HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1993-01-12 12564
MINUTES OF THE 656th REGULAR MEETING & PUBLIC HEARINGS
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
Sew LIVONIA
On Tuesday, January 12, 1993, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 656th Regular Meeting & 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 125 interested persons in the audience.
Members present: Jack Engebretson R. Lee Morrow James C. McCann
Brenda Lee Fandrei Conrad Gniewek Raymond W. Tent
William LaPine
Members absent: Robert Alanskas
Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director,
and Scott Miller, Planning Technician, 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
`r 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. Engebretson: We are going to begin tonight with the pending item section of
our agenda.
Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition
92-10-2-46 by James Staniforth requesting waiver use approval to operate
a limited service restaurant within an existing building located on the
east side of Merriman Road, north of Schoolcraft Road in the Southwest
1/4 of Section 23.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Gniewek, seconded by Mr. Tent and unanimously
approved, it was
#1-1-93 RESOLVED that, Petition 92-10-2-46 by James Staniforth requesting waiver
use approval to operate a limited service restaurant within an existing
building located on the east side of Merriman Road, north of Schoolcraft
Road in the Soutwest 1/4 of Section 23 be taken from the table.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
12565
Mr. Engebretson: This is an item that was tabled from a previous meeting. There
were some outstanding items to deal with here. Mr. Nagy, have
those matters been taken care of from your point of view?
Mr. Nagy: Yes they have and we have also received a copy of the lease
agreement that will be entered into dealing with the matter of
property maintenance and refuse collection and there is a copy on
file in our office in connection with this matter.
Mr. Engebretson: Did that include comments as to what provisions would be made to
deal with the increased trash?
Mr. Nagy: Yes it is all covered.
Mr. Gniewek: Mr. Nagy, the previous petition had a great deal of improper
parking space sizes and also there was a possibility of this going
before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Have all of those been
alleviated?
Mr. Nagy: Yes. The revised site plan has overcome the problems of deficient
parking and it now fully complies and will not need any variance
from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. Engebretson: There was also concern about a drive that connected this property
with the medical clinic next door. Was anything addressed on that
John or was that left open to see how it goes? The doctors
indicated they didn't necessarily want that closed off but they
wanted to reserve the right to have that occur in the future if it
became a problem.
Mr. Nagy: This plan does not provide for the closing of that driveway. That
is a matter that will be left up to them.
Mr. Morrow: One comment to the petitioner and the surrounding property owners.
I certainly hope they can work it out so that drive can remain
open. It will work better if it is left open. However, I
recognize the fact that it complies with the ordinance. In our
prior discussions there was talk about possibly closing it off,
which is their right, but I as one Commissioner would like to see
it open.
Julie Alkarawi: I am the owner of the party store. I had one point I wanted to
make. We were supposed to remove the ice machine. I had them look
at it while the City Inspector was there and this ice machine looks
like it is built in. It is about 6 to 8 inches buried in asphalt
plus the cord is buried underground up to the store. The only
thing we can do is have it painted. It is close to impossible to
remove it as it is now. I never looked at it that close before.
Mr. Engebretson: Is that a problem John?
Mr. Nagy: I think when the weather permits we can go out and take a look at
it and see if our Inspection Department might have something in
mind. We will make every effort to work it out with you.
12566
Mr. LaPine: You are the property owner and you own that party store. Do you
have any plans to do any renovations?
Ms. Alkarawi: Yes. Right now because of the vacant building we are under a lot
Nor of pressure but this will be rented and it will erase a lot of
problems and it will look much better.
Mr. LaPine: It sure needs some sprucing up.
Ms. Alkarawi: We are aware of that.
Mr. Engebretson: She has committed, Mr. LaPine, that the exterior of that building
will be improved with some paint or stain by June 30th.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Gniewek, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously
approved, it was
/11-2-93 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December
15, 1992 on Petition 92-10-2-46 by James Staniforth requesting waiver
use approval to operate a limited service restaurant within an existing
building located on the east side of Merriman Road, north of Schoolcraft
Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 23, the City Planning Commission
does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 92-10-2-46 be
approved subject to the following conditions:
1) That the Site Plan dated 12-22-92, as revised, prepared by Frank J.
Ferlito which is hereby approved shall be adhered to.
2) That the landscaping shown on the approved Site Plan shall be
`, installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and
shall thereafter be permanently maintained in a healthy condition.
3) That the Building Elevation Plan dated 10-20-92 prepared by Frank
J. Ferlito which is hereby approved shall be adhered to.
4) That the number of customer seats shall not exceed 22.
5) That the pole sign existing on the subject property in front of the
building proposed to be occupied by the Limited Service Restaurant
shall be removed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy.
for the following reasons:
1) That the proposed use complies with all of the special and general
waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 10.03
and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543.
2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed
use.
3) That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the
surrounding uses in the area.
12567
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance
#543, as amended.
`r Mr. Tent: How can we cover that ice machine? I would like to see it removed.
I would like to see something done. We have an opportunity now to
go ahead and improve the front of the building.
Mr. Gniewek: Mr. Nagy has already said once the weather breaks the Inspection
Department and his department will go out to the site and arrange
for some modification or change of that particular condition that
does exist presently. It is also indicated in our staff notes that
the ice machine in the front of the property will be removed.
Mr. Tent: I just wanted to emphasize that for the petitioner to assure him we
are going to watch him.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is approval of the
minutes of the 655th Regular Meeting & Public Hearings held on December
15, 1992.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mr. Gniewek and unanimously
approved, it was
#1-3-93 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 655th Regular Meeting & Public
Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on December 15, 1992 are
hereby approved.
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
92-12-8-21 by Microwave Communications, Inc. requesting approval of all
plans required by Section 18.42b of Zoning Ordinance #543 for a proposal
to install a satellite dish antenna to the wall of a commercial building
located on the south side of Five Mile between Newburgh Road and Blue
Skies Avenue in Section 19.
Mr. Miller: This is a shopping center that is located at Five Mile and
Newburgh. The satellite dish will be located on the Farmer Jacks
store. It will be on the wall that faces the rest of the shopping
mall. It will be approximately 17 feet from the south elevation
and 43 feet from the wall that is to the east. The satellite dish
is six feet in diameter and it will be set up in such a way that
only the satellite dish will protrude over the building.
Mr. Engebretson: There are no residential uses in the area?
Mr. Miller: Behind it to the south is a church and the residents in the
subdivision will not be able to see it.
12568
Mr. Engebretson: Is the petitioner present?
James Hava: I live in Chelsea, Michigan. What we are looking at doing is
installing a six foot communications dish primarily for receiving
- video and audio for news briefs while grocery clients are waiting
in line to pay their bills.
On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mrs. Fandrei, and unanimously
approved, it was
//1-4-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition
92-12-8-21 by Microwave Communications, Inc. requesting approval of all
plans required by Section 18.42b of Zoning Ordinance //543 for a proposal
to install a satellite dish antenna to the wall of a commercial building
located on the south side of Five Mile between Newburgh Road and Blue
Skies Avenue in Section 19 subject to the following condition:
1) That all plans dated 7/10/92 by Microwave Communications, Inc. ,
submitted on behalf of Farmer Jacks at 37685 Five Mile Road, are
hereby approved and shall be adhered to.
for the following reason:
2) That the proposed satellite antenna location is such that it will
have no detrimental aesthetic impact on the surrounding properties.
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 92-12-8-22
by Microwave Communications, Inc. requesting approval of all plans
required by Section 18.42b of Zoning Ordinance #543 for a proposal to
install a satellite dish antenna to the wall of a commercial building
located on the south side of Five Mile between Middlebelt Road and
Beatrice Avenue in Section 23.
Mr. Miller: This is the shopping center at Five Mile and Middlebelt. It is
also for a Farmer Jack store. It will be approximately 25 feet
from the west and 60 feet from Five Mile Road. This is also 6 feet
in diameter and set up in such a way that only the dish will
protrude over the building.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Fandrei, seconded by Mr. Gniewek and unanimously
approved, it was
#1-5-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition
92-12-8-22 by Microwave Communications, Inc. requesting approval of all
plans required by Section 18.42b of Zoning Ordinance //543 for a proposal
to install a satellite dish antenna to the wall of a commercial building
located on the south side of Five Mile between Middlebelt Road and
Beatrice Avenue in Section 23, subject to the following condition:
1) That all plans dated 7/15/92 by Microwave Communications, Inc. ,
submitted on behalf of Farmer Jacks at 29583 Five Mile Road, are
hereby approved and shall be adhered to.
12569
for the following reason:
1) That the proposed satellite antenna location is such that it will
have no detrimental aesthetic impact on the surrounding properties.
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 92-12-8-23
by Microwave Communications, Inc. requesting approval of all plans
required by Section 18.42b of Zoning Ordinance #543 for a proposal to
install a satellite dish antenna to the wall of a commercial building
located on the south side of Eight Mile between Inkster Road and Angling
Road in Section 1.
Mr. Miller: This is a shopping center at Eight Mile and Angling Road. This is
also on a Farmer Jacks. It will be located at the rear of the
store. It is approximately 65 feet from the south elevation and it
will be on the west elevation. The dish will be six feet in
diameter and only the dish will show. The two residential houses
behind it will possibly be able to see it but will have to look to
find it.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mr. Gniewek and unanimously
approved, it was
##1-6-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition
92-12-8-23 by Microwave Communications, Inc. requesting approval of all
plans required by Section 18.42b of Zoning Ordinance #543 for a proposal
Sur, to install a satellite dish antenna to the wall of a commercial building
located on the south side of Eight Mile between Inkster Road and Angling
Road in Section 1, subject to the following condition:
1) That all plans dated 7/11/92 by Microwave Communications, Inc. ,
submitted on behalf of Farmer Jacks at 28107 Eight Mile Road, are
hereby approved and shall be adhered to.
for the following reason:
1) That the proposed satellite antenna location is such that it will
have no detrimental aesthetic impact on the surrounding properties.
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 92-12-8-24
by Schostak Brothers & Company, Inc. requesting approval of all plans
required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 for a proposal to
alter the exterior elevation of an existing storefront located on the
southwest corner of Plymouth and Middlebelt Roads in Section 35.
Mr. Miller: This store is located in the Wonderland Shopping Center. It is the
old Foland Store. Basically it is cleaning up of the front
elevation using pretty much the existing materials and also
matching the existing materials in the rest of the shopping mall.
%%ow They will also be putting in a new entrance.
12570
Mr. Engebretson: Will the petitioner please come forward and explain your
proposal.
Michael Polsinelli, 26913 Northwestern Hwy. , Southfield: What is being proposed
'`., before you is a renovation of the north elevation of what used to
be the Foland Department Store building to accommodate Service
Merchandise, which we have successfully leased to. What you see is
the front elevation which represents approximately 53 feet of the
existing Foland Department Store, which will remain as is. An
additional 189 lineal feet of frontage, will be demolished 40 foot
from the existing storefront back into the store. That portion of
the store currently is a single story addition that Federal's
Department Store put on 20 some years ago. Service Merchandise is
proposing to take that first section of the building out and
install a full two-story section to accommodate their
merchandising. There currently is an office door that Folands used
that was on the east side of the corner of this building. It is
proposed that will be closed and a new entrance be installed on the
north side of the northwest corner to facilitate package pickup.
The existing exit door will be eliminated so this will also be an
entrance off the main parking lot. We also have Bob Schostak here
from Schostak Brothers if you have any other questions.
Mr. LaPine: What kind of doors will they be?
Mr. Polsinelli: These doors will be glass entry doors.
Mr. Gniewek: Will the Service Merchandise be taking over the entire Foland area?
Mr. Polsinelli: Service Merchandise will be using 52,000 square feet of the
existing 63,000 square feet. There will be some storage remaining
and some additional retail that will be turned in line to the mall
that will be reused.
Mr. Gniewek: Approximately how many jobs will be created by having this store
there?
Mr. Polsinelli: Upwards of 300 jobs.
Mr. LaPine: The signage, is that a permitted sign or do they have to go through
the Zoning Board of Appeals?
Mr. Nagy: If you will notice in our notes, this is not to be considered
approval of the sign. They will have to submit it separately
pursuant to the vicinity control ordinance. That sign as shown is
over what is allowed, so yes it will be necessary for them to go
before the Zoning Board of Appeals.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mrs. Fandrei and unanimously
approved, it was
#1-7-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 92-12-8-24 by Schostak Brothers & Company,
Inc. requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of
12571
Zoning Ordinance ##543 for a proposal to alter the exterior elevation of
an existing storefront located on the southwest corner of Plymouth and
Middlebelt Roads in Section 35 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1) That the plan dated 11/11/92 by Schostak Brothers & Company, Inc. ,
submitted on behalf of Wonderland Shopping Center, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to.
2) That the proposed wall sign shown on the elevation plan is not part
of this approval and a sign plan shall be submitted separately
pursuant to the Wonderland Vicinity Control Ordinance.
Mr. Tent: I just want to make one comment. I am pleased we do have a Service
Merchandise coming in. They will utilize the vacant space. I wish
you the best of luck and I believe it will be an asset to the
Wonderland Shopping Center.
Mr. Engebretson: Just a point of interest Mr. Polsinelli, how many of these 300
jobs will be full time?
Mr. Polsinelli: I don't have that information.
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 Metro Detroit Sign requesting approval for two wall signs
and to erect one ground sign on property located on the north side of
fir. Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt and Purlingbrook Roads in Section 2.
Mr. Miller: This is the Bakers Square Restaurant that is located in the Livonia
Mall property. They revised their original proposal because they
would have to go to the ZBA for two of the signs. Right now they
would rather just get the one sign that is conforming and come back
later and ask for two more signs. At this time they are asking for
one wall sign for the south elevation, which is the elevation that
faces Seven Mile Road, and it will say Bakers Square Restaurant and
Pies. It is 60 square feet and they are allowed 78 square feet so
it is conforming to the ordinance.
Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner like to add anything?
Enos Curtis from Bakers Square: We want three signs. We are looking for approval
for a sign on the south elevation and recommendation of approval on
the east and west signs.
Mr. Engebretson: Tonight you have modified your request to simply be the one sign
that faces south?
Mr. Curtis: And your recommendation of approval for the other two.
Mr. Nagy: That will hold up all the signs. That is why we suggested you only
ask for the one that is complying and you are reserving the right
to come back at a later date for the other two.
12572
Mr. Engebretson: The Zoning Board backlog is such that it would probably create a
problem for you having a sign by your opening date.
`o,• On a motion duly made by Mr. Gniewek, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously
approved, it was
#1-8-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Sign Permit Application by Metro Detroit Sign
requesting approval for one wall sign on property located on the north
side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt and Purlingbrook Roads in
Section 2 be approved subject to the following condition:
1) That Sheet 1 of sign plan dated 10-20-92, as revised 1-8-93,
allowing for one sign, prepared by Federal Sign, is hereby approved
and shall be adhered to.
Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Sign Permit
Application by Gibbs Planning Group, Inc. on behalf of Cane Woods
Subdivision requesting approval for a new subdivision entrance marker.
Mr. Miller: This is an entrance marker. The subdivision is located on the
north side of Seven Mile Road west of Gill Road. This is the
marker they are proposing to put in the landscaped area to the
right as you drive into the subdivision. The marker will say "Cane
Woods". It is 8 square feet and they are allowed 20 square feet so
they are below the allowable signage under the ordinance.
Mr. Engebretson: Is the petitioner present:
`rrr•
Angelo Constantine, 9766 Joy Road, Plymouth, Michigan: Basically it speaks for
itself. It will be made of cut field stone. The letters will be
sand blasted into the marker.
Mr. Engebretson: What are you going to do about illumination?
Mr. Constantine: We plan on lighting it as the project is under construction and
we will have to deal with the lighting if the homeowners'
association wants to continue lighting it after all the houses are
built.
Mr. Engebretson: If they don't, then you will extinguish the lighting?
Mr. Constantine: That is correct.
Mr. LaPine: How many homes were you building there?
Mr. Constantine: Thirty.
Mr. LaPine: How many have you sold?
Mr. Constantine: I believe 11.
12573
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Fandrei, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously
approved, it was
#1-9-93 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Sign
v,,., Permit Application by Gibbs Planning Group, Inc. on behalf of Cane Woods
Subdivision requesting approval for a new subdivision entrance marker
subject to the following conditions:
1) That the sign elevation plan dated April 1992 submitted by Gibbs
Planning Group, Inc. for an entranceway sign for the residential
subdivision Cane Woods, being that it meets all requirements of
Zoning Ordinance #543, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to.
2) That the site landscaping plan dated received 1/4/93 City of
Livonia Planning Commission, submitted by Gibbs Planning Group,
Inc. , is hereby approved and shall be adhered to.
3) That external lighting of the subdivision entrance marker is
approved for the period of home construction and sales, thereafter
any lighting is at the discretion of the homeowners.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mr. Engebretson: We will now move to the public hearing section of the agenda.
Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the first item on the Public Hearing portion of
the agenda is Petition 92-10-2-47 by Robert Zaschak requesting waiver
use approval to operate a trade school in an existing office building
located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Six Mile Road and
Grove Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 13.
Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating
they have no objections to this waiver use proposal. We have also
received a letter from the Traffic Bureau stating the building has
been long established and the petitioner does not intend to change
the outside. We find that the petition complies with the
ordinance. Also in our file is a letter from the Fire Marshal's
office stating their office has no objections to this proposal.
Lastly, we have received a letter from the Ordinance Enforcement
Division stating their office has no objections to this proposal.
Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please step up to the podium.
Bob Zaschak, 19468 Fitzgerald: I am the building owner and also a member of the
corporation that plans on opening up the trade school in that
building.
Mr. Engebretson: Would you give us a brief description of what it is you intend to
do?
12574
Mr. Zaschak: We would operate a dealer trade school and job placement center in
the gaming industry, anticipating casinos opening up in Windsor,
Greek Town and possibly Highland Park. We hope to train the
blackjack, roulette, craps, etc. dealers to operate the casinos.
`�. My partners and the employees will be trained, accredited people
out of Las Vegas. They are pit bosses. They have set up casinos
and trade schools. Their last operation was in Green Bay,
Wisconsin and they have set up casinos and gambling operations on
cruise ships in the Orient so we have well-trained accredited
people that have passed all the FBI checks throughout the 20 years
they have been in operation. This is going to be run in a
school-like atmosphere. There is no outside intereference. You
are not going to have traffic in and out. Students are going to
come in for two five-hour sessions, a day session and an evening
session, so you are not going to have people coming in and out.
There will be less traffic in there now than the last business I
had in the front, which was an in-and-out type of operation. There
will be no disruption to the neighborhood whatsoever. We are
currently approved by the Michigan Bureau of Lottery Division to
run certain gaming operations. We have applied to the Education
Department in Lansing and we are waiting on their approval at this
point.
Mr. Morrow: Mr. Zaschak, you alluded to your prior tenant. I don't recall who
that was.
Mr. Zaschak: In the entire building I had Lanier Worldwide. They outgrew the
facility and I had no room to expand so another tenant moved in,
Benchmark Temporary Help, and they would have upwards of 150 people
Soar per day coming in for the minimum wage type applications. They were
certainly disrupting the neighborhood.
Mr. Morrow: I recall Lanier went in as one of the original tenants. I wasn't
sure who you were referring to. Secondly, you indicated afternoon
and evening classes. Could you be a little bit more specific as to
time?
Mr. Zaschak: One class would start at 10:00 a.m. until approximately 5:00 p.m.
and the other class would start around 5:00 p.m. or 5:30 p.m. until
10:00 p.m.
Mr. Morrow: Roughly how many people?
Mr. Zaschak: We are looking at 10 to 15 per session.
Mr. Morrow: What about the staff?
Mr. Zaschak: The staff will initially start off with about five personnel.
Mr. Tent: The number of students, would 15 be the maximum or would you
entertain the thought of having more?
Mr. Zaschak: Yes we would.
Mr. Tent: What is your maximum?
12575
Mr. Zaschak: We probably could handle at one time 25 students.
Mr. Tent: You are talking about two sessions. Would you increase the
sessions?
Mr. Zaschak: No, not at all. If for some reasons those hours do not work out
with the students, we could adjust but it would not be beyond 10:00
p.m.
Mr. Tent: Do you have any intent of using that as a bartending school?
Mr. Zaschak: Not at all. It is going to be a certified trade school. We have
had contact with Oakland University, University of Detroit,
Schoolcraft College, and the personnel running this school have
qualified for college credits in Las Vegas. So we have had contact
with the universities in the area and they are coming out to
discuss this matter with us.
Mr. Tent: Do you have any schools in this general area?
Mr. Zaschak: We are the first in Michigan and we are trying to get in here.
With all the controversy with gaming and all, we are the first one.
Mr. Tent: You do have experience?
Mr. Zaschak: I don't have experience. Several members here know me. I am
retired from the City. I have had 27 years with the City and I am
retiring in June. My partner is a certified gaming instructor and
a pit boss and he ran casino gaming schools in Vegas and throughout
the United States and the Orient.
Mrs. Fandrei: John, our notes indicate that they originally were going to have
10 to 15 students and now Mr. Zaschak indicated it might go up to
25. Is there enough parking for the increases if this were to come
about?
Mr. Nagy: They would still comply with the off-street parking.
Mr. Gniewek: Mr. Zaschak, how long are the semesters? How long before someone
becomes proficient?
Mr. Zaschak: I don't have the schedule here but just for the basic course, the
easiest course would be blackjack, and that is a 100 hour course so
you are talking 4 to 5 weeks just for the blackjack. The other
courses would run 8 to 9 weeks.
Mr. Gniewek: If they wanted another session, it would be longer?
Mr. Zaschak: If they wanted another phase or session or if they need additional
training, we would provide additional training for them to help
them complete the course.
Mr. Gniewek: Does the student coming in pick which particular thing he wants to
do?
12576
Mr. Zaschak: That depends on their ability. There will be a testing procedure
when they come in. You have to have some proficiency in math to
deal these games. You can't just walk off the street and have no
proficiency in math because you are not going to do well. We have
a pre-test. If they don't pass that pre-test, we are going to
eliminate them right off the bat. They would have to be drug free
and they have to have no record whatsoever. If you have a record
of any history of drugs or anything in your background, these
casinos will not hire you. We tell them right off the bat if you
have any history of that, let us know right now, you are not
getting in the program.
Mr. LaPine: Mr. Zaschak, will some of these students be coming from Windsor?
Mr. Zaschak: We hope so.
Mr. LaPine: Do you have to be a graduate of this type of school before a casino
will hire you?
Mr. Zaschak: Yes you do. You also have to pass a test under the Las Vegas
standards. There is a standard in the industry and you would have
to perform under that standard.
Mr. LaPine: Once the school is established, and let's assume gambling does come
to the Metropolitan Detroit area, would casinos maybe contact you
to send someone over if they wanted to move up from being a
blackjack dealer to another operation and they would come back to
school and learn how to operate those type of games?
NoirMr. Zaschak: Yes.
Mr. LaPine: I don't think there is a problem with the parking there because
when I was out there to look at it, it was more than adequate so I
don't see any big problems. This will be approved by the state.
Is that correct?
Mr. Zaschak: We have a license right now from the Lottery Division for certain
activities and we have applied to the Michigan Education
Department. We applied a week or so ago and they told us it could
take 30 to 90 days to go through their system so we are on hold.
This is step one to get through the process.
Mr. Engebretson: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak for or
against this waiver use?
Maxine Raupp, 16790 Middlebelt: I am the second house from where this is proposed.
I have a question about the zoning. What is the zoning actually
going to become?
Mr. Engebretson: We are not actually changing the zoning. What the issue is here
is whether or not to permit this trade school to operate within
this office district. The zoning would stay the same.
12577
Ms. Raupp: You said it would adequately handle 25 student cars. You have to
consider also the teacher cars, cars from the other building, the
employees from the other offices in that complex plus anybody that
is meeting at that area. Since this petition came out, there has
been an increase in driving activity into there and my whole yard
-„. has been illuminated by car lights from people looking over the
territory late at night. If this is not going to change our
particular area, I am wondering why I am so well illuminated by
cars and headlights and people in that section because at 11:30,
twelve o'clock and one o'clock in the morning I don't expect my
yard to be lit up like daylight. That has just been occuring since
I was given notification of this petition. I do object to this. I
think it will increase the traffic a great deal.
Mr. Engebretson: To the staff, If I understand correctly this facility would have
the capability of accommodating the 25 students assuming that was
the entire use in that building. Is that a correct assumption?
Mr. Nagy: That is correct. The off-street parking is really a function of
the size of the building. When we first approve a site plan for
the development of any property, whether it is office, commercial
or residential, we do factor in the off-street parking based on the
size of the building. The building is not being expanded to
accommodate this new use so it meets all the off-street parking
pursuant to the size of the building and the nature of the use.
Ms. Raupp: How many parking spaces are there right now?
Mr. Nagy: 59 spaces.
Ms. Raupp: Even with the building only being partially used, there are not
that many empty parking spaces.
Mr. LaPine: Where do you live?
Ms. Raupp: I live on the east side of Middlebelt on the south side of this
complex.
Mr. LaPine: Can you tell me how the lights bother you because the parking lot
runs east to west and there is also parking north and south in the
back. There is a wall back there too. I don't understand how the
lights hit you.
Ms. Raupp: The cars come in facing south and they go directly into my yard.
Mr. LaPine: The only time the lights would be on is when somebody pulls in and
then when they go in they turn their lights off and when they leave
they put their lights on and pull out. I don't understand where
these lights are in your yard all the time.
Ms. Raupp: Just since this petition has come out, I have gone out in my yard
to walk my dog and there is a car or two sitting there with the
lights on for more than half an hour to an hour lighting up my
yard. They turn them off for a short time and when I come back in,
their lights go back on. I don't know why that is happening but it
is happening.
12578
Mr. LaPine: Mr. Zaschak are you doing some work in there at the present time?
Mr. Zaschak: We haven't done any advertising. I have been there every day since
probably five o'clock until eleven or twelve o'clock at night
%ow refurbishing the place. The whole amount of cars there would be
two cars, myself and my partner. Being there every day, there is
nobody coming in and out because we haven't advertised. Nobody
knows we are there at this point. Yes there might be one or two
cars there but we get out of our cars and go in the building. We
don't sit in the parking lot with our lights on. I can't agree
with that.
Mr. Engebretson: If this is approved and if this continues to be a problem,
undoubtedly the petitioner is going to be required to renew a
waiver from the Zoning Board of Appeals relative to the wall and
this would be a good time to follow through on this, although I
have a feeling that Mr. Zaschak would be willing to be cooperative
with you if this does continue. Maybe it just an aberration here
during this construction period. I think we can depend on him to
run a tight ship and he will be cooperative with you.
Mr. Gniewek: Mr. Zaschak, you said you are retiring from the City. You are
retiring from the Police Force. Is that correct?
Mr. Zaschak: That is correct.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 92-10-2-47 closed.
`. On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. McCann and unanimously
approved, it was
#1-10-93 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January
12, 1993 on Petition 92-10-2-47 by Robert Zaschak requesting waiver use
approval to operate a trade school in an existing office building
located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Six Mile Road and
Grove Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 13, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
92-10-2-47 be approved for the following reasons:
1) That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the special and
general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in
Section 9.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543.
2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed
use.
3) That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the
surrounding uses in the area.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance
#543, as amended.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
"+� resolution adopted.
12579
Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 92-11-2-49
by Total Petroleum, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to construct and
operate a gasoline/convenience station on the southeast corner of Wayne
Road and Ann Arbor Trail in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 33.
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 office has no objections to this waiver use proposal. We
have also received a letter from the Traffic Bureau stating the
following is submitted for your consideration: (1) Right Turn Only
signs shall be posted at both west exit driveways and at the north
exit driveway. (2) No Left Turn signs shall be posted at the
northwest and the northeast driveways. (3) 30 foot radius should
be put on all three driveway approaches. NOTE: This is a high
volume traffic intersection. Speed on Wayne Road is posted @ 45
mph with Ann Arbor Trail being posted @ 35 mph. Left turning
traffic on both roads can back up as much as 20 vehicles. Also in
our file is a letter from the Fire Marshal stating their office has
no objections to this proposal.
We have also received a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Yarnevich of 8891
Laurel stating they are unable to be present at this meeting but
are totally against this request for the following reasons: (a)
There are numerous accidents at this corner, therefore, a gas
station will just add to this problem. (b) The people mostly
affected with this proposal, who live directly behind this property
have voted it down also, and they as neighbors support them. (c)
This is a beautiful Livonia sub and if you check around in Livonia,
it is mostly kept that way. (d) Finally, we don't need another
gas station.
We have also received a letter with 47 signatures attached from
George and Carol McDonough of 8937 Laurel asking that we deny Total
Petroleum the waiver use approval to construct the proposed
gasoline/convenience station. They have the following objections
to the proposed station: 1) The traffic problems that currently
exist at the corner of Wayne and Ann Arbor Trail will only be
compounded. 2) It appears to us that the City of Livonia feels
obligated to its residents and concerned for their safety by having
restrictions on the location of a gasoline station without 65% of
the residents located within a 400' radius. We have some
reservation about the safety of our home and property due to
possible fire/explosion or potential leakage from the underground.
storage tanks. 3) We do not see why we need another gasoline
station. 4) We also have objections to the intimidation techniques
that have been used by Total Petroleum in an attempt to obtain the
necessary 65% approval of the area residents. 5) When we purchased
our property we were assured that the only thing that would be
built on the corner would be an auto convenience mall similar to
that on Middlebelt Road north of Plymouth. They end by saying they
are writing this letter to record their objections since there is a
12580
possibility that their work schedules may not allow them to
personally attend the public hearing and want the Commission to
consider their objections to the proposed gasoline/convenience
station when considering the petition by Total Petroleum.
We also have in our file a letter from Anthony C. Rea stating his
property is directly across Ann Arbor Trail from this development
and he has no objections to same.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, just for the record has the petitioner submitted
anything in the form of a written consent from 65% of the abutting
property owners?
Mr. Nagy: No they have not.
Mrs. Fandrei: Mr. Nagy, what does the ordinance require as far as gasoline
stations in the proximity of residential neighborhoods?
Mr. Nagy: Among the many standards that regulate gasoline service stations,
one of the requirements is where the station is to be located
within a 400 foot radius of a residential neighborhood, there is a
requirement that the applicant receive at least 65% of those
property owners within the 400 foot radius to consent to the
location and placement of the service station. That standard has
not been complied with.
Mrs. Fandrei: Do you know Mr. Nagy if they made an effort to comply with this?
Mr. Nagy: I do know they tried, on at least two occasions, to obtain those
\r. signatures.
Mr. Engebretson: Having said that Mr. Nagy can we conclude that (a) the Planning
Commission doesn't have the authority to approve this proposal
because it is non-complying. However, we could approve it subject
to Zoning Board of Appeals approval of a waiver. Is that correct?
Mr. Nagy: You could condition it if you recommend approval.
Mr. Engebretson: Secondly, does the protest petition you have constitute a valid
protest, which requires a six vote majority of the City Council?
Mr. Nagy: This is not a zoning change. This is a special use approval or
waiver use within the existing C-2 zoning. It does indicate strong
objections on the part of property owners but it does not
constitute a protest, which would require a 3/4 majority vote of
Council.
Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please come forward and explain your
proposal.
Alan Helmkamp, 19500 Victor Parkway, Suite 290: I am attorney for the petitioners.
With me tonight, available for answers to your questions, are Mr.
Daniel Clayton, who is a real estate representative, and Mr. Donald
Moore, Construction Manager. Let me say in no particular order
12581
with respect to the 65% ordinance, that Mr. Nagy is correct when he
indicates that efforts were made and, in fact, there were consents
submitted from 16 property owners within the 400 foot radius and my
understanding is 65% would have required 18, so my client fell two
short. It is also correct that we will be seeking a variance of
that ordinance requirement from ZBA at the appropriate time
depending upon how we do with you folks and Council.
Secondly, with respect to the objecting signatures that came in, I
would merely observe that my quick perusal of that today indicated
more than half are outside the 400 foot area. They are within the
affected subdivision but many of them came from Hanlon Street and
Dover and our approach for approvals was confined solely to the 400
foot area, and had we spread out we might have had many more. I
just want to make sure that you understand that you have 47 there
and 16 here and you are comparing apples to oranges. Ours came
from a much smaller possible group of people who are affected.
With respect to the petition itself, this is a proposal calling for
a four-pump, self-service station. The site plan calls for an 1850
square foot convenience store, being your typical pop, chips,
candy, cigarettes, etc. It would be a very modest type of
convenience store. The landscape plan which is proposed to you,
and I am into this in just the last five days so to some extent we
are learning about this proposal together, and in my initial review
of the landscape plan I have already made a recommendation to my
client that they step up the large plantings on the property line
which would be most close to the Laurel Avenue for screening
purposes so you can take that as an amendment to the landscape
Iry plan. I think the character of the intersection substantially
lends itself to this use. With the exception of the one station
across the street, you have to go quite a ways to find a gas
station. If you go to the west to Ann Arbor Trail and Newburgh
Road, there is no gas station there. If you go to the east to Ann
Arbor Trail and Hines Parkway or even further to Farmington Road,
there is no service station there. If you go north at Wayne Road
and Plymouth Road, there is no service station there, so I don't
think we are looking at an oversaturation of this service for the
surrounding neighborhood within the couple mile area surrounding
the proposed site. I think the site is appropriate. I am sure the
politicians in town will be unhappy to see a good sign location go
but nonetheless this property, which would lend itself to other
uses such as fast-food restaurants, etc. , we feel this is a
proposal that would be best for the community and the neighborhood
as compared to some other things. With that I would defer to
questions.
Ray Tent: Mr. Helmkamp, you have been involved with the City for a long time.
You know how the City functions and all its ordinances. While I
appreciate the fact that you have only taken on this particular
petition within the last five or six days but still you were quick
to criticize the signatures on the petition by being out of the
district and out of the location, etc. Don't you think at this
'rr�
12582
particular time that you are aware that the zoning requires that no
gasoline service station be erected within 400 feet of any
residential district unless the written consent of 65% or more of
the owners of residential property within the radius is submitted
`,. by the petitioner. That is our ordinance. In this particular
case, as the Chairman indicated, for us to act on it we have to
send it to the ZBA for them to go ahead and give some relief to
this situation. Wouldn't it behoove you to go ahead and get those
signatures before you came forth with the petition? That is what I
am concerned about. We have people that object and you still
haven't come up with 65% of the signatures. That is what bothers
me.
Mr. Helmkamp: Your point is well taken Mr. Tent. Believe me my client spared no
effort to attempt to get the required 18 signatures. We have 16
and we just couldn't squeeze two more out of there.
Mr. Tent: Well that is not 65%.
Mr. Helmkamp: I guess that is why we have a ZBA and have variances. My thought
would be and I think perhaps the Chairman has already intimated or
maybe Mr. Nagy intimated in response to a question, we would
appreciate the approval recommendation of this body and perhaps you
could make it contingent upon the ZBA waiving this particular
ordinance requirement as opposed to making us come back here.
Mr. Gniewek: Does Total Petroleum own the property?
Mr. Helmkamp: They do not. They have it under contract.
�1irr►
Mike Batko, 8930 Laurel: I am one of the 47 petitioners that signed that. On
behalf of all the people in the immediate area, we would like to
vote against it due to the increased traffic flow and the
congestion it will generate. Traffic is already backed up to a
substantial point. I have to go out of my subdivision on the other
streets to get to Wayne Road and Ann Arbor Trail to get to Westland
Mall. Being a taxpayer I shouldn't have to fight those kind of
battles just to get out of my subdivision. As far as the 24 hour
convenience center, we don't need another one. We have a 7/11 that
is there. We have a party store that is there. We have another
gas station that is directly across the street that is a 24-hour
convenience center. There are two more gas stations less than a
mile and a half away just south of Wayne Road. The other reasons
are litter, noise, pollution and fumes will increase due to the
nature of their business. Without a plan to develop the whole
section, we will basically be stuck with a gas station surrounded
by a field with a bunch of trash in it. As far as apples to
oranges, if you are going to count 400 feet, you should count all
the people that are in that immediate area that have to deal with
that corner. As it was said earlier, that corner is very hard to
get out of. It may be one of the worse 10 spots in Michigan. I
tend to believe that because of the problems I have getting out of
there every day. As far as getting 65% of the 400 radius, I guess
we need a further verification of how many signatures we need to
have against that because I don't think it will be a problem.
12583
As far as squeezing two more people, just from the information I
have heard from the other people in the subdivision, they were
contacted two and three and four times and begged and offered free
gas coupons to sign so they could get their two more people. As
`r. far as apples to oranges, people in the affected area, the people
who pay taxes should be the ones that get to vote on it.
Vicky Kowalis, 34647 Dover: I am also strongly opposed to this gas station. Where
our residence is on Dover we would greatly be affected by 24 hours
of lights. They would come right to our front windows. During the
summer we would be forced to install air conditioning or sleep with
our windows closed due to increased traffic, noise and congestion
all hours of the day and night. The majority of the people in the
Arbor Park View Subdivision have small children under ten and this
is not the ideal type of business that we would want to have. We
would have an increased flow of traffic through the neighborhood.
As it is right now, people come through thinking there is an outlet
to Wayne Road, which there is not. It is not an ideal place for a
gas station.
Carol Bimberg, 8925 Laurel: I am proof that somebody is not doing their home work.
I am the fourth house from the corner directly behind where the gas
station location is proposed and my husband and I, even though we
have lived there for approximately 14 months, have not been
notified neither by Total or their representative. We were not
even notified by the City of this meeting. Our neighbors told us.
We moved from Dearborn at great expense. I grew up in Dearborn.
It was difficult to leave the City but we decided to build in
Livonia because Livonia had a lot to offer and I am hoping in
Livonia the taxpayer's voice will be heard. Just to reiterate some
of the arguments, we do not need another gas station or convenience
store there. We have 7/11. There are ample party stores there.
We have a gas station right across the street. We have many
children in the area. We are not opposed to progress those of us
in the neighborhood and my family in particular but we would like
to have a say over what the progress would be. If someone could
please show me on the map approximately where this 400 foot radius
is.
Mr. Engebretson: John, could you explain what the notification process is on these
waiver uses like this?
Mr. Nagy: The City has a policy, not required by ordinance, but it is a
policy that in order to adequately inform the public we do send you
notices. Not only do we rely on by law the official paper of the
City of Livonia to post notice but we do, in order to more
affectively inform the public, try to send out notices to the
property owners. We have to rely on our tax rolls for property
owners within an area. I was just looking on the notification and
at the time we prepared this it looks like the notice went to the
subdivider. It indicates it went to PDM Building Company. I don't
know if that is who you bought your property from but apparently
either you have a land contract or.
12584
Ms. Bimberg: We have a direct mortgage and this most current tax bill did go to
PDM and when I called the City to inquire, we found it very
curious, and I am following up, that the first tax bill was sent to
our mortgage company and it was paid by them but the second tax
bill went to PDM. We are looking into that.
Mr. Engebretson: Perhaps that explains why you did not get the same notice that
your neighbors got.
Mr. Shane pointed out the 400 foot radius on the map.
Ms. Bimberg: My neighbors and I would like to make sure that we contact people
within that radius.
Mr. Engebretson: It is not up to you to do that. It is for Total to do that.
This is relative to the ordinance requiring 65% of the neighbors
within a 400 foot radius needed to give their approval for us to
approve it. We can't approve it. We can only approve it subject
to the Zoning Board of Appeals giving them relief, which they may
or may not do, but the burden is on Total to get those signatures.
You can certainly campaign against it with your neighbors. If you
are interested in a more specific answer, the staff will give that
assistance to you tomorrow because this is not the end of it
tonight. This will go on to the City Council. If you will contact
the Planning staff tomorrow, they will be happy to assist you in
any way they can.
Mr. Morrow: It is my understanding nothing official has been submitted to the
Planning staff so the numbers alluded to have not been audited or
addressed by the staff or the commission so we just accept them at
their word that they have 16 signatures although there is nothing
official.
Jack Cottrell, 9024 Laurel: In the beginning when the Total Petroleum came around,
I did sign the petition that it was acceptable. I have no problems
with a gas station. I think most of the members of the board were
here two years ago before these residents bought these homes. We
had a conflict with the original owners. We were in Court years
ago because we did not want a strip mall. My concern is the layout
does not show the environmental aspect of the Rouge River there.
The Rouge River is south of Dover and then there is a church in
there and there is a Rouge River Creek. What is Total Petroleum
going to do regarding the environmental standpoint? Is there an
engineer here to answer questions for me?
Don Morris: I am the Construction Manager for Total. Basically all the tanks
put in today are put in with great care.
Mr. Cottrell: What kind of tanks will you be using?
Mr. Morris: They could be fiberglass. They could be steel.
Mr. Cottrell: On the fiberglass would they be double walled?
Mr. Morris: Not necessarily.
12585
Mr. Cottrell: I think you might have to. Are you familiar with the State of
Michigan State Fire Board under the date of January 14, 1991? The
State of Michigan requires that all steel tanks be put in the
ground with protection?
'tr.
Mr. Engebretson: I am going to interrupt this. It is my understanding that the
State Government governs these kinds of installations and that
these site plans would have to be approved by a state agency. It
is beyond our capability to deal with all those regulations and I
am not trivializing your concern sir, it is just I have to mention
we aren't capable of dealing with that but it is our understanding
in all cases such as this that the State of Michigan is a party to
all aspects of this construction and they do have the ability to
deal with your concerns. If this proposal should happen to go on
as an approved item and if it gets City Council approval then I
would say at that time if you would want to involve yourself in
that process, the City would be happy to point you in the right
direction.
Mr. Cottrell: We will eliminate the environmental at the moment but on your
blueprint that you proposed for this corner, where do you plan to
put the tanks and what would be the approach from the tanker from
your facilities in Taylor? Would they be coming up Wayne Road or
down Wayne Road. Either you would have to make a right hand turn
into the station or a left hand turn across a southbound lane and
it is a very-high, accident-prone corner. At Christmas time there
were two major accidents there. It is hard for a driver to pull in
there, as a professional driver myself for an oil company, and it
is going to be tough coming in.
Mr. Helmkamp: I can answer your first question sir but not your second but I will
get an answer for you. We have three tanks underground. (He
pointed them out on the plan) For some of the homes the building
will be between the tanks and the homes. For the homes which are
closer to Ann Arbor Trail, there would be no building between the
tank and the homes.
Mr. Cottrell: On the existing property your station is going to be modeled after
your latest up-to-date station?
Mr. Helmkamp: Yes.
Mr. Cottrell: Will you be eliminating the walnut trees on Ann Arbor Trail?
Mr. Helmkamp: We try to save as many as possible. If you have particular trees
you want to save, we should know about it and try to incorporate
them in the plan.
Mr. Cottrell: All of Ann Arbor Trail is walnut tree lined.
Bob Rowlett, 34901 Ann Arbor Trail: I am against the Total Station basically
because I own the Amoco station on the corner. I have been there
for three years. I have called the City of Livonia three or four
times a week to send the police out because of accidents. As far
12586
as other gas stations, there is a Total Station at Farmington and
Plymouth, another one at Schoolcraft and Farmington. I can't see
why they would want to put another station so close to their other
ones. As far as convenience stores, there is me, there is a party
``` store, 7/il. The biggest thing is the traffic impact. There is
just too much congestion on that corner.
Mr. Morrow: As a matter of record, for my information, at your station, hearing
tonight there is a tremendous amount of traffic, does that have a
negative impact on the amount of business you do?
Mr. Bowlett: No.
Mr. Morrow: You don't feel the traffic causes people to drive by your station?
Mr. Bowlett: No. In fact a lot of people cut through my station. We don't have
a problem serving the area.
John Breen, 34589 Ann Arbor Trail: I am within the 400 feet of the gas station
proposed. The people have been out to my house concerning this,
the Total Oil people, and I did not sign the petition. I am
opposed to it on the grounds that with the existing stores that we
have and the pollution we get from them, I don't think we need
another store whose primary business is out through a window and
people dispose of everything in the driveway. Unfortunately I live
east of there so the prevailing west wind makes me receive
everything they dispose of. I do not think this is a real good
thing for this area or for my neighborhood. I would appreciate
your consideration.
Alan Helmkamp: Just briefly the letter you have from Mr. Rea, he is the owner of
the Minute Lube on the northeast corner so I think that would give
us number 17. Secondly, the consents were submitted to the
department and I believe they have been audited. With respect to
the hours of operation, we will work on lighting, we will work on
screening and planting to accommodate the neighborhood. The final
point is these kind of services don't generate new traffic. I
don't think that will bring additional traffic.
Kathy Ascott: We are members from the same subdivision and we have several
members in the audience here tonight who have not spoken. I just
wanted to know if it would help you if you had their names and
addresses because I feel they are not getting up to speak because
most of the issues have been covered.
Mr. Engebretson: That wouldn't be a bad idea to have that in the file.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 92-11-2-49 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mrs. Fandrei and unanimously
approved, it was
12587
#1-11-93 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January
12, 1993 on Petition 92-11-2-49 by Total Petroleum, Inc. requesting
waiver use approval to construct and operate a gasoline/convenience
station on the southeast corner of Wayne Road and Ann Arbor Trail in the
``ft. Southwest 1/4 of Section 33, the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 92-11-2-49 be denied for the
following reasons:
1) That the petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the
proposed use is in compliance with all of the special and general
waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 11.03
and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543.
2) That the proposed use is in violation of Section 11.03(a)(10) of
the Zoning Ordinance which prohibits the erection of a gasoline
service station within 400 feet radius of any residential district
unless that restriction is waived by the written consent of 65% or
more of the owners of residential property within such radius.
3) That the proposed use is detrimental to and incompatible with the
adjacent uses in the area.
4) That the proposed use is contrary to the spirit and intent of the
Zoning Ordinance which, among other things, is to promote and
encourage a balanced and appropriate mix of uses and not
over saturate an area with similar type uses as is being proposed.
5) That the location and size of the proposed use, the nature and
intensity of the principal use, the site layout and its relation to
`., the streets giving access to it will be such that traffic to and
from the site will be hazardous to the neighborhood since it will
unduly conflict with the normal traffic of the area.
6) That there is no demonstrated need for additional gas station
services in the subject area.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance
#543, as amended.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 92-12-2-51
by Action Olds, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to add showroom
space to an existing building located on the north side of Plymouth Road
between Farmington Road and Stark Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section
28.
Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating
their department has no objections to this waiver use proposal. We
12588
have also received a letter from the Traffic Bureau stating their
department has no objections to the site plan as submitted. Also
in our file is a letter from the Fire Marshal's office stating they
have no objections to this proposal.
err.
Mr. Gniewek: Mr. Nagy, the petition is for renovations to the existing building
and showroom space but I notice there is additional property
attached to this whole site where presently existed a former
antique store, I believe. Is there anything indicated on this site
plan about what is happening to that particular section as far as
what they are doing on that site?
Mr. Nagy: It doesn't specifically deal with that other than show the building
will be removed and there will be truck parking in that area but it
doesn't go into any more details than that.
Mr. Gniewek: I did notice there is some storage of vehicles on that site
already. I was just curious.
Mr. Engebretson: I might begin by letting you know that the staff made an attempt
to clarify some of these issues having to do with the house and
total site and was unable to get through or to receive a return
call so we have an incomplete proposal before us tonight and I am
wondering, not that it is particularly relative, but I am curious
as to why we had that difficulty in getting prepared for tonight's
meeting.
Bill Ditzhazy: I have no idea. The phone number is on there. Mr. Lawrence is the
one to contact at Action Olds. I would be happy to answer your
,, questions. I heard one about the house. That is definitely going.
The site is being cleaned up on that particular lot, which is
adjacent to the main property and the building is being added.
Mr. Engebretson: Why don't you present your case and we will make a determination
whether or not we can dispose of it tonight or whether we will need
to postpone it for further information.
Bob Gillow: I am the owner of Action Olds. We appeared approximately a year
ago before you to describe the difficulty that we were having in
the automotive business with trying to maintain two physical
facilities and we were successful since we last appeared here in
selling the property where the Nissan franchise was located and
have brought the activities that were being performed one mile west
at the Nissan facility down to the Oldsmobile store to consolidate
those two operations. The Nissan people have required us to build
a separate showroom on the Oldsmobile site in order to distinguish
between the two franchises and concurrent with that we are
demolishing the antique store and using that area for additional
parking.
Mr. Engebretson: Is that all reflected on these latest plans that we have here?
Mr. Gillow: I believe it is and let me say if anyone had been attempting to get
hold of me, I never fail to respond to phone calls. I certainly
r.. apologize if somebody did because I am not aware of any attempt to
communicate to me regarding this project from anyone either on the
staff or the Commission.
12589
Mr. Engebretson: Just as a matter of interest, we are not wanting to be critical
but all the calls were directed to you.
Mr. Gillow: Believe me there must be an error. I return my phone calls.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, are these plans satisfactory?
Mr. Nagy: I believe that while they do show the intent, the Commission
generally requires more detail as to the treatment of the site
after the building is demolished. We have certain standards with
regard to the front yard setbacks. You can't place vehicles closer
than 20 feet to the road right-of-way. Those kinds of specific
standards are not dealt with and that was the purpose for the call
to try to work those out prior to tonight's meeting, to try to get
those plans amended to meet the specific requirements. To that
extent, they are deficient.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Gillow, to not intend to be disruptive to your business, it
is almost going to be necessary when we conclude this public
hearing that we are going to table this item to our next meeting,
during which time we can deal with these things. I can tell you
that in our preparation for this meeting there is general support
on what you are proposing to do here. However, it is necessary to
tend to some of those details and that is the purpose the staff
attempted to reach you. Since that somehow fell apart, I am going
to suggest that we go to the audience to see if anyone wishes to
speak for or against this but to not dwell too much on this tonight
because we would prefer to deal with the complete site plan in two
weeks from now. Does that represent a hardship to you sir?
Mr. Ditzhazy: In a way it does. The type of questions John is going to ask are
the type of questions we can normally settle after this meeting.
Mr. Engebretson: That is not true. We are going to go to the audience to see if
there is anyone who wishes to speak for or against this proposal?
There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 92-12-2-51 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Tent and unanimously approved,
it was
#1-12-93 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January
12, 1993 on Petition 92-12-2-51 by Action Olds, Inc. requesting waiver
use approval to add showroom space to an existing building located on
the north side of Plymouth Road between Farmington Road and Stark Road
in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 28, the City Planning Commission does
hereby determine to table Petition 92-12-2-51 until the meeting of
January 19, 1993.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance
##543, as amended.
12590
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 92-12-2-52
by Pro-Motion Marine, Inc. requesting waiver use approval for outdoor
display and storage of boats on property located on the north side of
Plymouth Road and Stark Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 28.
Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating
their department has no objections to this waiver use proposal. We
have also received a letter from the Fire Marshal's office stating
they have no objections to this proposal. Also in our file is a
letter from the Traffic Bureau stating the following is submitted
for our consideration: The above location has been a boat
dealership for several years and is well established. The
department has no objections to the plan as submitted.
Mr. Morrow: John, because it was a prior retail for boats, is the waiver
extended to the rear yard where most of the storage is done?
Mr. Nagy: The prior petition did although it did not include this specific
site where the prior petition for Wonderland Marine was.
Mr. Morrow: So we have no waiver for outside storage behind the building
per se?
gm, Mr. Nagy: For the prior user yes, but it did not extend to this portion of
the site.
Mr. Morrow: So that use has been abandoned?
Mr. Nagy: It has not been abandoned.
Mr. Morrow: I guess what I am saying is if the front yard storage is not
allowed, do they have to have a waiver for the rear yard?
Mr. Nagy: They need a waiver for the rear yard storage.
Mr. Engebretson: I think the point is this business is located in a different part
of the building than Wonderland Marine.
Mr. Morrow: I didn't know how far their outside storage extended to the rear.
Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please tell us his name and address.
David Ratcliffe: I am the President of Pro-Motion Marine, 33606 Plymouth Road.
Mr. Engebretson: It is my understanding that you have asked that we table this
item so that we can readvertise a different configuration of
outdoor storage. Is that correct?
Mr. Ratcliffe: I just want to clarify my request. My request for the outdoor
vglaw
storage, just so it is understood, to the front of the building,
12591
which is due south facing Plymouth Road, is for display of new boat
products not for long-term storage or just to leave boats laying
around the yard because that is a parking area. I need to display
the boats in the same fashion that a new car dealer displays cars
to attract the public. The rear of the building which faces north,
`r the building owner has given me full use of the fenced in section,
which is north of the building and to the west. I lease 7500
square feet of the building, which is my business, and directly
down the line going north I have an area of 170 feet by 150 feet,
which is all fenced off, which is intended for my use, and I wanted
to request to use that area for storage for new boats, customer
boats in for repair and possible long-term storage, usually nothing
longer than six months, for non-seasonal use.
Mr. LaPine: Is the area that is behind the Salvation Army Thrift Store, is
that part of the area you would use for storage?
Mr. Ratcliffe: Basically there is a fence line down the middle of the yard in the
rear of the building which divides the yard basically in half. The
yard that is directly behind Salvation Army has now been painted
for parking spaces and is not for my use.
Mr. LaPine: Who uses that now?
Mr. Ratcliffe: Nobody. They painted a lot of lines for parking spaces but it
would appear, at this point, the patrons of the Salvation Army park
in front of my store instead out in back.
Mr. LaPine: You talk about the storage in front of the building. Are you
saying you would put some boats out there in the morning and take
them back to the storage area in the evening or would they be out
there from April through August?
Mr. Ratcliffe: My intentions are to bring the boats up in the morning just before
the start of business hours and to return them to the yard or
inside the building at the close of business for that day.
Mr. LaPine: How many boats would we be talking about?
Mr. Ratcliffe: I think my original request was for six but looking at this
further and seeing how many parking spaces would be left for my
employees and customers, I don't think there would be enough room.
I think a more appropriate number would be to limit it to four.
Mr. LaPine: That is the problem I see. If you put six boats out there you will
be taking all the parking and there will be no parking for any of
your customers.
Mr. Engebretson: We want to arm you with this piece of information regarding the
outdoor display of these boats in that front yard, certainly it is
your right to seek that. I am going to suggest to you, however,
that the probability of that being approved is very remote. We
understand your purpose in wanting to have that there much like an
automobile dealer needs his cars displayed out front. We wouldn't
12592
let an automobile dealer display cars in that particular area as an
extension of the display room either so it is not a matter of
singling you out for special and poor treatment, it is just a
matter that that particular location does not lend itself to that
particular kind of proposal. You certainly have every right in the
Sir world to seek that but I want to make you aware that the likelihood
of that being approved is very, very remote. I would suggest to
you if you could make your business plan to see if you could get
along without that, if you could move it to the rear. However you
need to get customers to come into your store. I am just trying to
share with you what might happen in the future so maybe you could
consult with the staff and find an acceptable proposal that is
likely to work its way through the system. We want you to succeed.
There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 92-12-2-52 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Gniewek, seconded by Mrs. Fandrei and unanimously
approved, it was
#1-13-93 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January
12, 1993 on Petition 92-12-2-52 by Pro-Motion Marine, Inc. requesting
waiver use approval for outdoor display and storage of boats on property
located on the north side of Plymouth Road and Stark Road in the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 28, the City Planning Commission does hereby
determine to table Petition 92-12-2-52 to date uncertain.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance
#543, as amended.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 92-12-6-6
by the City Planning Commission proposing to amend Section 2.10 and
11.03 of the Zoning Ordinance so as to provide standards for the
location of Family Entertainment Centers as waiver uses in C-2 zoning
districts.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, since the City Planning Commission is the petitioner
here, can you share with us and the audience what brings this
proposal about and exactly what it is we are seeking to accomplish
here tonight.
Mr. Nagy: What we have here is a proposed amendment to the text of the zoning
ordinance. It is not a zoning change. What it does purport to do
is amend the language section of the zoning ordinance to provide
for new standards and new regulations dealing with what we would
call Family Entertainment Centers. We have identified in our
proposed amendment the appropriate sections of the zoning ordinance
that now regulate amusement devices. This proposal goes beyond
that because of the larger and expanded operation that is called
Family Entertainment Centers.
12593
To help you understand just what Family Entertainment Centers are
and what our proposed ordinance changes are, we are going to show
you on the screen what the existing language is, what our proposed
language changes are, and then we will ask the representatives from
Wonderland Shopping Center to explain to you in more detail what a
No. Family Entertainment Center is so we can help you understand the
new language and the regulations we are bringing about to
accommodate this proposed use.
This language will not automatically permit Family Entertainment
Centers to locate within regional shopping centers. They will
still be prohibited uses, but upon petition and findings of
compliance with these new standards that we are coming up with if
this ordinance should be adopted, then the prohibition can be
waived and the use allowed. The mere language change will not
automatically allow Family Entertainment Centers to locate within
the City of Livonia.
In addition to that, we have a lot of correspondence here. We know
the strong feelings that the community has. We have three major
petitions with over 1500 signatures by residents that live in
Clement Circle, Wilson Acres Subdivision, just to name two that
come to mind, and many other correspondence from other residents.
We have correspondence from the Principal of Emerson School and a
couple of teachers with objections. They all talk about the
application of a Family Entertainment Center to Wonderland Shopping
Center. What we really have here tonight is not the application
specifically of this to Wonderland Shopping Center. What we have
here tonight is a language amendment that will allow these uses at
possibly three locations within the community. Wonderland Center
is only one. It could also be Livonia Mall or Laurel Park Place
Mall. Rather than me reading all these petitions into the record,
we will acknowledge that they are here and we will not only
incorporate them by reference into this hearing tonight but we will
also save them in the event this ordinance does come to pass and
there actually becomes a petition relative to the application of
this use to Wonderland Shopping Center. In the interest of time,
if you people want to come forward and reiterate what you feelings
are, do that but in the interest of time rather than me try to read
into record all of these, we will acknowledge they are here. We
would like to begin first by showing you what the current standards
are and what our changes are and we can go from there.
Mr. Engebretson: Before we begin I would just like to embellish Mr. Nagy's
comments very briefly. This is a very long and involved process.
This is just the beginning. Tonight, as Mr. Nagy said, we are
having this public hearing to consider whether or not to amend the
ordinance to provide this kind of use. After it leaves here, it
goes to the City Council. They advertise and they hold their own
public hearing. After their public hearing, it goes to a regular
meeting and they will then either refer it to a committee for
further review or they will refer it to the Law Department for
preparation of the ordinance, which for the most part is prepared.
After they do that, they then bring it back to the Law Department
and one Council member will give it first reading and it will then
12594
move on to the next regular meeting at which time a Council member
will give it a second reading and there will be a role call vote.
If the role call is successful, then the minutes will be approved
and then at the following regular meeting the new ordinance would
be published in the paper of record, which is the Livonia Observer,
and at that time the ordinance would be in effect. That would
probably take sometime in the neighborhood of May or June to be
completed. We are in the very early stages. There are going to be
many meetings. If it is successful and the petitioner then seeks
the waiver use to actually go forward with this proposal at
Wonderland, to be honest with you he probably will, then it will go
through the whole public hearing process again, here and at the
Council and all the things I said before happen all over again. It
is a very long involved process. Those of you that are interested
in following this, I think we have many of your names on file to be
notified. You may also want to be in touch with the Council office
so you can receive notification from them. However, it is clear
you have a good network and you are very aware of what is going on.
I just say that in the spirit of trying to make sure that everyone
understands what the process is and we don't want to leave anyone
out of any one of these steps. Now Mr. Shane if you will read this
ordinance change so everyone can understand what is being proposed.
Mr. Shane: The ordinance change is going to be in two sections. The first
thing that was necessary to do is to amend the definition section
of the ordinance because there is one section that deals with
mechanical amusement devices and the facility that will be talked
about in a minute does include mechanical amusement devices. The
necessary change to be made here, if this ordinance is adopted, is
to provide language which is commensurate with the state laws in
regard to this issue, so on the top of the sheet you see the
existing language where it defines Mechanical Amusement Devices as
"Any machine, device or contrivance, whether operated mechanically
or electronically, which is activated by a coin, token, plate,
switch or lever, and is operated for amusement only, and does not
dispense any form of payoof, prize or reward, excepting any game
replay. Mechanical amusement devices shall include, but not be
limited to, pinball machines, tactical games, shuffleboard, video
and computer games, electronic games, and tests of skill."
In the proposed amendment, the language in the middle is being
changed and it talks about not prohibited by the laws of the State
of Michigan and it has to do with the payoff prize and reward. We
always try to make the ordinances for the City the same as the
ordinances for the State of Michigan. That is really all that is
about.
Mr. LaPine: Before you go on, does that mean you are taking out where it says
payoff, etc.?
Mr. Shane: Right, everything from the word switch or lever will be changed to
"and which is operated primarily for amusement and is not
prohibited by the laws of the State of Michigan".
Mr. LaPine: In other words, they dispense tickets, which they can use these
tickets to get prizes. As long as that is allowed under the state
statutes, that is allowed you are saying?
12595
Mr. Shane: That is correct. That is the reason for that particular change.
The bulk of the amendment will concern itself with a portion of the
C-2 zoning district. The C-2 district is the part of the ordinance
which provides uses in the general commercial district and we call
that C-2. There are other districts like C-1 and C-3 but C-2 is
the district wherein mechanical amusement devices, for example, are
currently located. They are in that particular section because
this is a section of the C-2 district which is the prohobition
section. That is to say that the first part of the C-2 district
and those uses which are enumerated are permitted by right. That
means it doesn't need any special approval by the Planning
Commission or Council. In Section 11.03 wherein this will be
located, there are uses enumerated there which are permitted only
through a waiver use process or public hearing process before the
Planning Commission and Council. In other words, if it is not
approved by that process, it is prohibited. Mechanical amusement
devices are currently treated that way. In this particular section
currently mechanical amusement devices are allowed within a
shopping center of 500,000 square feet or more. That would be
Wonderland, Livonia Mall or Laurel Park Place providing these
particular conditions are adhered to.
(1) spells out how many devices you can have in an area which
normally is called an arcade and there is one located at Wonderland
now. This tells you how many you can have in there. The second
condition indicates it must be attended at all times by a person 21
years of age or older. In other words it has to have proper
supervision. Number (3), there can be no loitering or sale or
consumption of food and beverages. Number (4) talks about the
... hours of operation, where it cannot stay open past 9:00 p.m. and
number (5) talks about provisions to prevent noise and confusion
from interfering with the other uses of the center. It is within
this area it is being changed to provide for Family Entertainment
Centers. All of this center section is being added so in addition
to an arcade with mechanical amusement devices, you can also have a
Family Entertainment Center, which will be further explained later,
within the same shopping center.
You have two sets of regulations, one that talks about mechanical
amusement devices being located within an arcade or within a Family
Entertainment Center. The only difference is it tells you how much
square footage can be located there and how much of it can be
devoted to mechanical amusement devices. Beyond that the other
conditions stay the same. When you get beyond this point, it is
necessary to explain what is a Family Entertainment Center and what
are the conditions connected with that.
The last part of the amendment will talk about Family Entertainment
Centers and attach a number of conditions. What this would say is
within a large shopping center with 500,000 square feet of gross
floor space or more you can have a Family Entertainment Center,
which contains uses such as kiddie rides, carousels, minature golf,
video games, computer games and other such mechanical amusement
devices when located within said shopping center and then it has a
v..
12596
series of conditions. First, no loitering is permitted on the
premises. Second, no service or consumption of food or beverages
except as an accessory use. The use has to be attended at all
times by qualified personnel and management personnel and that
adequate provisions shall be made to prevent noise and confusion
``m. from interfering with the peaceful use of adjacent premises and
then it talks about how many mechanical amusement devices could be
located within a Family Entertainment Center. It will be explained
as we go along that Family Entertainment Centers contain much more
than mechanical amusement devices but because it does, it had to be
considered within this section. This says that the location and
number of mechanical amusement devices shall be limited to no more
than one device for each sixty square feet of floor area and that
would be the floor area used by the Family Entertainment Center.
Just to reiterate, if this ordinance amendment is passed, the
Family Entertainment Center may not go into any location within the
City of Livonia unless they file a petition called a Waiver of Use.
Some communities call it special use. It receives a public hearing
before the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission provides
the Council with a recommendation and they take the final action.
Also in the audience tonight there are representatives from
Schostak Brothers, who own the shopping center, and also
representatives from the company that would like to locate a Family
Entertainment Center in our town. The purpose for them being here
is to more fully explain what they mean by a Family Entertainment
AN. Center.
Mr. LaPine: I have a question. Under the arcade section of the ordinance,
items 2, 3, 4 and 5, they are different than some of the things
under a Family Entertainment Center. Let me explain something.
What do we mean when we say there shall be no service or
consumption of food or beverages on the premises, except as may
otherwise be permitted by this Ordinance as an accessary use? Let
me go back to the other ordinance. Under arcade we say there shall
be no loitering or sale or consumption of food or beverages on the
premises. It doesn't say anything in that section about an
accessary use. Tell me what the difference between the two is.
Mr. Shane: In the arcade situation we are dealing only with mechanical
amusement devices and that is all. With respect to Family
Entertainment Centers I mentioned it includes much more than
mechanical amusement devices. I understand within the Family
Entertainment Centers that are located around the country, that
they do have some minor consumption of food as a very limited use.
If it was beyond a limited use, it would require separate approval
as a restaurant. In order to be as far reaching as possible with
this kind of ordinance you want to include as much as you can as
you understand what the use is that you are talking about and we
understand it does include some minor beverage and food service.
That is why it was put in with respect to the Family Entertainment
Center.
r...
12597
Mr. LaPine: Under the arcade one it says such space shall be properly attended
by qualified personnel who shall be at least 21 years of age.
Under the entertainment one we say such use shall be properly
attended at all times by qualified personnel who shall be under the
direct supervision by on site management personnel who shall be at
least 21 years of age. As I read that, they can hire 16, 17 and 18
year olds as long as they have one person, who is a management
personnel, over 21 years of age. The other ordinance they don't
say that, they say everybody who works in an arcade has to be 21
years of age. What is the difference there?
Mr. Shane: We always try to do the job better as we go along. The other
ordinance has been there a long time and with this particular
ordinance we tried to structure it so any kind of Family
Entertainment Center would would be free to operate as they
normally do. The whole point of this is the supervision and
management personnel has to be 21 years old.
Mr. LaPine: But it says under the arcade section of the ordinance everyone that
works there, as I read it, has to be 21 years of age but here you
don't have to be as long as you have one person supervising that is
21 years of age. Is that the way you read it?
Mr. Shane: You can read it that way. I think the point is the reason for the
public hearing is to bring these issues out and if it needs to be
changed, it can certainly be amended. I would agree with you that
is how it does read. The whole idea behind it was to make sure
that the management personnel were of age.
.r Mr. LaPine: It seems to me that if you are going to have an entertainment
center you need more than one person that is 21 years of age. One
other thing, under the arcade one it says that the hours of
operation shall not extend beyond the hours of the shopping center
within which the mechanical amusement devices are located. We have
nothing under the entertainment section that they can't operate
after the shopping center closes. Is that correct?
Mr. Shane: That is true.
Mr. Gniewek: Mr. Shane when you say accessories as far as food is concerned in
the entertainment center, it will be meaning that they might be
serving food for birthday parties and things of that sort?
Mr. Shane: That is correct.
Mr. Gniewek: If you are talking about personnel being managed by someone 21
years of age, that would be people they might hire to sell tickets
or to supervise a game, for example small children might come in,
you might have an 18 year old or a 19 year old who will be taking a
ticket when the kids go in to play?
Mr. Shane: I think that is basically what we are talking about.
Mr. Engebretson: We will turn now to the Schostak organization.
12598
Bob Schostak: Our firm, Schostak Brothers, owns the shopping center Wonderland.
If you would permit us a couple of minutes to set up we have some
presentation material. Members of the Livonia Planning Commission
and citizens of Livonia and neighbors of Wonderland, let me take a
few minutes to explain to you a little bit about who we are, what
`ay our involvement is at Wonderland, and specifically the advent of
mall entertainment activities, Family Entertainment Centers, as
described previously.
First off, let me introduce our firm because while I know that many
members of the Planning Commission and the staff are familiar with
us, I think it is important that members in the audience likewise
understand what our role has been. Our firm is a 70 year old
company, which was established in the 1920's primarily as a
development and management firm of shopping centers. Our firm is
owned by my family and along with approximately 120 associates in
our offices in Southfield and employs approximately 700 to 800
people throughout our various real estate activities. We operate
approximately 30 shopping centers for a variety of ownerships
including ourselves and those owned by nationally recognized
institutions, such as insurance companies, pension funds and
independent investment groups. We have operated within the City of
Livonia for the last 30 years and have been involved specifically
in the original leasing of Livonia Mall and Wonderland Mall back in
the late 1950's and early 1960's, as well as development and
management of the Deerfield Woods Apartments located at
approximately Seven Mile and Farmington Roads as well as the Seven
Mile/Farmington Shopping Center at that intersection, as well as
more recently the Laurel Park Shopping Center and office building
complex.
We acquired Wonderland in 1983 and it was at that point we saw an
opportunity to enhance an older property and bring it into the
proper stage of development of a regional shopping center. We
began in 1985 with an enclosure and renovation and a series of
expansions which were completed in 1987. Mr. Polsinelli, my
associate, will show you a slide of Wonderland as it existed when
we acquired the center in 1985. I say this to remind all of us of
what the property was back in the 60's, 70's and 80's while it was
that competition, new malls, new opportunities for customers to
shop, were growing throughout the Detroit area.
In 1987 we completed the renovation and enclosure. We continue in
our effort to distinguish Wonderland from its competitors through
the leasing of space to retailers who have been destination
oriented merchants. This was concluded in the original lease-up of
the center in 1987 to include tenants such as Dunhams, Office Max
and Ganto's Botique. Wonderland is successful and it is successful
in its market place as evidenced by the continued demand by
retailers to lease space within the center, notwithstanding the
current recessionary times that we are facing.
As an example of this important success of Wonderland, you will
recall the Foland Catalog Showroom. Folands was formerly a Federal
12599
Department Store, which was renovated to a Foland Store in the late
70's or early 80's, was successful for a number of years but
unfortunately due to chain-wide problems failed and the company
Nftw filed for bankruptcy, was liquidated and no longer exists and the
Wonderland location was vacated last fall. We are proud to say
that within a year period of time of that closing, we have
leased the space to Service Merchandise. Service Merchandise is
obviously a nationally recognized retailer. They are selective in
their locations and will reopen within Wonderland in the fourth
quarter of this year.
Allow me to take a few minutes and chat about the evolution of
shopping malls because I think it is important you understand why
it is that we are proposing this anchor family amusement
entertainment center for Wonderland. As many of you have observed
over the last 15 years, consumers have constantly been looking for
alternative places to shop in lieu of the traditional regional
shopping center, and as such the success of major large stores have
dominated retailing recently including Target, Pace, Sports
Authority, Builder's Square and many others. As malls continue to
strive for their place in today's retailing climate, mall owners
must continue to look for ways to distinguish themselves from their
competitors. This has included more recently the addition of these
power retailing formats like I mentioned, Dunham's, Service
Merchandise and others, to locate within existing malls in a
traditional regional shopping center. In addition, malls have to
become more than a place strictly to shop as they were intended to
be when originally opened in the 1960's. Mall owners have to make
;`err their centers entertaining, safe and fun to shop while they capture
the consumer. It is for this reason that Wonderland seeks the
addition to what is referred to in the shopping center industry as
anchor entertainment.
Mall entertainment includes food courts, theaters and now indoor
theme parks. Wonderland really began in the early cycle of these
mall entertainment components when the food court was added in the
early 1980's. The AMC theaters were located in the center in
1987.
The area we are proposing for the Family Entertainment Center is
here. (This was pointed out on the slide) It is located between
the food court and the theaters. It has been escalating across the
country for the last five years and more recently publicized as
part of the Malls of America in Minneapolis, which is, of course, a
larger full line theme park within what is now being called the
largest mall in the United States. Wonderland proposes an
operation not nearly this size or scope but an operation of
approximately 30,000 square feet in that area, which will be the
entertainment court for the shopping center.
Allow me now to talk to you about mall entertainment specifically
as it relates to Wonderland. Providing entertainment in malls is
not necessarily a new concept as I mentioned. In the past this has
12600
included skating rinks, cinemas, game rooms, athletic centers,
swimming pools and more. More recently, however, a coordinated
central entertainment section of the malls has been developed to
include indoor theme parks as previously mentioned. The effort is
to create excitement adjacent to the retailers, restaurants and
other service facilities. The intent is to give the consumers
another reason to come and shop at the mall. People can shop, have
fun, be entertained all at the same time, and at a minimum it would
recognize that mall, in this case Wonderland, for another reason to
come and shop and as an attraction for the entire family.
Retailers agree that retailing has peaks and valleys. However, the
entertainment court will minimize the valleys thus making the malls
more successful. The concept of food, fun and film, i.e. the movie
theaters, is another reason to use the regional center as a
community center, as more than strictly a place to buy apparel and
other soft goods.
After significant review, our firm selected Edison Brothers, which
is a chain of approximately 3,000 specialty stores located in most
of the enclosed shopping centers in the United States. They
include stores such as Bakers, J. Riggins, Oak Tree, and many
others that have served the consumer apparel market for many years.
Over the last several years they have developed a division known as
Edison Brothers Mall Entertainment. This company has made a major
entry into the enclosed mall entertainment business and has indeed
proceeded to open several of these Family Entertainment Centers and
plan several more shortly. The division includes approximately 131
different units, including restaurant entertainment complexes.
— Mall entertainment will once again distinguish Wonderland from its
competitors. It will also give the people of this community a
place to be entertained, to have birthday parties and other private
functions that heretofore have not been available. Their appeal is
from the three year olds to grandparents who will participate in
the various attractions, which will be shown to you shortly by
George Mcauliffe, Vice President and General Manager, with 14 years
of experience in the mall entertainment business, who is employed
by Edison Brothers. This year-around, indoor, mini-theme park will
have attractions for people of all ages. It will be a viable
addition and create wonderful opportunities for our community.
We, as previously stated, are a company that is three generations
and 70 years of success. We have been involved as a corporate
citizen of Livonia for nearly 30 years and are currently the fourth
largest taxpayer. We have a strong sense of community
responsibility to Livonia. We are involved in many, many community
functions and, take me seriously when I say this, we have never
proposed anything that would jeopardize this very important
relationship. Furthermore, from an economic standpoint we have a
significant investment in the center and all our properties in
Livonia. We will have an even greater investment in this Family
Entertainment Center and we want to do the right thing.
12601
Furthermore, we believe that there is an opportunity here that is
very unique for the young people in our community. Presently
business partnerships between the schools and civic groups along
with Wonderland and Edison Brothers are being explored to find ways
`qtr• to make it possible for the youths in this community to have places
for employment, opportunities for advancement, opportunities for
secondary and formal education and ways in which the community
would have a positive impact on our youth through this facility and
the resources of Wonderland and Edison Brothers.
While I understand many of the concerns, we share the concerns and
we take the concerns seriously, and the reason we are here tonight
is to explain the proposed use of the space as it relates to the
proposed language of the ordinance. My associates, myself and the
people from Edison are here to answer any specific questions. With
your permission, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Mcauliffe to
explain the specifics of the Edison Brothers mall entertainment
operation.
George Mcauliffe: I am the Vice President and General Manager of Edison Brothers,
501 N. Broadway, St. Louis, Missouri: Bob did a good job of
setting the scene of why his company is interested in having family
entertainment as part of Wonderland Mall.
Before I explain what a Family Entertainment Center is to our
company and what we are proposing, I would like to give you a
little bit of background about our company. I think it is
important that you understand the scope of our operations and the
respect we have in the retail community. Edison Brothers Stores is
a member of that retail community. We operate over 2800
,"` stores largely in America's malls in all 50 states and Puerto Rico.
We are a publicly held corporation. We have stockholders that we
answer to, who have invested in our company. We are currently
celebrating our 70th year of operation so we have a history.
In 1989 the company began what was for us a strategic
diversification into the growing mall entertainment field. That
was done for many of the reasons that you just heard from Mr.
Schostak, having to do with the development and evolution of
entertainment into the retail market place and what it could
become. Many people in the industry even 3 1/2 to 4 years ago as
the company developed into the entertainment aspect, asked the
question why is a conservative midwest retailer going into this
business, and the answer is because it has become legitimate in the
90's. There are many companies that work very hard, including the
two predecessor companies that Edison Brothers acquired, over the
years to get away from that image of the game room, the
smoke-filled den of inequity with no supervision where unsavory
people go to hang out, and people have been working, as I said,
very hard to overcome that image. We have been very successful
over the years. It is obviously a major business to our
corporation.
In addition to Exhilarama, which is the name of our family
entertainment center operations, we operate Dave & Buster's
12602
Restaurant and Entertainment facilities, which are well known in
the south. We recently concluded an agreement with Paramount
Pictures to have the sole license for the Star Trek properties to
develop mall based Star Trek simulations as well as having the
New exclusive rights to Virtual Reality, which we will talk about a
little later, which is the state of the art in not only
entertainment simulation but simulation for a lot of other
purposes.
Within our division I mentioned predecessor companies. The way
they grew over the years and were able to acquire the reputation
that we have is through a strong orientation on security, safety,
crowd control and image consciousness. We have said for a long
time that we want our store to be like any other retail shopping
mall. When I say I am going back to the early 80's before the
Family Entertainment Center concept, even in our game rooms, which
were typically 2,000 square feet or ten percent of the size of
facility which is proposed at Wonderland, even in those operations
there is a program in place to keep them clean, they are well lit,
they are attractive and there is something in there for every
member of the family to do together and they are well managed
through a system of regional management and accountability that
allows us to put them out as any other retailer. The success of
our excutives that came to Edison Brothers through acquisition,
their success in our company comes from delivering that quality
product over time and at each level they have obtained. One of the
major initiatives and innovations in the entertainment venue, which
Edison has brought to the table, is in Exhilarama Family
Entertainment Centers.
I think, having heard about the petition and some of the other
conversations earlier, I imagine the concerns of the board and the
community involved is their familiarity with the typical game room
and their unfamiliarity with the Family Entertainment Center
concept. As Bob said, the concerns I have heard so far are the
concerns that we share every day. We can't afford to have an
operation that isn't what we are about to tell you Exhilarama will
he. It represents at this location a huge investment by our
company. Our status as a public company and a major mall retailer
has motivated us to become the management experts of family
entertainment. We intend to make sure that we deliver to Livonia
what we tell you we are going to deliver and we have a track
record. We currently operate four of these centers. The first
opened in March of 1989 in Cincinnati and at the time it was the
first of its kind in a shopping mall in the United States. Prior
to that there was two or three years of research that went into it.
I personally was involved in the development of that center so I
have been involved in Family Entertainment Center design and
operation for seven years. We now have operated for almost four
years with what I would estimate to be a couple of million guests
through the facility. What we tell you tonight comes from
experience. This is not our first venture. This is not something
we have envisioned and haven't tried. We do intend to deliver a
product that we, the Livonia community and Wonderland Mall can be
12603
proud of. That is the end of the speech and what I anticipate the
first question will be is how do you do that? I will just go
through real quickly a few of the things we operate under.
`44111. In that design you will find there are a couple of key things.
First of all the environment that you create is what sets the
atmosphere and will have a lot to do with the behavior within the
atmosphere and how much fun the people have. The layout has a lot
to do with that. The light levels have a lot to do with that. The
component selection. There are a lot of different things to do in
a Family Entertainment Center and Exhilarama and they are picked
and chosen for a few reasons: (1) We like to have attractions that
every age group can enjoy. (2) We like to have attractions that
age groups can enjoy together. We have had four generations in our
facilities twice now. That does more than just promote family
business. It also helps minimize the problems that I think you
anticipate. For example, in a game room you have a harder time
putting different products in there to attract younger people and
older people. When you attract a lot of young teenagers, it
becomes a less attractive place to be for those teenagers who may
create problems. When you have a high degree of older people in a
nicely lit environment and younger people, those types of teenagers
aren't comfortable in the atmosphere. That doesn't take care of it
by itself. You have to be able to sustain the management to be
able to have a health organization that keeps those families coming
back and also to supervise the operation.
Each facility has a General Manager who is supervised by a Regional
Manager. That Regional Manager supervises no more than two anchor
entertainment centers so he can focus his attentions on the
`. operation. Our Director of Anchor Entertainment Centers is one of
the leading authorities in the field of family entertainment
centers. The Vice President and General Sales Manager, that is me,
I report to our President. (He went through the rest of the
organization)
Some of the other things we do. We have a code of dress and a code
of conduct and it is strictly enforced. We know how to deal with
the types of problems you might anticipate. The way we deal with
them is in a pro-active manner. In addition to the design and the
manager present in the facility, there are certain ways you create
the atmosphere. First of all you have house rules. We don't allow
smoking. We have no gambling, no loitering. People are moved
along. Mike Polsinelli from Schostaks spent a weekend at one of
our anchor centers and I think he will give you his observation on
that. We pioneered in the early 80's an anti-truancy program. We
don't want kid's lunch money. We don't pick locations across the
street from schools. We are in this for the long haul and we are a
major operation. Our anti-truancy program is that we don't allow
children into our operation during school hours.
The security orientation is backed up by the staff. The question
came up earlier from one of the members of the Commission about why
the change in the language from one person over 21 to a person
12604
supervised by a person over 21. The answer to that is in the
traditional arcade you have one person on duty. Here we have 30 to
35 people on duty. The profile of the General Manager right now
the average age of our GM's is over 30 years of age. They have an
` average of 10 to 12 years of experience. Our Assistant General
Managers, their profile is late 20's. One of those individuals is
on the premises at any given time of operation. The Personnel
Supervisors, there are up to three of those on any shift. They are
free to roam the facility and supervise the employees. Their
profile is, we may have a few that are 20 years old but the vast
majority are in their mid 20's. Then you get down to the Sales
Associates. Those people are collecting tickets, cashiers, etc. ,
who are younger. The vast majority of those are over 18. We do
offer a few positions for those under 18 and there are limits under
state law that we comply with. We have strict standards for our
people. It is a good training job. It is a good entry job for a
person to get into and to grow with a company such as ours. We
have the benefits, the pension plan, 41K for full time employees
that allow us to hire and retain good people so that keeps our
experience level up. We have a security staff that does believe it
is important to the way we operate, that it is important to have
people whose only job is to have their eyes open on security. All
of our other individuals, again there are up to 30, in this
facility during peak periods always need security training and
represent 60 pairs of eyes. We have full communication. Every
employee has a two-way radio or an intercom telephone at their duty
station. All those things put together are what we feel our
strongest point and have allowed us to develop the reputation we
have. I can stand here tonight and ask you, encourage you, suggest
that you call any of the communities in which we operate our Family
Entertainment Centers and ask them what they think and if I didn't
stand up in front of groups like this one tonight and say those
things over a 4 1/2 year period now and if we did not deliver those
things.
(They presented slides showing the various facilities)
Mr. Polsinelli: I will be real brief. I do want to submit something to the City.
As part of our ongoing dealings with Edison Brothers, you have seen
a lot of pretty pictures and you have seen a lot of copies of
brochures, but we wanted you to see the real thing. We spent a lot
of time with the Edison Brothers people. We made numerous trips
out to the site. What I will show you are some pictures that I
personally took. They are not going to be as bright, they are not
going to be as professional but it is going to be representative of
the real thing and it is something that I went out to experience to
bring back to relate to you. It is understandable that all of you
cannot make the trip. I understand some of you on your own during
the holidays were going out that way. Anyone who is going to New
Jersey I will be glad to supply you addresses so you can look at
it. It is an experience you have to see. One of the things we did
in talking to the Edison Company people, we contacted the mall.
City Planning Commission has a letter from the mall manager of
Echelon Mall in Voorhees, New Jersey, with respect to his personal
12605
experience, how he viewed this as positive and made it a project.
for the mall. The second thing is we contacted the Voorhees Police
Department with respect to their opinion. This is one of the
contacts we gave the local Police Chief Lee Grieve to contact and I
spoke with Chief Grieve and he has contacted the police from a
suburb of Cincinnati to verify that in Forest Fair they have not
had a problem and the Forest Fair Police spoke highly of that
operation. In Voorhees the letter, and I will just paraphrase it,
is that the Voorhees Police have established a very good working
relationship with the management of Exhilarama. Their records do
not indicate any problems with gathering, annoyance, and mall
shoppers and under the present management will be an interesting
and entertaining attraction. I will submit this to the staff so
they can put it with the balance of the letters and petitions they
have. I did go to Echelon on a Saturday afternoon. I went out and
took two sets of pictures, one set being between 4:00 p.m and 6:00
p.m. , the other being between 8:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. (He passed
the pictures around)
Mr. Engebretson: Mike, we have been notified that a great many of these people have
baby-sitters at home. In fairness Mike I think it is appropriate
that we go to the audience at this point to give them an
opportunity to raise issues that concern them but I want to make
sure you had a fair opportunity to make your presentation. Is
there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak for or against
this proposed change in the ordinance?
Andy Weingarden: I live in the sub south of Wonderland and I am wondering if the
Schostaks are making a mistake. They should be against this. If
,,r they did a marketing survey, I think they would find why most of
the women in Livonia, Redford, Garden City and Westland will not
shop at Wonderland Mall by themselves. This fun house sounds
wonderful for Laurel Park. It sounds so nice you don't need any
guards. With the clientele at Wonderland that we have, I have been
hassled up there. My neighbor lost her purse. Two neighbors lost
their cars there. The clientele up there is just lousy.
Stan Anderson: I am the President of the Clement Circle Civic Association. Our
association is the homeowners' association immediately east of
Wonderland Mall and it is surrounded by Middlebelt and West
Chicago, Inkster and Plymouth Roads. You have already alluded to
the fact you have received our communication to the Planning
Commission, to the Council and to the Mayor, in which we outline
our objections that were put forth by the civic association board
at a special meeting and then at a general meeting by the
membership of the Clement Circle Civic Association. It was a
large, well-attended meeting and at that time I noted in my letter
to you there was no indication of any support for this proposal.
The prime concerns which Mr. Schostak, Mr. Mcauliffe and the other
representative spoke about were it may become a hangout for the
teenagers and the possibility of gang trouble. The mall is bounded
on two sides by residential property. It is a concern of those
folks that the increased traffic, particularly of teenage drivers
probably, could be a problem and particularly on Friday and
12606
Saturday nights when Exhilarama plans on being open until midnight.
As the preceding gentleman mentioned the general security at
Wonderland could be compromised and that is a concern that we want
to certainly avoid because we very definitely, as a neighborhood,
`rrrpr certainly do not want Wonderland to become an avoided shopping
center. We want it to prosper. We want it to do well and we want
it to be successful but it is the feeling of the membership that we
do not want Exhilarama.
I would like to point out something. I participated with several
members of the City and the Wilson Acres homeowners' representative
in a visit to the Exhilarama in New Jersey. I would like to give
you a couple of personal feelings and comments on that. Number
one, our visit was in the late morning so we didn't get a chance to
see any crowd problems. We were the crowd. There were six or
eight of us and we were all that was there. On the positive side,
the Exhilarama appeared to be well supervised. The security in the
building is monitored with on-site cameras and it appeared to be
well lit. In the pictures Mr. Polsinelli showed you saw some of
the dark ceilings. They intend to lighten those up and make it
even more bright in there. It was generally well lit and rather
open for visual control. As pointed out previously, the local
management of the mall stated they did not receive any opposition
from the residents of the area and their area is very, very similar
to ours, bounded on two sides by homes similar to ours on the south
side and the east side and the major street in front of the mall
just like Plymouth Road and then offices in other buildings. So
the geographics for that area and our area are very similar. I did
not see anything especially threatening but I would certainly have
to admit that in any competitive atmosphere, which some of these
events would produce, there is always a possibility for flare-ups
and trouble. That is basically, as we indicated in our letter to
you, the primary concern. I don't think it is so much the concept
of the Exhilarama. What people are primarily concerned about is
their safety and the safety of their kids. In conclusion, and I
think this is a concern to all of us, I think security and hours of
operation are the things we are particularly concerned with.
Security and good cooperation between the security that Edison
Company provides, the law provides and the Livonia Police provide.
Those are the major issues.
Ray Kufel, 11140 Oxbow: Basically the same as the first two gentlemen were saying
about our main problem is security and teenagers. It is going to
be a hangout. I don't care how they sell it as family
entertainment. It is supposed to be open until 11:30 at night, if
my understanding is right. I don't know of any family here or at
home that will have their kids out until 11:30 at night. Unless I
am wrong on the time. What time do they plan on having it open
til?
Mr. Mcauliffe: Depending on whether or not the business materializes, for example
in New Jersey we are open until midnight. However, we are in the
process of scaling back now until eleven o'clock probably for the
reasons you mentioned. The concept is for family. There is
something for everyone. We do get people that come out of the
theater.
12607
Mr. Kufel: Is there any way at all that you would close at 9:00 p.m. , mall
hours, or is that not possible?
Mr. Mcauliffe: I don't want to rule anything out.
Mr. Engebretson: What we really want to avoid is we don't want to get into an
interrogation but we want to get your concerns and points on the
record.
Mr. Kufel: The primary education, the secondary education, the principals in
the schools in the area, and we are continuing on to the rest of
the schools in Livonia, so far every principal we have talked to,
Dr. Watson we talked to, the principal of Franklin, the principal
of Emerson, the principal of Cleveland, every person in education,
which I feel in the City knows our kids the best, is against this.
You have letters from these people. You will be getting more. I
think everybody here now has an exact idea of what this is about.
Everyone is totally informed. We have 1600 signatures so far and
we have the northwest section starting right now. I asked the
Mayor, I met with him last Friday, and I asked him what we could do
to change his way of thinking or your way of thinking or the
Council's way of thinking to stop this ordinance from going through
the City and he said show us it is going to be harmful to the kids
and the best way we know is to go through the school system.
Thomas Carey, 29843 Richland: I live right behind Wonderland. I have lived there
38 years. I've seen it when it was a vacant field. I am going to
read this so I won't be repeating myself. Some people think an
amusement park is a good thing for young people. There is nothing
,- in this plan that would be constructive for a teenager, only a
hangout. The video machines already in Wonderland approved by City
Council are 35, there are now 62 of them there. When first
proposed, it was to be open daily from 9:00 a.m. until 12:30 p.m.
When surrounding neighbors complained about the disturbance already
caused by the patrons leaving the theater late at night, they
changed it so it would be open late only on weekends. If they get
an approval, they will no doubt go back to daily late hours. They
project an increase of 1500 people a day at the business traffic
area in Livonia with the racetrack, Handy Andy, Builder's Square,
Terrace Theater, the Ford factory, General Motors Plant and six
shows at Wonderland. We have close to 2,000 signatures now from
concerned signatures, not only from the south end. If the charter
is changed for Wonderland, it will be open door for carnival
parties to go in Laurel Park and Livonia Mall. We don't think this
carnival-like park will help business in the mall. Their money
will be spent on games and not in the mall stores. If this proves
to be a mistake, it can't be corrected easily. Don't split our
City by forcing a recall or boycotting of the stores. Wonderland
is already troubled by crime. I don't think a year-round amusement
park will bring business to Wonderland being it is to be open after
the stores are closed.
Ben Matusz: I am the Vice President of Wilson Acres Homeowners Association. We
are immediately south of Clement Circle. We had a general meeting
in mid November and we had about 60 to 70 homeowners show up and
12608
they were 100% against Exhilarama. Some of their reasons were
crime, negative image of the arcade that is at Wonderland now, the
hours of Exhilarama, the security problem that would exist
probably. I also went to Voorhees, New Jersey along with Stan
Ne.. Anderson and some members of the Planning Commission and I have
some observations that I wrote down. I am not going to read them
all. I am just going to scan and try to iterate what I think was
missed. The Echelon Mall seemed larger than Wonderland. It is
surrounded by berms and roads whereas Wonderland has a back wall
that backs up to Devon Aire. They have roads surrounding the whole
mall. They haven't had a previous arcade at Echelon Mall. The
mall neighborhood is on a rapid transit stop to a big city, I think
it is Camden, New Jersey. It is probably about four miles away.
There is no entrance to Exhilarama from inside the mall. You have
to go on the outside. The food merchant in the mall caters to
kiddie parties. The kiddie parties are monitored and managed by
Exhilarama personnel. I guess there is a good relationship,
according to the mall manager, with the food merchants and
Exhilarama. The mall manager claimed one minor incident since the
opening. Exhilarama in New Jersey comprises about 33,000 square
feet. The mall manager claims that 25% of the floor space is
dedicated to video games and the rest is dedicated to kiddie games
and other types of entertainment. It is not all video. The cost
ranges from a quarter per game to $5.00 max per game. The
Virtuality is rather expensive and my impression it is for people
in their 20's. Nobody mentioned laser tag, which is another game.
You basically wear some kind of a vest and you have a gun and it is
all electronic and it registers points. Again, it seemed well
lighted and roomy. It was clean. It was well maintained. We had
'441m. system
lot of people managing the operation. It did have a TV security
system plus on floor personnel. They indicated all their security
people work for the company. The operational hours were flexible
until after midnight. On a personal note, it is no comparison to
what is in Wonderland now. It is like the difference between night
and day. Personally, I would think if it is in fact going to be
something that is family entertainment, if it is something that is
going to be in the ordinance, they should limit the number of video
games based on floor space. That would make them put in something
that is family oriented as well as video games if this thing came
to pass. As far as security and the hours, I think most people
would be concerned after the place closes. Disburse the crowd and
get rid of them. That would be my suggestion. In total I thought
the operation was quite nice and well managed.
Randy Lamlus, 29670 Maclntyre: First of all, this is nothing but over extravagant
babysitting. This is where kids are going to hang out. We are
going to have trouble there. We have enough trouble at Wonderland
as it is. Cars have been stolen. A couple of years ago we had
shootings up there. We don't need this. We like our City. We
want it safe and we want it clean. We have people from Detroit
coming in. It is being taken over. This is just too much. I
would like to also say when a mother is taking her kids up to the
mall, they are taking them up there to shop not to drop them off.
They are going to drop them off at Exhilarama and then come back
and bother their mother for money all the time. Eventually the
mothers and fathers are going to get tired of it. As far as
12609
traffic, the traffic is unbelievable as it is. Plymouth and
Middlebelt is one major mess. If you allow this Exhilarama in
there it is going to be more and more trouble. It is not worth the
time and trouble and I wouldn't want my kids coming and bothering
`.► me for money all the time. They are trying to make it sound like a
Cedar Point. If I want an amusement park, I will go there.
Tim Allen, 28715 Grandon: I am the Treasurer of Wilson Acres Homeowners
Association. I would just like to, with your permission, read a
letter to the Commission from the Principal of McKinley Elementary
School, Mrs. Jane Van Poperin. "Dear Livonia Planning Commission:
As the principal of McKinley Elementary School in Livonia I am
writing to express my concern with regard to the proposed
Exhilarama amusement facility. McKinley School shares the same
square mile as Wonderland Shopping Center and it is likely that our
students will become customers of the Exhilarama facility. While
in theory this proposed family entertainment center offers an
opportunity for children and their parents to enjoy a variety of
activities together, I think that the reality will be that many of
our students will find this to be a place to 'hang out' with other
children. It is my belief that children benefit from being home
interacting with their parents. This leads to communication
between parents and children and builds sound relationships. At a
time when educators and parents agree that young people need
guidance in developing their goals and value systems, it is my hope
that the Livonia Planning Commission will give serious
consideration to the negative impact Exhilarama may have on the
children of our community. Respectfully, Jane VanPoperin"
Judy Schulmeiste, 9961 Arcola: I tried to get my Christmas shopping done the week
before December 1st because the traffic is terrible as it is. I
had to do some last-minute shopping the week before Christmas. I
was in the store with my two young boys less than half an hour and
I came back out and my hub caps were ripped off. All four at $80
apiece. I waited 15 minutes to see security driving through the
parking lot. I never saw them. I moved my car to the other side
of the mall and went inside to make my report. If we don't have
security now, how are we going to have it with Exhilarama':
Karen Marcum, 9890 Harrison: I would like to thank Mr. LaPine for the points he
brought up in the amendment regarding the age. I hope that will be
taken into consideration when you look over the proposal. The
other thing I would like to see in the proposal, if you were to
approve it, is maybe having age restrictions so a child of 13 or 14
comes in, they have to have a parent with them if this is going to
go. I am opposed to it and as a mother with a husband and two
children, we will not be at Exhilarama.
David Teeters, 11418 Cranston: I want to make one comment. We just moved back to
this area last summer. The City has changed a lot since we went
away. My wife will not shop at Wonderland after dark nor will
anyone she knows. The City of Livonia is considering this proposal
for this indoor amusement park and it is alleged it will be a
family oriented attraction. Let me assure you that video arcade
12610
games, games of chance at the midway, war-like combat games
involving laser weapons and other such activities are not my idea
or any other people I know their idea of family oriented
attractions. Ice skating, a walk to the library, the library hours
have been cut and the ice skating facility is going to be closed by
the City and swimming at a neighborhood pool, which is now closed,
are more in line with what most people feel is good, clean fun. I
would rather that the Council and the City management would utilize
more fair handedness and common sense in planning what is best for
Livonia and all of its residents.
Kathy Beasley, 28954 Grandon: I come here to talk to you for the children, I too,
like the representative from Edison Brothers, have a wonderful
teenage son, who is now a freshman at Bentley High School. As I
was discussing Exhilarama with a friend on the phone before Ryan
even knew there was a proposal coming into our City, he stopped
dead in his tracks and said are you kidding me, one more reason I
don't go to the mall mom. I just don't want the gangs to come in.
This is from a 14 year old who is now a freshman at Franklin, who
likes to hang out with his friends but not at Wonderland Shopping
Mall or any of the malls around the cities. I am also talking for
my 10 year old daughter who will soon be going to the school that
is directly across from the mall, Emerson. I don't want her to
have the peer pressure from her other friends that might ask her to
go over to the mall to hang out for a little while. I am talking
to you as a business woman who promotes products for family values.
I work late into the evening and I come home down our highways into
my yard fearful of what is waiting for me. I fear more desperate
for my life right now if this comes into our community. I don't
know what is lurking behind my garage as it is now but if this
comes into my community, my area and doesn't close when the mall
does, are you going to guarantee to me that these people will leave
when they are supposed to? I also speak for the people of my
community. We are a hard-working community all over Livonia but
especially in the south end. I have to work to help pay for the
bills of my household and also to help give my kids what they need
to get along in our society. I don't have any extra money to give
my children to go to Exhilarama. I know day after day I will have
to battle this issue.
Henry Binder, 9207 Inkster: I do know one thing ladies and gentlemen tonight you
are going to take a vote and you are going to take a hard vote. I
also know right now the City is divided. I mean throughout the
City. If this doesn't stop, you will have this City divided. Let
me tell you about Wonderland Shopping Center. Two years ago I
drove down and around the cleaners at the south end. I drove up
that drive and there is a little throughway where you walk through
with a cart and just beyond that I saw two securities running with
two kids in front of them. They got to that wall and those two
kids hit that wall and went head over heels into the neighborhood.
The two security stopped dead. But you know whose problems those
were, the residents, the taxpayers. Security didn't go no further.
I have been a long, long, oldtimer. I have worked with the
Planning Commission for many years. The votes were coming in right
12611
that Planning has passed something with the archdiocese. Has
anyone driven by there lately? It has gone from a high-rise to a
low-rise to a McDonalds, to a funeral home. You name it, I fought
it. Drive through there ladies and gentlemen, you will something,
Nftw a beautiful subdivision. Was it worth it? Yes it was worth it.
Now you are coming in with this and ruin my neighborhood. No sir,
you won't do this. Now back to Schostak Brothers. Let me put the
target where it belongs. One of you gentlemen mentioned tonight
Cincinnati. I know Cincinnati. I know where you have an
Exhilarama. I stopped there. I also know when the shopping center
was built. I built a church a block and a half away from there. I
know the area like I know the back of my hand. You didn't tell
these people that place went sour down there and went bankrupt.
You mentioned you have one going in but what happened before? It
brought that shopping center to its knees. I spoke to the pastor
down there that I built the church for and I said what do you think
of this situation and he said they didn't have enough with the
first one, they are going to get a second one. Why don't you put
the cards on the table where they belong. Tell them you went
bankrupt and you are coming in bigger than ever. They don't
appreciate it down there either. I am going to tell you they don't
appreciate it. I have a niece who lives down there that has gone
into that shopping center and has stopped from going in there. I
will attend the Philadelphia facility but I am going to tell you
something. You are not going to take me there. I am going to walk
in there unannounced and I am not going to go there at high noon.
I am going to walk in there on a Friday or Saturday night and I am
going to close that place and I am going to come back and report to
you ladies and gentlemen, believe you me, that is what I am going
`'err to do and I am going to do it myself with no extra dollars coming
from anyone else.
Tom Weldon, 29912 Orangelawn: That is right behind AMC Theaters and the entrance
to this proposed kiddie draw. I would like to go through a
scenario for you since some of you are new. When I fought
Wonderland's expansion I was down here and Schostak made a lot of
promises but once they got past the Planning Commission and City
Council a lot of those promises didn't happen. Before they even
enclosed the mall we brought up crime, parking, the noise levels
and we live right behind there and as one gentleman pointed out
earlier we the homeowners were there first before the mall was
built. My family and I have been there before this mall was built
so we have some right that Schostak Brothers don't have. We still
to this day have semi's parked behind there. Security is crap. I
have personally had cars come in here from Detroit playing their
radios so loud that we couldn't even hear the TV in the living room
in the summertime. This is what I am dealing with now and you are
going to bring more and more in. AMC movie theaters, Michael
Polsinelli sat there and said they would close when the mall did.
They got in, guess what happened, they started showing midnight
movies. I have cars leaving at two thirty in the morning. You
come to my neighborhood on a Friday night and see the traffic that
goes in and out at six different movies. Call the security? You
are lucky to get them on the phone. Just like the one gentleman
12612
said the guys run and jump over into my yard as an escape route. I
can't even leave my doors unlocked and you are going to allow them
to bring in more trash to a late night thing? I have personally
called the police several times on the security. They are not
doing their job. I called the police and they said we will send
New someone when we get a chance. I am living there and paying taxes
on a house that isn't worth anything. You try to sell the house in
the summertime, people come over there and it is nine o'clock on a
Saturday and guess what you hear, cars taking off every two hours
for six different movies and now you are going to add an entrance
right behind my house for who knows how many people are going to
come to this place from who knows where. It is not going to be
Livonia citizens because they don't come there now. They are going
to promise you the moon and once they get you on the dotted line it
is going to be we have the right to operate in this building by our
standards. Just like AMC movie theaters came in and started
showing midnight movies after they promised they wouldn't. Now
they are starting the movies at 10:30 p.m. and 10:45 p.m. That
means cars do not leave until two hours after that. Then the
movies are all staggered a good five minutes so there is a constant
stream. You people before you vote should came to my neighborhood
and sit in that parking lot and watch on a Friday and Saturday
night. I am tired of it. We have been here over 30 years and now
you want to bring more trash in. We don't need it. When they were
building this enclosed mall they promised a J.C. Penney down on my
end. They put in a movie theater and now we have the George Burns
Theater and now they aren't doing nothing because we have a movie
theater at Wonderland rather than over there. The George Burns
Theater could show ten movies a night but no we have it at
Wonderland. You guys would rather bring in garbage rather than
`'` J. C. Penneys and some top of the line stores we were promised.
Now we have Target competing with K Mart, two discount stores. We
have Montgomery Wards that doesn't know which way to go. Federals
when it was discounted in the beginning couldn't even make it. Why
don't you do like Birmingham does and put some high class stores in
there to draw some high class people. Now they want us to have
kids all night long.
Ed Miller, 31605 W. Chicago: I am a little upset that you would prepare a change
in an ordinance to allow so-called Family Entertainment when we are
closing the pool down the road where I live. I live between the
mall and the library. Our library hours have been cut back
drastically. I know these fellows think they have nothing to do
with that but we are talking about families and Livonia is supposed
to be for families so I think you have to look at everything that
is going on here and realize that we may be giving our children
something on one hand, violence inspired video games, and we are
taking something away from them, library hours and the pool. I
just think you folks when you vote should think about that.
Another thing is I don't see any indication that this City is going
to increase its police force. In fact I think we are probably in
for a reduction or two if, anything, the way the economy is going
and with budget cuts. If Wonderland Mall keeps pulling the police
force on any given night, it affects the north end of town so
people around Laurel Park Mall think they are getting off scot
•.r
12613
free because this thing is going in the south end of town. That is
not true because that will affect them too if the police have to
shift down to the south end. I guess we are going to lose our ice
rink and our pool. We have had problems getting things for our
parks and I just think the south end needs a little more
Slaw consideration.
Lori Zimmerman, 29009 Grandon: It would be a gross understatement to say this
meeting has done anything to instill our confidence and trust in
the City officials, Schostak Brothers, or Edison Brothers. Mr.
Chairperson, at the beginning of this meeting it was stated that
tonight we were not going to target anything to Wonderland, that we
were just looking at a change in the rules and regulations and
since then all we have heard is Wonderland, Wonderland, Wonderland.
I think we all came here, a lot of people have seen the plan, and I
think it would behoove us all to be up front and honest about what
we are doing here. At the beginning you also mentioned that most
likely this would go through and we were going to carry this
through the various stages. It was going to be a long, drawn-out
process but it was indicated this most likely was going to be
passed tonight. If I misunderstood, I am sorry. I think we need
to be above board and honest about this. This isn't about
education. This isn't about enhancing mine or anyone else's
shopping experience. This is about money that is going to come out
of the average person's pocket. Most likely it is going to come
out of the pockets of the people that are coming to Wonderland
right now, which are people from downtown Detroit or from low
income families that can't really afford it to begin with and it is
going to come out of their pockets and go into other people's
pockets and I think that needs to be addressed. What is the
*111. purpose of this mall because it isn't for education and it is not
to enhance our shopping experience. We are all skirting around the
real issue and I think it is time we got down to what this is all
about
Steve Weldon, 29112 Orangelawn: I can stand here and talk to you about virtual
reality but I think I will talk about actual reality. Although my
brother earlier talked about that quite clearly. The noise, the
problems of the people back behind the shopping center. They are
always throwing trash there. They don't leave it in the shopping
center, they throw it in the residents' yards. All that stuff goes
on. If we are going to talk about a community value, which is what
this kiddie park is supposed to do, I would suggest that maybe they
invest in building up our libraries where the kids could go and do
something there. The other thing I would like to address is why
next to the theaters? That is where all the residences are. who
is the brain that said let's put it there? There is a street over
on the other side called Joy and Plymouth Road, why can't you put
it over on there where all the traffic is. I hope you people will
consider that and say let's redesign that. The other item I would
like to address is this Commission. Some of you are kicking back
like this is no big deal. Maybe it isn't to you. We have a lot of
hard working people out here. Mr. Schostak and Mr. Edison here I
am sure they have nice homes but they don't live right in
12614
back of a shopping center I am sure. The noise level is bad. Mr.
McCann I have often watched you and you seem to take an interest in
what is going on with some of the people. Some of you seem like
you have already been bought. You think that is unfair but that is
the perception I get sometimes from watching this Commission. I
would like to suggest to the people out here think about it the
next time it comes up to having a recall. The ones that aren't
servicing you, let's do something about it.
Laurie Schwartz, 11903 Haller: I am very close to the mall. I have a 13 year old
daughter and a 10 year old son and it is a big draw. They want to
hang out at the mall. It is very, very difficult these days to be
a good parent. You want your children to be happy. You want them
to get together but there is a lot of danger involved. I want
something better for my children. I don't want them to have
another entertainment place where they can go and mindlessly spend
money. I want them to have places where they can go like the
library and Greenmead and more places like that where they can grow
as human beings and not be tempted all the time by all this
mindless entertainment. I please ask you to consider our jobs as
parents are tough enough and I am very grateful to the principals
of our schools that took the time to write. I would also like to
mention that it seems to me that one of the major issues here is
profit. Something major and entertaining like that is going to
draw in big bucks but who is going to profit from that? The people
who own it. The community is not going to profit from this at all.
Kathy Cooper, 11369 Arcola: I just feel like if I were looking to buy a new home
in Livonia this would be a real negative factor and I would more
"*Np• than likely not move here to be perfectly honest with you. I have
lived in Livonia for about four years. I love the City of Livonia
but I think this is a real negative aspect to the City.
Mary Fedornko, 9936 Hartel: My property backs up to the water tank on West
Chicago. We have a walkway that goes into the Clement Circle park.
At least twice this summer we have police running through and
speeding through our neighborhood chasing people that have come
from the mall that have stolen something. That makes me very
nervous because we have a lot of children in the neighborhood and
the police speed through the streets trying to catch these people.
My children are 7 and 12. My daughter is in Emerson Middle School
which is across from the mall. She is under a lot of peer pressure
right now from the kids to be able to go to the mall and spend time
at the mall without mom tagging along. I am having a hard time
doing that. I visit the mall very frequently. My son and I walk
every morning at the mall. We did happen to walk at the mall one
evening last week and there was a woman that was also walking and
she was a speed walker. There was a group of kids sitting outside
of Eaton Place, just sitting there with no refreshments, just
hanging out, and they saw her and they followed her throughout the
mall making fun of her and I don't think that is something we need
to see in our City. I would like to support Mr. LaPine in his
comment that the age limit on the people that would work in a
12615
place like this, I would not feel comfortable allowing my child to
go on a roller coaster that a 16 year old might be in charge of. I
agree, they do say that they hire people that are older and the
younger ones only have jobs but there is no saying they could not
change that. I hope you will consider everything that everyone has
said here tonight and please really think about doing this.
Resident: I moved to Livonia two years ago and I would not have moved here if
I had known this was going to happen. I am the mother of a nine
year old and a five year old and there is no need for this. I
entertain my children at home with games. We go to the library.
Build a church at the mall. We do not need this.
Resident: If I could I would like to say that the southeast section of
Livonia, you have heard a lot of bad things about Wonderland, about
our area. It is a great place to live. I don't like to bad mouth
our own neighborhood. Wonderland is no different than any other
mall you have. They all have their crime problems. I apologize to
Mr. Schostak. Maybe he could address more of what he has been
doing. I don't know because I haven't gotten involved in that. I
want to say our end is a good end. The people are good there and I
just want to come back up and thank you all for listening to our
gripes.
Ken Fedornko, 9936 Hartel: As far as the ordinance, whether it is Livonia Mall,
Wonderland, Laurel Park, whatever, is the ordinance being changed
in the best interest for the City or is it for one individual? I
am asking for the whole City. Are the people in the City of
Livonia going to benefit or is just going to be certain parties?
`ormir Mr. Engebretson: If there is no one else wishing to be heard, we will go to the
Commissioners.
Mr. McCann: A lot of things came out tonight. Number one, the Planning
Commission does a lot of work up here. I think we all take
everything seriously. Sometimes we sit back in our chairs. That
is because we sit up here three or four hours every Tuesday night
and spend our Saturdays and Sundays driving around the community,
and this is pretty much all just our community services. We are
not perfect. We don't have any preconceived ideas. We came in
here tonight, I had certain ideas about what I thought this is. I
have a lot of respect for the Schostak organization. I think they
have done a lot in this City. I spent my whole life in this City.
I have four kids I am raising in the City now. I thought
Wonderland Mall had just about had it when they took it over and I
think it is a real productive piece in Livonia. Yes there are a
lot of problems. A lot of them I didn't know about until tonight.
When I came in here tonight, I have two little boys that I take to
Chuck E Cheese's. We have just done a thing in the City with Major
Magic. We have all attended and gone to Major Magic. I did not
have time to go, because of my work schedule, to New Jersey to
visit the other one but from what I have seen from the pictures, it
was that type of thing. I have gone to Major Magic and Chuck E
12616
Cheese's with my kids. It is attended with children and the
parents are there. It is a family activity. My kids love it. On
the other hand, there are a lot of people out there that I am close
friends with and I owe a lot of favors to people out there that are
very friendly and have done a lot for me over the years but I can't
'411' do it. I am sitting on this board and I have to make a decision to
make my vote count for what is best for the City overall.
What I have learned tonight is what this is for me isn't what it is
for the people that live in the area. I take my kids to Chuck E
Cheese's when I chose. I don't live next to a Chuck E Cheese's
although I am going to be close to one now, Major Magic, but it is
something that I take my kids too. One of the things I see here is
that it is something new to the malls. Maybe it would work in
Livonia. I trust the Schostaks and what they tell me that it is a
good product, it is meant to be for the family, that they don't
have a problem with young teenagers hanging out and it is not like
the game rooms where you just get teenagers. There are a lot of
small kids hanging around. It is not typical and that is what I
found for Major Magic and Chuck E Cheese's. They have video games
but it is not a thing that is attended by a lot of teenagers.
There are certain problems, I agree.
Number one, I have time limits on when my children come home. My
kids are teenagers. I require them to be in at a certain time
during the week and if this is a family activity like they say,
most kids have to be home by 9:00 p.m. during the week and 11:00
p.m. on the weekend. I think that is something that should be
looked at with the ordinance. If we are going to have something
like this, we could limit store hours or a certain time on
weekends.
The other thing that was brought up tonight in the schoolteacher's
letter, that is unattended children. If you have 10 and 11 year
old children, you have to let them go out and play but do you want
10 and 11 year old kids hanging out in the mall? I certainly don't
want my children there and if I lived close enough to the mall, I
am sure my 10 year old would end up in there.
I think the other thing that has been brought out by the audience
tonight is if you are going to have kids in the mall, you have to
put an age limit where they have to be accompanied by an adult,
whether it be 15 or 16 year olds. I would think that is
appropriate. I wouldn't want my 10 year old or my 12 year old
hanging out. My teenage daughter can drive so she is going to be
where she can.
It is a private enterprise. For people to say they don't care
about the City. I personally know the Schostak organization has
been involved in other community projects. He does help a lot.
One of them I am involved in, I am the President of the Foundation
of Schoolcraft College and in many past fund raisers they have
contributed their help. So they do help in community projects.
12617
The age limits, I agree with what the people are saying but I think
if you put the 18 year old age limit, I think you would have
problems saying an 18 year old isn't an adult. He can contract, he
can vote but he can't have a job. If you have something that a
supervisor has to be there fine but I don't think you can take the
law and just wipe out a job for an 18 year old who is an adult as
long as he comes within those qualifications.
I learned a lot tonight. I am not happy with the ordinance the way
it is right now. I think people have brought forth some real
strong ideas and problems coming in but there is another view of
what we saw it as and what we are thinking here.
Mr. Tent: You people out there moved to Livonia because it was a great City.
It was a well-planned City. It is probably considered one of the
best-planned cities in the country. That is because the people
that are involved here in government are concerned. They are
concerned about what happens in the City. We are concerned with
every facet, every area, so some of the statements made by Steve
and his brother Tom, I didn't appreciate. The fact is, as Mr.
McCann has stated, we spend many hours doing Commission work and
you can look around the City and see the results because we had you
in mind. We want Livonia to be a great City. We want business to
thrive here.
The Schostak Brothers have done a great job in the City of Livonia
and I want to comment on it. They have lived up to their promises
but as my colleague said here things were brought up at tonight's
meeting, some questions, some concerns, which bothers me also.
'4'u" The thing is we aren't talking about a use now or a specific
purpose in Wonderland. We are talking about our ordinance. This
ordinance would affect the entire City. This ordinance is no
different than setting up a parking ordinance or some of our
building requirements, etc. You have to have some ground rules for
it so what we are looking at here tonight is in the event the
family center becomes a reality, it is going to have to meet some
rules and regulations and some directions that we can go by. By
having this hearing tonight we wanted your input on it. We invited
the people from the Edison Company to share with you what they had
in mind for a Family Entertainment Center that was targeted in
their mind for Wonderland but we haven't seen it. All we are
talking about is an ordinance.
If this ordinance were to pass, it doesn't necessarily mean
whatever would come in would be acceptable. They would have to go
through the whole process. That is what our Chairman meant when he
spoke at the beginning of the meeting. A lot of things would
happen before anything like this would become a reality. I say
have faith in us. We want to do what is right. The process we
have here now, you people came out to the public hearing and you
addressed your concerns. Mr. Binder spoke here a little while ago.
It is true. In other words we did have public hearings, etc. on
the neighborhood and the area but we wound up with the subdivision.
These are the things to get the meeting of the minds. Everything
is not set in concrete.
12618
With this in mind, I say we have learned things here today. We
have come up with security items that are some concern of ours with
the school system. With that in mind, I am taking these notes to
heart. We are not going to ram this down anybody's throat because
this is important. I have lived in Livonia for 37 years and I have
been a part of this community and I certainly don't want to see it
go downhill but I don't want to condemn these people for coming
here and sharing their ideas with you. I know from their track
record that these are honest people. I have had people come before
us on this board and they have promised us things but when it came
to reality you never got what you wanted and that disturbed me.
This is my concern and I hope we have enough support from you
people to know we are not going to sell you down the river.
Mr. LaPine: I would like to say I am a little disappointed in some of the
remarks some of the people made here tonight. I have talked to a
number of the people from the area who know me. I lived in that
area for 23 years before I moved. My wife still works down in that
area in one of the schools. When people get up here and make
remarks that people on this board, somebody has their hand in their
pocket, it is uncalled for. I have served this City for 23 years
on the Zoning Board of Appeals. I have been 4 years on this board.
Nobody has ever given me a dime. I do this because I love it. I
resent the fact that people even think we do these type of things.
We sit up here. We hear arguments for and against proposals. We
make our judgments based on the facts as we see them. In our
hearts we support the people. You are the people who live here.
My position is, and the people who called me know what my position
was, I was opposed to this from the first day I heard it and I am
still opposed. For people to get up there and make accusations
like they did tonight, it is uncalled for and it is not needed. We
can all have differences of opinion and we can work out our
differences of opinion. We don't have to make accusations against
people.
With that Mr. Chairman I would just like to say I am opposed to
this basically but what we are being asked to do is to amend an
ordinance, in affect, to accommodate really one individual. Mr.
Schostak owns both Wonderland Shopping Center and Laurel Park.
There is only going to be one of these in town. The only other
person who can get one would be Livonia Mall. I don't know how
many other people across the country have these. Maybe Edison
Brothers is the only one that has these across the country. It
seems to me that if we let this ordinance go through, we are
saying, in affect, we approve this type of operation, and if we do,
we are just going to have one operation. I can't believe a thing
of this nature can operate with more than one within a 25 mile
radius because you only can draw so many people who are going to go
to this type of operation, so in reality you can only have one
within a certain area. The way it looks to me now they picked
Wonderland Mall. Why they picked that over Laurel Park, I do not
know. The fact still remains, we are asked to amend an ordinance
to accommodate one individual and I don't think that is how
r..
12619
ordinances should be enacted. Ordinances should be enacted so they
will help a large range of people. For that reason I am opposed to
it. All these other things should be taken into consideration but
the bottom line is do we amend an ordinance to accommodate one
individual?
Mrs. Fandrei: I am not as steady as my gentlemen commissioners. My husband and I
have lived in this City for 33 years. I have worked in this City
for 18 years. We all here are appointees of the Mayor. I have
served on three different commissions because I care about my
community. I care a lot and as two of my commissioners have said,
I am hurt deeper than you will ever know to be accused. We are
here to look at the health, safety and welfare of our community.
That is what we are commissioned to do and that is what we are
going to do look at what is best for our community.
Mr. Morrow: We got beat up a little bit here tonight but we appreciate you
folks coming down because you are closest to the situation moreso
than myself so we appreciate the input. I guess I am a little bit
embarrassed by the way we treated some of our guests here tonight.
They were bringing forth something that they think is good for
Livonia. I went to New Jersey. I saw a first-class operation. I
was impressed with it. Schostaks have done a lot of wonderful
things for the City. They too have supported some of the community
activities that I have been involved with outside of the Planning
Commission. I am trying to keep my eye on the ball. I am trying
to learn what they are trying to bring in through this ordinance
amendment. The thing in my mind is does Livonia need an ordinance
amendment to accommodate this particular use. If we determine that
is good for Livonia, at least what our recommendation will be to
Now the City Council, we probably couldn't pick a better group of
people to administer it although one gentleman made the comment here
tonight that all shopping centers have problems. My wife was in an
accident as a result of a Livonia policeman responding to a problem
they had at Wonderland so we are all affected by this. Keeping my
eye on the ball, my decision will not be based on Wonderland. It
won't be based on Edison Brothers. If I am convinced Livonia needs
an ordinance amendment to allow this to come in, I see a lot of
wonderful things that I think are neat but it doesn't necessarily
mean we need them in Livonia.
Mr. Gniewek: I am a 30 year resident. I received my 25 year pin a couple of
weeks ago for the amount of time I have spent in this community. I
have gone from the PTA to the Human Relations Commission. I have
been on several commissions. I, like Mr. LaPine, have never
received a dime for anything I have ever done. I know only one
person said that but if only one person said that it is in the
minds of other people. We work hard on this particular commission.
We spend a lot of time. I started work this morning at five
o'clock so I could be here for this meeting. I am a printer. I am
not a politician. We put an honest effort into everything we do
and I want you people to know that. The first thing that comes to
mind to us is what's good for the people of Livonia and we try to
put ourselves in your position. I don't live in a big house. We
are looking at a new idea, a new concept here. We are looking at
12620
Family Entertainment Centers. They only have four in the whole
country. This is a new idea. In my opinion, I don't think we are
quite ready for it in Livonia. Maybe in the future we may have
some people in the area who have had a chance to experience it say
`or why don't we get something like this in our area. Give us the
opportunity to hear you before you form an opinion on what we are
going to do. We are here to serve you. We are here to work with
you. We have been doing that. This is probably, in my opinion,
the best Commission in this City because we have no vested interest
in anything. All we do is go out and look and make recommendations
and then it goes on to the Council and they vote.
Mr. Engebretson: I am not going to chastise the audience for some of the careless
remarks that were made but they were unfounded and to even comment
on them, in my mind, gives them more credit than they are due. I
served this City in at least five other capacities. All of this is
done on a volunteer basis and while I wasn't up quite as early as
Connie was, I was up at eight o'clock on City business out in the
community and here we are, it is almost midnight. This has been a
long day and the vast majority of this day has been spent on City
business and I didn't get paid a dime for it so give us a little
bit of credit.
Now I want to tell you how I feel about this particular issue. The
lady that made the remark that I gave the impression that this was
something that was likely to go through, I apologize for not having
articulated that statement clearly enough because all I was trying
to say was it is a long process. I had no idea that this was going
to go through. I have no idea at this point that it is. I want
you to know, as Mr. Gniewek pointed out, it is a new idea and that
'441mw for that reason, after having gone to New Jersey and studying this
issue at great extent and keeping an open mind until tonight when
all the facts are in, I cannot support this proposed ordinance
change because in my opinion it is fraught with problems. When we
were in New Jersey we had the opportunity to meet with the mall
manager, the manager of Exhilarama, development and security chief
and others, all who were very courteous and very giving of their
time, but I mentioned to Mike Polsinelli later that one of the
things that really concerns me, and I think we have to wait and see
on this, is that when it becomes necessary to spend half an hour
talking about the security issue and why the security would be
provided to control non-problems, it leads me to believe there
really is a problem right under the covers but it is being
suppressed and it has only been in operation for 14 weeks so we
really can't say that just because they only had one incident that
you can draw any conclusion from that. The installation in
Cincinnati, as I understand it, while it started sometime ago isn't
even at this time in full swing. I will tell you moreover why I am
concerned about this proposal. In the process of talking to the
mall manager we talked about security and things, and then he
brought up the subject of gambling and he made the comment it all
depends on how you run your business and what your ethics are.
Gambling is permitted in the State of Michigan by the Catholic
Church, by a great many organizations that are empowered to do that
so I am not trained to say that I think I am going to change the
world just because I chose not to gamble. What concerns me is
12621
the children. Children pouring money into these games for the
purpose of obtaining a ticket. It is not at Edison Brothers where
I observed this but in a similar situation at Major Magic over in
Ann Arbor. I saw a young girl pouring tokens into the game and her
.,` sole purpose was to get tickets. She is pouring in a token worth a
quarter to get a ticket that is probably worth half a cent and I am
wondering what this teaches children when they are 4, 5 and 6 years
old and while I don't think it is something that my personal life
experience is necessarily repeated on a regular basis, when I was a
young person 12 to 13 years old, I had a job, saved some money and
went to the county fair, and while it is not fair to compare a
county fair to this operation, the games that were offered to
unsupervised youngsters were very attractive and very appealing and
I was set on winning a prize. I spent all my money in about half
an hour and I was devastated. I spent the rest of the day
wondering what had happened. Here I am 40 some years later and I
still remember it so I guess it had a very profound impression on
me. The point being, I think several of the residents here tonight
brought up the issue of peer pressure where unsupervised children
may get caught up in these kinds of activities and I am just not
sure that is really a healthy situation. The mall manager and the
security manager in New Jersey did indicate that mothers do drop
children off and go about their business either in the mall or
maybe off premises so that would be a point of concern also. In
addition to all those things I am very concerned about all the
subliminal violence that is portrayed in the vast majority of these
games. That is another form of a lesson to young people that I
think face enough challenges these days. I am not so concerned
about giving a 17 or 18 year old a minimum wage job, I am concerned
about what kind of people we are molding here to take over as our
'411°'r leaders of tomorrow.
Again, with the risk of sounding repetitive, I do think in all
fairness to the Schostak organization and the Edison Brothers, both
of them very legitimate business organizations, it is my impression
they have a 90's idea. Maybe it is okay and maybe I will be proven
wrong but if I have to make an error, I would rather error on the
side of caution and safety and keep what we have rather than take a
chance that this really is a good idea. If it proves that this is
something that sweeps the nation and is indeed a good idea, then I
suspect there will be incentives for people to come back to Livonia
and convince us it is a good thing to do. I think you can tell
that we have tried to take this very seriously. We are not being
flip with any of this. If we sounded that way, I think you read us
wrong. We haven't voted yet so I still don't know how it is coming
down but I think we have all had the opportunity to let you know
how we feel. With that I will look for a motion.
On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Gniewek and unanimously
approved, it was
#1-14-93 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January
12, 1993 on Petition 92-12-6-6 by the City Planning Commission proposing
to amend Sections 2.10 and 11.03 of the Zoning Ordinance so as to
12622
provide standards for the location of Family Entertainment Centers as
waiver uses in C-2 zoning districts, the City Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 92-12-6-6 be denied
for the following reasons:
`qty.
1) That the proposed amendment is not needed as the Zoning Ordinance
currently provides for a variety of commercial uses to be located
in large commercial shopping centers.
2) That the proposed amendment provides for uses which will be
incompatible to and not in harmony with the general commercial uses
found in large shopping centers.
Mr. McCann: We have gone through this tonight. I guess I am going to move to
join in the denying motion for two reasons and that is because the
ordinance on this type of thing really is a limited use. We only
see two possibilities that can go into Livonia. I think what the
people brought tonight were very valid concerns. The mall hours I
think are appropriate for something like this. I don't think you
should have children without their parents attending with them.
Without those things in the ordinance, which it isn't in the
ordinance tonight, I couldn't vote for this ordinance change.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 656th Regular Meeting
and Public Hearings held on January 12, 1993 was adjourned at 11:59 p.m.
`fir.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
James C. McCann, Secretary
j
tii ,,
ATTEST:
1
' tl •(t :
Jack Engebret�on, Chairman
jg