Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1994-05-17 13423 MINUTE'S OF THE 684th REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF '44111► LIVONIA On Tuesday, May 17, 1994 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 684th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Jack EngPhretson, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. , with approximately 25 interested persons in the audience. Members present: Jack Engebretson R. Lee Morrow James C. McCann William LaPine Raymond W. Tent Robert Alanskas Members absent: Brenda Lee Fandrei Messrs. H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director, and Scott Miller, Planner I, were also present. Mr. Engebretson informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and decide the question. If a petition involves a waiver of use request and the request is denied, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City Council; otherwise the petition is terminated. The Planning Commission holds the only public hearing on a preliminary plat and/or a vacating petition. Planning Commission resolutions become effective seven days after the resolutions are adopted. The Planning Commission has reviewed the petitions upon their filing and have been furnished by the staff with approving and denying resolutions. The Commission may use them or not use them depending upon the outcome of the hearing tonight. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 94-4-1-9 by Jeff Winkler of Winkler Builders, Inc. requesting to rezone property located on the west side of Louise Avenue between Eight Mile Road and Morlock Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 2 from M-1 to R-2. Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Shane: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating they have no objections to this rezoning proposal. Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please come forward. Dave Reardon: I am from Statewide Realty, 27520 Five Mile Road, representing Jeff Winkler this evening. We plan to erect a 1260 square foot ranch, two baths, full basement. We bought the lot and 13424 we were told it was residential and found out it was not residential for what we needed it for. Mr. Morrow: Who told you it was zoned residential? Mr. Reardon: The seller thought it was zoned residential. Mr. Tent: The price range of the home you are going to build there, what range would it be in? Mr. Reardon: $104,900. Mr. Tent: If you are successful with the rezoning, you will start immediately? Mr. Reardon: I would hope so. Mr. Alanskas: Will the house be all brick? Mr. Reardon: Brick front and vinyl siding with attached two-car garage. There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 94-4-1-9 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimously approved, it was #5-91-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May - 17, 1994 by the City Planning Commission on Petition 94-4-1-9 by Jeff Winkler of Winkler Builders, Inc. requesting to rezone property located on the west side of Louise Avenue between Eight Mile Road and Morlock Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 2 from M-1 to R-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 94-4-1-9 be approved for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the adjacent and surrounding residential uses in the area. 2) That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Planning Commission's policy of removing industrial zoning from residential lots in this general area of the City. 3) That the proposed change of zoning will provide for the construction of a single family residence on the subject property consistent with the adjacent residential uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. 13425 Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-4-1-10 by Robert Jacobs of Buddy's Pizza proposing to rezone `..• property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Farmington and Stark Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33 from R-9 to P. Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Engebretson: The petitioner has asked that we table this particular item until further notice but because we have advertised the public hearing we want to ask Mr. Shane to read into the record any correspondence we have regarding this petition and then we will see if there is anyone wishing to speak for or against this petition. Mr. Shane: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating they have no objections to this rezoning proposal. Other than the letter that you just mentioned from Buddy's, that is the extent of our correspondence. Mr. Engehretson: The letter I am referring to is f um Robert Jacobs from Buddy's Pizza simply making the request I mentioned earlier. Mr. Tent: I was just looking over this petition. When it was initially approved it was for 140 seats. That was our initial approval for Buddy's Pizza. They wound up with 201 plus. Was there any reason? Can they do things like this? Can they tell us one thing and do another? I know we are going into another avenue but I see in this petition they are asking for 214 seats. My question is how can we confine them to the number that they requested and petitioned for? There are a few more up the line here where we are going for the same thing. We approve 106 and they come in with 205, etc. Is that legal? Mr. Shane: No it is not legal. It is obviously an enforcement problem. What they are really asking for is to rezone a parcel of property to P. They have in the restaurant now, as you indicated, 214 seats while they were approved for 150. That is an enforcement problem. It is not legal. Mr. Tent: So in other words when we put this in our re olution we are only hoping that it will be enforced. Is that correct? Mr. Shane: Sure. Mr. Tent: I just wanted to bring that out because I see a lot of that going on. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 94-4-1-10 closed. 13426 On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Alanskas and unanimously approved, it was #5-92-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 17, 1994 by the City Planning Commission on Petition 94-4-1-10 by *"' Robert Jacobs of Buddy's Pizza proposing to rezone property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Farmington and Stark Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33 from R-9 to P, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 94-4-1-10 until date uncertain. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-3-2-8 by Paul Bloom requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to an existing veterinary clinic located on the south side of Five Mile Road between Merriman Road and Bainbridge Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 23. Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Shane: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating they have no objections to the building addition proposal. We have also received letters from the Fire Marshal Nik.•' and Traffic Bureau stating they have no objections to this proposal. Tastly, we have received a letter from Bill MacDonald of the Inspection Department stating there is no objection to this proposal; the property and building are well maintained. They state further the Zoning Board of Appeals had previously waived the protective wall on the south lot line. The addition to the building alters the terms under which the variance was granted and will require a new rehearing, either before or during construction. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Shane, regarding Mr. MacDonald's letter and the reference to the necessity for a rehearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals for the waiver of the wall because of this change, wouldn't it be true that because of the new ordinance adopted in the relative recent past that we could waive that wall as part of this proposal, which would forego the necessity for any further Zoning Board action? Mr. Shane: That is correct and the staff is recommending that you do so. Mr. EngPhretson: I just wanted to get that on the record. Is the petitioner here? 13427 Paul Bloom, 31205 Five Mile Road: I want to add on a little more space. We have a third veterinarian now so we need another examining room and we need some office space for the doctors. tir.. Mr. Engebretson: Just a normal and orderly expansion of the business? Dr. Bloom: Exactly. Mr. Morrow: What would be the ratio of office to examination room? In other words, is it going to be principally office or examination room? Dr. Bloom: Actually the whole addition is going to be doctors' office and staff office. We will take the existing doctors' office and convert that into an exam room. Mr. Morrow: So it is primarily office space expansion and a little bit more for an examination room. Dr. Bloom: The expansion is completely office space. Mr. Morrow: That is what I was trying to determine. Mr. TaPine: First Dr. Bloom I want to commend you on a well-kept office. It is well kept. The addition is going to be built in the same manner as the existing building, material and everything, so it won't look like it is an expansion? Dr. Bloom: It is not supposed to look like an expansion. Mr. Alanskas: Dr. Bloom I see that you have had your trash stored internally and now you are going to have a dumpster outside. Is that because you will need the space? Dr. Bloom: Yes. Mr. Alanskas: There is no odor with the trash you have? Dr. Bloom: No. Mr. Tent: This is a follow-up to Mr. Alanskas' question. I was concerned about the external dumpster. This is a medical facility. You are going to have needles, etc. Dr. Bloom: No. Medical waste has to be handled under a different code by MIOSHA and also by the Michigan Department of Health. They have to be stored inside the building or under a locked outside dumpster so they will be stored inside. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. EngPhretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 94-3-2-8 closed. 13428 On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously approved, it was #5-93-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the `r.► City Planning Commission on May 17, 1994 on Petition 94-3-2-8 by Paul Bloom requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to an existing veterinary clinic located on the south side of Five Mile Road between Merriman Road and Bainbridge Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 23, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 94-3-2-8 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the Site Plan marked Sheet P-1 dated 03-28-94 prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. 2) That the building elevations shown on the Site Plan which are hereby approved shall be adhered to. 3) That the landscaping shown on the Site Plan which is hereby approved shall be adhered to and shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and shall thereafter be permanently maintained in a healthy condition. 4) That a greenbelt shall be substituted for the required protective wall on the south property line. for the following reasons: 1) That the subject use complies with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543. 2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. 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. Engebretson: Just for the record I would just like to add that regarding this issue relative to waiving the wall the reason is because of a veritable jungle that separates you from those residences in the back. It is not that there is just some growth back there but you can't see through it and it makes sense to do that. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 13429 Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-4-2-10 by Danilo Josifoski requesting waiver use approval to remodel an existing building in connection with a proposal to operate a full service restaurant and banquet hall on property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between Oporto Street `` and Ryan Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 14. Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Shane: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating the drainage for the parking lot should be outletted to the existing 15" public storm sewer located near the southwest corner of the existing parking lot within the credit union property. We have also received letters from the Fire Marshal's Office and the Traffic Bureau stating their departments have no objections to this proposal. Lastly, we have received a letter from the Ordinance Enforcement Division stating their office has no objections to this proposal; however, the following deficiencies were found: 1. A ground sign is not permitted on this property due to the setback of the building. 2. The roof mounted mechanical equipment is not screened from view on a portion of the east side of the building or the south. 3. There is no parking lot lighting whatsoever. 4. There are no storm drains anywhere in parking lot. 5. The westernmost driveway approach on 6 Mile Rd. is damaged and is in need of repair. 6. The existing landscaping is in poor condition and will require complete renovation. There are no underground sprinklers shown on the proposed landscape plan. 7. In lieu of itemizing all the problems, the `r•► building can be described as being in disrepair. 8. The asphalt areas on this site will require complete resurfacing. 9. In 1988 the Zoning Board of Appeals denied a request to continue the waiver of the protective wall required on the easterly and southerly lot lines. The wall was not built as the Zoning Board of Appeals required, the owner was taken to court for failing to comply, and the business went into bankruptcy soon after. The wall will have to be built or reappealed to the Zoning Board prior to the lusiness reopening. Mr. Engebretson: Is the petitioner here? My name is Danilo Josifoski. I live 37630 Plymouth Road, Livonia. Joe Philips, 921 Wing Street, Plymouth: I am the architect. The last letter that Mr. Shane has read, since then there have been substantial revisions to the drawing. At this point I don't know if there is any document available on the changes that have taken place but that would probably be a good place to begin. (Mr. Miller presented the new plan.) 13430 Mr. Miller: This is their revised site plan. They have included lighting and they have shown that on the site plan in various locations. There is a catch basin located to the rear. There are two of them. The landscaping has been increased to 10 feet along here and this is already conforming so this could `s. be used as greenbelt. Mr. Shane: I can maybe help out a little bit here. The ground sign which was shown on the previous plan has been removed because it is prohibited. There cannot be a ground sign when a building sits within 20 feet of a lot line. The rooftop units are now going to be screened in their entirety. The sprinkler system will be added to the landscaping. The landscaping has been increased so it now exceeds 15% of the site area, which is required. It is done partially, as Scott mentioned, by widening of the greenbelt along the east by some additional plant islands within the parking lot and the plant material has been increased by nearly double what you saw at the study meeting so it now exceeds 15%. The point was the greenbelt was rather sparse when you saw it before. It has now been increased considerably in terms of the materials that are proposed. As far as the parking lot is concerned it will be completely resurfaced. The driveways, where needed, will be completely repaved. Engineering is satisfied with the drainage because as long as they connect those catch basins to that 15" storm sewer that exists to the west, that will satisfy the requirement and their plans will be required to reflect that when they are submitted for building permit review. The only thing that they have not given us is a cut on the light fixtures but they have assured me that they will *411111. be ground-lighted type fixtures. Mr. Alanskas: To the petitioner, all the landscaping on the east side of the building hugging the building, that is all dead. Will that be replaced? Mr. Josifoski: All the dead is going to be replaced with similar plants. Mr. Alanskas: That entire area is completely dead on the east side and also towards the front. Mr. Josifoski: Right. On the east side we are going to put brand new landscaping there. Mr. Morrow: Mr. Chairman, I am assuming that the reference that Mr. MacDonald made to the protective wall is the same as the prior petition that if we deem it appropriate we can waive the wall. Mr. Shane: You are not waiving the wall, you are substituting a greenbelt. Mr. Morrow: That is what I meant, then the rehearing at the Zoning Board level would not be necessary. Mr. Shane: Correct, it would not be necessary. 13431 Mr. Tent: Mr. Josifoski, do you have any experience in the restaurant business? Mr. Josifoski: Yes, we operate a restaurant and business on the east side in `t.. Roseville. It is called Joey's Family Restaurant. We have been there for two years. I would like to mention when we bought that piece of property there the business was closed down and for two years we have done very good and almost have repaired the whole building. Mr. Tent: Will the menu be similar? Mr. Josifoski: We will be opening a family dining restaurant. It will be similar. Mr. Tent: Are you going to pursue a liquor license? Mr. Josifoski: Not at this point in time. Mr. Tent: Did you buy the property outright? Mr. Josifoski: We bought the property. Mr. Tent: As far as the architecture on the exterior of the building, are you going to just keep it as it is except to make any improvements to bring it up to condition. Mr. Josifoski: From the outside we will be cleaning the brick and on the backside we will be doing painting and opening the windows and `44111. we will putting on canopies so it will give it a new change. We are not doing a very big renovation on the outside due to the fact we have to do a big job inside the building. As you know, the way it is now it has two floors. We are going to try to level the whole building on the same level and do complete renovation on the inside. Mr. Tent: If you are successful with this proposal, how soon would you put the building up? Mr. Josifoski: As quickly as I can. Mr. Tent: So finances are no problem? Mr. Josifoski: No. Mr. LaPine: Sir, I guess I have a problem reopening that as a restaurant basically because it has been closed so many years. Over the years I have lived in Livonia, I have been here over 35 years, that has been a successful restaurant two times, one time Danny's Suburban Chop House and then when it was Vargo's. Back in those days we didn't have the competition for the restaurant business that we now have in Livonia. I am curious r.. 13432 because it is basically in a residential area and it is off the beaten path, it is on Six Mile Road where you don't get a lot of traffic going by there except for people living in the 'm► area, can you explain to me how you feel this is going to be a successful operation? How is it going to be different than competing with all the restaurant chains that we have here in Livonia? Mr. Josifoski: It will be a pleasure to answer that question. We have been in the restaurant business, as I mentioned before, for two years now and I know how to operate a restaurant business. First of all, we are a family and we work hard and if you work hard you can make it any place you go. Secondly, we don't worry about the residential area because if you maintain good service and good quality of food, the people are going to come. They don't just come around you, sometimes they drive ten miles. The third point is in that area there are about ten churches and once you start serving good food and you provide good service the people, due to the fact there are churches there, they will stop and then they will start telling friends and family members and they will be stopping by. We don't worry about that at all. If you want to know, on the east side we didn't put up one bit of advertisement. The best advertisement is by word of mouth. Mr. LaPine: To the architect, I haven't been in that building since it has been closed up but I understand it is in pretty bad condition. Is basically the inside going to be gutted and started f um `f.. scratch? The roof looks like it has to be completely replaced. All the mechanical equipment on the roof looks like it is rusted through. We are talking a considerable amount of money, I think, to renovate this building and I just wonder, it is not my money he is spending, it's his own, but is the building savable? Mr. Philips: The building, for all purposes, will be brand new. It will be stripped to the baring walls. Most of them are masonry. In the area Mr. Josifoski was talking about there are two floor levels. The one level is about 4 feet above the other one. That was the original building that was built and at some point the additions came down to grade. That is going to be entirely lowered down to grade so the entire restaurant is on one floor. The only area that will remain somewhat intact would be two of the banquet rooms, restroom areas and portions of the banquet room. The mechanical and electrical equipment for the entire building will be all brand new. Mr. LaPine: The banquet rooms will be a separate operation. Is that correct? Mr. Philips: That is correct. 13433 Mr. Alanskas: On the southeast corner you have four stairs going down. Is that to get into the basement? Mr. Josifoski: Yes. Mr. Alanskas: Is that going to be used? Mr. Josifoski: Once the second floor is leveled that will be covered so there will not be any stairs. Also, if the Commission would give me permission to mention something else. We have been in Livonia for three years and we have been doing a great job, in my opinion. We have a place west of Newburgh and Plymouth Road and to answer the question how are we going to do the job there and spend the money, we have been in the construction business for ourselves doing major repairs so we are not afraid to work. We know construction work and we know the food business. Mr. Engebretson: Would the architect want to add anything? Mr. Philips: One comment regarding the catch basins at the back of the site. Apparently at this point they haven't been inspected but if they in fact do not connect to that 15" main, it is anticipated that we would, in fact, do that. The light fixtures that were mentioned, we would definitely forward a sample of that. We would look for something similar to what you would as far as directing the light on site and away float the adjacent properties. I really was looking for a clarification on the screen wall. My understanding would be '4441, the landscaping that we are providing we would not, in fact, have to go for a variance. Mr. Alanskas: What color is the roof going to be? Mr. Philips: The roof is flat and the mansard portion of the existing roof is some sort of synthetic material that simulatis slate. That would not be changed. Mr. Alanskas: How about the sides of the building? Mr. Philips: On the sides of the building there is a combination of brick, stone and masonry. The brick and stone would be power washed. The masonry would be repainted. The paint, we haven't gotten into that yet. There will be the addition of some canopies over the existing windows and also where we plan on putting some new windows. The canopies, at lust at this point, are intended to bring a little more color to it. Right now it is a very drab building. We are looking for some color on the canopies and it may be on some of the accents. Mr. Alanskas: Will they have to come before us for the canopies? 13434 Mr. Engebretson: I don't think so if there is no signage on them. The thing is that the color could have a big impact. This proposal, while it appears to be relatively complete, appears to also have a few issues that are not completely addressed and under `„ normal circumstances we don't like to leave things like that to chance, so regarding your commitment on the downlighting, I think by the time this moves on to City Council you will have had time to deal with that but regarding things like canopies and the issue of the substitution of a greenbelt for a wall, there really hasn't been a case made in my judgment for that. The City Council and Planning Commission have authority to substitute a greenbelt in lieu of a wall as you indicated but there is normally some effort made on the part of the petitioner to make a convincing case. It is the appropriate thing to do. It appears to me you have fallen just a bit short. That is not meant to be a criticism. I think you have done a great job to take a petition regarding a piece of property in this condition from ground zero to where you have in a relatively short time. I think you have done a commendable job. I fear however there is just a little bit more to be done. I am not sure we can act on this tonight. Mr. Tent: I think you are correct. That is the recommendation I was going to make. We are lacking in the color of the building. We are lacking the back wall retainer, the color of the canopies, etc. I would like to make a motion that we table this until next meeting. At such time the architect and petitioner can come together and finish up their drawings and show us the things that are lacking. I am in favor of this. ``.. I think it is a great improvement and it has some merit but it is lacking in items I would like to see. Mr. Engehretson: The motion is inappropriate at this point because the public hearing isn't over. Mr. Tent: Those were just my comments. Mr. LaPine: Not to take the case of the petitioner but I think you could make an argument why the wall shouldn't be there. On the south side, the back, there is a rise up there where they built a berm back there. On the west side you have the credit union building that has trees all the way around. The only place you might not be able to make an argument for would be on the east side where the homes are. Mr. Engebretson: It is that east property line that concerns me. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak for or against this proposal? Brock Putman, 17005 Oporto: I am on the east side of the property. I am concerned with the hours of operation. Can he answer that question? 13435 Mr. Engebretson: We will ask that question. What other questions might you have? Mr. Putman: Naturally the wall was a concern. Also the liquor license. I `, understand they are going to have a banquet facility on the back end. Mr. Engebretson: That is the proposal. Mr. Putman: But no liquor license? Mr. Engebretson: That is correct. Mr. Putman: Then I guess the only question is the hours of operation. Mr. Engebretson: I would just mention to you regarding the liquor license sir, in order for them to begin serving liquor there, there would be a very lengthy process involved: (a) They would have to obtain one; (b) They would have to go through the Planning Commission and City Council and the State of Michigan to have permission to use a liquor license. It is not an event that could occur in the middle of the night and you would certainly be keenly aware of that proposal. We will ask them about the hours of operation. Patricia Pearson, 16971 Oporto: My property abuts up to the northwest side. My concern is at one time, approximately 8 to 10 years ago, there was a proposal to make that parking lot larger to accommodate the parking, which would extend it further back to cover the back end of my property line. I am concerned that if that is passed and the restaurant opens, that parking lot will be eventually extended to hold the capacity of a banquet hall and a restaurant. Also the traffic flow is going to affect the residential area of Oporto and Munger. With a new residential area coming up there is most likely going to be an increase in traffic. Besides that there are no sidewalks in that area and there are a number of small children that ride their bikes and play in that area. My concern is the increase of traffic flow through Oporto, particularly if he is proposing to get the church business on Saturday and Sunday when the children are out the majority of the afternoon and daytime. I am concerned with the traffic flow, hours of business, and again, the wall against the residential area to block out the lighting and the noise. Mr. Engebretson: Regarding the prospect of a potential intrusion of that parking lot being extended in the rear, as you have heard there is a proposal to utilize that greenbelt in lieu of putting up a wall so if this proposal were approved, in its current form, they are prohibited from doing that. I suppose they could come back and petition on another occasion to have the greenbelt converted to parking but they may have a very, very hard time doing that if this proposal is approved in part 13436 based on the reliance that the neighbors are going to receive this protection that you have expressed concern about. Regarding the lighting, we are convinced the architect has made the commitment that the lighting is going to be directed down and not out into the neighborhood and we have yet to determine the hours of operation. The traffic issues are very difficult for us to address at this particular point. We don't have a traffic study there but there will be some additional cars in the neighborhood as a result of this but as Joe Taylor has mentioned on more than one occasion, the day the traffic went to pot in Livonia was 25 years ago when I moved here. I don't mean to trivialize your concern. I hope you understand we are very concerned about those points of view and that is why we are moving very cautiously here. Ms. Pearson: Well there is just the berm in the back. Again, there is the noise factor from the cars in the parking lot. The berm is not going to cut much noise down and if there is no other type of provision made on the Past side, there is going to be a tremendous amount of noise. Even with an additional wall on the east side or additional trccs, there is still the noise that will come from the back part of the parking lot. Mr. Engebretson: Did you live there when that restaurant was operated as either La Bordeaux or Vargo's? Ms. Pearson: La Bordeaux closed down prior to our moving there. Mr. Engebretson: So you haven't had any personal experience then while that operated as a restaurant. Mr. Tent: Ms. Pearson, what you are referring to happened here about 12 years ago and there was some discussion about putting a banquet hall on the back of the property and that is where you are getting concerned about the parking and the addition to the building. Under this proposal there is nothing of that type. The banquet facility they are speaking of will be inside the building and you will notice no difference whatsoever. As far as the existing parking, etc. it will just encompass what we have now so that was killed about 12 years ago and they didn't come back. That was a big concern of everybody in the area. Mr. Engebretson? It is a good point that I failed to mention, that the building is not being proposed to be expanded. What they are proposing to do is to be within the existing building so there is no expansion of the building. Don Meyers, 16945 Oporto: For the record I wanted to comment that my feelings are mutual as both people said. A11 the points I was going to bring up were brought up by them. Just for the record I want it to be noted that I was here in attendance and I oppose this. 13437 Mr. Engebretson: I would like to ask the petitioner what are your planned hours of operation? Mr. Josifoski: 10:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m. Noir. Mr. Engebretson: Seven days a week? Mr. Josifoski: I am not sure about that right now. It will be seven or six. Mr. Engebretson: So there is another question that needs to be addressed. Mr. Morrow: Just to follow up on that lighting, does the architect have a height in mind? We normally like to see them 18 to 20 feet. No higher when they are in the areas of residential. Mr. Philips: They have not been engineered yet. That is the pole height that I am accustomed to using as well. It is rare that I would go higher than 25 but if your restriction is 18 to 20 feet, there is no problem meeting that. Mr. Morrow: That is our standard pretty much. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 94-4-2-10 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent and seconded by Mr. Alanskas, it was #5-94-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the Nr.. City Planning Commission on May 17, 1994 on Petition 94-4-2-10 by Danilo Josifoski requesting waiver use approval to remodel an existing building in connection with a proposal to operate a full service restaurant and banquet hall on property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between Oporto Street and Ryan Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 14, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 94-4-2-10 until the study meeting of May 24, 1994. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Tent, Morrow, Alanskas, Engebretson NAYS: LaPine, McCann ABSENT: Fandrei Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. * Mr. Nagy entered the meeting. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-4-2-11 by Lorrine B. Salan requesting waiver use approval to operate an arcade with mechanical amusement devices within the Livonia Mall shopping center located at the northwest corner of Seven Mile and Middlebelt Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 2. 13438 Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating they have no objections to this waiver use proposal. We have also received letters from the Fire Marshal's office and the Traffic Bureau stating their offices have no objections to this proposal. Tastly we have received a letter from the Ordinance Enforcement Division stating their office has no objection to this proposal; however, based upon our calculations for floor area, this arcade would be permitted a maximum of 25 amusement devices. Proposed are 39 devices for an excess of 14, which may be appealed to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Engebretson: I think Mrs. Hildebrandt is here. Are you representing the petitioner? Would you please come forward then and address whatever comments you wish. Jeanne Hildebrandt, 29514 Seven Mile Road: I have been with Livonia Mall for about 30 years now and we have had during the past 10 to 15 years two to three petitioners come to us for possible space for a game room in Livonia Mall. I didn't proceed with them because I felt I was very strict on my own for a possible game room. I felt they were corporations that were not hands on. This couple that has come to us would be there. They would be a hands on operation. In the location that this is, it is 1600 square feet, it is down near one of our security offices. We have two security offices in Livonia Mall right now, one down by the management office and one next door to this location. Security is in and out of this office frequently. I have in-house security, which is tightly controlled, and they would be right near this space. The game rooms have also become adult entertainment centers not just for children. I feel at this time sure that the couple that I am dealing with would run a proper operation in Livonia Mall. Mr. Engebretson: Does the lady have anything to add? Lorrine Salan, 6900 Yinger, Dearborn: My partner is Marvin Kuhn. I am relatively new to this business. I have just seen what Marvin has done in it and I myself, I don't like these machines. I think they are noisy and I think they are stressful but like my brother told me you don't necessarily have to like what you can make money in as long as other people enjoy them. I am sure you all have children or grandchildren and you see how much the kids love them. It is like they are hypnotized. In the last couple of weeks Marvin and I have gone around to a couple of them. There is the Main Street Arcade that is located at Wonderland Mall in Livonia and I don't think you have had any problems there. I don't know what his square footage is but he has 56 machines. If you look at our 13439 drawings we have a foot between each machine. All of the arcades we have gone to the machines are basically touching each other. We had a little misunderstanding with our architect and he actually wanted us to go as far as 35 machines. Right now with the cost of machines we want to deal more with quality machines than quantity. Some of the arcades we have been to they have a lot of machines using a lot of electricity but nobody is playing them. We would rather stick to 25 to 30 machines to start with, to tell you the truth, and go with machines that are more popular. I don't knave what other questions or things you would like to ask me about this. Marvin's whole family has worked in the arcade business. He lives close by in Livonia. If we had any problems, his family has had experience working arcades. He has, of course. From what we have seen I know these kind of establishments didn't have really a good reputation but I think if you visited any of them lately and see how entranced most people are with these machines. There is no time for trouble. We would have attendants. We are asking for some extended weekend hours. We would offer to have two attendants on site, possibly an attendant and a security guard if that was what the City required of us. There was another point I wanted to make but I can't remember what it was. Mr. Engebretson: Well we will give you a chance to come back. There are several questions. We will give you plenty of opportunity to raise whatever points you wish. Mr. Tent: Mrs. Hildebrandt I feel comfortable with you coming here representing this particular client. I know how well you run the mall and you are a concerned person so that gives me some relaxing feelings. However, haw long of a lease will these people have? Mrs. Hildebrandt: They are starting out with a five-year lease cancellable on 30 days notice. Mr. Tent: I have always been concerned with these devices in malls because of the kind of people they attract and the hours, etc. Could they exist with 25 machines? Also, the hours to me seem very long. That is Friday and Saturdays until 12:00 p.m. Those hours are long. Are we flexible in any respect as far as equipment and hours? Mrs. Hildebrandt: I think they are flexible in the equipment and the hours. We have the Jonathon B Pub that is open until 12:00 or 1:30 in the morning and I think the prospective tenants were interested in trying to keep the game room open a little later due to the Pub being open and the theatre being open until midnight. Mr. Tent: You stated that other people have approached you to use similar facilities and you checked them out and turned them 13440 down. You feel very comfortable that this operation will be successful? Mrs. Hildebrandt: I have been very cautious over the years. I have done a lot st . of research on game rooms. I am very cautious with whom I am dealing with. I am not saying that the other prospective tenants were not proper but they are not hands on. They are not local. Cyber Station was before this Planning Commission probably a couple of years ago and I didn't proceed. They received consent from Planning Commission to install a game room in Livonia Mall but I was very concerned. They were a California organization. I was concerned about them being in the premise when needed and not having a stranger run the operation so I didn't proceed with the lease. Mr. Morrow: I would just like to pursue this a little bit more. The petitioner indicated that the 39 machines might be a little excessive as far as their relating to it at the present time and she might want to live with quality, 25 to 30. The zoning permits 25. Would it be your intent to move forward and then later appeal for 30 to 39? In other words, when we have a petition before us we want to know what is going to go forward with this to the City Council. Ms. Salan: Basically right now we are thinking of putting in 30 machines. We wanted to get the variance to go up to 35. If at a later date we decided we wanted to put in additional machines, could we come back and get a variance for that later on? With 56 machines at the Main Street in Wonderland and 60 in the arcade at Westland, I don't feel like we are asking for too much when we ask for 39. At 39 we would have a foot between machines and most of these machines are literally touching each other. Mr. Morrow: So if I follow you, you are going to go with 39, request a variance for the excess over 25. You may not initially install 39 but you want to get the variance for the maximum amount. Ms. Salan: Yes. Mr. Nowak of the Planning Department told me that because the minimum was 25 we would have to obtain two variances, one to take it up to 35, which is the maximum allowable, and then another to add 4. We just want to do whatever was easiest for now. Mr. Morrow: I just wanted to make sure we weren't changing the plan. Mr. LaPine: Is there any age limit that people can go in and use these games? Can a 12 or 13 year old go in? Ms. Salan: Basically I am not sure. Marvin do you have an age limit? Marvin Kuhn, 8913 Hubbard, Livonia: At one time I ran an arcade in Redford 13441 over at Seven Mile and Telegraph. My experience was we allowed kids going down to maybe about 8 years old to play the games. Eight year olds upwards to maybe 30 to 35. *,r Mr. LaPine: Is this the type of operation where a family goes to the mall shopping and ma and dad say okay Junior you go over here and here's a couple of bucks to play games but don't leave? I guess I get worried when we talk about 7 and 8 year olds. How do we control it? Haw do we know the right parents are picking up the right kids? These are the things that worry me. The other question I have is do you win at any of these games? At Chuck E Cheese's and Major Magic you win so many tickets and then you get free tickets for prizes, etc. Ms. Salan: Mr. rapine we have been trying to research that lately because some of the arcades have different prize plans. I was thinking about this one and recently I found someone that was using it and they had great success out in the City of Roseville where we reward children, or any age. An A is worth four free games. A B is worth two free games. We hope we are doing something to promote the right kind of kids to come in. The man that was doing it out on Gratiot had great success. I guess he had a write up in the local newspaper out there. Somebody told us the parents were a little more positive because of that. We are going to work out a system where every time they can show us a report card, then we are going to record their name for a certain semester and try to reward or promote kids getting good grades. Other machines automatically have built into them that if you score a certain 'taw amount you get a free game. Mr. LaPine: How about the question of younger children being in there? M. Hindebrandt: Mr. LaPine, through my research through the entire shopping center industry nationwide, there are many shopping centers that have game rooms and probably this one I am proposing is one of the smaller. They have never had a serious incident with the game rooms. It is up to the management of the mall and the security to make sure that these game rooms are handled properly. In my research there has never been a serious incident. Mr. Engebretson: Mrs. Hildebrandt, do you differentiate between a mall game room and a place like Exhiliarama because there was a shooting at one of those in the past year? Mrs. Hildebrandt: Yes, these are on the interior of the mall and I might add again my security is in house and tightly controlled. Mr. Alanskas: What is allowable right now by the square footage is 25 machines. If you put in 25 machines, what percentage of those would be for adults over 17 years of age because what I am hearing is you want to get business from the Pub after hours. 13442 Ms. Salan: A lot of the games that are popular with teenagers are also popular with adults right now so there isn't like a set caliber of machines. 4101. Mr. Alanskas: Are you going to have skeetball machines in there for example? Mr. Kuhn: Room permitting we will put one or two in there. Mr. Alanskas: It will be mainly for games for people above 16 years old to get them to come back and play after 9:00 p.m.? Mr. Kuhn: I think about 30% of the machines will be geared towards adults 21 and over. Mrs. Salan: One thing I have noticed in our interviewing of all these arcades in the last month, we were really concerned with this issue. I don't want to have anybody get shot or have problems or have fights break out so we get a bad reputation and have to close down. It is my number one priority to hope and pray and do everything we can to make sure nothing like that ever happens. In interviewing all these managers and owners of these arcades, I was really amazed at how little trouble any of them have had. You can check out the arcade at Westland Mall and talk to the man that owns Main Street Arcade and they have had no problems. The most important thing is you cannot have an attendant that goes back and sits in the office. You have to have someone on the floor and they have to be watching these kids all the time and you have to be very, very strict the minute anyone gives you any trouble. You also have to have signs up where you say no abusive language, no food, no drinks. The guy at Main Street had a very good sign hanging up there. He has one of your City rules, in fact it is a City Ordinance concerning mechanical amusement devices and it is about truancy. It is about us asking children during school hours "What are you doing here? Why aren't you in school?" and if they can't get a good answer they get security to find out where their parents are or to escort them out of the mall. I know Mrs. Hildebrandt is very concerned with that and we are too. You have to stay on top of that. If somebody gives you trouble, you tell them to leave and you tell them not to come back. You get your reputation known that you are strict, that you won't put up with any troublemakers or any horseplay in the place. I think that is really important. Mr. Engeahretson: All of us here would echo Mr. Tent's comment regarding our high regard we have for Mrs. Hildebrandt and her words weigh heavily, but I must ask her regarding this five-year lease cancellable by mall management. Could you elaborate on the characteristics on that lease? 13443 Mrs. Hildebrandt: There are a couple of leases in the mall that are cancellable upon 30 to 60 days notice by the landlord due to the fact of either non-payment or improper conduct, such as a free-standing restaurant if it is not maintained properly, if the cleanliness is not up to my standards, if they allow teenagers, etc. hanging out. I don't allow teenagers to congregate in the mall. We want them as customers but I don't allow gang congregation in the mall. We have the right to cancel a lease. Mr. Engebretson: In this particular instance I suspect you have confidence you are dealing with people that will be paying their bills on time so you have some subliminal concern for a potential of things beyond their control that might be detrimental to the mall. Mrs. Hildebrandt: This is the first couple that has come to me that I have felt secure with that they would have a hands on operation for this type of business in the mall. Mr. Engebretson: Would either of the petitioners talk to us about the games that they have proposed to have in there. Talk to us about the characteristics and the nature of the games. I have in mind fun, skill, violence and things like that. What kind of categories do these games fall into? Mr. Kuhn: It is such a mixed bag. I would say we would have about 5 or 6 pinball machines. We will have an air hockey machine. We are going to have a crane, which is where you pick the prize up. We are going to have a basketball hoop where you throw ''" basketballs into the hoop. The rest of the machines are primarily geared to more or less the teenage crowd. Mr. Engebretson: What would the nature of those games be? Mr. Kuhn: It is a few games like fighting machines. There is a basketball game, which is one of the top two selling games right now, which is extremely popular with the kids now. Mr. Engebretson: You made mention roughly to 10 or so machines. Can I assume that the balance of the machines will be some kind of competition where two individuals or more are competing with each other? Mr. Kuhn: Yes sir. Mr. Engebretson: With killing your opponent? Seriously, I have been to some of these places and we talk about teaching kids lessons and rewarding them for getting good grades and then we turn around and reward them with an opportunity to kick the daylights out of their partner. We are living in a world today that is fraught with violence and it is not your fault, but it is just a fault of life and it comes in many shapes and forms, and when I see 8 year olds being brought up with that as a natural 13444 thing. In the movies everyone gets killed but in real life it is not like that, and we all know that, and I am really concerned about that. In an instance where we had a similar proposal but on a much larger scale a couple of years ago we ter. went out east and visited one of these places and the vast majority of the games were based on some kind of violent activity and the security people that we talked to and the owners of that particular operation were very concerned about it but they did keep things under control but they had uniformed police officers as well as mall security people very, very visible in order to maintain control. Mr. raPine and I on one occasion visited one of these facilities. I won't mention where it was, but we were intimidated by some of the people that were participating at that location. We were physically intimidated by some of the folks there and when you stop to think about that, is that really the kind of business you want to get into. Forgive me for putting that question to you. I withdraw the question but it is a point of concern. There have been numerous references here tonight to security and obviously all of you, including Mrs. Hildebrandt, are concerned about security. I know we have a police mini station there. There is mall security close by but when we have to talk about security to the extent we have, we are acknowledging there is a problem. All of those things cause me great concern. In addition to that I am troubled by the concept of children pumping tokens representing quarters into machines in large quantities in the hope of winning free plays or tickets to be redeemed for prizes or whatever. I am just wondering if we are teaching them the right kind of lesson. These are subjective kinds of issues. I acknowledge that. I am being very honest with you about some of the concerns I have. You mention children and grandchildren. At this stage of my life I deal with grandchildren. They are not quite big enough to participate in this type of event. I want to make sure I give you credit and give Mrs. Hildebrandt credit that you would do everything in your power to make this work well but I think that you are dealing with issues that are going to be difficult and could be something that we all could live to regret. Mrs. Hildebrandt wishes to respond. Mrs. Hildebrandt: Also in my research throughout the country in the shopping center industry with such organizations as General Mills Corporation, these game rooms have become family. You see the fathers, the grandfathers, the mothers, the grandmothers, coming in with these children, more so now than the teenagers hanging around. Mr. Engebretson: At the risk of sounding argumentative I must tell you that in some of my research, which I am sure was not nearly as exhaustive as yours, and I spent a number of days researching this both locally and in other locations, and while I know that is the intent, it sometimes doesn't work that way. I 13445 have seen cars pull up, children dumped off with handfuls of money and then the cars pull away, or as Mr. LaPine said the children are dropped off and their parents go elsewhere in the mall to go about their lousiness, and maybe it works okay most *4.11,r that • the time but this is a world that again has some people that we share a space with that cause me to have great concern where malls and/or particular businesses that are not particularly day care lnsinesses wind up being baby sitters. It happens. I have seen it. I have seen it time and time again and so to think it won't happen, at the risk of sounding inappropriate, would be naive because it is going to happen and you can't control it. Ms. Salan: That is one of the reasons we wanted to stress this thing as a family arcade. We hope by stressing that point to the public that we could keep thugs or undesirables from hanging around. We definitely would do everything we can to thwart them from making it a hangout. I think the mini police station that is right next door to us would help. The security system at Livonia Mall is excellent. I am not going to lie to you. The number one game in the country right now is a game called Mortal Combat and it does involve these figures battling back and forth but let's not forget it is still the parents that teach the children their moral fibers and their principles. Most of these games are more in relation to sporting events even though some of them are things where you take a gun and you aim it at a target. A lot of them revolve around sporting events. I definitely am going to do what I can. Marvin is a father so he is concerned with violence but I still think a lot of that stuff is the parents' responsibility but I know `'s' what you are saying. That bothers me too. The crime in this country is outrageous. Everyone is afraid of what is going on in this country right now and there are a lot of people that do believe that there is a connection between the violent movies, maybe games like this, and what is happening to this generation that we see all this violence, but there are other experts that say the children are learning some valuable motor skills, hand to eye contact, motor skills, by these types of games. In a climate like ours when you have such a long cold season what can kids do all winter long? Since the kids enjoy this so much, is it really so bad for them? You might say they are wasting their money putting their quarters in these machines but would you rather have them wasting their quarters on drugs? I mean it's a toss up. I am not saying these are the most moral things in the world but I don't think they are so bad. I wish some night when you gentlemen had a chance you would take a ride out to, I was really impressed, the arcade at Westland Mall called Spare Change. He allows people 16 and up to be attendants there and I have talked to a couple of these attendants and said have you had any trouble and they said no. I said do you like working here and they said yes it is really cool. I said do you have any trouble at all and he 13446 said no. The only arcade that we found in this whole area that had any trouble was the one at Ford Road and Beech Daly and he told us one day a kid came in with mud all over his shoes and got mud all over his floor and he asked him to leave and the kid dragged his feet out of there. He told him to either vacuum the floor or get out. Marvin has been in this business a lot longer than I have and he hasn't had any bad experiences. We would like to have a chance. We will run things the best we can. I understand your concerns so it definitely bothers me too. Mr. Engebretson: I will just make one more comment. It is not my intent to be harsh or to be argumentative or adversarial with you. I believe sincerely that you believe from the bottom of your heart all of these things that you said will come to pass. I think where we may have some differences are your experiences versus some of mine. Putting money into drugs versus putting money into machines is a little unfair when you get down to it. I grew up in a colder country than this and before malls existed and we came out of it okay. Please understand that I take every word you say as gospel and I don't mean to offend you in any way by making any of the statements that I did. Mr. Tent: I brought up the discussion requesting the devices to not exceed 25 and I asked if you were flexible to this extent so to the petitioner I am saying if you were successful in getting this petition, would you accept the 25 mechanical devices? Can you exist with that? Also, the hours of operation shall not extend beyond 9:00 p.m. Could you live with that? If you can't, I can't support this proposal and you would have to go forth to the ZBA to get their approval and so forth, so my question is could you limit your mechanical equipment to 25 and not exceed your operating hours past 9:00 p.m.? Mr. Kuhn: We can. Mr. Tent: If this were successful you could go on your way. If it were approved on the condition you wanted 39 pieces of equipment, then you would have to go to the ZBA and you would have to appeal the working hours and so forth. I am just letting you know these are the things that would be required. Also, soundproofing would be required in that section and whether the Livonia Mall would provide that or would this be a lease improvement they would have to provide? Mr. Kuhn: It has been my experience the big concern is the noise level. The games themselves do have volume controls. We plan on keeping the machines down. Mr. Tent: We have an ordinance here that may require soundproofing. It is not just the volume of the machines. Would you be prepared to do that? 13447 Ms. Salan: Yes Mr. Tent we studied that at the different malls and most of them have this carpet wallpaper which absorbs sound very well. Ceiling tiles absorb a lot of the sound but most of the arcades in malls, to be within those bounds of sound problems, fir. that is what they have done and it works very well. We stood outside a couple of them and we found when we were 10 to 15 feet away from the entrance that the sound was not very noticeable. Also we are at the very end of a hallway and there is like a bathroom across from us and a mini police station. There is a jewelry store which would be to the east of us but their entrance is at the other end so I don't think we would bother them too much. Mr. Tent: You could live with 25 pieces of equipment and working hours until 9:00 p.m.? Ms. Salan: I feel myself that Marvin is more confident than I am that we can make it with 25 machines and only being with the mall hours. To tell you the truth I am a little bit worried about that. The fact that we are not in a high traffic area. This isn't one of the main mall entrances. If you don't give us the chance to try the longer hours, we can't see if it would work or not. I think it is rather crucial myself. Marvin is the expert. I will go ahead with this if you would restrict us to that but I would be more positive and definitely more ambitious about this whole project is we could get the extended hours, at least for weekends. Even if you said we could only be open until 11:00 p.m. Some of the arcades are open until 1:00 a.m. or 2:00 a.m. Originally we were asking for 12:00. If you want to cut us to 11:00 p.m. , it is up to Now you. Mr. Engebretson: If you would just clarify, I have heard yes we will amend the petition for 25 devices and we will close at 9:00 p.m. and then I have heard it a different way. What are you doing? Mr. Kuhn: I am not saying that we can't absolutely make it on those hours. It is so unpredictable. It is something we will have to try out especially where it is located. Mr. Engebretson: What does that mean? We need to know whether or not you are amending this petition from 39 machines to 25 and to limit hours to 9:00 p.m. Ms. Salan: We would like to try for extended hours but if you won't let us have it we are going to try to make it. We talked to Mrs. Hildebrandt about giving us some lease agreement that if we can't make it within the first year or two that she would allow us to get out of the lease. That is the whole thing with being around the back of the mall. We are not in one of the main halls so we could put up a security gate. Mrs. Hildebrandt said she could provide us with that. In addition ti.. 13448 it is in a good part of town. I can understand your objections but I am just asking please let us do that and if it doesn't work out we could go back to your hours. Mr. Engebretson: All I am trying to determine is what you wish to go forward with. I am understanding it is the original petition 39 devices with the extended hours. Mr. Kuhn: Actually it is 30 to 35. Mr. Morrow: I am sensing we got this young lady and her partner on the spot. I know we have to conclude the public hearing. I know Mrs. Hildebrandt has given a lot of thought to this and although they are extending the petition to permit use with the minimum of 25, if there are no time constraints, perhaps we could table this to give them a chance to rework it and come back to us. I for one want to find out more about these violent games. Are these any more violent than what is available on Nintendo or some of these games proliferated through the many retail establishments? Mr. Kuhn: No sir. I have been in business for 13 years and I am quite familiar with all types of various games and Mortal Combat, which is that type game, is the same as on Genesis as it is in the arcade. Mr. Morrow: That was a comment I wanted to make. It may not prevail but it was a thought I had. Mr. McCann: I know they do have Mortal Combat and all those various games available for either your home computer or for Genesis Games. Mr. Engebretson: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak for or against this proposal? I would like to clarify one point Mr. Tent mentioned. I don't think he intended to have it come out the way it did. If you were successful here and if the numbers had been reduced, you would still need City Council approval and I think it was implied that if you brought the numbers down that this would be it. This is a control zone as Mrs. Hildebrandt has undoubtedly explained to you. It is one of the high visibility areas of the community that gets extra attention so no matter what happens here, if it is approved, you still go before City Council, and you may have to go before the Zoning Board of Appeals depending on the final outcome of the quantity, etc. Mr. Kuhn: One comment made tonight was about you had a concern about kids being encouraged to play these games to get these redeemable things. The only games that will have that redemption is the skeetball and perhaps the crane. 13449 Mr. Engebretson: The ones you just mentioned are the ones I have seen youngsters go after with a vengeance and they put in money because they are so excited to get that ticket out. It is disconcerting. It really is. The excitement level getting that ticket exceeds any relevance it takes to get that ticket. They have no appreciation for the money they are putting in there. At least in most cases. It is a point of view that we may disagree on. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 94-4-2-11 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas and seconded by Mr. Tent, it was RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on May 17, 1994 on Petition 94-4-2-11 by Lorrine B. Salan requesting waiver use approval to operate an arcade with mechanical amusement devices within the Livonia Mall shopping center located at the northwest corner of Seven Mile and Middlebelt Roads in the southeast 1/4 of Section 2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 94-4-2-11 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the total number of mechanical amusement devices shall not exceed 25. 2) That the hours of operation shall not extend beyond 9:00 p.m. 3) That the subject area shall be soundproofed as required in the `%" Zoning Ordinance Section 11.03 (s) (5) . for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed use complies with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543. 2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. 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. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on May 17, 1994 on Petition 94-4-2-11 by 13450 Lorrine B. Salan requesting waiver use approval to operate an arcade with mechanical amusement devices within the Livonia Mall shopping center located at the northwest corner of Seven Mile and Middlebelt Roads in the southeast 1/4 of Section 2, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 94-4-2-11. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion failed for lack of support. A roll call on the original approving motion resulted in the following: AYES: Tent, Alanskas, McCann NAYS: LaPine, Morrow, Engebretson ABSENT: Fandrei Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion failed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow and seconded by Mr. LaPine, it was #5-95-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on May 17, 1994 on Petition 94-4-2-11 by Lorrine B. Salan requesting waiver use approval to operate an arcade with mechanical amusement devices within the Livonia Mall shopping center located at the northwest corner of Seven Mile and Middlebelt Roads in the southeast 1/4 of Section 2, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 94-4-2-11 until the study meeting of May 24, 1994. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: \r.• AYES: LaPine, Morrow, McCann, Engebretson NAYS: Alanskas, Tent ABSENT: Fandrei Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-4-2-12 by Michael Patarino for Schenkelshultz, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to construct a full service restaurant to be located on the southeast corner of Schoolcraft and Middlebelt Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 25. Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating their department has no objections to this waiver use proposal. We have also received a letter from the Fire Marshal's office stating they have no objection to this proposal. Also in our file is a letter from the Traffic Bureau stating the site plan does not fulfill the off-street parking requirement as prescribed in Section 18.37 of the 13451 zoning ordinance. Lastly, we have received a letter from the Ordinance Enforcement Division stating their office has no objections to this proposal; however, the following deficiencies were found: 1. The parking required for this use and the Home Quarters store is 920 spaces; proposed are 863, resulting in a deficiency of 57 spaces. 2. It appears from the plans that the restaurant is proposing 2 wall signs on the building and a ground sign in addition to the existing Home Quarters ground sign. Permitted is 1 wall sign on the front (west wall) not to exceed 72 s.f. of sign area. As a mixed use development site, the restaurant would not be permitted a separate ground sign. These items may be appealed to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please step forward. Charles Tangora: I represent the owners of the property. My purpose here is to introduce the petitioner. Schenkelshultz is an architectural firm out of Indianapolis, Indiana, and they represent China Coast, which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of General Mills. Tonight we have the Architect and Project Coordinator, Randall Anderson. I will introduce him and he can take over. Randall Anderson, 9100 Keystone Crossing, Suite 700, Indianapolis, Indiana, 46240: The property in question was very ably described by the staff. It is an outlot of the Home Quarters shopping center. The General Mills people, just to give you a bit of background, they operate the Olive Garden, Red Lobster and China Coast restaurant chain. There is one in the immediate `" area. It is on the north side of the Jeffries Freeway on the other side of Chi Chi's at the corner of Buckingham and Middlebelt. That is a very similar example in regards to the aesthetics and the care and maintenance that the China Coast and the General Mills people in particular give to all their restaurants. This restaurant would have an area of 9,036 square feet. There will be 334 seats in the restaurant, 35 employees. The restaurant parking area and manueverability area would be fully integrated with the Home Quarters development; therefore, there is that exchange of vehicles from the Home Quarters area over to the China Coast area. There is not going to be any impediments to that flow of traffic from one use to the other. The area, as you know, is very highly c o mnercial. There are a number of restaurants in the area. There is a Bob Evans at the northwest corner. There is a Chi Chi's and Olive Garden on the northeast corner of the intersection. There is a retail store across the street, the racetrack and the Home Quarters obviously to the east and south. We think our use blends well with those uses. I don't think we submitted to you any renderings or pictures of what this restaurant would look like. For your information I will give you this information for your records. This is 13452 our prototype building. What you see there is what you will get. Those are the colors. They are brown and kind of oriental architecture obviously. (He displayed the picture) For your further clarification the staff spoke of some issues regarding signage, parking. The staff has indicated to me and our staff that they believe that the overall parking requirement, while it is substandard by the zoning ordinance, is more than sufficient for the uses in mind. The parking requirement for the Home Quarters is one parking space for every 125 square feet. Because of the nature of the business, being a warehouse with the larger aisles, there is a lot of dead space in there that is somewhat different from a typical retail use such as a WalMart or a K Mart where you have more narrow aisles with more people because they sell more things. They believe that probably a parking ratio of perhaps 150 to 200 spaces is more accurate for that use, so when you combine that kind of standard with the restaurant, you have more than enough parking. Plus, there is that shared affect where people would come to the restaurant and then shop or come and shop and then go to the restaurant so they are very comfortable with the parking issue. In regard to the signage, we have clarified that with the staff. A11 we are proposing are two wall signs that would require a variance. The combined area of both signs would be something between 50 and 55 square feet. We are allowed 72 square feet on the west side so the combined total of signage is within the parameters of what you would allow for a total sign package for one sign face so for that reason, because we are not in excess of what the intent of the ordinance is with regard to the total signage, the staff has told us that they are very comfortable \.. with that variance also. We are not asking for a variance for a separate ground sign at the corner. There is a sign there now where the Home Quarters Shopping Center name is on there. We are not proposing any additional sign. That is basically the extent of the sign and parking variances. You have the elevations. We are not going to be bound by those elevations. You have the color package. If you have any questions I will be happy to answer them. Mr. Morrow: General Mills is not buying this property, they are leasing the property? Mr. Anderson: They have bought the property. I believe the purchase day was April 1993. Mr. Morrow: So there is a reciprocity with the parking. Mr. Anderson: That is correct. Mr. Tent: All the parking spaces will be 10'x20'? Mr. Anderson: Correct. 13453 Mr. Tent: Will they be double striped? Mr. Anderson: Whatever the ordinance requires is what we will do. I don't think our plan shows it that way. ti't' Mr. Tent: We would like that. What we are attempting to do in these parking areas because of the nature of parking lots and the small areas, is have these 10'x20' double striped. It is much easier to put your car in a proper position. You are not banging up doors. Would you be willing to do that on your parking plan to show double striped parking? Mr. Anderson: That is fine with us. We will do whatever your ordinance requires. Mr. Tent: Do we have to put that in the resolution John? Mr. Nagy: You would have to make that a condition of approval but since this lot consisting of 2 acres will be integrated with the 15 acres already developed by Home Quarters, the parking lot is already in and is not double striped. They are trying to integrate the two and you would have one single striped and one double striped. It could be worked out. Mr. Tent: Let's double stripe them all. It has always been a problem. Wherever they have double striped, it is much easier to park the cars. Mr. Anderson: Just for the record I am speaking only for General Mills. I am not speaking for the developer. Mr. Tent: That is what I am talking about also. We have to start somewhere. Mr. Engebretson: Just to clarify, the ordinances does not require double striping but it doesn't matter whether you have a new $10,000 car or a $50,000 car, when you have the advantage of double striping it does tend to get people in those spots in a little more orderly way. It has been our custom to encourage people to do that and it seems to me we have 100% acceptance of that. We do have an unusual situation here where we have some shared parking. I think all we can address here tonight in our resolution would be to confine it to your portion of the parking lot and if Home Quarters was moved to do it with theirs that would be great. It would be a step in the right direction. It would save a few doors. Mr. Tent: The colors that you are presenting, those are the true colors? Mr. Anderson: You can have total confidence that is a prototype building. The picture is very accurate. Mr. Tent: So what we see we are going to get. `or 13454 Mr. Alanskas: You say parking is not going to be a problem. I disagree 1000%. I will tell you why. The way Home Quarters is set up, where the restaurant is going to be that is the Home Quarters garden center and from May 1 to August 30, I was there today, the parking is all where this restaurant is going to be °"" because they park there to get into the home center to buy their products. That lot was full for over two hours. I really disagree about parking. I am all for this. It is a very nice facility but you are going to have problems with your customers because they all park on that side of Home Quarters. They don't want to park on the right hand side and walk all the way down to the garden center. That is a big selling point for Home Quarters in the summer months. Mr. Anderson: All I conveyed to you was the comments I was given flout the staff. Mr. Alanskas: Do me a favor and go out there tomorrow and sit for a couple of hours. Mr. Anderson: I was out there this afternoon about 1:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. There were some cars located there. It looked like there were employe parked there but it wasn't a problem from what I saw. Mr. Alanskas: I just hope it is not a problem for you but believe me it is going to be a problem. Mr. LaPine: I wish to echo what Mr. Alanskas said. I think you are going to have a problem but that is your problem. If you do have a `ow problem, you are going to lose customers. You mentioned something about 35 employees. According to the promo sheets you gave us it said 100 employees. That makes a big difference in parking. Mr. Anderson: 35 maximum per shift. Mr. TaPine: It says here 25 per shift, 100 employees total. Mr. Anderson: That is something that changes from site to site. Our normal site is a bit larger than this. This one was downsized. Mr. TaPine: So it is going to be 35 employees per shift Mr. Anderson: That is what I was told. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 94-4-2-12 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Tent and unanimously approved, it was 13455 #5-96-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 17, 1994 by the City Planning Commission on Petition 94-4-2-12 by Michael Patarino for Schenkelshultz, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to construct a full service restaurant to be located on the southeast corner of Schoolcraft and Middlebelt Roads in the °r"' Northwest 1/4 of Section 25, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 94-4-2-12 be approved subject to a variance being granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals for a deficient number of parking spaces and to the following additional conditions: 1) That the site plan marked Sheet SD-1 dated 3-17-94 prepared by Schenkels Architects which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. 2) That the Landscape Plan marked Sheet L-1 dated 3-15-94 prepared by Schieber & Associates, Landscape Architects, which is hereby approved shall be adhered and the landscape materials shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and shall thereafter be permanently maintained in a healthy condition. 3) That the Trash Enclosure Plan shown on C-2 dated 3-17-94 prepared by Schenkels Architects which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. 4) That the Building Elevation Plan marked Sheet A-2 dated 3-17-94 prepared by Schenkels Architects which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. 4411. 5) That the total number of customer seats shall not exceed 334 seats. 6) That all parking bays will be double striped. for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed use complies with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as modified by the Zoning Board of Appeals as set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543. 2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. 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. 13456 Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously %or approved, it was #5-97-94 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to waive the provisions of Section 10 of Article VI of the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure requesting the seven day period concerning effectiveness of Planning Commission resolutions in connection with Petition 94-4-2-12 by Michael Patarino for Schenkelshultz, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to construct a full service restaurant to be located on the southeast corner of Schoolcraft and Middlebelt Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 25. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-4-2-13 by General Mills Restaurants, Inc. , d/b/a China Coast, requesting waiver use approval to utilize a Class C license in connection with a proposed restaurant to be located on the southeast corner of Schoolcraft and Middlebelt Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 25. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, is there any correspondence relating to this petition? 'ow. Mr. Nagy: There is no additional correspondence other than what was read in connection with the previous petition. Mr. Tangora: I would just like to add that Randall Hall is here on behalf of John Carlin, who was not able to make it tonight. He represents General Mills for this waiver use for a Class C license. Mr. Tent: Mr. Tangora, the liquor license you are getting, will that be a new license? Mr. Tangora: I don't know of any Class C license available in the City so I think it will be a new license. Mr. McCann: We only have five licenses left in the City of Livonia. I do know of at least one, possibly two, that are available for sale. Would your client consider purchasing one of those if it was for sale? Mr. Tangora: I would have to ask Mr. Hall here. It is not my client. General Mills is represented by Mr. Hall. He should be the one to answer that. 13457 Mr. McCann: Let me ask you this, if we tabled this for a week, the building could go on that would not be a problem. I know they don't want to start without a Class C license. I am sure one will be available to purchase or be assigned out of the five the City has, but would that be a hindrance to table this part of it for one week? Mr. Tangora: We would just like to go ahead on the same agenda. I am aware there might be one available from the golf course but that will have to go through the procedure of granting the golf course license to the petitioner. Mr. McCann: I know there is one for sale by the Seven Mile Road/Farmington establishment that is now closed. Mr. Tangora: From what I understand, I have been through this before, but when Whispering Willows had a Class C license and there is a new category Class C Golf licenses and they can be used for municipal golf courses so when you apply for a golf course license the Class C becomes available. That is what happened at Whispering Willows and I understand that is what is happening at Idyl Wyld. Mr. Engebretson: What we are really dealing with here tonight is not the issue of the license itself but it is a waiver use as to the right use of the land. Mr. Tangora: Then we have to come back for the approval of the license so we have a lot of time. Nifty Mr. McCann: John, in order to use one of the existing Class C liquor license that we have? Mr. Nagy: It is just a zoning decision. Mr. LaPine: John, is there any problem here with liquor licenses within 1,000 feet? Mr. Nagy: Yes, that is waivable at the Council level because of all the licenses used in conjunction with the eating establishments, therefore, the 1,000 foot requirement can be waived by the City Council. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 94-4-2-13 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. McCann, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously approved, it was 13458 #5-98-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 17, 1994 by the City Planning Commission on Petition 94-4-2-13 by General Mills Restaurants, Inc. , d/b/a China Coast, requesting waiver use approval to utilize a Class C license in connection with a proposed restaurant to be located on the southeast corner of Schoolcraft and Middlebelt Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 25, the City Planning Commission doPs hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 94-4-2-13 be approved subject to the waiving of the 1000 foot separation requirement by the City Council for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed use complies with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543. 2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. 3) That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrouding 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. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. McCann, seconded by Mr. Tent and unanimously approved, it was #5-99-94 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to waive the provisions of Section 10 of Article VI of the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure requesting the seven day period concerning effectiveness of Planning Commission resolutions in connection with Petition 94-4-2-13 by General Mills Restaurants, Inc. , d/b/a china Coast, requesting waiver use approval to utilize a Class C license in connection with a proposed restaurant to be located on the southeast corner of Schoolcraft and Middlebelt Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 25. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-4-3-4 by George Mesler requesting to vacate a 30 foot easement located in the north half of vacated Pembroke Avenue between Melvin Avenue and Oporto Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 2. Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. 13459 Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating this petition would vacate the northerly 30 feet of a 60-foot wide easement retained pursuant to Ordinance 1515. Please be advised that this office has no objections to vacating this 30-foot easement. ` u. Mr. Engebretson: Is the petitioner here. George Mesler, 19831 Melvin: Back last fall I tried to sell that property and the realtor showed it to several people and he couldn't sell it because of the size of the yard. Since then I tried to split it. What happened, I sold my house to my son and he sold his house so quick he is in my house now with me so I have been like this for five months. I am beginning to become a nervous wreck. That is my problem. If I can get that easement off because there is nothing on it. Mr. Engebretson: We have checked that out. We understand that. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engehretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 94-4-3-4 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously approved, it was #5-100-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 17, 1994 by the City Planning Commission on Petition 94-4-3-4 by George Mesler requesting to vacate a 30 foot easement located in the north half of vacated Pembroke Avenue between Melvin Avenue and __ Oporto Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 94-4-3-4 be approved for the following reasons: 1) That the subject easement is no longer needed to protect any public utilities. 2) That the subject easement can be more advantageously used in private ownership. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, announced that the public hearing portion of the meeting is concluded and the Commission would proceed with items pending before it. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is approval of the minutes of the 683rd Regular Meeting & Public Hearings held on May 3, 1994. 13460 On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent and seconded by Mr. Alanskas, it was #5-101-94 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 683rd Regular Meeting & Public Hearings of the City Planning Commission held on May 3, 1994 are hereby approved. '`n• A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Tent, Morrow, Alanskas, McCann, Engebretson NAYS: LaPine ABSENT: Fandrei Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Sign Permit Application by KA-DE Investments requesting approval for one ground sign for the property located at 33470 Lyndon Road in Section 21. Mr. Miller: This property is located on the north side of Lyndon just west of Farmington Road. They submitted a landscape plan which was requested at the study meeting. It is zoned OS so they are allowed one identification sign at 10 square feet. They can either use it as a wall sign or a ground sign. The petitioner is proposing a ground sign, which will be 10 square feet, 6 feet high. It is located 10 feet from the right-of-way line, which is required, so it is a conforming sign. The landscaping says there will be six yews approximately 18 to 24 inches around the sign. `ios•► Mr. Engebretson: Three on either side which would basically fill in that gap that is underneath the main body of the sign. Would you say that is a fair characterization? Mr. Miller: Yes. Mr. Engebretson: Is the petitioner here? Scott Allen, 42619 Five Mile: I am here on behalf of KA-DE seeking approval of the ground sign. I was here for the meeting last week and you had a couple of requests at that time for a scale drawing and also some colors, which I have in hand. The sample is the color of the building. Mr. Engebretson: Thank you very much for attending to those details. It makes the proposal a lot easier to understand. Mr. Alanskas: You are going to put those three yews in the middle of the sign. How far back is that floodlight going to be ft•it the yews? Mr. Allen: That is going to be an experimental thing when the yews are in place. 13461 Mr. Tent: The illumination time of the light. How long will that light be on? Will it be on by a timer or will it be on all the time? Mr. Allen: It will be on a timer. Mr. Tent: These are the true colors? Mr. Allen: Those are the colors. On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Tent and unanimously approved, it was #5-102-94 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Sign Permit Application by KA-DE Investments requesting approval for one ground sign for the property located at 33470 Lyndon Road in Section 21 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the Sign Package by Apex Sign Group, Inc. , received by the Planning Commission on May 4, 1994, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2) That the sign shall not be illuminated beyond one hour after closing; 3) That the landscaping related to the sign as shown on the Landscape Plan, received by the Planning Commission on May 13, 1994 is hereby approved and shall be adhered to. \.. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 684th Regular Meeting & Public Hearings held on May 17, 1994 was adjourned at 9:46 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMIISSION J' 1 / ;2 C. McCann, Secretary ATTEST: '6, ///// Jack EngPhre -.•n, Chairman jg