mile Road, located on the southeast corner of Eight Mile and Middlebelt Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 1. UNAPPROVED MINUTES 2 Mr. Taormina: This request is by the operator of the 7-Eleven convenience store and a Mobil gas station located at Eight Mile and Middlebelt Road to utilize an SDM liquor license. The SDM is a Specialty Designated Merchants license which would allow the petitioner to sell prepackaged beer and wine products for consumption off the premises. The property is on the southeast corner of the intersection. It’s about 1.25 acres in area. It includes 231 feet of frontage on Eight Mile Road and 225 feet of frontage along Middlebelt Road. The zoning is C-2, General Business. The site is developed with a gas station and convenience store. The convenience store is roughly 2,200 square feet in size. The Zoning Ordinance, as it applies to SDM Liquor License requests, has a number of special waiver use requirements. One of those is Section 11.03(r)(1) which stipulates that the proposed SDM licensed establishment cannot be located within 500 of any existing SDM licensed business. This distance is measured from between the actual buildings, and in this case, the closest SDM licensed business is more than 500 feet away. It would be Cantoro Italian Market. They carry an SDM license and they are located approximately one- half mile to the south of this business on the east side of Middlebelt Road. The next closest licensed establishment is the Beer Baron party store. They carry an SDD as well as an SDM license, so they sell both packaged beer and wine products as well as spirits. The other special requirement that applies to these types of liquor license requests is Section 11.03(r)2 which specifies that any proposed SDM licensed business must be located no closer than 400 feet from any church or school building. There are two churches in relative close proximity to this location, but both are more than 400 feet away. The closest church is at the northwest corner of the intersection in Farmington Hills and measured between the buildings that distance is right around 500 feet. The next closest is Clarenceville Methodist Church, which is approximately 680 feet to the south, also on the east side of Middlebelt Road. In terms of the closest school, Clarenceville Middle School is located roughly 1,500 feet to the south of the subject property. There is no special requirement related to the placement of the SDM products within the establishment, so the floor plan that was submitted with the application indicates that those products would be displayed on the open shelves within the store as well as existing refrigeration units, which are highlighted on this particular plan. With that, Mr. Chairman, I’d be happy to read out the departmental correspondence. UNAPPROVED MINUTES 3 Mr. Wilshaw: Please. Mr. Taormina: There are six items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated March 24, 2017, which reads as follows: “In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no objections to the waiver use at this time. The existing parcel is assigned the address of 29321 Eight Mile Road. The attached legal description appears to be correct for the parcel, and should be used in conjunction with this petition. The existing building is currently serviced by public water main, s anitary sewer and storm sewer. Should renovations to the building require alterations to the existing services, drawings will need to be submitted to this department to determine if permits will be required. Also, should the owner need to complete work wit hin the Middlebelt Road or Eight Mile Road rights-of-way, permits from the Wayne County Department of Public Services and/or Oakland County Road Commission will be required.” The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated March 23, 2017, which reads as follows: “This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to utilize as SDM liquor license in connection with the convenience store (7-Eleven) within the gas station (Mobil) on property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal.” The letter is signed by Keith Bo, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated March 24, 2017, which reads as follows: “I have reviewed the plans in connection with the petition. I have no objections to the proposal.” The letter is signed by Brian Leigh, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated April 3, 2017, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above-referenced petition has been reviewed. This Department has no objections to this petition.” The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Director of Inspection. The fifth letter is from the Finance Department, dated March 22, 2017, which reads as follows: "I have reviewed the address connected with the above noted petition. A false alarm charge of $50.00 has been outstanding for this address since October 20, 2015. Accrued interest through March 9, 2017 is $8.64, bringing the total owed to the City of Livonia to $58.64.” The letter is signed by Coline Coleman, Chief Accountant. The sixth letter is from the Treasurer’s Department, dated March 20, 2017, which reads as follows: “In accordance with your request, the Treasurer’s Office has reviewed the address connected with the above noted petition. At this time, there are no outstanding amounts UNAPPROVED MINUTES 4 receivable for taxes. Therefore, I have no objections to the proposal.” The letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treas urer. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for the Planning Department? Mr. Long: Mr. Taormina, in the notes it indicates that two previous requests for SDM licenses were brought to the Planning Commission in 2008 and were both denied. Do you know, were either of those appealed to City Council and what was the disposition? Mr. Taormina: I believe neither one of those items was appealed to City Council. So the action of the Planning Commission in both cases was final. Mr. Long: Thank you. Ms. Smiley: Nothing has changed since then, has it? Mr. Taormina: Changed in terms of what? There have been changes to the state statute regarding the operation of SDM licenses out of gas stations. So there has been, and I think this is described in the notes. There’s been some relaxation of the rules related to fueling facilities, namely, the minimum inventory that the business must maintain; and then secondly, there were some distance requirements between the point of sale where the liquor sale occurred and where the fuel is being dispensed. So while there were some significant inventory restrictions and very tight distance requirements, both of those have been modified, and I think it has opened up the door for these types of requests. This is the first one and we expect a few more to come in as well. Ms. Smiley: Okay, but there hasn’t been any big drop in the number of licenses in that part of the city, has it? Mr. Taormina: No. I don’t think there’s been any change to the number or distribution of licenses in the northeast quadrant for some time. Quite frankly, I can’t think of anything significant recently. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions for the Planning Director? Seeing none, is the petitioner here? Again, we ask that you start with your name and address for the record please. UNAPPROVED MINUTES 5 Steve Ormond, Clark Hills, P.L.C., 500 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, Michigan 48226. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Ormond. And you’re representing the petitioner? Mr. Ormond: Representing the petitioners if we look at it that way, both 7 - Eleven and the franchisee who operates the store. And what I’m understanding from the recommendation letters or the comment letters that were submitted is the basic zoning criteria for the waiver are all met. This is not a construction project so the other possible considerations that would come into play don’t come into play. It is an interesting change that happened at the turn of the year when the legislature revised the statute. A little bit of background on that. The previous statute had the inventory requirement which was a quarter of million dollars; the store had to have that much inventory in order to apply to the Liquor Commission for an SDM license if they were operating gas dispensing as well. And in the case of small store operations like 7-Eleven, other convenience stores, smaller stores, it was very uncommon to have an inventory of that level. The larger store operations, larger retailers, could do that but not the smaller stores. The legislature, I think, felt that that was a bit of an unfair result for the smaller operators and made the change at the turn of the year and, at the same time, imposed a new, in addition to relaxing the inventory requirement, imposed a new system of limited SDM licenses going forward. This is new for the sale of spirits. There had been limits on the number of licenses for a long time, but the SDMs were basically available to all comers. So this exchange was made. This was kind of the bargain, if you will, and the legislature granted a period of I think it was 90 days following the new legislation for existing stores that might be qualified to submit their applications, and this is one of the stores. The store has every intention of operating this business in a good way. I think at that location it has a history of being a good citizen of the city, and there is a liquor and alcoholic beverage monitoring system/training system. 7 -Eleven has it. It’s called Come of Age and that’s been approved by the Liquor Commission to train all of the store employees. As you may know, the issue of underage consumption of alcohol is always of concern. At the same time, this store plans to implement what is called the Bars Program, which is a, I’ll say kind of a mystery shop kind of a system where the store will get regular pass or not pass cards if the store employee is not property monitoring the age of the purchasers. 7 -Eleven has had an active role, not in the management of the store per se, UNAPPROVED MINUTES 6 but in helping the franchisees to sustain their business and also to sustain compliance with all of the laws. I’m proud to represent them. I’m a Livonia boy bred and I’m proud of the City and what its accomplished, and I think allowing this to go forward would simply express the City’s compliance with basically the legislative desire and, at the same time, allow a small business operator to compete to some extent. Now there are sometimes concerns expressed about whether the alcohol sales represent an oversized percentage of store revenues. In the 7-Eleven stores, the experience is less than 10 percent of store revenues are represented by sales of beer and wine. In this store, the estimate is that there would be about 1,000 items in the inventory, the SKUs, but the beer and wine would represent perhaps 40 or 50 of those SKUs. So this is not a situation where we’re converting a convenience store into a, in effect, a mostly liquor store. This is not one of those situations. I’m happy to answer any other questions you may have. And I also have with me 7-Eleven’s field consultant, Brian, and also the store manager, Raul. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Ormond, for your presentation. I appreciate that. Is there any questions for the petitioner? Mr. Long: Is the store open 24/7? Mr. Ormond: Yes, it is. Mr. Long: Would the beer coolers then be locked up at 2:00 a.m,? Brian Hopper: The cooler doors that would have been in them would be locked at 2:00 a.m. and then unlocked at 7:00 a.m. Mr. Long: Okay, I’m sorry. Your name and address for the record please . Brian Hopper: The address for 7-Eleven is 850 Stephenson Highway in Troy, Michigan. Mr. Long: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions for the petitioner? Seeing none, is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Seeing no one coming forward, is there anything else that you’d like to add, Mr. Ormond? Mr. Ormond: No. If there are no questions, I’d just like to point out one more time, I can’t help it. It’s the lawyer in me. We have complied with UNAPPROVED MINUTES 7 all of the specific zoning requirements, and so we would certainly appreciate an approval. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. With that, I’ll close the public hearing. Is there a motion? On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Priddy, and unanimously adopted, it was #04-21-2017 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on April 11, 2017, on Petition 2017-03-02-05 submitted by 7-Eleven, Inc. and Fazal & Khurram Corporation requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(r) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to utilize an SDM liquor license (sale of packaged beer and wine) in connection with the operations of a convenience store (7-Eleven) and gas station (Mobil) at 29321 Eight Mile Road, located on the southeast corner of Eight Mile and Middlebelt Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 1 , which property is zoned C-2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2017-03-02-05 be denied for the following reasons: 1. That the petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use is in compliance with all of the general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2. That this part of the City is currently well-served with SDM licensed establishments selling packaged alcoholic beverages; 3. That there is no demonstrated need in the area for additional sales of packaged alcoholic beverages such as are permitted by the utilization of an SDM license; 4. That the petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated that the proposed use would be compatible to and in harmony with the principle use of the subject property as well as other uses in the surrounding area; and 5. That the proposal is contrary to the goals and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance which, among other things, are intended to insure suitability and appropriateness of uses. UNAPPROVED MINUTES 8 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. Wilshaw: Mr. Taormina? Mr. Taormina: I just wanted to, if the maker of the motion could correct in I believe Conditions #2 and #3 the reference to SDD. Change than to SDM license. Ms. Smiley: Absolutely. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, that looks like a typo there. Ms. Smiley: And that’s okay with you, Commissioner Priddy? Mr. Priddy: Yes. That’s acceptable. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: We have a denying motion on the floor. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, the roll call would be in order. Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The petitioner will have 10 days to appeal this to City Council.