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