Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2001-05-2218567 MINUTES OF TBE 525 REGULARMEETING GELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, May 22,200 1, the City Planning Commission of the City ofLivoma held its 825ne Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. James C. McCann, Chairman, called the meeting to order A 7:30 p.m. Members present: James C. McCann Robert Alanskas H G. Shane Dan Piemecchi Blaine Koros Members absent: William LaPme Messrs. At Nowak, Planner W, Scott Mille; Planner III and Bill Poppenger, Planner I were also present Chairman McCarm informed the audience that if a petition on tonigM's agenda involves a morning request this Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in Nm, will hold its own public hearing, and will make the foal detemtination 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 Corumssion's recommendation is forwarded to the City Comcil for the foal detemumm n as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected If a petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan 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 firmshed the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions, which the Commission may, or may not use depending on the outcome of the proceedings tonight We will begin with the Miscellaneous Site Plans for our agenda ITEM #1 PETITION 2000-06-02-24, as amended/ Mark Chanitz/Panem Bread Mr. Piemeechi, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 2000-06-02-24, as amended, by Mark Chanitz, on behalf of Pan= Bread, requesting approval to increase the signage of the resmumat located at 28551 SchoolcraR Road in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 25. Mr. Miller: This site is located an the south side of Schoolcraft between Middlebelt and Inkster. On August 30, 2000 this restaurant received waiver use approval. As partofthe approval it was conditioned: That wall signage similar to the rendering on the Elevation Plan is approved, which may he either one (1) or two (2) waft signs, provided that the total area of all such signs does not exceed jm"o (42) sq. ft, and furtherpro,dded that the petitioner seek the granting ofa variance for an excess number of wall signs iftwo wall signs are desired The restaurant has been constructed and is in operation. Presently, the 18568 restaurant has one wall sign at 42 sq. If m its west elevation Pan= Bread is requesting to amend City Council Resolution 4667-00 and be allowed to put up another 42 sq. ft wall sign on its north elevation Situate permitted for this site under Section 18.50H is one (1) wall sign not to exceed 42 sq. If in sign area Fisting signage is me (1) wall sign m the west elevation="Panera Bread" = 42 sq. If Situate Conditioned by City Council one (1) or two (2) wall signs not to exceed 42 sq. If in total sign area Proposed signage is for two (2) wall signs Mating 84 sq. If in sign area (existing sign =west elevatim _ `Pmem Bread'= 42 sq. ft with additional sign =north elevation —'?mm Bread' = 42 sq. ft). Excess Situate- one (1) wall sign at42 sq. If in sign area. At the May 15, 2001 Study Meeting the Planning Concussion discussed the need for an additional wall sign for this reslaumnt It was fell that the problem night not be identifying the restaurant itself but getting to it mce you see it It seemed to the Planning Commission that the internal drives of Millemuum Park are too confusing and somewhat like a were. Some members feltthatbetterint mdi tonalsignagewasabe solution Ifanadditimal wall sign were to be approved for this restaurant, then it should at least follow the requirements for a comer unit of a cater and should and exceed Yafthe allowable area of the permitted sign. Mr. McCann: Is there any conespmden e? Mr. Nowak There is ore itemofcorespondence and it is a letter from the Inspectim Department, dated May 1, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request ofApal 25, 2001, the above referenced petition has been reviewed The followaig a noted: (I) This petition will need the following hvo variances Jesus theZonhug Board ofAppeals for signage as proposed: (a) Excessive number of waRsigns. One additional sign proposed, fora total oftwo, only one (total number) allowed (b) Excessive sign square footage. Allowed is 43 square feet (42 feet per CouncilResolution) and proposed is 86 square feet (excess 43 square feet} (2) A site visit today showed the dumpster gabs open and the dumpster overfilled, with trash on the ground This Department has no further objections to the petition other than as noted" The lefteris signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection That is the exert of the correspondence. Mr. McCain: Is the petitioner here this evening.? Mark Chamtz, 2433 S. Hanley Road, St Louis, Missouri 63114. I have been here me other time wben we were going for our special use in our previous hearings and I have been asked to take mother look at increasing our signage. The operation side of the company, is experiencing a little softer opening than expected and they were hoping maybe that with some additional exposure it uught pump up our presence there. That is why I am heretonight. Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. Almskes: When you went an there were you expecting to get mos[ of your business from people orientally inside the complex or from people from the mads? 18569 Mr. Chanitz: My background is on the design and architecture side but in talking to the real estate guys back at the office, it is a case by case situation. Sometimes we are a destination spot and sometimes we are a very imFronptu spot Given the size and the magnitude of that development, I think we were expecting to see more mpromplu people that were utilizing the Millermmor Park development, as a whole, dropping in. I think what is happening is because of ourpositio ing in the comer, as the nature of where the actual street curb cuts are relative to where we are m that particular retail budding, m other words, coring behind the budding as opposed to right in fiord. I think it is a little bit more of disadvantage. If you are flunking of going to the hardware store next door, you are going to go there and if you are hungry, you have to hop back in you car. Wejust have a little less exposure, I think. In the past 12 months we have opened 20 company owned and approximately 70 franchise openings and Pols particular unit is toward the lower end of our weekly sales. Because it is a company owned store, we tend to watch it a little closer and try to manage it a little more. Mr. Alanskas: My thought was that when the research and wareho tsmg gets people m there, you would have a better business. Do you know how many days a week, in regards to the letter, that you dumpster is emptied? Mr. Chmitz I don't but I could find art Mr. Alayskas: We don't like to have hash lying aromd. With the winds, if you have hash lying all aromd an the concrete, it will blow all over. Those gaps should be closed as soon as someone uses it Mr. Chanitz: Typically, I world imagine, we would have a three day a week pick up. I was asked to look at this in the Chicago market about six months ago but I have never looked at in the Detroit market. Mr. Alanskas: Thankyou. Mr. Piercerrehi: Have you considered requesting another curb cutthere? When I visited you place, I fond that I had to go through to that major sheet and then go right and then ngbt again. I found that very confusing to get into your lot Have you requested that? Mr. Chanitz: Not through the developer, Mr. Goldberg, I believe is his name. I would think we would have more opposition to altering some of the parking within that development as opposed to hying to approach it from a signage standpoint. I don't know. There are ammther of ways we can get the word out but one of the things is that when the President comes to town and he sees that particular site, he just feels that we should have a little more exposure especially considering that SchoolcraR, there is a depressed section there and you also have that berm that kind of hides the northern elevation. We have or address off of the Nfiddlebelt side but yet we are probably a Pond of a mile from that address, in terms of where we are in relation to the comer. You could argue either way that 18570 another sign along the north side there is maybe going to help, maybe not Who knows? My charge is to come down here and see if can entertain that notion. Mr. Piemecchi: You are aware that Mr. Alanskas mentioned through the write ups from the Inspection Department that you really are only entitled to one sign but the Council did state that you could have two but you would have to split them up. Mr. Chanitz: Right. I realized that you would ask me that The thinking there was that everything is dictated by how large that letter "P' is in Proem. It is two feet, two inches high Everything else tapers down tom that proof across the sign. The eclipse is smaller and the word "bread" is smaller. If you were to split those into two, you would actually be looking at a sign that was less than 12 inches high across the entire name. There were others that advised us not to go that small. That is was getting too small to read tom a significant distance. This iml something that we thought we would even come back a second time. It isjust we thought we would part all ofoir eggs in one basket So we would get as much visibility as we could. The real reason we are here is because this particular location is operating at least 50 percent under what all our other openings are. Mr. Piercerchi: That may be so but sometimes that is hard tojudge because oflocations. Mr. Chamtz: Right Mr. Piemecchi: Is bread that essential to that signage? Mr. Chanitz: You wouldnR think so but as we are going forward we are already at almost to 300 units in the country. We are trade markmg certain icons. There is another bread that we have. It is like a woman holding a piece of bread but the point is that there are certain things that we cant alter tom because they have been trademmks. The word "Pan=" up there alone would be a no, no as far as our copyright and our trademarks are concerned Mr. Piercecchi: Some of our concerns of which you probably are aware of, that what we do for one, sometimes set a precedent I am sure you are aware of that In study we discussed your dilemma quite thoroughly and perhaps we could say yoube got a quasi comer there, which you really dont quality, for but there are two streets, you could look at one as a street and Schoolcraft is another street and even going to that esttrerne and stretching it the most we could give you under those directions is, when you are on a comer of two major streets, you can have half again as much signage, which would be 21 square feet Mr. Chanitz: Right Mr.Piemecchi: Ibankyou. Mr. Shane: Have you thought any about directional signage? For example, if someone turns in the back of the building, if there were a sign somewhere that said where 18571 you were located Of course, the guy next to you will want the same thing. Have you thought about that? Mr. Chanitz: Yes. We have approached the owner of the property. Typically, what happens in some of these larger developments is that we are considered small fish in a big pond. If there are monumerR signs out there, particularly with the big boxes, those guys will always getthen naves up long before we will. Whenyouhave 43, 000 sq. ft. versus 4300 sq. ft, those are the ones that are the anchor tons . We have approached the landlord on that issue and his comment is to see if we can try this more first Mr. Shane: Thankyon. Mr. McCain: If them are no fiuther questions from the Commissioners, I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? Seeing nobody, sir, do you have any last comments? Mr. Chanitz: I don't want to walk away with nothing m terms of, ifyor are going to vote this up or down on the exact same sign that we have there, I would be willing to amend it so that we could at least entertain looking at, the one thing I didn't bring with me was a signage catalogue that breaks down what are our sign types, works out in square footage. What I am getting at is the 50% that you are proposing, I am wondering ifwe could do it with even a 12 inch high letter. What I would rather do, I don't know how amenable this is..... Mr. McCann We are a recommending body. You are going to have to go on to City Council. We'll make a recommendation and if we recommend 21 square feet and you say, "Well, Ibe got a sign that will fit and it is 24 square feet" I am sure they will 5stenbwhatyorhavew say. Allright? Mr. Chanitz: Perfect Mr. McCann: A motion is in order. On a motion by Mrs. Koons, seconded by Mr. Shane and unanimously approved it was #5;342001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to Ore City Council that petition 2000- 06-02-24, as amended, by Marr Chani% on behalf ofPanera Bread, requesting approval to increase the signage of the restaurant located at 28551 Schoolcraft Road in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 25 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the request for an additional wall sign, as shown on the Sign Plan marked J -528B dated 31110 1, as revised, by Mandeville Signs, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, except for the fact that the area of the sign shall not exceed 21 sq. If; 18572 2. That these wall signs shall not be illuminated beyond one (1) hour after this reshuram closes; 3. That any additional signage shall come back before Poe Planning Commission and City Council for their review and approval; 4. That this approval is subjectto the petitioner being granted a variance firm the Zoning Board of Appeals for excess signage and arty conditions related thereto. Mr. McCain: Is there any discussion? Mrs. Kours: I didn't bring flus up eadier because itreally wasn't a question for the petitioner but would like it reflected in the record I do think that there is a need for directional signage within that whole Millemhium Park for safety as well as direction and I would like that reflected in our records so that maybe itis something thatthe City Council can fake up. Thank you. Mr. McCann: I find that particular parking area to be difficult as well. I agree with you Mr. McCann, Charman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted It will go no to City Council as amended ITEM #2 PETITION 2001-05-05-17 James Balis, Cambridge Center West Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 01-05-08-17 by James Blain, on behalf of Cambridge Cent West, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to construct an addition to the office building located A 39209 Six Mile Road in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 18. Mr. Miller: This k located on the southeast comer of Six Mile and Haggerty. The petitioner is requesting approval to construct an addition to the office building located on the southeast comer of Six Mile Road and Haggerty Huai The existing building is two stories in height and 44,000 sq. R in size. The new addition would be two stories in height and 33,016 sq. ft in size. Once completed the entire structure would have a gross floor area u77,016 sq. ft The new addition would be constructed to the rear or southwest comer of the existing building and would face Haggerty Road. Once completed the expanded office building would have a somewhat 'V' shaped footprint Presently, where the new addition is proposed to go is a large parking lot utilized by Northwest Airlines, which is the office building to the southeast The petitioner bas explained that Northwest Arlines bas a surplus of parking and does not need this area. Parking regntredis one (1) space for each 200 sq. ft of floor area (77,016 x 80% : 200 = 308 spaces). Parking providedis 286 spaces. Deficient parking is 22 spaces. Parking for Northwest Airlines is summarized as follows: parking required= 1 space for each 200 sq. ft of floor area is 53,600 x 80% : 200 =214 spaces. Parking provided is 418 spaces. In the data statistics noted on the Site Plan, the petitioner 18573 calculates into his parking wird the stacking area of the drive Hmu of the bank located in the Cambridge Center West office bolding By his calculations, 22 cars are provided in the bank's stacking lanes. The Ordinance does nothave any provisions for counting drive thin stacking lanes as parking since the cars are not, in reality, parked and people do not leave thew vehicles to use the building. Parking is based on the size of the budding so that people using the budding have ample space to move about in a safe manner. In 1990 this site did receive a variance been the Zoning Board of Appeals for 20 deficient parking spaces. Since the new addition changes, the demand for parking and variances are based on the site conditions and hardships at the fine of the Z.B.A. hearing, the petitioner would be required to be granted a new variance for deficient parking. The Landscape Plan shows that the petitioner plans on carrying over the landscape scheme of the existing site. Crabapple trees and dense yews would be extended down the levgfir of Haggerty Road. The landscaping next to the new addition would be similar to the landscaping adjacent to the existing bolding and would consist ofBroadne or Jumpers, Daylilies and Washington Hawthoms. Required landscaping is not less than 15% of the total site. Provided landscaping is 18% of the site. The Building Elevation Plan shows that the new addition would match the existing budding in building materials. The exterior of the existing bolding is covered by, what the Elevation Plan calls, "a glass curtain wall". From the outside the budding has the appearance it is made entirely of green glass. A wainscot of brick would be installed along the bottom of the new addition similar to that of the existing budding. On May 15, 2001, the petitioner submitted an application for a wall sign for the north elevation of the existing office building. Signage is summarized as follows: Signage Permitted for multi -tenant office buildings is one (1) business c®ta sign (a sign which gives direction, name and identification to a business correct — shall not contain time, logo or trademark of any tenant), not to exceed 30 sq. ft in sign area and not to exceed 6 ft in height Existing Signage is one (1) ground sign, 29 sq. ft in sign area and 6 ft in height Graphics read `National City Bank" Proposed Signage is one (1) wall sign, north elevation ="Blain The Blain Group" and is 64 sq. ft Ibis request for a wall sign would require a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak Theearefourilemsofcorrespoudence. Ihefrstitesmisaletterfrom Hue Livonia Fire & Resme Division, dated May 14, 2001, which reads as follows: "Thu office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct a Me story addition to the examrg building on properly located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal with the followbrg stipulations. Establish fire lanes to provide emergency access to and around above buddings. Fire lanes shaft meet the wallto wall turning radius requirements ofthe Livonia Fire & Rescue and shall satisfy the requirements ofthe City ofLivonia Fire Lane Ordhossce(Ord. 1429)." The letter is signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal. The second letter is train the Engineering Division, dated May l5, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Eagmeenng Drvis on has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have an objection to the proposal at this nine We trust that this wilt 18574 provide you with the information requested." The letter is signed by David Lear, FOR, Civil Engineer. The third letter is from the Inspection Depu rvcn, dated May 17, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request ofA4ay 2, 2001, the above referenced petition has been reviewed. The following a noted (1) As proposedthis petition w ifi require a variance pom the Zoning Board ofAppeals for excessive wall signage both number and square footage. No wall signs allowed and no square footage allowed (Site has a monument sign currently existing.) Thespian does not detail allexisting signage (2) The petition willalso require a Zoning variance in regards to the following parking issues: (a) Deficient number ofspaces. 321 required, 286provided and 35 deficient (b) Deficient width ofspaces per case ZBA 8711-190. Nine foot width instead often foot width. Also plans refer to ZBA 9006-70, which granted a variance for the bank (3) The proper dispersal ofthe required barrier freeparking spaces will be addressed at the plan review state. (4) The property has not yet been divided (split and recombined) according to the proposal (5) The rearparking needs maiNenance, repair, resealing and double striping. (6) On 5Q7/01 there was a dumpuer without enclosure on the east side ofthe building. (7) The height ofthe proposed fight standards is not specified and should be clarified to the Commission and Counch s satufactfon. (8) No debut is mentioned fort he lockedgate at the south end of the property on HaggertyRoad This Department has no further objections to thus petition other an as noted" The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection The fourth letter is from Division of Police, dated May 21, 2001, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed thep/ans as submidedfor the proposal to construct a two-storyaddition to the property. Weare submiumgthefollowmgrecommendatwmforyowcomiderafion: (1) Stop signs installed at the exits to Haggerty. (2) The parking lot needs proper illumination. Currently appears to be only three (3) BghApoles in the area of theproposedadddion. (3) Three addtionalhandicap spacesare required based upon a total of308 spaces, which required five (5) handicap spaces. Handicap spaces must be individually, signed as required by City ordinance." The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau Ihat is the exmnt of the correspmdence. Mr. McCain: Is the petitioner herethis evemng? James Blain, 39209 Six Mile Road. Mr McCann Do you want to tell us any more about your project? Mr. Blain: If you want to address each one of the issues, I can probably comment on each issue. For the parking, we were given a variance originally and the bank wanted ustoreconfigurethedrive-thruso. ThevananceallowedustocouMthe staking in the drive-tlnu area Withregard to the signage, the bank had two signs. They received a variance for those signs. When the bank changed names, they wanted to do a ground sign and eliminate me of the signs, which we agreed to. They then realized that nobody could find then bank They have come to me and I have come to the City in ask to have the building identified withmy name. I presently probably own over 200,000 sq. ft of office space 18575 there. We will then be the major tanarn in this bolding and the variance was granted back then for the same square footage that we are asking for now. The parking lot has been repaved since the inspection and re -double striped. I think Scott can verify that That bas been taken care of Light pole standards will be thesameheight If we don't have the right number, obviously, well add the right number and the proper handicap. All of the other requirements we meet according to stop signs, turning radiuses for fire engines, that sort of thing we met. Landscape, we are above that If you go out and look at the whole area and how we keep up the property, you will see that we go above and beyond the call of duty when it comes to landscaping and trying to keep the properties up. I don't think we neglect our properties at all. Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. Alanskas: If this is approved and you go up to 77,000, is that going to be enough or are you going to be coming back for mare? Mr. Blain: That is it What happened was we originally sold the property to Republic Airlines who then sold to Northwest Airlines. Why they wanted so much parking was because there were going to be multiple shifts of people answering the phones. With technology opening more centers around the country, they got rid of all the shifts. So for probably 10 years we looked at this parking lot out of our office building and we are pushing people, we are crammed in and we said why don't we ask them if they want to sell a third since they never use it and have never used it for ten years. They checked their parking requirements for well in excess of what they needed and well in excess of what the City required and they decided to sell us that That is why we ended up bymgjust aportion. Mr. Alanskas: Buying you property back. Mr. Blain: Riglu but not for the same price. Ibat is basically wberewe areat and we need the square footage. Mr. Alanskes: All right Thank you Mrs. Koros: Mr. Blain. you proposed signage,'Blain, the Blain Gmup" seems kind of wordy. Mr. Blain: If we just put up "Blain" we felt that we had to put "the Blain Group" up there. 'Blain" is the logo. Ibe word "Blain is like a logo, inyou look at it how it was designed. I don'tknow if it shows up m the sketch But ifyou look u the sketch, A is really the logo. The Blain Group is really the name. That is wiry we did it and if you verify with the bank, they thought their group sign would be more than enough. Well now, they still have to identify the bolding as the green budding on the comer at Su and Haggerty. They don't warn to pay for the sign an the glass. But anyway, the logo and the name, that is what we go by. It is an all of our cards. I don't know whether you would rather see'Blain" m'rMe Blain Group." We feel the two of them go together. 18576 Mr. McCann: I think no matter what you do, it is always going to be the green building at Six and Haggerty. Mrs. Koros: It is a distinctive bolding. Thank you Mr. Shane: Just for the record, to the staff, the two buildings together, the Northwest Airlines and Mr. Blaufs proposed building, there is something like 180 puking spaces over what the ordinance requires. Is that correct? Mr. Nowak The Northwest Aikwe building, even with the decrease in the number of spaces, if that piece is sold off; would still exceed their requirement They me far in excess ofwbat they week Mr. Shane: O.K. bh. Blain: I don't know why this is. When we discussed this with Scott, all of our buildings, ifthere me less people per square foot, because of the technology or what the reason is but if you look at all three or four of those parking has and all of those buildings were full, there are, I flunk Cambridge Center is a big most story bolding, which has Eastern Michigan in it, we easily, on any day, have at least 100 parking spaces available. Mr. McCaam We find that the ordinance is written for Wile for that type of use and if you sell the building and another use rimes in, they may have different requirements for the needs for parking. That is why we do have certain facilities that do have a shortage of parking even with the requirement Mr. Blain: But when we first bolt the bolding the parking lots were Carly adequate I can 0 you that these buildings were full for whatever reasons. Mr. McCarm What does the Blain Group do? Mr. Blain: We arean architectural company. We have a building company, a developing company and a management company. We own Amememter. Amerirenter is curwatly being done all across the country. That is why we need more square footage. Mr. McCann: Sounds goods. I am going to go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one, a motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Pierwcchi, seconded by Mr. Shane and unanimously approved it was #5-85-2001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Cantil that Petition 01-05-08-17 byJames Blain, on behalf of Cambridge Center West, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to constmct an addition to the office bolding located at 39209 Six Mile Road in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 18 be approved subject to the following conditions: 18577 1) That the Site Planmarked Sbeet A-1 datd821/00, as revised, prepared by James Blain Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2) That the Landscape Plan marked Sheet L-1, dated 4/09/01, prepared by Russell Design, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 3) That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu ofbydmseeding; 4) That underground sprinklers are to be provided for all landscaped and sodded areas and all planted materials shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Inspection Departmamt and thereafter penranentiy maintained m a healthy condition; 5) Tbat the Exterior Building Elevation Plan marked Sheet A4.1 dated8/21/00, as revised, prepared by James Blain Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to: 6) That the brick used in the construction shall be full face 4 -inch brick, no exceptions; 7) That all onsite dumpsters shall be enclosed and the three walls of the trash dumpster area shall be constructed out of the same brick used m the construction of the building or m the event a poured wall is substituted, the wall's design, texture and color shall catch that of the building and the enclosure gates shall be maintained and when not in use, closed at all times; 8) That all light standards shall be shielded from the adjacent properties and shall not exceed 20 feet in height; 9) That the petitioner shall correct to the Fre Deparhnent's satisfaction the following as outlined m the correspondence dated May 14, 2001: - that fire lanes shall be establisbed to provide emergency access to and around Cambridge Center West - fire lanes shall meet the wall to wall tum ng radius requirements and shall satisfy the requirements of the City of Livonia Fire Lane Ordinance 41429 10) That the petitioner shall correct to the Inspection Depadmunf's satisfaction the following as outlined m the correspondence dated May 17, 2001: - that the entire parking lot shall be repaired, resealed and double striped - that all handicap spaces shall be identified and comply with the Michigan Barrier Free Code 11) Tbt the 64' sq. ft wall sign, w shorn on the Sign Plan marked Sheet A4.1, dated 5/07/01, prepared by James Blain Associates, is hereby approved and 18578 shall be adhered to, and my additional signage shall be separately subatilted for review and approval by the Plawing Commussion and City Council; 12) That Otis approval is subject to the petitioner being granted a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for deficient parking and excess signage and any conditions related thereto; 13) That the spectic plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be subru ted to the Inspection Department at the time the budding pemNs are applied for; and 14) That the items mentioned by the Police Department and then requnemeNs shall be adhered to; Stop signs installed at the exits to Haggerty The parking lot needs proper illurmnatem. Correctly appears to be only three (3) lights poles in the area of the proposed addition. Three additional handicap spaces are required based upon a total of 308 spaces, which required five (5) handicap spaces. Handicap spaces must be individually signed as required by City ordinance. Mr. McCa®, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted It will go an to City Council with an approvmg recommevdatiom ITEM#3 PETITION 2001 -04 -GB -03 Charles Tovsme Offices, LLC Mr. PiercercH, Secretary, announced, the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001 -04 -GB -03 Charles Towne Offices, LLC requesting approval to substitute a greenbelt for the protective wall as outlined in Section 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance for property located at 34441 Eight Mile Road in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 4. Mr. Miller: This site is located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Gill and Ellen. The applicant is requesting approval to substitute a greenbelt in lieu of the protective wall that is required between an office zoned property and a residential zoned property. The applicant is requesting that the existing landscaped greenbelts along the east, west and south property lines be accepted as appropriate substitutions. Ibis split zoned property consists of the north 300 If of Lots 15 and 16 of the Fairway Subdivision. Only the north 275 If. of Lot 15 and the north 275 If of the west 119 If of Lot 16 is zoned OS, Office Services. The remaining 36 If along Gill Road (east property line) and the left over 25 If along the south property line is zoned RUFB, Rural Urban Farm When this site was rezoned to OS in 1986 these areas were retained as a buffer and as bermed landscaped greenbelts. During the rezoning process the petitioner explained that the intent was to use the wide greenbelts to lessen the impact of the office use on the residential neighborhood Because the protective wall is required to be erected on the zo ing line, not the property line, if walls were to be installed along the east and south sides of the site they would have to be offset from the property line. It would then become a matter of who 18579 rrarinbins the area behind the wall. An on-site inspection showed that the berms along Gill Road and the south property line are very tall, approximately 5 ft in height, and planted with large evergreens. These greenbelts provide a very adequate and unique screetung mechanism. The zonmg line along the west property line Wins concurrentwith the property line. Ibis west property line has a fairly flat 10 ft greenbelt between the edge of the property and the site's parking lot If a wall were erected along this property Ime, it would inn right along the property line. The abutting property to the west is, at this time, vacant and sparsely wooded. The west property line is also planted with large evergreens. At the Studv Meeting of May 15, 2001, the Planning Commission felt that the greenbelts along the east and south property lines provided a nice natural buffer between this site and the adjacent neighborhood. Without knowing what type of future development might be proposed on the vacant properties to the west, the Planning Corrmssion had some reservations about approving a permanent wall waiver for that property line. Mr. McCamn: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak There is no correspondence for this item Mr. McCain: Is the petitioner here this evening? John P. Sinn, 3276 Coohdge, Royal Oak We are requesting the waiver because we feel that we have the necessary space to have the permanent greenbelt and that the property which is west of us is probably going to be zoned commercial because it hasn't been sold for years. We, ourselves, have been trying to buy the property. Mr. McCann; Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. Shane: You said you have been trying to buy the property for years? Mr. Dingo: Yes. Mr. Shane: And you was unsuccessful? Mr. Divan: Yes. Mr. Shane: To the staff, what does the Mases Plan forecast for the property to the west? Mr. Nowak The Master Plan shows the property to the west to be developed in the combination of office and residential. Essentially, those parcels are something like 600 feet deep. It shows approximately the north 300 feet being developed as office and the southerly remaining portion being developed as residential. Mr. Alanskas: Mr. Duan, on these permanent greenbelts, how are you going to maintain them? Mr. Dinar We will maintain the landscaping with professional landscapers and we will keep them looking very good. 18580 Mr. Alanskas: This will be done on a weekly or aanibly basis? Mr. Dinar: It will be done on a weekly basis. Mr. Alanskas: What would be done? Mr. Dinar: We will see that the pees are growing right, weed our the weeds and keep the grass cuII Mr. Alanskas: Is A irrigated? Mr. Dinar: We have a slewkler system Mr. Alanskas: Thank you Mr. McCain: Are there any other questions? If not, I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? I dont see anyone. Mr. Drum, the property to the west, do you know who owns it now? Mr. Dinan: No, I don't Mr. McCain: A motion is to order. On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mrs. Koons and uvammously approved, it was #5-8(x2001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council thatPetition 2001 -04 -GB -03 Charles Towne Offices, LLC requesting approval to substitute a greenbelt for the protective wall as outlined in Section 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance for property located at 34441 Eight Mile Road in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 4 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the landscaped grembelts along the east and south property line, as shown on the Site Plan marked Ll by Michael Boggio Associates, as received by the Planning Comi fission on April 18, 2001, shall be substituted for the protective wall required by Section 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance; 2. That the landscape greenbelt along the west property line is hereby temporarily denied until such time that the abutting property to the west is developed, at which time the owner of the property sball have the option of either erecting the required protective wall or coming back before the Planing Comrission and City Council for a pemanent wall waiver 3. That a variance temporarily waiving the wall along the west property late shall be obtained from the Zooms; Board of Appeal; 4. That airy change of circumstances at the areas contaating the greenbelts resulting in a diminution of the greenbelt's effectiveness as a protective 18581 barrier, the owner of the property shall be required to construct the protective wall pursuant to Section 18.45. Mr. McCann. Chaimvw, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted It will go on to City Council as amended with the south and east borders being approved This concludes the Miscellaneous Site Plan portion of our agenda We will nowproceed with the Pending Item section of our agenda. These Rens have been discussed at levgfii in prior meetings therefore, there will only be limited discussion tonight Audience participation will require unanimous consent from the Commission. ITEM #4 PETITION 91-07-08-13 American Tower Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is Petition 91-07-08-13 by American Tower requesting approval to expand the area previously approved for a monopole and equipment sbed at property located at 17217 Middlebelt Road in the S.E. 1/4 of Section 11. Mr. McCain: We received aletter from Amy D. Miller, Zoning Coordinator for American Tower dated May 22, 2001, addressed to Mark Taormina, which reads as Srlbws:"American Towerarespectfullyrequutwgthe PIr mg Commission to table the above relerencedappluarun until the soonest available meeting date. I understand that this a short notice, but the Planning Commissun's concerns m regard to this appluarun have not been resolved at this dine. Thankjvu so much jor yon assurance with this applicarun. Ijyou have any questions, I can be reachedar (248) 446-8495, extension 397." Mr. McCann: A motion ism order. On a motion by Mr. Alauskas, serenaded by Mrs. Koons and unanimously approved it was #5-87-2001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby reconrrnend that Petition 91-07-08-13 by American Tower requesting approval to expand the area previously approved for a monopole and equipment shed at property located at 17217 Middlebelt Road in the S.P. 1/4 of Section 11 remain tabled indefinitely Mr. McCaw, Chahman, declared one motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted ITEM #5 PETITION 99 -08 -GB -05 Melvin Herner & Kevin Konat (Classic Interiom Furniture Store) Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is Petition 99 -08 -GB -05 Melvin Heiner & Kevin Kort, on behalf of the Classic Interiors Furniture Store, requesting approval to substitute a greenbelt for the protective wall as outlined in Section 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance for property located at 20292 Middlebelt Road in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 1. 18582 Mr. McCann: We met wAh the petitioner at the study meeting and we told him it wuuldnI be necessary to come back for tranighPs meeting because everything was in order. We went through the plan and everything appeared to be proper. Is there a motion? On a motion by Mr. Sbane, seconded by Mrs. Koons and unammously approved, it was #5-88-2001 RESOLVED that, the City Phoning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition 99 -08 -GB -05 Melvin Hemer & Kevin Koss; on behalf of the Classic Interiors Furniture Store, requesting approval In substitute a greenbelt for the protective wall as o dined in Section 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance for property located A 20292 Middlebelt Road in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 1 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the landscaped greenbelt along the north property line and the annual greenbelt along the east property line, as shown on the plan received by the Planning Commissim on August 3, 1999, sha0 be substituted for the protective wall required by Sectim 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance; 2. That these areas shall remain in their present state and my changes to these areas shall require Planning Commissim review and approval; 3. That the trash dumpster area shall be enclosed to the satisfaction of the Inspectim Department and the three walls shall be constructed out of masonry blocks or poured concrete and the enclosure gates shall be maintained and when not in use, closed at all tomes; 4. That the dumpster enclosure shall be constructed within six (6) months of this approval. Mr. McCain, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted It will goon to City Cantil with an approving resolution. ITEM #6 Approval of Minutes 823'" Regular Meeting Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item an the agenda is Approval of the Minutes of the 823`a Regular Meeting held on April 24, 2001. On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mrs. Koons and unanimously approved, it was #5-89-2001 RESOLVED that, Poe Minutes of the 823`a RegularMeeting held by the City Planning Commissim m April 24, 2001, are hereby approved. A roll call vote was tap® with the following result AYES: Piercerebi, Koons, Sbane, Alanskas, McCain NAYS: Now ABSENT: LaPme Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted the 825me Regular Meeting held on May 22, 2001, was adjourned at 8:15 P.M CM PLANNING COMMISSION Dan Piemenchi, Secretary ATTEST: James C McCann, Chairman /nm 18583