Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2007-09-25MINUTES OF THE 951'' PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, September 25, 2007, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 951st Public Hearings and 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: William LaPine Deborah McDermott R. Lee Morrow Carol A. Smiley Ashley Varloogian Ian Wilshaw John Walsh Members absent: None Messrs. Mark Taormina, Planning Director; At Nowak, Planner IV; and Ms. Marge Watson, Program Supervisor; were also present. Chairman Walsh 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 pefition 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 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 2007-08-01-06 LEO SOAVE BLDG. CO. Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2007-08- 01-06 submitted by Leo Soave Building Company, Inc. requesting to rezone properly at 18956 Farmington Road, located on the east side of Farmington Road between Seven Mile Road and Clarita Avenue in the Northwest''/. of Section 10 from R-1 to OS. Sepkmber 25, 2007 24327 Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the properly under petition plus the exisfing zoning ofthe surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There is one item of correspondence from the Engineering Division, dated September 13, 2007, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposal, the assigned address or legal description contained within the attached Warranty Deed." The letter is signed by John P. Hill, Assistant City Engineer. That is the extent oflhe correspondence. Mr. Walsh: Thank you. Are there any questions from the Planning Commissioners for the staff? Mr. La Pine: Yes. Mark, part of the building that faces east, tie back of it faces the homes that are on Westmore. Is that correct? Mr. Taormina: This property abuts the rear yards of those homes along Westmore. That is correct. Mr. La Pine: That whole street is zoned R-1. Correct? Mr. Taormina: That is correct. Mr. La Pine: So br him to get the rezoning, he'd have to rezone all those homes which are 110 feel, the depth of that property, for him to be able to get an OS zoning there and get the 15 feel for the side yard. Right? It just doesn't make sense that we're going to rezone all that R-1 to OS. Mr. Taormna: If I understand your question, the site plan as it is shown here does not comply with the setback requirements because the building is shown only two feel from the north property line. But if the parcel to the north is rezoned to an office classification, the building could be conforming without the need for the five foot screening wall. That is correct. But that would require the rezoning of the properly to the north. Mr. LaPine: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Is the petitioner here this evening? Enrico Soave, 31567 Bridge, Livonia, Michigan. I'm here on behalf of the petitioner. The only other remarks that I have in addition to Mr. Taormina's is that the proposed rezoning is in conformity with September 25, 2007 24328 the OS zoning and also I believe it's in conformity with the overall harmony of Farmington and Seven Mile. Mr. Walsh: Thank you. Are there any questions for Mr. Soave? Mr. Morrow: Have you made any attempts to acquire the property to the north? Mr. Soave: There have been some negotiations but nothing that has come lofmition. No. Mr. Morrow: We know it's just a zoning issue tonight, but one of the things we will be concerned with is the two fool setback on the north properly line. I know it can be accomplished through the Zoning Board of Appeals, but should this zoning come through and you come back for a site plan review, we'd like to be updated on the property to the north and, hopefully, there will be some movement about rezoning that to OS. Thank you. Mr. La Pine: Is this a building you're building for someone or is this a spec building? Mr. Soave: This is a building for sale. Mr. La Pine: Its for sale. You're not moving your operations here? Mr. Soave: No. Its actually for sale. Mr. La Pine: Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a mo0on is in order. On a motion by Morrow, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was #09-105-2007 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on September 25, 2007, on Petition 2007-08-01-06 submitted by Leo Soave Building Company, Inc. requesting to rezone property at 18956 Farmington Road, located on the east side of Farmington Road between Seven Mile Road and Clarila Avenue in the Northwest % of Sec0on 10, from 1-1 to OS, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2007- 08-01-06 be approved for the following reasons: Sepkmber 25, 2007 24329 1. That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding zoning and land uses in the area; 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 complimentary to the OS zoning on other similarly situated properties fronting on Farmington Road in the area between Seven Mile Road and Curtis Road; 4. That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the developing character of the Farmington Road frontage properties in this area; and 5. That the proposed change of zoning is supported by the Future Land Use Plan which recommends office use 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. 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 2007-08-0230 "ISBUDGETGROUP Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the mxl item on the agenda, Petition 2007- 08-02-30 submitted by Avis Budget Group requesting waiver use approval to operate a car rental facility at 29070 Plymouth Road, located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and Camden Avenue in the Southwest'''/ of Section 25. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are five items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated September 13, 2007, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above-reterenced petition. We have Sepkmber 25, 2007 24330 no objections to the proposal, the assigned address or legal description contained herewith." The letter is signed by John P. Hill, Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated August 24, 2007, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to operate a car rental facility on property located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and Camden Avenue in the Southwest X of Section 25. 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 August 31, 2007, which reads as follows: We have reviewed the plans in connection with Avis Budget Group, located at 29070 Plymouth Road. We have no objections or recommendations to the plans as submitted." The letter is signed by David W. Sludl, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated September 10, 2007, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of August 23, 2007, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) The existing fence northeast of the building is in disrepair and has wild growth intertwined in it. (2) The north parking lot needs to be repaved and the balance repaired, resealed and double striped. (3) The north section that abuts R-6 zoning needs an approved greenbelt, protective wall or an approved separation agreement. (4) The rear area noted as lawn is in poor shape and wild growth. (5) The Commission and/or Council may wish to further address landscape issues to include an irrigation system. (6) Parking lot lighting must be shielded from residential areas. (7) The wood siding/sheathing on the building is in poor repair. Consideration should be given to replacing it. The plan is not clear on this aspect. (8) The junk/debris between the buildings as seen from the rear should be cleaned up and removed from site. (9) The gas meter detailed on the front elevation needs bollards to protect it. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Director of Inspection. The next letter is from the Plymouth Road Development Authority, dated September 21, 2007, which reads as follows: At the 19P Regular Meeting of the Plymouth Road Development Authority of the City of Livonia held on September 20, 2007, the following resolution was adopted. #2007-26 RESOLVED, that the Plymouth Road Development Authority does hereby support the proposed plans submitted by Avis Budget Group to operate a car rental facility at 29070 Plymouth Road, located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and Camden Avenue in the Southwest X of Section 25, subject to the Planning Commission's determination of the necessity of the security gate and re -landscaping for September 25, 2007 24331 safety and aesthetic purposes, and further subject to compliance with all City codes and ordinances and the Plymouth Road Development streetscape goals and objectives, as such may be modified by the action of the Planning Commission and/or City Council." The letter is signed by John J. Nagy, Executive Director. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions for the staff? Mr. Morrow: Through the chair to Mark, is there any site lighting indicated on the plan? Mr. Taormina: I think the plan indicates some site lighting, but as Mr. Nowak pointed out at the study session, the site actually lacks that lighting as it is shown on the plan. So that's something that would have to be addressed. Mr. Morrow : As well as type of lighting as it relates to height and what the fixture actually looks like. Mr. Taormina: Correct. Mr. Morrow: And as far as the landscaping plan, are you in receipt of any type of plant materials other than just grass? Mr. Taormina: No, I don't believe the plan addressed any details relative to additional landscaping or maintenance of the existing landscaping. Mr. Morrow: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Is the petitioner here this evening? Patricia Fisher, Avis Budget Group L.L.C., Detroit Metro Airport, Building 287 Lucas Drive, Detroit, Michigan 48242. Mr. Walsh: Thank you. Is there anything you'd like to add to the presentation thus far? Ms. Fisher: Yes, I would. I would just like to say that I did receive the letter from Mr. Bishop. I did meet with the landlord, and we did go over all these items. We did want to address them. There was a few things. Would you like me to go through all these because we do have a plan together on addressing all of these. Mr. Walsh: Yes. Please do. September 25, 2007 24332 Ms. Fisher: Okay. The existing fence in the back of building, yes, first of all, there is a lot of vegetation and overgrown things that need to be taken away. I do want to remind you that Avis is a premier rental car company, and so our image s everything and, of course, we want everything to be nice and neat and attractive for our customers. So we would do away and we would gel rid of all the vegetation and all the overgrown. Right next door is Kentucky Fried Chicken. When you look at all their landscaping in the back, it's very nicely done. So what I would like to do, I would like to bring that fence, exactly that same type of fence, all the way around. It stands pretty high. So that we're all in uniform so everything will go together. By taking all the vegetation away, there would be a lot of area where we can do some landscaping. There is no way to do any landscaping in the front except for the tree, and I'll be more than happy to plant some flowers in the very front because the front of the building goes right down to the end of the sidewalk and the sidewalk and the building starts. There is nothing there. So all of our landscaping would be done in the back. We'd have a landscaping company come out and give us some bids on that and we'd make that nice. On the parking lot lighting, yes, we did notice that Kentucky Fried Chicken actually has a stand and the light does come down into the rear portion of the parking lot. We have already contacted DTE to see what kind of lighting they would suggest. There's a pole, that would be the east south side of the parking lot, and they suggested that we put a light there because then it would not interfere with the residents over on the other side of the parking lot. Mr. Walsh: Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions for the petitioner? Mr. Morrow: Is the landlord here tonight? Ms. Fisher: Yes, he is. Mr. Walsh: Good evening. We need your name and address for the record. Angelo Mauti, 17017 Doris, Livonia, Michigan 48154. Mr. Walsh: Thank you. Mr. Morrow? Mr. Morrow: The Planning Commission shares the same feelings with Avis, and we want to put our best foot forward and have a nice looking site. As one Commissioner, I don't think we have a plan here tonight that we can go forward with. From here it will go to the City Council, and a lot of the things we talked about tonight have to be on the plan before we can send it forward. So there might be a chance that this would gel tabled tonight so that the September 25, 2007 24333 planning can catch up with the resolution. I have no problem with the use, with Avis and everything. It's just as far as the site is concerned. In addition, normally what we get is some sort of rendering showing what the materials are, what the colors will be of the whole building, and of course, we also have some site work to talk about as far as the parking lot is concerned. Anyways, those are the thoughts that I had and I wanted to share them with you, although I appreciate the fad that you want to support the changes that we're talking about. Mr. LaPine: The building on the corner that has the import rebuilders, at the same time this part of the building is being remodeled, can we do something to spruce up the front of that building and the side? Mr. Mauli: The side oflhal comer building? Mr. LaPine: Yes. Mr. Mauli: The outside of this existing building is what it is. We had it painted. Its already been remodeled, the outside of the building. The corner building has nothing to do with the building we're talking about. Mr. LaPine: I understand that, but its all one paroel. Mr. Mauli: Yes. Mr. LaPine: So ifwe're going to remodel one part, ifthis building is done and done right and looks nice, then that one looks like a sore thumb as far as I'm concerned. It seems to me if we're going to do some remodeling here, we should remodel that building at the same time, at least the front of the building. Maybe I can go along with the side because it does look like you did do some painting there. That's my own personal opinion. To the young lady from Avis, in the back there, are you talking about that white vinyl fence that's back there? You're going to continue it all the way across? Ms. Fisher: Yes. Mr. LaPine: That's a good thing. I recommended that at our meeting. The other thing is, is there going to be any car washing inside this building at all? Ms. Fisher: No. Mr. LaPine: There will be no car washing? September 25, 2007 24334 Ms. Fisher: No. The only thing we would do inside the building is to clean the inside of the cars. We currently have an Avis in Livonia. It's on Plymouth Road between Farmington and Stark. Our lease is up on October 31, so that's why we're looking because we do want to stay in the area. That area has been sold from what I'm told and we don't want to slay in that area with that other business. I'm looking to slay on Plymouth Road. If you go into that building that we currently do business in and just observe, you'll see how we do business. Its more of a staging area because of the elements in the winter so that the cars are clean and wane and ready to go. We currently rent maybe 10 cars per day, so the traffic isn't really going to be there. That's basically it. Its more like a staging area for our customers so that we can do our walk around to make sure there is no damage on the cars. Mr. LaPine: You wont be doing any oil changes, car washing? Ms. Fisher: No. Absolutely not. We are business to business. I've already talked to Firestone. Maybe he would like some of our business and gas, we have to find a gas station in the area. We do not do any type of . . . small repairs, maybe if its a fuse or whatever. Yes, we do that, but we'll do that at another business. As far as oil changes, at another business. All of the major repairs, everything goes back to the airport for repairs. Mr. LaPine: Let me ask this question: how many cars would you have parked here at any one time for rentals overnight? I assume you're not going to have a fenced in area so you'll always have the possibility of vandalism. How many cars would you have parked there at any one fime? Ms. Fisher: We would probably have outside at any given time maybe five to six cars, and that would be a lot. Mr. LaPine: Okay. So most of the people order these cars ahead of time and then they come there and pick them up. Is that the way it works? Ms. Fisher: Yes. Also, we do have pickup service for our customers. We will go pick them up, and we also deliver cars so we wouldn't have that traffic there either. Mr. LaPine: The other question I have, the sign over your door says Avis and then we got all that metal that's on the south side and then goes along to the east where the scooter shop is. Is all that coming down? Sepkmber 25, 2007 24335 Ms. Fisher: Are you talking aboullhe awning? Mr. La Pine: That's right. Everything is come down? Ms. Fisher: Yes. Just our area. What I'd like to do, our current location has Mr. LaPine: awning. I just want to take that awning and put it here. All I going to do it, you do it all at the same time. I'd like it to be want to do is move my store. Mr. La Pine: What I'm saying, you're taking down at the stuff along the building. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. scooter ... Ms. Fisher: I believe that's what the plan is, yes. The scooter - they want to anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this see what we're going to do and they would like to match that. petition? Seeing no one coming forward then, a resolution That was the last thing that I heard. Mr. La Pine: This is where Mr. Morrow made the point. We need to see a Before I offer a resolution, it will be a tabling resolution, but I more comprehensive plan to see exactly what we're getting would like to advise the petitioners that it would be important, if here. At this point, we're just hearing bits and pieces. You this is tabled, that you work with our staff because they will need to come in with one good plan showing both the scooter know what we're looking for as far as actually what you're going side of the building, plus the front of your building, the fence in to do addressing the Inspection Department's concerns, the back and everything. It gives us a better understanding of something that will be finalized so when this actually moves what's going on there. As @ is now, it's just a matter of us using forward to Council, we'll see exactly what the City is getting. So our imagination. Ms. Fisher: See, I don't know what the scooter people really want to do with their portion of the building. I can tell you what I would like to do with our portion of the building. Mr. LaPine: I understand about your portion. It makes more sense if you're going to do it, you do it all at the same time. I'd like it to be where its compatible with your building on their side of the building. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Walsh: Any additional questions? Thank you for being here. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward then, a resolution would be in order. Mr. Morrow: Before I offer a resolution, it will be a tabling resolution, but I would like to advise the petitioners that it would be important, if this is tabled, that you work with our staff because they will know what we're looking for as far as actually what you're going to do addressing the Inspection Department's concerns, something that will be finalized so when this actually moves forward to Council, we'll see exactly what the City is getting. So we precede them to get things shaped up so they can take quicker action. It's solely from seeing the site plan. I have no September 25, 2007 24336 problem with the use. I know Avis is a first class company. I know they will be good tenants in there and I know they'll be good ... well, I guess the same citizens only just a little bit further east than they are now. So on that note, I'm going to offer a tabling resolution to a future date, and hopefully I will look for direction on that from the chair. If they can do it by the next study, I'd be happy to accommodate that. On a motion by Morrow, seconded by Wilshaw, and unanimously adopted, it was #09-106-2007 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on September 25, 2007, on Petition 2007-08-02-30 submitted by Avis Budget Group requesting waiver use approval to operate a car rental facility at 29070 Plymouth Road, located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Middlebell Road and Camden Avenue in the Southwest % of Section 25, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition 2007-08-02-30 be tabled to allow more time for the preparation of revised plans that will address building and site maintenance issues and needed site improvements. Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. As soon as you have a definitive plan for us to look at, work with our staff, we'll put that on our next agenda I know you're working with a deadline and we will work with you on that to make sure we move it along. ITEM#3 PETITION2007-08-0231 STARBLICICS Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2007- 08-02-31 submitted by James Blain Associates/Cambridge Center West Limited Partnership requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a full service restaurant (Starbuck's Coffee) with drive -up window facilities at 39209 Six Mile Road, located on the southeast corner of Six Mile Road and Haggerty Road in the Northwest % of Section 18. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning oflhe surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated September 13, 2007, which September 25, 2007 24337 reads as follows: `Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposal or the address for the referenced property. The Starbuck's Coffee House, however, should be assigned a new building address at the time of permit application submittal in the Building and Engineering Department. The legal description contained in the Blain Group letter dated October 9, 2006, is acceptable except for the typo in the first sentence of the second paragraph should read, 'Section 18, TIS, R9E.' The letter is signed by John P. Hill, Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated August 28, 2007, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct and operate a full service restaurant with drive -up window facilities on property located in the southeast comer of Six Mile Road and Haggerty Road in the Northwest X of Section 18. We have no objections to this proposal with the following recommendations: (1) Mark the north access to Haggerty as right out only due to the congestion on Haggerty Road. This will improve Fire Department access in an emergency. (2) Existing plan does not show a dumpster. Where will trash/garbage be disposed?" The letter is signed by Andrew C. Walker, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated August 31, 2007, which reads as follows: 'We have reviewed the plans in connection with Starbucks Coffee, located at the southeast comer of Six Mile and Haggerty. We have no objections or recommendations to the plans as submitted." The letter is signed by David W. Sludl, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated September 7, 2007, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of August 24, 2007, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) This review is based on the petitioner's property being rezoned from OS to C-2. (2) The train lane serving the drive -up window is shown to be only 10 feet wide where a minimum of 12 feet in width is required. Approval by City Council with a super majority would be required to maintain the width as presented. (3) The number of parking spaces appears to be sufficient. At least one barrier free parking space is required to be van accessible. All barrier free parking spaces are to be property located, sized, signed and striped. (4) This plan does not make provision for a dumpster(s) or dumpster enclosure(s). The Commission and/or Council may wish to determine how bash disposal will be maintained at this site. (5) Signage allowed for a C-2 district is: (a) One ground sign not to exceed 30 square feet, 6 feet in height and 10 feet in length with a setback of 10 feet minimum from any right-of-way. (b) Two wall signs, one not to exceed one square foot for each one Sepkmber 25, 2007 24338 lineal foot of frontage of the building and a second wall sign not to exceed one half of the square footage of the first wall sign. (c) Directional signs for vehicular and pedestrian traffic to and frem the site may not exceed two square feet in area with a two foot setback and a maximum height of three feet All other directional signs shall have a minimum setback of 10 feet and a maximum height of 5 feet All directional signage must be free of advertising. (d) One menu board sign not exceeding 30 square feet of total sign area and may be located only at the point of vocal communication with the main building. (e) Any additional signage or increase in signage size would require a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. (6) The west side of the Petitioner's building appears to have a setback of only 51 feet where 60 feet is required. A variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals will be required to maintain a deficient setback. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Senior Building Inspector. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions for the staff? Mr. Morrow: Mark, at our study session, the drive-lhm lane was 10 feel wide. The ordinance calls for 12 feel. There were some suggestions made so that we could gel it per ordinance. Was that accomplished in this plan? Mr. Taormina: Yes. Actually the building has been shifted to the west the additional two feel providing for an adequate drive-thm lane of 12 feel. Mr. Morrow: Okay. Very good. Thank you. Mr. La Pine: Mark, the drive-lhm, when they pick up their coffee and they want to go north and they make a turn to come back so they can come back out to gel onto Haggerty Road, in that area there is where we have the outdoor seating. Right? Mr. Taornina: If I understand your question, as vehicles are exiling the drive - up and they want to go back to Haggerty, they would circle back around the west side of the building, and in doing so, would be wrapping around the front of the building, which is the patio area. Mr. La Pine: Do we have any barriers in case a car should hit that area? Mr. Taormina: This plan does not show any kind of barrier fence but it's probably something that could be added to the plan, some kind of a defining edge. It looks like there's considerable Sepkmber 25, 2007 24339 landscaping provided there to mark the limit of the patio, but maybe some additional fencing could be provided if that's a concern. Mr. LaPine: In case someone would lose control of their automobile, they wouldn't crash in there and hit somebody. Normally when we have a drive-lhm, we have a pass-through lane. Mr. Taormina: Yes, we normally do. Again, as I pointed out in the presentation, it's not something that is provided on this plan and would have to be recommended to be waived by this body and then approved by the City Council. Mr. LaPine: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Is the petitioner here this evening? James Blain, James Blain Associates/Cambridge Center West L.P., 39209 W. Six Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Mr. Walsh: Thank you. Is there anything you'd like to add, Mr. Blain? Mr. Blain: Other than the dumpster conversation, which we studied at great length, the problem we face is that there are two front yards to this building, and you really cant put a dumpster in the front yard. When this building was first constructed, there were no dumpsters allowed at all, which didn't work out. I think you might remember we had to contain our trash within the building. We did have a dumpster placed on the east end of the building, and there is no dumpster at the south end of the L shape of this building. So we felt that we should put the dumpster on the side yard, south side. I don't know if Mark can show that or not. It gets it out of the front yard. So it's not in the front yard. Its accessible not only from Starbucks but the rest of the building at this end, because the other dumpster is at the far east side, plus it allows the truck to gel into the dumpster area, which is something you fight all the time trying to minimize the appearance of the dumpster and still allow fora truck to gel to il. So that's what we felt was the best location for a dumpster to service not only Starbucks but the rest of the tenants. Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Blain, are you prepared to answer questions about the signage on the Starbuck's property, or do you have a representative? Mr. Blain: I have a representative. Mr. Wilshaw: I have some questions about the signage that's proposed. September 25, 2007 24340 Heather Coach, Construction Manager, Slarbuck's. I should be able to answer some questions regarding the signage. Mr. Wilshaw: Excellent. I appreciate that. My questions in regard to the signage package as submitted, it has a number of signs on R. There's a directorial sign at the entrance to the property, which basically is pointing to where the drive-thru is. That's fine. You have two menu boards. There's what you call a pre -order menu and then a menu board. What the purpose of those two? Ms. Coach: Well, actually, we have just eliminated that pre -order menu board. We are not using those anymore. So it's just the menu board itself. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Good. My question was going to be what's on that pre- order menu board so I guess that's not a problem. The other question is the signage that's on the building itself. You have three sides of the building that are proposed to have signage on it. You're allowed one sign with 22 square feel. You're asking for three signs of 187 square feet. Can you do with less signage on that building? Ms. Coach: First, we would like to have a wall sign on each of the three main faces, the west, the north and the east. We can reallocate the square footage and reduce it, but the reason on the west side, that is our name elevation, so we would really like a sign to give presence to that elevation. The north elevation is also a main entrance point so we need some signage there. But then for the people who are exiting off of 4275 heading westbound on Six Mile, if we had no marking on this building, it would be very difficult for somebody exiling the freeway to look for the Starbucks and almost getting past the Starbucks before they know it's there, and trying to gel in and out of the site. We just want to give them as much warning as possible so that they can plan ahead so they can access the site and make it as easy for them to gel in. On the west elevation, that is our logo disk. If we had something like that on the east elevation, that would be enough to make the building recognizable to somebody looking for it. Mr. Wilshaw: My opinion is, since you're on a comer essentially, you do have two faces as you mentioned. The north and west area are the two primary faces. I can understand signage on those two faces. The east side, I dont necessarily see as being of value. Traffic that's coming along Six Mile westbound from 275 can certainly see the sign that's on the north part of the building because that's going to be a pretty big sign, and I would think September 25, 2007 24341 that you're probably not going to have, unless you have a feeling for what percentage of your customers will be driving through the property, through the parking lot from Six Mile, I would think that the majority of your customers would come in from Haggerty Road, even if they tum from Six Mile. Ms. Coach: We are going to have to pull from 275 to get the commuter traffic most likely heading south on 275 in the morning. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Well, my opinion would be to see that signage reduced sizably because it's quite a bit over limit, and we try to keep our signs in the city pretty reasonable ifwe can. Ms. Coach: I totally understand that. We can adjust the square footage so that maybe one sign isn't just so large, that it's a little smaller so it puts things more in proportion. Mr.Wilshaw: Thank you. Mr. LaPine: Two questions. I want to ask you a question about the dnve- thru lanes. In most instances when we approve a drive-thru, we always have a bypass lane. People are very impatient. They're in line. The way its set up here, everybody is in line. Once you're behind the guy in front of you, you cant get out of the line until you pick up your coffee. Sometimes people get really inpatient and they say I can't wait in a line and they want to pull out. Do you have that problem with any of your other locations? Ms. Coach: Most of our drive-thru locations are what we consider isolated drive-thm lanes where there is no bypass. I can't say that it never happens, but it's pretty rare. Mr. LaPine: Okay. Now, the second question I have, I agree with the owner of the property, Mr. Blain, about the dumpster. My only question is, I don't know how much garbage is produced at a Starbuck's. I've never been to a Starbuck's. But it's a long way from there to where this dumpster is. Is that a problem? Ms. Coach: Its farther than what we normally have, but in this instance, what would probably occur, and I'm not in operations, but I've seen this in the past, is where they would take the garbage out at one time during the day and they usually get boxes. We have paper products. And then they would take it out once a day to the trash dumpster. Mr. LaPine: Have you ever considered putting in a small compactor to pack it down, and then once a day just take it out and throw it in the dumpster? September 25, 2007 24342 Ms. Coach: You know, I would love to but our floor plan is so tight ... it's not a very large building. We just do not have the inside room to do that. Mr. La Pine: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Morrow: Are you able to speak to Mr. LaPine's question about safety as it relates to the traffic ciroling or going by the customers on the north end there? Ms. Coach: In the seating area? Mr. Morrow: Yes. Ms. Coach: Yes. Typically, Starbuck's would require either landscaping around the seating area as it is shown here or a handrail. We like the landscaping because it provides a nicer environment for the people sitting outside. The handrails are usually about this high, metal and they are not like something you would see on the freeway that would stop a car. They are not guardrails. They are just handrails. Mr. Morrow: The reason we say we're concerned is maybe loo strong, but because you know you are a satellite operation with the coffee but you have a very large office building there. As you can see from the plan, there is a lot of traffic generated. So that will be a fairly busy area. Ms. Coach: The one thing to think about is, that's a fairly safe drive lane at that point because people have slopped at the drive-thru window, they've picked up their product, so are they just starting to go. They are not already in motion. They are just beginning to gel in motion. So they are not going very fast. Mr. Morrow: I can appreciate that but because you are part of a larger complex, your office personnel traffic perhaps aren't going as slow as your customers exiling your drive-lhru. It's just a safely concern I have. You've already addressed it with the landscaping. I'd like you to consider perhaps something else to protect those customers. Ms. Coach: Would that be especially on the curb where people would be exiling toward Haggerty? Mr. Morrow: Yes, I would think around the perimeter, particularly on the curve part on the north. Although I'm not a safety engineer, I September 25, 2007 24343 can just express the concems. Certainly, you or Mr. Blain do not want a car croshing into customers. Ms. Coach: Oh, absolutely not. Yes. Mr. Morrow: So I want that to be strongly considered. We've had other dnve- lhms where the Police Department has expressed those concems. Thank you. Ms. Smiley: We need your address for the record. That's one thing. And the other things is, I guess I'm the same way. I'm feeling the same way about this. There's a Potbelly's at College Park that allows for that. It's very attractive and it's also a lot safer. A lot of times people have their coffee and reading and doing a number of things, multi -tasking. So it's a safety concern on my part. I'd like to see something besides a few bushes. Ms. Coach: We can look into that further. Ms. Smiley: I'd appreciate that. Ms. Coach: My address is Starbuck's Coffee Company, 400 Water Street, Suite 205, Rochester, Michigan 48307. Mr. Wilshaw: One additional question: what are the hours of opemtion going to be at this facility? Ms. Coach: Typically, they are 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 or 11:00 p.m. Mr. Wilshaw: Seven days a week? Ms. Coach: I have not asked this specific question for my operations at this particular store, but that's a typical time of operations. Mr. Wilshaw: That's seven days a week, right? Ms. Coach: Yes. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you. Ms. McDermott: I'd also like to request that you consider banging the signage down a little bit. I understand that you want to be identified and why, but I'm really more of a less is more and the Slarbuck's logo kind of says it all to me. So if you would just please considerlhat. Ms. Coach: We can definitely look into some more options. Brady Blain, James Blain Associates, 39209 W. Six Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Can I just add one thing? In regard to the signage, we're arguing that the main entrance is the west elevation. That is where the front doors are. If that is, in fact, the case, then signage is in compliance for both the west elevation and the north elevation. It would just be the east elevation that would need a variance. We've got 84 feet of frontage and I think the ordinance allows for one square foot per lineal foot of frontage. I think that's a 74 square foot sign that's called for in that elevation, and therefore the north elevation sign, or the second sign, would be ... I think the ordinance calls for something that is half of that square footage so that would give us, I think it's under 30 square feel. So therefore those two signs would be in compliance if, in fad, that is considered the main entrance. September 25, 2007 24344 Ms. Vartoogian: I have a question that the architect might be able to answer regarding the north access on Haggerty. The Fire Marshal made the recommendation that it be a right turn only. Have you given any consideration to that? Mr. Blain: I agree with it. It should be nghl turn only because there is another exit farther south. So if you want to turn left, you can. I mean there is a tremendous amount of traffic there. The right tum only probably is the nghl decision. Ms. Vartoogian: All right. Thank you. Mr. La Pine: About the shrubbery, I agree with you. I want the shrubbery to stay. I just want to have something on the outside so if a car hits it, it stops them for a split second. It may help if they have to go through the shrubbery and give the people at lead a chance to jump up and move out of the way. That's the only reason I want that in there. We have another case coming up where we have the same situation where we want protection of the people sifting out there on the patio. I had one other question and I'm trying to figure out what it was. Mr. Blain: I agree with you. I think what you do there and what we've found is, we've got some vertical poles, big ones, we could use and we've used some big boulders because we get a lot of turnaround problems there. Mr. LaPine: I never thought of that but boulders would probably be a very goodlhinglodo. Thankyou. Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this pefition? Brady Blain, James Blain Associates, 39209 W. Six Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Can I just add one thing? In regard to the signage, we're arguing that the main entrance is the west elevation. That is where the front doors are. If that is, in fact, the case, then signage is in compliance for both the west elevation and the north elevation. It would just be the east elevation that would need a variance. We've got 84 feet of frontage and I think the ordinance allows for one square foot per lineal foot of frontage. I think that's a 74 square foot sign that's called for in that elevation, and therefore the north elevation sign, or the second sign, would be ... I think the ordinance calls for something that is half of that square footage so that would give us, I think it's under 30 square feel. So therefore those two signs would be in compliance if, in fad, that is considered the main entrance. September 25, 2007 24345 Mr. Walsh: Thank you for adding that. No one did come forward when I called, as a result ... Mr. La Pine: Can I ask a question? Mr. Walsh: Yes. Mr. La Pine: To the representative from Starbuck's, do you still have the operation across the street in one of the bookstores over there? Ms. Coach: Yes. That's our licensed location. This is a corporate location. Mr. La Pine: Okay. So that's a licensed location, and that is staying. Ms. Coach: That is staying, yes. Mr. Walsh: Thank you, ma'am. If there are no other questions, we would proceed to a resolution. On a motion by LaPine, seconded by Varloogian, and unanimously adopted, it was #09-107-2007 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on September 25, 2007, on Petition 2007-08-02-31 submitted by James Blain Associates/Cambridge Center West Limited Partnership requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a full service restaurant (Slarbuck's Coffee) with drive-up window facilities at 39209 Six Mile Road, located on the southeast corner of Six Mile Road and Haggerty Road in the Northwest''/. of Section 18, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2007-08-02-31 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Site Plan marked Sheet No. A-1 dated September 19, 2007, as revised, prepared by James Blain Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2. That appropriate recordable legal instrumentation, such as a cross parking agreement, that gives notice and ou0ines the terms of how the subject properly(s) would share parking and access, be supplied to the City; 3. That the Landscape Plans marked Sheet No. S2 dated August, 2007, prepared by James Blain Associates is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, except that additional measures, such as the installation of decorative September 25, 2007 24346 fencing, bollards and/or boulders shall be installed to demarcate and protect the outdoor seating area; 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 Elevations Plan marked Sheet No. A-2 dated August, 2007, prepared by James Blain Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 6. That the brick used in the construction shall be full face four (4") inch brick; 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 an enclosed dumpsler area shall be located within a practical walking distance from the restaurant and the distance and location shall be approved by the Inspection Department; 9. That the walls of the dumpster enclosure 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 of steel construction and maintained and when not in use closed at all times; 10. That the maximum customer seating count shall not exceed a total of thirty-two (32) seals, including twenty-two (22) interior seats and ten (10) outdoor patio seats; 11. That a trash receptacle shall be provided for the outdoor patio area and shall be emptied regularly as needed; 12. That the traffic lane serving the drive -up service facility shall be at least twelve (12') feel in width, unless this requirement is modified by the City Council by means of a separate resolution by which two-thirds of the members of the City Council concur; September 25, 2007 24347 13. That a bypass lane at least twelve (12') feel in width may be omitted only if this requirement is waived by the City Council by means of a separate resolution by which two- thirds oflhe members of the City Council concur; 14. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals; 15. That the signs shall not be illuminated beyond one (1) hour afterthis business closes; 16. That no LED lightband or exposed neon shall be permitted on this site including, but not limited to, the building or around the windows; 17. That Item #1 specified in the correspondence dated August 28, 2007, from the Fire Department shall be resolved to that Department's satisfaction; 18. That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals for deficient building setback and deficient parking and any conditions related thereto; 19. 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; and 20. Pursuant to Section 19.10 of Ordinance No. 543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, this approval is valid for a period of one year only from the date of approval by the City Council, and unless a building permit is obtained and construction is commenced, this approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed use complies with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Sections 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; and Sepkmber 25, 2007 24348 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. Walsh: Is there any discussion? Mr. Morrow: Under Item 3, I would like the landscape plan modified to reflect some form of boulder or other form of protection for the outside seating area. Mr. Walsh: Is that acceptable to the maker and the second? Mr. LaPine: I have no problem with that. Ms. Varloogian: Yes. Mr. Walsh: Okay. So thalwill stand as amended. Mr. Wilshaw? Mr. Wilshaw: That one was of the comments I was going to make. The dumpster provisions of this approval, are those appropriate considering that the dumpster is already existing and not part of this plan? Mr. LaPine: Basically, what we're saying is, we're going to agree that the dumpster can stay where it is, and we'll see what happens. I would assume if Starbucks finds it's a problem, they will talk to the owner and then they'll make some arrangements to change it. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, the only other item that I think should be added, if it's okay with the maker, is that signage should be not illuminated beyond one hour after closing. Mr. LaPine: I have no problem with that. Mr. Walsh: Its fine with the second? Ms. Varloogian: Yes. Mr. Walsh: So that will stand as amended as well. Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. Sepbmber 25, 2007 24349 ITEM #4 PETITION 2007-08-0232 FINE WINE SOURCE Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Pefition 2007- 08-02-32 submitted by The Fine Wine Source, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDM liquor license at 37100 Six Mile Road, located on the north side of Six Mile Road between Newburgh Road and Fitzgerald Avenue in the Southwest'''/ of Section 8. Mr. Walsh: Ladies and gentlemen, this item has been withdrawn from consideration tonight by the petitioner. It will remain subject to scheduling unfit such time when the petitioner lets us know they wish it to be considered. kYVjFii",M9=k1YOle] y0VI=1tiKYKeI 99=1c Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petifion 2007- 08-02-33 submitted by Beaner's Coffee requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a full service restaurant with drive -up window facilifies at 11003 Middlebelt Road, located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and Milburn Avenue in the Northeast % of Section 35. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning ofthe surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are bur items of correspondence. The first dem is from the Engineering Division, dated September 13, 2007, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposal or legal description contained therein. The above address number of 11003 Middlebelt Road has been assigned to this building section." The letter is signed by John P. Hill, Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated August 29, 2007, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to operate a full service restaurant with drive -up window facilities 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 September 7, 2007, which reads as follows: 'We have reviewed the plans in connection with Beaner's Coffee, located at the Sepkmber 25, 2007 24350 southwest comer of Plymouth and Middlebelt. We have serious concerns over the outside seating area. The tables and chairs will be very close to drive -thin traffic on the south, and close to the parking area to the northeast. The only protection for these patrons will be the curb, which is very low. We would recommend some type of barrier protection around the outdoor seating. We also have a concern regarding the entrance of the drive-thru. In looking at the area, it appears the plan is to allow patrons to enter only from a southeasterly direction. This will create additional traffic through another parking lot to the northwest, and a traffic conflict from patrons who will attempt to enter from the main drive to the south despite curb and pavement markings. We believe that a drive -thin in this area of The Village Shops of Wonderland will create a vehicular and pedestrian traffic problem." The letter is signed by David W. Studt, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated September 10, 2007, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of August 27, 2007, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) Although not part of this review, it appears exit egress does not meet code in this application. Two exits are required and the path of egress may not be through a kitchen area. This will be further addressed at time of permit application should the project move forward. (2) Although a master sign package has not been submitted, it appears the proposed wall sign at 18.42 square feet could be in line with their allowed pro rata signage per lineal feet of frontage. This is based on the assumption that other tenants in retail C 8 D only request their allotted signage per frontage foot. (3) Parking spaces beyond the drive -up window shall be designated for use by drive -up window patrons. This may be waived by separate resolution with a super majority vote of Council. (4) Outdoor seating has been proposed for this site within acceptable path of egress to be clear at all times. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Walsh: Are there any quesfions for the staff? Seeing none, we will go right to the petitioner. Good evening. Sanford Green, Director of Real Estate, Beaner's Coffee, 2501 Coolidge, Suite 302, East Lansing, Michigan. Good evening. Mr. Walsh: Is there anything you'd like to add to the presentation thus far? September 25, 2007 24351 Mr. Green: No. I believe that we have sent, via the developers engineer, some responses to two questions that were raised in the study session, one being the issue that involves the drive-thru window stacking, an entrance to that stacking and also to the outdoor seating issue. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. LaPine: We have two big concems. I haven't seen anything this evening that shows me how its been resolved. Number one was the way we felt the traffic had to make a sharp tum to gel into the drive- in lane, and the other one was what we were going to do about assuring there is a barrier around the outside patio area where we won't have any problems with accidents. Can pu tell me what happened on those two items? Mr. Green: We've got one of two approaches. I think the one that we would elect to go with is, first of all, to move the outdoor seating that is located along the area where the people are pulling away from the drive-lhru window, move that at least 15 feel away. We'd also cul down the number of outdoor seals from to five to four. Then we would erect a three foot fence around it that would allow access to it only from basically our front door. It would look something similar . I think someone brought up in relation to the previous petitioner, the Potbelly and Caribou fencing area outside their stores. It could be similar to that. As for the stacking, we have some drawings. I did send them two days ago, I think to Mr. Nowak's attention or I had our architect sent it, but you're looking quizzical so I guess perhaps you didn't receive it. Mr. Walsh: We have not received anything, so what we do appreciate is your verbal discussion, and as this progresses, perhaps that will follow-up for the Council to look at. Mr. Green: I'll make certain of it. Mr. Bill Cote, Middlebelt Plymouth Venture, L.L.C., 17672 Laurel Park Drive North, Suite 400E, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Mark, if you could go to the site plan, the larger site plan that shows the parking lot and buildings. Hubbell, Roth and Clark are engineers that responded back to us on the drive-lhm facility, and they were responding to Sergeant Sludl's letter that says that: "it appears the plan is to allowpatrons to enter only from a southeasterly direction." We don't agree with that. Our engineer doesn't and we dont either. Could you blow up all the buildings in that area right to the pond? We have access from this driveway down to Sepkmber 25, 2007 24352 this driveway and back up through here. We have access through this aisleway behind the buildings into the drive-lhm. We have access coming from the north down between the buildings and into the drive-lhru. And we have access turning into this driveway around and back into the building. A car could, by option, come in off Middlebell, and the driveway, the turning area, is designed for that car to make that tum. Now, we have probably four or five ways to gel to this drive-thru area. If I'm correct from Beaners representative, their peak hour is about 8:00 a.m. in the morning when Wal -Marl and Target aren't even open yet. So we have four or five ways to gel to this. I believe Sergeant Studt's letter says it appears that it will only allow patrons to enter from the southeast direction. I think that's incorrect because we have four or five areas to access that driveway. Mr. Morrow: I guess my concern is, there are a lot of options there. To me, the way that driveway is engineered or the geomelrics, doesn't make the right tum coming in off the southerly drive too "turn - friendly'. I mean maybe, and as you indicated, there's enough room, but to me a lot of times we see that type of concept to steer traffic in a certain direction. Its just, like I say, if you're coming in either from the east or the west on that southerly driveway, turning into the driveway just doesn't look that friendly to make that turn because the way it scoops up to the north. That's my big concern. Do you follow what I'm saying? Mr. Cole: Yes, I understand what you're saying. Mr. Morrow: I guess what I'm hearing here tonight, that the ideas that you have we won't see. Is there any way to tell us what those ideas are? Mr. Cole: Relative to changing it? Mr. Morrow: Yes. It was indicated there were drawings that were sent that didn't arrive. Mr. Cole: No, no. What the Beaners representative was talking about was the other issue that had to do with the seating area. Mr. Morrow: Oh, so I misunderstood. I thought the other concern was also addressed in those drawings. Mr. Cole: No. There were two concerns in the Department of Public Safety's letter. One was the seating. Beaners Coffee had made the assumption or heard their architect had sent some drawings that showed fencing in this area. Obviously, you didn't September 25, 2007 24353 receive them. The other issue is the Sergeant's perception that we designed access only from one direction. Mr. Morrow: I know that's what he said, but I shared his concern about the geometrics of that tum. That was my dilemma. Mr. Cote: Yes, we have a letter from Hubbell, Roth & Clark, Richard Beaubien, who is a very well known traffic consultant. He was part of the design of this and prepared a letter, which I have with me. I sent it over to the Planning Department. You may not have received it yet. I don't know. Mr. Morrow: So they are comfortable that cars can make that turn? Mr. Cote: Hubbell, Roth & Clark is very comfortable with that. Mr. Morrow: To me, it's tantamount to a U-turn, the way I see it. Mr. Cote: That's correct. Mr. Morrow: Sometimes those aren't so easy to negotiate. Anyways, that's my comment. Mr. Cote: And I respect it. Mr. La Pine: I know exactly what you're saying but it really confuses me. I was over there two or three times. It's like a maze in there trying to find your way around. You've got four areas you say people can drive in, which means they have to come all the way from Plymouth Road, go south, tum, go east and everything, all going to the same area. So you have two cars here, two cars here, two cars here. You've eight or ten cars come in trying to get in line here, which to me doesn't make much sense. Number two, once you get in, unless you have signage pointing two or three different directions how to get to where Beaner's is, people are going to be in the parking lot saying, where am I at here? Normally when you have a drive-thru like this, going back to the last case on Starbuck's, its right on the corner. They can see it. They know how to get in. Here you're telling me people are going to come off Plymouth Road, go into this entrance, come in off of Middlebelt. It just isn't going to work that way. People want to get there, get fast, get their coffee and get the heck out of there on their way to work. It's just not convenient. I just don't think it's the right location. I'm not opposed to Beaner's going there. If they want to put it in there and it doesn't make it, that's their problem, but I just dont think its the right location. They would be better off if it was someplace on Plymouth Road where they could drive in and drive right out to Sepkmber 25, 2007 24354 Plymouth Road again or another spot on Middlebelt where they could drive in and right out. It just doesn't seem it's the right spot. That's my personal opinion. I might be wrong, but I just don't see how it can work. Mr. Wilshaw: Just a comment. After listening to the conversation we've had so far about the traffic pattem, I do agree with my fellow commissioners that the vast majority of the customers are going to come in off of Middlebelt to go to Beaner's. I don't see a lot of people wanting to tum off of Plymouth Road, jog through the parking lot and the whole properly just to go to a coffee place. They are most apt to turn at Middlebell, go down and as soon as they see it, turn in there and go gel their coffee. I am concerned that there isn't adequate space for a car to make that U -tum into Beaner's entrance, but I am familiar with Dick Beaubien. I've known him for a while. He is a very well respected traffic engineer, and if he says you can do it, I'm not one to disagree with him. It doesn't look really good to me but I'll respect his judgment. My only other concern, just as a comment is, if for some reason Beaner's is not successful in this location, what we have is very unusual situation where you have the end cap of a strip mall with a drive-lhru lane, which precludes you from being able to put many other types of developments in that place. You're pretty much locked into a restaurant -type facility. I hope yoUve taken that into consideration in designing this. Mr. Cote: Well, if that were to happen, from a construction and design point, if they weren't there anymore, we could easily take this out, landscape it, and put another tenant in that space and make it a retail tenant. We'd just take the driveway out, which is really easy to do. Mr. Wilshaw: All right. Mr. Cole: We thought of that Ms. McDermott: I'm glad to hear that because that was my concern as well. I sat there today and I have a Mustang, which is a fairly small car, and I know I can make that tum, but I think, as a customer, I wouldn't want to make that turn. Its not really user friendly. Coming in from one of the other directions, I could see that not being a problem, but coming in from Middlebelt Road, I'd probably do that once and I wouldn't do it again. That's just my comment. September 25, 2007 24355 Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion is in order. Mr. Wilshaw: After my reserve comments I just made, I do respect the property rights of Schostak and their development and their wisdom of what they want to do with their property, so I am going to offer an approving resolution. On a motion by Wilshaw, seconded by Morrow, and adopted, it was #09-108-2007 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on September 25, 2007, on Petition 2007-08-02-33 submitted by Beaner's Coffee requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a full service restaurant with drive -up window facilities at 11003 Middlebelt Road, located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and Milburn Avenue in the Northeast ''/ of Section 35, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2007-08-02-33 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the maximum customer seating count shall not exceed a total of forty-three (43) seats, including twenty- three (23) interior seats and sixteen (16) exterior patio seats; 2. That both the drive -up and bypass traffic lanes for drive- thru traffic shall be at least twelve (12') feet in width for a combine total of at least twenty-four (24') feet in width unless this requirement is waived by the City Council by means of a separate resolution by which two-thirds of the members of the City Council concur; 3. That at least two (2) parking spaces beyond the drive -up window shall be designated for use by drive -up window patrons unless this requirement is waived by the City Council by means of a separate resolution by which two- thirds ofthe members of the City Council concur; 4. That the installation of some type of banner protection around the outdoor seating area as specified in the correspondence dated September 7, 2007, from the Police Department shall be resolved to that department's satisfaction; 5. That the outdoor dining shall be conducted in a manner that will insure that sufficient clear space for pedestrian Sepkmber 25, 2007 24356 circulation and egress is maintained on the sidewalk at all times; 6. That a trash receptacle shall be provided for the outdoor patio area and shall be emptied regularly as needed; 7. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals; 8. That no LED lighlband or exposed neon shall be permitted on the site including, but not limited to, the building or around the windows; and 9. That the signs shall not be illuminated beyond one (1) hour afterthis business closes; Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed use complies with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Sections 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2. That the subject site has the capacity to 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. Walsh: Is there any discussion? Mr. Morrow: If I follow the gentleman from Beaner's correctly, I think he indicated that the plan we haven't seen, he was reducing the number of outdoor seats from 20 to 16, and I think he said he went from five tables to four. If that is the case, I would like to reduce Item #1 to 16 exterior patio seals. Mr. Walsh: Sir, is that correct? Mr. Green: That is correct. Mr. Walsh: Okay. If that's okay with Mr. Wilshaw, then we will do so. Sepkmber 25, 2007 24357 Mr. Morrow: Thank you. A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Wilshaw, Morrow, Vartoogian, Smiley, Walsh NAYES: LaPine, McDermott ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None 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#6 PETITION 2007-08-0234 HUNTINGTON BANK Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2007- 08-02-34 submitted by Huntington Bank requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a bank branch with drive -up service facilities at 30111 Plymouth Road, located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Middlebell Road and Milburn Avenue in the Northeast'''/ of Section 35. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated September 13, 2007, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above-refemnced petition. We have no objections to the proposal or the legal description contained therein. The above address number of 30111 Plymouth Road has been assigned to this parcel." The letter is signed by John P. Hill, Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated August 29, 2007, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct a full service bank with drive -up window facilities on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and Milbum Avenue in the Northeast X of Section 35. 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 August 31, 2007, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed the plans in connection with September 25, 2007 24358 Huntington Bank located at 30111 Plymouth Road. We have no objections or recommendations to the plans as submitted." The letter is signed by David W. Sludl, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated September 10, 2007, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of August 27, 2007, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) This site as part of the regional shopping center will not be allowed a monument sign without a grant from the Zoning Board of Appeals. (2) It will be allowed any number of wall signs totaling 54 square feet. Any square footage amount in excess will require a grant from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The amount proposed is unclear from the plans provided. (3) It is unclear if the drive-thm lanes are 12 feet wide. If they do not meet the required width, Council may by separate resolution with a super majority waive any deficiency. (4) One barrier free parking space must be van accessible with a minimum 8foot space and adjacent 8 -foot access aisle, property signed, sized, marked and striped. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions for the Planning Department? Seeing none, then we will go right to the petitioner. Brad Schneider, 2060 Franklin Way, Marietta, Georgia. I'm here to answer any questions. One comment about the drive-thru lanes being less than 12 feet, I think they ran 11 feet wide, the approach lanes. The islands under the canopy where the transactions will take place are approximately 91/2 feet wide, so that's why we have approximately 11 foot lanes approaching the drive-thru islands. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. Morrow: One of the items we discussed at the review was the parking spots in front of the bank where there is handicap parking. They are only 18 feet in depth. Not being a real expert on handicap parking, is that adequate for handicap parking because there was some talk about using the overhang on the other side and make them 18 feet so you can get four parking spaces on that. So I'm just wondering if there was any talk about that. Mr. Bill Cole, Middlebell Plymouth Venture, L.L.C., 17672 Laurel Park Drive North, Suite 400E, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Oh, yes. I believe on that drawing they have them switched. And I think if I am correct, they should be on the opposite sides because the parking next to the sidewalk requires different depths of parking September 25, 2007 24359 spaces. Mr. Taormina: That is correct. So the change would involve making these spaces on the south side of the drive aisle closest to the building 20 feel and then having the 18 foot deep spaces on the north side of the drive aisle adjacent to the landscaping where vehicles could overhang the landscaping but not the sidewalk. That would be the change. Mr. Cole: We will make that correction on our engineering drawings when we submit to the city. Mr. Morrow: I was also concerned that some of them were handicapped. I don't know how strict they are on those. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: There was mention about the poles in the drive-thru area being made out of dryvit material as opposed to a masonry material. Is that going to change or is that still dryvit material? Mr. Schneider: The columns? Mr. Wilshaw: Yes. Mr. Schneider: The columns are all prefabricated material; there won't be any stucco. Mr. Wilshaw: What is this prefabricated material made out of? Mr. Schneider: Its like a glass reinforced material. It comes pre -finished. It's not stucco. It's hard surface so you won't be able to dent it. Mr. Wilshaw: Is it able to withstand cars bumping into it? Mr. Schneider: There will be steel pipe bollards on both sides. Anybody would hit those before they would hit the column. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Good. We talked at our study meeting briefly about the signage as well. Do you have one sign on the west side, one on the north and nothing on the east? Is that comect? Is that still what you're proposing? Mr. Schneider: Yes, that's correct. Mr. Wilshaw: And do you have a need to have that excess signage on the west side of the building? September 25, 2007 24360 Mr. Schneider: We prefer to have that, yes. So people coming from the west approach, they'd be able to see the sign on the side of the building. Mr. Wilshaw: How do they differ from the people who are approaching from the east, which doesn't have a sign on the east? Mr. Schneider: I think there's a While Castle on that side, isn't there, that would block the view. Mr. Wilshaw: So those people would have to rely on the sign that's on the front of the building? Mr. Schneider: Correct. Mr. Wilshaw: So the people that are coming from the west could they not be served by the sign that's on the north side of the building as well? Mr. Schneider: They'd be able to see the sign on the west side from farther away I guess. Mr. Wilshaw: My preference would be that you have a conforming sign package with just one sign on the front of the building, given my preference. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion would be in order. On a motion by Morrow, seconded by LaPine, and adopted, it was #09-109-2007 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on September 25, 2007, on Petition 2007-08-02-34 submi0ed by Huntington Bank requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a bank branch with drive -up service facilities at 30111 Plymouth Road, located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Middlebell Road and Milburn Avenue in the Northeast % of Section 35, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2007-08-02-34 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Site Plan marked Sheet No. HB -1 dated August 24, 2007, as revised, prepared by Schostak Brothers & Company, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, subject to any revisions as noted below; September 25, 2007 24361 2. That any parking space that abuts a pedestrian walkway shall be striped at least twenty (20') feet in length and any parking space abutting landscaping shall be permitted to be striped at eighteen (18')feetin length; 3. That appropriate recordable legal instrumentation, such as a cross parking agreement, that gives notice and outlines the terms of how the subject properly(s) would share parking and access, be supplied to the City; 4. That the Landscape Plans marked Sheet No. HB -9 dated August 24, 2007, as revised, prepared by Schostak Brothers & Company, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 5. 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; 6. That the Exterior Building Elevations Plans marked Sheet No. A4.1 and A4.2 both dated August 24, 2007, as revised, prepared by Professional Design Group, are hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 7. That the brick used in the construction shall be full face four (4")inch brick; 8. That the decorative "acorn" style luminaries, as shown on the Electrical Lighting Levels Plan marked Sheet No. HB -7 dated August 24, 2007, as revised, prepared by Schostak Brothers & Company, shall not exceed a height of twenty (20') feel and shall match the light standards and fixtures utilized in the Village Shops at Wonderland; 9. That there shall be no outside dumpsler located on the site, and all trash must be contained within the building except on the day trash is scheduled for removal; 10. That all three drive -up lanes and the bypass lane for drive- thm traffic shall each be at least twelve (12') feel in width for a combine total of at least forty-eight (48') feel in width unless this requirement is waived by the City Council by means of a separate resolution by which two-thirds of the members of the City Council concur; September 25, 2007 24362 11. That the wall and ground signage portrayed in the Sign Package submitted by Gardner Signs, as received by the Planning Commission on August 28, 2007, is hereby approved, subject to the granting of variances for excess wall sign area and number of ground signs for a Regional Center by the Zoning Board of Appeals and any conditions pertaining thereto; 12. That no LED lighlband or exposed neon shall be permitted on this site including, but not limited to, the building or around the windows; 13. That Item #4 specified in the correspondence dated September 10, 2007, from the Inspection Department shall be resolved to that department's satisfaction; 14. 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; and 15. Pursuant to Section 19.10 of Ordinance No. 543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, this approval is valid for a period of one year only from the dale of approval by the City Council, and unless a building permit is obtained and construction is commenced, this approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed use complies with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Sections 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; and 3. That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any discussion? Mr. Morrow: On Condition #10, is that reflected on the plans, Chairman? Mr. Walsh: They had 11 feel. Sepkmber 25, 2007 24363 Mr. Morrow: Then I want to modify that 11 feet in width for a combined total of ... what would be that? How many lanes do we have? Mr. Walsh: 44. Mr. Morrow: 44 feel in width. Should I leave that at 12 feet and let the Council make that change? Mr. Taormina: Yes. Mr. Morrow: Okay. Thank you. A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Morrow, LaPine, McDermott, Varloogian, Smiley, Walsh NAYES: Wilshaw ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None 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#7 PETITION 2007-08-0235 MAYFIELD PARTNERS Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2007- 08-02-35 submitted by Mayfield Partners, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a child care facility at 32520 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Mayfield Avenue and Shadyside Avenue in the Southwest''/. of Section 3. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under pefition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are several items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated September 13, 2007, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposal or legal description contained therein. The above address number of 32520 Seven Mile Road is the assigned address for this parcel" The letter is signed by John P. Hill, Assistant City Engineer. September 25, 2007 24364 The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Ibscue Division, dated August 29, 2007, which reads as follows: 'This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct a child care facility on property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Mayfield Avenue and Shadyside Avenue in the Southwest X of Section 3. 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 August 31, 2007, which reads as follows: We have reviewed the plans in connection with Children of America Child Care, located at 32520 Seven Mile. We have no objections or recommendations to the plans as submitted." The letter is signed by David W. Sludl, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated September 10, 2007, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of August 27, 2007, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) Fencing that encompasses the outdoor play area must be at least five feet in height where only four feet is shown. (2) This property is a double frontage lot abutting Seven Mile on the south side and Mayfield on the north side. The required setback from both public streets is 75 feet. The proposed setback from Seven Mile is 97 feet and 163 feet from Mayfield. The setbacks are sufficient (3) Planning or Council may wish to request more information regarding the location of the dual trash enclosure and the need for a cross agreement with the poperty to the west for access. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Senior Building Inspector. We have received copies of a form letter that was apparently made available to residents in the area, received by the Planning Commission on September 25, 2007, which reads as follows: "In recent days, Wixom -based builder/developer Schonsheck, Inc. informed Livonia residents that a new daycare center is being proposed east of Joe's Produce on Seven Mile, east of Farmington Road. Florida - based World Wide Child Care Corp. is seeking to open a Children of America, facility. World tide owns and operates centers across the country. As a longtime business owner and/or resident of Livonia, 1 am quite concerned with these proposed plans, for a number of reasons including. Saturation: Livonia is already oversaturated with daycare centers with 99 existing centers. Economy: Michigan's challenged economy and resulting job losses has resulted in escalating disenrellments at all area centers, many of which have been forced to close as a result. Demographics: The median age of Livonia residents continues to increase affecting elementary school enrollment with many schools closing in recent years. Again, the Livonia childcare community has continued to suffer Sepkmber 25, 2007 24365 as well. Should the City of Livonia approve the construction of yet another daycare center, it will severely impact the future of the area's existing centers, which continue to struggle for survival. Many of these centers have served as good corporate citizens and vital community resources for decades. One such center, Kid's Stop Childcare Center, located directly across the street from the proposed development, has been privately owned and operated for more than 20 years. 1 am requesting that the City of Livonia tum down Schonsheck, Inc.'s proposed Children of America development, taking into consideration that it could severely and irreparably effect longtime, existing Livonia businesses, for the reasons stated above." We have received a number of copies of these fors with a total of 31 signatures. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Walsh: Thank you. Are there any questions for the staff? Ms. Smiley: Mark, did you say it was a six foolfence? Mr. Taormina: Yes, it is indicated that they would go with a six foot fence surrounding the play area as opposed to what was originally shown as four feel. It is required to be at least five feet, but they opt for a six fool high fence. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Fine. Thank you. Mr. La Pine: Mr. Nowak, did that letter come from an association or residents? The only homes will have to be on the south side of Seven Mile because next to this is the nursing home. Then there's two other homes along Seven Mle. I'm curious where all the signatures came from. What streets? Mr. Nowak: Some of them are signed by persons who give their addresses on Seven Mile Road, Loveland, Woodring and Mayfield. Those are the general locations. Ms. Smiley: You said you have 57 percent of the people approving d, neighbors approving it? Mr. Taormina: That is a special requirement of the waiver use provisions and that applied to the owners of residential property within 400 feet of the subject property. The petition that we received just recently includes many residents that live more than 400 feet from the subject property within the residential area on the south side of Seven Mile Road and possibly some business owners as well on Seven Mile Road. I'm not sure. We didn't analyze it to that extent, but yes, you're right, we did analyze, for the purposes of determining compliance under that special September 25, 2007 24366 provision in the ordinance, whether or not more than 55 percent of the residential property owners within 400 feet had signed a petition in agreement, and it did comply with that requirement. Ms. Smiley: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Two questions, Mr. Taormina, through the Chair. The square footage of the play area, does that meet our recently revised ordinance? Mr. Taormina: Yes. 5,000 square feet. That is correct. Mr. Wilshaw: And did you say in your presentation that the dumpsters have a wood gale on them? Mr. Taormina: Yes, I believe that was indicated on the detail of the plans. Usually, we require steel gates in lieu of the wood gates. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Is the petitioner here this evening? Timothy Hader, Schonsheck, Inc., 51331 W. Pontiac Trail, Wixom, Michigan 48393. Mayfield Partners has the same address. Mr. Walsh: Is there anything you'd like to add to the presentation thus far? Mr. Hader: I can add a couple things real quick. I think there is some question about the 55 percent requirement in your ordinance for the residents within 400 feet of our properly line. I think that totals 7, if I recall. We submitted four. Subsequent to our application on the 23'd of the month, we got another one signed and sealed by another neighbor. Could you pass that down? I think that makes 5 out of the 7 that are required. The other applicant expressed her willingness to sign but the City records show that the current owner has been dead since 1999. So the widower, she didn't feel nghl to sign anything so she didn't sign it, but we have five out of seven. I did receive a call Iasi week about the look of the building and the request for more information about the looks, specifically the masonry on the building. I did bang a sample of that with me today that I can show you. Is there a good place to set that? Mr. Walsh: Actually, there is. Is that the only piece that you're going to show us? Mr. Hader: Yes. Sepkmber 25, 2007 24367 Mr. Walsh: Actually, if that's all that you have, you can just hold it up. You can put it in front of the podium. That will be fine. Mr. Hader: In addition to that, we contacted Children of America and they were willing to send us some photos here. They've got literally dozens and dozens and dozens of plans and elevations, and we got things from two story buildings to single story buildings. These photographs here are what we would like to present to you as far as the color scheme. They do show some masonry piers from our plans. As you can see, we've got a wainscot around three sides of the building with masonry in the back side. We're up about eight feel high. These are the color schemes that are less aggressive or vibrant as the sketch in our application. So I'd like to pass these around loo if you don't mind. Mr. Walsh: Sure. If you pass them along, we'll take a look at those. Mr. Hader: The only thing I have to add is the objection we apparently received from the church across the street. I understand they've been there for quite some time, and really, the competition they're worried about doesn't exist. The direct competition as the church is a faith -based day care center where you're dropping your child off for more than just day care. Its education in a religious aspect, and where Children of America, in particular this building here, is not faitlrbased. So if you're looking for a faitlrbased education for your children as far as day care goes, that you're going to consider Children of America, so I don't think there's competition there. As far as the signatures from 31 applicants, I suspect, although I don't know for sure, that they're probably the parents of the children who attend the church and the day care there. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Ms. Smiley: Its a franchise or a chain. Are there other Child Care Centers of America in Michigan? Mr. Hader: Yes. Ms. Smiley: Where? Mr. Hader: Oh, geez. I couldn't even tell you where. I'd have to go online and look. It used to be Tutor Time, and the same folks who started Tutor Time years ago sold that company, and then now they've started a new line. They're very familiar with markets and where they can best be served. They're not ones to waste money. Including properly, building, etc., we've got over a $3 September 25, 2007 24368 million investment here. So they're not, as you would say, spending their money unwisely. Mr. La Pine: Do you have any of these in the Detroit metropolitan area built yet? Mr. Hader: Children of America? Mr. La Pine: Yes. Mr. Hader: Oh, I'm sure there are. Mr. La Pine: Do you know where they are at? Mr. Hader: I do not have a location map of additional Children of Americas. Mr. Morrow: Just a comment. I was one of the commissioners who was quite confident that this was not representative of the colors that we were going to see. So if you're indicating that those pictures are representative of color ... Mr. Hader: Yes, those pictures are far more representative. When we first had Children of America, they said go to our web site. Well, I searched the web site and that's what they had and that's what I printed. But certainly we dont want to put that on the site. I don't think it would be very appropriate, and I think the pictures submitted give a dear representation of what we really want to do on the site. Mr. Morrow: All those bricks you have in front of you, which ones will be used? Mr. Hader: It's a three color blend. So you're going to see a mixture of all three. Mr. Morrow: Okay. Mr. Wilshaw: I have a number of questions about the building materials. The rendering that was provided to us obviously is somewhat lacking, and we see this brick. But do we know what the color of the dryvil, the roof ... we have a picture, but it's hard to tell if that roof is blue or turquoise or what color it is. Mr. Hader: I dont have a list like Sherman Williams colors. We did ask one of our bidders, who provided the E.F.I.S. for those samples. I didn't gel the call from Mr. Nowak until Thursday and he wasn't able to get me those pre -colored samples for today's meeting. Certainly, I'll have them for the City Council meeting next month. September 25, 2007 24369 The roof material, by the way, is not going to be turquoise. It will probably be a charcoal gray; ft's going to be asphalt shingle as indicated on the elevations. Il will not be turquoise. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. That's certainly a variance from what we see here in the plan so far. Are you okaywith having steel or some type of door for your dumpsters that are better than wood? Mr. Hader: We have no problem with that. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. And in your rendering, you also have a wood fence that extends to the east of the building. Yet, I don't we that on the plans at all. Mr. Hader: A wood fence that extends to the east of the building? Mr. Wilshaw: Its on the rendering. There's a privacy fence that is extending to the east of the building. Mr. Hader: I'm not sure where. Mr. Walsh: If pu look at the pictures, Mr. Wilshaw, you'll see an enclosed play area. I believe that's where the fence is. Mr. Hader: Oh, that could be. Every one is laid out a little different; every site plan is different. We're proposing a vinyl fence, not wood, as is indicated on the drawings. Mr. Wilshaw: That's really where I was headed to is, if you're going to have some sort of fencing for your play area, a more durable material than wood should probably be used. Mr. Hader: It will be vinyl. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. That sounds good. What are the ages of the children that are going to be at your facility? Mr. Hader: Up through age 12. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Mr. La Pine: Unfortunately, I was one of the ones that liked your design. My philosophy is, its kid friendly, you know. If kids walk up there, they dont want to be scared. They look at an all brick building and think, "Oh, I'm going to see the doctor again" This kind of gives them the feeling that they're going into a play area. Are these little figures here, are they going to be on the building? September 25, 2007 24370 Mr. Hader: Yes. I think the additional photographs I passed around today still have highlights of the color in the pier areas, either orange or blue or green or red, fairly smaller areas than what you see here. Mr. LaPine: Of the three, that one I probably like the best. Mr. Hader: Well, that's all the same building. The ones I passed around are the same. Mr. LaPine: That's all one building? Oh, I thought it was three different buildings. Mr. Hader: No, it's all the same building. You're looking at different areas, the side, the back, the diamond of the E.F.I.S. Mr. LaPine: I can buy that. That's very nice. Mr. Hader: It's always fun to do something with children. We did a pediatrician's office one time with big curved walls. Instead of putting number two on the door, we actually painted number two on the wall from floor to ceiling. It's always fun to do something like that. Ms. Smiley: I take it then you're more into the construction. You're not actually going to operate the child care center? Mr. Hader: No, ma'am. Schonsheck is a developer/builder. We're going to build the building. Children of American will own and operate it. Ms. Smiley: What kind of security measures do you have setup? Mr. Hader: They've got a front desk. There is someone who will main the station at that desk for all operating hours. I don't think they have like a card access. I think that person is there to check ID, check your child out, you sign a form, your child's name, time, who you are, verify identification. There will be surveillance. Also the backside of the building where the play area is going to go is fenced in six feet. I think five feet is required by ordinance. Children of American like to see six feet for the added bit of security and privacy as well. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Taormina: A quick question regarding the roof component. Does that wrap all the way around four sides of the building because ft's hollow in the center for the mechanical equipment. September 25, 2007 24371 Mr. Hader: Yes. It's like a Burger King. It's hollow in the center and depressed, so the actual roof top units are about level with the gutter that runs around the perimeter of the building. Besides acting as an architectural detail, they actually screen the units from all four sides. Mr. Taormina: Will this appearance be visible from all four sides? Mr. Hader: That is correct. Ms. Smiley: I want to go back to your landscaping. In the pictures, not these pictures, but the pictures of the drawing of it, I see there's really nothing out in front. I think you need to do something there on the front of the building, you know, up near the sidewalk. You have a great opportunity for some good landscaping in that area. Mr. Hader: It's always a struggle when you look at landscaping. You want to put down what the ordinance requires, but then, as I typically do, add more, and then the City holds you to it. We like to show what is required. We always end up doing much more. Most ordinances don't require, for example, foundation landscaping, but everybody puts in foundation landscaping. So we like to show what's required and then during the construction process we usually add more. If you'd like to add some specific requirement along Seven Mile, I have no objection to that. Ms. Smiley: I'm sure our department would be glad to work with you on that, and I think you'd do better by the time you go to Council if you show more rather than say that we'll probably do more later. Mr. Hader: Well, I mean, we do what the ordinance requires. Typically, what we like to do, when there are headlights that face a road, is to put in some plants that will grow and fill in about three feet in height to hide those headlights from shining in the road. Its kind of typical. In this case, we're going to do that as well. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Mr. La Pine: I notice at this particular location you're going to have a metal seam roof. This one is going to have asphalt shingles. Mr. Hader: That's right. Yes. Mr. La Pine: Thank you. September 25, 2007 24372 Mr. Taormina: One last question regarding the parking, has the operator reviewed the parking in terms of the number of spaces and are they satisfied with that? Will that meet their needs? Mr. Hader: Yes, in fad, they've signed a copy of the site plan and the floor plan, with the operator's initials on it, for our protection as well. So they're very happy with the layout. Mr. Walsh: If there are no additional questions then, we'll go to the audience. Thank you, sir. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petifion? Please give us your name and address for the record. Pam Tanner, Open Arms Church, 33015 Seven Mile Road, Livonia. Mr. Walsh: Actually, are you each going to speak in succession or are you all speaking together? Ms. Tanner: Well, we may do it in succession. Mr. Walsh: Okay. We'll take the names and addresses. Ingrid Grabill, First Baptist Church, 17725 Inkster Road, Livonia. Mr. Walsh: Okay. We'll lake them all now and then we'll go forward. Camille Rutherford, St. Mathew's Church, 30900 Six Mile, Livonia. Unidentified person: I'm not speaking. I'm supporting. Mr. Walsh: Okay. Thank you. Ms. Tanner: I'm speaking on behalf of Open Arms Church. We did receive the letter from ... Mr. Walsh: Okay. Ma'am, one more suggestion. If you can come a little closer, its hard for us to hear. Ms. Tanner: I'm speaking on behalf of Open Arms Church. We received the letter from Schonsheck for approval for this proposal, and we obviously are against it. I operate a child care center in the church. We are not affiliated with the church, so I have to correct that assumption. It stales here that they need approval from residential property owners within 400 feel. Correct me if I'm wrong. They said they had six or seven approvals, which is 57 percent. I am the one that had turned in the petitions eadier, and 14 of the pefitions that I turned in were from residents from the south side of Seven Mile Road, which live in the apartment September 25, 2007 24373 complex, I believe it's Canterbury Apartments. One of the big oppositions was the traffic coming in and out, the egress in and out of their center, especially during rush hour, early morning and evening. Being an operator of a center for 22 years in the City of Livonia, and along with my colleagues, we all have the concerns that are stated on this, of course for obvious reasons. We've seen quite a change in our enrollment over the last six years, and you, of course, know that they have closed down many schools in the area because they just - seven elementary schools, within the same area that they are proposing to put this site. Along with this, there is another corporation based in New Jersey that is also coming to our state, the Learning Experience, which is also going to put up a center on Seven Mile and Vidor Parkway, which of course would be in direct competition with Children of America. We just represent the smaller, privately owned centers, the people that are here today. I'm sure there's quite a few other centers being that there are 99 already existing in Livonia right now. I think the city can use something else aside from another day care center. So that is my take on this. I have more than enough signatures that are required and more that they've obtained, not from businesses, but from residents from the south side. Ms. Grabill: I just wanted to question whether that particular area actually needs another child care center. I'm privately owned also renting space from a church in Livonia. Right, not faitlrbased, just renting a space from a church. And according to the child care coordinating council, their records and whatnot, it looks as though there are 54 licensed centers in Livonia and 45 licensed daycare homes. I'm wondering whether or not Livonia actually needs more child care in that area, in addition to the Learning Experience that's going up on Seven Mile - I think 100 child care spaces. So that's my concern, trying to slay in business. I've been in business 30 years and I'd like to stay in business, and I just don't know if Livonia really needs any more child care centers. That's my concern. Ms. Rutherford: The other day care center that's going up is only two to three miles at the most down the road from where they propose to have this one. It's at Victor Parkway and Seven Mile near the freeway. So it seems like ifs really saturating Livonia with daycare centers of one type or another. These two are so huge that it is competition to all the rest of us that have been in business. I've been in business 28 years. I'm in a church also. We really feel that we really don't need any more day care centers here in Livonia. September 25, 2007 24374 Ms. Tanner: To also interject, unfortunately we don't have the other population. Maybe we'll have to bang them to the next meeting of the franchises and the corporations and the chains that have come in as well. We're all hurting. We can all tell you honestly that our enrollment has just gone done, and we're here as living proof because we've all been in the industry for more than 20 years. Also just to interject with the parking situation, I know as a school I have many functions annually and I have probably currently enrolled 40 children at my center. We have quite a large parking lot. And when we do have these functions, we probably fill up every space. I don't know that is adequate parking spaces for 150 families that may potentially enroll here. That's something that they may want to reconsider if they do or are able to go up the expansion of their parking lot. It's just going to inundate that whole outside drive or pass way that would go into the residence that would need to come in and out. Mr. Walsh: Thank you being here this evening. Mr. LaPine: Mr. Chairman, before they leave, are you all from the church or are you three different... . Ms. Grabill: Three separate private child care centers. Mr. LaPine: How close are you to this operation? The one in the church I can understand across the street. Ms. Grabill: I'm south of Seven Mile on Inkster Road. Mr. LaPine: So you're quite a ways away. Ms. Grabill: Correct. Ms. Rutherford: I'm at Six Mile and Merriman. Mr. LaPine: So you're quite far away. Ms. Rutherford: Still, I think there's a apple effect. We draw from all over. Mr. LaPine: I understand that, but you're not going to be drawing ... you're getting people from ... Ms. Tanner: Not necessarily. We don't take people that are direct residents of the area. We have people that we service from all over. Mr. LaPine: I understand you gel it from all over the city. But I'm saying, the only one, as far as I'm concerned, that should be concerned is the one across the street in the church. Now do you have a September 25, 2007 24375 school there? Do you teach kids or are you just a day care center? I'm talking about the church now. So you're strictly a day care center? Ms. Tanner: We provide services for children three months to eight years of age. We have a kindergarten classroom. We provide educational programs. Mr. LaPine: I would assume, because you're within a church, you're not affiliated with the church, you rent a space from the church, that your rales would be a lot lower than a big operation like this that's $3 million dollars. Ms. Tanner: Absolutely. Mr. LaPine: So I dont see how they could be that much in competition with you depending on what the families are looking for. Ms. Tanner: Correct. Mr. LaPine: So I don't see where there's really competition. If somebody wants to go to you and gel it for $150 a week and it costs $250 across the street, they have the option. Ms. Tanner: Correct, but itstill hurts the industry. Mr. LaPine: I understand that. We hear the same argument every time we have a new drug store come in town. Everybody says, "What do we need more drug stores for?" It's not my position to say a drug store shouldn't be operating right across the street. If they can make it, more power to them. That's competition. I think you're over -reacting here. I don't think this really is going to hurt you as much as you think it might, especially if you have a core of people now that are happy there. They're not just going to go right across the street because its a brand new building. Ms. Tanner: Well, aesthetics will draw attention. I mean, right, you're not comparing apples with apples. Exactly, but nonetheless, we don't need another day care center. Mr. Morrow: The petitioner used the words Taitlrbased." I assume that covers some sort of religious leachings. How many of the day care centers in Livonia, the ones that you're speaking of, are faith -based? Ms. Grabill: Mine is not. Ms. Rutherford: All three of us are not faith based. Sepkmber 25, 2007 24376 Ms. Tanner: Mine is. Ms. Rutherford: Is it? Mr. Morrow: Do you know how many other ones would be in the area? Ms. Tanner: No, I can't give you an exact number. Mr. Morrow: I had never really thought about that until it came up tonight. I just thought a day care center was a day care center. Apparently, there's two ... Ms. Grabill: And keep in mind that all child care centers are licensed the same, regardless of whether they're faith based in a beautiful building or renting space. Mr. Morrow: I understand that, but they would offer something to their clients that probably most dont if they're interested in some sort of faith leaching during the day. So, thank you. Mr. Walsh: Thank you for being here this evening. Are there any additional questions or comments? Mr. Wilshaw: Just one comment that I do take away from the conversation, the comments that were made by the ladies. The issue of traffic did come up which, of course, I'm sensitive to, and looking at how this plan is designed, the ingress and egress of this properly, not only going through the strip mall to the west, but also it does cut through the entrance to the apartment complex. Presumably a lot of the traffic at this facility is going to be early in the morning as people are headed to work, which is probably around the same time that they're going to be a lot of people exiling the apartment complex as they also head to work. So it's something to think about as we look at this proposal. There will be some level of traffic conflicts there as a result of this. I think it's a valid point that they raised. Mr. Walsh: Thank you. Are there any additional questions or comments? A motion would then be in order. Mr. Wilshaw: I'll just give a comment here before I make my motion. The proposal as I see it in front of us at this point, the site plan has been shown to us, the material sample board that was brought in, photographs that we were just handed, don't necessarily paint a full picture for me of what I'm necessarily approving. I see a metal seam roof. I'm hearing that its going to be shingled. I see a turquoise roof that's going to be gray in color. September 25, 2007 24377 I don't necessarily gel the warm and fuzzy that if I offer an approving resolution, that I know exactly what it is I'm going to be seeing in that approving resolution, which I do think is the purpose of the Planning Commission is to flush out those details so that the City Council doesn't have to look at those things and make those decisions and basically hold a Planning Commission meeting at their level. Therefore, what I'm going to do is offer a tabling resolution, that we'll see if there's support for, to give the petitioner an opportunity to gel those site plans and material samples together so that they can present to us so that we have a full picture of what we're approving. On a motion by Wilshaw, seconded by McDermott, and unanimously adopted, It was #09-110-2007 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on September 25, 2007, on Petition 2007-08-02-35 submitted by Mayfield Partners, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a child care facility at 32520 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Mayfield Avenue and Shadyside Avenue in the Southwest I/ of Section 3, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition 2007-08-0235 be tabled to give the petitioner more time for the preparation of revised plans that will address building and site issues. Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The item will be tabled until you can submit information to the Planning Department and then we will reschedule you after that. ITEM #8 PETITION 2007-08-0236 MARASH NUCULAJ Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2007- 08-02-36 submitted by Marash Nuculaj requesting waiver use approval to operate a Class C liquor license in connection with a full-service restaurant at 11502 Middlebelt, located on the east side of Middlebell Road between Plymouth Road and Elmira Avenue in the Northwest % of Section 36. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning ofthe surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Sepkmber 25, 2007 24378 Mr. Nowak: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated September 13, 2007, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposal or legal description contained therein. The above address number of 11502 Middlebelt Road is the assigned to this building section." The letter is signed by John P. Hill, Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Division of Police, dated August 31, 2007, which reads as follows: We have reviewed the plans in connection with Livonia Sports Bar located at 11502 Middlebelt. We have no objections or recommendations to the plans as submitted." The letter is signed by David W. Studt, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The third letter is from the Inspection Department, dated September 7, 2007, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of August 27, 2007, the above - referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) The Petitioner's property is located closer than 1,000 feet to a property with a Class C liquor license. The 1,000 foot minimum requirement may be waived by City Council. (2) No signage has been reviewed. (3) This property is located in a Control Zone, therefore, any alterations to the exterior of the building will require review from the Commission and approval by Council. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Senior Building Inspector. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions for the staff? Seeing none, would the petitioner please step forward? Leonard Else, Leonard Else Design Associates, 2760 Dixie Highway, Waterford, Michigan 48328. 1 am the designer working with the owner of the restaurant, Marash Nuculaj. Marash presently owns and operates three restaurants in Ypsilanti and two in Belleville, along with the Nora's, the former Family Buggy restaurant at Plymouth and Middlebell. For the economic viability of this restaurant, the owner would like to have a liquor license. He is primarily a food restaurant operator, but one of his existing restaurants in Belleville operates with a liquor license. It is a casual lakefront restaurant with a strong emphasis on food along with beer, wine and liquor. I've designed a number of similar kinds of restaurants and they appeal to a wide spectrum of the population from young families to senior citizens. A similar kind of thing, we designed Tom's Oysters Bar across from the Renaissance Center. We designed the Malarkey's Pubs. There's one in Southgate and one in Westland. There's a Hills Bar and Grill that we designed that just opened up in Rochester Hills, and there's an O'Toole's out in Waterford that is September 25, 2007 24379 on Cass and Elizabeth Lake Roads. These are basically places where people enjoy the bod. They may want to watch some sports events on the TVs. They appeal, like I've said, to this wide spectrum of the population. This is Marash Nuculaj, the owner. Marash Nuculaj, 11502 Middlebell, Livonia, Michigan 48150. Good evening. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions or comments? Mr. LaPine: Is the restaurant that is there now that took over from the Family Buggy, is that in operation today? Mr. Nuculaj: Not right now. Mr. LaPine: You're closed down? Mr. Nuculaj: Correct. Mr. LaPine: My opinion of a sports bar is that its more of a younger crowd, usually football games, hockey, baseball, things like that. Is this going to be geared to that type of crowd or more to a family- oriented crowd? Mr. Else: It appeals to the whole spectrum. In fact, it's very interesting the way it actually works. Mr. Walsh: Sir, if you could step closer to the microphone. Thank you. Mr. Else: Its very interesting the way it actually works. In the daytime, at lunch time, you'll get business people having peelings at this kind of restaurant. At the evening time, you'll have families. You'll have senior citizens coming in. Later in the evening, you might have people that are watching the game. It seems to appeal to that wide spectrum. Mr. LaPine: I'm nolan expert on sports bars. We have a number of them in Livonia. I've been to one of them, Doc's Sports Bar. I don't know if you know where its at. But if you go in there on a football Sunday, the howling and screaming going on will drive you crazy. That's why I'm just wondering. Grant you, this is a lot smaller than Doc's is. I have no problem with sports bars. I was just wondering if you were catering more to the sports enthusiasts or to families coming out for dinner on a Friday night or Saturday afternoon or whatever. How many liquor licenses does he have at the present time? Sepkmbe, 25, 2007 24380 Mr. Else: One for the restaurant that's in Belleville, the lakefront restaurant. Mr. Wilshaw: Is it the intention of the liquor license to be used for beer, wine and alcohol, orjust beer and wine? Mr. Else: Yes. Mr. Wilshaw: All three? Mr. Else: Beer, wine and alcohol. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. What makes Livonia Sports Bar a sports bar? What features does it have to draw people in as a sports bar, other than the sale of alcohol? Mr. Else: The multiple TVs, the larger, smaller plasma TVs and projection TVs. That seems to make it an attractive place to watch sports events. Mr.Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Are there any additional questions or comments? Seeing none, thank you, gentlemen, for being here this evening. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this pefition? Norman Klawender, 29228 Elmira, Livonia, Michigan. I own one of the houses on the north side of Elmira that backs up to the alley behind this building. I live there with my wife and two children. I dont know if you can show it on there. Elmira is the first street south. I would be the fourth house in from Middlebelt on the north side of Elmira. My concern is, for one, I'm raising a young family at this location. When I got the notice in the mail that the owner was requesting a liquor license for a sports bar, again, my idea of a sports bar would be probably similar to what you said, a lot of hoofing and hollering going on. Both of my children's bedroom windows face that direction, towards the back of that building. I'm concerned with any increase in traffic that would be around the backside of that building. There's several dumpsters back there. Al 5:20 this morning, there was a truck back there emptying a dumpsler that woke my year old son. So anything pedestrian or vehicle traffic would be a great concern of mine. My neighbors as well have young children. Their bedrooms also face this area back there. That house there is mine. That's where I live. The back of their building, their dumpster is back there. The employees come out there. I can hear them all the time, which a normal conversation I don't September 25, 2007 24381 mind, but anything above and beyond that would be a concern of mine as well as my neighbors, all who are mising young children. The distance from the back of my house to the back of the building is not very far. I've never measured it so I couldn't tell you exactly how far it is, but it's definitely less than 100 feel. A lot of limes the back door of that building is open during business hours. So anything real loud would concern me. We've also notice, since the opening of the Target and the Wal- Mart stores at Wonderland, we've noticed a large increase in pedestrian traffic through our neighborhood. My garage was broken into; several items were stolen. The same with the people down the street from me. So, again, anything that would increase traffic there is a concern of mine. We've already been negatively impacted by some of the other developments going on there. So I wanted to voice my concerns. As stated, there are other facilities that have liquor licenses that are close by. The Chili's restaurant, there's a Red Lobster that is real close to there. There are other bars along the Plymouth Road corridor that are also relatively dose. I think that's pretty much what I wanted to say. I would be against it. Talking to my neighbors immediately on both sides of me, they would be also. Mr. LaPine: Did you live there when the Family Buggy was in there? Mr. Klawender: Yes. Mr. LaPine: Did you have any problem with them? Mr. Klawender: No. We ate at the Family Buggy a couple limes, and it was like a family atmosphere. There were no TVs or anything in there. I didn't have any problems except for dumpsters being emptied way loo early in the morning. Mr. LaPine: So really, your objection is to the liquor license basically? Mr. Klawender: Absolutely. Mr. LaPine: Now, what if they didn't have a liquor license and there was a sports bar without a liquor license. Would you still have an objection to it? Mr. Klawender: In my opinion, a sports bar without a liquor license isn't a sports bar. It's a family restaurant. Mr. LaPine: I figured that's what you were going to say. I have to agree with you. Mr. Klawender: Right. September 25, 2007 24382 Mr. La Pine: If that would happen ... Mr. Klawender: Yes, I think it would be a totally different crowd that would be there. It would be more in line with what the Family Buggy what, which was a family restaurant. If any of you were ever in the Family Buggy, you could have a big teddy bear sit at the table with you. I don't envision that at a sports bar. Mr. LaPine: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Morrow: I guess one of my pet peeves on what I heard tonight about the dumpster is people that allow their dumpster people to pick up at 6:30 a.m. or 5:00 a.m. in the morning when they abut neighbors. Have you ever tried to contact the property owner? Mr. Klawender: I know my neighbor has contacted the City several times. It's ongoing ... it happens all the time. Mr. Morrow: But I mean, who is responsible for the dumpster? Mr. Klawender: I couldn't tell you. I know if I drive back there right now, there's probably five or six different dunpslers in there because there are several businesses, and each dumpster has a different slicker for a different company. So they all come at different limes, different days, and a lot of times, like early on Sunday morning, we'll hear someone back there with a leaf blower blowing the parking lot clean. A lot of times we'd like to try and sleep in if the kids can, but it's not always possible. We have a leaf blower blowing right behind my back fence. Mr. Morrow: Well, I was hoping that it would be a little more streamline to get people to say ... you know, because it makes sense to me ... Mr. Klawender: It makes sense to me. Mr. Morrow: You might get your neighbors together and request them because it's just not right to be banging dumpslers at 5:00, 6:00, 7:00 in the morning when they can specify the hours of pickup, and if they can't, they can find somebody that will. Anyways, that was just a comment. Mr. Walsh: Thank you, sir. Mr. Klawender: Thank you. Mr. Walsh: A motion would be in order. September 25, 2007 24383 Mr. La Pine: The only issue involved here is the liquor license because they have the zoning for the restaurant. As we've heard in many cases, most restaurants nowadays say they basically can't operate without a beer or wine or liquor license. They just can't make it go. So with that in mind, I'll make an approving motion. On a motion by La Pine, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, ilwas #09-111-2007 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on September 25, 2007, on Petition 2007-08-02-36 submitted by Marash Nuculaj requesting waiver use approval to operate a Class C liquor license in connection with a full-service restaurant at 11502 Middlebell, located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Plymouth Road and Elmira Avenue in the Northwest I/ of Section 36, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2007-08-02-36 be approved, provided that the City Council waives the 1,000 -foot separation requirement between Class C licensed establishments as set forth in Section 11.03(h) of the Zoning Ordinance, for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed use complies with all of the general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2. That the subject site has the capacity to 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. Walsh: Is there any discussion? Mr. Morrow: The only thing I would add is that, the petitioner and his architect are here tonight and have heard the concerns of the neighborhood. I would certainly request their management and staff at that location to be sympathetic because they are in relatively close proximity to the residential there, to do what they can to minimize the noise of the patrons, whatever they can do, particulady in the Tale evening hours. Thank you. September 25, 2007 24384 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#9 APPROVALOF MINUTES 949th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 949'r Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on August 14, 2007. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Wilshaw, and unanimously adopted, it was #09-112-2007 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 949" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on August 14, 2007, are hereby approved. A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Smiley, Wilshaw, LaPine, McDermott, Morrow, Varloogian, Walsh NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 951s' Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on September 25, 2007, was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Carol A. Smiley, Secretary ATTEST: John Walsh, Chairman