HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2003-10-2820863
MINUTES OF THE 875" PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
On Tuesday, October 28, 2003, the City Planning Commission of the City of
Livonia held its 875° Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City
Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. James McCann, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Members present: James C. McCann Dan Piercecchi H. G. Shane
Robert Alanskas William LaPine John Walsh
Carol Smiley
Members absent: None
Messrs. Mark Taormina, Planning Director; At Nowak, Planner IV; Scott Miller,
Planner III; Bill Poppenger, Planner I; and Ms. Marge Roney, Secretary, were
also present.
Chairman McCann 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 requeslfor 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 len 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 dale of adoption. The Planning Commission
and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their fling.
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 2003-09-01-16 JOHN ELIEFF
Mr. Pieroecchi, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2003-
09-01-16, submitted by John Elieff requesting to rezone
properly located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between
Mayfield and Shadyside Avenues in the Southwest''/. of Section
3 from C-1 to C-2.
P1111 -51111
Mr. Taormina
presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. McCann:
Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak:
There is one item of correspondence from the Engineering
Division, dated September 29, 2003, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has
reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections
to the proposal at this time. The legal descriptions for the
parcels as submitted are correct based on the existence of 60
feet of right-of-way for Seven Mile Road adjacent to each
parcel. Our records indicate that the 60 feet of right-of-way
across Parcel B has not been dedicated at this time. If this is in
fact the case, this right-of-way should be dedicated to Wayne
County at this time." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron,
P.E., City Engineer. That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. McCann:
Is the petitioner here this evening?
Alphonse V.
Tabaka, Tabaka & Chiesa, 40400 East Ann Arbor Road, Suite
104B, Plymouth, Michigan 48170. I represent Mr. Elieff. Mr.
Elieff is to my right here. I am an attorney in the local area here.
Just briefly, Mr. Elieff owns the site to the west, currently the
shopping center, and recently purchased the property to the
east which he hopes to develop. In order to give him a better
opportunity to deal with the property, he is asking that this be
rezoned to C-2.
Mr. McCann:
Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mrs. Smiley:
Is that the one thats now marked R-9 that he just purchased?
He owns the property to the west?
Mr. McCann:
No.
Mr. LaPine:
The piece the cross hatch is on.
Mrs. Smiley:
Okay. So he owns those two parcels?
Mr. Tabaka:
Yes. He originally owned Parcel A. He's owned it for a time,
and now he purchased Parcel B.
Mrs. Smiley:
Okay. Thank you.
20865
Mr. Piercecchi: What is the primary reason, sir, that you wish to go from a
neighborhood commercial to a general commercial rezoning?
What specifically did you have in mind?
John Elieff, 25301 Michigan Avenue, Dearborn, Michigan 48124. We thought
that we would either build a mirror image of the center we have
or something similar, and we need an anchor to attract other
tenants. We thought a restaurant, like a family dining,
breakfast, lunch place would do real well. The current zoning
only allows for 40 seals. When I brought it to reallors and told
them a 35-40 seal restaurant, they all told me I wouldn't be able
to attract a tenant there.
Mr. Piercecchi:
True, in general business, it's zoned for restaurants but it's also
zoned for repair shops and all kinds of noisy things that go
along with it when you go into C-2. Why can't you just leave it
like it is and ask for a waiver use for a restaurant?
Mr. Elieff:
I mean I don't know exactly once we build, what tenants the
reallors are going to bring to us, but we're kind of competing
with the golden mile there, Haggerty from Six Mile all the way to
Novi, all the big national companies. They're fighting to gel in
and we're kind of off that path. We're number two. We've got to
try twice as hard to attract people and gel tenants. We're not
interested in pulling in a factory or a noisy repair shop or
anything. I own the center next door and I want to complement
my center and improve it. I wouldn't want to do something there
that would hurl my center on the other side. We've got a nice
mix of tenants on the other side and I want to kind of round it out
and complement it. This parcel has been empty for ... 20
years I've lived in Livonia, the parcel has been empty and had
an old sign on there, available, but nothing has ever happened.
I want to take it to the next level to improve it.
Mr. Piercecchi:
But the next level, if I understand you correctly, would be a
restaurant that seats more than 30.
Mr. Elieff:
Yeah, I want it to be available to do that.
Mr. Piercecchi:
But like I said, sir, C-1 you can do that also. You just have to
get a waiver.
Mr. Elieff:
Right, but that's not the only ...
Mr. Piercecchi:
I dont know what you talked about -- competing with the golden
mile or with Six Mile Road.
rzmiY:1
Mr. Elieff:
With Haggerty Road and all the big tenants that are going in
there and all the construction that goes on, we're on a smaller
road, less traffic. For me to go and spend the kind of money it
would lake to put up a building, I've got to be able to attract a
tenant that can pay the rents that's needed to be able to show a
bank that, hey, this is a viable project to bank on.
Mr. Shane:
I just want to expand on what Mr. Piercecchi was saying. Can
you tell me what other specific kinds of uses you're looking for
other than restaurants that you couldn't do in C-1 but you can
do in C-2?
Mr. Elieff:
Well, like I would be looking at a bank or a credit union. We've
had some interest from some banks. But like I said, nothing that
would . . I'm the neighbor next door, so whatever we do, I
would be hurting myself if I did something that wasn't in
character with the area and the neighborhood. I want to add on
to my property and make my properly better, not make it worse.
Mr. Shane:
Mr. Taormina, can't you have a bank in a C-1 district?
Mr. Taormina:
Banks are permitted in the CA district, but waiver use approval
is required for any drive -up facilities.
Mr. Shane:
So you could do a bank in the C-1 district with a special
approval?
Mr. Elieff:
But for me, when a realtor comes and brings a tenant and tells
him, "You might be able to do this here," they just pass you by
and go on to the next site that's available. I want to be able to
say, "Yes, we have this. It's available. We're in the market this
way." Spend money and advertise in the newspaper that way to
gel the tenants in. I don't think I can really aggressively go out
there and tell someone, maybe we can put a deal together here.
Mr. Alanskas:
Sir, you said you own the property or ...
Mr. Elieff:
I purchased it.
Mr. Alanskas:
You purchased it knowing that it might stay C-1? You still
bought it?
Mr. Elieff:
I bought it, yes. I didn't want someone coming next door to me
and maybe doing something that would hurl my center.
20867
Mr. McCann:
My question was, you've staled that you really need the C-2 for
a bank and a restaurant. Both those are waiver uses. What I
guess I'm looking at is, I live on Mayfield, and I'm a regular
shopper between Jets and the cleaners and everybody there.
Why do you need to change the one parcel from C-1 to C-2? Is
that 100 percent rented right now?
Mr. Elieff:
It will be.
Mr. McCann:
Why would you need to change the zoning on that half?
Mr. Tabaka:
It would be an integrated parcel.
Mr. Elieff:
It would open up the whole parking and probably conned and
add to that existing parcel where the building is and run it all the
way across.
Mr. McCann:
Its two separate parcels. So what you would want to do is
make a u -shaped building, you're saying?
Mr. Elieff:
I would probably go straight across. I wouldn't mirror it. I would
just go across not to block the view of the stores.
Mr. LaPine:
My only problem is, I would feel more comfortable for a C-2
zoning if I knew what was going in there. But my problem is, we
may give you the zoning for C-2 and you may not find a good
tenant. And then somebody comes along and offers to sell it to
you, and you claim because you own the building next door,
you're going to be cognizant of what goes in there as long as
you own the properly. But if you should sell the property off,
then we lose control of what goes in there and that's a worry I
have. Like Mr. McCann and our other members have said, if
you want a restaurant, you're not going to compete with the big
name restaurants. There's no doubt about it. And you're not
going to gel a big national chain to come on Seven Mile Road in
that location. I happen to live by the shopping center, the Kmart
shopping center. I live behind the subdivision there. A nice little
family restaurant-- there's one on eight Mile Road that's been in
there now for three or four years that's done fine. As a matter of
fad, there's two of them there - one in the Northwood Shopping
Center and the other little one down the street. You probably
would do fine there, but if you're going to go after a national
chain, you're not going to gel that type of restaurant. You're
going to have to cater to the people within the surrounding
couple miles of that area. It cant be a pizzeria because we're
pizzeria -ed out in that neighborhood. At this stage of the game,
YIO:IY:1
1. That this general area in the vicinity of the Seven Mile
Road and Farmington Road intersection contains sufficient
C-2 zoned lands to serve the needs of the area;
2. That the petitioner has failed to adequately demonstrate a
need in this area for additional commercial uses such as
are permitted by the C-2 district;
3. That the uses permitted in the existing G7 zoning district
as well as the several waiver uses are sufficient to serve
the area;
4. That the proposed change of zoning would lend to
encourage future requests for similar zoning changes
along Seven Mile Road in this area;
you haven't made an overwhelming case for us to rezoning it
from C-1 to C-2. There's alternatives for you to do what you
want to do under G7 by getting a waiver use. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. McCann:
Are there any other questions? Is there anybody in the
audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Mr.
Tabaka or your client, do you have anything else to say before
we close the public hearing?
Mr. Tabaka:
I think, just in general, we're not looking for a national tenant.
We realize that. Really, what Mr. Elieff is trying to tell the group
is that he wants the flexibility in marketing this particular parcel,
and he certainly has no intentions to do anything that would be
derogatoryto the area, to his own shopping center. It just would
be complementary to his needs.
Mr. McCann:
Thank you. I will close the public hearing. A motion is in order.
On a motion by
Mr. Shane, seconded by Mr. LaPine, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#10-153-2003
RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on October 28, 2003, on
Petition 2003-09-01-16, submitted by John Elieff, requesting to
rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road
between Mayfield and Shadyside Avenues in the Southwest''/.
of Section 3 from G7 to C-2, the Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2003-09-01-
16 be denied for the following reasons:
1. That this general area in the vicinity of the Seven Mile
Road and Farmington Road intersection contains sufficient
C-2 zoned lands to serve the needs of the area;
2. That the petitioner has failed to adequately demonstrate a
need in this area for additional commercial uses such as
are permitted by the C-2 district;
3. That the uses permitted in the existing G7 zoning district
as well as the several waiver uses are sufficient to serve
the area;
4. That the proposed change of zoning would lend to
encourage future requests for similar zoning changes
along Seven Mile Road in this area;
5. That the proposed zoning district would lend to attract uses
which are incompatible to and not in harmony with
surrounding land uses in the area; and
6. That the subject properly is located so as to provide
commercial services principally to the surrounding
neighborhood in accordance with the intent of the C-1
zoning district.
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. McCann: Is there any discussion?
Mr. Alanskas: In my opinion, the parcel that is here is surrounded by C-1
zoning, and if we even thought about rezoning this to G2, I'm
quite sure we would have a domino effect because other people
would say, "I'd rather than C-2 than G7." It would just go right
down the street. Thank you.
Mr. Piercecchi: I just want to say that I'm going to support the denying
resolution, especially in this area which is bordered on the north
by apartments, R-7, and on the east by R-9, which is elderly
housing. Granted, I think as Mr. LaPine staled, that we're not
sure that if its zoned G2, who the next owners are going to be.
Property does change hands, so I will support the denying
resolution.
Mr. McCann: Mr. Elieff, Mr. Tabaka, I think what you've found at the Planning
Commission tonight is that we're not ready to rezone the
property but the uses you're looking for, possibly a family
restaurant or possibly a credit union or bank, may fl in that
location and are appropriate under G7 with a waiver use.
However, if you look al the zoning, we do this gradual zoning. It
goes from C-2 to C-1 to R-9 to a residential use. We try and
step the bases down. And then to change the zoning from C-2,
61, G2, R-9, it doesn't make good planning sense. I think we
can accommodate the tenants you're looking at within the
zoning. It's not uncommon; many, many tenants come to us.
They sign leases subject to Planning Commission and Council
approval. That's a very common way of doing business within
the City. Would the Secretary please call the roll?
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted. It will go onto City Council with a denying resolution.
20870
ITEM #2 PETITION 2003-09-01-17 CONTRACTING RESOURCES
Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition
2003-09-01-17 submitted by Jim Bamas, on behalf of
Contracting Resources, LLC, requesting to rezone property
located on the west side of Farmington Road between Five Mile
Road and Lyndon Avenue in the Northeast % of Section 21 from
R-2 to OS.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the properly under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak: There is one item of correspondence from the Engineering
Division, dated October 6, 2003, which reads as follows:
`Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has
reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections
to the proposal at this time. No further right-of-way dedication is
required and the legal description as prepared for the combined
parcels is comect. The drive approaches to Farmington Road
will require a permit from Wayne County and the site will be
subject to the detention requirements of the Wayne County
Storm Water Management Ordinance. There are no City of
Livonia storm sewers immediately adjacent to the site." The
letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. That is
the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening?
Jim Bamas, President, Contracting Resources, LLC, 403C E. Grand River,
Brighton, Michigan 48116. Here with me is the developer, the
broker, John Barker the architect, and a couple of the residents
in case there are any questions.
Mr. McCann: Thank you. Is there anything additional you'd like to tell us at
this point?
Mr. Barnas: Not at this point. Mark did indicate a few days ago about a
heads up about the parking, although we understand we're in
for rezoning and not site plan approval. John with Hobbs+Black
has done an analysis on some parking that we'd like to present
to you.
Mr. McCann: Why don't we set up the tripod. You have a proposed picture of
what it might look like.
20871
Mr. Barnas: There's a site plan and a full size rendering
Mr. McCann: Basic renderings. Again, this is just for perspective of what
might go in there, correct?
John Barker, Hobbs+Black Architects, 100 N. Slate Street, Ann Arbor, Michigan
48104. Everyone has done a pretty good job of explaining it.
Within this kind of multi -packaged parcel, we're proposing a
two-story office building with aboul28,800 square feel. It backs
to the Lutheran property. The building at this point is pretty
simple. The one question that we had at hand was when we did
the parking analysis. The building lakes 283 parking spaces.
And for what at least has been in the early discussion mode,
that with the prospective tenant, we're not going to need
anywhere near that level of parking for this building. We'd like
to look at the concept of being able to take some of this parking
and turn it into green space on the site. As Jim said, this may
not be the forum to do that, but we thought it was an important
point to bring up. It may be in the form of a variance or a land
bank situation. As Jim indicated, we've done an analysis of
what this particular building would take for parking in the
neighboring communities, be it Northville, Novi, Farmington; we
looked at Southfield; we looked at Royal Oak, and its
substantially less in terms of a need. The medical need is really
precedent. We can accommodate on this site. We're not
talking about building a bigger building, but we might think about
the ability to add some more green space to this site. In terms
of what a building would look like, unfortunately at this point
because negotiations are underway, there is a prospective
tenant that the project is being discussed with. Unfortunately
until that moment happens, one can't really disclose who that is.
But the design of the building, at lead we've done a conceptual
model that's done with that prospective organization in mind and
suits their image. It's a very, very professional -looking building.
It would either be a masonry building or a cast stone type of
building. Basically, a two-story medical office building. Large
windows and some articulated features about it.
Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. Alanskas: When they first came before us a couple years ago, as I
understand it, there was a tenant that had a business on the
east side of Farmington Road and they wanted to move into this
building. Are they going to be one of your tenants?
Mr. Barnas: I'm not familiar with this
20872
Mr. Barker:
I don't think we're the same deal that might have been here two
years ago.
Mr. Alanskas:
I just wondered if they had contacted you because I know they
had outgrown their area and they wanted logo into this building.
Mr. Barnas:
We first started some discussion with Mark and the Planning
Commission and had an informal meeting with the Mayor
maybe 9 or 10 months ago. At that point in time, it took the
broker about six, seven, eight months just to assemble the three
pieces. So that's where we're at.
Mr. Barker:
That's our whole history.
Mr. Shane:
Have you taken this to a point where you have an idea of the
number of parking spaces that you think they'll need?
Mr. Barker:
We think we're roughly in the 200 space demand for this site.
Mr. Barnas:
And that should work well with the users that we have in mind.
Mr. Shane:
I'm going to say that kind of helps me a little bit because we
have been discussing the possibility of a much larger greenbelt
for the rear to try and help the folks in the senior citizen housing
back there, so this sounds like it might work into that scenario.
Mr. Barker:
That's actually one of the ideas that we had that we could press
the deep part of the parking forward and save some of this area.
So that line might move up. While we might move that line up,
we might be able to afford a little bit more lawn and green space
up toward the front of the property.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Sir, is this building cast in cement? That's exactly what you're
going to put in there?
Mr. Barnas:
No.
Mr. Barker:
No. Not 100%. We would come for normal site plan approval.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Talking about parking here is fine and we're cognizant that other
communities have much less standards, but when it comes to
the site plan, we can resolve all these issues. Right now,
tonight, we're whether it's appropriate to make this an OS zone
from a residential zone. That's what we're here about. So we
can lake care of all those problems in site plan review.
20873
Mr. McCann:
Are there any other questions? Is there anybody in the
audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition?
Vince Lee, 14801
Farmington, Livonia, Michigan. My wife, Chris and I, own two
of the four parcels. We own the vacant land and the little red
house next to it. We've owned it for about 30 years. I would
like to vote for it for the simple reason, when I purchased that
land as an investment, I used to be a real estate broker in the
city, and at the time, I don't know if many of you are as old as I
am, but at the time the City had that proposed zoning for a
medical site. And then it went through a lot of transition, and I
think it's back maybe to its logical use or it's logical most
premium use. It would appear tome it would be a good building
to have in the City in relationship to tax base, but you people are
more sophisticated in that than me. But since I grow older and
I'm in the senior citizen status position, I think the more medical
facilities, the better. Thank you very much.
Mr. McCann:
Anybody else? I will close the public hearing. Does the
petitioner have any last comments?
Mr. Barnas:
No, I have no further comments.
Mr. McCann:
Thank you. I think Mr. Piercecchi asked for the floor.
Mr. Piercecchi:
I will offer an approving resolution. I think this is a win-win
situation here.
On a motion by
Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mr. Alanskas, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#10-154-2003
RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on October 28, 2003, on
Petition 2003-09-01-17 submitted by Jim Barnas, on behalf of
Contracting Resources, LLC, requesting to rezone property
located on the west side of Farmington Road between Five Mile
Road and Lyndon Avenue in the Northeast''/. of Section 21 from
R-2 to OS, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 2003-09-01-17 be approved
subject to the following conditions:
1. That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in
harmony with the surrounding zoning and land uses in the
area;
20874
2. That the proposed change of zoning will provide for
additional office uses to serve the area;
3. That the proposed change of zoning is complementary to
the OS zoning on adjacent properties fronting on
Farmington Road, both north and south of the subject
properly;
4. That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the
developing character of the properties located on the west
side of Farmington Road north of Lyndon Road; and
5. That the proposed change of zoning is in accordance with
the Future Land Use Plan designation of Office land use
for this area.
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. McCann: Is there any discussion?
Mr. Shane: I wonder if the maker and the supporter of the motion would
consider, based on the petitioner's discussion on parking,
eliminating some amount of land in the back from this zoning
proposal and leaving it in the R-2 District, for example, 50 feet
or something? Do you know what I'm saying? Because if he
only needs 200 parking spaces plus or minus, he can eliminate
probably 50 feel of that back there and still have more than 200
parking spaces.
Mr. McCann: My question, if I may respond to Mr. Shane, is that what we did
on the proposal to the south of it with Brighthouse was make
that parking. My only point is, what I would rather have is some
type of land banking so that they meet the ordinance if they
should ever need to.
Mr. Shane: I guess my answer to that is, they can always come back and
ask for additional zoning.
Mr. McCann: We could do it that way. Either way.
Mr. Shane: Personally, I would feel more comfortable if we rezoned it back
there to parking or something. They can always put more
parking in even with the land banking.
20875
Mr. McCann:
I do notice, according to our plans, that the northeast unit of
Silver Village does just about abut the property line. There
would be parking right up to it unless we did something. What is
your proposal?
Mr. Shane:
My proposal is to leave the rear 50 feel in parking or rezone the
rear 50 feel in the parking designation and/or leave it in R-2.
Mr. McCann:
The maker of the motion was Mr. Piercecchi.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Well, the reason why I didn't make any comment on that is
because of the notes we received with tonight's agenda. It said
the approved site plan for the Brighthouse Network facility
expansion on the adjacent properly to the south shows that the
westerly 46 feet of that property, although zoned P, will be left
as a greenbelt area. Doesn't that handle what you are trying to
do?
Mr. McCann:
He would like to do the same thing.
Mr. Shane:
I would like to do the same thing on this properly, more or less.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Do you think now is the time to do this or after we see the final
plans?
Mr. McCann:
No, you have to do it now because It's a zoning issue.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Okay, so we want to rezone that to P?
Mr. Shane:
That is my suggestion.
Mr. Barnas:
Do you mind if I interject? We would prefer not to do split
zoning but to keep it one zoning, and if we have to landbank, we
can receive that at site plan approval. I think its loo premature
to determine what we're ultimately going to do there.
Mr. Shane:
If I may, chats the reason why I asked the architect if he was
pretty sure that the numbers he spoke of were fairly firm. If
that's not true, then ...
Mr. Barker:
While that may be true, if we dont rezone all of this propertythe
same, we're going to have a reduced acreage of OS, which if
we follow the letter of the ordinance, we couldn't build the size
building that we've been in discussion on.
20876
Mr. McCann:
I believe that if you have the parking, that would be included in
your OS district. You can zone it parking and include it as part
of the parking for your building. Is that correct, Mr. Taormina?
Mr. Taormina:
That's correct.
Mr. McCann:
So it would not impact the size of the building. It would not
impact your proposal in any matter. The only thing it would
restrict is pulling any type of building on the rear 50 feel, but you
could land bank your parking back there for future use should a
new tenant come in that requires more parking.
Mr. LaPine:
Mr. Chairman, if we leave it all OS, he can still land bank @ for
parking. He can still put in all the landscaping back there, so I
don't really see any reason to change it. That's my personal
opinion.
Mr. Alanskas:
Also, I might interject, when we asked him about the building,
its not cast in stone. So they may be considering putting up a
larger size building if possible if he had the tenants, so I think it
would be best if we just kept it all OS. Thank you.
Mr. McCann:
I wouldn't want to put up a larger building than he has actual
parking for. I'd hale to suggest that he could gel away with
something more because he's going to do reduced parking.
Mr. Shane:
To me, if his plans change and he wants to have a bigger
building, then come on back and ask for some additional zoning.
Mr. McCann:
So the maker of the motion, you don't want to change your
motion?
Mr. Piercecchi:
I agree with Bill and Bob. I don't see what purpose it is. We
can landbank back there and accomplish the same thing. This
way everything is loose.
Mr. McCann:
Unless there's an alternative resolution, I'm going to call the roll.
Will the Secretary please call the roll? The motion is carried
and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City
Council with an approving resolution to OS zoning.
20877
Mr. Pieroecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition
2003-09-01-18 submitted by Christopher McGrath, on behalf of
Newburgh Properties, LLC, requesting to rezone properly
located at 19025 Newburgh on the west side of Newburgh Road
between Seven Mile Road and Kingsburn Drive in the Northeast
% of Section 7 from OS to C-1.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the properly under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. Nowak: There is one item of correspondence from the Engineering
Division, dated October 6, 2003, which reads as follows:
`Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has
reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections
to the proposal at this time. No further right-of-way dedication is
required and the legal description as prepared for the combined
parcels is comect. Any drive approaches to Seven Mile Road
will require a permit from Wayne County and the site may be
subject to the detention requirement of the Wayne County
Stomp Water Management Ordinance. Any work within the
Flood plain of the open drain on the site will require a permit from
the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality." The letter
is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. That is the
extent of the correspondence.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening?
Christopher J. McGrath, PLLC, 42705 Grand River, Suite 201, Novi, Michigan
48375. I am an attorney from Novi and I represent Newburgh
Properties, the petitioner in this case. Before I gel started, I do
have a drawing of what a proposed site plan might look like for
this particular project. If I may pass it around; there's nine
copies.
Mr. McCann: Thank you
Mr. McGrath: Mr. Taormina correctly points out that there is some history to
this property. Back in 1997, there was a petition for rezoning.
From what I can gather, many of the members of on the
Commission currently were also members back then with the
exception of Mrs. Smiley, Mr. LaPine and Mr. Shane. This
properly was originally zoned C-2. That was back in the 80's
before the lawsuit was filed. That was a 1998 lawsuit which was
fled by the then owner, Jack Shenkman. As a result of the
YIR:i(:1
resolution of that lawsuit, Consent Judgment was entered
changing the zoning of this properly from C-2 to OS, which is its
currently zoning classification. I would like to point out that was
a small piece of a larger puzzle. A bunch of different parcels
were rezoned. This was only one part of that Consent
Judgment. Now, I'd like to, as I indicated, request that this
property be rezoned from OS to C-1, and I'd also like to suggest
to the Commission that it might be more appropriate to amend
the Future Land Use Plan as well from OS to C-1 for the
reasons I staled in my petition. Back in 1997 when the original
petition was denied, there may have been a need for office
space in this particular portion of the City. But since then, as I
pointed out, Vidor Office Park has been developed and all
along Vidor Parkway and then down Pembroke there's a lot of
vacant office space right now. I would submit that G7 would be
more appropriate for this particular use. We don't have the
concerns here that we gel this property rezoned and then quick
sell it off to someone for a higher price. We've been in
negotiations with CVS for quite some time here. In fad, I have
a letter dated November 13, 2002, with me. This is addressed
to Mrs. Elaine Beresh, who is one of the two members of
Newburgh Properties, LLC. It says, `Dear Mrs. Beresh,
attached please find the first draft of a lease along with the
exhibits for the above -referenced store. Please review the
attached and contact me with any questions or comments you
may have." Another thing I'd like to point out, back in 1997 we
were proposing a similar use. That was for an Arbor Drugs, but
this is a CVS pharmacy, obviously.
Mr. McCann: I guess what you're trying to tell us is that there's some type of
hardship. That it can't be developed as OS or professional
service. I know that there's a piece right across the street
where somebody is paying a very large price for a piece of
property to build a dentist office. Certainly, he's ripping down a
home and doing a number of improvements in order to do that.
There was a new dentist office that was just developed up on
Eight Mile Road. I mean there are practitioners out there
looking for space. What is the hardship in searching those
people out?
Mr. McGrath: This property has been on the market for years and years.
Mr. McCann: Al what price, though? At a price that's reasonable for office?
20679
Mr. McGrath:
Well, if you look at just the sheer glut of office space in that
particular portion of the City with the offices in the Vidor Office
Park and along Pembroke there.
Mr. McCann:
We just had somebody come right at the comer of Seven Mile
and Victor Parkway. They put in another office there. We have
other people coming with new developments along there for
more office.
Mr. McGrath:
Well, it's worth noting that this particular property is less than
three acres, and because of the wetland situation, the
developable area of that property is even less. We're talking
about a little over one and half acres. Some litigation work has
been done in the past. We would need to get new permits
possibly to develop this. But the point I'm trying to make, this is
such a small parcel that an office building there is just not
appropriate, I would submit, from either an aesthetic standpoint
or from an economic standpoint.
Mr. Alanskas:
Sir, when did the LLC acquire this property?
Mr. McGrath:
I'm not sure about the exact date when this was deeded to
Newburgh Properties, LLC.
Mr. Alanskas:
You mentioned that Elaine Beresh is a part of the LLC?
Mr. McGrath:
Yes.
Mr. Alanskas:
Is Jack Shenkman also a part of that?
Mr. McGrath:
No, sir. Jack Shenkman is not an owner of this property.
Mr. Alanskas:
Because I see in 1996, she had a petition with Jack Shenkman
to put up the first drugstore.
Mr. McGrath:
That's correct. But as I said, Mr. Shenkman is no longer an
owner of that property. The only members of Newburgh
Properties, LLC, are spelled out in Item 1 of my petition - Elaine
Beresh and her daughter, Marsha Baker.
Mr. Alanskas:
All right. Thank you.
Mr. LaPine:
When the medical building was built directly behind, the five -six
story building, it was a time when I happened to be here when
the petition came up. I'm a member who was here. We tried to
get the hospital to buy that comer because we knew it was
going to be a problem to develop. The problem was, the price
that Mr. Shenkman wanted for that little parcel was so
outrageous it was ridiculous. They were willing to buy the
properly and develop a nice green area and not even build on it.
Its been a parcel that we knew from the word go was going to
be lough to develop, and we tried to work out some deal where
the office building could have bought the property. We could
have got a nice corner there with a greenbelt and shrubs and
things of that nature. Al this point, we have had three different
proposals in that immediate area, Seven Mile and Newburgh,
for rezoning to commercial. We turned every one of them down.
Al this point, I haven't seen you make a good enough argument
for me to rezone this from OS to a commercial endeavor here.
God only knows, do we need another drugstore? Just go down
the road a mile, you've got a drugstore. Go a mile in the other
way, you've got a drugstore. Now, that isn't for me to say. If a
guy wants to go ahead and spend his money and put a
drugstore in there, but if something goes in there as a drugstore
and it doesn't make it, we're stuck with an empty building. As
Mr. McCann pointed out, a small doctor's office or a small clinic
might be compatible to that little parcel. But at this point, the
drugstore draws a lot of traffic. I don't know if you drive
Newburgh and Seven Mile Road very often, at certain hours of
the day its almost gridlock. So at this point, as one member,
you haven't made a good argument for me to change the
zoning.
Mr. McGrath: If I could just respond to that briefly, Commissioner LaPine.
With respect to the hospital, it is my understanding they used to
actually have an option to that particular property and they
never chose to exercise that option. And you do correctly point
out that there are some other drugstores - one at Six and
Newburgh, one at Eight and Newburgh. I think its worth noting
that neither of those are freestanding drugstores so to speak.
The one at Eight and Newburgh shares a building with the golf
store, and the one at Six and Newburgh is part of a much larger
plaza. This particular proposal would look more like the CVS
drugstore located at Nine and Haggerty. It would be a
freestanding drugstore so to speak. But I've attached a study
that CVS has done indicating that due to the population
increase in this particular area, this is a viable option from an
economic standpoint. I don't think CVS would be interested if it
wasn't. They're smart gentlemen over there. They're not going
to enter into a bad deal like that, and I think an empty office
building is going to be just as unatlrecfive as an empty
pharmacy building. But I don't think we're going to have an
Ylrff:til
empty pharmacy building with the increase in population and the
residences that have been built around that area since the last
petition. I think you're going to have plenty of shoppers there.
But due to the current economic situation, I just don't know that
we're going to be able to draw office tenants to that particular
area. Again, a small office building like that, number one, I don't
think its going to look very good on that corner. Number two, I
don't see how they're going to compete with some of the nice
buildings in Vidor Office Park.
Mr. Walsh: I just had a comment regarding the vacancy rate. I certainly
think you're correct in terms of the office space that is vacant,
but we also have more commercial vacancies in town than I'm
personally comfortable with. Right now, its OS. I think we
should leave it that way. Let the economy recovery and we'll
see how the vacancies shake out, but the vacancy rate really
doesn't have any weight for me because we have commercial
vacancies that are of concern. In fad, if I'm not mistaken, it was
a CVS at Six Mile and Farmington. Isn't that correct?
Mr. McCann: Six Mile and Farmington and Five Mile and Merriman.
Mr. Walsh: Right by Baskin and Robbins, that was recently vacant and that
commercial center has really been suffering. I think the history
here is in favor of leaving it as OS. And I think from a planning
perspective, I'm more concerned with the commercial vacancy
rale in town than I am the OS. That's my comments.
Mr. McGrath: Commissioner Walsh, I'd like to address that if I may. It's my
understanding that the particular CVS that closed down in that
part of the City, one of the main reasons it did so is that a
Walgreen's was put at the same intersection. Now I recognize
that there are a lot of pharmacies in the City of Livonia. It is my
understanding that there are 33. That's pursuant to FOIA
request that I did. But where in the zoning ordinance does it say
that 33 pharmacies is loo much?
Mr. McCann: I dont think that was the ... go ahead.
Mr. Piercecchi: We don't know when enough is enough. I'd like to ask Mark,
our Director, a question. Mark, how much land did that
Walgreen's use up on Six Mile and Farmington? Can anybody
remember that? Was that two and half acres?
Mr. Taormina: Give me a minute or two and I will answer your question
rirlly�
Mr. Piercecchi:
And question number two, inasmuch as there's a pharmacy in
the hospital, they could protest that and it would require six
voles from City Council to pass it. Correct?
Mr. Taormina:
I'm sorry. Could you repeat that?
Mr. McCann:
He's wondering if the hospital could file a valid protest against
the rezoning?
Mr. Piercecchi:
Because there is a pharmacy in that hospital.
Mr. Taormina:
Absolutely. As an adjacent landowner, if Mission Health Center
presents a petition to the City Council prior to the roll call vote
objecting to the rezoning, then that would constitute a valid
protest petition and it would require a three-fourths majority vole
of the Council in order to pass the rezoning. But to answer your
first question, the land area for the Walgreen's pharmacy at the
southeast corner of Six Mile and Farmington Roads is 78,300
square feet, so that would be slightly less than two acres.
Mr. Piercecchi:
The reason why I asked that question, not to have an
adversarial relationship with you, but as you said, the office
lakes up more space than a drugstore does, and I wanted to
know just what Six Mile and Farmington look. It's almost two
acres.
Mr. McGrath:
I'm not saying that office couldn't be built there. I'm saying that
generally the more attractive offices I would submit are in the
medium-size to large-sized developments.
Mr. McCann:
I will take offense to that with my little 3,000 square foot office.
Mr. McGrath:
No offense was intended.
Mr. McCann:
Thank you.
Mr. McGrath:
I was generalizing, but I did want to address the objection issue
real quick. Last time around when the petition did come up in
the mid-1990's, Mission Health Center did object at that time
and it did require a three-quarters vole from City Council, which
obviously didn't go through. But in 1999, Mission Health did
send the owner of this particular property a letter withdrawing
that objection formally, and we don't anticipate that there's going
to be an objection this time around.
Mr. McCann: Thank you. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to
speak for or against this petition?
Richard Abboll, 23100 Providence Drive, Suite 490, Southfield, Michigan. I work
for Providence Hospital Medical Centers. We have sent a letter
tothe Presidentofthe City Council protesting this rezoning. We
copied the Planning Commission on this. We object because
we've made our development giving consideration to the
zonings of the surrounding properties, and think that a change
in this from its general office and professional office type of
zoning to a retail type of use could potentially harm us. Not that
we're saying CVS is harmful but as Mr. LaPine said earlier,
we're not certain what will happen in the future with that
properly. We would not want that to become a properly that
would be detrimental to us providing medical care to the citizens
of the City of Livonia. So we have filed a protest for the
rezoning of this properly.
Mr. McCann:
Thank you. Is there anybody else wishing to speak for or
against this petition? I'm going to close the public hearing. Sir,
you have the opportunity for any last comments.
Mr. McGrath:
I stand corrected with respect to the objection.
Mr. McCann:
Yes, 0's kind of hard to refute it. A motion is in order.
On a motion
by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. LaPine, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#10-155-2003
RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on October 28, 2003, on
Petition 2003-09-01-18 submitted by Christopher McGrath, on
behalf of Newburgh Properties, LLC, requesting to rezone
properly located at 19025 Newburgh on the west side of
Newburgh Road between Seven Mile Road and Kingsburn
Drive in the Northeast % of Section 7 from OS to C-1, the
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that Petition 2003-09-01-18 be denied for the following
reasons:
1. That the proposed change of zoning is contrary to the
Future Land Use plan designation of Office;
2. That this general area in the vicinity of the Seven Mile
Road and Newburgh Road intersection is currently well
served with a variety of commercial uses;
YIr1:1:L1
3. There is no demonstrated need for additional commercial
zoning in this section of the City; and
4. The proposed change of zoning would provide for uses
that are not needed in this area.
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. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with a denying
resolution.
Y 1:1 k5 F1,l9 =k Y Y I [a] i! FIQr1cEiP1iYZiF •,F70PPP
Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition
2003-09-02-19, submitted by Jon Massa requesting waiver use
approval to operate an automobile and light truck repair facility
on property located at 30759 Eight Mile Road on the south side
of Eight Mile Road between Merriman Road and Milburn
Avenue in the Northwest'''/ of Section 2.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from
the Engineering Division, dated October 3, 2003, which reads
as follows: `Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division
has reviewed the above -referenced petition. No further right-of-
way dedication is required and the legal description for the
parcel as submitted is connect. The packing shown along the
east side of the building presents a safety issue. Our records
indicate that the distance from the face of the building to the
east property line is approximately 24 feet. This means that
cars parked along the east side of the building will have to back
into the Milburn Street right-of-way by using the approach as a
maneuvering area. At present, the approach extends for a
significant distance along Milburn. One possible solution would
be to make this parking parallel and adjacent to the face of the
building." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City
Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue
YIQ8d7
Division, dated October 8, 2003, which reads as follows: "This
office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a
request to operate an automotive and light truck repair facility on
property located at the above -referenced address. We have no
objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by James E.
Corcoran, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of
Police, dated October 16, 2003, which reads as follows: "We
have reviewed the plans regarding the proposal to operate an
automotive and light truck repair facility located at 30759 Eight
Mile Road. This proposal will require one properly posted
handicap space located near the entrance to the office. We
recommend that the parking space located at the southwest
comer of the property be removed. This will allow the garbage
truck ample room to tum around after accessing the dumpster
and to more easily exit the property after making a pickup." The
letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau.
The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated
October 14, 2003, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your
request of October 2, 2003, the above -referenced petition has
been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) The parking lot
needs maintenance, repair, resealing and double striping.
There is no provision for accessible parking. (2) The existing
landscaping is deficient of the amount required and the side
yard and front yard are basically asphalt instead of landscaping.
The existing landscape also needs maintenance and perhaps
the two front trees replaced. The rear area is also overgrown.
(3) The building needs to be painted on the south and west
walls. (4) The rear main door and front overhead door need to
be replaced. (5) There is an unenclosed dumpster in the rear.
This Department has no further objections to this petition." The
letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection.
That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening?
Jon Massa, 8916 Danzig, Livonia, MI 48150. I'm a resident of Livonia. Its
myself, mainly. I've got two other employees. I'd like to operate
a small auto repair, light truck facility. This facility suited our
needs for the square footage that we need. I understand there
is insufficient landscaping and things like that. The landlord
there is willing to cooperate with the landscaping issues. I've
been talking to Al and Mark, and they brought suggestions to
me. We've changed this drawing several limes to help
accommodate the things that they brought up. The landlord
was not fond of losing all his parking lotthere to the east side of
the building, but we counterotfered with putting planters up
rzmrrJ
against the building. He's got one existing planter in the front of
the building and that's all he has at this point. We proposed that
we could put a planter in front of our building that we're looking
to lease from him and then maybe build a big planter across the
front of Eight Mile there since there is a lot of room there. As far
as his east side of the building, he would accommodate us and
help us. Actually, he would do it. He would also put planters
across that side of the building to help accommodate those
needs.
Mr. McCann:
Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. Piercecchi:
I'm pleased that the barbed wire is coming off. That fence that's
on your western boundary running north and south, does that
have any value at all? It seems like it's just wide open there.
Mr. Massa:
Yes, you're correct. It is wide open there, but as At and Mark
have told me, to be an auto repair, we would have to fence that
over to the building to enclose the yard and a gate. So as far as
my purposes, it's valuable now to attach a gate and run it
straight over across towards the building and have two gates
open and close. If they'd like that to be a privacy gate, that
could be. That's where the barbed wire is that looks like its
property.
Mr. Piercecchi:
So the fence right now has no value, but will have value once
you're set up.
Mr. Massa:
Yes.
Mr. Piercecchi:
You just have to make it perpendicular to the building then.
Mr. Massa:
That's correct.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Okay. Thankyou.
Mr. LaPine:
Could you tell us what type of repair work you're going to do
here? Just tune-ups, things of that nature?
Mr. Massa:
General auto repairs, lune -ups, exhaust, brakes. I've been in
the area in Redford and in Detroit the last 15 years. Six and
Telegraph - there was a Shell gas station. I was a long-term
employee there for 12 years, and the last three years a part
owner there. We had a basic service station operation, which is
general auto repair, light truck repair. And the last three years I
was in Redford across the street on Five Mile and Telegraph at
rirllri
Rhodes Auto Center, as kind of like an owner/operator there.
There we did the same. We did major and minor repair but we
had three buildings there. We had a lot more square footage, a
big yard and things like that there. But at this facility, we're
going to keep it small, keep it cute, keep it clean. We're just
looking to make a living.
Mr. LaPine:
Whaldo you define as lighttmck?
Mr. Massa:
Like your SUVs, one ton or under.
Mr. McCann:
You wouldn't mind a stipulation to that in your waiver use, would
you?
Mr. Massa:
I'm sorry, say that again.
Mr. McCann:
If we put that as one of the conditions, one ton or under, you
could live with that?
Mr. Massa:
Yes.
Mr. LaPine:
Will any of these vehicles be stored overnight? Does it lake
more than two days to do it. Do you keep them inside? Do you
park them outside?
Mr. Massa:
Right. In most cases, we're generally a one -day, tworday repair
facility. We've got a lot of commercial customers - a lot of
dealerships and stuff we do some stuff for. But basically, we do
the repair that day and get it back to them, or if we have to store
the vehicle, it will be kept indoors.
Mr. LaPine:
Okay, so there won't be a lot of vehicles parked outside waiting
to be repaired?
Mr. Massa:
Only during the day if they're completed to be picked up. That's
going to be it.
Mr. LaPine:
Will your dumpsler be large enough to accommodate any parts
or anything that you throw out?
Mr. Massa:
I think so from my experience and what I've been doing the Iasi
15 years. Where I just came from, we had a 6' by 6' which was
five fool tall or whatever. We had it emptied once a week and in
most cases that was more than enough.
Y
Mr.
La Pine:
What does Multicom, your neighbor to the east - what kind of
business is he in?
Mr.
Massa:
He's doing some kind of foam system and security systems.
Mainly he works in prisons and things like that.
Mr.
Alanskas:
You're going to have three hoists there?
Mr.
Massa:
I'll have three hoists there.
Mr.
Alanskas:
Are they air operated or are they electric?
Mr.
Massa:
They're electric, aboveground, electric hydraulic.
Mr.
Alanskas:
Okay. How many compressors are you going to have in the
building?
Mr.
Massa:
Just one.
Mr.
Alanskas:
With a 10 horse?
Mr.
Massa:
10 horse, yeah.
Mr.
Alanskas:
Okay. And you're going to have impact wrenches in the
summertime?
Mr.
Massa:
Yes.
Mr.
Alanskas:
All right. I'm always concerned with noise in the summertime,
because when it's hot, usually a repair shop will open their
doors and windows. Noise really travels, especially with air
impacts and compressors. Are you going to be doing any
engine work or transmission work?
Mr.
Massa:
No transmission work. Any engine work would be light engine
work.
Mr.
Alanskas:
The engine oil you're going to be selling there, is that going to
be in a tank or in case lots?
Mr.
Massa:
As far as buying it?
Mr.
Alanskas:
Like rfyou're doing an oil change for a customer or a luneup.
Mr.
Massa:
We'll be buying it in cases.
r
Mr. Alanskas:
Where are you going to be pulling the old oil that you lake out of
these engines?
Mr. Massa:
We have container drums and a couple companies that recycle
that. We do that with antifreeze also. Antifreeze and oil go in
their own separate drum to be contained. When they get full or
near full, we call the recycler and he comes over and picks them
up.
Mr. Alanskas:
Will it be stored inside the building at all times?
Mr. Massa:
Yes.
Mr. Alanskas:
Not outside?
Mr. Massa:
No.
Mr. Alanskas:
There will be no refuse outside at all?
Mr. Massa:
No.
Mr. Alanskas:
As far as drums or old mufflers that you take off a car, or sheet
metal.
Mr. Massa:
None.
Mr. Alanskas:
It will all be inside the building?
Mr. Massa:
Yes.
Mr. Alanskas:
All right. Thankyou.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Well, actually, Bob asked the question I was going to ask
because we have a different standard if you're going to do
transmission work. But you say you will not do anytransmission
work?
Mr. Massa:
No, we're not in the transmission business.
Mr. McCann:
Is there any else? Is there anybody in the audience thatwishes
to speak for or against this petition?
Paul Wrosch, 20490 Milburn, Livonia, Michigan 48152. I've lived in Livonia for
two months. I bought a home on Milburn because its a nice
quiet neighborhood. I'd like to keep it that way. And I'm not
against Mr. Massa opening up his place without some
r:•r
adjustment. Number one, Milburn is one of the few streets you
can use to gel from Seven Mile to Eight Mile without going on
Merriman. If you just drive a little bit over to Flamingo, you can
go through. And so a lot of people do. They go to Fanner
Jacks and stores over there. So Milburn is not the quiet street I
thought it was al limes, okay. So there is some traffic. We also
have a number of children living on Milburn, and I was very
concerned, I'm not sure how this came out, with that side
parking that faces Milburn. You see the building does not go all
the way to the curb. There is a head -in parking lot there right
now. And it is a blind spot for cars turning from Eight Mile onto
Milburn. Plus the cars coming through Milburn from the
opposite way, from the residential area, lend to go a little loo
fast for my tastes. With those cars backing out, think about this
yourself: you've backed out of head -in parking where you had,
let's say a minivan next to you. You know you got to edge out
slow. Well, by edging out slow over there, you're in the street
already, and if cars are going to come around that corner less
than 20 yards away, it's a blind spot. So there was a
suggestion, the gentleman mentioned that might be closed off
for parking. If it was, that would be perfect. I'm not sure parallel
parking would solve the problem. I don't know. But it is a blind
spot and it is dangerous. And just two or three houses over,
there are a number of little children living there. That's the
reason I moved here from busy Macomb. The first reason was
my grandson lives out this way and I expect him to be over in
my yard a lot. Okay. The second thing was, using Milburn, you
know, you've taken your cars into places. What do they do
when they're finished repairing it? They road lest it. I would not
like to see Milburn used for any road testing. Okay? I think that
would be very important not to be using that to run cars up and
down. The third thing, I'm not sure what kind of hours this
gentleman wants to keep. One of the things I've been
disappointed in where I live, and I'm only two houses off of Eight
Mile, plus there's a big business loo there across the street from
his place, the truck noise. I have my mother living with me;
she's 89; she has Alzheimer's; she likes to sleep in until at least
10:00 and there's a lot more truck noise than I thought there
would be. I can live with that. But if we have a lot of noise from
this shop added to that truck noise, I'm not sure I'd want to stay
there. Finally, we need to know about noise; we need to know
about hours this gentleman wants to keep. I don't know how
many hours you want to stay open?
Mr. McCann: Sir, you have to address us.
20891
Mr. Wrosch: Well, he might know the answer. You might not.
Mr. McCann: I'm putting the notes down to ask him questions.
Mr. Wrosch: Okay. And that's all I have to say. I would not want to see that
parking left the way it is because it definitely is a blind spot. The
building is in the way; people come around that corner, they
know there's no houses there; they're moving fairly quick. I'm
not saying they're speeding, but they are going 30 - 35 miles an
hour, and if a car is backing out between a couple of larger
vehicles, they've got to be in the street before they could see
anything coming. Thank you.
Mr. McCann:
Mr. Taormina, did you talk to the petitioner at all? We talked
about possibly pulling some greenbelt along Milburn there and
having some parking. We would have two spots at this end and
two spots at this end so that they would be pulling out in a front
direction like normal traffic.
Mr. Taormina:
Yes. In fact, we did diagram that out for him. I believe he
indicated that he did advance that idea to the landlord. Maybe
he wants to elaborate on what the result was there.
Mr. Massa:
I did speak to Lonnie Urban, who is the owner of both buildings.
He was not fond of- and once again, this is me bringing it to him
and telling him what At and Mark had told me - putting a big
greenbelt island there and then losing what he feels is a lot of
his parking even though the way we've drawn it out, there was
four spots parallel or two side by side parallel. He could still gel
the same out of it. I'm not loo sure where I stand in the mix of
that. I'm sure that's something the City of Livonia can force the
issue with him. I understand that because I'm occupying some
of his front parking, is why maybe the whole unit is getting
observed for parking. As far as what my usage is, I'm just trying
to do everything ... to be kind of between you people and him
and go from there.
Mr. McCann:
Thank you. What about the hours of operation?
Mr. Massa:
The general hours for wherever I've been, Monday through
Friday, 8 to 6. We've worked 8 to noon or 8 to 3 at the latest on
a Saturday, and then closed on Sunday.
Mr. McCann:
And you'd have no problem if we put as part of your conditions
that there would be absolutely no road testing up and down
Milburn Avenue with the vehicles you're repairing?
20892
Mr. Massa:
That's no problem. We'd rather be on Eight Mile road testing
anyways, so that's no problem.
Mr. McCann:
Is there anybody else in the audience wishing to speak for or
against this petition?
Dave HerrgoH,
Michigan Pattern Products, 20525 Milburn, Livonia, Michigan
48152. I own the building due south. It's the adjacent building.
I personally do not see this as an issue of packing, greenbelt,
garbage removal, rubbish removal, anything like that. We are
going through severe changes in this City, this stale, with
industrial buildings becoming vacant. This gentleman has an
opportunity to rent his building. Possibly we should all think
about easing our regulations a little bit on sluff to the point
where we will allow people to come in and do sluff. This
gentleman has had this building for rent for about six months
now, five months. I've had units for rent. I've complied with
industrial, light industrial. And you try to slick with these.
There's a possibility someday I'm going to have another unit for
rent very soon, and if I cannot gel a renter, how do I pay my
taxes? They're astronomical. So, due to the fact that he has a
renter, someone who is willing to go in there, keep a clean
operation, I agree. Hours - this is an industrial area. They are
no hours in industrial areas. Am I not correct?
Mr. McCann:
Sir, there are neighbors that abut this property. That's a
reasonable question to ask because this is a waiver use. This is
typically a louder use with the air impact wrenches, and it has a
bigger impact. That's why its a waiver use.
Mr. HerrgoH:
I beg to differ with you on that because light industrial, you can
have just about any kind of noise possible. So I don't think it's a
noise issue either. I think it's a fact that this gentleman wants to
move in, keep a clean operation. I'm all for it. Somebody
brought up the fact about the barbed wire? I have the barbed
wire. The reason being, vandalism. Okay. It's a big thing. I
had to put a gate up that we lock every day during the summer
because of vandalism. And it's nothing that we can stop. The
police have been called three times. They've come and taken
reports, and it's never been heard of again.
Mr. McCann: When did you put the barbed wire up?
Mr. Herrgolt: About three years ago, four years ago
20893
Mr. McCann:
Mr. Taormina, do we have an ordinance against barbed wire in
the City?
Mr. Taormina:
Its allowed in industrial districts under certain conditions.
Mr. McCann:
Anything else, sir?
Mr. Herrgot:
No, sir. That's all. I just wanted to mention that man has an
opportunity to rent his properly. Let's let him have it because
they are few and far between right now.
Mr. LaPine:
Do you live in that area?
Mr. Herrgolt:
No. I own that building.
Mr. LaPine:
I understand that, but you have to realize there is some
residential people that live in that area.
Mr. Herrgolt:
Oh, yes.
Mr. LaPine:
And they have some rights loo.
Mr. Herrgolt:
Oh, definitely. We comply with all their rights. The neighbor
due south of me, a nice lady. She calls me her son because I
take care of her sluff loo. Its not that we are infringing on
anybody's rights. I have no problem with the parking, backing
in, pulling out. Thal type of thing. If this other gentleman does,
that's his prerogative. I've been in this building for 35 years
now. The one I'm in now, 30 years, excuse me, and we've
never had a problem with that. The only problem we've ever
had is vandalism.
Mr. LaPine:
Okay. Thankyou.
Mr. McCann: Is there anybody else in the audience that wishes to speak for
or against this petition? I'm going to close the public hearing.
Sir, you have the opportunity for any last comments.
Mr. Massa: Just as this gentleman said, I'm just a young guy that wants to
operate a business and keep things clean and do things right
and abide by whatever I've got to do about landscaping issues.
Mr. Alanskas: How long is your lease for?
Mr. Massa: Well, the lease is all contingent on this, obviously.
Y
Mr. Alanskas: I mean if it's approved, how long is your lease?
Mr. Massa: Well, he's going to allow me to sign a one year lease and after
that he'd like me to sign a five year lease.
Mr. Alanskas: All right. Thank you.
Mr. McCann: A motion is in order.
On a motion by Mr. Walsh, seconded by Mrs. Smiley, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#10-156-2003 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on October 28, 2003, on
Petition 2003-09-02-19 submitted by Jon Massa requesting
waiver use approval to operate an automobile and light truck
repair facility on properly located at 30759 Eight Mile Road on
the south side of Eight Mile Road between Merriman Road and
Milburn Avenue in the Northwest % of Section 2, the Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 2003-09-02-19 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1. That the Site Plan marked Article I prepared by Jon Massa,
dated October 23, 2003, is hereby approved and shall be
adhered to;
2. That the Building Elevations Plan marked Article 2
prepared by Jon Massa, dated October 23, 2003, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to;
3. That a fully detailed landscape plan shall be submitted for
approval by the Planning Commission and City Council
within 60 days following approval of this petition by the City
Council;
4. That the following issues as outlined in the correspondence
dated October 14, 2003, from the Inspection Department
shall be rectified to that departments satisfaction:
- That the parking lot shall be repaired, resealed and
double striped;
- That the handicapped parking shall be provided near
the building entrance as required and shall be properly
sized, marked and signed;
20895
That the building shall be painted on the south and west
walls;
That the rear main door and front overhead door shall
be replaced;
5. That repair work conducted at this facility shall not include
bumping, painting, spraying, rust -proofing, or transmission
repair;
6. Thal there shall be no overnight outdoor parking or storage
of vehicles on the site;
7. That all auto parts, equipment, scrap material, debris or
similar items generated by the subject use shall be stored
inside the building or inside a dumpsler or other type of
trash container;
8. That any lighting equipment provided on the subject site
shall be shielded and shall not exceed 20 feet in height
above grade;
9. That the use of barbed wire on the fence enclosing the
subject properly shall be prohibited, and all existing barbed
wire shall be removed;
10. That the plans referenced in this approving resolution shall
be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time the
building permits are applied for;
11. That vehicles repaired at this facility shall not exceed one
ton capacity;
12. That there shall be no lest driving of vehicles on Milburn
Avenue;and
13. That the site plan shall be revised so as to provide
additional landscaping in the east side yard area between
the building and the Milburn Avenue right-of-way.
Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for
the following reasons:
1. That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the
special and general waiver use standards and
rzri�rl
requirements as set forth in Sections 16.11 and 19.06 of
the Zoning Ordinance #543;
2. Thatthe subject property has the capacitylo 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. McCann:
Is there any discussion?
Mrs. Smiley:
I have one question. Did we want to mention in the conditions
about no trucks over one ton in capacity that you talked about or
is that not part of it?
Mr. McCann:
That was Mr. LaPine's recommendation. We had a reference to
no more than one ton light pickup truck repair and no road
testing on Milburn Avenue. Did we want to change the parking
configuration on the recommendation going to Council or leave
four parallel spots or four spots that would go into a greenbelt
area?
Mr. Walsh:
I'm fine with it the way it is.
Mr. McCann:
Why don't we let the Council decide it? There would be a
greenbelt between the two entrances. You'd actually have an
entrance and exit to the building as opposed to a large area. To
be honest with you, people will still park whatever way they
want.
Mr. Shane:
I was going to say that I would have preferred to talked to the
landlord about this issue, but I don't want to hold up this
gentleman because I think we don't need a empty building. But
I'm not loo sure we've solved that problem along Milburn unless
we do something like you suggested. I don't want to hold him
up, but I'm really not satisfied with that setup that's along there.
Mr. McCann:
Possibly we could make that recommendation that way if the
landlord has a problem with it, he could come to Council and
defend himself.
Mr. Shane:
That's fine.
20897
Mr. McCann: Would that be all right?
Mr. Walsh: That's fine. I mean I don't want to hold him up. If that's
acceptable, let's make that recommendation.
Mr. McCann: You'll set it up with an amended site plan showing two spots
with a greenbelt in between them on the north side and two
spots with a greenbelt in between on the south side?
Mr. Taormina: As I understand it, there will be a condition added requiring that
change to the Site Plan. Now whether or not he presents that
change to the City Council is up to him.
Mr. McCann: We can put it in as part of our conditions that it will be changed.
Mr. Taormina: If I may add to Item 9, removal of any barbed wire would only
Mr. Alanskas: But you have windows in the building that can be opened.
Mr. Massa: Really, no.
Mr. Alanskas: Good.
take place on the property he owns.
Mr. McCann:
It would only on the part he owns. We couldn't do it on
someone else's property. Is that all right with the supporter and
the maker of the motion?
Mr. Walsh:
That's fine.
Mrs. Smiley:
And I would like to thank you for Irving in Livonia, moving here
and working here. We like that.
Mr. Alanskas:
I just hope that you watch your noise level in the summertime
because I was in that business for 30 years. I was the past
president of the Michigan Trucking Association. We had a lot of
cases come before us in regards to excessive noise around the
neighborhood, and some places were closed because of that
because each mechanic wants to have their own radio. In the
summertime it's blaring outside. So if you could, please watch
that. That's very important.
Mr. Massa:
On this building, it's nice that there's only one overhead door in
the front of it.
Mr. Alanskas: But you have windows in the building that can be opened.
Mr. Massa: Really, no.
Mr. Alanskas: Good.
Mr. Massa: There's a lot of other noise across the street. Whatever that
building is across the street, right now there's a lot of noise.
Mr. Alanskas: Then you know what I'm talking about?
Mr. Massa: I do. Yes, I do.
Mr. Alanskas: All right. Thank you.
Mr. McCann: Please call the roll.
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carded and the foregoing
resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an
approving resolution. This concludes the public hearing portion
of this meeting. We will now proceed with the Miscellaneous
Site Plan section of our agenda. Members of the audience may
speak in support or opposition to these items. Will the
Secretary please read the next item?
ITEM #5 PETITION 2003-09-08-27 FAMILY VIDEO
Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition
2003-09-08-27 submitted by Rockford Construction, on behalf of
Family Video, requesting approval of all plans required by
Section 18.47 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a
proposal to renovate the exterior of the building located at
37405 Ann Arbor Road in the Northeast % of Section 31.
Mr. Miller: This site is located on the corner of Newburgh and Ann Arbor
Road. Family Video is requesting approval to modify the
exterior of the commercial building and divide it into four units.
Family Video would be occupying the front unit that faces Ann
Arbor Road. The other units are identified Units A, B and C.
They are required to have 88 parking spaces. The site shows
94 spaces, so they meet the parking requirement. They are
proposing to remove some of the existing pine trees along
Newburgh and Ann Arbor Road and replace them with
deciduous trees. The other trees identified as Spruce trees will
be trimmed to a 10 foot height. The existing building is brick on
all four sides. The decorative dryvit paneling would be removed
and a new pre -finished metal roof system would be installed
along the lop section of the north and east elevations. Over the
main entrance of the Family Video Store, the metal roof would
extend out into a peak shaped canopy or overhang. At the end
of the lip of the overhang would be a glass block tower.
According to the petitioner, this lower is part of the signature
look or image of Family Video. This glass lower would be just
over 26 feet in height and would be internally illuminated. A
new vestibule entrance would be constructed under the
overhang. New exterior entrance doors would also be installed
around the building to allow access to each of the other units.
Large picture windows would be incorporated along the north
and east elevations. Family Video is proposing two wall signs
and two ground signs. They are allowed two wall signs because
they are the comer unit. The new proposed ground signs are
conforming but because the two wall signs are still shown on the
front elevation, a variance is still required from the Zoning Board
of Appeals.
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from
the Engineering Division, dated October 21, 2003, which reads
as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division
has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no
objections to the proposal at this time. No further right-of-way
dedication is required. Our records indicate that the additional
27 feet of right-of-way for Newburgh Road has previously been
dedicated. The legal description should be revised to reflect this
dedication. We are sending you a marked up description
reflecting this dedication, which you can pass on to the
petitioner's architect for his use." The letter is signed by Robert
J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the
Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated October 8, 2003, which
reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan
submitted in connection with a request to renovate the exterior
of the commercial building on property located at the above -
referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal."
The letter is signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal. The
third letter is from the Division of Police, dated October 21,
2003, which reads as follows: We have reviewed the plans in
regards to the proposal to renovate the site located at 37405
Ann Arbor Road. We have no objections to the plans as
submitted. The handicap parking must be properly posted and
stop signs should be installed at both exits of the parking lot."
The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau.
The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated
October 20, 2003, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your
request of October 6, 2003, the above -referenced petition has
been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) The parking lot
20900
needs maintenance, repair, resealing and double striping. (2)
The asphalt curbing needs repair and/or replacement at the
northern end of the parking lot and also at the island curbing.
(3) The required tuck -pointing of the brick at the rear has not
been completed. (4) Lease space 'D" is incorrect as drawn.
The proposed west door is inaccessible and not suitable for an
entrance door. That space would require two exits. (5) As a
group commercial center (more than four establishments) the
parking ratio would be one space per 125 usable square feet.
This site would need 105 spaces of which five would be
accessible. Therefore, a variance from the Zoning Board of
Appeals would be required for the deficiency of 11 parking
spaces. (6) The barrier free parking needs to be not only
disbursed but also nearest the front entries. The plan should
have three spaces for the family video, two to the east or west
of the entrance and one space to the side not chosen for the
two. Another space should be located between the entry doors
for suite "B" and "C." The last space should be located nearest
the entrance for suite "D." One van accessible space of eight
feet wide with an adjacent access aisle of eight feet wide is
required. The balance of accessible parking is to be eight feet
wide with a five foot wide adjacent aisle. The spaces are to be
property sized, signed, marked and located. Ramps must be
provided as needed. This Department has no further objections
to this Petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant
Director of Inspection. And lastly, Mr. Chairman, we did receive
a letter from John Fricke, Signature Associates, dated October
22, 2003. He is an associate broker and he is urging the City of
Livonia to support this project. That is the extent of the
correspondence.
Mr. McCann: Is the pefifioner here this evening?
Todd Bezenah, Family Video, 4749 East Dunbar Road, Monroe, Michigan. In
regards to our proposal of a renovation of building, I did have
the pleasure of silting in last Tuesday althe publicwork session
and discussed a number of these subjects. We feel that with
the site plan we resubmitted that we hopefully worked through
and made all the corrections we discussed last Tuesday. In
regards to some of that list, I'd like to kind of go through it one
by one if we could. With the asphalt repair, anything on that will
be replaced or repaired as needed so it looks 100% pretty much
like a new lot. Being deficient 11 parking spots, I believe that
was with a five -unit building; we're now four. So we won't have
to go to the ZBA for that. I think we are in compliance.
Handicapped spaces being moved to wherever is necessary -
20901
Mr.
no problem. And we're okay with stop signs also on the exits
Can a teenagergo back there?
and entrances. I'm here to answer any questions.
Mr. McCann:
Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. Alanskas:
Can anybody rent a video in your store? Any age, a teenager,
So it's very ... I believe ... I think Mrs. Smiley frequents our
for example?
Mr. Bezenah:
Yes. There are restrictions just like a movie theater. If you
Mrs.
were to come in and you weren't 18 years old, you can't rent R-
Thanks for not saying the adult section.
rated movies. Just the regular codes.
Mr. Alanskas:
Looking at your very fine brochure here, it says that you have
Mr.
four sections: nearly new, favorites, family fun and classics.
She's always in that back room, right?
Where do you stock your x -rated movies?
Mr. Bezenah:
Those are back in a room, way back. Just in a back closed off
Mr.
room that's very non -accessible.
Mr.
Alanskas:
Can a teenagergo back there?
Mr.
Bezenah:
No. The doors are locked and its monitored by a camera also.
So it's very ... I believe ... I think Mrs. Smiley frequents our
Farmington Hills store, and she didn't even know we had one.
Mrs.
Smiley:
Thanks for not saying the adult section.
Mr.
Bezenah:
Sorry.
Mr.
Alanskas:
She's always in that back room, right?
Mrs.
Smiley:
You guys are really picking on me!
Mr.
Bezenah:
Ijust lost one vole.
Mr.
Alanskas:
I just wanted to make sure that you didn't rent x -rated film to
young teenagers. That's all.
Mr.
Bezenah:
Correct. Yes.
Mr.
Alanskas:
Thank you.
Mr.
Piercecchi:
We appreciate your new site plan showing the trees. We
suggested that you mark them and you did that. On the east,
you're replacing two pines with Red Buds?
20902
Mr.
Bezenah:
Yes.
Mr.
Piercecchi:
On Newburgh Road, three pines. But at the intersection of Ann
Arbor Road and Newburgh, you're pulling out four pines but you
didn't specify what you're going to replace them with. Then I
have a question for Bob or H.
Mr.
Bezenah:
Oh, I see with the line here. With a two and half inch caliper, I
believe they'd be new Eastern Red Buds.
Mr.
Alanskas:
Eastern what?
Mr.
Bezenah:
Red Buds.
Mr.
Piercecchi:
There will be four Red Buds there?
Mr.
Bezenah:
Yes.
Mr.
Piercecchi:
Now my question to my colleagues here, Bob and H, who are
very good ... is a Red Bud a good bel for Michigan winters?
Mr.
Alanskas:
Sure.
Mr.
Shane:
Sure.
Mr.
Alanskas:
Very good. They're very hardy.
Mr.
Shane:
Its a nice tree.
Mr.
McCann:
Anybody else? Mrs. Smiley, do you want to respond?
Mrs.
Smiley:
No. I just want to make sure you clarified it wasn't the adult
section that l hung out in.
Mr.
Bezenah:
Yes. You had no idea we had it.
Mrs.
Smiley:
Exactly. I want that on the record.
Mr.
McCann:
Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? Seeing no one, a motion is in order.
On
a motion by
Mrs. Smiley, seconded by Mr. Shane, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#10-157-2003
RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2003-09-08-27
20903
submitted by Rockford Construction, on behalf of Family Video,
requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of the
Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to renovate the
exterior of the building located at 37405 Ann Arbor Road in the
Northeast'''/ of Section 31, be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1. That the Site and Landscape Plan marked C101 dated
October 23, 2003, as revised, prepared by DTS Architects,
is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
2. That the height of the planted trees shall be measured from
the lop of the root ball to the mid -point of the top leader;
3. That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu of
hydroseeding;
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
Department and thereafter permanently maintained in a
healthy condition;
5. That the Exterior Building Elevation Plan marked A201
dated October 23, 2003, as revised, prepared by DTS
Architects, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
6. That the brick used in the construction shall be full face 4
inch brick or, in the case a precast concrete system is
used, it shall meet ASTM C216 standards;
7. That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be concealed
from public view on all sides by screening that shall be of a
compatible character, material and color to other exterior
materials on the building;
8. That the petitioner shall secure the necessary storm water
management permits from Wayne County, the City of
Livonia, and/or the State of Michigan;
9. That all light fixtures shall not exceed 20 feel in height and
shall be aimed and shielded so as to minimize stray light
trespassing across properly lines and glaring into adjacent
roadway;
20904
10. That the petitioner shall correct to the Inspection
Department's satisfaction the following as outlined in the
correspondence dated October 20, 2003:
That the entire parking lot shall be repaired, resealed
and double striped;
That the asphalt curbing at the northern end of the
parking lot and the island curbing shall be repaired
and/or replaced;
That all handicap spaces shall be identified and comply
with the Michigan Barrier Free Code;
11. That the signage shown on the approved plans, consisting
of two 30 square foot ground signs and two 54 square foot
wall signs, are hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
12. That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted
a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for
nonconforming signage and any conditions related thereto;
13. That no LED lightband or exposed neon shall be permitted
on this site including, but not limited to, the building or
around the windows;
14. That the lights used to illuminate the glass tower shall be
softened by light shields in order to make it less intrusive;
and
15. That the specific plans referenced in this approving
resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department
at the time the building permits are applied for.
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an
approving resolution.
ITEM #6 PETITION 2003-10SN-10 H & R BLOCK
Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition
2003 -10 -SN -10, submitted by The Blain Group, on behalf of H &
R Block, requesting approval for signage for the office building
located at 39209 Six Mile Road in the Northwest'''/ of Section
18.
20905
Mr. Miller:
This site is located on the southeast comer of Six Mile and
Haggerty Road. The petitioner is proposing an additional
ground sign for this office site. There is an existing ground sign
on the site's northwest corner at the intersection of Six Mile
Road and Haggerty Road. According to the Sign Ordinance, a
multi -tenant office building, with a minimum of 200 feel of
frontage along two major thoroughfares, is permitted two ground
signs. This site qualifies because it has 470 feel of frontage
along Six Mile Road and 650 feel of frontage along Haggerty
Road. The proposed signage is one ground sign 27 square feet
in sign area. Existing signage is one ground sign 29 square feet
in sign area. The proposed ground sign would be located
approximately 78 feet from the boulevard drive off Six Mile Road
that this site shares with adjacent office developments. It is
pointed out that under the current sign ordinance the proposed
ground sign would require a variance from the Zoning Board of
Appeals. A Business Center Sign, which the proposed sign is
classified, can only identify the center itself and cannot contain
the name, logo, or trademark of any business located within the
complex. By identifying the tenant, H & R Block, the proposed
sign is deemed nonconforming and they would need approval
from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. McCann:
Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina:
There is one item of correspondence from the Inspection
Department, dated October 23, 2003, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request of October 6, 2003, the above -
referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted.
(1) There is currently a proposed amendment to the sign
ordinance that would allow this petition to be approved as
presented. (2) Without the proposed ordinance amendment,
this petition would require a variance from the Zoning Board of
Appeals. Identification of a single tenant currently is not
permitted. This Department has no further objection to this
petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director
of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. McCann:
Is the petitioner here this evening?
James Blain, 29309 Six Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. McCann:
Is there anything additional you'd like to tell us about this
petition?
20906
Mr. Blain:
No, other than H&R wants to move its sign from Six and
Newburgh to its new location about a mile away. They are
expanding their facility from about 3,000 square feet to 10,000
square feet. They are making a major regional financial and tax
center. They want to slay in Livonia.
Mr. McCann:
Wonderful. Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. Piercecchi:
Are you going to vacate your current site on Newburgh Road?
Mr. Blain:
Thais correct. That site won't fit their needs or they'd expand it.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Its loo small?
Mr. Blain:
It is too small.
Mr. McCann:
Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? A motion is in order.
On a motion by
Mr. La Pine, seconded by Mr. Walsh, and unanimously adopted, it
was
#10-158-2003
RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2003 -10 -SN -10,
submitted by The Blain Group, on behalf of H & R Block,
requesting approval for signage for the office building located at
39209 Six Mile Road in the Northwest % of Section 18, be
approved subject to the following conditions:
1. That the Sign Package submitted by The Blain Group, as
received by the Planning Commission on October 3, 2003,
is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
2. That this ground sign shall not be illuminated beyond one
(1) hour after this business closes;
3. That no LED lighlband or exposed neon shall be permitted
on this site including, but not limited to, the building or
around the windows;
4. That any additional signage shall come back before the
Planning Commission and City Council for their review and
approval;
20907
5. That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted
a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for tenant
identification and any conditions related thereto; and
6. That the specific plans referenced in this approving
resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department
at the time the sign permits are applied for.
Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion? Will the Secretary please call the roll?
The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It
will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. This
concludes the Miscellaneous Site Plan section of our agenda.
We will now proceed with the Pending Item section of our
agenda. This item has been discussed at length in prior
meetings; therefore, there will only be limited discussion tonight.
Audience participation will require unanimous consent from the
Commission. Will the Secretary please read the next item?
ITEM #7 MOTION TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING OPEN-AIR BUSINESS USES
Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition
Petition 2002-11-06-05, a motion to hold a public hearing
pursuant to C.R. #601-02 to determine whether or not to amend
Section 11.03(1)(1), Subsections a, b and c, of Article XI of
Zoning Ordinance No. 543, as amended, regarding Open -Air
Business Uses.
Mr. McCann:
Mr. Taormina, is there any additional information on this?
Mr. Taormina:
There is nothing additional. We request that the Planning
Commission take no further action on this item for the reasons
staled in the prepared resolution.
On a motion
by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Alanskas, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#10-159-2003
RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission does hereby
determine to take no further action on Petition 2002-11-06-05,
submitted pursuant to Council Resolution #601-02, to determine
whether or not to amend Section 11.03(1)(1), Subsections a, b
and c, of Article XI of Zoning Ordinance No. 543, as amended,
regarding Open -Air Business Uses, inasmuch as a recently
approved language amendment (Petition 2003-01-06-01) has
revised Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance to provide that
any or all special waiver use requirements may be waived or
r•r:
modified by a separate resolution approved by a five -member
supermajority in which two-thirds of the members of City Council
concur.
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted. It will go onto City Council with an approving
resolution.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 875" Public
Hearings and Regular Meeting held on October 28, 2003, was adjourned at 9:25
p.m.
ATTEST:
James C. McCann, Chairman
CIN PLANNING COMMISSION
Dan Piercecchi, Secretary