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