HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2005-05-2422311
MINUTES OF THE 906"' REGULAR MEETING
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
On Tuesday, May 24, 2005, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 906" Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive,
Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. John Walsh, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Members present: Robert Alanskas William LaPine H. G. Shane
Carol Smiley John Walsh
Members absent: Dan Pieroecchi, R. Lee Morrow
Messrs. Mark Taormina, Planning Director; At Nowak, Planner IV; and Scott
Miller, Planner III; were also present.
Chairman Walsh informed the audience that if a petition on tonighfs agenda
involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the
City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and make the final
determination as to, requesting approval of the Master Deed, bylaws and
whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning Commission holds the
only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or vacating petition. The
Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City Council for the final
determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected. If a petition
requesting a waiver of use or site plan approval is denied tonight, the petitioner
has ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City Council.
Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Commission become effective seven
(7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning Commission and the
professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their filing. The
staff has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions,
which the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the
proceedings tonight.
ITEM #1 PETITION 2005-04-08-09 CB CLUB SITE CONDOS
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2005-04-
08-09 submitted by Leo Soave, on behalf of CB Club Site
Condominiums, requesting approval of the Master Deed, bylaws
and site plan required by Section 18.62 of the Zoning Ordinance
in connection with a proposal to construct a condominium
development on property located at 28200 Lyndon Avenue in
the Northeast % of Section 24.
22312
Mr. Miller: This petition involves a request to develop a site condominium
project on properly located on the northwest comer of Lyndon
Avenue and Hanison Avenue. The property has 424 feel of
frontage along Harrison Avenue and measures 120 feet along
Lyndon Avenue, for a total of 1.17 acres. Presently this sliver of
property is part of the CB Swim Club facility, which consists of
an in -ground swimming pod, a bathhouse, a playscape with
playground equipment, a miniature golf course and an outdoor
basketball court. The described properly is in the process of
being rezoned (Petition 04-09-01-11) from RIF (Rural Urban
Farm) to R-2 (One Family Residential). The Planning
Commission, after holding a public hearing, recommended
approving the requested rezoning at their October 26, 2004
Regular Meeting. Following a public hearing, the City Council
gave First Reading on the requested rezoning at its December
20, 2004, Regular Meeting. Second Reading and a Roll Call
Vole are scheduled at the time the site plan is presented to the
Council for action. Review of this petition is based on the
assumpfion that the property will be rezoned to 1-2. According
to the submitted documentafion, the proposed development
would be known as 'CB Club Site Condominiums." CB Club
would be made up of six lots or units, all fronting off Harrison
Avenue. In order to accommodate the site condominiums, the
swim dub's miniature golf course and outdoor basketball court
would have to be relocated. The site plan does not show any
type of aboveground detention, so it is assumed that storm
water would be handled underground. Five feet wide sidewalks
would be installed along the enfire length of this development's
frontage of both Lyndon Avenue and Harrison Avenue. An R-2
zoning district requires each lot to have a minimum land area of
8,400 square feet, a minimum lot width of 70 feet, and a
minimum lot depth of 120 feet. All the proposed condominium
lots of CB Club meet or exceed these lot size requirements. A
copy of the Master Deed and bylaws for CB Club has been
submitted for review.
Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from
the Engineering Division, dated May 9, 2005, 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. Detention in accordance with
Wayne County's storm water management ordinance and on-
site storm sewers will be required in connection with this
development." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E.,
City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire &
Rescue Division, dated May 3, 2005, which reads as follows:
22313
"This office has reviewed the site plan submitted m connection
With a request to construct a condominium development on
property located at the above -referenced address. We have no
objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Andrew C.
Walker, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of
Police, dated May 11, 2005, which reads as follows: 'We have
reviewed the plans in connection with a proposal by CB Club
Site condominiums located at 28200 Lyndon. We have no
objections or recommendations to the plans as submitted." The
letter is signed by David W. Studt, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau.
The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated May
3, 2005, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of
April 29, 2005, the above -referenced petition has been
reviewed. The following is noted. (1) This site does not provide
any open recreation space. (2) Exhibit A, Bylaws, Page 7 top
paragraph 2" to last word Whether' is incorrect. It should be
Weather.' (3) No mention is made of the existing fencing (some
with barbed wire) and what is to be removed and what is to be
replaced for safety. ff the intention is to add a new 6 foot tall
chain link fence at the east end of the R-2 property line, it will
require a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. 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. Walsh: Is the petifioner here this evening?
Leo Soave, 20592 Chestnut, Livonia, Michigan 48152. What we propose is to
build six individual homes on this property. All lots are
conforming with the R2 requirements, 70' x 120' or more. The
house will be 1,400 square feet or more. Its one and two
stories, full basement, attached garages and they should sell for
about $250,000 to $300,000. I'll answer your questions. Thank
you.
Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. Shane: Mr. Soave, because of the swim dub and its closeness to the
rear of some of these lots, are you planning on any kind of a
landscape barrier or anything of that sort, particularly along Lots
4, 5, and 6?
Mr. Soave: Well, we haven't thought about it. Since the swim club may
want to sell this property in the future, I think it would be a waste
of money to plant trees over there. Typically, that type of an
issue is handled by the homeowner. If they don't like it, they
can put some shrubs up there. If the Commission wishes for us
to do some plantings, we will do that.
22314
Mr.Shane:
I wasn't suggesting that we would require R. I was just
wondering what your plans were because if I were the
homeowner, I'd want to do it myself as well. Thank you.
Mr. La Pine:
Mr. Soave, this is a condo, right?
Mr. Soave:
It's a site condominium.
Mr. La Pine:
Don't site condominiums normally put in the barrier or
landscaping or something?
Mr. Soave:
Typically, on a bigger site, yes, but this is only a six lot project.
Mr. La Pine:
It really makes no difference if its six or one or 25 because we
don't know about the swim dub. You know why they're selling
the property, for financial reasons. They may make it; they may
not make it. They may go under in a year. They may be there
10 years from now. Who knows? In the meantime, it not only
protects the homeowners, I think it gives some protection to the
swim club in case young kids walk over on that properly or
something.
Mr. Soave:
Okay. We already plan on moving that fence over to where the
future property line is going to go. We're going to do that.
Mr. La Pine:
What kind of fence are you going to put up?
Mr. Soave:
What is there now.
Mr. La Pine:
A chain link fence?
Mr. Soave:
Yes, sir.
Mr. La Pine:
Is the fence along Harrison and abuts the houses back to the
north? Will all that fence come down because there is barbed
wire upon some of that fence.
Mr. Soave:
Right. That all has to be moved east.
Mr. La Pine:
One other question, and you and I discussed this the other day.
Apparenfly, you've got a problem. You've got to bring a sewer
line all the way down Hanison. Is that right?
Mr. Soave:
Yes, sir. I feel asleep on this one. Yes, sir.
Mr. La Pine:
That's not like you.
22315
Mr. Soave: Yeah.
Mr. Alanskas: In regards to open space, what are you going to have there for
these six lots?
Mr. Soave: I'd like to gel the open space requirement waived on a small
project like this. There's no room for open space. I think it
would be a nuisance to the future homeowners to have an open
space on this project.
Mr. Alanskas: All right. Thank you.
Mr. LaPine: Seeing that each of these houses has 30 feet behind them to
where the fence line is going to go, basically we will say, for
argument's sake here, that belongs to them. That's not part of
the condo. So that's their open space, we'll say, just like my
backyard.
Mr. Soave: Correct.
Mr. LaPine: That makes sense.
Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition?
Marty Kozyn, 14962 Bainbridge, Livonia, Michigan 48154. I represent CB Swim
Club. I just want to touch on the landscaping and then the
trees. Right now, its up for debate within the Club. I cant get a
real consensus as to whether or not people want trees or not
back there. So I think, as Leo stated, it's going to be sort of a
combination between us and you guys agreeing as to what
might be the best end result for that. So it's to be debated.
That's all I wanted to say. I can answer any questions too.
Mr. Alanskas: Since our last visit, is the Club doing better?
Mr. Kozyn: That's to be debated as well. We're down a little bit. We had a
pretty good first meeting with the swim team so that was pretty
encouraging. People are just kind of Tale as far as paying bills it
seems this year. So I dont know if its this particular year or the
general economy.
Mr. LaPine: On that basis, is there a point where you will not do any
improvements on the property unless you gel so many people
committed to the swim club this year?
Mr. Kozyn: No. We want to clean the place up a little bit.
22316
Mr. LaPine:
You operate no matter how many people you gel?
Mr. Kozyn:
Yep. Itjust may end up being a smaller dub.
Mr. LaPine:
The improvements that you told us when you came to us
originally months and months ago, to fix the dub house and
things like that, and you have to fix the pool I understand. That
all will be done no matter how many members you have?
Mr. Kozyn:
Correct.
Mr. LaPine:
Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there anybody else in the audience that wishes to speak for
or against this petition? Good evening, Mr. Tent.
Ray Tent, 18051 Deering, Livonia, Michigan. Good evening, ladies and
gentleman, the Planning Commission. I didn't intend to speak
on this item. I have another one, but this got my attention. I've
lived in the City for over 50 years, and I've sal there where you
folks are. I mean a lot of things came before us. We've been
concerned about a lot things, but Mr. LaPine hit the nail right on
the head. Regardless of whether you've got one house, two
houses or three houses, we fought very hard for landscaping. A
developer had to put this in. So to let him skate on this one, he
is not going to put any shrubs in or trees or anything like that.
That is debatable. So I think if I was out in that particular area
and I bought a condominium up there, I'd like to have that
completed. We've always had landscaping that the developer
had to put forth, so he may have to go ahead and increase his
houses another $10.00 or something that. But the fact is, we
want to make Livonia beautiful and affordable, and we can't do
that if we start slipping away and start culfing ends. I can't
remember ever when we went ahead and allowed a developer
to say, well, I'm only going to put two or three houses up here,
so Tel's forget about it. So with that in mind, I support Mr.
LaPine, and I hope that the Planning Commission would go
ahead in your approval and indicate landscaping would be
required. Because if you don't, the Council probably will. So
with that, thank you.
On a motion by
Alanskas, seconded by LaPine, and unanimously adopted, it was
#0538-2005
RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2005-04-08-09
submitted by Leo Soave, on behalf of CB Club Site
Condominiums, requesting approval of the Master Deed, bylaws
and site plan required by Section 18.62 of the Zoning Ordinance
22317
in connection with a proposal to consbud a condominium
development on property located at 28200 Lyndon Avenue in
the Northeast 'L of Section 24, be approved subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the Master Deed and bylaws complies with the
requirements of the Subdivision Control Ordinance, Title
16, Chapter 16.04-16.40 of the Livonia Code of Ordinance,
and Article XX, Section 20.01-20.06 of Zoning Ordinance
#543, except for the fad the following shall be
incorporated:
That the first floor of each condominium unit shall be
back or stone, on all four (4) sides, and the total amount
of back or stone on each two-story unit shall not be less
than 65% and not less than 80% on one-story
dwellings;
That all exterior chimneys shall be brick
2. In the event of a conflict between the provisions set forth in
the Master Deed and bylaws and the requirements set
forth in the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance No. 543, as
amended, the Zoning Ordinance requirements shall prevail
and petitioner shall comply with the Zoning Ordinance
requirements;
That the petitioner shall induce language in the Master
Deed and bylaws or a separate recordable instrument
wherein the condominium association shall reimburse the
City of Livonia for any maintenance or repair costs incurred
for the storm water detention/retention and outlet facilities,
and giving the City of Livonia the right to impose liens on
each lot owners property prorata and place said charges
on their real estate tax bills in the event said charges are
not paid by the condominium association (or each lot
owner) within thirty (30) days of billing for the City of
Livonia;
4. That the brick used in the construction of each
condominium unit shall be full face four inch (4") brick;
5. That the Site Plan marked Sheet 1 prepared by
Arpee/Donnan, Inc., as received by the Planning
Commission on April 26, 2005, is hereby approved and
shall be adhered to;
22318
6. That the petitioner shall secure the necessary storm water
management permits from Wayne County, the City of
Livonia, and/or the State of Michigan;
7. That the Site Plan referenced in this approving resolution
shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time
the building permits are applied for; and,
8. That all required cash deposits, certified checks,
irrevocable bank letters of credit ancVor surely bonds which
shall be established by the City Engineer pursuant to
Article XVIII of Ordinance No. 543, Section 18.66 of the
ordinance, shall be deposited with the City prior to the
issuance of engineering permits for this site condominium
development; and
9. That the Petitioner shall submit for the review and approval
by the Planning Department a landscape plan for the rear
of the proposed lots.
Mr. Walsh: Is there any discussion?
Mr. Alanskas: I agree with Mr. LaPine that we would put some kind of
landscaping in the rear. That should be on our record. I think
Mr. Soave can get back to Mark in regards to what type of
landscaping to put back there. I think this developer has always
done a fine job on landscaping, and I'm not woried that he
won't do it this time.
Mr. Walsh: Mr. Alanskas, I have a question for you. The addition that you
made to the prepared resolution would indicate that he can
agree with Mr. Taormina on the landscaping to allow this to
continue to move forward?
Mr. Alanskas: Yes.
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving
resolution.
ITEM #2 PETITION 2005-05-08-10 STEVE'S FAMILY DINING
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2005-
05-08-10 submitted by Steve's Family Dining requesting
approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the Zoning
Ordinance in connection with a proposal to construct additions
and renovate the ezierior of the restaurant located at 15800
Middlebell Road in the Southwest%of Section 13.
22319
Mr. Miller: The petitioner is requesting approval to construct additions and
renovate the exterior of the vacant restaurant that is located on
the northeast comer of Middlebelt Road and Broadmoor
Avenue. Over the years this site has accommodated a number
of different restaurants, including Gotsis, Nags Head, American
Inn and EmmetFs. The petitioner is planning on reopening the
establishment and operating it as a new restaurant known as
Steve's Family Dining. Two additions would be constructed to
the building, both on the north elevation. One, dose to the
northeast comer of the building, would be 495 square feel in
area. According to the floor plan, this small bump out would
provide the opportunity to relocate the bathrooms and allow the
expansion of the kitchen area. The second addition would
furnish the main entrance area with a new vestibule. This
enclosed entrance passage would be 90 square feet in size.
The two proposed additions would expand the restaurant to an
overall size of 4,830 square feet. The owners of Steve's do not
plan on increasing the seating count established for the
previous restaurants so waiver use approval is not needed. In
order to accommodate the larger of the two additions, some of
the existing parking spaces right up next to the building would
have to be removed. Eight"ne parking spaces are required
and they are providing 96 spaces. However, the 96 spaces
shown on the plan are only 9 feet wide. Parking spaces in
Livonia are required to be 10 feet wide. Based on the site plan,
there seems to be ample space on the site to accommodate 10 -
foot wide spaces. There are two existing drives offering access
to the site, the main one off Middlebelt Road and a secondary
one off Broadmoor Avenue. A note on the site plan indicates
that the existing trash dumpster endosure would be upgraded to
current standards. There is an existing 6 -foot high masonry
screen wall between this property and the residential properties
to the east. A landscape plan has not been submitted at this
time. When questioned about this, the petitioner stated that the
existing landscaping would be deaned up and maintained.
Required landscaping is not less than 15% of the total site; they
are providing 30% landscaping. Presently the exterior of the
building is brick. The petitioner is proposing to completely
refurbish the entire exterior of the building. The structural
design of the restaurant would basically stay the same but the
brick would be covered with dryvit. For contrast and precaution,
a two and half (2�") foot stone veneer would wrap around and
trim the base of the entire building. The existing asphalt
shingled roof and rooftop -screening enclosure would remain as
is. The plans do not suggest any type of signage for the new
restaurant. A note on the site plan indicates that the existing
ground sign would remain.
22320
Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from
the Engineering Division, dated May 9, 2005, 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 letter is signed by Robert J.
Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the
Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated May 3, 2005, which reads
as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in
connection with a request to construct additions and renovate
the exterior of the restaurant located at the above -referenced
address. We have no objections to this proposal." The letter is
signed by Andrew C. Walker, Fire Marshal. The third letter is
from the Division of Police, dated May 11, 2005, which reads as
follows: We have reviewed the plans in connection with a
proposal by Steve's Family Dining located at 15800 Middlebelt.
We have no objections or recommendations to the plans as
submitted." The letter is signed by David W. Stuck, Sergeant,
Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection
Department, dated May 10, 2005, revised, which reads as
follows: "Pursuant to your request of May 2, 2005, the above -
referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted.
(1) This building had a special inspection performed December
16, 2004. A copy of the letter generated with the items needing
correction is attached. (2) The parking lot appears to need
resurfacing or possibly extensive repair, resealing and the
double striping. (3)Thelandscaping is in poor repair or missing.
We would recommend a detailed landscape plan be submitted
for review. (4) The drawing provided does not accurately reflect
the north elevation and the mechanical equipment on the roof
which is only partially screened. (5) The drawing reflects
incorrectly sized parking spaces. All regular parking spaces are
to be 10 feet wide and 20 feet deep. 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. Walsh: Is the pelitioner here this evening?
Danny Nedanovski, 18245 Manor Lane. I'm representing Steve's Family Dining.
Moe Ismail, A&M Consultants/Ml Associates, 13746 Michigan Avenue, Dearborn,
Michigan 48126. Good evening. I am the designer with A&M
Consultants. Regarding a few things they said, we did already
change the site plans so we made it 10' x 20'. 1 do have the
22321
right site plan. We also contacted the landscaping company.
We already have some
plans regarding all the landscaping
development. We would like
to show the color and how we're
going to do it.
Mr. Walsh:
Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. Alanskas:
You bought the property, sir?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Correct.
Mr. Alanskas:
I saw the outside three or four times already, but not inside. Mr.
LaPine said he was there and that you have gutted the inside of
the building. You took out the bar. Do you have the bar and
liquor license?
Mr. Nedanovski:
We're in the process of doing a liquor license right now - the
hansfer.5
Mr. Alanskas:
So you are going to have liquor there?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Probably just beer and wine. Liquor jusl for banquets.
Mr. Alanskas:
How are you going to serve it? In the back by the kitchen?
Mr. Nedanovski:
It's going to be a service bar, yes. Its not going to be a sit-down
bar in the restaurant.
Mr. Alanskas:
It's going to be a service bar. Okay. Number two, your
landscape is entirely gone. I saw you look out all the bushes in
the front.
Mr. Nedanovski:
Correct.
Mr. Alanskas:
And there is like a little wall around the sign where there's about
a two foot area for putting in some kind of plantings. We haven't
seen that landscape plan yet.
Mr. Nedanovski:
I have the landscape plan with me here.
Mr. Alanskas:
Pardon?
Mr. Nedanovski:
I have a new landscape plan.
Mr. Alanskas:
I know you have it now. We haven't seen it but our staff said
you had 30%. Well, there's nothing. And where all that red
mulch is in the front, under that, that's all nothing but weeds.
They just dumped red mulch on there to take care of the weeds,
22322
and the entire site is not irrigated. They used to go out there
with a garden hose and try to water it, which is not acceptable.
On your plan, do you show irrigation for all our landscaping?
Mr. Nedanovski:
No. I am going to gel ...
Mr. Alanskas:
That's something you're going to have to have. All your
landscaping will have to be irrigated.
Mr. LaPine:
As you know, I was out there Iasi week. We talked, Steve. Two
things that I question. Number one, why you were taking the
brick down and you explained that to me. I told the other
members that you were going to bring some samples tonight to
show us the dryvit. That's the color - similar to what's on the
Ground Round. Is that correct?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Similar.
Mr. LaPine:
Right.
Mr. Nedanovski:
It's sort of a peach color. The Ground Round one is more of like
a beige.
Mr. LaPine:
How about the stone that you're going to put on the bottom,
which you showed me. It was similar to what's on the Ground
Round. Is that correct?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Correct.
Mr. LaPine:
One of the questions I asked you. Why would you want to
remove the brick because the brick was in pretty good shape, I
thought, except that it was painted. The only way to get all that
paint off, I imagine you would have to steam dean it and Steve
told me basically you're worried about repainting it all the time.
Mr. Nedanovski:
Notjusl that. Well, we're not removing the brick.
Mr. LaPine:
No, you're just going to cover it.
Mr. Nedanovski:
Right.
Mr. LaPine:
As you know, the brick goes in and out. How do you get that so
it's all even?
Mr. Nedanovski:
It just depends on where you start on the shape of the framing
when you do the dryvil. If it's started all at one point, it will be
one flat surface regardless whetherthe bricks curve or not.
22323
Mr. LaPine:
I think one of the reasons you told me that you were going to do
this is because you're about the fifth restaurant that was in
there. Basically, all the other ones pretty much kept the same
kind of look. You're trying to give it a whole new look so it looks
like a brand new restaurant. Is that right?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Right. We want to go with a flesh look.
Mr. LaPine:
Can you give me an off-the-cuff figure of how much money
you're spending here to renovate this piece of property?
Mr. Nedanovski:
With equipment and everything?
Mr. LaPine:
Yeah.
Mr. Nedanovski:
$350,000, $400,000.
Mr. LaPine:
$400,000-$500,000?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Yeah.
Mr. LaPine:
Okay. I just want to get that on the record because we've got
another new establishment coming in next to a lighting company
that's gong to spend $250,000 - $300,000, so I'm glad to see
that type of revenue being spent on the Middlebell area. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Shane:
Could you give us an idea of what kind of food you'll be serving
in this restaurant?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Polish, Italian, American food.
Mr.Shane:
Okay.
Mr. Taormina:
Scott Miller and I visited the site today. We noticed that the
screen that runs along portions of the north and south sides of
the building are in disrepair. The metal coping that runs along
the top has sections that are missing. I think the screen itself is
either plastic or vinyl.
Mr. Nedanovski:
It's vinyl siding.
Mr. Taormina:
And it looks like it's been painted before with not much success
as far as paint adhering to that. Perhaps you could give some
consideration to replacing that material.
Mr. Nedanovski:
Thatwill be replaced.
22324
Mr. Taormina:
We did look at a material today at another site that was just
approved. We recommend that you visit this site and give some
consideration to it because I think it would be long lasting and a
much nicer appearance for your building. It's actually a church
property on Five Mile Road. I will have to give you the address
later. Its the Chinese Gospel Church. And then I guess, lastly,
Mr. Chairman, if I may, is it a cultured stone that you will use
along the lower band on the building?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Yes.
Mr. Taormina:
I was just wondering if any consideration has been given to
matching that. Sometimes we see that run up to the sill line on
the windows.
Mr. Nedanovski:
Yes, just a little bit lower. The stone will be about three feet
high, I believe, just under the windowsills.
Mr. Alanskas:
Getting back to what Mr. Shane said about your menu, I've
eaten various times there on the one on Five Mile just west of
Haggerty. It's very good. Are you going to have a more
extended menu than what you have there?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Yes. Most of the menu is going to be the same. We might add
a couple things.
Mr. Alanskas:
What are your hours and days going to be in regards to being
open?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Pretty much 7 to 9 everyday, and then on Sundays from 7 to 8.
Mr. Alanskas:
Are you going to have an area for small parties?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Yes. It's going to be used for everyday dining and ...
Mr. Alanskas:
Because I see that you are not, by taking out that bar, it took a
lot of space, you are not getting any more seats, so you should
have more room inside the building for yourtables and stuff.
Mr. Nedanovski:
Not necessarily. That bar area had a lot of seating.
Mr. Alanskas:
But you're taking that out?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Yes. The bar is completely gone.
Mr. Alanskas:
So you're going to have booths in that area?
Mr. Nedanovski:
Yes. Its going to be all tables in the bar area.
22325
Mr. Atanskas: When you entered the building and went to the north, you had a
step up for a few d those tables. Is that going to be level now?
Mr. Nedanovski: The whole restaurant will be one level.
Mr. Alanskas: And you're going to redo the bathrooms, I understand?
Mr. Nedanovski: Oh yeah.
Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? Seeing no one come forward, I would
seek a resolution.
On a motion by La Pine, seconded by Shane, and unanimously adopted, lwas
#0539-2005 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2005-05-08-10,
submitted by Steve's Family Dining, requesting approval of all
plans required by Section 18.58 of the Zoning Ordinance in
connection with a proposal to construct additions and renovate
the exterior of the restaurant located at 15800 Middlebelt Road
in the Southwest % of Section 13, be approved subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the Site Plan marked SPA dated April 22, 2005,
prepared by A&M Consultants, is hereby approved and
shall be adhered to, except for the fad that the parking
spaces for the restaurant shall be re -striped at ten (10')
feet by twenty (20') feet;
2. That the maximum number at customer seats shall not
exceed 134 seats
3. That no landscaping is approved at this time, and that a
landscape plan shall be submitted within 60 days of this
approval for the review and approval at the Planning
Commission and City Council;
4. That the Exterior Building Elevation Plan dated April 22,
2005, prepared by A&M Consultants, is hereby approved
and shall be adhered to;
5. 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;
22326
6. That the three walls of the trash dumpster area shall be
constructed out of the same brick used in the construction
of the building or in the event a poured wall is substituted,
the wall's design, texture and color shall match that of the
building and the enclosure gates shall be maintained and
when not in use closed at all times;
7. That the petitioner shall secure the necessary storm water
management permits from Wayne County, the City of
Livonia, and/or the State of Michigan;
8. That all light fixtures shall not exceed 20 feet in height and
shall be aimed and shielded so as to minimize stray light
trespassing across property lines and glaring into adjacent
roadway;
9. That the entire parking lot shall be repaired, resealed and
doubled striped to the Inspection Department's satisfaction;
10. That only conforming signage is approved with this pefifion,
and any addifional signage shall be separately submitted
for review and approval by the Planning Commission and
City Council;
11. That no LED lighthand or exposed neon shall be permitted
on this site including, but not limited to, the building or
around the windows; and,
12. 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. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving
resolution.
ITEM #3 PETITION 2005 -05 -SN -04 GENERAL PROPERTIES
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2005-
05-SN-04
00505SN-04 submitted by General Properties Company requesting
approval for an entrance marker for the Whispering Woods
Apartments located at 31200 Modock Street in the Northwest
of Section 2.
Mr. Miller: The petitioner is requesting approval for a new entrance marker
for the Whispering Woods Apartments. This apartment complex
22327
is located on the east side of Merriman Road between Fargo
Avenue and Eight Mile Road. The proposed sign would be part
of an elaborate wall element that would frame both sides of the
boulevard entrance of Morlock Street. The proposed entrance
feature would be comprised of masonry wall panels, wrought
iron fencing and ornate stone pillars. The pillars, which would
be topped with carriage lights and figurines, would frame and
support the wall panels and fencing. The proposed entrance
sign would be located on the wall panel of the southern unit.
The plans do not clarify if a second identical entrance sign
would be placed on the wall panel of the northern arrangement.
It is assumed that only a single sign would be installed at the
entrance. Because the entrance marker is in excess of what is
allowed by the zoning ordinance, a variance from the Zoning
Board of Appeals would be required. The petitioner would also
like to erect a gatehouse in the middle of the boulevard island of
the Modock Street entrance. The structure would be just 126
square feet in area and constructed out of the same materials
as the entrance wall elements. The gatehouse would have two
functioning doors on the side (north and south) elevafions.
When questioned about the necessity of the gatehouse, the
petitioner explained that it was just for adomment purposes.
Because no type of structure is allowed in the right-of-way of a
road, the petitioner would have to be granted a variance from
the Zoning Board of Appeals in order to build the gatehouse in
the boulevard island.
Mr. Walsh: Mr. Nowak, is there any correspondence for the record?
Mr. Nowak: There is one item of correspondence from the Inspection
Department, dated May 3, 2005, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request of April 29, 2005, the above -
referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted.
(1) The owner of this property has refused to comply with the
City's Rental Ordinance and has not obtained eitherlicensing or
inspection since the inception of the law. He remains operating
illegally. Charges are in process. (2) This petition, should it
move forward, will need vanancss frem the Zoning Board of
Appeals for the gatehouse, signage and fencing. 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 conespondence.
Mr. Walsh: Is the petitioner here this evening?
Elliott Schubiner, General Properties Co., LLC, Box 250966, West Bloomfield,
Michigan 48325.
22328
Mr. Walsh:
Is there anything that you'd like to add to the presentation thus
far?
Mr.
Schubiner:
No. I'm here to answer some questions, whatever you may
have for me.
Mr.
Walsh:
Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr.
LaPine:
Number one, the gatehouse - if we approve this, is this what I'm
going to get?
Mr.
Schubiner:
Yes.
Mr.
LaPine:
I'm going to get the gatehouse; I'm going to gel ...
Mr.
Schubiner:
Absolutely.
Mr.
LaPine:
Just like it shows here. This is the plan because you had an
alternate plan?
Mr.
Schubiner:
No, no. That's what's up there now.
Mr.
LaPine:
No, I'm sorry. There's another plan behind here. This one here.
Mr.
Schubiner:
No. That's just the sign. On the right hand side, that's going to
be built and lett hand side with what you looked at before.
Mr.
LaPine:
This sign here is going to be on both sides.
Mr.
Schubiner:
Thal is correct. We have to do that for balance.
Mr.
LaPine:
Okay.
Mr.
Schubiner:
I think it's going to be a very, very composing entranceway, and
I think its very important not only to us, but to the City because
R's going to do something I hope to attract more people. This is
what our problem has been for four years now.
Mr.
LaPine:
This is rentals, right?
Mr.
Schubiner:
Sir?
Mr.
LaPine:
These are rentals, apartments?
Mr.
Schubiner:
Yes, that's correct.
Mr.
LaPine:
You've been there quite a long time, have you not?
22329
Mr. Schubiner:
I built them.
Mr. LaPine:
I just wonder when I see the gatehouse, the first thing that came
to my mind, maybe you're going to start selling these off as
condos. Have you ever given that any consideration?
Mr. Schubiner:
We would not do that. No.
Mr. LaPine:
You would not do that?
Mr. Schubiner:
No. Definitely not.
Mr. Taormina:
I have a question for the pelitioner through the Chair. If he
could describe each of the materials that will be used in the
construction of these landscape elements.
Mr. Schubiner:
These are all going to be cut stone and theyre all numbered.
They're all cut to size pursuant to what the architect has
designed. Its going to be quite elegant, we think, and the
architect that we have hired to do the work is probably one of
the best architects, in my opinion, in this area. He's done some
wonderful things, and what he's done here and what he's
proposing here for our site is quite exciting, we think.
Mr. Taormina:
If I may follow up on that. So cul stone will be used on which
parts of the building and the sign? The area that would appear
to be the stone that's on the lower part?
Mr. Schubiner:
That's correct.
Mr. Taormina:
And then on the sides. On the upper part of the building, is that
a similar type of material?
Mr. Schubiner:
It is.
Mr. Taormina:
That is stone and then up higher than that?
Mr. Schubiner:
Yes. That's correct.
Mr. Taormina:
And then on the pillars themselves for the sign, is that a cast?
Mr. Schubiner:
Yes. The center, the back is probably going to be ... we don't
know what we're going to do with the back because its facing
the trees and the woods and it's not going to be loo evident. So
in all probability what we're going to do is possibly use brick as
a backup on the sign that's not going to be visible.
22330
Mr. Taormina:
Yes, as you can see, some of those elements ... the backside
will be visible from traffic on both northbound and southbound
Merriman Road. So some type of finish material would be
needed along the backsides of the signs.
Mr. Schubiner:
We can do that. In fad, I think its probably a good idea. The
fence is going to be all galvanized. Its going to be steel. It's
going to be quite
nice. I think its going to be elegant. I think its
going to certainly make a mark.
Mr. Alanskas:
You're showing on this part here like a little lion on lop of the
posts.
Mr. Schubiner:
That's correct.
Mr. Alanskas:
You're going to have just one?
Mr. Schubiner:
Two.
Mr. Alanskas:
There will be two. In the gatehouse where you have the door,
are you going to have a guard in there?
Mr. Schubiner:
No. Not at this time. We're going to have a door on both sides.
There's going to be a door on the north end and the south side.
Mr. Alanskas:
But there will be nobody in there to direct somebody coming in
and out?
Mr. Schubiner:
No, not yet. Not now.
Mr. Alanskas:
Are you proposing to do that?
Mr. Schubiner:
Its possible.
Mr. Alanskas:
Otherwise, why would you have doors there in just an empty
building?
Mr. Schubiner:
Well, we're trying to anticipate perhaps a need someday, but we
dont need it now, and we certainly don't want to do it.
Mr. Alanskas:
I know because if you have guards there, it's very costly.
Mr. Schubiner:
Twenty-four hours.
Mr. La Pine:
I love your design. I love what you're doing, but I have a
problem approving it when I get this letter from the Inspection
Department. The Inspection Department hasn't been able to do
some inspections on your property. Can you tell us what's
happening?
22331
Mr. Schubiner: Theyre welcome to come out and do an inspection any time
they want to do an inspection. Our buildings, when we first built
them, in my opinion, there are no apartment buildings in the
Stale of Michigan built like this. They are all concrete and steel.
The first phase that we built was built on bar joists over 18 -
gauge pan and two and half inches of reinforced concrete. The
second floor of the second phase was all eight inch hollow core
flexicore load bearing walls. There are no buildings like this.
There's not a crack in them. Theyre welcome to come out any
time that they want to. I'm not going to get into the legality of
the ordinance at this point. I dont think its time for me. There
is nothing wrong with our buildings. Any time any one of the
inspectors want to come out, they're more than welcome. We're
happy to see them. We're happy to take them through the
property at any time. But I think right now we should just
perhaps ... I don't want to gel into ... when the letter was
written. It's just a course of method in which to try to get me to
do something that I don't think is quite legal.
Mr. LaPine: Well, it is our ordinance, you know. I mean I have a hard time
approving this unless the Inspection Department tells me
they've got no problems. That's my personal opinion. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Schubiner: I'm going to answer that, if I may, LaPine. I think you're
probably coned in your approach, but I do want this Planning
Commission to know, in our opinion, my attorney's opinion, and
it's quite a big law firm. They're quite astute and quite
knowledgeable, and they dont feel its legal. You can go from
there; do what you want. We certainly would appreciate the
approval. We're anxious to get it started, and we want to have it
up by October if possible.
Mr. LaPine: Like I said, I can approve it 100%. 1 love R. I think its going to
look beautiful.
Mr. Schubiner: I do loo.
Mr. LaPine: It was an asset to the property. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Walsh: Are there any other questions for the petitioner? Is there
anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this
petition? Seeing nobody come forward, a motion is in order.
On a motion by Shane, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, itwas
22332
#05-60-2005 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2005-05SN-04
submitted by General Properties Company requesting approval
for an entrance marker for the Whispering Woods Apartments
located at 31200 Moriock Street in the Northwest % of Section
2, be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. That the Sign Plan marked A-1 dated April 27, 2005,
prepared by DesRosiers Architects, is hereby approved
and shall be adhered to;
2. That this approval is based on the Petitioner completing all
elements of the referenced plan, including the walls,
fencing, pillars, and gatehouse;
3. That any additional signage shall come back before the
Planning Commission and City Council for their review and
approval;
4. That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted
a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the
gatehouse, excess signage and any conditions related
thereto; and
5. That the specific plans referenced in this approving
resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department
atthe time the sign permits are applied for.
Mr. Walsh: Is there any discussion?
Mr. Taormina: Mr. Chairman, just one consideration, and that is, Condition #4,
if we could add the gatehouse to the items that would require
approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. Walsh: Is that okay with the maker and the supporter?
Mr. Shane: Fine.
Ms. Smiley: Okay.
Mr. Walsh: It is so modified. Is there any additional discussion on the
resolution?
Mr. Alanskas: I'm going to support the approving resolution. What this
gentleman wants to do looks fantastic, but on the other hand,
I'm saying, why are we having all these problems? I'm hoping
that our legal staff and their legal staff and the Inspection
Department can get this straightened out because what you
22333
want to do looks very nice, and I want to make sure that
everything is correct to our ordinance. Thank you.
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared 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. These items have 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 #4 PETITION 2005-02-02-07 CONSIGNMENT OUTLET
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2005-
02-02-07,
005
02-02-07, submitted by Consignment Outlet Livonia, requesting
waiver use approval to operate a second hand store
(consignment shop) at 15700 Middlebelt Road, on property
located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Broadmoor
Avenue and Rayburn Avenue in the Southwest %of Section 13.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there any new information to consider?
Mr. Taormina:
If there is no objection, Mr. Chairman, what I'd like to do is allow
Mr. Nowak to reference some of the correspondence that we've
received since the last time this item was heard by the
Commission, and then after that allow the petitioner to address
the Commission on any changes that have taken place on the
site.
Mr. Walsh:
Before we do that, Mr. Alanskas reminds me that we need a
motion to remove this from the table.
On a motion by
La Pine, seconded by Shane, and unanimously adopted, it was
#05-61-2005
RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on April 5, 2005, on
Petition 200502-02-07, submitted by Consignment Outlet
Livonia, requesting waiver use approval to operate a second
hand store (consignment shop) at 15700 Middlebelt Road, m
property located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between
Broadmoor Avenue and Rayburn Avenue in the Southwest % of
Section 13, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend
that Petition 2005-02-02-07 be removed from the table.
22334
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. Mr. Nowak, could you please go through the
correspondence?
Mr. Nowak:
We have received letters in support of this petition. Some of
these letters are quite lengthy. You did receive
copies of these
letters in your packets. For the record, I will state that there are
separate letters signed by Margaret Randall, Dave Reardon,
Cathy. Little, John Saba and Jeanine Saba.
Mr. Walsh:
If there are no questions for our Planning staff, let's take Mr.
Taor mina's suggestion and we will go straightto the petitioner.
Ms. Smiley:
There is one more letter from Katherine Patterson. Do you have
that one too, Al, for the record?
Mr. Nowak:
Oh, I did overlook one of the letters, yes. There also is a prier
of support from Katherine Patterson.
Ms. Smiley:
Thankyou.
Mr. Walsh:
We will go on to the petitioner, Mr. Creighton.
Carl Creighton,
Esq., Brashear, Tangore, Gallagher, Creighton and Amann, 355
N. Canton Center Road, Canton, Michigan 48187. Good
evening. I'm standing in for my partner Bryan Amann who is
unavailable this evening. With me tonight also is Mr. Pal Manor,
the CEO of API; Keith Lutz who you've met before; Richard
Rosenbaum, representing the owner of the property; and the
operators are also in attendance in this evening. I really do not
have a lot to add to what you have learned at the study session.
Improvements are underway. The property has been sealed. It
appears that it may need another sealing coat. The striping is
yet to be done. Landscaping improvements have been done,
Submitted as part of your package is a new floor plan with a
reduced clothing area, reducing that area to 587 square feet
from that which was previously proposed. There has been a
logo type also submitted through the Planning Commission to
refurnish the awnings to remove the Ethan Allen logo and put up
the Consignment Outlet logo. The people from API are working
with your planning staff with respect to the outdoor signage. We
would be happy to answer any questions that you have. I
visited both that site as well as the Friske site, which was
approved not too long ago. I find them extremely comparable
only that the building that is at issue is much more impressive,
much better appearing and much better organized. We would
be more than happy to address any concems that you have at
this time.
22335
Mr. Alanskas:
Sir, how long of a lease do you have on this property,
Consignment Oufiet?
Mr. Creighton:
I will defer to the owner.
Mr. Alanskas:
Is it a signed five-year lease?
Mr. Creighton:
Mr. Rosenbaum is indicating by a shake of the head, yes, he
has signed a five-year lease for the record, with options.
Mr. Alanskas:
With options. All right. I've been by there various times, and I
was not impressed with the thought of having this type of
business in the City. A couple months ago, there was a huge
article in Crain's magazine stating that this is possibly a very
large business of the future; however, this is not the future. I
was very dismayed when I heard last week at our study session
that one of the Councilmembers went by the building and there
was a display of clothing inside the windows. Is thatlme?
Mr. Creighton:
No.
Mr. Alanskas:
That is not true?.
Mr. Creighton:
I was there yesterday and there was dothing in the area that is
indicated on the floor that is before you in the extreme center of
the store.
Mr. Alanskas:
So you're telling me there was never any clothing in the
windows for display?
Mr. Creighton:
Absolutely not.
Mr. Walsh:
The operator is coming forward. Why dont we wait if he wishes
to address that.
Todd Sdiiflar,
Consignment Outlet Livonia, 15700 Middlebelt, Livonia, Michigan
48154. I'm the owner of Consignment Outlet. We put a little
contest on with our employees, the gids bat work there. We
said look, we want to really show ... we want an image, but we
don't want to show like we're a junk store. What we did is, we
had certain windows for display only. What they did is, they put
a bride's dress and a groom's suit on actual body forms. It was
just showing that we have wedding dresses and groom outfits
available. We had been told that it was a concem. We took
them down immediately.
Mr. Alanskas:
All right. Thank you.
22336
Mr. Creighton: I would indicate, in response to that, when I was on Fifth
Avenue last weekend, Macys, Saks Fifth Avenue, all had
display units by students, by their staff, of new and designed
clothes. Obviously, its a concern and that's not the primary
focus of the store, but from a realistic standpoint, the clothing
has become diminutive at 587 feet out of 18,000 square feet.
So if, in fad, there was some dothing in the window on one
occasion, I don't think that was particularly earth shattering.
Mr. Walsh:
Thank you, Mr. Creighton. Any additional questions?
Ms. Smiley:
I just wanted to make sure that, Mark, if we approve this, the
waiver use goes with ... it would be a waiver use and it would
be ... say the lease is up, they could lease it to someone else,
anyone else that could also use itfor second hand or resale?
Mr. Taormina:
That is correct. They would be bound to the same conditions
that would apply with any approving resolution.
Mr. Walsh:
Are there any additional questions for the petitioner? Seeing
none, we're going to go to the audience. Is there anybody in the
audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Mr.
Tent?
Ray Tent, 18051
Deering, Livonia, Michigan. Good evening. This is the one that
I came by to talk about. I've lived in the City of Livonia for over
50 years. I've been a member of this body for a long time, and
now I'm like the fire chief. I just run around when I see things
going on in the City. I look at them. There are things that have
been approved and I wouldn't have, and there are things hat
have been approved that I thought were terific. We've got a
great City. We've got a good business climate. Livonia is
considered one of the best, really one of the best planned cities
in Michigan, and that's because we took special attention to a
lot of things. On this consignment operation, I find nothing
wrong with it. I've been down to see it three times. Really,
didn't bother me because it was there, but the thing that did
concem me, and we've touched on it here and I'm really
concerned about it, is the waiver use. Now, these are my
concerns. The store was opened illegally to begin with. That
shouldn't have been done. Now, how did that get through? It's
been in there a long time and finally you said, hey, you don't
belong here. A waiver use is required to honor this site, and
you cannot condition zoning. So in other words, once ... Ms.
Smiley touched on it ... because once you approve a waiver
use, it goes on forever and ever and ever. And we've had
conditions like that where bey wanted to have some waiver use
22337
at some of the property. We've approved some, but they were
in different areas and all that. But in this particular case, it's true
that if you grant this waiver, it will go on and on and on with the
properly. I have ro objection to these people. They've done a
fine job. The store looks nice. As far as clothing is concerned,
they dont have any junk dothes, old stuff over there. Whatever
they had, what I've seen, it's been top quality stuff. It's arranged
nice. Its clean. Its a nice building for that, but that's our
commercial strip. Sure, we haven't leased any property there or
sold any property there in a little while. I mean I'd certainly like
to see Middlebelt pick up over there, but that's our commercial
area. It's not some place that we can just throw anything into it.
Now there's one suggestion that I had, and I believe we touched
on it. Mr. Bmshears group here, and the gentleman down at
the end, is a lease. Okay? They say they got a five-year lease
on the property. Now, I'm just wondering, this is what our legal
department has to look into. With this five-year lease, if they
terminate the lease, for any reason, they decide to go out of
business, the lease is terminated, the properly should be able to
revert back to our commercial properly. I mean, this is a sticky
one because now we're talking a waiver use. And waiver use
goes on forever and ever and ever. It goes with the property.
They can continue on forever with that. I don't think we vent to
get involved with that, but I think we should explore the
possibility. I'd like to keep them here in the city because they're
good people, but the thing is, I don't want to hang ourselves
now by granting a waiver use. So I think our legal staff should
look into this and see if they can go ahead and get a revocable
lease, this five-year lease or whatever it is. Then if they decide
to pull out in five years or whatever it is or four years, it reverts
back to where it should be. In other words, and I talked to one
of the commissioners here a while ago because I've been after
this for a long time. In Lansing, they're considering doing
something with these type of leases. So that is something that's
with the waiver use, I'm sorry. And so (hats something. If
they're looking into it, maybe by that time we'll have that thing
with an order. So with that in mind, I would say, while I like the
place, it's done. The people are nice that are in there, and its a
nice location. The building is nice, but until we can solve this
waiver use, I certainly would be very cautious on it. So I would
suggest to the Planning Commission that they look at it very
carefully. Get our legal people into it and see if we can do
something different to keep it here in the city. Their operation in
Canton is a nice operation. What they're doing there is good.
And so with that, those are my comments and I have no
problem with them being there, but I have a problem with them
being there forever and ever and ever selling the place to
somebody else who can sell used stuff and antiques and all that
22338
sort of thing. So, with that in mind, I hope that you will consider
that, take that in consideration and come up with some answer
and with that I want to thank you.
Mr. Walsh:
Thank you, Mr. Tent. There is nobody else in the audience
except those related to the petitioner, so Mr. Creighton if you
would like to have the last word.
Mr. Creighton:
In response, Mr. Tent's got me. I've only lived in Livonia for 44
years, and I only lived in that neighbor for a mere 20 years.
This is a beautiful building. Its going to remain so. It was
empty for two and half years. We need to revitalize Middlebelt
Road. We don't need any more empty buildings. The
petitioners are more than happy to enter into an agreement
whereby this is a temporary waiver use that is limited to this
tenant. We have a five-year lease with two successive five-year
options for a total of 15 years. We're more than happy to
condition our temporary waiver use on our occupancy if that is
something that tips the scales. I would assume that its as long
as this lease or any extension of this lease beyond the two
existing options. I mean if they stay there for 50 years and they
maintain the building and pay their taxes as a good corporate
citizen, I would assume that the temporary waiver use would
continue, but we're willing to condition your granting us a waiver
use to the continuation of this lease, this occupancy by this
tenant. It currently is for five year with two additional five-year
options. If there are extensions beyond that, obviously we'd like
to still have the waiver use continuing forthese users.
Mr. Alanskas:
Through the chair to Mr. Taormina. Mark, the way our
ordinance is written, there is no such thing as a temporary
waiver use. Coned?
Mr. Taormina:
Correct.
Mr. Alanskas:
Then that could not be done. Correct?
Mr. Taormina:
Well, as I understand it, he is volunteering to offer that condition.
Mr. Alanskas:
But then we'd have to go back to our legal department and see
if that could be done.
Mr. Taormina:
That's correct.
Mr. Alanskas:
And the only way that can be done would be to table this until
we got a conclusion unless we make a decision this evening.
Thankyou.
22339
Mr. Walsh:
Mr. Creighton, I have a question for you. The concerns have
been expressed in a variety of ways throughout this process
regarding the waiver use. Are you and your client willing to
suffer a tabling while we seek a legal opinion of our counsel or
do you want an action tonight?
Mr. Creighton:
I would like an action tonight. We are willing to be bound by any
subsequent ... the offer has been made. If it can be legally
accepted, we're more than happy to do that. I mean I think it is
a good and valid waiver use as it stands. You're suppose to be
looking at the use of the building, the banning of outside sales,
the condition of the properly, the maintenance of the property.
All of those things we're committed to 100 percent regardless of
the length of the waiver use. As a practical matter, to have this
tabled and have a discussion over the legalities of it, as
Chairman Walsh well knows, the law is not only what the judge
said yesterday, it's what he says tomorrow.
Mr. Walsh:
I just wanted to gel your opinion. That will help us with moving
this along.
Mr. Creighton:
Were willing to meet ... I think the petitioner has shown the
commitment to go well beyond meeting anybody halfway on
this. I think you've seen his sincerity. You've seen that he is
taking a very good building. He's making improvements to a
very good building. He's taken a substantial structure; he's
improving the landscaping. He's improving the parking and
driveway area. Its obviously in his best interests to have the
finest, nicest operation on Mddlebelt Road or in the word. I
mean this is also an internet operation. The pictures of this
building as well as the building in Canton are spread over the
world wide web. He doesn't want a rat trap there either. He's
willing to do whatever is necessary to make you happy, and I
think we should take that for what it's worth and go forward with
this waiver use tonight.
Mr. Walsh:
Thank you. Now Mr. Tent, we are not going to engage in
additional public discussion. I gave Mr. Creighton the last word.
Are there any additional questions or comments? Seeing none,
a motion is in order.
Mr. La Pine:
I'm going to make the denying resolution, but I'm going to give
my reasons why I'm denying it. Number one, I've been opposed
to this since the first time I heard it was coming to Livonia. I
agree that Middlebelt Road has turned into a lot of empty stores
up and down Middlebelt, but slowly and surely we're having
them filled up. Tonight you heard the restaurant is spending
close to $400,000, $500,000 right rext store to this operation.
22340
Across the street, the lighting company that we just approved is
going to spend $250,000, $300,000. 1 dont feel that this is the
type of establishment that we need in Livonia. We're well
served by these types of establishments in Livonia. We have
resale stores. We have factory outlet stores. We stores that
sell discontinued items from manufacturers. We have all kinds
of these stores throughout the City of Livonia. We dont need
any more. There's no need for any more. I haven't seen
anybody banging the doors of City Hall saying we have to have
more of these. Number two, I'm being very consistent. I just
voted against the Curiosity Shop on Plymouth Road. I voted
against the one that wanted to come in on Middlebelt and Five
Mile Road. So being consistent, I cannot vole for this one
because I feel we're well served in this community with these
types of operations. For those reasons, and also, I'd just like to
read an article. This paper that was given to us called Shopping
Centers Today about these operations. Its a very good artide.
One of the things that really came out to me, it says here, "But
dont expect to find these stores in enclosed malls or upscale
new projects. The resellers want the drive up convenience of
open-air stores for two reasons: people haul in the stuff to sell
and these operations typically cant afford to pay the rents a
mainline retailer will pay'." And secondly, one other thing that
kind of irritates me: Mr. Creighton, you said that this building has
been there empty for two and half years. For two and half years
it sal there and it deteriorated. Where was the owner of the
building? Sir, I've got the floor. Over the two and half years he
owned the property, he at least could have come out and
updated the property, kept it up-to-date, cut the weeds, cut the
grass, do all the things that are necessary. If he would have
done that, maybe some potential buyer or lessee of the building
might have taken the building over long before now. With that,
Mr. Chairman, I will make the denying resolu0on.
On a motion by LaPine, seconded by Shane, and unanimously adopted, it was
#05-62-2005 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on April 5, 2005, on
Petition 2005-02-02-07, submitted by Consignment Outlet
Livonia, requesting waiver use approval to operate a second
hand store (consignment shop) at 15700 Middlebelt Road, on
property located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between
Broadmoor Avenue and Rayburn Avenue in the Southwest % of
Section 13, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 2005-02-02-07 be denied for the
following reasons:
22341
1. That the petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the
proposed use is in compliance with all at the general
waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in
Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance;
2. That the petitioner has not adequately established that
there is a need for the proposed use in this area of the
City;
3. That the petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated that
the proposed use would be compatible to and in harmony
with surrounding uses in the area;
4. That the nature of the proposed use would not enhance the
image and character of the commercial development in this
area; and
5. That the proposed use is contrary to the goals and
objectives at the Zoning Ordinance which, among other
things, are intended to insure suitability and
appropriateness of uses.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there any discussion?
Mr. Alanskas:
I am also going to support the denying resolution. I've never
heard of a proposal where we can put on our statute or
enforcement to go along with the partial changing of our
ordinance. I think that would be up to our legal staff and
counsel to straighten that out. Thank you.
Mr. Shane:
I'd just like to say I supported the resolution for some or many of
the reasons that Mr. LaPine stated. But most of all, I'm
concerned about how this use will be perceived by the public
and by future commercial users along the area. There's no
doubt that it's a first class operation, but the very fad that it's a
consignment I think would be perceived by many people as
another operation for the sale at used goods. I think that's the
perception which bothers me.
Mr. Walsh:
I'd like to stale that I'm going to support the resolution, but I do
encourage you to continue on with Council. If I had a certainty
with regard to your offer on the waiver, I'd be much more
indined to support this. I think you have an honorable business.
It is not the current operator that I'm concerned with. Its the
future. I hope that you will have some ability to work with the
Planning Department and Legal Department and find a
resolution that would be beyond this body's ability to address.
22342
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Taormina: If you could just indicate his appeal rights.
Mr. Walsh: Yes. You have ten days within which to appeal the decision
made tonight to the City Council.
Mr. Creighton: An appeal will be following tomorrow.
Mr. Walsh: Thankyou.
ITEM #5 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 905'" Public Hearing
Mr. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the
Minutes of the 905" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held
on May 10, 2005.
On a motion by Shane, seconded by LaPine, and unanimously adopted, it was
#05-63-2005 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 905" Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on May 10,
2005, are hereby approved.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following
AYES:
Shane, LaPine, Alanskas, Smiley, Walsh
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
Pieroecchi, Morrow
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a mo0on duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 906"' Regular
Meeting held on May 24, 2005, was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Carol A. Smiley, Secretary
ATTEST:
John Walsh, Chairman
22343