Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2010-03-16MINUTES OF THE 993RD PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, March 16, 2010, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 993 Id Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Lee Morrow, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Deborah McDermott R. Lee Morrow Lynda Scheel Ashley Vartoogian Carol A. Smiley Joe Taylor Ian Wilshaw Members absent: None Mr. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, and Ms. Margie Watson, Program Supervisor, were also present. Chairman Morrow informed the audience that if a petition on lonighfs 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 pefifion 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 date of adoption. The Planning Commission and the professional staff have reviewed each of these pefifions 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 2010-02-02-01 JOHN DEERE Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Pefifion 2010-02- 02-01 submitted by Gasso Development Company, L.L.C., on behalf of John Deere Landscapes, requesting waiver use approval to operate a contractors yard in an M-1 District at 13580 Merriman Road, located on the east side of Merriman Road between the railroad right-of-way and Schoolcraff Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 26. March 16, 2010 25259 Mr. Taormina provided background on the item and presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Morrow: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated March 2, 2010, which reads as follows: "The Engineering Division has completed its review of the above- eferencsd waiver use request. The legal description as shown in the City records is correct. The address for this parcel is 13580 Merriman Road. There is an existing 124nch diameter public sanitary sewer which traverses this property in an east -west direction and serves the parcel immediately east of this property. The Department of Public Works will occasionally have to gain access to the sewer for routine cleaning. In an emergency (e.g. sewer collapse), the Department may have to gain immediate access to the sewer." The letter is signed by Kevin G. Roney, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated March 3, 2010, which reads as follows: 'This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request for waiver use approval to operate a contractor's yard in an M-1 district at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal with the following stipulation: Combustible storage shall be kept a minimum of 10 feet away from building." The letter is signed by Donald F. Donnelley, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated February 19, 2010, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed the plans in connection with John Deere, located at 13580 Merriman. We have no objections or recommendations to the plans as submitted." The letter is signed by John Gibbs, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated March 9, 2010, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of February 10, 2010, the above - referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. The outside stacking or stockpiling of material shall not exceed 8 feet in height. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Morrow: Does the Commission have any questions of the Planning Director? Seeing none, is the petitioner with us tonight? We need your name and address for the record please. Najah Gasso, Gasso Development, 20320 W. Eight Mile, Southfield, Michigan 48075. I'm the owner of the property, and I have the tenant, John Deere, here for any questions. March 16, 2010 25260 Mr. Morrow: Okay. Sir, did you want to give us your name and address too, please? George Zieman, 7527 Fowler Road, Horton, Michigan 49246. Mr. Morrow: Do you have anything you want to add to the presentation that you just heard from Mr. Taormina? Mr. Zieman: No, sir. Mr. Morrow: Do you understand all the correspondence relative to your petition? Mr. Zieman: Yes. Its not a problem with compliance. Mr. Morrow: Does the Commission have any questions of the petitioner? Mr. Taylor: How long have you been operating at that facility? Mr. Zieman: We actually just moved to that facility back in June of last year. We had a facility on Stark Road. We actually had two other facilities, one in Plymouth and one in Southfield, that I brought to Livonia. So I brought three facilities into one and stayed here in Livonia. Mr. Taylor: So you weren't aware of our ordinance more or less then? Mr. Zieman: No, sir. Mr. Taylor: Thankyou. Mr. Morrow: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against the granting of this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, I'm going to close the public hearing, unless you have something more you want to say. Mr. Zieman: No, sir. Mr. Morrow: A motion would be in order. On a motion by McDermott, seconded by Varloogian, and unanimously adopted, it was #03-18-2010 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on March 16, 2010, on Petition 2010-02-02-01 submitted by Gasso Development Company, L.L.C., on behalf of John Deere Landscapes, requesting waiver use approval to operate a contractors yard in March 16, 2010 25261 an M-1 District at 13580 Merriman Road, located on the east side of Merriman Road between the railroad right-of-way and SchoolcraR Road in the Northwest 114 of Section 26, which property is zoned M-1, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2010-02-02-01 be approved subjectlolhe following conditions: 1. That the Site Plan marked Sheet C.1 dated February 2, 2010, prepared by Chester Slempien Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; That the outdoor storage of materials and equipment shall be limited to the hard surface areas behind the building, and in the event that any unpaved areas within the storage yard are used, these areas shall be hard surfaced with crushed rock or gravel to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department and shall be maintained in a dust proof condition, and said storage area shall be properly graded and drained to dispose of all surface water in a manner as approved by the Engineering Division, as designated on the above -referenced Site Plan and shall be maintained in an orderly manner; 3. That there shall be no outdoor storage of disabled or inoperative equipment and vehicles, scrap material, debris or other similar items; 4. That there shall be no outdoor storage on the side of the building, and any material or equipment currently being stored in this area shall be removed within one (1) month of receiving final approval by the City Council; 5. That the outdoor slacking or stockpiling of materials shall not exceed eight feel (8') in height above ground level; 6. That all landscaped and sodded areas shall be permanently maintained in a healthy condition; and, 7. That the plan referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time of application for the Certificate of Occupancy. Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the special and general waiver use standards and March 16, 2010 25262 requirements as set forth in Sections 16.11 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2. That the subject property 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. Morrow: Is there any discussion? Ms. McDermott: I just wanted to add here that I think they've probably already applied for the Certificate of Occupancy, so maybe we need to change the wording for that. Would that be acceptable, Mr. Taormina, since they are already there? Mr. Taormina: They may have a TCO, so we will take a look at that. Ms. McDermott: All right. Thank you. Mr. Morrow: So if It's required, we will leave it in? Mr. Taormina: Yes, and if not, we will remove it. Mr. Morrow: That will work. Anything else? Ms. McDermott: No. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #2 PETMON 2010-02-02-02 SONIC DRIVE4N Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2010- 02-02-02 submitted by Dortch Enterprises, L.L.C. d/b/a Sonic requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a drive-in restaurant with drive -up window facilities (Sonic Drive -In Restaurant) at 29155 Seven Mile Road, located on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebell Road and Maplewood Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12. March 16, 2010 25263 Mr. Taormina: This is properly located in Section 12, a square mile bounded by Middlebelt Road to the west, Seven Mile Road to the north, Six Mile Road to the south, and Inkster Road to the east. The request this evening is to construct and operate a drive-in restaurant that will also include a drive -up window facility. The site is located on the south side of Seven Mile between Middlebelt and Maplewood Avenue. The property is roughly 625 feet east of Middlebelt Road. This site was recently created through the division of a larger parcel that included the neighboring property to the west. The site area is roughly 3,600 square feet or .83 acres in area. It measures 150 feel in width along Seven Mile Road and has a depth of approximately 240 feet. The neighboring westerly parcel has the exact same measurements. This is the site of the former VFW Hall. Currently, there is a sign advertising a bingo hall; however, that bingo hall never opened. The westerly parcel contains an 8,000 square foot building as well as some additional parking spaces. The subject site, which is the easterly half, was created to accommodate the proposed Sonic Dnve-In restaurant. The zoning of the property is G2, General Business. Drive-in restaurants are allowed under the provisions set forth in Section 11.03(c)(2) of the Zoning Ordinance. A drive-in restaurant is defined as any establishment where food and beverages are served to customers while they are sealed in their vehicles upon the premises. Drive-in restaurants are also allowed to have outdoor seating. Customers place orders while seated in their vehicles and attendants deliver the food. There is no interior seating proposed in connection with this restaurant. However, they would provide tables and chairs within an outdoor patio area. The building that is proposed on the site is centrally located. It would measure approximately 1,645 square feet in area, and would have drive -up window facilifies located on the east side of the building. The outdoor patio is an area that measures roughly 28 feel by 30 feel and is located in the front or north elevation of the restaurant. There would be seating for a total of 28 customers within the outdoor patio area, and it would be partially enclosed with a three and a half foot high stone wall and glass panels along two sides. We have details that show exactly what that will look like. The restaurant would have 10 employees working at any one time. Parking for drive- in restaurants is computed based upon an improved parking area that has to be at least nine times the size of the useable floor area of the building. When you use this measurement, it requires about 10,665 square feet of parking area. We've computed the area to be roughly that size, slightly less than that. So we looked at an alternative way of calculating the parking, one that would be based on a restaurant with drive -up March 16, 2010 25264 window facilities, which this includes. When you use that formula, they're required to have one space for each three outdoor seats, plus one space for each employee working during the largest shift, then two additional spaces that are beyond the drive -up window for use of the drive -up window patrons. So when you calculate the parking that way, they're required to have 21 parking spaces and that is exactly what the site provides, 21 conforming parking spaces that would be striped along portions of the southwest and east property lines. In addition, one banner free space would be provided adjacent to the northwest corner of the patio seating area. There would also be drive-in facilities provided at the site. There are a total of 21 drive-in spaces. This includes seven along the west property line, nine adjacent to the building and patio on the west side, and then five along the east property line. This plan is slightly different than what the Commission looked at during their study session. As you will recall, the previous plan provided all 21 of the drive-in spaces on the west side of the property, or the area west of the building. Those 21 spaces would have been divided between two overhead canopies. In response to some of the concerns that were expressed at that study session relative to proximity between the drive-in spaces and the apartment complex to the south, they moved five of those spaces to the east side of the property, thereby increasing the separation between the closest drive-in space and the rear property line. The distance has been increased from 30 feel to 75 feet. As I indicated, there will be three overhead canopies nine and half feet in height. There is also a drive -up window that would be located on the east side of the building. The service lane ortraffic lane thatwould service the drive -up begins here on the south side of the building and then wraps around the building, continues along the east side where the pickup window would be located in the northeast corner of the building. The drive -up lane servicing this area is required to be at lead 12 feet in width. They are showing a drive -up lane equal to 10 feel in width. It's also required to have a 12 fool bypass lane. What they are providing instead is a 20 fool traffic aisle. Thus, they're required to have 12 and 12, for a total of 24. What they are providing is 10 and 20 for a total of 30. So they meet that requirement of the ordinance in terms of the overall width provided for both the drive -up lane as well as the bypass lane. There is adequate stacking provided for the drive -up facility. Required is one space at the pickup window and a minimum of four spaces waiting to use the window. What they're providing is a total of 8 spaces. So they exceed what the ordinance requires in terms of vehicles wailing to be serviced at the drive - up window. There is a dumpster area provided on the site in the southwest corner. This enclosure would be six feet four inches March 16, 2010 25265 in height all the way around. It would have concrete block and face brick matching the building, in addition to metal gates that would conceal the dumpsters or the trash units from view. In terms of lighting, this was another issue that we discussed at the study session. They have provided greater detail. They provided a photometric plan that basically shows that the lighting levels will drop to zero at the rear property line. There would be a total of 7 pole -mounted fixtures that would be a maximum of 20 feel in height. These would all be shoebox type fixtures, full cutoff with shields provided where they are adjacent to the residential district to the south. In addition, we asked for details provided for the drive-in canopies. They provided that. They're showing these would also be shoebox-style fixtures. They would be directed downward and there would be a single fixture for each drive-in stall. The ordinance requires that drive- in restaurants have ingress and egress from public streets by means of at least two separate driveways. What they're going to do in this case is rely on a cross -access agreement with the property owner to the west. In addition, there's going to be an on-site driveway that would be for egress purposes only. So vehicles entering this site would come in this driveway, which is actually located on the parcel to the west, but you can see the opening that would be provided allowing for vehicles to enter the site here and then circulate in a counterclockwise fashion. They would be able to either park and go into the outside patio where they would be serviced or they would go in their vehicles or they could wrap around through the drive -up window. The vehicles could then exit out the easterly driveway. In terms of landscaping, this is another modification to the plan. Under the previous plan, we were looking at about 12 percent of the total site area being landscaped. Under this plan, they're showing 18 percent, which does complies with our minimum requirement of 15 percent. Those landscaped areas are provided primarily around the perimeter of the site, including along the street frontage of Seven Mile Road and in the vicinity of both the front and the rear yards of the building. The ordinance requires that there be a prolective wall along the rear of the property and that R be at lead five feel in height. There is an existing wall that was constructed as part of the VFW Hall. However, that wall is currently non -conforming. There are sections of it that are as low as three and a half or three feet eight inches in height. These areas would have to be increased in height to at least five feet or up to seven feet, depending on what the Commission requires. In lieu of increasing the height of that wall, what they're showing is extending the visual screen by attaching a metal mesh fencing above the wall. It would extend a few feet in height above the wall. From that, they would plant ivy that would grow up the existing wall and then along this March 16, 2010 25266 lattice framework that would extend above that. Again, I have some details that I'll show you in a few minutes. You'll get a better idea of what that would look like. Next is what the building would look like. As you can see from this rendering, it would contain a combination of brick and stone on all four sides. The upper sections of the building contain a face brick with the bottom four feel covered by a stone veneer. As you can also see from the slide, the stone veneer would extend up the lower element located at the drive -up window on the east side of the building. Along the lop portion of the building along the cornice, there would be a brick soldier course. The typical height of the building would be about 16 feel. This lower element extends to a height of approximately 22 feel. Then on lop of that, you can see this pre -manufactured dome -type of a structure that would add another three feet to the overall height of the building. We have not analyzed this petition in terms of signage. What they would be permitted is one wall sign not to exceed 30 square feel in area. That's based on the lineal frontage of the building. They would also be allowed one ground sign with a maximum of 30 square feet, six feet in height and 10 feet in length having a minimum setback of 10 feet from the right-of-way. They're also permitted menu boards and certain directional signs. Cleary, what we've seen from the plans and from the information submitted, they will exceed the signage allowance. If this petition does move forward, we would like to have the signage be a callback item, as well as the landscaping. Mr. Morrow: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated March 2, 2010, which reads as follows: "The Engineering Division has completed its review of the above -referenced waiver use request. The legal description as shown on the plans is correct. Currently, there is not an address for this proposed parcel. An address will be assigned by the Engineering Division after design plans have been reviewed and the review fees paid. The following pertains to utilities related to this project. Sanitary Sewer. It is noted that you are planning to utilize an existing 10 -inch diameter sanitary sewer located south of this site. The plans also show a sanitary sewer north of the proposed building in the Seven Mile Road right-of-way which could be utilized as the sanitary outlet if desired. Note that should the developer wish to proceed with utilizing the 10 -inch sewer, Engineering will require the sewer be televised prior to tapping. Water Main. There is a water main located within the 7 Mile Road right-of-way which must be utilized to serve this site. Storm Sewer. It is noted that the plans indicate that this site will be served by a private storm sewer March 16, 2010 25267 system located on private property immediately west of this site. Note that this new development cannot utilize an offsite private storm sewer for site drainage. In addition, because the storm sewerlocated within the 7 Mile Road right-of-way will have to be utilized, a permit will have to be obtained from Wayne County to complete this work. Your project will therefore have to comply with Wayne County storm water management requirements. This project will not require a Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control permit, however best management practices to protect against erosion will have to be utilized during construction." The letter is signed by Kevin G. Roney, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated March 8, 2010, which reads as follows: `This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct and operate a drive-in restaurant on property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Donald F. Donnelley, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated February 26, 2010, which reads as follows: We have reviewed the plans in connection with Sonic Drive-in Restaurant, located at 29155 Seven Mile. We have no objections or recommendations to the plans as submitted." The letter is signed by John Gibbs, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated March 9, 2010, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of February 16, 2010, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) A cross access agreement with the adjoining property must be provided for the shared drive located on the west side of the property. (2) A detailed sign package will need to be submitted for review. It appears that the signage shown does not meet the location, square footage or number of signs permitted. A variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals may be required. (3) The number of parking spaces proposed is 21, where 22 are required. If one of the outdoor tables were removed the number of parking spaces would be sufficient. A variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals would be required for the deficient parking. (4) Two parking spaces are required to be designated for drive thru customers. (5) All barrier free parking spaces are to be property sized, signed and striped. (6) All landscaped areas requiring grass are to be sodded and all landscaped areas are to be fully irrigated. (7) This property abuts a residential district and must provide a continuous protective wall at least five feet and not more than seven feet in height as measured from the highest side where vehicles may be parked. (8) As a note, the existing building located at 29155 Seven Mile will have its occupancy limited to comply with the number of parking spaces that are provided after the property split. This Department has no further March 16, 2010 25268 objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. I'd like to just point out that when this letter from the Inspection Department was written, wherein they indicate there is a deficiency of one parking space, and one of the options available was to reduce the number of seats at the outdoor patio area, that has been done. Under the previous plan we were looking al total of 32 seats. With the current plan, they are showing 28 seats. So they eliminated the need for that parking space. Mr. Morrow: Thank you. Are there any questions for the staff? Ms. Scheel: Mr. Taormina, you said you had a picture to show us of the back wall. Mr. Taormina: This is a diagram showing what they propose to do. This is the curb and the existing wall that is about three and half feet in height. Above that would be this heavy gauge wire mesh that would extend approximately one and a half feet above the top of the existing wall, with the thought being that they would plant ivy at the base of the wall, which would grow up the wall and up this mesh material in a fashion similar to what this photograph illustrates. Ms. Scheel: Would the ivy grow on both sides of the wall orjust the outside? Mr. Taormina: I think it would only climb up on one side of the wall. Whether or not it would fall back, I don't know, but my guess is that it's only on a single side. I would have to look at the aerial photograph, but I'm not sure if there's landscaping on the opposite side of the wall or not. There could be parking right up against R. Ms. Scheel: Okay. That's it for now. Ms. Smiley: My question is about the wall. Would the mesh material block light and noise? Mr. Taormina: No, the mesh material would be only a minimal visual barrier by itself. It would have to have a pretty heavy growth of ivy to fully block the Sonic property, and I wouldn't count on it blocking any sound. Ms. Smiley: Thankyou. Ms. Varloogian: Another question for Mark. What does the Boston Ivy look like in the winter? Does it die out? March 16, 2010 25269 Mr. Taormina: I think it slays pretty much just a woody matenal. I believe its fully deciduous so you would probably see the leaves fall off and grow back in the spring and summer. That's my guess. We really didn't look at it that carefully, but that's my understanding. It may provide some limited visual screen, but to a lesser degree in the winter months. Ms. Vartoogian: Okay. Thank you. That's all. Mr. Taylor: Mark, have you seen this any other place? Mr. Taormina: No. Mr. Taylor: I've never seen it. Mr. Taormina: We've not seen this. Mr. Taylor: What is the height of the wall now behind this properly? Mr. Taormina: On the commeroial side of the wall at its lowest point, it is roughly three feet eight inches. Mr. Taylor: So by ordinance, they would have to bring it up to five feet? Mr. Taormina: Or seven feel, depending on what this body and the Council ulfimately decide. Mr. Taylor: What is the height ofthe wall behind the Burger King? Mr. Taormina: I'm sorry I did not check that, but we can certainly do that. Mr. Morrow: Is the pefifioner here this evening? Mr. Taylor: It looked like probably five feet to me, but I wasn't sure how tall R was. That wall kind of varies as it goes east. Mr. Taormina: Yes, it steps down unfortunately. Mr. Taylor: I dont parficularly care for the fad of this ivy growing up there. I don't think I've ever seen that happen before, and what will happen to it and how it will be maintained. I'd rather see a seven foot wall better than anything there. Mr. Taormina: One of the things I'd still like to explore with the developer, and we can do this at a later date if we call it back, and that is to modify the site so that we could gel a few extra feel of landscaping along that wall so that maybe we could plant something more substanfive that could grow above the height of March 16, 2010 25270 the wall, should we decide that this ivy concept isn't going to work. Mr. Taylor: Right. I asked you that at the study session, if you could move the parking out a little bit and put arborvitaes in there. I think that would be a better solution. Mr. Taormina: I still think that's possible, but maybe we can hear from the architect. They were asked to look at that but they came up with this concept instead. Mr. Taylor: Thankyou Mr. Morrow: Is the petitioner here? We will need your name and address for the record please, sir. Jeff Bedolla, Director of Operations, Dorlch Enterprises, L.L.C., 8487 Retreat Drive, Grand Blanc, Michigan 48439. Bruce Calhoun, Project Manager, Creekwood Architecture, Inc., 1111 Creekwood Trail, Burton, Michigan 48509. Mr. Morrow: Thank you. And you are here representing the petitioners? Mr. Bedolla: Yes. Mr. Morrow: Are there any questions that the Commission has of the petitioners? Ms. Smiley: I guess you've already heard that we are not fond of the wall. Can you tell me why you think that will work for you? Mr. Calhoun: If you could go back to the landscape plan. We were trying to address the landscaping. Before we had parking and it went all the way across the back. We divided that up. We moved the parking space up and widen it out. So now we have two pine trees next to the dumpster. We have a deciduous tree over on the left, also a deciduous tree on the right, and two additional pine trees. We are trying to provide a lot of buffer on there as much as we could in the landscape area that we're provided. The distance from the front to the back, with the setbacks for the parking, drive through and the building and the patio, it really limited us to the amount of area that we had in front of the wall. We only have like 16 inches, and that's not enough room to plant something like a vine material. The biggest thing that we have with the wall is the wall is only six inches thick. To extend that wall up another two feel, we're looking at the structural integrity of it. We're going to have to core the top of that wall March 16, 2010 25271 and then go another two feet up with masonry or concrete. It's just not practical. It's something that isn't going to work. So we came up with the idea of attaching the lattice fencing on lop of there and then putting the Boston Ivy to create the screening that you require. Also note that the wall is five foot on the apartment side all the way across, but since the ordinance has been changed, it has to be five fool on both sides. So now we have to adhere to that portion for the ordinance. When you said something about extending the landscaping area out, we just really don't have the room to do that. I called Sonic and asked if there was any way that we could shorten that front canopy, and then said they just don't manufacture it any shorter than what we have. I figured it we could gel two feet out of that canopy, then I can gel two feel in the landscaping, but they just don't manufacture it any smaller. So there's no option there. We're pretty much limited to the area we have. In the initial plan, we had that parking in front next to Seven Mile Road. It was through the Planning Commission's request to move that to the back and just have an access drive and landscaping up toward the front, which we did. If you notice, on the bingo hall side, there's landscaping right up against the sidewalk. Originally, that's the way we had it, but then we switched it around and put landscaping to the front and parking to the rear. Ms. Smiley But it really doesn't provide much of a buffer, though, does it? Mr. Calhoun: It provides a screen. As far as sound abatement, the reason we didn't worry about sound abatement is we moved the canopy up so that any sound coming from that would be another 30 feel beyond what it was before. So we're pulling that away from where it was before to the residential property. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Morrow: On that line, I just have a comment to ask Mark. Mark, he had mentioned two feel. Would it be possible to put some bumper blocks in there so that you have a two fool overhang, or somewhere in that area, to add to the grassy area and still support arborvitae in there? Mr. Taormina: That's a good point. Do you know what the overall depth of the parking stalls are? If they are 20 feel, we can shorten those up a couple of feel. Mr. Morrow: I was wondering if it would support the arborvitae, which are fairly narrow but they grow fairly tall. March 16, 2010 25272 Mr. Calhoun: We have 21 feel from front to back, and that gives us 20 feet on a diagonal, which is the minimum requirement for 30 degree parking. The only problem with adding a little extra for the cars to hang over, if we do that and then plant arborvitae, the cars are no longer going to be able to hangover because they'll be going into the arborvitae that we just provided the extra for. Mr. Morrow: I didn't know if they could be trimmed to fit. Mr. Calhoun: They could, but they'd be right up against the bar because arborvitae is going to grow to be about 36 inches in diameter when its fully grown at 6 or 7 feet high. Mr. Morrow: Anyway, Mark, I offer that as a suggestion to see if anything can be done. Ms. Vartoogian: I don't see any, but did you bring any building samples of the materials? Mr. Calhoun: We had them and then we forgot. I'm sorry. We forgot those back at the office. Ms. Vartoogian: I notice on the plans, I don't remember that much of the stone on the original plan as there is on this one. Mr. Calhoun: The stone is going to be up the tower and a wainscot all the way around the building, and then there's brick above that. The stone isn't even a cultured stone. It's a natural stone that will be placed on the building because it has to support the brick above. So it will be a fully masonry building. Ms. Vartoogian: Its not like the thin brick application? Mr. Calhoun: No. We can't do that and support the brick above. It's got to be full four inch stone brick. Ms. Vartoogian: That's good to hear. What are your hours of operation? Mr. Bedolla: 6:00 a.m. to midnight. Ms. Vartoogian: Monday through? Mr. Bedolla: Monday through Sunday. Ms. Vartoogian: I'm curious about the sound levels that will be coming out of the speakers throughout the site. I know you have the drive-thru speakers and you also have the speakers at the individual March 16, 2010 25273 parking stalls. What kind of sound level can we expect from that? Mr. Calhoun: We submitted to the Planning Commission the sound decibels from each speaker. At a distance of one fool, its 84 decibels, but from a distance of 8 feet, it goes down to 66, 16 to 60, and 32 to 54. It drops considerably as you gel away from the speakers. The speakers are really loud enough just for the person in the car to hear. It's not broadcasting. Ms. Vartoogian: Will there be any music playing out of those speakers? Mr. Bedolla: Typically, we have music that plays on the patio and at the speakers, but again, at a real low level. Mr. Calhoun: Its pretty much the same. It drops down. It even drops down to a 36 decibel at 16 feet. Mr. Bedolla: Its not a speaker that we want people who are driving by to hear or anything like that. It's just basically for the cars. Ms. Vartoogian: And what type of music? Do you just have a continuous stream of the same songs over and over again, or is it varied? Mr. Bedolla: Sonic has its own radio station from Texas. People call in and request songs. When they're on the patio, they can hear their song if they want to call in. It is varied though, but it's pretty mild music. Ms. Vartoogian: Okay. Mr. Bedolla: A lot of 50's. Ms. Vartoogian: One last question. Can you go over the lighting on the site? Mr. Calhoun: Under each canopy, we have 70 wall down lights that are mounted underneath the canopy. There was talk about recessing those lights up in the canopy, but then we had a concern about the apartments behind there. They would look down on the canopy and see all those little bumps. Right now, it's just going to be a nice clean smooth lop to the canopies, and the lights will be mounted underneath. They're a cutoff light, not like you see in a lot of gas stations where you see the lens down. These are complete cutoffs so you don't see anything from the side. They just go straight down. The poles we have mounted in the back. If you can notice on the lighting photometric plan, we don't have any spillage on the back due to the wall that cuts off the spillage. The poles are, again, they are Mr. Wlshaw: Okay. I'm going to look to see to have that eliminated on this particular site just because we have a longstanding policy in the City of not allowing neon accents and so on, even though I do understand that's kind of the diner concept. A couple other questions. The traffic management at this site, typically when it's operating at normal operation, I can see a pretty good traffic flow. I like that you cut off the one exit to strictly being an exit. When you first open up your stores, it's not unusual to see March 16, 2010 25274 down lights, shoebox style, and they have complete cutoff. We have four poles in the back and that distributes the light pretty evenly around the back. We try to keep that light level as low as possible, but we still want to maintain security. We have a couple security lights on the building, and then we have the ones underneath the canopy, again, in the front of the building and on the park canopies. Ms. Vartoogian: Okay. One last question. The yellow feature on top of the building, the highest point, is that lit up? Mr. Bedolla: Some of them have like not a neon, but just a colored tubing that goes across the lop of it. Ms. Vartoogian: Some of them do? Will this one? Mr. Bedolla: We proposing it. Ms. Vartoogian: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: I have a couple questions for you. In regards to the lighting, I was going to ask you about any neon or LED Iighlbands. Ashley hit one of them, which is the blue tubing on the top feature. When I went over to the store in Westland at nighttime, R's all illuminated, those lubes. I would prefer if it was not. Typically, we don't allow any LED or neon tubing on the site. So that would also include that feature as well. The other question I was going to have in regards to that LED or neon accent lighting is, around the canopy you have little colored elements, if you will, that have the corporate colors in them. You can see those actually on that plan there, the little yellow and red accent pieces. At nighttime, those are also illuminated with some sort of a neon or LED tubing. Is that what you intend on this particular site? Mr. Calhoun: Il was the intent to have that. That's kind of the feel of the Sonic restaurant to gel kind of a 50's feel to it, a drive-in style. So it's up to your discretion as far as what we can have or we don't. Mr. Wlshaw: Okay. I'm going to look to see to have that eliminated on this particular site just because we have a longstanding policy in the City of not allowing neon accents and so on, even though I do understand that's kind of the diner concept. A couple other questions. The traffic management at this site, typically when it's operating at normal operation, I can see a pretty good traffic flow. I like that you cut off the one exit to strictly being an exit. When you first open up your stores, it's not unusual to see March 16, 2010 25275 massive traffic jams around your store. What are you going to do about that? Mr. Bedolla: I have a whole plan set up for it utilizing the properly next store. We already have permission from the landlord of that property. We have to do this when we open any store, but the traffic has been dying down since we're opening up more and more stores. Its not as crazy as it was when they first opened up. I do have a whole traffic plan that will lake people around, and we do have additional parking that we can use. You can't see it on the plan. Its over to the left, that big gray area. So there's really a lot of space we can utilize to get all the traffic off the street, which we're kind of fortunate to have that. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. And you would have people that would be out there directing cars? Mr. Bedolla: We hire people. That's their title, Traffic Control. That is their job. Mr. Wlshaw: That's good to hear. As far as your trash pickup, what time does that normally occur al your facility? Mr. Bedolla: I'm not sure yet in Livonia how they're picking it up here, but we normally have it picked up in the early hours of the morning. Mr. Wilshaw: Because you have the apartment complex behind you, we would hope to see that could be done sometime in the reasonable hours once people have woke up and say after 9:00 a.m. if possible. Mr. Bedolla: That's fine. I'm not sure even who picks up the trash here in Livonia, if its contracted through the city or if it is through individuals. Mr. W Ishaw: Its going to be your individual trash. Mr. Bedolla: We'll make sure that they pick it up at a decent hour. Mr. Wilshaw: Then also, you talked about the photometric plan and having lights that don't spill over into the apartment complex behind you, which is excellent. What are you going to do to insure that music doesn't spill over to the apartment complex as well, or any of the sound from the order board? Mr. Calhoun: The volumes can be controlled inside the service. If there's a problem, we can adjust it down. We don't want to create an instance, by no means. It's just a little option for the customer to March 16, 2010 25276 come in, a little special thing. As you notice by the decibels that we submitted, the noise levels are pretty low coming through there. And again, its only designed to go to the cars. It's not designed to go beyond that. If it was, then you have someone in this car, and he can't hear the person taking the order from the other car. So we want to keep those levels pretty low. Mr. Wilshaw: I found looking at your other facilities that I've been to over the years is that the order boards at the drive -up stall are usually pretty quiet. They're easy to deal with. My concern would be more the order board for the drive-thru in the back because that's obviously going to be facing the residential properties behind you. That's the one I'm going to be a little bit more cautious of to make sure that you adjust that to a reasonable level. Mr. Calhoun: We have talked to Sonic on that particular too, and we talked about angling the menu board a little bit more so it doesn't direct back toward the apartments, but it goes to the neighboring property. So we can do that. We'll just adjust it over a little bit. Mr. Wilshaw: It sounds like a good solution. Thank you. Mr. Morrow: While we're on this subject, I just have a question on the sound. I noticed that the people that service the drive-in portion of it, are they are roller skates? Mr. Bedolla: Yes, sir, weather permitting. Mr. Morrow: What is your experience as far as the noise level with the roller skates on the cement, or whatever it is? In other words, sometimes you have metal wheels on concrete. Mr. Bedolla: No, they're all rubberwheels. Mr. Morrow: So that's not a concern as we're relating to sound? Mr. Bedolla: There's no more sound that their tennis shoes. Mr. Morrow: Okay. I just wanted to get that in the record. Thank you. Mr. Bedolla: No one uses metal wheels any more. Mr. Morrow: I haven't been on skates in a while. Ms. Scheel: I just wanted to double check the hours of the drive-thru and the ordering windows. They close at midnight for the entire week? March 16, 2010 25277 Mr. Bedolla: Actually, the hours of operation are per your ordinance. We adjusted our hours of operation to meet your ordinance, and I believe it is listed on the site plan. Ms. Scheel: So, 2:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday, then? Mr. Bedolla: Yes. Ms. Scheel: Okay. I just wanted to double check that. And then what time will you be getting deliveries? Mr. Bedolla: I'm not sure yet with the suppliers, but most of the time, ft's between 9:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m., or 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. they'll usually come in. Some of them actually deliver overnight, but I'm not sure which one we're going to be using at this location yet. There's a couple different suppliers. We'll just have to tell them what time we need them there. They just can't deliver during our rush periods. Ms. Scheel: Okay. And the outdoor patio that I'm looking at in the picture and the pamphlet that we have here, it has the arched windows. Are we having those? Mr. Calhoun: Yes. Actually, that's a new concept with Sonic. It's something that's not on very many of them. It is to try and extend the season for the use of the patio just a bit longer by creating the wall around there and the glass. It helps to buffer the wind coming through there. There are also some infrared heaters as you can see up by the canopy that will bring some warmth to the people sitting underthe canopy. Ms. Scheel: Okay. Then what is the season of the patio for outside? Mr. Calhoun: We'd love to have it all year round, but probably would only extend to late October. Mr. Bedolla: It just depends, really. I mean if you have warmer days in November, people would come in and sit down, but usually when it starts dropping below 40, nobody really wants to sit there. Ms. Scheel: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Morrow: We like the protective wall there also, in addition to extending the patio hours, because it does form a barrier between the drive and the patrons sitting there. So it is a safety concern too. Its kind of like a double hit there. March 16, 2010 25278 Mr. Calhoun: And it gives the people on the patio a sense of security. Mr. Morrow: Yes. Thank you. Ms. McDermott: I just wanted to clarify something with the music because I was at the store in Westland on Friday night. Did you say that the music is only coming from the same speaker box where you place your order? Mr. Bedolla: Music comes from the speaker box and also from underneath the canopy in the front. Mr. Calhoun: There's no music coming from the actual speakers that you talk through. Some of the stores actually have a speaker up on each canopy on the pole and then in the patio itself up on the wall that sends out music. It always points toward the canopy. Ms. McDermott: Okay, because I was not silting near the front, we were not in our vehicle near the front, and I wouldn't say the music was overly loud, but certainly it sounded like more than something coming out of a speaker right near the car. Mr. Bedolla: They do not come out of the speaker near the car. Ms. McDermott: So you're saying it was on the pole overhead. Is that what we're having at this location as well? Mr. Bedolla: We're looking at that and, again, that's something we can control from the inside, the volume of that. So when somebody has it louder, it's because they're turning it up in there. So that is what we usually have. Some stores have had it just on the patio and some on the poles on the canopies. Ms. McDermott: I know it adds to the whole experience of being there. It was a little hard to gauge at that location because you're right on a main road. We were facing Wayne Road. There was quite a bit of traffic, and it was Friday night about 8:30. So it was a little hard to tell, but I just wanted to make sure that it wasn't along the canopy, I guess, continuous. Mr. Bedolla: There's only two speakers on that whole canopy that will shoot down. You have the same problem with what we were talking about with the decibels. If you have music on the canopy pole that is too loud, then you can't hear the people trying to place their order. You try to give them the ambiance of the music, but you can't have it loud because then we can't hear the customers and then you can't gel the orders taken and then you're yelling back and forth. March 16, 2010 25279 Ms. McDermott: Okay. Thank you Mr. Morrow: On the Westland site, you're backing up to commercial whereas here, you're backing up to residential. That's why the Commission is dwelling a little bit on the sound. Mr. Bedolla: We were also aware of that, loo. When sound was mentioned, we brought up the possibility of moving those canopies forward to keep them away from the apartments. Mr. Taylor: Mark, they mentioned the wall. Is the wall behind there deficient in width, because we've added to other walls to raise the height of the wall. Mr. Taormina: No, I think that's just the type of wall that was constructed in this case, the poured wall. It's probably a little narrower than what we'd see for eight inch block walls, which you see probably on more sites. The older walls were built that way. Newer walls are poured concrete walls with patterned brick, and that's why it's only six inches. Mr. Taylor: Do you see any problem with extending that wall up a little bit? Mr. Taormina: Its going to add to the cost. Like Bruce mentioned, they'd have to core d and reinforce it to add any height to R. The other option is just to lake it down and build a new wall. Mr. Taylor: I just think it should be at least as high as the Burger King wall, if nothing else. I really like what you've done in moving the canopy away from the neighbors. That helped a lot. I think you heard the message that we gave you at the study session about this being close to a neighborhood. That was great what you did, and you increased the landscaping. Obviously, you heard us about the lights. So I appreciate what you've done in that way. I noticed that the store in Westland is now open on Friday and Saturday night, 24 hours. Can you comment on that at all? Mr. Bedolla: Again, that's another franchisee and they can just do whatever the ordinance allows them to do there. With our stores across the country, some are open 24 hours, 7 days a week and some aren't. There's just some places you want it that way. I don't parficulady like to run stores like that. I like to close at midnight. Mr. Taylor: That's encouraging to hear. I think we should really look at the back wall, though, against the neighbors and with the arborvilaes. Mark is very astute on these kinds of things, and he probably can make it work. If you put some adult arborvitaes March 16, 2010 25280 in there, they will kill a lot of the noise. I think you definitely ought to take a look at that. Mr. Bedolla: I don't know if it's possible, but if you're looking for arborvitae, would it be a possibility that we could remove the wall and the footing, and then plant the arborvitae back there instead of placing the wall and placing the arborvitae. The reason I say that is there's actually about a fool and a half behind the wall that's our property. The wall was not built on the property line, so we've lost a fool and a half of properly because of the wall. But the problem with the six inch wall, and I've talked to my engineer, he is not comfortable with extending the wall up with it only being six inches because structurally that's just not safe. Mr. Taylor: I understand the problem you have, but you have to understand our ordinance. I don't know how you're going to solve it, but obviously you're going to have to do something to solve it. I don't think that putting a screen mesh up is really solving the problem that we want to do for the neighbors. Mr. Bedolla: Okay. We can work with the Building and Planning Departments and gel that to meet the ordinance without any problem, whether we have to add to the wall to thicken it up and bring it up or whatever we have to do. Mr. Taylor: I'm sure there's something you can do to add to that wall. Thankyou. Mr. W Ishaw: Is this going to be a corporate store or a franchise? Mr. Bedolla: Its a franchise store. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. And how many other stores does this franchisee have? Mr. Bedolla: Currently, we're working on a deal in Dearborn, also. Mr. W Ishaw: Okay. So this is just the only one they would have, other than the Dearborn one? Mr. Bedolla: Right. This would be our first or second store. Mr. Wilshaw: How far along is the Dearborn store at this point? Mr. Calhoun: We've made it through site plan review, and we're in the permit process. Mr. Wilshaw: So its a little bit ahead of this one. March 16, 2010 25281 Mr. Calhoun: Yes. pull up? Mr. Wlshaw: Okay. Thank you Ms. Vartoogian: About how long does a customer usually stay at the store if they pull up? Mr. Bedolla: It really varies. People at the drive-thm window, we try to gel them in and out in less than three and half minutes. On average, I'd say about 1210 15 minutes. Ms. Vartoogian: The ones that pull up on the site? Mr. Bedolla: Yes. I mean we've had people that will stay there for half an hour, and some people get their food and act just like it's a drive lhm, get it and go. Ms. Vartoogian: I guess my concern with that would be, especially when the hours of operation are until 2:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday, when people would just come there and hang out, and pretty much loiter in the parking lot in their cars because it's a place to go and there's music. I'm wondering what impact that would have on the residents, and depending on what the residents say, if any of them speak tonight, perhaps, and I don't know what the other Commissioners think, that maybe the music could be turned off at a certain time on the weekends so that it doesn't go until 2:00 a.m., because I can see if you're living in those apartments and you have your windows open in the summer, you could possibly hear that music or people being rowdy or loud at the restaurant. I'm wondering if turning the music off would kind of help eliminate that? Maybe not. I don't know. What's your experience with your other stores? Mr. Bedolla: I've always controlled the environment just because I don't prefer people hanging out because you'll have the cars come up, blast their own stereos. Again, we can't hear someone trying to place an order from a customer next door to him. So we try to make it as friendly as possible but we realize at night, especially when you have a residential area next to it. The last store I just built in California, we had condominiums right next door to us. It was a thing we had to do. We had to control it and we just controlled it. Make sure the managers go out and police it. The car hops are always out there so if people are getting loo loud, we just ask them to turn it down or you're going to have to leave. If they don't, then we have to call the police, and the police come out. We just control the environment. We're just not locked inside the building and just let people do what they want outside. March 16, 2010 25282 Ms. Vartoogian: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Morrow: If there are no more questions, I'll go to the audience. You gentlemen can have a seat. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against the granting of this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, I will close the public hearing. I will ask for a motion. On a motion by Scheel, seconded by Taylor, and unanimously adopted, it was #03-19-2010 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on March 16, 2010, on Petition 2010-02-02-02 submitted by Dorlch Enterprises, L.L.C. d/b/a Sonic requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a drive-in restaurant with drive -up window facilities (Sonic Drive -In Restaurant) at 29155 Seven Mile Road, located on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebell Road and Maplewood Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, which property is zoned C-2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2010-02-02- 02 be approved for the following reasons or subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Site Plan marked Sheet No. C2 dated March 11, 2010, as revised, prepared by Creekwood Architecture, Inc., is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2. 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; 3. That the Landscape Plans marked Sheet No. Ll dated March 11, 2010, as revised, prepared by Creekwood Architecture, Inc., is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 4. That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu of hydroseeding; 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; March 16, 2010 25283 6. That the Exterior Building Elevations Plan marked Sheet No. A2.0 dated March 8, 2010, prepared by Creekwood Architecture, Inc., is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 7. That the back used in the construction shall be full face four inch (4") brick; 8. 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; 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 solid panel steel construction or durable, long-lasting solid panel fiberglass and maintained and when not in use closed at all times; 10. That the maximum customer seating count shall not exceed a total of twenty-eight (28) seals; 11. That two (2) parking spaces beyond the cinve-up window shall be designated for use of cinve-up window patrons, 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; 12. That a trash receptacle shall be provided for the outdoor patio area and shall be empfied regularly as needed; 13. That the traffic lane serving the drive -up service facility shall be at least twelve feel (12') 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; 14. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission, City Council and Zoning Board of Appeals; 15. That all outdoor speakers shall be adjustable; March 16, 2010 25284 16. That trash pickup shall not occur between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.; 17. That the hours of operation of the walk-up ordering window and drive -up window shall be limited to no later than midnight on Sunday through Thursday and no later than 2:00 a.m. on Friday and Saturday; 18. That the petitioner shall correct to the Inspection Department's satisfaction the stipulations contained in the correspondence dated March 4, 2010; 19. That the petitioner shall correct to the Engineering Department's satisfaction the stipulations contained in the correspondence dated March 2, 2010; 20. That the protective screen wall along the south property line shall be at least five feel (5') in height; 21. 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 22. 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. FURTHER RESOLVED, that nofice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Morrow: Is there any discussion? Ms. Scheel: Commissioner Taylor, does that address Item 19, what you were looking to address as far as the backwall? Mr. Taylor: Yes, I believe so. Ms. Scheel: Okay. I just wanted to double check that. Mr. Taylor: Mark, Item 2, the appropriate recordable legal instrumentation, such as a cross parking agreement, what are we talking about here? March 16, 2010 25285 Mr. Taormina: A cross access agreement with the adjoining property owner. That's all. Mr. Taylor: You mean with the property to the west? Mr. Taormina: Yes, so we can guarantee that there will be perpetual ingress and egress provided by means of that driveway. Mr. Taylor: Also, does that cover the busy time when they first open too? Mr. Taormina: That's going to have to be separate. That will be worked out probably under a separate lease agreement between Sonic or Dortch Enterprises and the owner of the property to the west. Mr. Taylor: Thankyou. Ms. Scheel: Do we need to state anything in here, or am I missing it, regarding the noise ordinance for the speakers or the music? Mr. Taormina: That's up to the Commission. We did not include language in the prepared resolution addressing that issue. So if you'd like to place limitations, that would be fine. Mr. Morrow: He indicated that they do have the ability to adjust @ up and down, and we make reference to it that it be controlled so that it does not spill over. Ms. Scheel: Okay. So we should add that as a condition then? Mr. Morrow: That would be fine. If that's what you would like to do, that's whatwe will do. Ms. Scheel: I'd like to do that if that's agreeable to Commissioner Taylor. Mr. Morrow: We'll wrap that up when we find out if there are any other additions. Ms. Scheel: Okay. Mr. Wilshaw: In addition to the sound qualifications, which I'm glad to see that we're going to put in, I think we should also add, if the maker and second are willing, something in regards to the dumpster and delivery times, that they be at a reasonable hour, 8:00 a.m. or 9:00 a.m., sometime in that time frame so that the residents don't have to deal with deliveries in the middle of the night. March 16, 2010 25286 Ms. Scheel: Do we say not before 8:00 a.m. and not after 10:00 p.m., or something like that? Do we have city ordinances that we work with? Mr. Taormina: I lhinkthat's reasonable. Ms. Scheel: That's reasonable? Okay. Mr. Morrow: Do the maker and the supporter agree? Mr. Taylor: I have no problem. We have an ordinance as far as the garbage goes. They can only gel there so early. I think it's 7:00 a.m. or 8:00 a.m. Isn't it, Mark? Mr. Taormina: I want to say it's 7:00 a.m., but if you want to stipulate 8:00 a.m., then maybe they can work around that. Mr. Morrow: If they're the contractor, they'll usually work with their customer. So the maker and the supporter approve of these conditions? Ms. Scheel: Yes. Mr. Taylor: Yes. Mr. Morrow: Any further discussion? Mr. Wilshaw: I just want to make a comment. I asked a lot of questions. I didn't gel a chance to really make much in the way of comments, but I've had a chance to go to about a dozen or so Sonics around the country in various cities. Of the various Sonic's I've seen, this is probably the nicest looking one that I've seen so far, as far as the design of the building and also the way the canopies are being placed up toward the front of the property so that it doesn't disturb the residenfial properly behind R. The petifioner has been very accommodating and willing to work with us on some of our requests. I very much appreciate that. I think we're getting a pretty good plan that's before us that I can support. I really do appreciate all the work that the petitioner has done to work with us on this particular site. Sonic is a unique business. It attracts a lot of people to the area. It's near Livonia Mall, which is just finishing the first phase of its development, and I think this will be a nice complement to the area to try to bring some good quality businesses to that section of town. I appreciate it. Mr. Taormina: I just want clarification with respect to the wall. Is it our understanding that there would be no adjustment to the March 16, 2010 25287 landscape plan, or would you like an attempt to try to increase that area for arborvitae plantings? Mr. Morrow: I think what we indicated is if there is another option that can be added before it gets to Council, it might work better. It may be possible; it may not be possible. Mr. Taormina: But this approval does not include the mesh and ivy option. Ms. Scheel: No. Mr. Taormina: Okay. Secondly, and this is really a procedural modification if the Planning Commission concurs, and that is, Item 15, addressing the issue of the LED light band and exposed neon. If we can strike that condition because they will be coming back to us with a signage plan. Since clearly their plan does not meet the ordinance, they will be coming back to us and we can address the issue of the neon and LED lighting at that time, and that would avoid us having to come back and modify this resolution. If we could strike Item 15, we can address that when the sign plan comes back. Mr. Morrow: That's a good catch because we are asking for the sign plan to come back. Mr. Taormina: Thank you. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #3 PETMON 2010-02-02-03 SIAM SPICY 4 Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next dem on the agenda, Petition 2010- 02-02-03 submitted by Siam Spicy 4, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to utilize a Class C Liquor License in connection with a full service restaurant (Siam Spicy 4 Thai Restaurant) at 37140 Six Mile, located on the north side of Six Mile Road between Newburgh Road and Fitzgerald Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 8. Mr. Taormina provided background on the item and presented a map showing the properly under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Morrow: Is there any correspondence? March 16, 2010 25288 Mr. Taormina: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated March 30, 2010, which reads as follows: "The Engineering Division has completed Its review of the above referenced liquor license waiver use request. This request will not involve any site work which would disturb utility easements or road right-0f--way. The address for this unit is 37140 Six Mile Road. The following legal description was provided by the Engineering Division in 2007 associated with a prior waiver use request (2007-06-02-23), and is still valid. A parcel of land described as beginning at a point distant N.89" 01'58"E.,539.92 feet, N.00"5458"W.,88.16 feet, N.87"2749"W., 270.54 feetN.00"56'18"W., 302.00 and West 20.00 feet from the Southwest corner of Section 8, T.1S,R.9E., City of Livonia, Wayne County, Michigan (said point being the Southeast corner of the described premises) and proceeding thence West 66 feet, thence N45"00"OOW., 25.45 feet, thence North 12 feet, thence East 84 feet, thence South 30 feet to the point of beginning. The above description is for the unit only, not the entire site." The letter is signed by Kevin G. Roney, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated March 3, 2010, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request for waiver use approval to operate a Class C liquor license in connection with the above-referenced restaurant. We have no objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Donald F. Donnelley, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated March 4, 2010, which reads as follows: We have reviewed the plans in connection with Siam Spicy 4 Thai Restaurant Class C license request, located at 37140 Six Mile Road (north side of Six Mile Road between Newburgh and Fitzgerald Roads). We have no objection or recommendations to the plans as submitted as long as they comply with all State laws, City ordinances, and stipulations and conditions set by the Traffic Bureau of the Police Department" The letter is signed by Donald E. Borieo, Sergeant, Special Services Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated March 15, 2010, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of February 16, 2010, the above-referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. 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 maybe waived by City Council. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Morrow: Are there any questions for the staff? Seeing none, is the petitioner here this evening? Was he aware of the meeting? Mark, do you know of any reason he is not here? March 16, 2010 25289 Mr. Taormina: No. Mr. Morrow: Then I'm going to ask for direction from the Commission, what their pleasure is. Mr. Taylor: Mr. Chairman, are we sure they heard what we were saying? Is this gentlemen here, maybe, for the Thai restaurant? Mr. Morrow: I guess we have a couple options. We can move forward without the input of the petitioner or we can table it until such time as he can make our meeting. I'll leave that up to the Commission. Mr. Wilshaw: Based on the fact that the petitioner is not here and we do ask that they be here to answer questions, I'm going to offer a tabling resolution to our next meeting to give the petitioner an opportunity to be here. On a motion by Wilshaw, seconded by Taylor, and unanimously adopted, it was #03-30-2010 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on March 16, 2010, on Petition 2010-02-02-03 submitted by Siam Spicy 4, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to utilize a Class C Liquor License in connection with a full service restaurant (Siam Spicy 4 Thai Restaurant) at 37140 Six Mile, located on the north side of Six Mile Road between Newburgh Road and Fitzgerald Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 8, which properly is zoned G2, the Planning Commission does hereby table this item until the next Study Meeting of March 23, 2010. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. We will move it to the next study meeting of March 23, 2010. ITEM #4 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 992nd Regular Meeting Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 992nd Regular Meeting held on March 2, 2010. On a motion by Taylor, seconded by Scheel, and adopted, it was #03-21-2010 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 992nd Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on March 2, 2010, are hereby approved. March 16, 2010 25290 A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Taylor, Scheel, McDermott, Wilshaw, Smiley, Morrow NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Varloogian Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Taylor: Before we retire tonight, tomorrow is the high holy day of the Irish, as some people call it. What I would like to do is wish everybody a Happy Shamrock Day and may your blessings outnumber the shamrocks that grow and may trouble avoid you wherever you go. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 993rtl Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on March 16, 2010, was adjourned at 8:23 p.m. CIN PLANNING COMMISSION Carol A. Smiley, Secretary ATTEST: R. Lee Morrow, Chairman