Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1999-11-09 17238 MINUTES OF THE 795th REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION �.. OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, November 9, 1999,the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 795th Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. James C. McCann, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Members present: James C. McCann Robert Alanskas Dan Piercecchi William LaPine Members absent: Michael Hale Elaine Koons H. G. Shane Messrs. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, Al Nowak, Planner IV, Scott Miller, Planner II and Bill Poppenger, Planner I were also present. Chairman McCann informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing, and will make the final determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City Council for the final determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected. If a petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan is denied tonight, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City Council. Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Commission becomes effective seven (7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning Commission and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their filing. The staff has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions which the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the proceedings tonight. We will begin with the Miscellaneous Site Plans for our agenda. ITEM #1 PETITION 97-6-8-16 MARTIN LUTHER MEMORIAL HOME Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Revision to Petition 97-6-8-16 by Martin Luther Memorial Home, Inc. to amend plans approved by the City on August 27, 1997 for the construction of a housing for the elderly complex on property located at 14871 Farmington Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 21. Mr. Miller: The site is located on the west side of Farmington between Five Mile and Lyndon Roads. On August 27, 1997 this property received Site Plan Approval to construct a senior housing complex that consisted of a nursing home and a three-story apartment building. As of today, the nursing home portion of the site has been developed and is operating. The petitioner is requesting to amend the independent living apartment, which would sit on the easterly half of the site. As the Planning Commission will recall, this building was to be 185,460 17239 sq. sq. in size and contain 132 units. An underground parking structure underneath the building provided secured parking. What the petitioner would r... like to do now is downsize the building slightly, shift the entire building to the south and complete the construction in two phases. By shifting the building, the site could accommodate a parking lot between the building and the north property line. The parking lot is needed because the underground parking structure has been eliminated. Phase I construction would consist of the north half of the building, including the center atrium area and the west wing that would connect this structure to the existing nursing home. This section of the building would be a total of 88,037 sq. ft. in size and contain 66 units. Phase II, consisting of the remaining south 80,052 sq. ft. of the building and containing the same number of units would be constructed at a later unknown date. Once completed the entire structure would become a total of 168,089 sq. ft. in size and contain 132 units. Parking required is one space for each dwelling unit, 66 units + 66 units= 122 spaces. Parking provided is 126 spaces. The look and building materials of the modified apartment building would be very similar to what was approved originally. The building would be constructed mainly out of brick around the entire 1St and 2nd floors. Vinyl siding would highlight the projecting areas and split face block would be installed up to the wainscot. The 3`d floor would be constructed entirely out of vinyl siding. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: There are two items of correspondence. The first item is a letter dated November 1, 1999 from the Division of Police which reads as follows: "The Police Department Traffic Bureau has reviewed the captioned petition plans and has no concerns and/or recommendations." The letter is signed by John B. Gibbs, Police Officer. The second item of correspondence is a letter dated November 3, 1999, from Jordan London, Vice President of Edmund London& Associates, Inc., and reads as follows: "It was brought to my attention by Scott Miller that there was some concern by the Planning Commission for walking distances from resident apartments located on the South side of the facility to the proposed location for parking spaces on the north side. Residents on the upper two floors on both the north and south wings will walk to the center of the building to access the elevators. Once down on the first floor, it would be an equal travel distance from the north or south end of the building. Placing a majority of the parking to the north will screen the parking lot from approaching visitors to the Independent Living Center or the Nursing Home. We have added some parking spaces to the south side for first floor residents and also added additional walks at the north in order to shorten the distance a resident will have to walk outside the building to access their car. We hope that this letter of explanation and the proposed modifications to the site plan will meet with your approval."The letter is signed by Jordan London. Thank you. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Bob Zabowski, Architect for Edmund London & Associates, Inc. 25505 W. Twelve Mile Road, Southfield, MI 48034 and also with me is Les Stauski, President of Martin Luther Homes out of Lansing, Michigan area. 17240 Mr. Stauski: This first photograph shows what is already completed. I think many of you �•- have been on the site already and seen it. For the individuals who may be watching on cable, this first section has been completed and is occupied and is filling up very rapidly. We have been admitting almost 22 residents a month. We are so successful on those that come in for rehabilitation that probably about 16 a month are going back home. It has really been very busy for us. The second phase which Bob will be showing you here is what you have already seen but instead we have some color renderings of what the building would look like and these are similar to what was approved before. The major changes you already heard was the fact that underground parking became so expensive in construction with ventilation systems, extra elevator, etc. that in order for the Martin Luther Homes to keep our promise to our own board of directors and for what our intentions are here, is to provide elderly housing that is affordable. When you start looking at an additional million and a half for underground parking which is higher than I thought it would ever be, we had to look for another alternative and hence, why we are here tonight. We are here to answer any questions you might have. Mr. Alanskas: Sir, when you came before us originally the big part of the plan was to have underground parking for your people there. I just can't phantom that you are going to make the elderly residents walk so far to get to their cars. It shows that you are going to have 13 parking spaces for 66 units, is that correct? __ Mr. Stauske: 13 parking spaces? Mr. Alanskas: Yes, you are going to put in an additional 13 parking spaces on the south side of that building so you are going to have 53 people that can't park there. They will have to go to the very back of the building to get to the front of the south building. Mr. Stauske: They will come down the elevator to the center of the building and they will walk to the parking. It will be the same distance whether they are going north or south. Mr. Alanskas: What is that distance? From the south building to the north to park their car and come back to an elevator, is how far? Mr. Zabowski: When this addition is built, anyone on the second and third floor will have to come to the center portion of the building to access the elevators. So once they go down, whether they go to the south side or the north side they will be traveling the same distance. Mr. Alanskas: Which is how many feet? Mr. Zabowski: It will be approximately close to 200 feet. Mr. Alanskas: 200 feet? So if they park in the southern part of the building and they have groceries and they have to carry bags of groceries 200 feet to get to an elevator? 17241 Mr. Zabowski: That would be correct. Mr. Alanskas: For the elderly? Mr. Zabowski: Yes. Mr. Stauski: Unless they use the circular drive in the front. I would love to have underground parking but it is just became unbelievable, the amount of regulations there are for underground parking. Mr. Alanskas: But you knew that when you came before us the first time. Mr. Stauski: Not really. Mr. Alanskas: We didn't say this was an approval on an if come what it would cost you two years down the road to put that parking in. It was approved that you were going to put in underground parking, period. Is that right or is that wrong? Mr. Zabowski: That is how the original plan was approved, but we are here before you to grant approval on this revised site plan. Again, we looked at the numbers and it was just not feasible to build this building with the rental rates, and you know better about the rental rates, Les, to make it feasible. 'New Mr. Alanskas: If we were talking to a younger group of people, I would say it would be no problem but when you are talking about the elderly and to make them do this, to me it just does not make any sense. Thank you. Mr. LaPine: When we talk about elderly people are we talking about 60 years old and older? Secondly, are these elderly people living here, they are not sick or anything? They can come and go just like they would if they were in a senior citizens housing complex? Mr. Stauski: This is an independent living center so they do come and go and they are healthy. We do expect in the third phase, or the second phase as it was explained tonight,that there would be one floor that would be assisted living and they would be a little bit more frail and elderly but not needing skilled nursing yet. Mr. LaPine: However, you will be providing a kitchen in this facility? Mr. Stauski: Yes, and for them they will have a kitchen and indoor activities and dining rooms. Mr. LaPine: But for all these units, people for all purposes,just elderly people living in a home that the rates are more reasonable or they don't want to keep up their homes they are living in now, and this is an alternative for them? 17242 Mr. Stauski: Yes and there are other services that are available and the families are more happy with the clinic in the building and restaurants in the building. Mr. LaPine: I for one have no objection to your eliminating the underground parking because to the best of my knowledge, we have a number of these facilities in the city. We have senior citizens in the city housing and none with underground parking to the best of my knowledge. I think the object here is to try to get this unit built at a reasonable cost so that the average elderly person can afford it. I really don't see any reason for the underground parking. That is my personal opinion. I do have some problems with the way the parking is laid out. You added some parking to the south end of the building which I don't think it is feasible because it is too close to the road going around the building. Is there anywhere else we could put this parking? This is on the new plan you submitted to us tonight. My problem is that that abuts right up next to the existing asphalt drive and when the people back out, you are not building this phase right now and maybe that is something that can be worked out when you get to that point. Mr. Zabowski: That's correct. They would be backing out into this drive here. Mr. LaPine: And to me that is a problem with elderly people. That is the only problem I have. Another question I have is, how many people actually live here. Are there people who rent these units who do not have cars? *ft. Mr. Zabowski: Our experience in our community in Holt is that probably about 1/3 to 1/2 have vehicles and the others do not. Mr. LaPine: That is what I assumed, that there was a certain percentage do not have vehicles. If they do not have vehicles, do you have buses or something to take them to the stores or do they just team up with somebody else in the building? Mr. Stauske: We have both mini-vans and we have a large 12 passenger bus that we use for excursions and other things and our facility that we have already built and are operating in the Lansing area. On Mondays also, one of employees goes through and checks off grocery or prescriptions items that they need to have picked up and we go get it for them and bring it back for about a dollar charge. Mr. LaPine: Thank you. That is all I have for right now. Mr. Piercecchi: In looking over the drawing here I see it is a brick veneer. What do you mean by brick veneer, full face 4-inch bricks? Mr. Stauski: It is full brick. Mr. Piercecchi: Because we look at that veneer as sort of like a panel brick. Mr. Zabowski: No,this is full brick. Mr. Piercecchi: So it is full face brick. 17243 Mr. Zabowski: Everything you see in the red is full brick, 4 inch brick. Mr. Piercecchi: O.K. Mr. Zabowski: Everything you see is full brick, no concrete masonry at all. Over here we've added more texture at the base and of course the lighter color you see is the vinyl siding. We felt that the vinyl and brick gave it a nice residential character. Mr. Piercecchi: I understand in this new plan that you have a walkway on that northern end to that building, which is new to that plan, is that correct? Mr. Zabowski: This area here? Mr. Piercecchi: No, it seemed like it ran parallel to where you just showed me. Are you planning on covering that? Mr. Zabowski: What we plan on doing is probably having some covered carports here, is that correct Les? Mr. Stauski: Yes, that is the intention. Mr. Zabowski: That is the intention, to have some covered carports here and we weren't Nem. planning on covering this walk but we may be able to do something across the parking lot area. Mr. Piercecchi: Everybody that is going to parking is going to be parking under cover, under that north end there? That whole package is going to be covered? Mr. Stauski: In this plan, at this point, there are no carports. In the whole facility what we found was several people were requesting carports and once we found out how many people actually drove and didn't drive, we added 4-5 unit carports to that facility but not as part of the master plan. It was really a phase that was added as it was needed. Mr. Piercecchi: But there are four or five spaces that will be covered? Mr. Stauski The ones we put in at Holt you can make them any size you want. We put five units in, and then five units in and on the other side of the building we put five units in, then another five units in for a total of 20. Mr. Piercecchi: Don't you think you should commit to that? Mr. Stauski: I guess we could commit to whatever is appropriate. I don't know if Livonia will be any different than Holt. There may be more requests for carports or there may be less. 17244 Mr. Piercecchi: Well the thing is we are approving a site plan here tonight. If it's not on the site plan, well then it's not on the site plan. Now Mr. Stauski: It isn't in the financing at this point either. It isn't in the finance package as part of the value engineering parking became the issue, underground versus surface. Mr. Piercecchi: I understand the cost on that and I am disappointed to see it gone but I understand the ventilation and all that. We are looking at a lot of money. I was surprised you scaled it back. I guess you just went from three to two different mixes of the room. But if you could put carports back there and a covered walkway, because every area is not going to be carport, you are going to have a lot a open parking too,right? Back in that north end too or is that all going to be carport? Mr. Zabowski: I think Les is looking at probably at 10 and maybe we could stretch that out. Mr. Piercecchi: You've got a long walk whether they have carports or not from that new sidewalk you are putting in all the way into that building, correct? Mr. Zabowski: We are accessing the building at this point and this point. Now on a nice day they will walk all the way into this courtyard. We added these walks and this walk here. Mr. Piercecchi: Don't you think a covered walkway is really in order there? It wouldn't cost an `„ arm and a leg. Mr. Stauske: When you say a covered walkway, to me I am not even thinking of the cost at this point, I guess I would like to see what it is going to look like. I have seen some that are pretty tacky. If we are going to do something, I want it to look pretty nice. Mr. Piercecchi: Yes, because what you have there is beautiful, we acknowledge. Mr. Zabowski: We can definitely take a look at that probability of taking one of these walkways. Mr. Piercecchi: Is there any parking really on that one side only, is that correct? Mr. Zabowski: There is parking all around here. Mr. Piercecchi: Then they should have access to both places. It doesn't hurt to let people get out of the rain and out of the snow. Mr. LaPine: I would like to ask one more question. It is my understanding, if I understand what you are saying here, is that the whole facility you built your complex without the carports and after the residents moved in you added the carports because the people wanted you to add the carports. Mr. Zabowski: That is correct. 17245 Mr. LaPine: That makes sense to me. Why build the carports if people don't want them. Mr. Zabowski: Right. Mr. LaPine: Thank you. Mr. McCann: Number one, you would have to come back for site plan approval if you want carports. Mr. Taormina, tell me what area is landscaped in this greenbelt. Is there a percent of change in this new plan compared to the prior plan? Mr. Taormina: There would be a difference. I don't have the exact percentage. That is not something that has been calculated by staff Mr. McCann: Based on my review of the site, there is tremendous difference in the parking area. Gentlemen, do you know what the difference is? How much of your landscaping is being taken up by parking spaces now? Mr. Zabowski: The actual footprint of the building shrunk a little bit so we gained some area. Mr. McCann: How many square feet would you say. Mr. Zabowski: Of the parking area? 'New Mr. McCann: No,the footprint of the building. Mr. Zabowski: The footprint of the building on the first floor is, there is total lot number of 26,855 sq. ft. Mr. McCann: How much on the old plan? Mr. Zabowski: That is phase II. We will have to add that to Phase I which is 38,360 sq. ft. so combining those two numbers will give you a total lot coverage for Phase I and Phase. And again, that is just the building area. Again the service parking is not calculated. Mr. McCann: About half by the time you add in all the spaces all the way around. I guess this is where I have a problem. You came to the Planning Commission before you changed the zoning and said look, we are going to come here, this is going to be showcase. It is going to be all brick and marble. We have looked at it and this is going to be the best one in the state. It is just going to be magnificent. Then you came in with the site plan after you got the zoning approval and told us, well you know what, we did promise you that but the cost, we had everything costed out. We have taken a look at everything and we are not going to be able to put in some of the things we wanted. We wanted an island drive. There were some other things as far as you weren't going to go all brick and marble. We are going to put in some dryvit and some split face block and we've had to change a few things here but we have it all costed out and that is what we are going to do. Now the third time you are coming back to us and saying we went with the 17246 changes. We will put in a little more brick in and not as much dryvit but it is about 50/50. Considerably less than what you originally told us before you �•- came in on the zoning. Now you are coming back in and telling us, you know all that nice area that we were so proud of and all those trees and the greenbelt and how nice it was going to be for our residents. We are going to get rid of that and pave it. That is what we want to do. I don't think the city is getting anything. Obviously your residents are going to have to walk a tremendous distance and you say people, it's retirement and it's not that hard on them to walk. I am a public administrator. I go in and out of nursing homes and assisted living homes everyday. That is what I do. Most of those people, by the time they move to assisted living or to residents home, are using canes. They are not able to carry their groceries. They are using walkers. Although they are in assisted living, they still want to be in a community where they can cook their food, have their own apartment, still live husband and wife. Mr. Zabowski: If someone needed to drop off their groceries, there would be staff on hand that would assist them. Mr. Stauske: I think I already said that in Holt we get their groceries for them. We get pharmaceuticals for them. Mr. McCann: The City has a wonderful bus plan too that picks up and takes people where they want to go. But it is not what you promised us when you came in. You reduced it at site plan now you are,to me, severely cutting it. I think what you've got to do, before I would even consider this, is basically, you've got a couple of courtyards as your greenbelt area now instead of having a nice large area that was going to be surrounded by green area. There were going to be walkways through it. People were going to be able to enjoy it. You said it was going to be a great place, set back in the woods and now we are going to have blacktop and building and that is it. I don't think it is fair to the residents of Livonia to have that back there now. I don't think it is fair to the people that are going to move into it and it is not at all what you promised. You said you can't afford to do it now. When you came in for site plan approval you said you had sent it to all these bidders and that is why you had to reduce this and that and that you had bids on the project and that it was all designed. Now you tell us you had no idea what the costs were going to be when we put it through site plan. I really have a hard time dealing with that. We have professionals come before us everyday. They design a building and have a pretty good idea what it is going to cost them. Mr. Zabowski: When we came in for the original site plan the costs we didn't have, as construction documents go, for this phase and as you know the construction industry in the past couple of years, has skyrocketed phenomenally. The construction costs have gone out of sight. We are trying our best to provide what we think is a beautiful building and building that can be built in this community. The buildings I have seen built, projects for the elderly, I think this is one of the nicest ones in the state. The interiors of this building are going to ``' far beyond the interiors you have seen in other parts of this state. 17247 Mr. McCann: Without any greenbelt, I can't even see what you are talking about. A cement building doesn't do anything for me. Number two, why not just go with Phase I N..- until you can afford to build Phase II? Why does the City have to give up because you want to have to all out and rented as soon as possible? Why can't you just wait on Phase II until you can afford to build Phase II? Mr. Stauski: It's a matter of fmancing. Banks are concerned about the long term care industry to begin with, as you probably are aware. Four major project chains have had difficulties and their stocks dropped and some have gone bankrupt. It is very difficult for us to get financing unless the banks agree that this is properly priced. We want to provide a quality product for the least expensive amount for residents as we can. We can build the Taj Mahal but nobody will move in because they won't be able to afford it. We went down to get ready to do some documents for pricing to build the building and found out how expensive this thing will be. The bankers wouldn't finance it, so we had to find areas in which we could still keep the quality services that we have, the building that we really wanted and the parking became the problem. It's a tight site to begin with. Mr. McCann: We have other people come in with these same problems but instead of just wiping out all the greenbelts with parking lots, saying they are going to cut back, they are not going to go from 64,000 to 65,000 feet, bring it down to around 50,000 so you need less parking and you have more greenbelt. You can have a path. We have other senior centers and they do nice paths around, - walking paths. Something for the senior citizens to go out and sit, give it some nature. People don't want to just move in and stay inside their condominium. Mr. Stauske: I wonder if it would be possible, since we have already identified that there will be some people on the site that don't require cars or parking, if we could reduce the parking spaces. Mr. McCann: Why not reduce the building size? Mr. Stauske: Then we are renting little efficiency apartments and people really want two bedrooms. Mr. McCann: I have nothing further. Are there any further questions? Hearing none, I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one from the audience, a motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. LaPine and denied, it was #11-186-99 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 97-6-8-16 by Martin Luther Memorial Home, Inc. to amend plans approved by the City Council on August 27, 1997 for the construction of housing for the elderly complex on property located at 14871 Farmington Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 21 that Revision to Petition `"" 97-6-8-16 be denied for the following conditions: 17248 1) That the petitioner has failed to justify the need to alter the plans that were approved in the original petition; NI.. 2) That the location of the new parking lot would have a detrimental effect upon the entire project and would cause undo hardship on the elderly residents who might live there; 3) That underground parking provides a more secure and protective parking situation; 4) That one of the main reasons the City approved the original site plan was based on the apartment building having underground parking; 5) That the shifting the multi-story building to the south would obstruct the "quality of life" of the senior residents of the adjacent Silver Village development; 6) That the petitioner has failed to comply with all the concerns deemed necessary for the safety and welfare of the City and its residents. Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion? Mr. LaPine: I would like to make an alternate motion to table this until we have a seven member board. Ng.. Mr. McCann: Is there support? Hearing none, the motion fails for lack of support. A roll call vote was taken with the following results: AYES: Alanskas, Piercecchi, McCann NAYS: LaPine ABSENT: Hale, Koons, Shane Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. You have ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City Council. ITEM #2 PETITION 99-10-8-25 REDFORD OAK PLAZA (Big Lots) Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 99-10-8-25 by Redford Oak Plaza, on behalf of the Big Lots, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of the zoning ordinance in connection with a proposal to renovate a portion of the exterior building elevation of the commercial building located at 30000 Plymouth Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 26. r.. Mr. Miller: This site is located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt and Tech Center Drive. Big Lots is planning on occupying the vacant half of the commercial building that presently has a Media Play Store as a tenant. This site 17249 was formerly a Builder's Square Hardware Store. The petitioner is requesting approval to renovate the portion of the south(front) elevation of the commercial _.. building where Big Lots would be located. Big Lots would like to put in an entrance for their unit. The submitted Elevation Plan shows that the existing overhead door in the wall would be enclosed with building materials to match the existing exterior finish. A new glass entranceway would be installed approximately 6 feet to the west of the filled in opening. The remaining exterior would not be touched. Big Lots is also proposing signage and an illuminated awning over the entrance. Because the awning is illuminated it is considered a sign and is figured in the overall sign calculations. Big Lots is permitted a sign not to exceed 182 sq.ft and 1/2 the sq.ft. of the one ground sign. Proposed siinalre is 2 wall signs-302 sq.ft. in total sign area. The south elevation - "Big Lots/Bargains-Closeouts"- 111 sq.ft in area, the south elevation - illuminated awning- 191 sq.ft. in area and 1 ground sign -panel- "Big Lots"-20 sq.ft. in area. Because the proposed signage is in excess of what is allowed by the sign ordinance, the applicant would be required to seek a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is a letter dated October 28, 1999 from the Engineering Division which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request,the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. The Engineering Division has no objections to the proposal at this Now time. We trust that this will provide you with the information requested." The letter is signed by David Lear, P.E., Civil Engineer. The second item of correspondence is a letter dated November 1, 1999 from the Division of Police which reads as follows: "The Police Department Traffic Bureau has reviewed the captioned petition plans and has no concerns and/or recommendations." The letter is signed by John B. Gibbs, Police Officer. The third item of correspondence is a letter dated November 8, 1999 from the Inspection Department which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of October 21, 1999, the site plan for the above subject Petition has been reviewed. The following issues are being brought to your attention. (1) The parking area for the entire site needs to be repaired, resealed and double striped. (2) Consideration should be given to providing enclosures for the dumpsters at the rear of the building. No enclosures exist at this site. (3) Graffiti needs to be removed from the rear wall of Media Play. (4) Pallets and debris need to be removed from the rear of the building. I trust this has provided the requested information." The letter is signed by David M. Woodcox, Senior Building Inspector. Thank you. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Mike Styles, I am with consolidated stores doing business as Big Lots, 300 Philip High Road, Columbus, Ohio. Mr. McCann: Want to tell us little about what you are doing here? 17250 Mr. Styles: Just as he explained, we are leasing the remainder of the Builder's Square s..w building that Media Play does occupy at this time to put in a Big Lots retail store. We have intentions of cutting a new store front in the front of this building with the glass, with the awning above and the signage above and infilling the block wall where the overhead door was. We are under lease with Music Land Group which owns Media Play. That is who we are leasing from. The information the gentleman spoke of there regarding the parking lots and the graffiti at the rear building and the debris would be that of the landlords at this time. I would do everything within my power to see that all those items are corrected. Mr. Alanskas: Sir can you explain to me what Big Lots is? Mr. Styles: Big Lots is a closeout retailer. We are nation wide. We have approximately 1200 stores across the United States. We deal in name brand products. First run goods. Mr. Alanskas: Are you referring to clothing or appliances. What do you sell? Mr. Styles: We carry the same mix of merchandise that you would find in a K-Mart or Wal- Mart. We carry clothing, domestic items, lawn and garden, toys, garden supplies and offices supplies. Mr. Alanskas: You buy merchandise that is not defective but is cheaper. How do you make your products cheaper to the public? Mr. Styles: Our products we buy are first run goods. We thrive on manufacturer over runs, package changing from manufacturers. We do a lot in that. Some of the items are not your name brand items. They are your lesser quality items but again they are first run new products. Mr. Alanskas: In the interior of the store, are you going to have just one big area where you have pallets to put merchandise or is it going to broken down? How is it going to be inside? Mr. Styles: Inside this building right now, it is pretty much an empty shell. Everything on the inside is going to be new. We have an open deck. We will have all new lighting. As far as the merchandising, it is all shelving just like you would see in K-mart or Wal-Mart. It is all steel shelving. Everything is out of the package. A lot of people interpret as being able to buy things a case at a time. If you want to buy a case you can buy a case but that is not our business. We sell individual items. Mr. Alanskas: Are you going to have cases stacked up and down? Are you going to have partitions for clothing? `` Mr. Styles: Basically, it is an open floor plan. We have wall fixtures all around the perimeter. We have interior gondolas which range anywhere from 54" high to 17251 72" high. Those are of platinum color and all the merchandise will be merchandised vertically on those gondolas. Nier Mr. LaPine: How many Big Lots do you have in the metropolitan Detroit area? Mr. Styles: I would say right now we probably have near 30. Mr. LaPine: How many do you have in the suburbs out this way, Farmington Hills, Southfield, Novi? Any at all? Mr. Styles: Yes we have stores all over the state of Michigan, several of them in the suburbs of Detroit. I don't know the exact number. Mr. LaPine: I visited the one at Greenfield and 11 Mile Road. Would you consider that one of your typical stores? Mr. Styles: I would have to say yes. I haven't been to that store personally but that is typical. Our stores are typical from one to the other. Keep in mind, our company, we lease second and third generation buildings. A lot of the buildings we go into, we do not go in and gut the building and build new. We will take an existing ceiling, existing lighting, existing flooring and if it is acceptable for us to do business with, we will leave it and use it as existing. In this particular location there is nothing on the interior of this building. It is an open deck building. It is exposed bar joists, painted white, new lights on, new VTC floor put in. Any partitions that are built, are new, new restrooms. The interior of the place is virtually going to be new. Mr. LaPine: Let me say, the store at Greenfield and 11 Mile Road needs a lot of work done on it. If you ever get out there, you need to take a look at it. Here you've got a new store so I assume things will be a little better. It isn't what I would call a type of store that normally would do good in Livonia, if you want my honest opinion. Livonia is more upscale stores. But that is no reason why you shouldn't come to Livonia. I wasn't really impressed with the store. It was, quite frankly, stuff was laying all over the place. You sell furniture in there. There was all kinds of stuff there. If wasn't organized in my opinion. That is my personal opinion. Maybe that is the way you operate but I wasn't impressed. That doesn't mean you shouldn't come to Livonia. I just hope that if you come to Livonia you are going to be successful because I don't like for someone to come in and a store and then two years later find out that you can't cut the mustard here and then we've got another empty store. I would rather wait for someone we know that can really do the job here and make a success. But if you've got that many stores and you are still in operation, you must have something going for you. I'll tell you, the one out at 11 Mile and Greenfield Road didn't impress me at all. Mr. Styles: I can appreciate what you are saying and respect your thoughts on that and Big Lots appeals to a wide variety of clientele and we have a long term commitment with this building in Livonia. We are on a lease for 10 years, I believe, so we 17252 are fully committed to making this go. We have probably been in the Detroit market here since the early '80s, doing business. Mr. LaPine: That is all I have Mr. Chairman. Mr. Alanskas: How many employees will you have at that store there? Mr. Styles: This store will probably employ anywhere from 40 to 50 employees. Mr. Alanskas: Are they full time or part time? Mr. Styles: There will be both and the ratio will be probably 1/3 will be full time. Mr. Alanskas: The 2/3rds that are part-time, what age group would you be hiring? Mr. Styles: We hire all age groups. Mr. Alanskas: Is it mainly young people? Mr. Styles: Not necessarily. We do hire the younger people and mostly they work out best for us in the evening hours. Then we have housewives that are looking for something to do that works well for us during the daytime shifts and into the evenings as well. r, Mr. Alanskas: What are the hours of your stores? From what time to what time are you open? Mr. Styles: Hours of operation are from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Mr. Alanskas: You are open on Sundays? Mr. Styles: Yes sir, 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday. Mr. Alanskas: O.K. Thank you very much. Mr. Piercecchi: To get the scope of your operation, I don't understand why you call it Big Lots when you sell things one at a time. Can you give me an idea of what the wage structure is in your facility for the full-time and part-time people? Mr. Styles: I am not personally involved with the Human Resources portion of our business. We try to pay prevailing wages within the area and if we don't, we don't get the employees. If we can't pay what the other retailers are paying in the retail market, then we are just kidding ourselves. I don't know, I can't quote you a dollar amount. I am not at liberty to say that or commit us to that because I am not involved with that. I am involved with the store planning department of our company. Mr. Piercecchi: Thank you. Mr. McCann: Do you need the awning illuminated? 17253 Mr. Styles: The illumination of the awning is done in this instance is two play. We have the 'ft.. awning there because we are going into a blank building front. We want some protection for the customers entering and leaving the building. We show the awning illuminated, again, for two reasons. One it creates a lot of excitement at the front of the building and the outset of this building where it is located. I think it would be real helpful and the other part of the lighting in the awning is to light the sidewalk area in front of our store front. Mr. McCann: There are other ways of lighting the sidewalk. Mr. Styles: Right. And we don't have a problem with that. If that awning does not need to be illuminated or internally lit, then we could possibly deal with that. Mr. McCann: Then you would have to reduce your sign by 100 sq. ft. to keep the lights on so that might put incentive there. Mr. Styles: But we would still like to have some down lighting if possible on that awning. Mr. McCann: You can have down lighting but you can't internally light it but my concern is, it looks like to me that you have cut a hole in front, put in some doors, bought an awning and a sign and that is what you are doing to the front of the building and that is what it looks like. Media Play did this huge dryvit thing, gave it some texture, brought it out. There is no texture. It looks like a side entrance. As "Noiryou said you want to interior light it because you are just off to the side and not really there but you haven't done anything to make it look like an entrance. You could build an area to cover for the rain, a mansard over that. There are a hundred different ways you could do it. It would give it some texture and definition and make it look like a separate unit. To me it looks like a service entrance to Media Play. It is just an awning over an entrance door. Do you do anything different at any of your other stores or do you just go in to the building and whatever is there and punch a hole. Mr. Styles: Pretty much. Again, our company has been successful by maintaining our cost and not overspending where unnecessary. Mr. McCann: But you see, my problem is the City is going to live with it for 10 years from what you just told me and to be honest with you, why because your master plan says don't put a dime into it. If it will pass all codes and you can go into the building, slap a sign up and start doing business, well this is a nice area. We are spending a lot of money right now. We have raised separate taxes along Plymouth Road to bring it up and make it look as nice as possible. This is like a downtown area for us. I don't know if you have been up and down Plymouth Road but we have put up all the antique lighting. We are buying property, we are laying grass. Mr. Styles: I have met with one of the developmental association last week and presented the same project to them and it was accepted at their meeting. 17254 Mr. McCann: I just have a real problem with just putting a sign on the wall and cutting a hole in the building and saying this is what you get for 10 years. I don't have �., anything else. Mr. Alanskas: I don't want to repreat what Mr. McCann is saying, but if we could somehow dress up the facia of this building to make it look entirely different. Like Mr. McCann said, and I am saying the same thing, it just looks like a blank building. I understand what you are trying to say because your people are trying to sell things as a lesser cost and you want to get into a building as least as possible. When you tell me you are going into an empty building, because that used to be a Builder's Square and Home Quarters and it is a blank building and it is wide and all you are going to do is put your merchandise in and sell it, it kinds of concerns me. You are telling me that you are doing nothing to the inside, the same as you are the outside. Mr. Styles: That is not true. The interior of the building will be the same face you would find across, I mean we don't walk in and build a bunch of little wing walls and such for our soft line department as a Target would but the fmishes on the walls is drywall and paint. Mr. Alanskas: How high is the ceiling where the lights are? Isn't that kind of high? Mr. Styles: The deck of that building is probably at about 24 feet and we are going to chain hang eight foot fixtures of lights within that building at a reasonable height so they can be maintained at probably 14' to 16'. Mr. Alanskas: So you are putting in different lighting then? Mr. Styles: Yes we are. Mr. Alanskas: Because what is in there now are the big globe lights. Mr. Styles: Exactly, those do not work. Mr. Alanskas: You didn't say that. So you are putting different lighting in. Mr. Styles: Yes we are. Mr. Alanskas: The neon lights, are they 12 foot sections? Mr. Styles: Eight foot sections, florescent, two bulb lights. Mr. Alanskas: With a top on it? Mr. Styles: No,they are exposed. Mr. Alanskas: O.K. Thank you. 17255 Mr. Piercecchi: Our Chairman brought up some very good points as he generally does and Commissioner Alanskas elaborated on further. Do you have anything to do �.. with the exterior of that building, as far as the style? Mr. Styles: Sure we could put a lot of style and design into it. Certainly. Mr. Piercecchi: When the time comes, I think Mr. Chairman, that we should need another look at this site. I think you can beautify it somewhat and as pointed out,the Plymouth Road Development Authority has spent tons of money trying to make that look like a down town area, even though if we have no official downtown area. We want to see that improved. I would like to have you come back. Talk with your people. See what can be done to beautify that front, to make it look like a separate entity rather than just an attachment to Media Play. Mr. McCann: Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? Mr. LaPine: Mr. Chairman,just one thing. I think what the Chairman said is apropos but on the other hand, I don't want to see this building empty for any long time. It has been empty for quite a while now. But I think he has a point. If something can be done to spruce up this building to make it look like a separate building away from Media Play. I don't know what it is, I am not an architect. I am just a layman, but it seems to me that you could spruce up the outside of this building. I don't like the inside of the building if it is going to look like the one on Greenfield, but I am willing to buy that because you people figure you can make a go here and that is fine with me. But I agree with the Chairman as he pointed, whatever goes there, we've got to live with. We would like to get something a little more classy here. You are coming into a good City. You can be successful here. Everybody that comes to Livonia usually does fairly well. You may have to spend a little money up front but you might get it at the other end. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Alanskas: You might consider, and it is not expensive,just to break up this bare wall, you can have exterior lights that shoot down. They are real nice but they are not expensive. They can really add to the beauty of the building. That is just one thing you could do. I mean in 10 or 20 foot increments along the building you can have some lighting coming down like you have at the theaters. That looks really nice. They stick out and that is just one thought that you could possibly do. Thank you. Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions and since there is no one in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition, a motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mr. Alanskas, and unanimously approved, it was #11-187-99 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine that Petition 99-10-8-25 by Redford Oak Plaza, on behalf of the Big Lots, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of the zoning ordinance in connection with a proposal to renovate a portion of the exterior building 17256 elevation of the commercial building located at 30000 Plymouth Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 26 be tabled to November 23, 1999. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ITEM #3 PETITION 99-10-8-26 VAN BORN PLAZA (Livonia 5 Plaza) Mr. Hale, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 99-10-8-26 by Van Born Plaza, on behalf of the Livonia Five Plaza, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the zoning ordinance in connection with a proposal to renovate the exterior building elevations of the commercial center located at 28423 Five Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 24. Mr. Miller: This site is located on the south side of Five Mile Road between Harrison and Sunbury. This site is located next to the Old Mexico Restaurant, which is located on the corner of Five Mile Road and Harrison Avenue. The petitioner is proposing to renovate the entire north(front) elevation of the Livonia 5 Plaza Shopping Center. Other than saying that the front of the building is a flat brick wall with a think metal canopy, the look of the center presently is very non- descriptive. What the petitioners would like to do is add decorative dryvit along the top of the storefronts to offer some relief to the building. Artistic peaks, elegant arches and creative offsets would provide a more eye catching look to the entire center. A more modern mansard type canopy, support by six new dryvit columns, would take the place of the existing dated metal canopy. The area underneath the canopy would remain as it is today, brick glass and doors. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: There are three items that we have received. The first item of correspondence is a letter dated October 28, 1999 from the Engineering Division which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. The Engineering Division has no objections to the proposal or the legal description contained therein. We trust that this will provide you with the information requested." The letter is signed by David Lear, P.E., Civil Engineer. The second item of correspondence is a letter dated November 1, 1999 which reads as follows: "The Police Department Traffic Bureau has reviewed the captioned petition plans and has no concerns and/or recommendations." The letter is signed by John B. Gibbs, Police Officer. The third item of correspondence is a letter dated November 8, 1999 from the Inspection Department which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of October 21, 1999, the site plan for the above Petition has been reviewed The following issues are being brought to your attention. (1) The dumpsters located in the northeast corner of the parking lot need to be placed at the minimum building setback(75) and enclosures should be considered at this time. (2) The pylon sign at the northwest corner of the parking lot needs to be refaced or removed. (3) The piers are proposed to have an E.I.F.S. exterior and may be susceptible to pedestrian and traffic damage. (4) Consideration should be given to resealing and double striping the parking areas. I trust this has 17257 provided the requested information. " The letter is signed by David M. Woodcox, Senior Building Inspector. Thank you. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Ryan Kattoo,Nu-Vest Associates, 29201 Telegraph , Suite 450, Southfield, Michigan 48034 and John Janviriya, 42551 Northville Place Drive, Northville, Michigan 48167, who is the designer. Mr. McCann: Can you tell us about your project? Mr. Janviriya: Basically I want to bring this shopping center to life. What I want to do is bring some dimension to the building instead of just doing a typical flat dryvit panel across the entire building. I would like to use diversity of colors, textures, offsets, dimension play of vertical -half horizontal. Also at night, one thing that it doesn't indicate in this picture is how we are going to back light all the diamond elements on the upper parapet, so it's going to have a halo effect so it's going to have a lot of appeal at night. It is not going to be revealed lighting where you can see the bulbs. It will be really classy. That was probably my biggest interest,to class up this building. It was perfect. It was a bare canvass, it was just straight. Mr. McCann: So you had a lot of fun? ,44110, Mr. Janviriya: Oh yeah! Mr. McCann: Any other comments? Mr. Janviriya: One thing he did say was about those were columns. Those are wall mounted columns so they will be just pinned up against the existing brick. Mr. McCann: The new dumpster location- any comments about that? Mr. Kattoo: I talked to Mark a few times regarding the dumpster location. The problem we have with this property is that we are having a hard time trying to fmd a place to put the dumpsters. They are currently located right by Five Mile Road and we are trying to find the best solution to place the dumpsters to reduce visibility and still provide a function for the tenants in the center and overall increase the appearance of the center. We have come up with our best solution of where to place the dumpsters on the west end of the building. As you can see from this site plan, our proposal is to place the dumpster on the west side of the building facing south, using the service trucks to be able to service the dumpsters and to exit through Center Avenue or through the back alley. The dumpster would be totally encased in matching brick to match the brick work of the shopping center, totally enclosed with at least a six foot wall. There is already a screen wall behind the whole shopping center so that there would be means for this dumpster to be not visible from the neighbors behind. Mr. Alanskas: Do I understand that you can get by with only one dumpster? 17258 Mr. Kattoo: What we are doing right now is that we are consolidating. There were three dumpsters on the site. We are consolidating the dumpsters to one dumpster, increase the size and just increase service. Because we are so limited on space we can't have three or four dumpsters at this location but because the tenants have contracts with the waste removal service, when that contract expires we are requiring them to go through the property management and have them service the dumpster when management takes over the contract. Mr. Alanskas: I have a big problem by putting the dumpster there because I think it is intrusive to the neighborhood on that street. Just hear me out for one minute. If you had only one dumpster on the east north corner where it is right now, if you could move that dumpster down about 15 feet and carry where Old Mexico is, they have a landscaping plan that is about six feet wide with big tall pine trees, where the dumpster is right now.... Mr. Kattoo: When you say down, do you mean north or south? Mr. Alanskas: Let me finish. Where the dumpster is now... Mr. Kattoo: Do you mean north or south? Mr. Alanskas: It would be south on the east part of the property line. Right now you've got a parking spot that you cannot see, so that is lost. If you just took one more `.. parking spot out of there, which would be a good 15 feet in length, you could put in some landscaping and a couple of big pine trees and you could come this way with some pine trees where you could screen that dumpster right in and have the opening of the dumpster facing south so it would be screened completely from the parking lot and Five Mile and it would not be seen and for them to come and pick it up they could just drive right through here or through the back, pick it up and go right out the front. Mr. Kattoo: Our concern is that, as you can see from our site plan, we laid out a new parking lay out. Mr. Alanskas: I saw that. Mr. Kattoo: We currently have 60 plus one or two parking spots for this center. We are trying to increase the overall parking for this center. If you do that, move the dumpster down, we will lose a little bit more parking. Mr. Alanskas: Have you ever seen that parking area half full? Mr. Kattoo: Currently, the center is roughly almost 50% vacant. Mr. Alanskas: I know you have three buildings vacant. My son-in-law works there. I go there every day. Even if you had it full, I think the parking lot you have now would be more than enough. 17259 Mr. Kattoo: It is kind of hard to say at this point, it is 13,200 sq. ft. of shopping center and we currently have 6,000 sq. ft. vacant. Mr. Alanskas: Depending on what you put in there. Mr. Kattoo: Exactly. Someone with a restaurant or someone that may require more parking for a training facility or anything else but we are not quite sure. But we would hate to reduce the amount of parking that is currently there and then lower the marketability of leasing out the sites. Mr. Alanskas: I commend you on what you are trying to do to the mall because it looks so much different from now and after. The dumpster is the only concern that I have and I still think it would work in that area by just taking out those two parking spots. One, you are not using any way, it's lost because it is in front of the dumpster so you haven't used that in the last 10 years so we are only talking one parking spot,to put more landscaping going across the front of that dumpster. Mr. Kattoo: Would it be in consideration of putting the dumpster in the opposite direction over to closer to Five Mile with an enclosure allowing the dumpster to be serviced from the west side? Mr. McCann: Are there any more questions? ..„ Mr. LaPine: I was out there today and I like what Mr. Alanskas says but my solution was you keep it where it is but you put a brick wall high enough, my concern is I don't want people driving Five Mile Road seeing the dumpster. So you put a brick wall high enough so it covers the dumpster going east and west and then you have one going north and south and they come in and pick the garbage up from the south. Otherwise they come up the side street, in the alley, you move in, you pick up the garbage and you drive out. Mr. Kattoo: I'm sorry. Up the driveway through the alley? Mr. LaPine: That's right. Mr. Kattoo: You are talking about the west side? Mr. LaPine: No, I'm talking about the east side. Mr. Kattoo: We are unable to get access to the property from the east side. Mr. Janviriya: The property line is flush to the east side. Mr. Alanskas: You can come in off of Five Mile with the vehicle to pick it up. r..... Mr. Janviriya: Basically around the lot and back out. 17260 Mr. Kattoo: Our ultimate goal was to basically, no one really like to see a dumpster close to Five Mile. I'm sure you don't want to have drivers drive by and see a dumpster. N.. We ultimately would like to remove the dumpster visibly in front of the tenants and the center and for when people drive by. Mr. Alanskas: But you will be moving it in front of a neighborhood. Mr. LaPine: Then if you move it on to the west side you will have it on the residential street and the neighbors who live out there will have to see it out there. Mr. Kattoo: The dumpster from the closest neighbor would be roughly 50 - 60 feet away. As I mentioned, the back neighbor already has a screen wall that is placed throughout the whole back of the alley of the center of over 6 feet. The dumpster would be totally enclosed itself with a six foot enclosure gate. The neighbor to the right is actually closer to Five Mile. There is not a driveway to the right of the west of the center. I have already talked to the neighbors. I am actually the property manager of that property. I am there every day. They have been very happy with the new changes that have been going on with the center and how the center has improved and cleaned up in the last few months. We are trying to get this dumpster in front of the center, which people driving up Five Mile everyday would see it too, more so placed on the side, furthest away from the closest neighbor as possible. Mr. LaPine: You made a statement a few minutes ago about tenants who may come in there. You talked about a restaurant but if it is any where near a neighbor and you've got a restaurant, restaurants create a lot of garbage and with my experience knowing that people who work in a restaurant when they come out and put the garbage out, they've got young people come out, they throw the garbage. Some of it hits, some of doesn't. Next thing we know, we've got rats and the next thing we've got neighbors mad at us. That is not my idea of a solution. A solution can't be farthest away from the neighbor as possible. That is my solution. Anyway, over here you've got a solid wall on the west side. This is where you are intending to put it. You've only got a 23 foot drive there and to get one of these big trucks in there,the front load that lifts up that dumpster and dumps it, I don't think it is feasible to do it. Mr. Kattoo: I contacted the waste removal service, Waste Management. The canister, itself, usually takes about a 6 x 6 x 6 foot square cube. The length of the center is over 50 feet. He feels there is no problem for him to service that site. Mr. LaPine: Well, here again, you are closer the residential neighbors and I don't know what time they pick up your dumpster but sometimes these people come in at 4, 5 or 6 o'clock in the morning and they are banging those dumpsters and the neighbors are upset. I think it is a bad location. Mr. McCann: I think 7 o'clock is the time they start. Mr. LaPine: O.K. I am through, Mr. Chairman. 17261 Mr. Alanskas: In any average business when there is a dumpster, when a person comes to pick up the refuse, even if you have gates going across the front to block it off, the r.., truck pulls in, they dump it, they go out and the gates are left open. They are always left open. In fact, Mark and I walked across to the other strip where they have enclosed and it is much bigger than what you have. They are wide open, stuff all over, blowing. You would have the same thing there on the neighbors because of the wind and refuse there. It would blow into the streets and it would be really detrimental to the neighbors there on that street. I still think you can work out having that dumpster on the northeast corner. You would lose two parking spots but you've got plenty of parking there. Mr. Kattoo: Is it possible that in consideration of placing that dumpster closer to Five Mile on the northeast corner then what we would do is angle the one parking spot so that the truck can make the turn? Mr. Alanskas: You mean the second row parking? Mr. Kattoo: Right, the row closest to Five Mile and the parking spot farthest to the left where there is actually a number there. We can angle that so when a truck comes around the dumpster would be facing south. It would be closer to the main road and then that way we are not losing parking. Mr. Alanskas: If you move the dumpster back 15 or 20 feet from Five Mile, I don't think you would have a problem at all. Mr. Kattoo: If we move this back 20 feet, I'm not sure if it is going to grant the truck proper turning radius to service that dumpster. Mr. Alanskas: He could come in at Five Mile, come to your closest lane south, turn left, swing right into the dumpster then leave. Mr. Kattoo: He is saying the gate would open on the south side, is that correct? Mr. Alanskas: Correct. Mr. Janviriya: He will lose the handicap spot in the number 26 slot. Mr. Alanskas: You can move the handicap anywhere. Mr. Kattoo: No, but I'm saying if we leave the row of parking in the front that leaves the dumpster from the turning radius about 30 feet. Mr. Alanskas: You just said a few minutes ago that the cube is only 6 x 6 and that the truck only needs 15 feet to get in there. Mr. Kattoo: And this angle over here with the curb side and the side road,the truck would almost be already facing north. But in this situation when he makes the turn he is facing directly east. 17262 Mr. Alanskas: All he has to do is when he is through dumping, is back up about five feet and swing out and leave. The biggest thing I want to see to that thing blocked so people can't see it from Five Mile with the wall and with some landscaping. Mr. Kattoo: I think the idea can definitely work. We just have to talk to the waste service and just say where it can be placed that you can service these dumpsters, maybe 5 or 10 feet in either direction, but it would be placed where you are talking about. Mr. Alanskas: I would more than glad to come out there sometime and show you what I am actually referring to. I think the Planning staff can work that out with you but I think that is the spot to have it would be on that corner instead of on the west side of the building. Right now in your old parking, you are showing two parking spots and when I was there today a car was parked there and when it is parked like that, you can't even get through this open area to get through there. Mr. Kattoo: That is why we want to lay out a new parking layout. Mr. Alanskas: That shouldn't even be there. Mr. Kattoo: Right. Mr. Alanskas: So that you have a drive through there. All right, thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. McCann: This is a very tough situation with your dumpster in here, I agree. I kind of like the revised spot because you do have the wall in the back and it takes the garbage truck away from trying to cut through a parking lot especially when there are pedestrians, children and vehicles that are going to be using it at the same time the truck is going to be in there. There is no good spot without bringing it right up to Five Mile and that requires the truck to drive around in the parking lot. Is it possible to bring that dumpster even farther forward. You've got the location at the northwest corner of the building. There is just no way of reversing the directions? Mr. Kattoo: Is there any way of reversing the dumpster itself? Mr. McCann: Is it southwest? By changing the direction, how many spaces would you lose there? Mr. Kattoo: Roughly, about three spaces or four. The truck would have to come to the right as you see the parking spots on the right side. They would have to be eliminated so that they can line up. Mr. McCann: Actually if you removed the two handicapped spaces you could have it in there, angled. Mr. Kattoo: There is a tree that is currently there now. I guess that would have to be lost in order to angle it. 17263 Mr. McCann: If you angled it, it would go right in front of the tree, wouldn't it? Mr. Kattoo: You are saying placing the dumpster in front of the tree, the opening facing north, is that correct? Mr. McCann: Yes. Mr. Kattoo: If we were to place it there, then we would lose about four parking spaces easy. Basically the parking to the right of the center would be lost. Mr. McCann: No. If you angled it out towards the Mr. Kattoo: If we angled it out towards to the northeast then the two handicapped parking would be lost and possibly the one on the right side. Mr. McCann: Actually, you would only lose the two. By bringing it over, by losing the one you bring it over a little bit to the left. If you take the two handicapped out, and you've got it right there you would be able to move the one handicapped spot over one so that you wouldn't lose any more parking there. You could use the excess from that one parking to do it. I am trying to get you out of here tonight. I kind of like the new plan. You are going to have three pickups a week, that is not too intrusive on the neighbors. It takes about four or five minutes to come and pickup the dumpster and get out of their. I am trying to compromise with the other points of view. It is valid. We try to protect the neighbors as much as possible but I don't want it out on Five Mile either. I think maybe if we tried to angle it in we could get you through this tonight and get you on your way so you could proceed with this project. Mr. Janviriya: I think one compromise could be to keep the proposed layout of the dumpster but on the southwest corner of the lot we could add a greenbelt to camouflage that area. I think that would be a valid compromise. Mr. McCann: How much greenbelt could you put in there? Mr. Janviriya: If we did a greenbelt, say 10 feet by 3 feet wide. Mr. Kattoo: And add a row of maybe evergreens, some hedges for visual blockage. Mr. Janviriya: I think it would be appealing to the residents and I think it would be a complete compromise between.... Mr. McCann: You would have to go more than 10 feet. You would have to go at least 20 feet just to keep the congruity of people driving back and forth. Mr. Taormina: Just a quick question to the petitioner. Is the enclosure that is shown on the print that you provided us larger than what is actually needed? Mr. Kattoo: Yes. 17264 Mr. Taormina: Your latest petition would be to provide a landscaping belt along the sidewalk? r.. Mr. Kattoo: Right. Mr. Taormina: That would run from the edge of the dumpster back towards the alley in order to screen that from view. Mr. McCann: How many feet wide would that be? Mr. Kattoo: Ultimately if we can go with one dumpster it would probably be 10 feet wide. If we have to go with two dumpsters, I would say 15 feet wide. It is currently at 20 feet by 12. Mr. McCann: What, the dumpster? Mr. Kattoo: The dumpster in this picture is 20 ft. x 12 ft. Mr. McCann: O.K. But bottom line is you can go to five pickups a week which is going to service your center on a five yard dumpster or 10 yard dumpster. Mr. Kattoo: Right now it is once or twice a week. Mr. Alanskas: That's because there is no one there. ,,;,` Mr. McCann: So you could have a 10 foot wide, or say even an 8 foot wide greenbelt with shrubbery, small berm going along the west wall. You say you also could put how wide of a berm along the south wall? How much could he get in there, Mark? Mr. Kattoo: The south wall? Mr. McCann: Yes. The wall going along the south property line. Mr. Kattoo: We have a 15 foot alley there. That would make it very tight. Mr. Taormina: I'm not sure that they would be willing to landscape that. I think that is paved right now to the edge and there is just enough room probably for a car. One of the initial alternatives that we discussed, was having the tenants have smaller containers along the back alley but apparently that is something that they are not willing to go with and so that just indicates just how narrow it is back there. Mr. McCann: It is also hard to maintain and keep it clean when you do that. Mr. Kattoo: When it comes to snow removal and things like that it is going to be very difficult. Another thought in mind, and I understand that this is a shot in the dark, but if we want to create a bigger wall or evergreens of whatever it may be, can it be done on the west side of the sidewalk, which would be somewhat on `" City property, but it is a greenbelt. 17265 Mr. McCann: No. We want a separation between the sidewalk and the dumpster. That is what I am saying, if you went 50 feet there, the building is 50 feet deep so it would appear to me that your greenbelt should be 50 feet by let's say if you need 10 feet for your dumpster pad, 10'X 50' along that edge would that give everybody a little bit of comfort as far as protecting that end? Mr. Alanskas: Would a truck be able to get in there though? Mr. Kattoo: That is something I would have to ask... Mr. McCann: 10 feet? Mr. Alanskas: That is awful tight. Because where he is turning that is a short turn. Mr. McCann: You would have to bank it. Mr. Kattoo: It wouldn't have to go back as far or recede as far. Mr. McCann: Well you could bank it in starting coming out so that the turn and even if it is an 8 foot,twelve foot is plenty to get a truck through. Mr. Alanskas: Because then he has to back up. Mr. Kattoo: What do you mean by "bank it"? You mean angle it to the south? r.. Mr. McCann: The entrance drive there. Mr. Kattoo: I asked the service company about that. They said they would like, maybe on the approach which is the approach is on an angle and the truck will be on an angle. I have been back and forth with Mark and the waste removal service trying to find out the best solution and ask the questions every way possible and that solution we thought of at one time and because the truck would not be even they would not be able to service canisters properly. Mr. McCann: But if there were only one canister.... Mr. Kattoo: If it is angled, it would have to be ... Mr. McCann: No, not angled. I am talking about if you are coming here. If you have 8 feet here, can the truck come around to pickup. You will have a 12 feet drive to pick up the garbage. Mr. Kattoo: I think that would be possible but I'm not the driver so I would have to find out. Mr. Alanskas: Then he has to back up? Mr. McCann: He would have to back around,they should all have TV cameras in the back of `'•- the truck. I represent a waste hauler so I am very familiar with some of the problems they have. 17266 Mr. Piercecchi: Doesn't it seem like to would be prudent here, some people have ideas and we 811111I,. have a good mixture here that we take care of this particular area, this petition, and leave the dumpster question that they can return and work with our staff and us on it and come up with the most logical and effective way to do it rather than hash out four or five different schemes here? Mr. McCann: Should we pass on the building and send that on and hold off on the dumpster? Mr. Taormina: It would be a call back item. You would have to bring it back at sometime to review the final design if that is what you desire. It is not an easy solution. Mr. McCann: The parking lot is the only problem and that is going to be one of the last things you do. Mr. Kattoo: We have to do it after the renovations so that we don't damage the re-striping. Mr. Alanskas: Did we discuss about the colors of the brick? Mr. Taormina: Maybe along those thoughts, we could have another site evaluation with the petitioner and a couple of the commissioners and then bring this item back for further study. If we do come to an agreement, it could be redrawn in a fashion similar to this and brought back to a study session to see if you would want to bring it back to a regular meeting for review and consideration. Nie.. Mr. McCann: But we can go ahead and approve the site plan and the building elevations tonight and get you going. Mr. Kattoo: Yes, go ahead with the renovations and then make that a separate issue. Mr. McCann: That's fine. Is there a motion? Mr. Alanskas: Mr. Chairman, I have one more question. We didn't discuss in regards to the pillars, we would like to see those all brick instead of the dryvit. Mr. Janviriya: What we had proposed is called a pansamosh. I have used it in locations at Fourth and Main Street in an area of Royal Oak and it has held up more than necessary. Mr. Alanskas: We have found that when you use dryvit... Mr. Janviriya: This is a new grade. Mr. Alanskas: I know, it is a heavy duty grade. You are going to have a whole row of cars parking right in front of this whole facility. There is nothing here to stop them from hitting these pillars. �"' Mr. Janviriya: But there is also a four foot sidewalk. This is flush to the wall. 17267 Mr. Alanskas: I understand that. Mr. Kattoo: There will be parking blocks to stop any cars from encroaching onto the sidewalk. Mr. Alanskas: I know what this is. I have seen this before. It has come before us quite a few times. Is there a problem having that all brick? Mr. Kattoo: To answer your question about cars that there is nothing to stop them in front of the walkway, there will be a row of parking blocks to stop any cars from intruding on to the walkway. Mr. Alanskas: We never have a problem approving dryvit when it is higher up on the building. When it is down at the bottom we find first of all, when snowplows drive by they throw salt over there, with the salt in the driveway. It just deteriorates pretty rapidly compared to brick. Mr. Kattoo: We have used this on many sites and it has held up very well over the years. Regarding the salt, we use calcium chloride along the walkway instead of the salt. If we were to move forward and brick this, the cost to brick it would have to put in a foundation to support the brick. It may put us over budget and it would not be feasible on the cost. Mr. Janviriya: Also not only that but it is going to pull away from the look of our design. Mr. Alanskas: You could still have your diamonds in there. Mr. Janviriya: The diamonds, but the materials are not going to tie in visually from the ground up. Mr. Alanskas: Oh, from the top up. Mr. Janviriya: The reason is why it is, is vertically those columns line up with the columns that support those peaks and if I change the material, then it is going to throw off the entire look and the feeling I was going for. Mr. Alanskas: All right, thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. McCann: The columns are decorative but is there anyway you could go to a.... Mr. Janviriya: One concept we had was to build on then use a concrete board sub-straight then use plastering that we would use for the E.F.I.S. to get the color and the look and I could still the dimension I am going for. Mr. Alanskas: Come again, you would be using what? Mr. Janviriya: Concrete and 1/2" concrete boards. Mr. Alanskas: Then put dryvit over the concrete? 17268 Mr. Janviriya: Not dryvit. We are not going to put the foam,just the plaster itself Mr. Alanskas: Oh, the plaster itself? Mr. Janviriya: Right. It will be solid as concrete but it will have my color that I am looking for. Mr. Piercecchi: Just on the bottom? Mr. Janviriya: Right. Just on the bottom. Mr. Piercecchi: How high will it go? Mr. Janviriya: I believe we have a 9 foot soffit. Mr. Piercecchi: So you are going to make it a masonry column then. You just didn't want to use the brick, is that correct? Mr. Janviriya: Right. Mr. Piercecchi: I don't understand why you can't put the brick on the sidewalk. Mr. Janviriya: Because it is not going to visually tie in. New Mr. McCann: Besides that you've got to have a foundation. Mr. Piercecchi: You see, it has been our experience, that is why we are questioning this material, that anytime there are carts or anything like that, bicycles or things like that, they bang into and that stuff does chip. It is susceptible to chipping. Brick, if it chips, you never see it. It still carries its beauty. Mr. Janviriya: I understand. My E.I.F.S. man and I came up with what we think work real well. It will be solid and it will tie the design visually together. Mr. McCann: Can you go with the concrete, Dan? Mr. Piercecchi: Yes, I can go with the concrete. Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions from the Commissioners, I will go to the audience. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one, a motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. LaPine, and unanimously approved, it was #11-188-99 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 99-10-8-26 by Van Born Plaza, on behalf of the Livonia Five Plaza, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the zoning ordinance in connection with a proposal to renovate the exterior 17269 building elevations of the commercial center located at 28423 Five Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 24 be approved subject to the following �.. conditions: 1) That the "Liv-5 Plaza Exterior Renovations" plans prepared by Paul Fritz Associates, dated October 13, 1999, are hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2) That the parking lot be resealed and double striped; 3) That the wall signs shown on the approved elevation plans are not approved with this petition; 4) That the existing pylon sign is not approved as part of the site plan; 5) That the location of the dumpster(s) is not approved as part of the site plan and shall be referred back to the Planning Commission for further study; and 6) That the material at the base of the decorative columns shall consist of either concrete or concrete board for added durability. Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion? Mr. Janviriya: We spoke with the Building Department and they had no problem with the pylon sign. In fact, I called to inquire about the refacing of that pylon sign and they had no problem with that. Mr. Alanskas: Just the top? Mr. Janviriya: Right. Mr. Alanskas: All right, we'll just have the pylon sign come back to us at a later date. Would that be correct Mark? Mr. Taormina: I guess that depends on the extent of the modifications to the sign. Mr. McCann: They can go ahead and reface unless we put it... Mr. Alanskas: The pole is fine but the top of it is all smashed in. Mr. Kattoo: It happened during that storm. Mr. Janviriya: One of the designs I was going to do was use elements of the design of the building and tie that into the pylon sign. Mr. McCann: Let's go ahead and that sign is not approved as part of the site plan. It is not `"" conforming and we will bring it back again. 17270 Mr. Kattoo: As a separate entity. Mr. Alanskas: The same as the dumpster. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution and we will be seeing more of you gentlemen. That concludes the Miscellaneous Site Plan portion of our agenda. We will now proceed with the Pending Item section of our agenda. These items have been discussed at length in prior meetings therefore, there will only be limited discussion tonight. Audience participation will require unanimous consent from the Commission. ITEM #4 PETITION 99-9-2-28 MODERN MOVING COMPANY Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 99-9-2-28 by Modern Moving Company (31465 Eight Mile Road) requesting waiver use approval to permit outdoor parking of moving company vehicles on property located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Merriman Road and Osmus Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 3. Mr. Piercecchi: I move that we remove this item from the table. On a motion by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by LaPine, and unanimously approved, it was �... #11-189-99 RESOLVED that, Petition 99-9-2-28 by Modern Moving Company requesting waiver use approval to permit outdoor parking of moving company vehicles on property located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Merriman Road and Osmus Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 3 be taken from the table. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Is there any new additional information, Mr. Taormina? Mr. Taormina: No, there are no additional items of correspondence pertaining to this petition. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Denis Rice, 17364 Maple Hill Drive, Northville. Gerry A. Bagazinski, as the petitioner's representative, and my business address is 32900 Five Mile Road, Livonia. Mr. McCann: Anything additional to tell us this evening? Mr. Bagazinski: There are a couple of items that were brought up at the public hearing that we have addressed at the site location. With respect to the report of the Building Inspector there was mention of the fact that there was some debris that was on the southeast corner of the property. This has been brought to the petitioner's ``r attention and my understanding is that the debris has been picked up and has been removed from the site. One of the other issues that has been brought up in 17271 addition to this was the concern over the barbed wire on the fence. I am under the understanding that the barbed wire has been removed. There is some barbed �.. wire on the western fence line and we believe that barbed wire is the neighbor's barbed wire and it is their fence line. That has not been removed. I think that the third additional item that has been brought to the petitioner's attention involved the parking lot, the barrier free parking and that the lot needed some sealing and being restriped. The petitioner recently acquired this property in June of this year and intends to make those improvements next year in the spring. Mr. McCann: Are there any questions? Mr. Alanskas: At our last meeting in which you were here, some of the neighbors had addressed a problem in regards to the use of loud speakers as early as three o'clock in the morning. Do you have those there? Mr. Rice: We have a loud speaker there, but the only person that would use that would be the secretaries and they don't get there until after 8:00. We are in the process of going to a wireless system for all drivers and we will have basically walkie/talkies to communicate. Mr. Alanskas: So the speakers will be taken down? Mr. Rice: Yes. Mr. Alanskas: All right. Thank you. Mr. McCann: You say the barbed wire is on the neighbor's fence. Which neighbor? Mr. Rice: On the western side. Mr. McCann: Do we know who owns that property? Mr. Taormina: No, we are not aware of the owner. Mr. Alanskas: Can you tell us who that is? Mr. Rice: It is property management. It is a multi-tenant unit building. Mr. McCann: Why would they have barbed wire? Mr. Rice: That part of the fence is their fence, it is not mine. Mr. McCann: How did you find that out? You are guessing it is their fence? You've only been there since June. Mr. Rice: I've owned the building since June. I was renting it for the previous year. The reason I know it is not mine because last year when the snow was removed by my snow contractor, he pushed that fence in and I had to repair it. 17272 Mr. McCann: They contacted you? Mr. Rice: The management company that owns that building. I had to repair the fence when the snow was pushed into it and bent the fence. Mr. Taormina: One quick question to the Chair, if I may, and that is whether the barbed wire overhangs one side of the fence or the other. Maybe that would be an indication of who owns it and whether or not this gentleman has the right to remove it. Mr. Bagazinski: I went out to examine the parcel, the barbed wire leans to the western edge. Mr. McCann: Any other questions? Hearing none, a motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Alanskas, and unanimously approved, it was #11-190-99 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on October 19, 1999 on Petition 99-9-2-28 by Modern Moving Company (31465 Eight Mile Road) requesting waiver use approval to permit outdoor parking of moving company vehicles on property located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Merriman Road and Osmus Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 3, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 99-9-2-28 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the total number of moving company trucks to be parked or stored on the subject site at any one time shall not exceed 20 trucks; 2) That this waiver use approval shall only apply to the portion of the subject property zoned M-1, which is further defined as the northerly 300 feet and more generally identified as the portion of the site lying north of the rear wall of the existing building; 3) That moving company trucks shall not be parked or stored any closer to the Eight Mile Road right-of-way line than the offset in the westerly building wall marking the south end of the office portion of the building, nor shall any moving company trucks be parked any further south than the rear wall of the existing building; 4) That other than routine maintenance,there shall be no on site repair of trucks and other vehicles; 5) That all the existing barbed wire on top of the chain link fence enclosing the subject property shall be removed; 6) That the petitioner shall correct to the Inspection's satisfaction the following site deficiencies as outlined in their correspondence dated September 29, 1999: 17273 - That the debris in the southeast corner of the site shall be cleaned r... up; That parking areas shall be repaired, resealed and double striped and barrier free parking shall be provided in conformance to the Michigan Barrier Free Rules as to size and location; and 7) That all of the conditions imposed on this site in connection with Zoning Board of Appeals Case No. 8609-157 shall be adhered to; and 8) That the use of the existing loud speakers, which presently is a nuisance to the residential neighborhood to the south, shall be discontinued. for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Sections 16.11 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2) That the 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. McCann: Is there any discussion? Mr. Bagazinski: I have a point of clarification here. I think that our petition was for the northerly 350 feet of that particular lot and I would like to clarify that. All of that has been approved for an M-1 use. Mr. LaPine: No it has not. We can't use it for an M-1 use. Isn't that right? Mr. Taormina: Although the Zoning Board of Appeals has granted the additional 50 feet as it applies to that northerly portion of the RUF zoned property, it is at this Commission's determination this evening as to whether or not the waiver use should apply to that portion of the property and the ordinance does provide for their review of this issue and determination as to whether or not it is appropriate to continue the use over all or a portion of the site. Mr. McCann: I think we have pretty much limited 300 feet all the way up and down as our standard as to what we are trying to use as Commercial or M-1 along that line. We have set that standard over the past number of years for all new petitions. The ZBA can allow it, the site plan is what is controlling. 17274 Mr. Bagazinski: Just as a point of clarification and what you are suggesting, and I guess as I read Mr. Taormina's memorandum there, that to incorporate the rear 50 feet 'oar would be a Zoning Board of Appeals matter? Mr. McCann: No. You can't do it. Mr. Taormina: The Planning Commission makes the determination on the waiver use. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Alanskas: Mark what is it in regards with the court problems and the costs? Mr. Taormina: In fact that was going to be considered as a separate resolution if the Commission approves that. Mr. McCann: Mr. Alanskas, did you want to make a motion? On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, and seconded by Mr. LaPine, and unanimously approved, it was #11-191-99 RESOLVED that, in the matter of Petition 99-9-2-28 by Modern Moving Company (31465 Eight Mile Road) requesting waiver use approval to permit outdoor parking of moving company vehicles on property located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Merriman and Osmus Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 3, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the City seek reimbursement from the petitioner for all costs relating to the court proceedings against the petitioner in connection with his continued unauthorized use of the subject property and that such costs be paid prior to approval of the waiver use by the City Council. Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion? That is a separate resolution just for us to make a recommendation to the Council and it has no binding affect. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ITEM #5 PETITION 99-9-8-23 CANVASSER BROTHERS (Buckingham Plaza) Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 99-9-8-23 by Canvasser Brothers, on behalf of the Buckingham Plaza, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the zoning ordinance in connection with a proposal to renovate a portion of the exterior building elevation of the shopping center located at 27462 Schoolcraft Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 24. Mr. Piercecchi: I will make a motion to remove from the table On a motion by Mr. Piercecchi, approved by Mr. Alanskas, and unanimously approved, it was 17275 #11-192-99 RESOLVED that, Petition 99-9-8-23 by Canvasser Brothers, on behalf of the Buckingham Plaza, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the zoning ordinance in connection with a proposal to renovate a portion of the exterior building elevation of the shopping center located at 27462 Schoolcraft Road in the southeast 1/4 of Section 24 be taken from the table. Mr. McCann: Mark, is there any new information? Mr. Taormina: At this time there are no new items of correspondence related to this item. Robert Canvasser and my brother Bryon Canvasser, 30200 Telegraph, Bingham Farms, Michigan. Mr. McCann: Tell us where we are at this evening. What is new and exciting? R. Canvasser: We had a study meeting with you folks and you asked if we would consider having the automobile club building painted. At that meeting we said we would have to talk to our partners, which we have, and it has been agreed that we certainly will paint that building in the front, the side and the rear. We'll paint the building entirely. You asked that question. Also Mark has contacted me and asked us if we could do something cosmetically to enhance it somewhat. Our response to Mark was that I would go back to our architects and see if we might be able to raze it somewhat, I don't want to say how much, I'm not a designer. Perhaps we could put a couple of peaks on it and perhaps some color into it to enhance it somewhat. I said that to Mark and in all honesty, gentlemen, this is the third meeting we have attended and I said it to Mark asking if it might be approved with what I just said to you folks that we would have the drawings done and bring them to Scott. That Scott could then show them to you. The meetings are, I'm not 40 years old like these other young people and I'll tell you, I'm 75 and these meetings are just too difficult on me and very very frankly, if that is acceptable to you, we would proceed on that understanding as far as the painting, that goes without saying. That certainly will be done. Mr. McCann: See all these meetings you go to and all this work you do has kept you both very young. You both look like 45 years old. Mark do you have a suggestion as to how to handle this? Mr. Taormina: Yes. I guess if the Planning Commission agrees, we could handle it in a fashion similar to the item we just discussed involving the Livonia 5 Plaza. That is any changes to the elevations would be brought forward for the Council's consideration and then the Council may seek some report back from the Planning Commission relative to whether or not that meets your concerns on this. I think that might be the appropriate way to deal with this. If you want to move forward and if we want to bring it back to you for a report prior to the final review and consideration by the Council, I think at a minimum they would look for that review. 17276 Mr. Piercecchi: Are you saying Mark that we will not see these potentially proposed modifications to beautify this facility. That is will go to the Council before we °v... get a look at it? Mr. Taormina: What I am saying is that you would have an opportunity to review the plans and report back to the Council prior to them taking fmal action. Mr. Piercecchi: I am very concerned about the aesthetics of that thing. I took advantage of you when you stated where one of your sites was. In fact I went to two of them but one of them had the parking lot was quite full so I couldn't photograph it. But the one on 12 Mile and Dequindre, the parking lot was empty. R. Canvasser: Oh, I'm sorry to hear that. I hope you were there at midnight. Mr. Piercecchi: I took these photographs and we had them enlarged for the Commission. When I looked at this, I felt very sad that you would put walkways and peaks and it is a rather nice looking facility. At the onset, for us, you really wanted to give us a self-storage type of look, straight across, no personality, really out of character with the times now. You say the one we approved. That was a beautiful package. I don't know about these costs but you know you've got to spend money to make money too in this world. You claim that you can only get X number of dollars but I don't want to get into that. But this facility here is a pleasant looking facility and I don't think that we in Livonia deserve anything less. B. Canvasser: What you see is what was built some 40 years ago and all we did was put dryvit on the face of what was built originally. R. Canvasser: That overhang is not a new overhang. That overhang was there when it was an AFD, when that center was originally built. Mr. Piercecchi: An overhang would do a lot for your facility. That'll keep people out of the rain and people can shop. I don't know what they cost but I think you are trying, you know I quite agree with your effort and I don't want to be disrespectful in this matter sir, it is like a window. You've got grime on both sides of the window. If you wash one side of the window, you do reduce the total amount of grime but you still have a dirty window. O.K.? I think that is the tendency that we are trying to avoid here. If you are going to do this thing, I think you better try to do it great. Try to do it the best you can all in one shot. This looks good and I'm glad to hear you are thinking about peaks. There can be other things too, you know,towers, something to give it personality. R. Canvasser: As you see on that one there, the architect did put a little bit more schmaltz in it perhaps and I would like to do that here. As far as putting an overhang on, an overhang is out of the question. Just today I renewed the lease with one of the tenants there, Jack's Produce. Not that that makes any difference to you folks there. I haven't had a raise from Jack's Produce since 1996. 17277 Mr. Piercecchi: We have been through this before sir. We understand. You beat it to death on how little you get here and how much you get there. I know you are a nice r.,, person because I happen to be in the rental areas which goes perpendicular to the lot and they said you people were really nice people. So I don't even question that you are not nice people. The point is we want the best we can get for Livonia and your original plan certainly was just a lick and a promise. R. Canvasser: What I suggested to Mark and what I am saying to you is that this is an upgrade of what we talked about at the study session and what we talked about when we came in here the first time and I don't know what more we are offer you. It is very difficult to take an old building and make it into a young building. The building there is older than some of the people in the audience. We are trying to do what we can. Mr. Piercecchi: I realize that you have a certain amount of problems, for instance the southwest wing. B. Canvasser: That is by Frank's Nursery. Mr. Piercecchi: That is about 80% isn't going to be touched. About 80%of that whole wing is going to be left alone. I don't know how you are going to blend that in but it is important that you do. It seems to me that that billiard place is much taller, correct? ,Now B. Canvasser: Yes it is. Mr. Piercecchi: O.K. There is where some of the things sitting on top may help balance that off but I am pleased that you are willing to make some exterior modifications to try and give it a little more personality and to give it a little more up to date look. Mr. LaPine: I am not happy with what these gentlemen are doing and I understand everything Dan says but we've got two choices here. We either approve what we can get or we deny it and they don't do anything and the center continues to get worse. I would rather have half a loaf of bread than no bread at all. I'm not happy. I wish he would go in there and spend 2 million dollars and renovate the whole operation but from what he told us, that isn't going to happen. If we deny him, what have we gained? Nothing. Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions, a motion is in order. Mr. LaPine: Mark, do you think we can work something out here that we can get better than what they originally showed us? He talks about he only wants to spend $50,000 or$60,000 and he says that is his maximum he mentioned to us. I don't know how much more he can do beyond what he showed us unless he is willing to spend some extra money. Mr. Taormina: Well clearly the improvements to the plan would have to be cost effective to the point where they don't jeopardize the project or he begins to take something away on some other feature. I think that it is important that we do provide some 17278 limited direction to the petitioner this evening as to what the expectations are possibly with making these improvements whether it is in the form of offsetting peaks or an increase in the height of the parapet or possibly the addition of peaks or a cornice of some sort or a combination of both or just accent bands. Whatever it might be, a combination of those that he could use to go back to his architect and then present revised plans. Mr. LaPine: If that is the point, then I have to agree with Dan on this point. I don't want to pass it on to Council until we see them and we are satisfied. Would it be the thing to do here is to table it again? Let them go back to their architect and with whatever input you can give them and they can come back with another set of plans and show us that they are trying to give us something more than what they've got. Would that be acceptable to everybody? Mr. Piercecchi: It is to me. Mr. Alanskas: You are not on a time restraint, are you? R. Canvasser: No. The work won't be done until next year anyway. Mr. Alanskas: I, as one Commissioner, don't like approving something and saying well we may do this or we may do that. I would rather, like Mr. LaPine says, table it and see what else you can do and bring it back to us and then get it going. R. Canvasser: Let me add one thing. First of all, what Mr. LaPine said, $50,000 or $60,000, that figure is not right. That is for the dryvit. We are going to spend another $50,000 on signs. Mr. Alanskas: We're not talking about signage. R. Canvasser: No, we are talking about putting individual lettered signs on there. It is not that we are only spending $50,000 or $60,000 there, we are spending considerably over $100,000. That is item number one. Item number two, at the study meeting, I was asked, which I responded to, it was only today that I made the additional offer to Mark. Perhaps I shouldn't have made the offer to Mark. Mr. Alanskas: I understand what you are saying but I would rather, like Mr. LaPine, table this and have you go back and see what you really want to do with it and then bring it back to us in that way so we know exactly what we are getting, whether you want to put one peak on or two. I would rather see it in writing and see a picture of what you are going to do. To vote on something that is not specific, I as one Commissioner, can't do that. R. Canvasser: I did offer to Mark that we would do what we could do. I would take it to Scott and you are certainly welcome to see them at that time rather than come back to another meeting. `+er Mr. Alanskas: Being that you are not on a time restraint.... 17279 R. Canvasser: I am on a physical restrain, I will be very frank with you gentlemen. r„/ Mr. Alanskas: I understand that but you have to understand our view point also. I hate to vote on something that I don't know what I am voting on. Mr. McCann: If we do get through this, and we get a revised plan and we are satisfied with it, we can waive your presence at the hearing. If you've got something the Commissioners, I think right now the only thing we've got is the AAA being painted, if we could just get some change in elevations on the buildings, maybe as Mark says, a little bit of combinations, we'll just waive your presence. Obviously we enjoy your company and you are welcome back every time, but we agree with you, it is very exhausting to sit through all these meetings and sit through all this, so if you could get your architect to add something, change the elevation a little bit to give it a little more distinctive look. Send it over, we'll take a look at it on the study. If it is fine, we will put it on the next regular meeting to approve it and you won't have to appear back. Is that fair? R. Canvasser: That is fair. That is fine. Mr. Piercecchi: There is only one other thing, Mr. Chairman, the tabling motion wanted also a schedule of when improvements would be completed. Just some kind of a time line so that we would know that the service drive behind the building is going to be looked up. You can set up your time line. We just want a time line so we know that it is in the mill. Can we have that? r... R. Canvasser: It would all be done certainly next spring. B. Canvasser: What about the alley? R. Canvasser: What are we talking about here? Let's see if we have a clear understanding of what we are talking about the alley. Mr. Piercecchi: Everything. Mr. McCann: Just tell us when things will be done. R. Canvasser: If you are talking about patching and repairing, I have no objection to that. I want it clearly understood. Mr. Piercecchi: We just want a time line. Mr. McCann: Does he need a surface coat on that, Mark? Mr. Taormina: Right now I don't know if that would do much for very long. There are some sections that appear to be failing. Some areas are worse than others that in the long term are going to require replacement altogether. It looks like they have already done patching over the years especially around the manhole structures. '"' I don't know how the drainage is working back there now but that would probably be the one factor.... 17280 Mr. McCann: So you are going to have to replace it within a period of time so give us a patch — and repair date and then a replacement date. Is that fair? R. Canvasser: A patch and repair? I don't know what I can say about this. Mr. McCann: That is going to fix the pot holes and get you from .... Mr. Alanskas: So you won't lose any cars as they drive by. R. Canvasser: They are not losing any cars. Mr. McCann: All right. Then just get us something where they will go through, and I don't know if they have to chop it up or whether they put on a seal coat and then they put a new layer right over it. R. Canvasser: It is a concrete alley. It's not a matter of seal coat. What has ended up happening, as Byron explained to you at our first meeting, there has been a number of water main breaks in there so therefore the concrete is in pretty bad shape. I don't deny that. It is displaced. You can't pave over it because it telescopes immediately right through. It can be patched with asphalt in certain areas. We were in the alley today, Byron and I checked it out today very carefully. We did find two catch basins that happened to under the triple net lease of Frank's Nursery and down at the Frank's Nursery area and Frank's Nursery was notified today to get those catch basins repaired. B. Canvasser: And they promised to do it. Mr. McCann: I'm going to cut you off. We've got to move on here tonight. There is a list that the Planning Director has of what has to be done. I am going to give you a copy of that and you are going to provide us with a time line with when those things can be done. You are also going to get the plans to him so that we can look over to kind of get some changes in the elevations and get back with us. Mr. Alanskas: We should make a motion to table then? Mr. McCann: Let's table it to the December 14, 1999 meeting. On a motion by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Alanskas, and unanimously approved, it was #11-193-99 RESOLVED that,the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to table Petition 99-9-8-23 by Canvasser Brothers, on behalf of the Buckingham Plaza, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the zoning ordinance in connection with a proposal to renovate a portion of the exterior building elevation of the shopping center located at 27462 Schoolcraft Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 24 to December 14, 1999. Mr. Alanskas: We are trying to work with you. 17281 R. Canvasser: I appreciate it. ,,r„ Mr. McCann: We appreciate your cooperation. We understand. It is for the benefit for both of us, the City and you. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ITEM #6 PETITION 99-7-GB-1 DR. JAMES A. MARCOUX Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 99-7-GB-1 by Dr. James A. Marcoux, on behalf of Marcoux Chiropractic, requesting approval to substitute a greenbelt for the protective wall as outlined in Section 18.45 of the zoning ordinance for property located at 15825 Middlebelt Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14. Mr. Piercecchi: I make a motion to remove from the table. On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. LaPine, and unanimously approved, it was #11-194-99 RESOLVED that, Petition 99-7-GB-1 by Dr. James A. Marcoux, on behalf of Marcoux Chiropractic, requesting approval to substitute a greenbelt for the protective wall as outlined in Section 18.45 of the zoning ordinance for property located at 15825 Middlebelt Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14 be taken from the table. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Dr. James A. Marcoux, 19909 St. Francis, Livonia. Pm not real sure what all this is about. I would like keep to the greenbelt that I have had for years since I have been there. We have a greenbelt in back of the office at the end of the parking lot. The only thing that has changed in the last year has been that they have eliminated the driveway that the old age home had and they have blocked it off so that now there is just a house in back of me. So there is actually less traffic. I think a greenbelt is attractive. It adds just a breath of air to that area. Recently we went ahead and got a couple of truck loads of briars and whatever we could pull out of there and we are just in the process of doing this in the last couple of weeks. Like I said, we got about two truck loads and I was informed that I could call the City and hopefully I could get them to haul it out of there because it is not something that you can bag. It is too much. That is where I stand. If we could get this continued instead of having, I guess what has taken place, if I understand it right, is that we have had to bring this up every so many years to keep the greenbelt there. It's been there since the building was built and it looks good. It's apropos. It serves the job for me. There is no real traffic or commotion back in there and I think it is good for the City and I think it's good for myself and I think it is good for the people around me. Mr. Alanskas: When you got a variance from the ZBA how many years did they give you for renewal? 17282 Dr. Marcoux: I really don't know. It has been so long, I can't remember. Mr. Alanskas: Do you recall when you when before the ZBA for a variance? Dr. Marcoux: It's got to be past 10 years. I think this is the first time I can really remember but the last eight years have been a tizzy for me. Mr. Alanskas: The reason I ask is because sometimes they give three years, sometime they give five. Sometimes they give seven years and I just wondered. Dr. Marcoux: It must have been beyond seven because I don't recall one in the last, unless you gentlemen have something that I could review, because I don't recall coming for a variance for years. Mr. Alanskas: O.K. Mr. LaPine: I was out there originally when you were suppose to come before us and you didn't show up. The landscaping around your building, it just seems like it is running wild. Have you done anything to do? Dr. Marcoux: Yes, we have. I was just making a remark Bill. I have been limited on funds. I have gone through a bloodbath divorce and I wasn't expecting it. So I have been out there myself and a couple of friends and we did, we started in the spring of the year. We chopped down a whole bunch of stuff and got things roughed in order and again just this last couple of weeks, I was saying, we had a mass push, I had two or three friends out there helping me for the last week and have been hauling stuff away. We've had some stuff dumped on us and I don't know where it came from but I took care of it. If you were to go out there tonight or tomorrow you will see that it has been cleaned up considerably, especially on the south side of the whole property line all the way from front to back. Mr. LaPine: I am talking about along the building. Back of the building, where it is all natural growth, I have no problem with that because that is all wild growth. Around your building, up against your building, it just looks like it needs to have something done. Dr. Marcoux: We have raked and cut and taken all of the shrubs that were getting too tall, we have cut them back. Mr. LaPine: I'll check it out. That was my only concern. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Piercecchi: Sir, I am just concerned, right now, with the greenbelt that is going to be on the west part of your building. When I saw the site it really looked like it needed a tremendous amount of maintenance. It really looked terrible. I understand now from you are saying, and I haven't been back since for about 10 days now, are you planning on adding anything additional in there? I think if you clean out all of the trash, you aren't going to have anything there. 17283 Dr. Marcoux: We cleaned out a lot of stuff and just the normal green, there is a lot of wild *g.r raspberries that grow in there and when it is green in the spring and summer, it looks really nice and they'll come back in the spring of the year again and just the trees and bushes that naturally occurring in nature there,they look nice. Yes, it was a mess and I'll be the first one to admit to that and I have put a massive push on getting that done. I've been in court with a divorce over 200 years in the last seven years. Mr. McCann: Sir, I understand, but what we are dealing with tonight is what we are going to get in the future. Dr. Marcoux: I've dealt with a big push on it in the spring of this year. We have painted the trim on the building. We put some new lights up. We've done the cleaning up of the yard part of itself. Mr. Piercecchi: We are dealing with only the greenbelt. Dr. Marcoux: We've got that considerably cleaned up and what we need now is to have a couple of pickups and I think we will be looking pretty darn good. Mr. Piercecchi: I personally don't have a problem with the greenbelt. In fact there is one north of you that ties into that one, right? Dr. Marcoux: Right. Mr. Piercecchi: That one is sparse too and there is a lot of vacant area in there. It is unfortunate that you people don't put in pine trees in because you are abutting residential property. Dr. Marcoux: I am abutting a parking lot in back of me that goes on into a church and then beyond that Mr. Piercecchi: What is the name of that place there next to you? Dr. Marcoux: On the south? Mr. Piercecchi: On the north. Mr. McCann: West of him is Woodhaven Dr. Marcoux: Woodhaven is the church and there is an apostolic church in back of me which is first on the west of me and a little bit north and then the parking lot is directly in back of me. The parking lot they have for the apostolic church. In deeper into the parking, whatever it is, a quarter of a mile there is an old age home back in there which is part of the Woodhaven. Mr. Piercecchi: By the way you talk, you want to make it nice so I would assume you will fortify what is there to with some additional plantings? 17284 Dr. Marcoux: Yes we have already done that. We have put some different flowers in, wild flowers and it is coming along. I do apologize for it being in the state it was in and if you were to go out there tomorrow, you see a mass improvement if you look at it. Mr. Alanskas: Forget 1998 and 1997, from 1995 to 1997, or from 1990 to 1997 do you have a maintenance schedule with a landscaping firm that takes care of your greenbelt before you had these financial problems? I mean, is it maintained? When you give someone a permanent greenbelt you can say right now you are taking a big push right now to get it cleaned up because you want tog et it approved. So if we approve a permanent greenbelt, and you say well now it's approved and I'll let it go for the next five years and let it stay the way it is. Dr. Marcoux: Bob, I'm not going to tell you, I have been basically cleaning it myself except for the people cutting my grass. They'll go ahead and blow it with the blowers and stuff like that. Mr. Alanskas: If you have been taking care of it yourself, what I am saying is it hasn't been taken care of property. Dr. Marcoux: No it hasn't. Mr. Alanskas: No just this year but the last five years. So it tells me that it has not been taken care of and maybe in the future it won't be taken care of again. *gm. Dr. Marcoux: I hope not. I know that is not what you want to hear but in 1991 all hell broke lose on me and I am starting to get my life back together. Mr. Alanskas: I just hope that you will take care of this. Dr. Marcoux: I will and I thank you fellows and your understanding. Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions, a motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mr. LaPine and approved, it was #11-195-99 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 99-7-GB-1 by Dr. James A. Marcoux, on behalf of Marcoux Chiropractic, requesting approval to substitute a greenbelt for the protective wall as outlined in Section 18.45 of the zoning ordinance for property located at 15825 Middlebelt Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14 subject to the following conditions: 1) That the natural landscaped greenbelt along the west property line, as shown on the plan received by the Planning Commission on July 9, 1999, shall be substituted for the protective wall required by Section 18.45 of ► the Zoning Ordinance; 17285 2) That this area shall remain in its present state and any changes to this area shall require Planning Commission review and approval. A roll call vote was taken with the following results: AYES: LaPine, Piercecchi, McCann NAYS: Alanskas ABSENT: Hale, Koons, Shane Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ITEM #7 PETITION 99-5-GB-2 PIERSON CENTER Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 99-5-GB-2 by Pierson Center requesting approval to substitute a greenbelt for the protective wall as outlined in Section 18.45 of the zoning ordinance for property located at 32625 Seven Mile road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10. Mr. Piercecchi: I make a motion to remove from the table. On a motion by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mr. LaPine, and unanimously approved, it was #11-196-99 RESOLVED that, Petition 99-5-GB-2 by Pierson Center requesting approval to substitute a greenbelt for the protective wall as outlined in Section 18.45 of the zoning ordinance for property located at 32625 Seven Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10 be taken from the table. Mr. Miller: I just want to point out that we have received a new site plan since the study meeting with the changes suggested by the Planning Commission. As you remember there were five trees planted here with a boulder and shrubbery along this area. The Planning Commission suggested a few more trees along this side of the parking lot and they now show an additional three trees along there. It is now more of a half circle around the parking lot. Dawn Taylor, 32625 W. Seven Mile. Mr. McCann: I see you've cleaned everything up. I walk my dog by your place every night. Ms. Taylor: They did a good job. I think they have done a good job for the last few years. They went through some difficulties, our landscaping company did. It is a big turn over job and I think these last two years they have done pretty good, a little late in the season. Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Hearing none, a motion is in order. ""' On a motion by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Alanskas, and unanimously approved, it was 17286 #11-197-99 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition r,.. 99-5-GB-2 by Pierson Center requesting approval to substitute a greenbelt for the protective wall as outlined in Section 18.45 of the zoning ordinance for property located at 32625 Seven Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10 subject to the following conditions: 1) That the landscaped greenbelt along the south property line, as shown on the landscape plan marked Sheet 1 received by the Planning Commission on November 5, 1999, shall be substituted for the protective wall required by Section 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance; 2) That any changes to this area shall require Planning Commission review and approval. Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion? Mr. Alanskas: Mark, I know the Council has concerns about these permanent waiver walls and I know we are looking possibly into changing our ordinance through the Law Department. What are we talking time wise to do that? Is it six months down the road, five months? Mr. Taormina: It has been referred to Committee and I believe it will be at that time that we will present on our recommended language amendment and that would be referred back to the Planning Commission for consideration. The change to the ordinance in effect will add teeth to the ordinance addressing the maintenance of the greenbelts and a statement if there is failure to maintain them that the City can then go back and require the installation of the protective wall. Mr. Alanskas: I know you have a landscape firm that takes care of your property. Ms. Taylor: Yes we do. Mr. Alanskas: All right, thank you very much Mark. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ITEM #8 MOTION TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING (Former Fire Station) Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary announced the next item on the agenda is Motion to hold a Public Hearing pursuant to Council Resolution#673-99 on the question of whether certain property located on the west side of Farmington Road north of Seven Mile Road (the former Fire Station No. 3 site and the adjacent residential parcel to the South), in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 4, should be rezoned from PL and RUF to a more appropriate zoning classification. Mr. McCann: This is for whether or not we should hold a hearing. This is the vacant fire station. Is there a motion to hold a public hearing on that? 17287 On a motion by Mr. Alanskas , seconded by Mr. LaPine, and unanimously approved, it was #11-198-99 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, and Council Resolution#673-99 does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether certain property located on the west side of Farmington Road north of Seven Mile Road (the former Fire Station No. 3 site and the adjacent residential parcel to the South), in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 4, should be rezoned from PL and RUF to OS. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ITEM #9 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Hale, Secretary, announced the last item on the agenda is the Approval of the Minutes of the 793rd Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on October 5, 1999. On a motion duly made by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimously approved, it was #11-199-99 RESOLVED that, the Minutes of the 793rd Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on October 5, 1999 are approved. r.. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted the 795th Regular Meeting held on November 9, 1999, was adjourned at 9:56 P.M. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION �` Dan Pierc cchi, Acting Secretary ATTEST: l �> ?Ames C. cCann, Chairman