Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/01/2000

Home

Page 6 --January 10, 2000 Z.B. Accessory Use m Is a check-cashing facility an accessory use to a gas station? NEW JERSEY (12/7/99) -- Shell Oil Company leased property in Little Ferry for a gas station, which it sublet to the station's operator. Financial Services LLC wanted to sublet an existing structure on the property from Shell Oil, renovate it, and conduct a check-cashing business. The property fronted on Route 46 and was located in an area zoned "B-H Highway and Regional Busi- ness Zone." " The gas station was located on a nonconforming lot. The lot was not only almost 46,000 square feet below the' required minimum area, but also had in- sufficient depth, and the structures of the gas station violated both front- and rear-yard setback requirements. Financial Services, with Shell's consent, first sought a building permit to allow remodeling of an existing 540-square-foot building to house a check- cashing business and an ATM machine. At the time, the station operator used the building for storage, although it was originally designed for a food mart. The zoning board of adjustment granted a variance to permit use of the build- ing as a food mart. However, the ~operator sold food snacks from a kiosk that was also used for other conventional gas station purposes. The borough's construction official denied the application. The official concluded the zoning ordinance prescribed the proposed mixed uses on the same building lot. Financial Services then applied to the board of adjustment for permission to use the building as a check-cashing business. Financial Services, in its testimony before the board, described the pro- posed use as "a non-bank bank." Financial Services noted check-cashing busi- nesses were licensed and regulated by the state. It described the operation as a financial convenience store for people who could not afford to wait the typical "clearing" period to access their money. It also stated the operation would al- low people without checking accounts to pay their bills. Financial Services represented its business, which went under the name Money Stop and cashed many different kinds of checks but generally not personal checks due to the potential they might not be collectible. The board also heard testimony from planning and traffic experts. Finan- cial Services' traffic expert, who conducted traffic counts, essentially found no detrimental impact from the traffic' the proposed business would generate. He found five proposed parking spaces would adequately serve the Money Stop customers. Financial Services' planner essentially concluded the proposed use was consistent with the zone and reflected compatibility with the borough's master plan goals of encouraging new commercial business on major thoroughfares. The planner analogized the proposed use to either an office or personal service business but acknowledged its services were not as comprehensive as those provided by a bank. The board hired a traffic expert and a planner who' directly refuted the testi- mony of Financial Services' experts. The board then concluded it could not