HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1993-09-28 13015
MINUTES OF THE 671st REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LIVONIA
`rr
On Tuesday, September 28, 1993, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 671st Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000
Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Jack Engebretson, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. , with
approximately 60 interested persons in the audience.
Members present: Jack Engebretson R. Lee Morrow James C. McCann
William LaPine Raymond W. Tent Robert Alanskas
Brenda Lee Fandrei
Members absent: None
Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; 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 93-8-1-12
by Tri-West Development Corp. requesting to rezone property located on
the south side of Five Mile Road between Bainbridge Avenue and Henry
Ruff Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 23 from RUFA to R-1.
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 rezoning proposal.
We have also received a letter from James and Gladys Hosey of 14954
Flamingo stating for forty years they have lived in the City
helping in many ways to make this a great City and now there are
people that want to come and divide up the neighborhood. They
state if Tri-West wants to split the land along Five Mile Road some
other way must be found other than coming into Flamingo at Hoy.
They suggested an alternate via Spanish Court or Five Mile Road or
better yet, let them run a road all the way to Henry Ruff. They
close by saying keep in mind the feelings of those long-time
residents when planning this development.
13016
We have also received a letter from Giuliano Soave of 19235 Gill
Road stating he believes the Planning Commission should approve
this petition for rezoning from RUF to R-1. If kept in its current
zoning, much of this land will go to waste. The most efficient use
of this parcel is R-1 zoning. He further states there are already
subdivisions in the surrounding area with R-1 zoning. He ends by
saying he is confident the Commission will receive more negative
feedback from neighbors who want to keep the present zoning of RUF
but the owners of this parcel should be allowed to utilize their
land in the most economically beneficial manner possible.
We have also received correspondence from Eugene and Patricia
Szewski of 30443 Hoy and A. Acosta of 30444 Hoy stating they are
against Petition 93-8-1-12 as it would create excess traffic on Hoy
and Flamingo, which has enough traffic already.
Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please come forward and give us your reasons
for making this request.
Sam Baki, 28623 Minton Ct. , Livonia: We are proposing, as you see, to rezone this
parcel to R-l. We feel R-1 is sufficient enough for the location.
There aren't that may lots, about 17 lots at the present time. I
understand everybody is complaining about the entrance from Hoy.
The traffic on Hoy is not as bad as everybody is complaining about
but we felt since Five Mile is behind it and commercial on the
other side, it is more sufficient to come in from the back, not to
have an entrance from Five Mile, due to fact people trying to exit
from that shopping center on Spanich Court to go onto Five Mile to
exit west, would have a hard time turning. We felt the best way to
handle any future traffic problems would be to enter from Hoy and
"ta" then the people will use Henry Ruff as an entrance, where there is
a light at that intersection. That is the purpose of our entrance
off Hoy and Flamingo.
Mr. Engebretson: Sir, you say we. Who is we?
Mr. Baki: There are partners.
Mr. Engebretson: And you are one of the partners?
Mr. Baki: Yes.
Mr. Morrow: Mr. Baki, the discussion about the roads leading into the proposed
subdivision, of course, are not germane tonight. There is nothing
we can do to condition zoning as it relates to how you come into a
piece of property. Primarily the question is should we go from RUF
to R-1. You indicated there is a 17 lot density under R-1. Did
you explore any other densities of a higher nature, meaning less
houses?
Mr. Baki: No we didn't.
Mr. Morrow: Do you currently own the property or do you have it on a condition?
Mr. Baki: We have it on condition.
13017
Mr. Morrow: If you were not granted the R-1, that would kill the deal?
Mr. Baki: Yes.
Mr. Engebretson: Anything to add sir?
Mr. Baki: Not really.
Mr. Engebretson: Then we will go to the audience to see if there is anyone wishing
to speak for or against this proposed rezoning.
John Borovsky, 15007 Flamingo: That would be just south of this development. I am
against it. If he says the traffic on Flamingo and Hoy is not that
bad, he doesn't live there. People use that to escape going down
Henry Ruff. Henry Ruff is an appropriately named road. It is the
worse road in Livonia. People by-pass it and use our street. I
have seen people going 40 to 45 down that road. That is made up of
1/2 acre lots. If he is going to chop it up into 17 postage stamp
size lots, that is going to ruin the character of the neighborhood.
If anything, he should use that Spanich Court property because I
would like to see it cleaned up. For years I have been calling the
City. There are truck tires and axles and old fuel pumps and
batteries strewn about that property. Nobody cleans it up.
Mr. Engebretson: That is not the property under question. We need to confine our
discussion tonight to the area that is crosshatched.
Mr. Borovsky: I stand on the record as being against it. It will increase
traffic flow and ruin the character of the neighborhood.
Debbie Shamma, 30564 Hoy: I live directly next door to this project. I am not
necessarily against this project but I am against the way it has
been proposed. I do disagree with the road going in the way it is
and I agree with Mr. Borovsky that I would like to have the lots be
much bigger. I don't disagree with the developer wanting to come
in and develop that area but it is not only going to ruin what I
feel is that rural urban type setting but I think it will affect
our values. We are looking at all our homes sitting there with 1/2
acre treed lots and then we will have these little cracker box type
homes. I happen to be a realtor so I do understand what it could
do to our values. I also have children that live there and that
road, I agree with John again, that road is very busy with traffic
and it is due to the condition of Henry Ruff. It is so rough that
everyone cuts through our neighborhood. I agree that I don't want
to see extra traffic so my concern is the way it is being proposed
and I would rather not have headlights in my picture window.
Mr. Engebretson: Since you are a realtor, you would be qualified to give us some
estimate as to the size homes that are in that general vicinity.
Ms. Shamma: Almost every home is between 1200 and 1400 square feet.
Mr. Engebretson: Regarding your concern with the traffic and the previous speaker
was concerned about that also, if this development were to be
closed on the south end and take all access to the property from
Five Mile Road, would you still have that concern?
13018
Ms. Shamma: No I don't believe I would. The only other concern I would have
would be the closeness of the development of the homes. That would
bother me I am sure.
Mr. Engebretson: I presume when you say you are immediately adjacent to the
New property, how far to the rear of your home do you have a lawn type
environment. Is that partly treed and wooded?
Ms. Shamma: No, it is an entire yard. As a matter of fact this development
company came to me to buy some of my yard and probably if market
value had been offered, I would have considered because I would
have liked to be an ally in the situation, but my lot from the
street back goes 292 feet.
Mr. Engebretson: Thank you very much for your input.
Joseph Kappler, 15071 Flamingo: I am right against that property. If they do what
they want to do now, our water line runs into Lot 21 and runs over
to Lot 3 and if they start building there, they will have to tear
up our water lines and we are going to have to put in new water
lines and why should we pay for something for this developer to
make money on? Another thing, when they build these small lots, we
are supposed to be 10 feet off the lot line. They make us be 10
feet so why shouldn't they have to be 10 feet? If their lots are
60 feet that brings the lots down to 40 feet. How are you going to
put a house and garage on 40 feet? I am against the whole works.
Mr. Engebretson: I would like to ask Mr. Nagy to respond to your concern regarding
the water lines. John, what would your estimation be?
Mr. Kappler: The City doesn't know anything about the water lines because when
they put the storm sewers in they didn't believe me. I had to dig
a whole four feet deep and show them where the water lines were.
Mr. Engebretson: I believe you but I am looking to Mr. Nagy from the standpoint of
policies of the City. Is it possible to assure this gentleman that
if this were to happen, that he would not suffer any financial loss
or he wouldn't be subsidizing the builder from a financial point of
view.
Mr. Nagy: Any utility improvement that is brought about by the virtue of a
subdivision plan will be borne by the proprietors of the
subdivision. That includes any relocation of existing utilities as
well as the expansion of any existing utilities or creation of new
utilities. All those costs are part of the subdivision improvement
costs.
Mr. Kappler: When the water line broke because it is only about two feet in the
middle of Lot 3, the City came to shut it off and then the people
on Lot 6 or 7, they had to pay for the water line themselves
because the City shut it off.
Mr. Nagy: We are going through a hearing process on the question of whether
or not the land should or should not be rezoned to this
13019
classification. In the event there is a subdivision that follows,
there will similarly be a hearing on the plan for the subdivision
itself, at which time we will get into not only street standards,
lot sizes but the utilities and at that time we will have a more
detailed engineering analysis of the utility improvement plan so we
`" can all be specific and know what we are talking about. It is
really at the time of the subdivision plan itself that we can get
into those kind of detailed engineering questions. Tonight our
role is one of determining whether or not it should be rezoned and
if so, to what lot size. It is in the early stages of rezoning not
in the details of the engineering plans.
Mr. Kappler: Why can't they leave it like it is? He got the property for a song
from Spanich because Mrs. Spanich didn't know anything about the
lots and the bank wanted to get rid of it so he got it for
practically nothing.
Mr. Engebretson: Sir we can't get into that type of issue tonight. Not to
trivialize your concern but that is not the issue here tonight.
Mr. Kappler: Well I am against it whatever it is.
Elaine Laurenchuk, 14726 Flamingo: I live slightly further south of this
development. I would like to comment on the traffic. Our streets
are narrow, there are no sidewalks, my children walk back and forth
to elementary school, riding their bikes to a friend's house. That
road gets a lot of traffic. They go very fast and more traffic
would come from this development and it would not be very good.
That road was not built to handle this amount of traffic.
Mrs. Fandrei: Would you be against this if the street didn't come out to this
intersection?
Ms. Laurenchuk: To be honest I was not even notified. My neighbor notified me of
it just this evening so I don't know much about the development but
anything that would bring more traffic into the area, I would not
be in favor of. I would like to see Henry Ruff resurfaced. That
would certainly alleviate our problem but anything that would bring
more traffic into the area is not good.
Mrs. Fandrei: What I am asking is if the street didn't come into Hoy and
Flamingo, you wouldn't be objecting to the development?
Ms. Laurenchuk: I don't like the idea of small lots. We have very large lots in
our neighborhood. It is a very nice park-like atmosphere and this
would change the makeup.
Nick Chuey: My wife and I live at 14932 Flamingo. We both are opposed to the
development as it is proposed. We have enjoyed the semi-rural
setting for a couple of years now. We have lived in this sub for
two years. I believe the development with bringing Flamingo Road
into a court situation, I am assuming there would be street lights
and sidewalks in the development. We currently don't have that and
I believe most of my neighbors enjoy that type of setting.
'fir
13020
Sometimes change is good but in this case I don't believe so at
least as proposed. I would like to go on record that I am opposed
to the development as it stands.
Robert Pollock, 30505 Hoy: I am close to this proposed development. I understand
.444" the question isn't about the traffic flow so I won't try to
address that but the lot size which was mentioned would not be
large enough to hold up the value of the houses that would be
comparable to those in the area. This proposal, not in its exact
state, has been put in front of the Council before and we were able
to stop it at that time. Hopefully we will be able to do it again
with your understanding. I had grown up at the location where I am
now. I owned another house in Livonia on a slightly smaller lot,
still much bigger than this, and I had purchased my parents house
because of the nice area that it is with the larger lots and I
would hope the Council can maintain that in this area.
Dolores Young, 30425 Hoy: This proposal runs similar to what has been brought to
you before and the people at that time said no they don't want the
small lots because it does not fit in with the present homes. The
idea of opening that road up into Hoy would totally change the
whole atmosphere of the neighborhood. My husband and I are both
against this at this time and the way it is proposed. Those lots
at 60 x 120, most of the lots in that are are 300 feet deep. Ours
is 600 feet deep so there is quite a discrepancy in the size of the
present lots and the ones that are proposed so we are against it.
Glenn Jackson, 30561 Hoy: That is Lot 32 at the corner of Hoy and Flamingo. As
proposed I am against the proposal as it is laid out here. I am
not against the development. I think there could be a compromise
'41ft' here if we look at 9 lots instead of 17 and use the Spanich Court
driveway there and put a road in off of that to service those 9
lots as they exist. At this time I am against the proposal.
Mr. Morrow: You mentioned 9 lots, what would be the zoning?
Mr. Jackson: I would leave the 9 lots at the RUFA rating but if we would come
half way down Spanich Court and put a road in through there I think
you would have adequate lots if you counted across there.
Art Oswalt, 30544 Hoy: We have Lot 20. We have lived in Livonia about 27 years.
We have seen many proposals changing from RUFA to everything else.
We are against this proposal due to the fact it will create a
traffic problem. On top of that we like the present environment as
it is. We have trees in the back. It is nice. It is peaceful and
it just sits in the way we like to see it done. We want it to be
on the record that we are opposed to the present petition.
Mr. Engebretson: What trees are you talking about sir?
Mr. Oswalt: We have a lot of trees in our backyard.
Mr. Engebretson: I am trying to understand what affect this would have on your
trees.
13021
Mr. Oswalt: It would eventually because of the huge traffic pattern that would
be coming up and down the road. That would probably destroy some
of the trees eventually. We have seen a lot of trees taken down
because of current damage.
'our David Lamb, 30544 Hoy: I am the last lot on the end. The way they have the road
routed around, it is going to end up being three houses behind my
lot on the same size lot as mine. I just again want to say I am
against this.
Virginia Oswalt, 30544 Hoy: My husband made a mistake, we are on Lot 19. We are
two lots away from the proposed development. I want to know why
from Bainbridge to Henry Ruff, when Bainbridge to Spanich Court is
already commercial. Why are you including that from Bainbridge to
Spanich Court? What I am thinking is maybe this gentleman wanted
to go for residential and then eventually go commercial.
Mr. Engebretson: I think we can assure you that is not going to happen.
Mrs. Oswalt: I want to go on record that I am opposed.
Mr. Engebretson: I would like to ask the petitioner to come back to the podium. I
have a question for you.
Mr. LaPine: Is Spanich Court a private road?
Mr. Nagy: Yes it is.
Mr. LaPine: Access by Spanich Court into this subdivision could not be
accomplished unless they bought Spanich Court?
Mr. Nagy: Yes and brought it up to City standards to become a fully dedicated
public street.
Mr. Engebretson: Sir, I understand that the lots you are proposing here would be
substantially smaller by a large factor than those that exist in
this area, but I am curious to know what your long range plans are
regarding the homes you will be putting in there. What general
size home do you have in mind?
Mr. Baki: We are starting at 1250 square foot and up to about 2000 square
feet. We have a sample ranch at the present time being built on
West Chicago. They can check that house out. That house is 1700
square feet. That identical layout with exterior elevation with
some amount of brick, which would be roughly 50% of brick on the
house, is going to be present on these homes. The starting price
is $125,000. That is the purpose of having these many lots because
of the costs incurred and due to all the prices in the area, it has
been confirmed the average house in that area generally runs about
$115,000 based on 1200 square feet.
Mr. Tent: Mr. Baki, I understand the property is subject to. In other words
you haven't purchased the property.
Mr. Baki: That is true.
13022
Mr. Tent: One of the things you said I take issue with. It is pretty hard
to find a home in Livonia for less than $100,000. We have a good
community and the homes are quite large and we do have large lots
and we have some smaller ones, but in this particular area have you
given any thought in keeping it in the RUF zoning category and
build homes in this size?
Mr. Baki: It will not go with the cost of the new construction. Between the
property's cost and the new construction, the prices of the homes
would have to start at $175,000. That area will not take it.
Mr. Tent: So you are set in your ways to the extent that if you weren't
fortunate in getting the zoning, this would be the end?
Mr. Baki: Yes. Like some other people mentioned with respect to Spanich
Court, which is a private road, we already looked into that first
and then we found out Spanich Court was not built to City
standards. For that road to be built to City standards it would
cost $100,000.
Mr. Tent: So nowhere in your figuring could you come up with anything
greater than what you are proposing at this time?
Mr. Baki: There is one way coming off Five Mile and then that would be
another issue. To turn left off Five Mile is going to be the
hardest. I have tried a few times to turn off Spanich Court when
we were looking at this property, and from the shopping center
there is a lot of traffic and it is hard to get out to turn left.
We felt it would be a better idea to come from the back.
'111m' Mr. Tent: When is your option up?
Mr. Baki: The option is whenever we go to the City Council.
Mr. Tent: No set date?
Mr. Baki: No.
Mr. Engebretson: Do you have anything to add?
Mr. Baki: With respect to water and sewer, there is water and sewer in the
back of the property on Spanich Court. That is where the proposed
connection is going to be.
Mrs. Fandrei: John, what would R-2 be?
Mr. Nagy: R-2 would be 70x120.
Mrs. Fandrei: R-3 would be 80x120?
Mr. Nagy: That is correct.
Mrs. Fandrei: Right now, what is our general front measurement on Hoy?
Mr. Nagy: 65 feet.
13023
Mrs. Fandrei: So that is close to the R-2.
Nick Chuey, 14932 Flamingo: I would like to ask the petitioner if they have a
slide showing the whole proposed modification to the property?
rrs. Mr. Engebretson: There is some preliminary work that was presented to the staff
and we have had the opportunity at our study meeting getting
prepared for this meeting to see that. We had some concerns that
have been expressed here tonight regarding that traffic flow and
the impact on the existing residents, etc. and while there isn't
anything to present to you because it is a zoning issue, I
understand your question is a valid question. It is one that can
be discussed if they have that kind of material available but
tonight we are trying to deal with the zoning issue and if it were
successful going through the process, then we would deal with the
platting of that land and you, of course, would be invited to those
meetings as well. I can tell you the rough work that has been
presented at this time did not receive a very favorable reaction
for many of the same reasons that have been brought up here
tonight.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 93-8-1-12 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas and seconded by Mrs. Fandrei, it was
##9-173-93 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
September 28, 1993 on Petition 93-8-1-12 by Tri-West Development Corp.
requesting to rezone property located on the south side of Five Mile
Road between Bainbridge Avenue and Henry Ruff Road in the Northwest 1/4
of Section 23 from RUFA to R-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby
determine to table Petition 93-8-1-12 until the study meeting of October
5, 1993.
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.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Tent, Fandrei, LaPine, Alanskas, Engebretson
NAYS: Morrow, McCann
ABSENT: None
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 93-8-1-13
by T. Rogvoy Assoc. & Boston Chicken requesting to rezone property
located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Seven Mile Road and
Clarita Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 11 from P to C-2.
Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
13024
Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating
their department has no objections to this rezoning proposal.
Mr. Engebretson: Is the petitioner present?
John Carlin: I am appearing on behalf of Boston Chicken. We are the
petitioners. We would like to tear down the two buildings that are
there, that are surrounded by this brick wall. We would tear down
the brick wall as well and construct a Boston Chicken restaurant.
I have site plans here. I have drawings here. I have photographs
of the existing buildings that we would tear down. I think all of
you are familiar with this location. I think that the usage of C-1
and C-2 around this site is compatible to what our use is, C-2.
There is P, parking, in the back. Our petition is to at least
change the hatched area. That is the only portion we are involved
with tonight. We think it would be a big improvement to the entire
frontage. They have done a nice job with the mall and we will be
removing an eyesore and build a nice restaurant.
Mr. Morrow: Mr. Carlin, just for clarification, you would take those two
buildings to the north all the way up to the service station, you
would raze those buildings to make your development.
Mr. Carlin: That is correct, and the wall behind on the left side of these two
buildings and the south side right up to the driveway. I am not
sure what happens to the wall along the south side of the gas
station and west side of the gas station. Whether that would come
down or not I am not sure.
Mr. LaPine: If those two buildings are taken down and that property is rezoned
Solar
and you build a freestanding building there with the required
setback under the ordinance, are you going to have enough parking
on your parcel? I am not talking about the shopping center,
because it is my understanding from other petitioners that they had
some kind of agreement with the shopping center that there were a
certain number of spaces behind these two buildings that they could
use for parking. Are you still going to be utilizing that parking
or will your freestanding building have enough parking within its
boundaries to handle your restaurant?
Mr. Carlin: The answer is no. We are sharing the parking with the surrounding
property owners.
Mr. LaPine: At the time the other potential tenant was moving in there, there
wasn't a big problem with the parking but since that time you have
Sveden House Restaurant plus the pet shop and where there used to
be parking that was supposedly given to these people to use, it is
now being utilized by the restaurant and pet shop. I am just
wondering if you are buying a piece of property where you are going
to find out you are going to have a real problem with parking
because I know Boston Chicken. Your establishment you have in
Livonia now is very successful. I know the one you just built on
Telegraph Road, I go by it every day, there are always people lined
up to get into the place. My problem is because this is right on
13025
Middlebelt Road at a very, very busy intersection, and because
basically Boston Chicken is a carry-out operation, if this is the
right location for this type of operation. Believe me I want you
to come to Livonia and I want to see that freestanding building but
I think we have a problem here. I think we have to look at it and
address it.
Mr. Carlin: When you get to the site plan they do have a drive-thru, so that
will cut down on the amount of people entering the restaurant. We
have found with our on-site parking, and we will have the employees
use the shared parking, we should have plenty of space. I was just
over there tonight and there was nothing being used in this area
here. (He pointed this out on the map).
Mr. Tent: Mr. Carlin, Boston Chicken is a fine operation which I certainly
want to come to Livonia and I think the people do a good job. Can
you tell me the size of this Boston Chicken as compared to the one
at Newburgh and Six Mile Road?
Mr. Carlin: I wasn't aware we were going to get into the site plan so I didn't
review a lot of that. This one would be 2880 to 3000 square feet.
I believe the other store is probably 2600 to 2700 square feet. I
am not one hundred percent certain.
Mr. Tent: Then this will be a larger store. Do you feel by removing the
existing masonry wall, which takes up parking, etc, is that going
to add any additional parking?
Mr. Carlin: We do pick up some additional parking as a result of moving the
wall simply because you can use the space and you have the ingress
and egress so yes that does have an affect.
Mr. Tent: I am pleased you are going to do that and you are tearing down the
two existing buildings but I have to share the feelings of my
fellow Commissioner about the parking and I hope you can address
that.
Mr. Carlin: That is a concern of ours as well. If you can't park, you can't
get into the restaurant. We aren't interested in running something
that our customers aren't going to be able to have access to. We
are aware of that. We have looked at this site and we feel we can
service our customers with the parking and with the shared parking
at the peak overflow times.
Mr. Tent: You say you are going to have a drive-up window at this location.
Do you have that at any other location?
Mr. Carlin: No we do not. It is something we have been looking at for over a
year now. It has been studied. It has been operated in other
locations, not in Michigan. In several of these Michigan locations
we are doing a design to accommodate that if a decision is made to
go that way.
Mr. Tent: You feel by being a carry-out, cars can drive through without
parking?
13026
Mr. Carlin: Yes.
Mrs. Fandrei: Mr. Carlin, I am also very anxious to have you, not only have you
come to Livonia again, but to have you come into this area. That
_1 ,,, is an area that has been suffering and you have a good operation
and we feel good about your company and your product. We are very
interested in trying to accommodate you. How deficient are you in
your parking?
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Carlin, since that question really wasn't something you were
prepared to deal with here tonight, and we are really far off
track, I think the concern is we don't want to send you the wrong
message of giving you approval for changing this parking and then
you turn up later with a parking problem. We are moving far off
the zoning issue.
Mr. Carlin: To answer the question, 31 spaces are required. We have 23 on site
so we would be 8 deficient. We can have 6 employees park off site
so that is only 2 deficient. We are convinced we can handle it.
Mrs. Fandrei: It does have a bearing on the rezoning and we are more comfortable
with two short.
Mr. LaPine: I have no problem with the rezoning request. I am going to have to
really be convinced before I approve any site plan because when you
are talking about a drive-in restaurant, we have to talk about the
stacking of cars, where do we stack them? How will that work out
on the site There are a lot of problems here. I have no
objection to the rezoning of this parcel but I may have a problem
'401w when you come in with a site plan.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 93-8-1-13 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously approved,
it was
#9-174-93 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
September 28, 1993 on Petition 93-8-1-13 by T. Rogvoy Assoc. & Boston
Chicken requesting to rezone property located on the west side of
Middlebelt Road between Seven Mile Road and Clarita Avenue in the
Northeast 1/4 of Section 11 from P to C-2, the City Planning Commission
does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 93-8-1-13 be
approved for the following reasons:
1) That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the adjacent
zoning district in the area.
2) That the proposed change of zoning will provide for a zoning
district which will permit uses which are compatible to and in
harmony with the surrounding use in the area.
3) That the shape and location of the present P, parking zoning
district is arbitrary and prevents the development of the subject
property for any commercial use which is compatible to the adjacent
'04111. uses in the area.
13027
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance
#1543, as amended.
Mr. Tent: The reason I made the approving resolution here is I would like to
get that area cleaned up and I think we can work with the
petitioner when he comes in with the site plan to make this a
viable site and I agree with my fellow Commissioner, I will look at
it very strongly and it will be a tough one but I believe the
zoning is appropriate.
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 93-9-2-22
by Building Committee, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to construct
a new credit union facility to be located on the south side of Five Mile
Road between Levan and Golfview Drive in the Northeast 1/4 of Section
20.
Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating
there is currently an application before the Department of Natural
Resources to fill a portion of the designated flood plain across a
portion of the subject site. While this office has indicated to
the above agency that we have no objections to the placement of
fill, the final determination relative to the matter will be made
by the Department of Natural Resources. We received a follow up
letter from Engineering making reference to their first letter.
This letter states when the preliminary plat for Rennolds Ravine
Subdivision was submitted to the Department of Natural Resources
circa 1987, the above agency determined that there was a flood
plain associated with the Bell Branch of the Bakewell Drain which
traverses the property. The above determination was made pursuant
to Public Act 167. Please note, however, that under City Ordinance
1543 this area is not designated as a flood plain. They further
state based on the above information, their office responded to a
Department of Natural Resources application to fill a flood plain
submitted on behalf of the subject property. You will note that we
did not object to the filling of the flood plain since it did not
contradict any City Ordinances. We indicated, however, our concern
with the impact that the current flood plain fill request would
have on the design criteria submitted to the Department of Natural
Resources for the relocation of the flood plain and the
installation of the culvert under Golfview Avenue in connection
with the Rennolds Ravine Subdivision. Therefore, this office has
indicated earlier that we had no objection to the filling of the
flood plain subject to a re-review by the Department of Natural
Resources of the 1987 information with the current application
information.
We have also received letters from the Fire Marshal's office and
the Traffic Bureau stating they have no objection to this proposal.
Also in our file is a letter from the Ordinance Enforcement
Division stating that their office has no objection to this
proposal; however they would like to bring to our attention the
'tow following: 1. Unless specifically waived as a function of site
13028
plan approval, a protective wall is required where this property
abuts property zoned residential, and 2. The ground sign proposed
for this property may be a maximum of 10 square feet in area, 6
feet high at a minimum setback of 10 feet from the property line.
We have also received a letter from Ronald and Karen Reinke of
15025 Golfview expressing their concern over this petition. They
state they purchased their home in 1987 and were aware of the
zoning designation on the property in question. In an ideal
situation, they believe that everyone would like to see this land
remain vacant or rezoned residential; however this is not the case.
They go on to say they object to the entrance off Golfview Drive as
it appears to be a very unsafe condition. Traffic has increased
significantly in the last several years on Five Mile and many of
them have had near misses trying to turn left into the sub with
patrons of Idyl Wyld and Bobby's Country House trying to turn left
into those establishments. Additionally, the residents on
Parkhurst were charged a premium for their ravine lots and now it
appears that some of the residents will now have a driveway view
with guardrail and little or no landscaping. They go on to say the
second concern is the proposed filling in of the floodplain and
destruction of wetlands. Their concern centers on the fact that in
instances of heavy rain, their rear yard two blocks south from the
Bakewell Drain has flooded to within 15 feet of their home and
water has been over the curbs at the intersection of Golfview and
Howell. This situation exists because the sub was engineered to
dump storm water to the Bakewell Drain, the flow of the drain has
increased with development to the west. The question of filling in
the flood plain causes them great concern. The end by saying
ft. destruction of wetlands is yet another problem that the DNR must
approve and from personal experience, it must be replaced. They
see no evidence that this is even being attempted on the plan as
presented. In speaking to the Planning staff, the wetlands may not
be a point of contention, however, it does appear on the owners
request to fill the area.
Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please come forward.
Bill Minahan, President of BCI, Building Committee, Inc. We are the designers and
builders of this project. We have been hired by the Livonia
Parishes Credit Union to develop this project for them, to come up
with a site plan, a plan for the building itself, and ultimately
construct it if we are allowed to, on this site. The credit union
is a closed charter credit union, which means you must be part of a
specific group in order to join it. Our experience in 10 to 15
years of doing this work through the midwest is that tends to be a
fairly low impact kind of credit union for this type of property.
It is not like a bank where anybody can walk in and participate.
You must be part of a small group in order to be a member there.
The site was designed in such a way to allow us to put about a 4500
square foot building with the ability to have a drive-up and with
possible expansion capabilities in the future. What we are asking
for is apparently a waiver from you in order to develop the
property.
13029
Mr. Engebretson: To make that clear for others, this proposed use is not a
permitted use in the OS zoning district but it is a use that is
permitted with this special waiver process that we are going
through here, which in effect could up the zoning just a notch. It
`�.. is a zoning type of issue but it is not really a change.
Mr. Morrow: I just wanted to explore your clients. You mentioned parishes as
plural. Is it representing one particular parish or will this be a
service bureau for a conglomerate of credit unions in the area?
Mr. Minahan: This is a fixed group of people right now that must be part of
eight parishes. You must participate within that parish in order
to be eligible for membership within the credit union.
Mr. Morrow: Are these Livonia parishes or parishes outside the border of
Livonia?
Mr. Minahan: All but one are located in Livonia.
Mr. Morrow: The ones in Livonia have their facilities here in Livonia.
Mr. Minahan: Yes.
Mr. Alanskas: What would the membership roughly be?
Fred Schuster, Manager of Livonia Parishes Credit Union: The number of
participants in the area, I broke them down into zip codes. We
have in 48150 - 1,384 accounts, in 48152 - 594 accounts, and in
48154 - 1,430 accounts presently. We do have some members who live
in surrounding areas. The other parish we service is Our Lady
Victory of Northville but we do service families in Westland and
Garden City. So it covers some of the surrounding area.
Mr. Alanskas: So what you are saying this facility could be used by at least
4,000 people.
Mr. Schuster: Yes.
Mr. LaPine: The eight parishes that this is going to combine, do those parishes
now have a credit union?
Mr. Schuster: Yes Livonia Parishes. We are existing now. Our office is on
Plymouth Road.
Mr. LaPine: So you have a location now but you want to relocate?
Mr. Schuster: Correct. We have been there for 42 years.
Mrs. Fandrei: The notes we have from our study meeting state that your square
footage was 5500 and the gentleman is stating 4500.
Mr. Minahan: The building as it is currently designed is at 4500 square feet.
That is the size of the building as it would be originally
developed.
13030
Mrs. Fandrei: Your future expansion that you have on your site plan, what square
footage would that be?
Mr. Minahan: I believe somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,000 square feet.
vrr.
Mrs. Fandrei: Then that would get us up to the 5500.
Mr. Shane presented the Schematic Site Plan to the Commissioners and audience.
Mrs. Fandrei: Your entrance would be the west elevation?
Mr. Minahan: That is correct. The main entrance of the building will be on the
west.
Mrs. Fandrei: You are required to have two handicap parking spaces and there is
one at that location?
Mr. Minahan: If we are requested to have two, we can easily do that.
Mrs. Fandrei: I guess I would like to know why you laid it out with the entrance
into the project being off of Golfview.
Mr. Minahan: When we develop these buildings one of the ways that you want to
keep the circulation on site and under some control is to separate
the member parking from the drive-up. This entrance off Golfview
gave us the opportunity to create more than adequate stack-up space
and to separate that traffic from members walking through the
parking lot, getting out of their cars. It is a safety feature.
Mrs. Fandrei: Would it be possible to take your entrance at that location rather
than at Golfview Drive where it would be interfering with your
residential traffic to go off Five Mile Road?
Mr. Minahan: Sure we could do that.
Mrs. Fandrei: That is the problem I have. That is the only road to get in or out
of the subdivision.
Mr. Minahan: I don't see that as a problem. The only concern I have, generally
communities have objections to having so many curb cuts.
Mrs. Fandrei: It is not favorable but it might be less objectionable to the
residents.
Mr. Minahan: The very shape of this site is somewhat awkward. That land in the
northeast corner is not much use to us other than for landscaping
purposes. It would be very easy to bring a drive through there.
Mr. Engebretson: I am not aware of a single commercial development in the City
that takes access from a residential street. I think that the
issue of the number of curb cuts on Five Mile Road is an
insignificant factor relative to that.
Mr. Minahan: We would have no problem at all changing that.
'Nr•
13031
Mr. Morrow: What are your hours of operation?
Mr. Schuster: Monday through Thursday, 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Friday 9:30 a.m.
until 6:30 p.m. and Saturday from 9:00 a.m. until noon.
Now
They presented a color rendering.
Mr. Engebretson: Does that represent the true colors?
Mr. Minahan: The colors have not been determined by the Board of Directors.
They have seen this and they like it. It is certainly subject to
some review. The intention was to develop a building to make it
look like a credit union building and secondly to have it fit into
a nearby residential area so we chose a style that we hoped would
be compatible using brick with either aluminim or vinyl siding and
an asphalt shingle roof and fully landscaped all around.
Mr. Engebretson: And the landscape plan, if this were approved, would come later?
Mr. Minahan: Yes it would. We have certainly put funds in the budget for this
to meet your expectations.
Mr. Engebretson: Would that include funds that would provide for substantial berms
and barriers that would separate your property from the
residential so they are not looking at an asphalt parking lot?
Mr. Minahan: The concern we have goes back to the shape of the site. The
eastern portion of that site is very narrow. Moving that drive
over to Five Mile would help. We are certainly open to looking at
that. We want to be a good neighbor. We want to develop a project
'04411.
that everyone would be proud of and if berms are needed, we will
certainly look at it. I am just somewhat cautious about the
eastern half of the site, the narrowness, that it pushes everything
too far north depending on how high of a berm. If we are talking
about a two foot or three foot berm, we could certainly do that.
If it gets to be more than that, that could be a problem.
Mr. Engebretson: You are aware there are ordinances here that require either a
wall or berm or greenbelt to separate residential areas from
non-residential uses.
Mr. Minahan: We would expect to comply with that.
Mr. Engebretson: Since this site is so difficult to work with, wouldn't it have
made sense to look at the other half of that empty parcel there
that would be to the west of this parcel?
Mr. Minahan: During negotiations with the owner this site became a more
favorable one for him to sell and I can't remember the reasons for
not looking at that site but this was the one that was offered.
Mr. Engebretson: It would just appear a lot of problems that we are concerned
about would go away.
13032
Mr. Minahan: It certainly would because we would have all the depth that we
would need but I think with what we are planning here, and what is
being requested in terms of berms, I think we can comply with that.
_om._ Mrs. Fandrei: What percentage of the property are you developing?
Mr. Minahan: I have not calculated that. The property right now is roughly 1.6
acres with 4500, potentially 5500 square foot building.
Mrs. Fandrei: Mr. Nagy, do you know the total acreage on the full parcel?
Mr. Nagy: The total size is 6.16 acres.
Mrs. Fandrei: Is that his site or the total site?
Mr. Shane: The total site.
Mrs. Fandrei: How many acres is their proposal?
Mr. Shane: 1.6 acres.
Bill Campbell: I am with the realtor involved with the property. The total piece
of property is 5.067 acres of which this is approximately 1.3
acre sale. If I could go on just a little bit to help Mrs. Fandrei
as far as why this was selected. The way the development was, the
way the owner had approached us was they could utilize the smaller
and narrow segment for parking rather than trying to squeeze on a
building and then put all the parking at that end so this way here
would work out better for everyone plus the cost was a little less
than the other end.
Mr. Minahan: I want to continue with that a little bit. Credit unions
nationwide are regulated by a 5% limit on assets. In order to
develop the size of the building 5% limit is for land and building.
In order to develop the size of the building we needed, we had to
keep the land costs under control. You asked the question why we
didn't move over to the western portion of this site. That
property, because of its depth, required us to take more, which
increased the cost and made the project not feasible for us. This
became a much more attractive portion even though it is an odd
shape.
Mr. Engebretson: We will go to the audience to see if there is anyone wishing to
speak for or against this proposal.
Carl Short, 15065 Woodside: I live in the affected subdivision and I am President
of the civic association in that area. I have three major
questions. One revolves around the flood plain alteration, which
is connected with this proposal. The impact on that, according to
the City of Livonia now, is they don't recognize the flood plains
exist. Is that a correct assumption?
Mr. Engebretson: Let me try to respond to that. It is our understanding that the
DNR, who has ultimate control over these issues, will be rendering
a decision relative to this proposal in the very near future. They
13033
are the controlling body. If they determine that a piece of land
is either flood plain or wetland, they will determine whether or
not it can be used and if it can, if there are other mitigating
factors, etc. That is not really for us to deal with tonight. I
hope that helps you understand who does have control.
Mr. Short: I understand at the same time the City of Livonia does have some
impact. They do have a say in the hearings the DNR puts on.
Mr. Engebretson: The DNR has the ultimate control.
Mr. Short: Yes they do. By virtue of the fact that if they don't put up a
wall upon this subject property line, you are jeopardizing a ten
million dollar subdivision. As was mentioned earlier in a letter
from Mr. Reinke, water backs up. That is a low area all the way
through. Everybody I have talked to in that subdivision, 72
houses, say their sump pump goes on at least every half hour. We
realized when we bought there were possible water problems. We can
live with that. We cannot live with the fact that our City has
stabbed us in the back.
Mr. Engebretson: Let me respond to that. The wall you refer to is not a
requirement. It was a requirement at one time. You could either
put up a wall or go to the Zoning Board of Appeals and seek the use
of a greenbelt with or without a berm in lieu of a wall. We have
recently implemented a new ordinance that gives the Planning
Commission and Council the latitude to substitute a greenbelt, with
or without a berm, in substitution for a wall, particularly in a
case like this where a wall would be detrimental. I can assure you
sto.. the City Engineering Department and the City Planning Commission
and I am sure the Council would recognize that potential damage and
would never force the developer to put a wall in there. There will
be no wall.
Mr. Short: Number two was the proposed entrance to the credit union. That
also has been taken care of. Number three, the increase in the
traffic pattern in that general area. Right now during rush hour,
both in the morning and at night, there is a fair amount of
difficulty getting out of our subdivision and the subdivision
immediately across the street due to traffic on Five Mile. With
the increased traffic that credit union will be putting in the
immediate area, I would like to request a traffic study be made to
put in a traffic signal.
John Hayden, 15105 Golfview: I too am opposed to the entrance which apparently has
been taken care of. My other two main concerns are regarding the
flood plain. I am not an engineer but I know water when I see it in
my backyard and my basement and right now it is not there and I
would hope any changes in the flood plain won't negatively impact
our home. I also have a concern with respect to the increased
traffic congestion. I have some security or safety concerns as
that corner at Golfview and Five Mile Road is a drop off for the
children when they come from school. Also our high school kids are
waiting inside the subdivision for the school buses to pick them up
at seven o'clock in the morning. This time of the year it is dark.
13034
I don't know if there is going to be an ATM at this site but I
would have a concern with respect to people coming through and
using the facility at all hours if there is an ATM machine.
�.. Mr. Engebretson: I would like to ask the petitioner to clarify for the record
whether or not there will be a proposal for an ATM.
Mr. Minehan: There is no plan right now to put an ATM machine in. However, we
want the option to have that. We would propose a drive-up ATM
underneath the canopy that would be well lighted.
Mr. Engebretson: It is my understanding that if you were to want an ATM in the
future, you would come back and go through a process similar to
this so we would have a chance to have our say at that time. At
the moment there is no ATM indicated on this property.
Don Anderson, 15121 Golfview: That would be four houses from the corner. Some of
the concerns I have, have already been expressed. I think that is
a very busy intersection because there are two subdivisions that
are emptying into that area. If I sense the Chairman's remarks
correctly, that entrance through the subdivision seems to be a
serious problem to you as it is to the rest of us. If you look at
that entrance, you will see that it is barely more than a car's
length from the sidewalk and you have to actually walk that area to
see how unsafe that entrance is in this particular plan. The plan
as a whole is a very ambitious one. It is a very ambitious
project. It is a very poor site selection. You can see the
problems that have cropped up here in a number of different areas.
The people that back onto this particular property will have the
advantage of watching a stream of cars go through the drive-thru
section most of the day, certainly on weekends and there is nothing
in this particular plan that shows any kind of landscaping. There
is a guardrail. If you like guardrails, I guess that is good.
There is a Christmas tree or two to the left and all landscaping is
on Five Mile Road so if you live across the road, you get the trees
but if you live behind, you get asphalt and something that might
look like alley more than anything else. This is a very ambitious
project as indicated by the plans for future expansion. I heard
the number 4,000 members of this credit union. They are obviously
planning on having more members at a future point in time and that
will increase the traffic to this particular project. I strongly
urge the Commission to give serious consideration to not approving
this particular plan.
Bill McDonnell: I own Lot 40 on Parkhurst at Golfview: The culvert that runs
through here right now runs underneath the street. Is anyone aware
of how much water this drain handles? Mr. Nagy, do you have any
idea how much water this handles?
Mr. Nagy: In terms of volume. I leave that up to our City Engineer. It is
their responsibility. It is not mine.
Mr. McDonnell: I understand that you read some letters. I am just going by facts.
These are things he has introduced to us indicating the City found
nothing wrong with the site plan and if you will look at the
s‘"" entrance, which we are talking about, that is ridiculous.
13035
Mr. Engebretson: If you had been paying attention sir, you would realize.
Mr. McDonnell: I understand but it was presented in here as acceptable. We are
here contesting it and you are hearing it, which is fine. That is
Ni.. the way it should be, but I don't understand the City looking at a
site plan like this and approving it.
Mr. Engebretson: From the point of view that those departments were asked to
respond within the areas of their concern and authority, they
responded in an appropriate manner. Now we are having this hearing
to deal with all the issues and I think we have a long ways to go
here. I hope you understand the City is very concerned about your
concerns and the fact that a department head found nothing
technically wrong with the proposal, from his particular point of
view, was not doing you or anyone else a disservice. That you are
being assured of here tonight and again at City Council.
Mr. McCann: I think when an engineer looks at it, he looks at it, is there an
engineering problem? He is not looking at a traffic study. The
police look at it from a different point of view as to whether
emergency vehicles can get in and get out. It is up to the
Planning Commission and Council to put it together and see if the
project as a whole is feasible. That is what we are trying to do
here. Nobody is being a traitor. People get angry at us but this
is our first chance to look at it. We have never seen this before
our study session last week. We are taking a look at it. The idea
of this public hearing is to get the viewpoints of the neighbors
and petitioner and then make a decision based on what is good for
the City as a whole and consider the local neighbors. We are
independent people who work in the City. We are all residents of
the City. We come up here to do the public good and we are not
trying to hurt anybody and our interests are in the best of the
City. Your comment that the City is betraying you, that has
nothing to do with it. That is why we are here and that is why we
are spending a lot of time on this issue tonight.
Mr. McDonnell: There was nothing about the City betraying us. That wasn't the
idea. The idea is if you have people in a job and you give them a
job to do, you have to look at these things. I am not on the
Planning Commission. I am not totally aware of everything that
goes on in the City but I certainly can see the proposed project as
it is right now just wouldn't fly.
Mr. Engebretson: That is our job. That is what we are here to do tonight.
Mr. McDonnell: The other question. We are talking about the flood plain. We are
going to go to the DNR. This meeting is on October 6. Is that not
the tail wagging the dog here? Supposing we go through this
exercise here and they say there is no feasible way we can change
that. If you don't know how much water this drain has to handle,
how can you possibly make any judgment? When you build this
project you will have more surface water that this will be able to
handle. When it rains, there is a concrete abutment, which the
culvert runs through. That thing runs to the very top of that.
The people are saying at the other end the water cannot get out
13036
fast enough so it backs up. When you start talking about putting a
culvert in, you better make an on-site visit and see what you have
and what can be done. That is our concern. Our concern is we want
someone to represent us. You represent us and we ask that you
�.. represent us in a way that looks towards us. You are on our side,
I believe. I don't have anything against anybody that wants to
develop anything but they have to consider where the property is,
what is behind it and how it impacts the rest of the people. Good
points were brought out here. Buses stop here to pick up kids.
Just take a trip sometime at 4:00 or 5:00 and see how hard it is to
get into that subdivision. You could not in good conscience look
at this thing and understand it and say this is a good proposal.
It is not a personal criticism to you or anybody else but I want
you to understand what we are concerned about and we want you to
look very hard at the situation before this thing is approved.
Mr. Alanskas: To the gentleman that just spoke, I live just south of your
subdivision and my wife and I walk through your subdivision at
least once a week. We walk there to look at flowers and nice homes
and I really have not seen that much water. I would be more than
glad to come by again and take a walk with you to see what you are
referring to.
Mr. McDonnell: When you are sitting with your windows open and you hear a roaring,
you wonder what was that and I walked out to the back and it was
this water running down this drain.
Mr. Alanskas: I would like to see that. That is very important.
Mr. McDonnell: I might have some photographs. This is not just a one-time thing.
Now you take this blacktop you are talking about and you are going
to add this surface water to it and you are talking about filling
up the stream, there will be a major situation. If you want to
have 100,000 people down at City Hall raising hell, I don't think
you want that.
Mr. Alanskas: I will take another look at it.
John McIntire, 36066 Parkhurst: I am directly adjacent to the proposed
development. The question as to exactly where the fill dirt is
going to be placed, it looks like they are actually going to put it
on my property. My property extends on the other side of the drain
at least 20 to 25 feet and according to this proposal, fill dirt is
going to be put contiguous to the drain. I am not an engineer but
I do know water flows downhill and if you put more dirt there, it
is going to make my land wetter and less usable. My kids play
there. We plant flowers there. We use that property on the other
side of the ravine. I would like to ask where that fill dirt is
going to be placed.
Mr. Engebretson: I would think probably not but let me tell you I don't think we
are going to resolve this issue tonight. There are many
outstanding issues that need to be investigated like yours.
Mr. McIntire: You have already addressed most of my other issues.
`rr.
13037
Tom Groth, 15063 Golfview: I am seven houses from the corner off Five Mile. I
want to emphasize one of the more practical aspects that may have
been missed, there is only one entrance to that subdivision. There
is no other exit so when people come in and they go south, they
have to circle the subdivision or make a turn at the berm that is
in the middle of the street on Golfview. I am very much concerned.
We have 30 to 50 children that go through the subdivision in the
morning or at noon or at night. There are 72 houses where these
children come from and one of the other neighbors said there is a
school bus stop that is very busy at that corner. Most of you know
that Comerica is down the street from us. They have four or five
drive-in windows. I have been there many times when cars are
backed up four or five deep. My biggest concern is if the
drive-thru or the entrance on either side of Five Mile were backed
up, the question is where would the cars sit, on Five Mile or would
they flow into the Rennolds Ravine Subdivision. It has happened on
one of the car washes at Five Mile and Beech Daly where the cars
backed up. If we have any evidence of the same type of activity
that is evident at Comerica, we will have a very big traffic
congestion problem. I would urge, from a practical and commonsense
standpoint, whether or not we can keep that traffic flow down to a
minimum. The last thing I would like to say is I have gone through
three sump pumps in the subdivision. It is wet back there now and
the pump pumps all the time. My concern is, not being an engineer,
but in terms of filling the back of the building with some dirt,
etc. that would push drainage problems further south. I would just
urge the Planning Commission to take a common sense, practical
approach because I feel we are going to have major problems. We
have had near head-on accidents coming into the subdivision. I
don't know if police reports are available but activity has picked
No" up substantially.
Joel Johnson, 36092 Parkhurst: My property backs up to the ravine. I would like
to recommend to the Planning Commission to reject approval of the
petition for the following reasons:
First, filling in the flood plain would be disastrous to the
residents who live on the ravine. Already in the six years we have
lived here, we have lost at least six feet of property from high
waters. Fortunately we have a deeper lot than some of our
neighbors who have lost at least ten. Whenever there is a heavy
rain, the current of the ravine is rapid and the water raises to a
level even with our yard. The flood plain in question is
completely covered. Filling this in would only worsen an already
losing situation and we can only guess what the rest of the
subdivision would encounter with flooding of basements, yards, etc.
It also appears to us that the property in question on Five Mile is
higher than ours. By filling in the flood plain to grade would
surely flood our yards.
Second, traffic now exiting Golfview onto Five Mile is very tricky
to say the least. We are close enough to the interesection of Five
and Levan, which is already very congested and directly across from
another subdivision entrance, that trying to make a left hand turn
onto Five Mile in the morning, mid or late afternoon can be very
13038
dangerous. Putting the entranceway for the credit union off
Golfview versus Five Mile will only increase this problem, and
would in no way benefit the citizens of Livonia. Rennolds Ravine
is a small subdivision consisting of 72 homes and does not warrant
`, a commercial entrance from its subdivision when other means can be
sought. At least 12 children from our subdivision share the corner
of Five Mile and Golfview as a bus stop. These children should not
be subjected to the increased dangers of traffic, strangers, etc.
encircling their bus stop, when on many winter mornings it is still
dark out.
Third, we feel there is already many vacant land and buildings in
Livonia that can better accommodate the plans of this credit union.
Fourth, the many trees that grow in this flood plain help decrease
the noise pollution that we endure daily from Bingham's Service
Station, the ambulances daily to St. Mary's Hospital, the barking
dogs day and night from the veterinary clinic and the speakers that
can be heard 24 hours from the 24 hour gas station at the corner of
Five and Levan. Filling in the flood plain would entail removing
these trees leaving a very clinical atmosphere to an already
congested, noisy area.
Along with the above, we feel approval of this petition will
decrease our property values and decrease our enjoyment of living
in this subdivision. In looking at the drive-in for the cars at
the drive-up window, my children play in the back yard and I am not
receptive to having gas fumes coming over the wall or berm from
cars sitting there idling, creating more noise pollution. What I
`vrr am in favor of is perhaps to have a wall built there over a berm.
Also I haven't heard it brought out that we have Blue Herons living
in that ravine. There are ducks. I have a concern about that.
Dave Nemer, 36083 Howell: This is at the back end of the subdivision. I have two
points I would like to make. The number one point is I have
standing water in the back of my backyard and I am very concerned
with this flood plain situation. You can go through a drought
which we have had and I still have a considerable amount of water
in my backyard. The walls in my basement are virtually cracked and
I am concerned with the water flood plain. Number two point I
would like to make is I have to believe that in this beautiful City
that we have, this Planning Commission can find a better place to
put this credit union. I believe this credit union really drops
the level of our homes in that area and I think this Commission and
these people can find a better place to put this credit union than
where we are right now.
John Sparkman, 36052 Parkhurst: I disagree with this plan. The proposed entrance
on this site plan, I want you to realize exactly how bad this
entrance would be even if they changed it to come off Five Mile
Road. Without being able to see the entrance across the street and
the entrance to Idyl Wyld Golf Course, if he takes that entrance
off Five Mile Road, we are going to have cars backed up in front of
our subdivision entrance and people that are travelling eastbound
`..
13039
on Five Mile Road trying to make a left hand turn into Idyl Wyld,
it will congest it even more. That would be even worse than going
into our subdivision. You probably go out and look at the area.
As far as water, I live on Lot 37 and I wanted to show you the
outline of the creek. The back of the creek is at the back of my
house. That creek takes all the water flow and there is a flat
plain back there, which they are proposing to fill in. This plain
is roughly nine feet lower than my backyard and I have seen that
water level one foot lower than my backyard. That water has been
so high back there that you can go down there in a canoe. If they
are proposing to fill that flood plain in, they are going to divert
all that water into my backyard.
David Gniewek, 15066 Golfview: Two initial points I had. One was the driveway
off Golfview, which has been addressed, and the second one was the
flood plain. During the spring we become part of a ravine. About
ten houses away from there is the water going into the drain.
Also, when the sump pump has failed we have had two inches of water
in our basement. My concern there is with any adjustment to the
flood plain that could become worse. Also, a third point is the
expansion of the building. I have seen the expansion of the
building but I haven't seen any expansion plans for parking. Does
that mean the overflow parking is going to be on Golfview or Five
Mile or whatever else? Also with the expansion of the building I
assume those 4,000 accounts will grow. I would like to know what
number they are talking about in five years. Has anyone seen a
business plan?
Mr. Engebretson: No we have not seen a business plan sir. That is not currently
part of our process but you have raised some valid questions. It
"qui' is our understanding that the area that they designate as future
expansion would still comply with the ordinance with respect to the
on-site parking issue.
Mr. Gniewek: With the parking, is that to support the existing structure?
Mr. Engebretson: It is based on the size of the facility.
Larry Coffey, 15099 Woodside: The back of my property right now I have had water
problems to where it is virtually impossible to even grow a
vegetable garden. I have had trees die and I think this is due to
the fact that the property at the back of my lot slopes back up,
which in effect traps all that property back there and any water
that flows into it. By filling in the ravine I can see where this
is going to compound the problem for me and several other people in
that immediate area in that corner. Obviously I am against it.
Linda Dubay, 15017 Woodside: I have no new concerns but would like to add that our
property also is not directly on the ravine but the water does
drain into the ravine and we have freestanding water over a foot
throughout the entire winter into the spring. There is much
wildlife as someone else expressed. We have rabbits, pheasants,
etc. that use the water back there and I have a great concern with
what is going to happen to both the wildlife and the water problem.
Again, we have basement problems and our sump pump is going all the
time.
13040
Linda Sparkman, 36052 Parkhurst: I do back up to the property. I am concerned
about the filling in of the flood plain. I think everybody in this
subdivision has problems with their basements leaking. I would
also like to point out that when the subdivision was built this
property was originally zoned professional service and then it was
"Now knocked down to office and now you are talking about knocking it
down a little bit more.
Mr. Engebretson: Let me clarify that for you. The zoning district that you refer
to as professional office simply had its name changed to office
service so it really didn't constitute a change in the use. It is
a simple change in the definition of the district.
Mrs. Sparkman: Is there a difference between what can go into professional
services and office?
Mr. Engebretson: No there isn't. You raise a good point. Right now if someone
were to come in with one of those type of uses, we wouldn't be
having this hearing tonight. We would be going through a site plan
approval process but the City would be hard pressed to control some
of the issues that we are controlling here tonight in that case
because the site plan requirements are clearly spelled out in the
ordinance and if the developer of that property meets all those
ordinance requirements, they get approval. That is one of our
concerns that if these issues here could be worked out where the
concerns about the traffic flow, the entrances, the water, the
wetlands, etc. , if they could be worked out, this proposal may be a
lot less intense than some of the other things that could come in
there as a permitted use without any struggle. I am not saying
that is an absolute fact. I am saying it is a possibility so the
�• point you have raised regarding the zoning district gives rise to
that particular point. I live in a subdivision where all the
comments you have made, I live two miles north of you, all the
comments you have made I lived through myself and I guess I sit
here trying to understand would I be concerned about that credit
union versus a medical facility that might be open 24 hours a day
with ambulances coming and doors slamming at three o'clock in the
morning and thinking of those kinds of things but I want you to
know that we are all genuinely concerned about all these issues you
have raised here tonight but we have to be realistic. Something is
going to go in there some day. It is not going to stay vacant
land. It will be built on and it will probably not be houses. Now
what we can do is find the best possible use that has the least
impact on the community that fits within the context of your
neighborhood and good for the community. That is why we are trying
to work with all of you residents and with the developer to try to
find out if this is the right use. Something will go in there in
due course.
Mrs. Sparkman: We are concerned that something doesn't encompass changing the
flood plain and wetlands.
Mr. Engebretson: We understand and I hope you have read that we are as concerned
about that as you are. There will be nothing that will go in there
13041
until we are totally convinced that those issues have been dealt
with and everybody is comfortable that we are not creating a
problem. That is the last thing we want to do is to create a
problem for you.
`r"' Robert Abar, 36042 Howell: Most of the issues have been stated already. My
concern is with the drive-thru. As stated before either off of
Five Mile or off Golfview we will create a lot of congestion in
that area no matter which way with the oncoming traffic trying to
get into the sub to the north of ours and also into ours. The
flood plain is obviously an issue for me. I have standing water in
my backyard. I have one question regarding the drive-thru hours.
Are they contained within the hours that were quoted before for the
facility?
Mr. Engebretson: Yes the drive-thru hours are the same as the business hours.
Mr. Abar: The only other concern was I had were the view of the residents on
the inside.
Rudolph Magdziarz, 15145 Golfview: That is Lot 42. You just made the statement
there will be something put up in that area. However, before I
bought on Golfview I did make an inquiry with the broker and
salesman whether anything was planned for that particular area and
I was told because of the size nothing was planned. Right now
everything is OS but when I bought the house this was what I was
given. (He held up map he was given)
Mr. Engebretson: There is land there and people have a right to use their land.
ti.► Mr. Magdziarz: I realize what you are saying but I was told nothing would be put
up.
Mr. Engebretson: You were given bad information sir. Somebody hoodwinked you if
they gave you those types of assurances. The City would have
probably given you a different point of view on that. The City
would never, never, never, under any circumstances, have given you
that information.
Mr. Magdziarz: I mean it was through the broker.
Mr. Engebretson: The broker gave you bad information and it is unfortunate but
there is nothing we can do about that.
Rick Sims, 36040 Parkhurst: I am Lot 38. I back right up to the ravine. When it
rains that ravine almost overflows right now and we are concerned
that any construction on the north side of the ravine is going to
create additional drainage in the ravine which we feel could
conceivably erode our backyard and obviously damage our home.
Those types of things have been mentioned. Storm water drainage is
very difficult to analyze and predict once changes are made. My
in-laws live on Myrna just north of Five Mile, just west of
Merriman. A new house was built on Auburndale just around the
corner from their backyard on the east. This house obviously was
13042
built on a natural underground drainage that apparently no one knew
about and it began to back up water into the neighbor's backyard
next to my in-laws and that water stayed there for several years
before something was finally done about it. My point is storm
water drainage is very difficult to predict and can be very
devastating.
Mr. Engebretson: We understand. We got that message. Is there any new
information that anyone would like to address?
Conrad Kudelko, 15078 Woodside: I am concerned about the fact that whatever is
there eventually, we have a Rennolds Ravine sign which is somewhat
set back from the street on an island. I am concerned that
whatever shrubbery or berm that goes up there, it is very difficult
to see the sign anyways because of all the politician signs during
re-election. Once the signs go down I am concerned with the layout
that we have with the trees out front that you won't be able to see
the subdivision. I wanted to express the concern of all of the
residents of our new community, there may be some way to work out
the flood plain but we are concerned because it is big unknown.
Until we have some reassurance we have a big concern.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 93-9-2-22 closed.
Mrs. Fandrei: I want to make a tabling motion and I would like to, if possible
Mr. Nagy have the City Engineer at that meeting and whoever else
may be able to address this flood plain area. This seems to be the
biggest area of concern to the residents.
Mr. McCann: I would like to support that motion but I would like to give them
three weeks to get a new proposal so they can have a site plan that
'41111. will agree with our Engineering department and then the Engineering
Department can explain why they are for it and they can look at
safety as far as the traffic is concerned.
Mrs. Fandrei: Traffic, and to the developer that they have building materials,
detailed landscaping. You have heard the concerns of the residents
with the ravine.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Fandrei, seconded by Mr. McCann and unanimously
approved, it was
#9-175-93 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
September 28, 1993 on Petition 93-9-2-22 by Building Committee, Inc.
requesting waiver use approval to construct a new credit union facility
to be located on the south side of Five Mile Road between Levan and
Golfview Drive in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 20, the City Planning
Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 93-9-2-22 until the
study meeting of October 19, 1993.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance
6543, as amended.
Mr. Morrow: I kind of suspected there was going to be a tabling motion and I
sat here for the last hour and a half trying to sort this
information and I guess I am precluded from speaking and having my
concerns become a part of the record because the tabling resolution
was allowed before comments from the Commission.
13043
Mr. Engebretson: The record is still open and the secretary is recording verbatim
minutes of what is going on here. This is not the first time we
have done this but procedurally discussion follows a motion. You
have a point Mr. Morrow.
Mr. Morrow: Mr. LaPine has the floor first.
Mr. Engebretson: Then we will go to Mr. LaPine.
Mr. LaPine: Mr. Chairman, I am not going to say anything because it was my
understanding that once a tabling motion was made, there is no
discussion on the motion. I don't see any reason to start
discussing this issue now that we have tabled it. I will hold my
comments until the next time we hear the issue. I disagree with
you. I think we should have gone ahead and let me ask the
questions I had. I don't think we should have any more discussion
because under Robert's Rules of Order the issue is closed.
Mr. Morrow: I am not here to make waves but there were a few comments I wanted
to make but I will reserve those for the study meeting. If you
will allow me to make them. I am not in favor of the rezoning
petition and it is certainly nothing against the Catholic parishes
and I want the record to show that. I am in favor of all the
points that were raised here tonight. The site plan should be
massaged because of the concern we have but one reason this is a
waiver is because it is a click up of the zoning as we know it and
I am familiar with Rennolds Ravine from the standpoint that was one
of the subdivisions that may be unique because there was a lottery
for the people to buy into that sub. With that property there on
Five Mile it was going to be difficult to develop it at best but
with a waiver use I can't see increasing the intensity of that
property. I have nothing against the gentlemen here tonight
because I am sure they do a good project but the residents should
know the reason this is a waiver is because it intensifies the use
of office zoning. That is the reason I cannot support the petition
but I am in favor of modifying it because ultimately the City
Council will determine whether that project goes in. If it goes
forward, I hope it will go forward addressing all the concerns
that you have raised here tonight.
Mr. Engebretson: I would like to add a comment or two that I think the residents
have raised some very valid points that there may be no solution to
and if there is no solution that we can't be assured it will not
have a negative impact, I too will oppose this proposal. However,
I would like to give the petitioner a reasonable opportunity to
study each of these issues that they have heard and to have the
opportunity to present a solution to each of them. If they can
address each and every one of them, then I think the proposal
deserves further consideration but it is going to take a
considerable effort and that is why I think we need at least three
weeks to address all these various points. In the process of doing
that it may become clear that the DNR makes a determination that on
its own merit will end this process. It may be that the DNR
approves. I don't think they would do that casually. I think they
13044
would do that in a highly technical manner that would address the
concerns that have been expressed although they are not aware of
all these individual concerns that have been raised, but I think
that in dealing with all those issues, the developer, the person
who requested this waiver use, may determine that it is not a
practical thing to move forward with if the costs to deal with
these various issues is such that it makes it an impractical use
for this land. That is where I am coming from. I apologize for
any confusion regarding the procedures here tonight. It is my
understanding, and I don't have my own set of the rules with me,
but I believe we handled this properly. If we haven't, I will
certainly issue a public apology next time.
Mr. Minahan: Let me first assure all of the residents here we want to be good
neighbors. We are not intending to barge into your neighborhood
and cause problems. The DNR has given verbal approval. What they
are doing is simply moving an arbitrary line closer to that creek.
We are not filling anything. We have no intention of filling
anything and in creating any more problems than you already have.
We are not able to solve any of the problems you have but we would
not contribute to them at all. Engineering studies, DNR review,
would preclude us from doing any of that. In order to make sure
everyone understands this, this argument came through passionately
tonight but I think through misguided information. We are not
filling anything. We are directing water away from it and
certainly not contributing, we may even be able to solve some of
the problems of this site draining into that particular area. The
DNR has verbally approved this. I don't have it in writing yet so
I will get that for you. We have an offer to purchase which
expires, which will probably preclude us from being able to
`, continue along with this process. I will do the best I can to do
that. I want to say one other thing to the residents, this is a
very low impact type of a business. This land will be developed.
We do this in eight states around the midwest. We have one in
Kalamazoo. We have one in Toronto where we have put these in
residential neighborhoods and we never have any complaints. You
could have something that is much more high volume, much more high
traffic and much more dense. We don't want to do that. We do not
want to be in the neighborhood if we are not welcome.
Mr. Engebretson: We would hope that the property owner would be cooperative
considering how long they have been trying to sell their land. I
think they would be very unlikely to not be cooperative. Regarding
your last comment sir, we agree there are many uses that are
permitted uses on that property that could come in there that would
be far more disruptive but let's work it out. Let's take our time
and do this in the right way. We will continue three weeks from
tonight. That will be on the fifth floor and whoever is interested
in participating in that hearing, is welcome to attend.
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.
13045
Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is letter dated August
31, 1993 from Modern Moving Company requesting permission to amend
Petition 93-2-2-7 by Al Rice requesting waiver use approval for outdoor
parking of moving and storage trucks on property located on the south
side of Eight Mile Road between Merriman Road and Osmus Avenue in the
`"' Northeast 1/4 of Section 3, to also allow marked vehicles with the Ryder
Truck Rental logo.
Mr. Engebretson: Is the petitioner present?
The petitioner was not present.
Mr. Engebretson: We need a motion to table indefinitely.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Fandrei, seconded by Mr. Tent and unanimously
approved, it was
#9-176-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to
table indefinitely the request by letter dated from August 31, 1993 from
Modern Moving Company requesting permission to amend Petition 93-2-2-7
by Al Rice requesting waiver use approval for outdoor parking of moving
and storage trucks on property located on the south side of Eight Mile
Road between Merriman Road and Osmus Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of
Section 3, to also allow marked vehicles with the Ryder Truck Rental
logo.
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
°low Application for a subdivision entrance marker and the submittal of a
landscape plan for the required greenbelt easement by Livonia Builders,
Inc. on behalf of Willow Creek Subdivision located in Section 14.
Mr. Miller: This is the proposed entrance marker. As a condition of the
preliminary plat they had to submit an entrance marker and
landscape plan. This is the submitted entrance marker. They are
allowed 20 square feet and the proposed is 18 square feet so it is
conforming to the ordinance. The landscape plan shows that the
signage will be located in the entrance of the new subdivision.
Mrs. Fandrei: What does the landscape show?
Mr. Miller described the various trees in the landscape plan.
Mr. LaPine: Is that sign lit?
Mr. Nagy: No it is not.
Mr. LaPine: What if someone is looking for the subdivision at night?
Mr. Nagy: There will be a street light at the entrance to that subdivision.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Alanskas and unanimously approved,
it was
13046
#9-177-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the
subdivision entrance marker and landscape plan for the required
greenbelt easement by Livonia Builders, Inc. on behalf of Willow Creek
Subdivision located in Section 14 subject to the following condition:
— 1) That the Landscape and Entrance Marker Plan dated 9/13/93, as
revised, by Livonia Builders, Inc. , is hereby approved and shall be
adhered to.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Final Plat approval
for Willow Creek Subdivision proposed to be located on the south side of
Six Mile Road between Merriman Road and Munger Avenue in the Northwest
1/4 of Section 14.
Mr. Engebretson: Has everything been put in order here.
Mr. Nagy: The final plat has been prepared in full compliance with the
preliminary plat. It has been reviewed by Engineering and they
sent a letter indicating their interests are satisfied and they
recommend approval. All the financial obligations have been
satisfied and there is a letter to that effect from the City Clerk.
The only new information we would have is we do have a letter from
an area resident who indicates interest in having the street name
changed from Ryan Road to Fulton Drive.
Mr. Engebretson: I have that letter Mr. Nagy and I would like to read that letter
so everyone understands what we are dealing with here. This is a
letter from Floyd Fulton and it is addressed to the Planning
Commission.
"This is a request that the City Planning Commission grant final
plat approval to the Willow Creek Subdivision subject to the one
street being named Fulton Drive at its September 28, 1993 meeting.
"Morton Floyd and Grace Angelica Fulton purchased and resided on a
portion of the future Willow Creek Subdivision from the early
1930's to their death in 1986 and 1987 respectively. These
pioneers raised their family of five children, one son of which
died, here. They drove to Northville with their water containers
to the spring for their only water supply prior to Livonia water
availability. They planted a fruit orchard, vegetable and berry
gardens. Their two cows and chickens supplied them with their milk
and daily food. There were bee hives and Mr. Fulton had a thriving
Apiary. For many years, Mr. Fulton would be called by City Hall,
Police and Fire Departments to go to private residences to capture
swarms of honey bees and hornets. People from miles away came to
their homestead for fresh produce and honey as late as 1985. Mr.
Fulton served in World War I and two of the sons served in World
War II and the Korean conflict. For fifty plus years these pioneer
people lived and worked on Six Mile Road at their homestead. They
are buried in Livonia.
13047
"The Fulton homestead was purchased by the second son, Ralph
Fulton, at his mother's death. The other family members have
disassociated themselves and receive no proceeds now or in the
future from this property sale between Ralph Fulton and the Livonia
Slur Builders. The one thing we would hope for is that the City
Planning Commission would take this opportunity now to preserve
this historical significance in naming the new street in the
proposed Willow Creek Subdivision adjacent and on the Fulton
property, Fulton Drive.
"The Livonia Builders have developed and built several homes and
subdivisions in Livonia. They have a reputation with the Livonia
staff and administration of doing good, quality work. They have
spent time and money to develop Willow Creek Subdivision. The City
of Livonia is loyal and encourages such builders. Mrs. Veri has
said she would have considered naming the street Fulton Drive if
the property owner, Ralph Fulton, had mentioned it at the time of
purchase. The Livonia Builders will continue to develop and build
subdivisions and there will be other opportunities to name a street
or subdivision for their five year old grandson, Ryan. This street
is located on a significant portion of the Fulton homestead. There
will not be another opportunity for Morton Floyd and Grace Angelica
Fulton.
"The following have all approved the street name Ryan Road but have
stated there is no objections to the name Fulton Drive:
1) John Nagy, City Planning Commission
2) Gary Clark, Engineering Department
`, 3) Arnold Klinger, Fire Marshal
4) Sgt. K. Dawley, Police Officer, Traffic Bureau
"Until such time as the Livonia City Council instructs the City
Clerk to affix her signature to the plat, changes can be made. A
precedent has been established with the City Planning Commission
and the City Council when by resolution these Bodies changed the
street name at Six Mile and Inkster Roads to Dolores.
"The City of Livonia is making great strides in saving its
historical heritage and it is at this time that it is respectfully
requested that the City Planning Commission share in these
endeavors and take this rare opportunity to preserve this small
part of the City of Livonia history and name the street in the
Willow Creek Subdivision, Fulton Drive."
John, when I received this letter I understood the nature of the
request and I thought back in my six years here as to whether or
not the City Planning Commission has involved itself in the naming
of a street and I honestly couldn't remember that we had and
therefore I called you today to ask your advise and counsel on what
the City Planning Commission's role is, what the Council's role is,
what the developer's role is, etc. in dealing with these kinds of
issues and so I don't misquote you I would appreciate it if you
would share with the audience and the Planning Commission the
information that you gave to me earlier today on those issues.
13048
Mr. Nagy: It has been the role of the Planning Commission to review
subdivision plats and street names and accepting the proposed
street names that are submitted by the applicant subject to the
review by the appropriate City agencies that have jurisdiction over
those areas. Streets proposed by proprietors are subject to City
approval. Review and approval has been done by the Engineering
Department, with the Fire Department and also with the cooperation
of the postal service. The Engineering Department is responsible
for street names and street addresses. The Fire Department looks
at them in the interest of their public safety to see that the
street names that are selected are not confusing, that they are not
duplicates, that they are distinct so as not to be confused with
other street names that they have to respond to in an emergency
situation. With regard to addresses, they try to make sure the
postal office concerns are properly addressed. The City Council is
the ultimate authority approval on plats and as this letter points
out once the plat is approved and the City Clerk affixes her
signature to it, that is it. It has largely been the appropriate
agencies agree, outside the Planning Commission, in identifying and
establishing street names. We do look from a planning standpoint
to see if any subdivisions line up with other existing streets,
that those names are picked up. If there is a continuation of
other streets, then we look to see those street names are picked up
and that there is continuity. We do give the proprietor a great
deal of flexibility. It is their subdivision and they are
improving it and where it is appropriate we give them the
flexibility in selecting names. After all it is their subdivision
and they are going to market it. That has generally been our
practice. I have looked back on my 26 years and I don't ever
recall Planning Commissions ever getting involved in requiring
selection of certain names for streets.
Mr. Tent: I too received a letter as the other Commissioners did. I am an
historical buff here in the City. I like to preserve the old. The
pioneers of the City have had streets named after them. McNamara
had a street named after him. Ventura Blvd. had a street named
after him. There is a Bennett but I don't know if it is our Mayor
or not but there are other significant names. I have been on this
Commission on and off a number of years and I go back to the 60's
when we were developing subdivisions here in the City and they
were, as Mr. Nagy indicated, named by the Engineering Department,
etc. When they came back to us they had names like Handy Dandy
Drive because they couldn't think of other names to have so while
they selected the names, we made a recommendation. While we didn't
have the power, we made a suggestion that if it didn't conflict we
would like that name. Then we got into the tree names. The
developers cut down the trees and then they named the streets after
the trees. We entered the picture at that time. While we didn't
make recommendations, we made suggestions. I see no problem here.
We can't make it a part of the resolution but I could say we could
make a suggestion to the Council in this particular case because
this is a different situation. It is kind of unusual. We have
someone who owned that land all those years. I would see no
problem in us not making this part of the recommendation but making
a suggestion to the Council why don't you consider naming it as
13049
suggested so we are not doing anything to distract from our
recommendation of approval of this plat because it is great. It is
a 1/2 acre development. I am so proud of it and I think Livonia
will be proud of it. This is the only thought I had, not to
recommend but to suggest we use the name Fulton Drive and let the
Council make the final decision.
Lydia Veri: Next week when we go to Council we will have another letter from
Mrs. Smalley. She resided on that property longer than Mr. Fulton
so what are we going to do.
Mr. Engebretson: Who is Mrs. Smalley?
Mrs. Veri: She lives in a house where the street is. Where we are putting the
house now does not belong to Mr. Fulton. Mr. Fulton still has a
house there. Mrs. Smalley sold the house and everything. When she
finds out about this she will send a letter next week. We are
starting something. I bought the property and I think I should
have something to say about the matter. We are this far and now
they are going to change the name. If they want to change the name
let them petition to the City and if the City wants to change it, I
don't care.
Mr. Tent: This has nothing to do with your plat. The meeting here now is to
approve your final plat which I am all in accord with. All I am
doing at this point is suggesting when it goes before the Council
we could say as far as the name concerned that we are satisfied, at
least I as one Commissioner would be, if they wanted to change it
to Fulton Drive with no effect on you. If a letter came from Mrs.
Smalley and we go on this letter exchange bit I certainly don't
want to be involved with something at that time to hinder this
development.
Mrs. Veri: The preliminary plat was approved by everybody with Ryan Road so at
this point I do not want to change the name. I named that road
after my grandson. My grandson is important to me.
Mr. Tent: I am not trying to be disrespectful to you.
Mrs. Veri: That is what I am saying. Next week I will have another problem.
There is only one street. I bought it from the other Mr. Fulton.
He still has a house there.
Mr. Engebretson: It is important that you understand that nothing is being held up
here. This will be moving on.
Floyd C. Fulton: I am the oldest son of Morton Floyd Fulton and Grace Fulton. I
have lived in Livonia since 1935 and presently live at 35947
Orangelawn, Livonia. I have prepared my thoughts on paper because
I am not experienced in this but having heard you read that letter
I realize it is late and I would be repeating many of the things
that were in that letter. I would like to submit several letters
for the record and your consideration. We have a letter from Helen
Smalley, who has been our good neighbor for many, many years. She
``r.
13050
is now in Westland in a very nice condominium. I would like to
have that letter read into the record and I would like to make
comments concerning it.
Mr. McCann: I would like a little clarification. I don't mind reading the
letter into the record but it is my understanding we cannot make a
recommendation as to the name of the street. That is going to be
the purview of the Council. Is that correct Mr. Nagy?
Mr. Nagy: That is correct.
Mr. McCann: Our recommendation will not have any affect one way or another. I
just want you to understand that.
Mr. Fulton: I was told we would be allowed to express our feelings. My own
experience, we have lived here a good many years and I can assure
you that at one time the Planning Commission absolutely changed the
name of a street in Livonia in honor and recognition of the service
of an employee of the Planning Commission.
Mr. Engebretson: I will be happy to read the letter from Mrs. Smalley into the
record: "To Whom It May Concern - I have sold my property on Six
Mile Road to Livonia Builders and have no say in the matter of
naming a road in Willow Creek Subdivision. However, if Mrs. Veri
should change her mind and call the road Fulton Drive in honor of
Mr. and Mrs. Fulton I believe it would be very gracious of her.
Sincerely, Helen Smalley" I will pass this down to the staff and
it will move on with the whole package to the City Council.
Si. Mr. Fulton: Mr. Dyla is a long time resident and he has also sent a letter to
you. Before we leave the letter from Mrs. Smalley I would like to
correct one statement. Mrs. Smalley is the third owner of the
property where she lives. I have forgotten the first resident. As
a matter of fact, my father bought the first lot for his five-acre
parcel from Middlebelt to Merriman. As a matter of fact we had
first choice starting from the riding stables west. I myself
plowed behind an old tractor the three acres the Smalley house is
on. I did a little bit of measuring, one-third of that road goes
along the west boundary of our property and then cuts over and over
two-thirds of it is right now along the inside of our property. As
a matter of fact it is directly behind the house. You have to
understand Mrs. Veri does not know me. She dealt with my brother.
I know she has hard feelings but I am not my brother, my father is
not my brother. My sister and other brother had no part in the
dealings with her. I would hope, as Mrs. Smalley said, that she
would be gracious enough to recognize our contribution and I just
hope she finds it in her heart to change her mind and recommend
that a change is made. It would make it much easier. I appreciate
the opportunity to be here.
Mr. Engebretson: I will be happy to read this letter but I think you really put
your finger on it. It is really their decision but being a good
neighbor we will complete the record. This is also a very brief
letter, which I will pass down for inclusion into the record and
Vin.
13051
to move on to the Council. "I Leonard J. Dyla have been a next
door neighbor of the Fulton Family for forty years and have enjoyed
a wonderful relationship with them. They have been pioneers in
this area and accomplished very much in this community. Please
name the street in their honor Fulton Drive. Thanks Leonard J.
Dyla" This was dated September 27th. Do you have other
correspondence?
Mrs. Fulton: I have correspondence from his sister, Rosalie Fulton Lee from
Houston and the correspondence that you have in your file from the
younger brother, Donald.
Mr. Engebretson: Both of which I presume are very supportive of the proposal.
Would you feel injured in any way if we skipped the reading but if
we did include them in the record?
Letter dated September 28, 1993 from Rosalie Fulton Lee and letter dated September
28, 1993 from Donald R. Fulton were received and filed.
Mr. Fulton: To complete my contribution. I would like to read, I spent some
time preparing it, but I would like to read the last paragraph or
two. While we the Fulton family respect and understand Lydia
Veri's desire to name a street after her five year old grandson, we
hope you will also recognize the importance of preserving bits of
Livonia history and be gracious enough and generous enough to
change your mind and support this request. There is no doubt that
her grandson can be honored in future developments. Again, I
appreciate the feelings Mrs. Veri has in this matter and would hope
she would agree to allowing the change to be included in your
approving resolution or as an amendment attached to the resolution
recommending the Council affect the name change on the final
approval. It boils down to one thing, there is only one Fulton
family. I hate to use the word family, my mother and father lived
here until they were in their 90's. I do feel Mrs. Veri will have
another opportunity to honor her own grandson. I can understand
her wanting to do that.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Tent and unanimously
approved, it was
#9-178-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the
Final Plat for Willow Creek Subdivision proposed to be located on the
south side of Six Mile Road between Merriman Road and Oporto Avenue in
the Northwest 1/4 of Section 14, for the following reasons:
1) That the Final Plat is in conformance with the Preliminary Plat.
2) That the City Engineer recommends approval of the Final Plat.
3) That all of the financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor
by the City have been satisfied.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
�"" Mrs. Fulton: Could what Mr. Tent suggested be point number 4?
13052
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy advised us that would be inappropriate for us to do that
based on the fact that is outside our responsibility. That could
be determined as meddling in their affairs. The Council makes this
decision.
Nfty
Mr. Nagy: The City Council has the prerogative to change the street name. I
think that was the real reason why the Chairman indicated you
should inquire when the Council will meet on it. At that meeting
you will be given the some opportunities that you have had here to
address the Council and if they are persuaded by your arguments
they can require the street name be so indicated on the plat before
its recording. The authority is with the City Council and not with
the Planning Commission.
Mr. Fulton: We realize that. We also understood that your recommendations mean
a lot and you do recommend with resolutions all the time. Anyways,
we will accept that and appreciate again your time.
Mr. Engebretson: We would just like to clarify that we have been directed by the
Planning Director, a long time professional in this business, that
we would be out of order in conducting our business here if we were
to do that. We respect his opinion and we trust that the City
Council will treat you in a proper manner. We know that well.
They will be receiving this entire package before they deal with
it.
Mr. Tent: I just want to say they will be getting the minutes from the
meeting.
y` Mr. Fulton: I didn't realize they got the whole ball of wax.
Mr. Engebretson: Verbatim minutes plus all the documents and several of them I am
sure are watching us right now.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously approved,
it was
##9-179-93 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 Final Plat approval for Willow Creek Subdivision
proposed to be located on the south side of Six Mile Road between
Merriman Road and Munger Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 14.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is motion by the City
Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #688-93, to hold a
public hearing on the question of whether certain property located on
the north side of Seven Mile Road between Lathers and Angling, Tax
Parcel CC1, should be rezoned from OS and P to R-C.
13053
Mr. Engebretson: This is a motion to hold a public hearing pursuant to direction
by the City Council.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously approved,
it was
#t9-180-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission pursuant to Council
Resolution #688-93, and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance ##543,
the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, does hereby
establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether
or not to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road
between Lathers and Angling, Tax Parcel CC1, from OS and P to R-C; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of such hearing be given as provided in
Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of
Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shall be a report and
recommendation submitted to the City Council.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is motion by the City
Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #727-93, to hold a
public hearing on the question of whether Article XXI of the Zoning
Ordinance should be amended so as to reduce the membership of the Zoning
Board of Appeals from seven members to six members plus an additional
alternate member, with all seven members serving on a rotating basis.
Mr. Engebretson: Again, this is a proposal to hold a public hear at the direction
of the City Council.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Alanskas and unanimously
approved, it was
#9-181-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby establish and
order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to amend
Article XXI of the Zoning Ordinance so as to reduce the membership of
the Zoning Board of Appeals from seven members to six members plus an
additional alternate member, with all seven members serving on a
rotating basis.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing shall be 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 Six Year Capital
Improvement Program 1994-1999.
Mr. Engebretson: This is the Six Year Capital Improvement Program which has been
put together by the staff. This is a matter of complying with the
law and sending it on to the City Council.
Su.
13054
On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mr. Alanskas and unanimously
approved, it was
#9-182-93 RESOLVED that, the City of Livonia Planning Commission hereby authorizes
the Planning Department to transmit the document titled "Capital
`r. Improvement Program, City of Livonia, 1994-1999" to the Mayor and
Council as a realistic program to aid in the determination of a complete
fiscal planning strategy for City of Livonia, and
FURTHER RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission stands ready to do
all things necessary to cooperate with the Mayor and Council in
maintaining a functioning Program of Capital Improvements and Capital
Budgeting for the City of Livonia.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is the approval of the
minutes of the 670th Regular Meeting held on September 14, 1993.
On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine and seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was
//9-183-93 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 670th Regular Meeting of the City
Planning Commission held on September 14, 1993 are hereby approved.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Tent, LaPine, Morrow, Alanskas, McCann, Engebretson
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Fandrei
`. ABSENT: None
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 93-9-8-17
by Chester Bartosik requesting approval of all plans required by Section
18.58 of Zoning Ordinance //543 in connection with a proposal to develop
a condominium project for property located on the north side of Seven
Mile Road between Angling and Lathers Avenue in Section 1,
Mr. Miller: The petitioned area is three acres in size. They are proposing a
26 unit condominium project. They have three buildings. Two units
will house 8 units and the middle building will house 10 units.
Each unit will be 955 square feet and it will be a two-bedroom size
unit. The density of the project allows 26 units, which is in
conformance with the ordinance. Parking is 65 spaces required,
which they show on the site plan and they are also required to have
recreational areas, which they show. Landscaping, because it is
residential there is not really an ordinance enforcing that but
they do show a lot of landscaping on this project.
Mr. Engebretson: Is the petitioner here?
13055
Chester Bartosik, 36028 Avondale, Westland: (He presented his plans) Basically to
reiterate what the gentleman said, there are three basic
structures. The front and rear are identical. It is basically
about 40% brick, 40% siding and the remainder is 20% glass and
glazing. We are the architect, engineer and developers, and we
feel we have a sense for this. What we tried to do in the front,
we tried to keep all the trees to pines. We adhere to all the
zoning ordinances. Like the gentleman said, they are 955 square
feet, two bedrooms, two baths. They have balconies off the dining
room and as an option, we are offering balconies off the master
bedroom also.
Mr. Alanskas: I have one question in regard to the percentage of brick and
siding. Being that you are going to be on a main thoroughfare, I
have a problem with only 40% brick.
Mr. Bartosik: As far as the visibility off the main road, the setback with all
the existing trees, really this building is hard to see. We can on
this first building on the side elevation put brick up to here.
Mr. Alanskas: Can you put more brick on all three? When I look at the buildings
I see more siding than I do brick. I would like to see more brick.
Mr. Bartosik: With all due respect that really is a matter of taste or
preference. Here are actual photographs of existing structures
similar to this.
Mr. Alanskas: I, as one Commissioner, would like to see more brick.
'goo. Mr. Tent: Mr. Bartosik, is the reason you are not considering more brick on
the buildings because of the cost?
Mr. Bartosik: We are trying to make this affordable housing and we don't believe
that putting more brick would enhance it. We believe we have a
nice mixture combination.
Mr. Tent: I appreciate what you are saying but I, as one Commissioner, can't
agree with you. I feel here in Livonia we take pride in having
some custom built homes and this subject has come up many times
before and the developer will say this will look better but when he
gets done, he will put additional brick on to make it more
compatible. My question to you is if you were requested to put
some additional brick on to make it more uniform, would you be
negative to that?
Mr. Bartosik: If we were told to put it on, we would abide by that.
Mr. Tent: I, as one Commissioner, want more brick and I am sure the Council
will request the same thing. You said earlier the part that will
be facing the trees they will not see it but in the winter time
there are no leaves on the trees. I think you have an attractive
start here. It is affordable to the area and it is going to sell.
All we are doing is we want to upgrade it to what we expect in
Livonia.
13056
Mrs. Fandrei: Did I understand you have no central air in these units?
Mr. Bartosik: Each unit itself contains through-the-wall air conditioning units.
Nom. Mrs. Fandrei: What would the cost difference be to put in central air versus wall
units?
Mr. Bartosik: I can't tell you off hand.
Mrs. Fandrei: I am a realtor. As I have driven around the City and have shown
condos and been aware of the appurtenances that have window air
conditioning units, they are unattractive and I would definitely
prefer seeing them not having the wall air-conditioning units. I
would rather see the central air then we don't have that protruding
unit.
Mr. Bartosik: I could look at it.
Mrs. Fandrei: What is the price range?
Mr. Bartosik: We are starting at $74,000.
Mrs. Fandrei: They are reasonable.
Mr. Bartosik: This is again getting back to the basics. With what we put into it
so far we don't feel it is at all a cheap looking product. In fact
it is a very handsome product. Again, putting brick on would add a
little to the cost.
__ Mrs. Fandrei: Brick on the front elevation higher on each end would be much more
attractive. I agree with my fellow Commissioner and as a
professional.
Mr. Bartosik: I agree it would but again as an alternative if they had balconies,
that is more attractive than saying a wall with all brick.
Mrs. Fandrei: I am not saying all the way up. Say underneath the top of the
windows.
Mr. Bartosik: I personally think that would be ugly. Again, if I personally and
my partner thought it would enhance it, we wouldn't hesitate to put
it in. I think we have a good product here and I am somewhat
reluctant to change it.
Bill LaPine: Are these single entrances?
Mr. Bartosik: There is a main entrance and then you would have your individual
entrance.
Mr. LaPine: Your parking consists of screened units. Is any of that parking
covered parking?
Mr. Bartosik: No sir.
Mr. LaPine: How many parking spaces does each unit get?
13057
Mr. Bartosik: Two and a half.
Mr. LaPine: So there is additional parking spots there for visitors. At the
rear where the flood plain is, what is that?
Mr. Bartosik: That is a retention pond.
Mr. LaPine: How deep will that be?
Mr. Bartosik: About four feet.
Mr. LaPine: That is where your storm water is going to drain?
Mr. Bartosik: Yes sir.
Mr. LaPine: There is a parcel of vacant land right next to you. Do you own
that land?
Mr. Bartosik: No sir we do not.
Mr. LaPine: Are you going to purchase that land?
Mr. Bartosik: At this point in time we are going to develop this and we would not
be hesitant if the price were right.
Mr. LaPine: If you were successful in purchasing that land, you would continue
this project on?
Mr. Bartosik: Yes sir we would for an additional 18 units.
__ Mr. McCann: Are you going to have the laundry rooms in each unit?
Mr. Bartosik: Yes sir.
Mr. McCann: Storage in each unit?
Mr. Bartosik: In each unit the first floor units in the laundry room, which is an
area designated as utility room, we would eliminate the utility
room and provide stairs going down into a private basement for each
of the individual units. The remainder of the basement would
become storage areas broken into four separate units.
Mr. McCann: You say there is air conditioning. I don't see them on your
drawing. Where are they marked on your drawing:
Mr. Bartosik pointed this out on his plans.
Mr. McCann: You said those are heating and air conditioning units. However, it
is not mandatory that the air conditioning be put it. They could
just become heating units?
Mr. Bartosik: Each unit will have heating and air conditioning.
Mr. McCann: Are you going to sprinkle?
Mr. Bartosik: No.
it
13058
Mrs. Fandrei: No sprinkling?
Mr. Bartosik: No.
`a. Mrs. Fandrei: We require sprinkling on all of our developments. I think that
would have to be a requirement.
Mr. Bartosik: Once we did submit for a building permit that will be brought up.
Mrs. Fandrei: We are talking about lawn sprinkling.
Mr. Bartosik: Yes it will be sprinkled.
Mrs. Fandrei: How about a compromise? How about brick up to between the two
windows, lower level and upper level?
Mr. Bartosik: Let me draw it on and look at it.
Mr. Alanskas: The existing site, what percentage of the people that purchase
there are retirees?
Mr. Bartosik: It depends on the area. In Westland there was a 50-50 mix. There
is another complex identical to this down in the Trenton area and
that one is more or less 80% seniors.
Mr. Alanskas: The siding is bad news because it fades and it dents.
Mr. Bartosik: It will be brick halfway between the windows. (He modified the
plan to show this)
On a motion duly made by Mr. McCann, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously
approved, it was
##9-184-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 93-9-8-17 by Chester Bartosik requesting
approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Zoning Ordinance #1543
in connection with a proposal to develop a condominium project for
property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Angling
and Lathers Avenue in Section 1 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1) That the Site Plan dated 9/20/93 by Stenrose Associates, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to;
2) That the Elevation Plan, defined as Sheet No. 3 dated 9/15/93 by
Architectural Services, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to
with the condition that it be brick half way up between the lower
floor window and upper floor window around all sides of all
buildings;
3) That the site plan shall be amended to show all lawn and landscaped
areas shall be irrigated by an underground sprinkler system.
for the following reasons:
1) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed
use;
13059
2) That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the
surrounding uses in the area.
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 93-9-8-18
by Best Buy Company, Inc. requesting approval of all plans required by
Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to
alter exterior elevations of the building located on the south side of
Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt Road and Melvin Avenue in Section 11.
Mr. Miller: This is the former location of the Marshall's discount store. The
proposed footprint of the unit for Best Buy will be the shaded in
area. It is approximately the same size as was proposed by
Phar-Mor Drug Stores. They are proposing to alter the elevations
of the building, particularly the front entrance. They are also
proposing a sign which is 240 square feet. They are allowed 242
square feet so this is conforming to the zoning ordinance. I am
sure the petitioner can explain the alterations.
Chris Johnson: I am with Best Buy out of Minneapolis. Our intent is to put a
36,000 square foot retail space in there with some auxiliary space
for servicing of equipment and district offices. The existing
building, we want to do substantially more than Phar-Mor did on the
original building. We will be refacing a large portion on the
outside and make it an attractive building that more closely
resembles our prototype building. The signage is 240 square feet,
similar to what we are using in our other stores in Michigan.
Mr. Tent: This signage on the front of the building, is that identical to
what you have in Westland?
Mr. Johnson: Yes it would be the exact same thing except in this building the
sign is not larger but the columns themselves would be a little
larger.
Mr. Tent: The size as compared to the operation in Westland, would this be
larger?
Mr. Johnson: The building in terms of the retail area?
Mr. Tent: Yes.
Mr. Johnson: Slightly larger but not enough to make a difference.
Mr. Tent: Will this be your regional headquarters?
Mr. Johnson: It will be the regional headquarters for Michigan, which would
entail 12 to 14 people. We would also have the service center for
the Michigan area stores which would be another 15 to 20 people.
Mr. Engebretson: How many truck trailers a day would be coming into that side
entrance?
13060
Mr. Johnson: We have two sets of distribution center stores. One we consider
our brown goods which are the electrical, etc. and those come out
of Minneapolis and our store would get a maximum of three trucks a
week. In most cases the store gets three trucks a week from
'0111ft. Minneapolis. During the slow parts of the year we share a truck
with another store. The white goods would be coming out of a
warehouse in another part of Livonia. This would be four trucks a
week because we would be bringing service in. At the most seven
trucks a week and basically four trucks.
Mr. Engebretson: During normal business hours?
Mr. Johnson: Yes.
Mr. Engebretson: The reason I was trying to get some idea of the truck traffic
that would be coming around that corner is because the more I think
about this proposal for two overhead doors on the extreme right
side of of the front of the building for installation of stereo
units, would there be any problems putting that entrance just
around the corner?
Mr. Johnson: We would prefer to have them around the front because they call
attention to what we do there. They are garage doors. Basically
they are all white with a small window. They are going to be
tucked back in underneath the canopy so they are not going to be
all that noticeable. Part of the problem if we do move them around
the corner, we would have a grade change of about 18 inches. In
terms of getting the trucks down to the dock and then coming up
that extra 18 inches to the door, we are going to get into some
problems.
Mr. Engebretson: I question that since cars are being parked there.
Mr. Johnson: It is 18 inches to get up into the grade.
Mrs. Fandrei: It didn't look 18 inches to me as I drove by it sir. I have to
agree with the Chairman.
Mr. Johnson: It is a grading problem. It is over a foot. It may be closer to a
foot than 18 inches.
Mrs. Fandrei: Would it be a problem to put it towards the rear of the building?
Mr. Johnson: In terms of operation, the typical installation takes about an
hour. From my own standpoint, if you put them on the rear of the
building, we would have two problems. One is the people waiting
for their cars.
Mrs. Fandrei: I want to let you know that I am delighted to have you come into
the community and into this area particularly. I think you know we
all are but I couldn't support this petition with those doors on
the front.
Mr. Johnson: Those were existing garage doors. They were boarded over.
13061
Mrs. Fandrei: I don't recall those at all.
Mr. Nagy: They are there from when it was Wickes Lumber.
Mr. LaPine: Isn't there a recessed dock in the rear of the building?
Mr. Johnson: There is not one now. Phar-Mor had permission to put one in and we
are planning to put one there.
Mr. LaPine: Is that where the semi's will all go?
Mr. Johnson: Yes.
Mr. LaPine: The doors in the front, that is where you will do the installing of
the stereo equipment?
Mr. Johnson: Yes stereo equipment in cars.
Mr. LaPine: Next to that there is another door. What is that door?
Mr. Johnson: There are two bays.
Mr. LaPine: Those two bays are used for the installing of stereo equipment but
the one for the rear where the semi's will be unloading basically
will not be seen from Seven Mile?
Mr. Johnson: Yes and we are keeping a canopy over those doors.
Mr. LaPine: That makes a difference as far as I am concerned.
fir. Mr. Engebretson:I want to echo Mrs. Fandrei's concern. We really are glad you are
here. We just approved another new retailing company coming into
our community called the Source Club. They have a similar
operation, not to install stereos necessarily but to install tires,
etc. and they moved their entrance around to the side and as I go
through my memory of the various retail operators that have those
kinds of products available, it seems to me that most of them have
those installation facilities near the rear or just around the
corner of the building not in the front elevation of the building.
I won't withhold support based on that being there and being
objectionable, although that is a subjective issue, I would have
much preferred to have seen it around the corner. If you can't put
it there, I undersand. If you could put it there, I would
encourage you to do that.
Mr. Johnson: Our front elevation does not face Seven Mile Road. The other thing
is I would think the apartments behind there would much prefer to
not look at that. We do abut residential back there.
On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine and seconded by Mr. Tent, it was
#9-185-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 93-9-8-18 by Best Buy Company, Inc.
requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning
13062
Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to alter exterior
elevations of the building located on the south side of Seven Mile Road
between Middlebelt Road and Melvin Avenue in Section 11, be approved
subject to the following conditions:
1) That the Site Plan, defined as Sheet No. 1 dated 9/14/93 by James
P. Ryan Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
2) That the Elevation Plan, defined as Sheet No. 3 dated 9/14/93 by
James P. Ryan Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered
to;
3) That the wall sign shown on the west elevation of the Elevation
Plan is hereby approved and shall be limited to 240 sq. ft. in sign
area.
for the following reasons:
1) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed
use;
2) That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the
surrounding uses in the area.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Tent, LaPine, Morrow, Alanskas, McCann, Engebretson
NAYS: Fandrei
ABSENT: None
''wr.
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 Beacon Sign Company, on behalf of Arbor Drugs, Inc. ,
requesting approval for one wall sign for the business located at 28007
Eight Mile Road in Section 1.
Scott Miller: This is at the Weirton Shopping Center at Eight Mile between Grand
River and Angling. They are proposing a wall sign in front of the
building. They are allowed 74 square feet and they are proposing
72 square feet so everything is conforming to the sign ordinance.
Mr. Engebretson: This sign was presented last week at our study meeting. We
didn't ask the petitioner to come back because it is a conforming
sign and they supplied adequate documentation for us to do our
business. A motion would be in order.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Fandrei, seconded by Mr. Tent and unanimously
approved, it was
/#9-186-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Sign Permit Application by Beacon Sign Company, on
behalf of Arbor Drugs, Inc. , requesting approval for one wall sign for
the business located at 28007 Eight Mile Road in Section 1, be approved
Now, subject to the following condition:
13063
1) That the Sign Package by Beacon Sign Company, received by the
Livonia Planning Commission on 9/13/93, is hereby approved and
shall be adhered to.
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 Phillips Sign & Design requesting approval for a ground
sign for the Emmanuel Lutheran Church property located at 34567 Seven
Mile Road in Section 9.
Mr. Miller: This is for the Emmanuel Lutheran Church. They are asking for one
ground sign at 30 square feet, which is allowed by the sign
ordinance. The site plan shows as you drive into the church
parking lot it will be on the left hand sign. It will be
internally illuminated.
Mr. Engebretson: As with the previous petition because this item complied with the
sign ordinance and they supplied complete documentation and
everything was satisfactory, we told this petitioner they could
skip the meeting also. A motion would be in order.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously
approved, it was
#9-187-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Sign
Permit Application by Phillips Sign & Design requesting approval for a
ground sign for the Emmanuel Lutheran Church property located at 34567
'fie Seven Mile Road in Section 9 subject to the following condition:
1) That the Sign Package by Phillips Sign & Design, received by the
Livonia Planning Commission on 9/15/93, 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 671st Regular Meeting
& Public Hearings held on September 28, 1993 was adjourned at 11:00 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
es C. McCann, Secretary
111
ATTEST: ,;i
Jac Engebre, son, Chairman
jg I