HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1992-03-31 11956
MINUTES OF THE 640th REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LIVONIA
On Tuesday, March 31, 1992, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 640th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000
Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Jack Engebretson, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with
approximately 65 interested persons in the audience.
Members present: Jack Engebretson Herman Kluver Brenda Lee Fandrei
William LaPine Conrad Gniewek Donald Vyhnalek
R. Lee Morrow James C. McCann Raymond W. Tent
Members absent: None
Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director
and Ralph Bakewell, Planner III, were also present.
Mr. Engebretson informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda
involves a rezoning request, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the
City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and decide the
question. If a petition involves a waiver of use request and the request is
denied, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City
Council; otherwise the petition is terminated. The Planning Commission holds the
only public hearing on a 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.
Mrs. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition
92-1-1-2 by Leo Soave for 9 property owners requesting to rezone
property located north of Orangelawn Avenue, west of Farmington Road in
the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33 from RUF to R-1A.
Mr. Bakewell presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing
zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. Gniewek: The property owners that are part of this petition, are they the
property owners facing Orangelawn?
Mr. Bakewell: Yes, I believe this is the back of their lots.
Mr. Gniewek: What will be the depths of the remaining lots if this is rezoned?
Mr. Bakewell: 300 feet.
Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating
their office has no objections to this rezoning proposal. We have
also received a letter from Detroit Edison stating they have no
objections to this rezoning.
11957
Mr. LaPine: Mr. Nagy, have these lots been legally split yet?
Mr. Nagy: No they have not.
Mr. LaPine: So what he is trying to do is get the rezoning first and then have
them split?
Niftw
Mr. Nagy: That is true. His application indicates that his rezoning and
acquisition of property is made subject to the rezoning.
Mr. LaPine: How will that be done? Will each lot have to be split
individually and then he would plat it as one plot and develop it
as a subdivision?
Mr. Nagy: Right. He would individually split each one of the subject lots,
combine them and then thereafter replat.
Mr. Engebretson: Is the petitioner present? Please come forward and give us
your reasons for making this request.
Leo Soave, 34822 Pembroke: I guess whatever everybody says, it goes with what we
are going to do. We have those lots. We are going to split them
in half and then run a street all the way through there and it is
going to be 12 single family homes. That 60 feet that fronts on
Angeline, that is zoned R-1 so we are not doing anything different
than what is there.
Mr. Tent: Mr. Soave, are you going to be the builder and developer?
Mr. Soave: Yes.
Mr. Tent: What type homes are you planning to put in?
Mr. Soave: Probably $150,000 and up. That is the only way we could afford to
buy the property and develop it and hopefully generate a dollar.
Mr. Tent: You are saying $150,000 homes. Are you going to have basements?
Mr. Soave: Yes.
Mr. Tent: Entirely brick homes?
Mr. Soave: Yes.
Mr. Tent: Is there anything special you are going to be putting in? That is
a nice price in that area for those homes, so are you going to
outshine the area?
Mr. Soave: As far as outshining it, whatever $150,000 gives you nowadays.
They will have a full basement, three bedrooms and two full baths.
We are going to do better than what is there now. It is not going
to take away from the neighborhood.
Mr. Tent: How many homes?
Mr. Soave: Twelve lots with twelve homes.
11958
Mr. Tent: What is the square footage of the homes you are proposing?
Mr. Soave: 1500 square feet and up. The colonials would be around 2000 square
feet.
Mr. Morrow: Mr. Soave, when you acquired that property did you contact each
"tar individual homeowner?
Mr. Soave: I met with every homeowner on Orangelawn.
Mr. Morrow: I notice Lot 140 is not part of this petition. Is that because the
property owner chose not to join the land acquisition or just was
not contacted?
Mr. Soave: I tried several times to contact the homeowner and she lives in Ann
Arbor and she is a an older lady who inherited the property and she
is a hard lady to get hold of.
Mr. Morrow: If we are looking at a development, we like to see it completed and
not just something that is left out.
Mr. Soave: But then you get some people that want to be left out. All the
time I put into this thing, I don't think she wants to sell.
Mr. Morrow: I guess that is why I am asking the question. She was contacted?
Mr. Soave: Yes sir she was contacted by phone. We also sent a couple of
letters and as of today's mail, nobody has answered us.
Mr. Morrow: There has been no response.
Mr. LaPine: Basically I was going to ask the same question. Let me just expand
on it. Let's assume Lot 140 is not bought and you put in Angeline
Road and it stops at Lot 141. In the future if that homeowner
wanted to sell off the back portion, they would have no access. It
seems to me if you are going to develop those lots, you should do
all of them or none. The road would have to cover all the lots.
It doesn't make sense to me to have a road stop and then have a lot
that could in the future be sold off and have no access.
Mr. Soave: I agree with you. What we are going to do, we are going to put the
road through so if they want to extend the road, they can do that.
Mr. LaPine: You are going to make it available to them?
Mr. Soave: Yes. I would like to rephrase my answer to the homeowners.
Whatever it is, it is going to be just as good as what is there if
not better. We are there to improve the neighborhood not to take
anything away from anybody. I apologize for my earlier statement.
Mr. Engebretson: When Mr. LaPine and I were out there Saturday, I don't recall
seeing your sign. Where is it located?
Mr. Soave: It is right against the tree. It is not on the property line. It
is about 50 feet in from the north property line.
ti..
11959
Mr. Engebretson: We will go to the audience now.
Dave McCall, 33874 Angeline: I have a few questions about the development. Mr.
Soave says he is going to put in 12 lots. He will extend Angeline
down to the end of Lot 140. It seems to me there is the
possibility for a lot more than 12 lots. I built my house
`41111, approximately two years ago. I was told by the Engineering
Department of the City that they had a problem with the sewers. My
basement was put in at 4'8" in the original grade. I had to have
900 yards of dirt brought in to bring the ground up to grade
because the sewer line was so high so I have questions about how
the sewer is going to go in and I see it very feasible for more
than 12 lots going in. I am concerned about the access. There are
64 - 66 houses in the sub with one access from Stark Road. I have
questions about the layout of the road and the lots, the sewer
access, etc.
Mr. Morrow: Mr. McCall, as far as the R-1A zoning, how do you feel about that?
Mr. McCall: It is open land. Houses can be put in there and it is feasible.
Mr. Morrow: As far as zoning, you feel it is compatible with what is existing
there?
Mr. McCall: Not broken into 12 lots.
Mr. Morrow: In response to some of your questions, what we are considering
tonight is zoning. Is that particular zoning compatible to what is
in that area and do the neighbors like it? Some of your concerns
would be addressed when it gets to the platting stage when they
come in with how they are going to lay out the road, how they are
'44em. going to plat the lots. Engineering will have to certainly make
sure there is sewage there, that the grades are correct and all
those types of details are handled at the preliminary plat, which
would also be a public hearing and you folks would be invited to
it. We are here primarily tonight just to see how you feel about
the zoning. Is that something you would be comfortable with in
that particular area. That is a comment I wanted to make.
Mrs. Fandrei: Mr. McCall, are you saying you would rather have more houses than
what he is planning on putting in this little area?
Mr. McCall: No, I am questioning what was told to us about 12 lots. I can't
see how someone is going to go to this expense and only put 12 lots
in there.
Mrs. Fandrei: Have you been told what Mr. Soave has been planning?
Mr. McCall: Mr. Soave told us he wants 12 houses.
Mrs. Fandrei: But we don't know lot size. That is kind of your question. Maybe
Mr. Soave could respond to your question and tell us what lot size
he is planning because that seems to be your concern right now.
11960
Mr. Soave: This has been pre-engineered and the lot sizes are going to vary
from 65 to 70 foot and all we can get out of there is 12 lots. As
far as the sewer, we are going to take it from Orangelawn north.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. McCall, I would point out to you the geometrics of this
particular area is slightly smaller than the area part of your
``,, subdivision just to the west. If that Lot 140 was included, I
think it would be the same. There are 14 lots on the existing
subdivision. I think 12 would be the saturation point within the
R-1 zoning district, which is what is being proposed, which is
compatible with the existing subdivision. I don't really think you
could squeeze more than 12 lots in there. If it was 14 it would be
squeezed tighter than your subdivision and the zoning districts are
the same. I don't think that can be done. We appreciate your
comments.
Robert Lehto, 10880 Edington: The thing I am concerned with, I don't necessarily
have any objection to the replatting of this, but unless we can see
what the end result is somewhat beforehand, once he goes through
the replotting stage, it is pretty much cut and dry. Can't we see
what the plot is going to be prior to him having this all rezoned?
Mr. Engebretson: We really can't but I will assure you that you can be heard and
your opinions expressed and you will be carefully listened to at
the hearing relative to the platting of that property but it is a
process that Mr. Morrow referred to earlier where the zoning issue
is only the beginning. There is preliminary plat and final plat,
dealt with both at the Planning Commission level and the City
Council level. It is a very long involved process and you are
given an additional assurance by the City, in terms of the
ordinances, that he has to comply with. He cannot go in there and
do what he wants to.
Mr. Lehto: We are all concerned about the access to the area. We now only
have one access coming off Stark Road. It is going to add another
12 houses. We don't want it so congested. We have small children
in the area. We want some consideration to this factor.
Mr. Engebretson: It is a valid concern and I can promise you that various City
officials, including the Fire Marshal and the Police Department
will address those issues from the standpoint of health, safety and
welfare of the community regarding the access. I am keenly aware
of the description you gave us of how you get in there. All of
those things will be taken into consideration at the proper time.
Unfortunately, this isn't it.
Richard Stern, 10812 Edington: My house is Lot 35. My first question would be to
Mr. Soave whether or not I am going to end up with a house within
60 feet of my house?
Mr. Engebretson: I don't think he can answer that question yet. If he can give
you some comfort we don't have any objection to him answering the
question.
11961
Mr. Soave: The way it is proposed now, the two backyards would be facing each
other.
Mr. Stern: I am going to end up with a house in my backyard. The reason I am
asking is the general layout of the subdivision, there are only two
houses that really end up with backyards directly behind them.
fir. Those would be built on Ageline Ct. The rest of the subdivision is
laid out so nobody backs up to any other existing house, therefore,
you are changing the whole development of the subdivision. I
assume it is a similar size lot as is already existing there. My
home was built in 1979. I am going to end up with a house that is
directly behind me, which is changing not only the scenery but the
value of my house.
Mr. Engebretson: I am curious what you thought would happen to that land back
there.
Mr. Stern: Prior to buying the home I checked into that. It was not rezoned
at the time the subdivision was put in there in 1979. The
homeowners refused to sell. That was my understanding from not
only the City but from the person we bought the home from. I
bought the home under these premises. I look out now into four
lots and an open field where the neighbor's children play. My
second concern is the traffic noise. Due to my working schedule, I
have the unique opportunity to be home at certain times of the day.
I can hear Farmington Road traffic. He is going to have to clear
thousands of trees in order to put in his subdivision. In order to
do that I am going to be either looking at the back of American
House or the medical complex. He is going to increase the traffic
down Farmington Road in order to do that. I can already hear the
traffic without the reduction of the trees. My next point is the
Saw marketability of my home. In his own words he is going to put in
something better than what is already existing.
Mr. Engebretson: He didn't mean to say that sir. He apologized for that.
Mr. Stern: $150,000 is about $40,000 more than my home is worth. This will
ruin the marketability of my home.
Mr. Engebretson: I think Brenda, as a realtor, was surprised at your statement.
She would like respond to your statement for a minute.
Mrs. Fandrei: If he is putting up a home $40,000 more value than yours, that
would not be a detriment. The point is if this house is of greater
value than yours, that would be an improvement and an asset and a
plus in selling your home. It would be more dollars in your
pocket.
Mr. Stern: Not being in real estate I am not going to dispute you. It was my
understanding when we bought the home I was told they compared my
home to 20 homes sold in a square mile.
Mrs. Fandrei: Each of these 12, if they are of the value Mr. Soave is expressing,
will be a benefit to each person in the neighborhood. I know the
neighborhood and this is going to be an asset and that is 17 years
of experience.
11962
Mr. Stern: I have one more point. Stark School has been empty for ten years.
It is 4.7 acres, which is larger than the 3.58 acres he is
proposing. There would be no tearing down of existing trees. The
access would be coming in off Laurel, Pinetree or Stark Road. The
only demolition would be the school itself. The School Board has
already stated they have 11 million dollars in budget cuts. I
Sw.y can't see why they wouldn't want to sell the land. I would ask the
Commission to take that into consideration and Mr. Soave to make an
alternate site.
Mr. Morrow: I want to advise Mr. Stern we have to address ourselves to the
petition before us. We don't normally recommend alternate sites.
He has provided us with a petition legally. It has been advertised
and we have to act on that on its own merit. We have to vote it up
or down in a recommending posture to the City Council.
Dave Stenrose, 34055 Parkdale: My only concern is extending Angeline. For 12 lots
to be serviced by Angeline, it looks like you would have to split
them lengthwise. I am not too worried about that. What bothers me
is once that subdivision goes in, then I can see one going in
directly north of that. I am not too thrilled with the increase of
construction traffic for the short term and the additional traffic
for the long term. Right now as it sits without knowing that
Angeline might be extended to Farmington Road or down to
Orangelawn, I have to say I am against the rezoning.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Soave are there any alternative options that are available to
you regarding the construction traffic or would you have to utilize
the existing residential streets?
Mr. Soave: The construction traffic might go on for a week and that would be
it. I would like to clarify that. It is going to take about a
week as far as clearing the site. As far as building the site,
whatever the economy permits. We could do it in six months. We
could forsee that.
Mr. Engebretson: The question was do you have any alternate access to that
property?
Mr. Soave: That piece of property is landlocked.
Linda Krause, 11085 Edington: I believe when those homeowners bought those lots
they intended to keep them as half acre lots rather than be
subdivided. My concern is that corner is not that safe of a
corner. I have four children, ages 8 1/2 to 4 1/2. It is a blind
corner and we can't see cars coming in. I don't feel more cars
should be coming through that subdivision. If you do rezone this,
I feel you should have a different access and not put it into our
subdivision at all.
Jerry D'Ortenzio, 33906 Angeline: I think our biggest concern is a different
access into the subdivision. You are talking 12 more homes. Just
about every home has two vehicles. That is 24 automobiles driving
into the subdivision that has a lot of children. Maybe one of the
homeowners would consider selling their home to put another access
off Orangelawn. That is our biggest concern. The subdivision is
already pretty big for one access.
11963
Mrs. Fandrei: Mr. Soave, has anyone indicated in those lots that they might be
interested in selling their homes for access?
Mr. Soave: That was never brought up.
Mrs. Fandrei: As you dealt with these people, did you get any feeling of that
'tors. possibility?
Mr. Soave: It was never brought up as far as buying a home for access. This
is such a small piece, I don't think it would be economically
feasible to do that. We are talking about houses being sold for
$150,000. How much money can you put into a lot to do that. It is
not sound economics.
Richard Hoffer, 34054 Parkdale: My major concern is there is no way this
commission can guarantee us that this would stop at these 12 homes
or 24 cars. There is property to the north and also to the east
there that if this goes through, chances are that will go through.
That is going to create quite a bit more traffic and will
eventually make it a through street to Farmington or to Plymouth
Road. That will be a lot more than the subdivision can handle. I
am very much against the rezoning.
Mr. Engebretson: It would be my guess if this were successful and a subdivision is
constructed along the lines of the existing subdivision to the
west with a cul-de-sac, that would pretty much eliminate the
expansion of that subdivision either to the east or the north.
Mr. Hoffer: There is no way you can guarantee that.
Mr. Engebretson: No we could not guarantee it.
David Soltis, 10948 Edington: I don't have a lot of new things to add but I have
small children living on the corner there and I am also concerned
with the additional traffic and not having another means to get in
and out of this sub. As it sits, I am against the rezoning not
because of the size of the lots but primarily from the aspect of
people getting in and out of that sub.
Fred Bryson, Lot 144: I am selling my half for residential because I am in fear of
commercial coming off Plymouth Road and I would rather have houses
than commercial.
Harold Klee, 33830 Orangelawn: That is Lot 146. First of all I would like to
thank the people in the subdivision for finally recognizing the
fact I have provided a park for their children to play in all these
years. We are interested in selling our property. I, like Fred,
am concerned about the multiple property that is R-7 back there.
Should that creep over, it would have an disastrous affect on all
of our property. I would much rather see it developed as R-lA
compatible with the other homes in the area. It is a much more
reasonable approach to take. I think in the long run it would be
good for the subdivision as a whole.
11964
Mr. LaPine: When this subdivision was plotted, at that time did the developer
ever approach you people along Orangelawn to buy off the back
portion of your lot? If that would have been sold off when the
other subdivision was constructed, it could have been plotted a
different way and we wouldn't have this problem.
Mr. Klee: You are asking me if we were offered at the same time the people in
'40411. the lots to the west of me when the subdivision was built, if I was
also offered. The answer to that question is yes. My neighbor to
the west of me chose not to sell, which landlocked me. Also, I was
really not that interested because all they were offering me for
the half acre lot at the time was $3,000. I would have had
nothing. At least now I have the money to send my kids to college.
Mr. Soave: All the property owners that I met with, their main concern was the
multiple issue. Most of them wanted it on the purchase agreement
that that was going to be developed as a residential site and not a
multiple site.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 92-1-1-2 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Gniewek, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously
approved, it was
#3-241-92 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March
31, 1992 on Petition 92-1-1-2 by Leo Soave for 9 property owners
requesting to rezone property located north of Orangelawn Avenue, west
of Farmington Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33 from RUF to R-1A,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 92-1-1-2 be approved for the following reasons:
1) That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony
with the surrounding uses in the area.
2) That the proposed change of zoning will provide for continuation of
single family residential lots similar to the adjacent Wellington
Woods Subdivision.
3) That the proposed change of zoning is supported by the Future Land
Use Plan which designates the subject area for low density
residential land use.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance
#1543, as amended.
Mr. Gniewek: I would like to add that some of the concerns I have heard from the
homeowners as far as one road access to this subdivision with this
many homes, throughout the City of Livonia there are several
subdivisions that have this many homes and more than this many
homes even with the additions that have been serviced and have been
very compatible with only one access. I don't think this is an
unusual situation in the City. I think it is a situation that in
the long run will improve the values of the homes in that area and
I think it does serve to keep away any multiple dwellings.
11965
Mr. Morrow: One comment I would like to make to the homeowners in the area is
with this coming off Angeline, at the time we did the other
platting, the sign that residential would probably follow even
though they couldn't acquire it at that time is the barricade at
the end of the street. That kind of served as notice that something
would progress through there. That is why I support the rezoning.
`r. Mr. Gniewek: I do have a home in my backyard and have had for 30 years and it
hasn't been a problem.
Mr. Engebretson: I would like to make a comment. I want to make it because I
don't want to appear insensitive to the concerns that were
expressed. I am sure their concerns are very real. I want you to
know the house I bought 17 years ago was about a block down from a
street like yours and right now there are about 75 or so homes
being built down there and I really view that as an enhancement
even though I would have preferred it to be vacant land. I would
like to assure you that if this is successful, and I am sensing
that it will be at this level anyway, that this is just the
beginning. There will be much to follow. You will have
opportunities to influence the final outcome.
Mrs. Fandrei: I empathize with the neighbors in anticipating the developing of
the property. It is not pleasant to go through. I have just gone
through it myself. We are directly east of a major area that has
just been developed. There is still some going on. One exit to
Newburgh Road. All of these neighbors were opposed and it isn't
easy. It is not comfortable having dust and dirt but it isn't
long and once it is done it is amazing how quickly we all become
used to it. I have looked at vacant fields and trees for 20 years
and now I have all homes. It was quite an adjustment but they are
good neighbors and we did adjust. I guess we are looking at
progress.
`ice.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mrs. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda was Petition
92-2-1-4 by Ledford & Grifka, P.C. for Northwest Alano Club requesting
to rezone property located on the east side of Newburgh Road south of
Ann Arbor Trail in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 32 from RUF to C-2.
Mr. Bakewell 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 rezoning proposal. We have also
received a letter from Detroit Edison stating they have no
objections to this petition.
Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please come forward.
Andrew Grifka, Attorney Agent for the petitioner, Northwest Alano Club, 14700
Farmington Road: The purpose for our request for rezoning is to allow for the
building of a social hall for the Northwest Alano Club. Northwest
11966
Alano Club is an organization which has been a vital part of the
Livonia community for ten years. They have occupied the
Perrinville School for ten years and due to the problems with the
school district and the extension of their leases due to the type
of their operation, they cannot rely on one-year extensions with
the fear the extension will not be granted and they will be left
high and dry with no place to go. To alleviate that problem, they
have decided to construct a building that will be a permanent site
for their home. The site under consideration on Newburgh Road
offers a very appealing site. Although we are requesting C-2,
general business rezoning, I would like to make clear to the
Commission that this is not a commercial business in any sense of
the word as far as like a strip mall, industrial, manufacturing
type businesses. What is intended to be built here is a very
aesthetically appealing structure with very nice landscaping that
will enhance the area. We are not looking to build a square brick
wall. Currently right next to the proposed site is the American
Legion Hall. Unlike that we are not going to need a liquor
license. The Northwest Alano Club is a social organization that is
committed to the sobriety of its members. These are recovering
alcoholics, people that have been sober for years and years. It
has helped many people in the Livonia community and we would be
very excited and happy to be able to bring the home to this site on
Newburgh Road.
Mrs. Fandrei: Mr. Gifka, had you first looked for another building to purchase?
Mr. Gifka: Yes we had. Mr. Shaw is the Chairman of the Northwest Alano. He
will answer that question.
John J. Shaw, 8448 Honey Lane, Canton: Although I am not a Livonia resident now, I
did grow up here and I am very pleased to be back. My parents
still live here. I do come before you today because I have been
entrusted with the position of Chairman of the Board and Chief
Executive Officer of our private social club and that is exactly
what we are. During the course of the last 18 months we became
aware by Mr. Joseph Janette that it would be impossible to get any
longer of an extension of our current lease other than one year.
We are in the tenth year of our ten year lease. The nature of our
organization does not allow us to pick up in 90 days and move. We
afford food for our members. We have a small kitchen. We employ 9
to 11 kitchen personnel. All board positions and officers are
voluntary by nature, although we are elected. In the past 18
months we have formed a site committee that has brought before us
various locations. The Miller Equipment location on Plymouth Road
just east of Farmington Road was one. We looked at eight sites.
In the beginning we were looking for a site with a pre-existing
building on it. Unfortunately, the sites that are zoned C-1 and
C-2 already, have had businesses operating on them and those pose
two objectional things to us. Number one, the types of businesses,
there was a very high possibility of failure to pass DNR because of
polluted grounds. Secondly, aesthetically. Our club is a home to
its members. It is an atmosphere of fellowship and friendship.
Prior to submitting this petition to you, we thought it would be
prudent if we canvassed both the residential and the small
11967
businesses that would be most directly affected if we are granted
this petition. Astoundingly, once we explained to them what we are
and what we are about, they were all for it. There were no
negative responses. We contacted all the people but one home and
the response was positive from all the people that would be most
affected from our locating there. The reason the other places we
looked at weren't sufficient is because they are in industrial
`.y areas and that is not what we are looking for. We want to fit into
the community. We want to be able to place ourselves into a part
of the community that is growing. Our membership is over 650
people. Our membership is overwhelmingly from Livonia, Plymouth,
Canton, Farmington, Westland and Garden City. That is where our
membership comes from.
Mrs. Fandrei: How many people in your club?
Mr. Shaw: We currently have, I believe as of yesterday, 656 members. We
offer various meetings. We have an educational lecture series that
is well know throughout Michigan. We have professional, well-known
speakers from Brighton Hospital, National Marriage Encounters,
National Council on Alcoholism and we offer that to the general
public.
Mrs. Fandrei: How many people will be at your largest meeting?
Mr. Shaw: Sunday morning is our largest meeting. It takes place at 10:00
a.m. and I would suggest there are as many as 300 people at that
time.
Mrs. Fandrei: Do you have plans on renting the building out to other groups?
Mr. Shaw: This is a private social club and our purpose is to provide an
alcohol and drug free atmosphere for our members, their family and
Now guests. It is exclusively for our membership. In regards to
renting, what we do is provide space for AA meetings seven days a
week.
Mrs. Fandrei: One of my concerns with the rezoning on this parcel is the size of
the parcel that is being requested rezoned to C-2. It is such a
large parcel.
Mr. Shaw: We have a rough plan on how we would use that area. The building
that we are considering would be approximately 10,000 square feet
and that would provide us with enough area behind the building for
approximately 160 cars.
Mrs. Fandrei: So we could have two zonings, a parking zoning and zoning for a
building.
Mr. Shaw: Yes.
Mrs. Fandrei: I have a question for John. Is there another zoning that they
could put in their building and get a waiver use rather than go for
the C-2 zoning?
11968
Mr. Nagy: The C-1 zoning classification that you see established on the
second parcel to the south where the American Legion Post is
located would allow this use as a waiver use. The meeting hall
could be located in that kind of a district. They are permitted by
right in a C-2. They are subject to special waiver use approval in
a C-1.
Noir._ Mr. Grifka: I was under the impression because we had restaurant facilities,
it had to be C-2.
Mr. Tent: Mr. Shaw, most of the questions I had to ask have been answered.
What are your hours of operation?
Mr. Shaw: 10:00 a.m. until 2:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday and until
midnight on Sunday.
Mr. Tent: The longest time is 10:00 a.m. until 2:00 a.m. and this is based on
seven days a week?
Mr. Shaw: Yes.
Mr. Tent: Do you have any provision for overnight guests?
Mr. Shaw: No sir.
Mr. Tent: What type of activities are being proposed other than lectures?
Mr. Shaw: The activities that we provide for our members, we have card tables
set up. We also have weekly Saturday night dances with the
proceeds going to the building fund. That is one of the ways we
have gotten to the point now where we are able to look for a home
of our own. Fund raising is all done in house. We do not solicit
and they never have. We are totally self-supporting. We also
provide meeting space for AA.
Mr. Tent: Let's get back to the dancing. Are those live bands?
Mr. Shaw: Our membership is from the age of 18 to 86. The 86 year olds don't
mind listening to the dance music.
Mr. Tent: I am just concerned about the neighborhood because you are abutting
some residential property.
Mr. Shaw: At the school we used the gymnasium facility for our dances. We
have between 150 and 200 people attending the dances. The dances
are not exclusive to our membership. We do allow non-members to
come to our dances. We have been having dances for eight years.
Our entertainment is professional disc jockeys, some of which work
at radio stations. The music is varied but personally before I
became Chairman I was in charge of the dances and I looked in there
and if I saw everyone dancing I figured the music was okay. In our
present location, that doesn't present any problem. With our
building located 60 feet from Newburgh and with the surrounding
area, I don't see where that would pose a problem.
11969
Mr. Tent: In response to my fellow commissioner who indicated there were no
homes close by, there is land behind so at some future date
something could happen and the C-2 zoning you would have is
forever and it doesn't change. I have one final question on your
restaurant. What type of food are you serving?
Mr. Shaw: Primarily what we sell is hamburgers, french fries, shrimp dinners.
`r. We have specials. We offer everything from soup to nuts. Mostly
fried food and deep fried food.
Mr. Tent: Can people come from the street and walk in and be served?
Mr. Shaw: We try to limit use of the club to our members and their guests.
There is an additional charge for non-members. For food items it
is a quarter more if you are not a member. Some of the people who
do attend various functions of the club like to have something to
eat prior to or immediately following the function. We charge them
an extra quarter. The kitchen is not exclusive to the members.
Mr. Grifka: With all due respect, I know there is the American Legion Hall
right next door that holds wedding receptions and other things
almost every Friday and Saturday night. I think you are kind of
getting into the same thing with noise and music and I understand
there hasn't been any problem with the American Legion Hall causing
problems with the music, etc.
Mr. Shaw: We do not rent our facilities to outside organizations.
Mr. LaPine: You now rent space in Perrinville School. How much space do you
rent?
Mr. Shaw: Approximately 19,000 square feet.
'tie` Mr. LaPine: I have the same concerns Mrs. Fandrei has. It is a large parcel to
rezone to the C-2 classification. When the R-7 was developed
across the street, I think that kind of set the tone for the whole
area. Once we rezone this property, if the board thinks it should
be rezoned and it is upheld by the Council, my worry is what
happens to the property south of you. People are going to be
coming in and saying now there has been a precedent set, let us
have C-2 property and we will start getting these mini-malls
springing up. That is a problem with me. I know nothing about
your organization but what I heard here tonight it sounds like a
good organization. It is probably needed in the community. I
guess in my mind I don't know if it is needed in this area to take
a piece of R-7 and rezone it to a C-2. It just doesn't seem that
is the right zoning. We are spot zoning a parcel that is basically
in a residential area. The other question I have, when I was out
there Saturday to look at the property I noticed you didn't have
any sign of notification that this property was going to be
rezoned as required under the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Grifka: There has been a 4 x 4 sign facing Newburgh Road.
11970
Mr. Shaw: I was personally there at the erection of the sign and we also took
a picture of it.
Mr. Grifka: Your concern is well taken about the domino affect. I think we are
kind of relying on the domino theory in that you have a C-1 there
now. You have the American Legion Hall there now. My
understanding of your position here is that you consider petitions
on a case by case basis. I follow the City Council debates and I
see one of the biggest concern is the development of strip malls.
We are not anything like that. We are something that is going to
be an asset to this community. If you want to put some
restrictions or conditions on the landscaping, putting berms around
it to try to make it aesthetically appealing as possible, so be it.
We have every intention of doing that anyhow. This is a perfect
piece of property for this. I have been out there several times to
look at this piece of property and to talk to the neighbors, who
have not voiced any opposition to this at all. They would rather
see this than 100 condominiums thrown into that piece of property.
So you do this on a case by case basis. If someone came in with a
petition down the road where they wanted to put up a strip mall,
you judge that on its merits. This area is rather depressed at the
moment, other than you have the Whispering Winds across the road,
which are very nice condominiums. This would be something that
would be very, very pleasing to the eye. We are not looking to put
up a square box. That is going to be something that is going to be
a major architectural design and all this has been taken into
consideration. I understand it is a large parcel. I didn't
realize until Mrs. Fandrei said something that it is possible to
rezone partly to parking and partly for the building. We will do
whatever needs to be done but to shoot us down because we have to
go with the C-2 zoning because of the type of organization we are,
I think would put a great hindrance on something that has been of a
vital service to this community for the last ten years.
Mr. McCann: The basic plan right now is for a 60 foot setback for the building.
Is that correct?
Mr. Shaw: My understanding is through our architectural planners, they told
us the minimum setback was 60 feet.
Mr. McCann: How deep is your lot?
Mr. Shaw: The lot itself is 416 feet deep.
Mr. McCann: So if the back 260 feet was rezoned to parking, you would have no
objections?
Mr. Shaw: I would have absolutely no objections.
Mr. McCann: You would have no objection to the front portion being C-1 and then
requesting waiver use from the Zoning Board of Appeals?
Mr. Nagy: They could petition through the Planning Commission and the City
Council for Waiver Use approval.
11971
Mr. McCann: Could we condition the approval tonight to C-1 or would we have to
set up another public hearing?
Mr. Nagy: It is the petitioner's petition. If he voluntarily amends it, you
could act on it tonight. You could recommend approval as amended.
Mr. McCann: You would have no objection with C-1? The major problem we have is
that it runs with the land. If we put C-2 zoning in there and you
pop out, next thing we know we have Perry Drug Store that wants to
go in there and we end up in Court. That is what we don't want. I
have a problem with making it C-2. We don't have that much rural
urban farm. However, I do see your organization being a vital
function to the City. I think it is a good use. It is a growing
use. Should you outgrow it, you would probably have sufficient
room to expand and not require you to move out of that property and
leave it to someone else. As I understand it, your food use is
open to the public but primarily it is 95% for member use.
Mrs. Fandrei: We cannot condition zoning. That is why we are trying to work this
out.
Mr. Grifka: I understand that. I just want to make it perfectly clear to you
that we have every intention of making this as aesthetically
appealing as possible.
Mrs. Fandrei: The other thing we run into is we have so many vacant C-1 and C-2
and so on. It is difficult to rezone another parcel to that zoning
when we have vacancies throughout the City, which is why I asked
you right up front if you had been looking for a building that is
suitable.
Mr. Grifka: We ran into DNR problems.
Mrs. Fandrei: We are getting very protective.
Mr. Grifka: I understand. As a resident I understand your position and I agree
with it and I watch those questions and answers when all the
candidates sat up here and a lot of the questions dealt with
zoning. Nothing makes me more mad than to drive down Seven Mile
Road near Livonia Mall and there are all these strip malls. I want
to bring home the fact that this is something that will really help
this area out.
Mrs. Fandrei: One of our commissioners mentioned that Perry Drugs might
eventually buy the property. We give rezonings because the
petition sounds wonderful. The next thing we know nothing gets
developed but the rezoning is there.
Mr. Grifka: Are you afraid we will get it rezoned and then we won't build?
Mrs. Fandrei: Your circumstances could change and it may not be just you but this
is what we run into. A petitioner comes before us for a rezoning,
the rezoning is granted, their circumstances change, they don't go
ahead and develop it and then we have a piece of property that
someone else comes in and does something with because they have the
zoning and we can say nothing about it. That is the risk.
11972
Bill Sabatine, 5862 Herbert, Westland: I am currently head of the Board of
Trustees. We have been in business 22 years. We have a bank
account of $350,000 approaching $400,000. We have bank approval
for another $400,000. We are also petitioning the Skillman
Foundation, the Kresge Foundation and the Mott Foundation for
donations to build our establishment. In 22 years we have had two
locations. The first one was the basement of a hall on Joy Road
Ifty behind the Token Lounge. We were there for 12 years. We then
leased the Perrinville School for a ten-year lease and we are now
in our ninth year of that lease. We approached Joe Janette of the
Livonia School Board for another ten years. We were denied. They
said they would give us a one-year lease. We are currently paying
$1.00 per square foot and splitting the costs of operating the
building. We are paying approximately $70,000 a year to open the
front door. We are current. We have the best credit rating in
town. We approached the Livonia School Board to purchase the Stark
School. They are going to use it for storage and they said at this
time they are not intersted. Along with when they offered us a
one-year lease, they wanted to up the price to $4.50 a foot, which
would increase our operating costs approximately $100,000 a year,
but only for a year. We wouldn't know if we would be there the
following year. If we are granted the opportunity to build on this
property, we hope it will be our last move. This is something that
was started with ten people that left the AA meetings. They had no
place for entertainment. We provide social life for people that
want to remain alcohol and drug free. We have baseball teams. We
have a pool, which we sponsor. We have children's picnics which
are held in Hines Park. We are a community organization but we
welcome everyone. If you have a relative or a friend with a
drinking problem, send them down. It is not locked up so if you
are not a member you can't get in. We need a home. We have one
year left. We have looked at property. We have been hit by the
DNR. We hope to buy this piece and in the next year build on it.
Mr. Tent: Mr. Nagy, this is just a rezoning now. Would we have review of the
site plan?
Mr. Nagy: Yes you would.
Mr. Tent: So at that point we could iron out all the differences. Mr. Shaw,
let's say the zoning was approved, how soon would you begin?
Mr. Sabatine: We only have one year left on our lease.
Mr. Tent: This is what we hear. They get their zoning and then they have
difficulties. Would you have to expire your other lease?
Mr. Shaw: Our plans would be to start building before our lease expires.
Mr. Grifka: Our intention is once approval is granted. We are on a contingent
offer to purchase pending approving by the City Council. If we get
City Council approval, I would forsee constructing beginning in six
to nine months.
11973
Mr. Gniewek: Are we prepared to finalize it at this point in time. I don't
think the petitioner has had a chance to think about how much room
is necessary. I am supporting the petition but I am wondering
whether we should make a motion to table so that both the
petitioner and the commission can review the site and the
petitioner could get together with our Planning staff and find out
what would be feasible as far as developing that property as far as
`, C-1 and parking. I think we are throwing out something that you
weren't expecting tonight. I am not sure you are as comfortable
and we are as comfortable as we would like to be.
Mr. LaPine: You are talking about a building of 10,000 square feet. The
property, building, landscaping, development of parking. How much
money are we talking about?
Mr. Shaw: Probably looking at a million dollars.
Mr. LaPine: You have $450,000 in the bank. I understand you are trying to get
some grants from some foundations. The worry I have, I have no
guarantees here. Once I give you the rezoning, let's assume you
can't get any money from any of the foundations and you have
$400,000 and you can't develop the property at this time. Now
you have C-2 or C-1. You decide at that point we can't build here,
let's sell the land. You could probably sell the land for 25 to 30
percent more than you paid for it because it has the C-2
designation. I have no guarantee that when I go along with this
motion I am going to get what I am seeing because at this point
I don't know and you don't even know what is involved in the
construction. You can be sure it is going to cost you more than
you assumed. The other question I have, a number of times you
have made statements here tonight that you have talked to all the
neighbors. I would like to see some letters from these neighbors
showing they are not opposed to it. When you are talking about
that amount of money and you are an organization that has to go
to foundations to get that money, am I going to get what I am
told here tonight?
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 92-2-1-4 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver and seconded by Mr. Tent, it was
#3-242-92 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March
31, 1992 on Petition 92-2-1-4 by Ledford & Grifka, P.C. for Northwest
Alano Club requesting to rezone property located on the east side of
Newburgh Road south of Ann Arbor Trail in the Southwest 1/4 of Section
32 from RUF to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine
that Petition 92-2-1-4 be tabled until April 7, 1992.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance
#543, as amended.
11974
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Tent, McCann, Gniewek, Kluver, LaPine, Vyhnalek, Fandrei,
Engebretson
NAYS: Morrow
ABSENT: None
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mrs. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 92-2-2-5
by Stephen R. Emsley requesting waiver use approval to convert a portion
of a historical residential structure for use as a veterinary office on
property located on the southwest corner of Eight Mile Road and
Meadowview Lane in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 6.
Mr. Bakewell 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 Fire Marshal's office stating
due to the fact that this structure is of Type 5 construction, they
are strongly opposed to its use as a commercial establishment.
This type of construction becomes very important as it relates to
City Ordinance and to the possible requirement for an automatic
fire suppression system. At the present time, there are no water
mains or hydrants on the site or in the immediate area. They state
their approval would be contingent upon a further review of a water
supply of adequate volume to supply the required limited area fire
suppression system.
We have also received a letter from the Traffic Bureau stating the
parking spaces are 9 feet wide and the ordinance requires 10 feet
for parking of this type.
A letter is also in our file from the Engineering Department
stating Eight Mile Road will be widened in the near future to five
lanes. In this connection they have been advised by County
officials that the project will necessitate the stabilization of
the embankment areas along the front property line of the site due
to severe grade differences between the property and the public
right-of-way. They state it might be advisable to place the drive
approach to the property in Meadowview Lane to avoid very steep
drive approach grades.
We have also received a letter from Kip Bonds of 38560 Morningstar
stating he is opposed to this request for the following reasons:
1) I see no sense in allowing another commercial building in this
area when one of the two newest strip malls just to the east on
Eight Mile is 50% empty and the other has remained uncompleted for
approximately two years. 2) With the Victor development to our
south, the freeway and Meijers etc to the west and the new
condominiums to the east a commercial building to the north will
effectively isolate this subdivision from all other single family,
residential neighborhoods in the general area and substantially
11975
reduce our property values. 3) If this petition is approved and a
successful business is established the commission will soon be
under great pressure to rezone the remaining lots along Eight Mile
Road and if this is approved my home will very likely back up to
the dumpsters behind a strip mall. Exactly what the zoning concept
is supposed to avoid. He goes on to say it is time to restore the
original RUFC zoning to the property, and allow someone to
~"' construct new homes on the site.
Lastly, we have received a letter from Detroit Edison stating they
have no objections to this petition.
Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please come forward and tell us your plans.
Alan Helmkamp, 19327 Augusta Drive: I am not the petitioner. I am not even the
petitioner's attorney. Bill Roskelly is their agent and he is out
of the country. Since I was going to be here anyway tonight in
case you had questions for me, I told Mr. Roskelly I would pitch
hit for him tonight. I am one of the two land contract vendee
owners of the property. This is our latest chapter of our ongoing
novel. A brief background before I introduce Stephen and Carol
Emsley, who are here with me. Stephen Emsley is the petitioner.
After the fire on August 12, 1990, it is true it has sat boarded
up. We were on the site physically in our Quonset hut until late
August of 1991 trying to run our law practice. During that time we
seriously considered renovating the building ourselves. Eventually
my law partners decided they did not want to go through another two
years of what we just completed. It was indeed fortunate that Mr.
and Mrs. Emsley came forward because our objective all along was to
find someone who loved the old place, who wanted to save it, who
wanted to bring it back as we had restored it and keep it
`,. professional office and Mr. and Mrs. Emsley came forward and they
will speak to their motivations. The easy thing to do would be to
bulldoze it and lose this historical asset and try to find some
slick developer that would come in with a rezoning petition and
cash in for the big bucks. Although we took a very bad hit with
the insurance, we have chosen not to do that because we made a
commitment to the neighborhood and to the City of Livonia to try to
maintain this historical site. We felt in meetings with the City
and the Historical Preservation Commission that the far ranging
objectives of all concerned would be met if we could find someone
motivated like us to keep it residential and bring it back the way
it was with waiver use for professional services. Veterinary
office, in my view, is a professional service.
I want to make a few comments about some of the objections raised
in the letters and then I will defer to Mr. Emsley. The key thing
is that this will be substantially like it was when we had it. The
exterior will remain the same. The interior will have to be
different. Mr. Emsley will speak to that. We have the Eight Mile
Road widening. There is nothing we can do about that. We have the
steep grade. Mr. Clark makes the recommendation for Meadowview
Lane. I can understand why the neighbors would have some concerns.
`ire
11976
We may have to talk about reducing along Eight Mile the steepness
and perhaps the City Engineer and Mr. Roskelly could get together
and work out some way to still use Eight Mile Road, at least for
egress. We will have to look at that. We, of course, had the "no
left turn" sign on the exit along Meadowview Lane when we were
there and I would assume that would continue. The intention is to
flow all traffic outcoming right onto Eight Mile. On the fire, my
friend Arnie Klinger having had his department fight a fire there,
I can understand why he would say with the old historic structure
that he would be opposed to a commercial use. Understand first of
all that we have City water and sewer coming to the site, hopefully
in the not too distant future. We stood with the neighborhood in
front of the water board two and a half years ago to get the
community to earmark some funds to bring water and sewer to our
neighborhood and they did so but we are under the raps of the
moratorium and there is nothing we could do about that. At some
point when the moratorium lifts, we will have water and sewer and
that comes right to the site. It is not true that there is no
water service nearby. There are fire hydrants 200 feet away and
that is the fire hydrant the Fire Department used when they fought
our blaze. It is true we need a better water supression system.
What happened in our case is we have a well and when the power was
lost when the electrical system failed during the fire, the pump
did not work and the sprinkler system did not work. We will have
to look into some kind of an adequate backup system in this case.
In my case unfortunately there seemed to be some oversight. I
think there is some system to have a backup power source for the
sprinkler system to work. Again, this will retain the residential
with waiver use. Mr. Bond's letter speaks to rezoning to
commercial and that is not what we are looking for here. With that
I will defer to Mr. Emsley. I want to put forward to the group a
handout he put together and I am sure he will talk about who he is
`. and what he plans and then I will come back if there are any
questions I can speak to.
Mr. Tent: Mr. Helmkamp, you have been before the board on many occasions and
you are familiar with the zoning ordinance. I would like to have
you just refresh my memory on this. In other words, what they are
asking for is waiver use and waiver use goes on forever and ever
with the property.
Mr. Helmkamp: That is what we have.
Mr. Tent: We are going from the RUF classification to waiver use so this type
of operation can go on and on in this location.
Mr. Helmkamp: It is nothing more than a continuation of what has already been
approved. To the extent it runs with the site and continues to run
with the site, it is an apple to an apple. It is still residential
but it is waiver use for professional service.
Mr. Tent: How much of your building was destroyed by the fire?
Mr. Helmkamp: It depends on what criteria you assign to that. The walls, the
outside structure is still up. The inside was substantially
gutted.
'taw
11977
Mr. Tent: Would it be over 50 percent?
Mr. Helmkamp: Again, I think it depends on the criteria you assign.
Mr. Tent: The reason I ask that is if it was over 50 percent, then, of
course, the zoning would be null and void and it would revert back
,tow to its original zoning of RUF and it couldn't be used for what it
was before. Correct me if I am wrong.
Mr. Helmkamp: That is my understanding as well. The front part of the house was
gutted but more than 2/3 of the structure only had smoke and water
damage. I think on a square footage basis much less than 50
percent was fire damage.
Mr. Tent: I was just going on that basis. If it was 50 percent or more, it
would revert back to RUF.
Stephen Emsley, 19871 Fry Road, Northville: It is kind of a long and widening
story to get me to this point on this project. I knew the owner
before the attorneys and I knew of this house for many years. I
watched the development from a private ownership to the office to
the fire and I thought all the time it was going to be brought back
to the original shape it was in and when the trailer moved, I
contacted them and said are you going to bring the building back?
The economics and hearbreak they went through, I don't think they
were mentally prepared and wanting to do this project. I said I
was interested in the project. I want to see the house restored to
what it was ten years ago. I have been a neighbor for 24 years.
To do this I have to utilize the building, again commercial. There
is no way you can salvage the home and turn it into a single family
residence again. The costs would be too high. I am a professional
engineer. I work for Chrysler Corporation. That is what I do for
a living. Part of my retirement is to continue with my wife in the
animal profession. She has worked with animals for a number of
years. I have worked with show animals. I have worked with many
organizations and many vets. I got together with a veterinarian
and we decided we could put together and maintain and pay for the
project with this kind of usage. It is a professional usage. The
only difference is some of the people can't scream and turn the
radio up loud. They may bark and they may whine. Where it is
located is four to five miles from the closest vet. The setbacks
from our lot line and occupied dwellings is two to three times what
a vet would require with a normal zoning. If I came in and asked
for a zoning change, I could move the building over to the lot line
almost and still be well within the code. All of those things I
looked at and said this is a great place to run a business. I am
proposing a a fully enclosed facility. The only time people or
animals would be accesible to the neighbors would be walking in
from the car into the building. It would be air conditioned and
heated and will have no windows or doors left open. Those are my
rules for running the operation. What was the garage will be
soundproofed and any animals that will be maintained on premises
for recovery or treatment of any kind would be housed in a
soundproofed garage. One of the reasons we did not ask for a total
11978
change but only a partial change is because I want someone on the
premises at any time there is an animal there. The vet would
occupy the apartment. The person who will be responsible for the
animals will be on the premises 24 hours a day. We would only
have business hours from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. except for
emergencies. I believe there are ten spaces for parking. I know
that is more than enough for this type of operation. Many people
come in and drop the dogs off. There would never be more than two
examination rooms in operation at one time. The people that are
occupying the building, as far as workers, there would probably be
four cars. That would leave more than enough for this type of
operation. Lastly, my wife will be a participant in the business
daily from opening to closing.
Mrs. Fandrei: Any outdoor kennels or runs?
Mr. Emsley: Absolutely not.
Mrs. Fandrei: Did I hear you correctly. There is going to be another individual
in residence in a separate building from your own home?
Mr. Emsley: I live in Northville.
Mrs. Fandrei: You are going to be living in the home?
Mr. Emsley: This home will have a residence upstairs for either my family or
the veterinarian who is working with me. I am planning on the vet
and his wife being the residents. As long as there are animals in
the building I will have somebody in residence.
Mrs. Fandrei: John, I thought there was no water and sewer to be coming into this
area in the near future.
Mr. Nagy: The plan is to bring it into this area.
Mr. Gniewek: Just to clarify. Mr. Emsley, you are not the veterinarian?
Mr. Emsley: No sir.
Mr. Gniewek: Your wife is not a veterinarian?
Mr. Emsley: No sir. She is an assistant.
Mr. Gniewek: You are planning on buying the property, buying the building,
renovating it and converting it into a veterinarian office, renting
it out to the vet and providing living facilities for another
person entirely? You will not live on site?
Mr. Emsley: I may. Right now the vet wants to live on site. If he is not
there, I will not allow animals to be kept in the building without
someone being on the site.
Mr. Gniewek: The plan you are looking at is to have the vet live on the site and
you live a mile and a half down the road where you presently live?
11979
Mr. Emsley: That is correct.
Mr. Gniewek: You are buying this property as an investment, restoring it as a
historical site but renting it out as a business opportunity for a
private veterinarian to utilize.
ti
Mr. Emsley: In the most part yes. My wife will also be working in the
building.
Mr. Gniewek: Mr. Nagy, you have indicated that water and sewer is going to be
extended to this particular area. We don't know when? The
moratorium could be lifted next week or two to three years from
now?
Mr. Nagy: Hopefully it will be sooner than later. I can't tell you when.
Mr. Gniewek: We know water will be coming there eventually but we don't know
when.
Mr. Emsley: I will be the owner and operator of this building and again I will
help the veterinarian also. I have a young vet that is going to be
a partner of mine. He again is the vet. There is a whole lot more
than just giving shots.
Mr. Gniewek: What was originally presented to the commission was that a Stephen
Emsley is going to be bringing a veterinarian service to this
building. The natural assumption is Mr. Emsley is the
veterinarian. The natural assumption is he will be living on site
because he is requesting residential parts of this building. None
of that was clear. Now we all know where we stand as far as what
will happen to the site.
L. Mr. LaPine: What happens to the pole barn?
Mr. Emsley: I discussed many things with the Fire Marshall that wrote the
letter. We spoke about the barn for storage. Even then I would be
required to drywall the inside and possibly separate that also if I
am going to use it for storage.
Mr. LaPine: Storage of what?
Mr. Emsley: There are many professional products that go along with that
service. There are collars, medical supplies, food, etc.
Mr. LaPine: Are you going to have a commercial operation?
Mr. Emsley: We won't be selling anything that isn't directly related to the
service.
Mr. LaPine: I hate to say this Alan, but if it were me I would think
seriously of bulldozing it and making it into a residential home.
Mr. Tent: Mr. Emsley, You are going to have to renovate the building and
restore it, etc. What are you planning on spending to put that
operation into order?
11980
Mr. Emsley: I will take a guess. I have had quotes of $43,000 to $105,000.
Mr. Tent: You are going to buy the existing facility from Mr. Helmkamp:
ti
Mr. Emsley: That is correct.
Mr. Tent: What are we talking as far as final figure?
Mr. Emsley: $300,000 final when I am finished.
Mr. Tent: Strictly dogs and cats?
Mr. Emsley: Yes, all small animals.
Mr. McCann: You understand you have to give up the Eight Mile road entrance?
Mr. Emsley: I don't understand that. From the letter that came in, it was
discussed there is a possibility of moving the entrance further
east and flattening the ground and still staying out of the
subdivision.
Mr. McCann: I have a problem with the driveway there. According to Mr.
Helmkamp, you are the current owner of this property on a land
contract or is this contingent?
Mr. Helmkamp: My partners and I are buying on land contract. We have a
contingent purchase agreement with Mr. Emsley.
Mr. McCann: Mr. Helmkamp, he is quoting $43,000 to $105,000. Could you tell me
what your insurance adjuster that you hired gave you as an estimate
to rebuild your offices back to their original shape?
`" Mr. Helmkamp: My recollection is it was over $300,000 to restore it as we had it.
We were about two weeks away from having everyone in to see it.
Mr. McCann: My recollection from the newspaper article said you were dismayed
when it was going to cost you $300,000 to rebuild it. My question
to him is, we are going to be putting in a veterinary office, which
is quite expensive. We are talking about turning the upstairs into
a residence. How much of this work are you planning on doing
yourselves?
Mr. Emsley: The bathroom and kitchen. This building is not going to be
occupied by customers. It needs to be clean. It needs to be
sanitary. It needs to be pleasant to the animal. I don't have
carpeting. They had carpeting. Everything is done on a much
different scale except for the reception area. The outside will
look the same.
Mr. McCann: Have you gotten any bids for the water system in the meantime?
Mr. Emsley: We discussed several ways with the Fire Marshal for doing this. He
brought the Cadillac up, which is a backup diesel power generator
and all that stuff. What they do they come in and cut the drip
line as soon as there is a fire. That is so they don't get
electrocuted. There are much easier ways of getting backup power
supplies.
11981
Mr. McCann: Have you gotten an idea of any costs?
Mr. Emsley: Yes, very cheap.
Charles Horka, 20535 Meadowview: I have a written statement "What better way to
predict the future than to examine the past. . .
"I have stood before this commission in the past, expressing my
opposition to the approval of any petition requesting the
consideration of rezoning and/or waiver usage of the parcel of land
in question. Once again, I stand before this commission expressing
my opposition to the most recently submitted petition (92-2-2-5, in
which Mr. Stephen R. Emsley is requesting waiver use approval in
order to operate a veterinary office out of this location. I
believe that approval of this petition will have negative impact on
the citizen's of Livonia Hills Estates, and therefore request the
support of the commission in rejecting this petition.
"CONCERNS
-Conflicts with the current zoning of this area.
-Point of entry/exit.
-Advertisement of the business
-Traffic
-Increased exposure of the residential dwellings to the public
-Disposal of refuge, ie, needles, and medications administered to
the animals
-Potential hazards posed to the children/citizen's of this
subdivision
-Decreased value of surrounding homes
-Invitation for future requests to re-zone the adjoining properties
on Eight Mile Rd.
-Visually contradicting to the current residential setting and
atmosphere
"We have the advantage here. . . We can see what the future holds in
store for us, by examining the past. If the future involves the
approval of this petition, then our future can be seen by looking
back at the last four years!"
Mr. Helmkamp had a dream. It has been our nightmare. I know he
means well. This thing should be bulldozed. I think 15 minutes
with a bulldozer would do justice to this City, our subdivision and
myself personally.
Roger Beaune, 20558 Hickory Lane: I am worried about the lots adjacent to there.
I looked at the house and I think it is more than 50% damaged. We
should have something from the Fire Department stating how much is
damaged before he starts rebuilding. When they widen the road, it
is going to be hard to put in a driveway off Eight Mile Road. It
is pretty steep right now and they are going to take another 15 to
20 feet off there.
Karen Buell, 38530 Morningstar: In addition to the views that have been expressed,
I really have a concern. I would like to know what assurance there
would be that there will not be outdoor kennels in the future if
this waiver use were approved.
r..
11982
Mr. Engebretson: I think we could assure you if it were approved that there would
be strong conditions prohibiting that.
Mrs. Buell: The other concern I have is the traffic. Those of us from the
neighborhood are very aware of the difficulty of making a left turn
° coming out of Meadowview onto Eight Mile. Most of us go down
"%row Morningstar and go out Hickory. It is much easier. It is almost
impossible from Meadowview to make a left turn. Those not familiar
with that area, as I expect most of the people would be that would
be coming to the veterinary office, would, I suppose, try to make a
left turn and that is where many, many people would be going. If
you have someone trying to make a left turn, if you are behind them
trying to make a right turn, you wait. It is not wide enough to
make a right turn when someone is waiting to make a left turn.
With a veterinary office there and the number of people in and out,
it would make a very, very difficult situation for those of us in
the neighborhood.
George Buell, 38503 Morningstar: I would never have bought the place if a vet was
there. I would have a hard time selling the house.
Mr. Helmkamp: Just a couple of quick thoughts. On traffic, I find it hard to
believe that one vet would generate more traffic than four lawyers
and I don't think that we negatively impacted the neighborhood in
terms of traffic. I appreciate the fact that I haven't heard any
criticism about our operation. I tried to be a good neighbor. I
apologize publicly to our next door neighbor Mr. Horka and to the
others for what happened. He said our dream was his nightmare. I
don't wish upon anyone to be the victim of a crime. We were the
victim of a crime. We are trying to make the best out of a bad
situation. We are trying to save a historical structure, which I
love and which I cannot put any more of my life and emotion into.
I just was used up over the experience. It seems to me if we
could save the structure in a professional setting in an operation
that would be no less intent than ours was, that would do a lot for
the City.
Mr. Emsley: Nothing was brought up about the signage. I think we would be
limited on the signage. It wouldn't be any larger than what was
there for the lawyers office, maybe even smaller than that. This
isn't an advertised type thing. People will make appointments.
There will not be a large amount of people there at any one time.
There aren't large crowds leaving at one time.
Jeff Horka: I am no longer a resident at 20535 Meadowview. My parents live
there. I have to speak in reference here to the accusation that
he, Mr. Helmkamp and the former tenants, were the ones with the
loss here. I have to disagree with that. The people that are
experiencing the loss and the victim of this crime, are the
residents of Livonia Hills Estates and it is time you recognize
that. This issue is four years old and it has been an eyesore and
we are the victims. We have a party here who is not going to be a
concerned party. He is going to be nothing more than a landlord
who proposes to lease this building to a veterinarian that we have
not met. Who is this person?
11983
Mr. Engebretson: I am not going to argue with you sir. It is a waiver use. It
has nothing to do with who is a victim of a crime that occurred a
number of years ago.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 92-2-2-5 closed.
‘Rim` On a motion duly made by Mr. Gniewek and seconded by Mr. Tent, it was
#8-243-92 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March
31, 1992 on Petition 92-2-2-5 by Stephen R. Emsley requesting waiver use
approval to convert a portion of a historical residential structure for
use as a veterinary office on property located on the southwest corner
of Eight Mile Road and Meadowview Lane in the Northwest 1/4 of Section
6, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that Petition 92-2-2-5 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 general waiver use
standards and requirements as set forth in Section 19.06 of the
Zoning Ordinance #543.
2) That the proposed use is incompatible to and not in harmony with
the surrounding uses in the area.
3) That the proposed use will create an unacceptable amount of
non-residential traffic on Meadowview Lane which is the only
entrance and exit to the adjacent residential subdivision.
4) That the proposed use, if approved, runs with the land and as such
has the potential of providing for a permanent non-residential use
on the property.
5) That the proposed use will encourage the non-residential use of
vacant property located west of and adjacent to the subject
property along Eight Mile Road.
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.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Tent, McCann, Gniewek, LaPine, Morrow, Vyhnalek, Fandrei,
Engebretson
NAYS: Kluver
ABSENT: None
Mrs. Fandrei: As a former Historical Commissioner and probably the most concerned
about restoring and saving historical buildings, I don't feel this
neighborhood is the place for any kind of business, which is why I
am voting against this petition.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
11984
Mrs. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 92-2-2-7
by Feng Zhi Yuan requesting waiver use approval to operate a carry-out
restaurant within an existing shopping center located on the south side
of Ann Arbor Road between Ann Arbor Trail and W. Chicago in the
Northeast 1/4 of Section 31.
fir. Mr. Bakewell 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 Fire Marshal's office stating they have
no objection to this proposal. Also in our file is a letter from
the Traffic Bureau stating the site plan as submitted complies with
the ordinance as it applies to the department's interests. We have
also received a letter from the Ordinance Enforcement Division
stating their office has no objections to the proposal. Lastly, we
have in our file a letter from Detroit Edison stating they have no
objections to this petition.
Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please come down.
Henry Scott: I am with a restaurant equipment suppliers and designers company.
Mr. Yuan and his family are opening a Chinese carry-out
restaurant and their waiver request is to put in 12 seats with
proper adequate handicap restrooms. They feel and the tenants in
the rest of the shopping center, which includes Manufacturer's
Bank, a trophy sales, a video store and the adjoining elementary
store just to the west, that it would be a great idea if they had
seats because the only establishment there now is McDonald's. This
is kind of a change in pace. There are no other Chinese
restaurants in the area so this would be a viable retail
"'rs. residential climate, which would enhance the neighborhood and
allow a change of pace.
Mr. Gniewek: Mr. Scott, the gentleman that is planning on operating this
establishment. Will he operate it as a carry-out if it is not
approved as a sit down?
Mr. Scott: That is true but it requires a lot more equipment to operate as a
sit-down restaurant than as a carry out and also because of the
neighborhood it lends itself to have a few seats.
Mr. Gniewek: The petitioner is committed to operate out of that restaurant
whether he has the 12 seats or not?
Mr. Scott: Yes.
Mr. LaPine: I don't follow what is your concern with this operation?
Mr. Scott: I am selling the equipment. I did the design of the place. Mr.
Yuan is a very, very knowledgeable Chinese cook. He has worked in
the finest restaurants around and he is now establishing a business
for his family.
11985
Mr. LaPine: If he did get approval, when would you start construction?
Mr. Scott: The building is ready right now. The gutting of the building has
been done.
Mr. LaPine: I was there Saturday and workers were in there and they were
putting up walls.
Mr. Scott: I think they were tearing down walls.
Mr. Engebretson: The usage is permitted as long as they don't have seats. They
are certainly entitled to be building and constructing a restaurant
facility minus the seats.
Mr. LaPine: Primarily, you are going to be a carry-out restaurant?
Mr. Scott: That is correct.
Mr. LaPine: Do we have any problems with parking at this site John? The
parking spaces appeared to be only nine feet in width.
Mr. Nagy: I will be happy to check it out further.
Ron Rissman: I represent my family, which owns the shopping center. We built
the center approximately 17 years ago and I have managed it since.
We have had a difficult time of late due to the economic downturn.
We have had difficulty keeping our center leased. We run a very
nice shopping center but due to the C-1 zoning we have had problems
attracting tenants that fit into the C-1. As was pointed out
previously, the center is abutted on both sides by C-2. It is a
large shopping center and there is a drug store across the street.
The gentleman wishes to open a carry-out Chinese restaurant and I
`°w' think 12 seats is something that will help him be a success. It is
difficult to run a carry-out establishment and make it these days
with the costs. Quite frankly, we have 3,000 square foot of
vacancy in the center right now. We have a 2,000 square foot video
store who is paying one half his rent because he can't afford to
make his full rent payments. So that is 5,000 square feet out of
17,000 total. We could use all the help we can get in trying to
fill up the center so it continues to be an asset to the City. On
top of that I understand he is a very good Chinese cook.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 92-2-2-7 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent and seconded by Mr. Gniewek, it was
##3-244-92 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March
31, 1992 on Petition 92-2-2-7 by Feng Zhi Yuan requesting waiver use
approval to operate a carry-out restaurant within an existing shopping
center located on the south side of Ann Arbor Road between Ann Arbor
Trail and W. Chicago in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 31, the City
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 92-2-2-7 be approved subject to the limitation of no more than
12 seats for the following reasons:
r..
11986
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
Now 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
11543, as amended.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Tent, McCann, Gniewek, LaPine, Morrow, Vyhnalek, Fandrei,
Engebretson
NAYS: Kluver
ABSENT: None
Mr. Tent: One question to Mr. Nagy. Can we be assured the parking spaces
will be 10' x 20'?
Mr. Nagy: Yes.
Mr. Kluver: Just a comment. The current number of restaurants having at least
12 customer seats in Livonia is a total of 124.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mrs. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 92-2-2-8
by Livonia Jaycees requesting waiver use approval to hold their annual
Spring Carnival at Ladbroke DRC located at the southeast corner of
Schoolcraft Service Drive and Middlebelt Road in the Northwest 1/4 of
Section 25.
Mr. Bakewell 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 petition. We have also
received a letter from the Fire Marshal's office stating they have
no objection to this proposal. Also in our file is a letter from
the Traffic Bureau stating the site plan as submitted does not
comply with the City ordinance. They state parking is not a
consideration; however, the layout and sanitary facilities are.
We have also received a letter from the Ordinance Enforcement
Division stating their office has no objections to the proposal.
Lastly, we have received a letter from Detroit Edison stating they
have no objections to this proposal.
11987
Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please come down.
John Walsh, Board of Directors and General Counsel of the Livonia Jaycees, 34443
Grove: Our request is for a waiver use to allow us to hold our 27th Annual
Spring Carnival at the DRC. We have held our carnival there for at
least the last 4 to 5 years. We intend to do the same thing. We
'r► co-sponsor with Wade Shows. We have approximately 20 rides, 30 to
40 games and some concession stands. It is open to the public. It
will run from May 14th to May 25th.
Mr. Morrow: John, in one of the reports was there any negative comments?
Mr. Nagy: The Traffic Bureau indicated the site plan does not comply with the
City ordinance.
Brian Duggan, President: I dealt with Traffic and I did send them a revised plan.
He really wanted a sketch of what we were going to do. We believe
his objection was simply a result of our submitting just a plat
map.
Mr. Nagy: That is precisely right.
Mr. Morrow: As in the past, the Jaycees will maintain local management of the
event as opposed to Wade Shows?
Mr. Walsh: That is correct. We have a trailer on site and we are charged with
the management of the event.
Richard Schnaars, Vice President and General Manager of Ladbroke DRC: I have
personally been here since 1989. We have had absolutely no problems
at that site whatever. They conduct themselves well. They work
very well with Wade Shows, which is a reputable amusement company
that is out of Florida. They sit down with us. They listen to our
rules. As you probably do know, the actual site is within our
property line. We do have security on site plus we have the added
benefit of having Livonia police on site. We have all the
necessary ingress and egress because of the racetrack facility.
They have worked very well with us. Our patrons enjoy when the
show comes to town. We work well together.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 92-2-2-8 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Fandrei and unanimously
approved, it was
#3-245-92 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Petition
92-2-2-8 by Livonia Jaycees requesting waiver use approval to hold their
annual Spring Carnival at Ladbroke DRC located at the southeast corner
of Schoolcraft Service Drive and Middlebelt Road in the Northwest 1/4 of
Section 25, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 92-2-2-8 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
11988
1) That all truck parking, temporary housing units and all other
related transportation equipment and apparatus relating to the
operation of the carnival shall be parked or stored on DRC property
adjacent to the carnival site.
for the following reasons:
`r.
1) That the proposed use complies with all special and general waiver
use standards and requirements set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06
of the Zoning Ordinance #543.
2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed
use.
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.
Mrs. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 92-2-2-9
by V. S. Kyriakopoulos, Tryfco, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to
increase the seating in an existing restaurant located on the north side
of Six Mile Road between Newburgh and Fitzgerald in the Southwest 1/4 of
Section 8.
Mr. Bakewell 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
`okai, they have no objections to the waiver use proposal. We have also
received a letter from the Fire Marshal's office stating their
office has no objection to this proposal. Also in our file is a
letter from the Traffic Bureau stating with a seating capacity of
91, the restaurant would require 45-1/2 parking places for
customers and about 3 for employees - a total of 48 places for this
one business. On petition 91-12-2-31, a restaurant was approved at
the same center that required 17 parking places. This would leave
only 146-1/2 places for the other business at this location. This
will put the lot below the required one space for each 125 sq.
feet, as required by Ordinance Section 18.38 (25). We also have
received a letter from the Ordinance Enforcement Division stating
their office has no objections to the proposal. Lastly, we have
received a letter from Detroit Edison stating they have no
objections to this petition.
Mr. Engebretson: Will the petitioner please come down and state your reasons for
this request.
Van Kyriakopoulos, 22141: I am one of the owners of Kerby's Coney Island, who have
12 restaurants. This is one site I would like to come into and
expand our operation. It is an existing restaurant. We do not
plan on changing the structure. There is enough room in there to
11989
add more seats. What we would like to have is 90 seats. The
present tenant is not able to pay his bills for whatever reason.
We request that we get 90 seats.
Mr. Tent: Mr. Kyriakopoulos, you are familiar with that site. I am familiar
with your restaurants. You have a very fine restaurant. It is a
'taw big operation.
Mr. Kyriakopoulos: Usually we have 100 to 126 seats in our other restaurants.
Mr. Tent: It is the type of operation that should go into more of a regional
shopping center because you have so much traffic. This is a kind
of a small area. You are going to have a full menu that they
don't serve there now. You need a lot of equipment.
Mr. Kyriakopoulos: Our kitchen will be bigger than they have but it will take the
same square footage and the dining room will be the same size. We
are not expanding the facility.
Mr. Tent: We do have a parking problem at that location right now. The
original James, they had provision for 60 customers and you are
talking about 91. You heard the letter from the Traffic Department
about the parking shortage that we would have in that center. My
big concern is, I know you have a fine restaurant and you would be
an asset to the area, but I am concerned about the other tenants.
Could you open up your restaurant with just 60 seats? If you can't
get by with 60 seats and you want the 91, could you find another
location?
Mr. Kyriakopoulos: First, the parking. I have a concern about the parking myself.
If I don't have any parking, I won't have any customers. We took a
look at the location and we determined there was enough parking for
our operation.
Mr. Engebretson: You said you went out and you surveyed the lot and you determined
you would have sufficient space. How many spaces were empty during
the lunch hour?
Mr. Kyriakopoulos: About 30 to 40 and more in the back of the building. We wanted
to make sure of the parking.
Mr. Tent: As far as your facility is concerned, do you have any venting
facility to keep the aromas out of the neighborhood?
Mr. Kyriakopoulos: We have freestanding restaurants like this in Farmington Hills,
Troy and Southfield and we don't have any problems. We will
install whatever is necessary. We usually don't have a problem.
Mr. Tent: The reason I ask that is because we have had a previous petition
and the neighbors were concerned about the aroma when they were
cooking. Your operation would be much greater than what they had
and I was wondering how you were going to contain everything within
your own restaurant.
11990
Mr. Kyriakopoulos: We haven't had any problems so far. In Farmington Hills we
have a neighborhood right behind us. We have never had any
problems. If there is a problem, I would have to work something
out.
Mr. Tent: Could you go there with 60 seats or would you require 91? If you
Nur can't have the 91, would you find another location?
Mr. Kyriakopoulos: No. All of our restaurants have 100 seats. With 60 seats we
could not make a profit. I have signed a lease with the landlord.
This is a problem that is new to us.
Mr. Morrow: On this parking situation. Let me get it clear in my mind. What
was the traffic report?
Mr. Engebretson: It becomes deficient.
Mr. Morrow: I guess from that standpoint, it is a moot question. We are
governed by the ordinance.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. LaPine and I were there Saturday afternoon and we looked at
the entire southern end of the lot and we counted 19 empty spaces
without a business operating in that area. We have visited that
facility on a number of occasions. It is a very nice shopping
center. It has attracted a great many very successful businesses
and there is a continuous stream of traffic in and out of that
center, and that is good. The problem is that there is a practical
parking problem at that facility. I don't think you are in a
position to influence and control the employee's parking in the
rear beyond your own employees. My concern is that if you go in
with these 90 seats, you are going to really put a significant
practical strain on the parking whether it meets the ordinance or
not.
Mr. Morrow: The recent granting of 20 seats for a Japanese restaurant, has that
come to fruition yet? Is that open?
Mr. Nagy: They are not in operation but they have been approved.
Mr. Morrow: So we really haven't seen the center reach its potential because we
have 20 more seats being added to one of the operations in there
and apparently we have the defunct operation in another.
Mr. Engebretson: I believe that to be correct. I would make a point that while
Mr. LaPine and I were there on Saturday, the vast majority of the
people were going to the north end of the lot, which we concluded
meant all the parking spaces there were full.
Mr. Morrow: In other words, the survey he made was not based on a full
operation.
Mr. Kyriakopoulos: I would like to make a point. Our business is mostly during
the lunch time from the office buildings around there. That is one
reason we are going there. On Saturday, those offices are closed.
Mr. Engebretson: We also have been there at other times during the week on other
issues and find basically the same problem.
11991
Mr. Kyriakopoulos: I believe it is the landlord's responsibility to have the
employees of the tenants park in back of the building.
There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 92-2-2-9 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Gniewek, seconded by Mrs. Fandrei and unanimously
approved, it was
#3-246-92 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March
31, 1992 on Petition 92-2-2-9 by V. S. Kyriakopoulos, Tryfco, Inc.
requesting waiver use approval to increase the seating in an existing
restaurant located on the north side of Six Mile Road between Newburgh
and Fitzgerald in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 8, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
92-2-2-9 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 general waiver use
standards and requirements as set forth in Section 19.06 of the
Zoning Ordinance #543.
2) That the subject site lacks the capacity to accommodate the
proposed use.
3) 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.
4) That this particular area of the City is currently well served with
restaurant type uses as evidenced by the restaurant survey prepared
by the Planning Department which indicates that there are 19
existing or proposed eating establishments located within the 4
square miles surrounding the intersection of Newburgh Road and Six
Mile Road.
6) That 31 additional customer seats as are being proposed will
overburden the site with additional traffic and the necessity of
parking additional vehicles parked on the site as set forth in the
letter from the Traffic Bureau.
7) That the proposed use is detrimental to the surrounding uses in the
area.
8) That this does not prevent the proposed tenant from utilizing this
business as it presently exists. The business could operate out of
this facility with 60 seats.
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.
11992
Mrs. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 92-2-3-1
by Zeimet/Wozniak & Associates, Inc. requesting to vacate a portion of a
12' wide easement located west of Newburgh Road, south of Ann Arbor
Trail, in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 31.
Mr. Bakewell presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
`ow existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating
their office has no objections to vacating the original easement
dedicated to the City in 1990. They further state Belle
Construction Company has re-executed a new Grant of Easement to the
City which essentially grants to the City the same easement area
with the exception of the building encroachment area. We have also
received a letter from Detroit Edison stating they have no
objection to this petition with the exception of existing
overhead/underground lines in this area. It is their opinion that
this portion of the easement should not be vacated.
Mr. Engebretson: The petitioner is not present but it is a housekeeping procedure
and it certainly isn't necessary for him to be here.
There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 92-2-3-1 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously
approved, it was
#3-247-92 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March
31, 1992 on Petition 92-2-3-1 by Zeimet/Wozniak & Associates, Inc.
requesting to vacate a portion of a 12' wide easement located west of
`, Newburgh Road, south of Ann Arbor Trail, in the Southeast 1/4 of Section
31, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that Petition 92-2-3-1 be approved for the following reasons:
1) That the subject area is no longer needed to protect public
utilities in the area.
2) That vacating the subject easement will not jeopardize the
protection of public utilities in the area.
3) That the proposed vacating is recommended by the City Engineer.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code
of Ordinances.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, announced that the public hearing portion of the meeting
is concluded and the Commission would proceed with items pending before it.
Mrs. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda was a Motion by the
City Planning Commission to hold a public hearing to determine whether
or not to amend Section 18.45 regarding protective wall requirements.
11993
Mr. Engebretson: This is a proposal to hold a public hearing as the motion stated
to deal with an issue that has been getting some publicity in the
newspaper.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mr. McCann and unanimously approved,
it was
#3-248-92 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby establish and
order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to amend
Section 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance so as to provide for the
substitution of a greenbelt in lieu of a protective wall.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing shall be given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance
#543, as amended.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
The next item on the agenda was the approval of the minutes of the 638th Regular
Meeting held on February 25, 1992.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Gniewek, seconded by Mr. McCann and unanimously
approved, it was
#3-249-92 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 638th Regular Meeting held on February
25, 1992 are approved.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
`�. The next item on the agenda was the approval of the minutes of the 369th Special
Meeting held on March 3, 1992.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Gniewek, seconded by Mr. McCann and unanimously
approved, it was
#3-250-92 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 369th Special Meeting held on March 3,
1992 are approved.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
The next item on the agenda was the approval of the minutes of the 639th Regular
Meeting held on March 10, 1992.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Gniewek and seconded by Mr. McCann, it was
#3-251-92 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 639th Regular Meeting held on March
10, 1992 are approved.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: McCann, Gniewek, Kluver, LaPine, Morrow, Vyhnalek, Fandrei,
Engebretson
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Tent
Nur
ABSENT: None
11994
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mrs. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda was Petition
92-3-8-5 by Emmanuel Evangelical Lutheran Church requesting approval of
all plans required by Section 18.58 of Zoning Ordinance ##543 in
'iro" connection with a proposal to construct a new church to replace the
previous one destroyed by fire on the south side of Seven Mile just west
of Gill Road in Section 9.
Mr. Bakewell presented the plans.
Mr. Bakewell: The petition states this is a rebuild of a church that was
destroyed by fire approximately a year ago. There was some
discussion about the possibility for future expansion and the
revised site plan will show where that expansion would take place.
The landscaping was another issue and the revised plan will state
what additional landscaping will be placed on the site.
Mr. Kluver: Will the storage building on the westerly side be removed?
Petitioner: That is going to remain.
Architect: What I have done is I have brought a reduced site plan, which has
been revised and hopefully takes care of all the requests we
discussed at the preliminary hearing. There was a request that the
building be set back ten feet. That has been done. (He showed the
revised plan) One issue that is not on the list which we discussed
is irrigation. I had two irrigation people give us estimates, one
was $4,500 and the other one was $5,000 and that is for the front
yard area. Our feeling is if we get a favorable price on this, we
firr are going to add it in as an alternate but otherwise we are hoping
because of the additional trees that we are putting out there that
we can keep it as an alternate and hopefully get it in if the price
comes in favorably.
Mr. LaPine: In the front of the property there are two large spruce trees. Are
they going to stay?
Architect: They are going to be removed. We are trying to add plant material
to make up for that loss.
Mr. Engebretson: Speaking to the installation of an irrigation system. You are
going to spend a lot of money and it is going to be very
spectacular and I can't imagine for a percentage point or less that
you would be willing to run the risk of sacrificing the aesthetics
and appearance of the whole building for such a small amount of
money.
Architect: In terms of the months of meetings we have had and the cost of the
irrigation system is like squeezing water out of the rock. $5,000
is a fair amount of money. It is not an elaborate building inside.
It is a tight budget.
Mr. Engebretson: What is the budget?
11995
Architect: About a million dollars. It will be in there as an alternate.
Mr. Engebretson: You are talking about less than 1/2 of 1%. I think I am trying
to convey to you that we are trying to be extremely cooperative on
the issue and you have cooperated as well by responding to some of
our concerns. I just can't imagine being prepared to sacrifice the
``rte aesthetics of the building for less than 1/2 of 1%. I would like
to hold out for that but I am not going to oppose the project on
that basis alone. There is a great deal of concern about the issue
and, again, if it was anything other than a church, we would have
insisted upon it.
Mr. Morrow: We worked over this petitioner pretty well at the study session. I
think he has shown a great deal of movement within a week.
Certainly I am disappointed we are not getting the irrigation. At
face value I think you will, if the bids come in adequate and if
there is money left over, then I think you would want to make sure
that you have a nice greenbelt. I think it is going to be
outstanding with the trees you have added. I am going to have a
little faith with these people.
Mr. McCann: I trust them and I know they will do their best but I think there
are certain things this Planning Commission has done for a number
of years now. One of the things is we have required ten foot aisle
parking in commercial districts. Free air in gas stations. There
are a number of things. One of the more important things is to
require sprinkling systems. If we don't do it now, we won't have
the opportunity. I realize this is an expense. I like what I see
here and it is going to be an asset to the City but I, as one
commissioner, feel it is important to the City to make them
irrigate the front.
John Decina: I am the property owner on the west side. Me and a few neighbors
that are here would like to have a couple of comments before you
make your final decision. As far as the church goes, I don't have
any problem. The only question we have is on the west side where
the parking is up against residential, we would like to recommend a
berm that would be five feet above the asphalt finished grade.
When somebody pulls in there at night, they will be shining lights
on the back of the houses. We would like that to go all the way
down. We would like to recommend if that would be possible at a
minimal expense plus I can add on those trees out in front. I
developed the property behind there and I have relocated those pine
trees and the expense would only be $800 to move them. I suggested
to the church that I would personally move them myself. For the
expense on the berm, they have to excavate over 11,000 square feet
of topsoil and they have to get rid of it. They can relocate it as
a berm. There is no extra cost whatsoever.
Mr. McCann: I would like to ask the architect. Those are some very valid
points that he is bringing up especially when you have church
activities going on in the evening and you have lights going back
there. Would the cost of putting a five-foot berm as he suggested
be so prohibitive?
Nr.
11996
Architect: We are bringing soil in at great expense to get the building up
because of raising it.
Mr. McCann: What would it take to alleviate these lights going into these
people's backyards every night?
Architect: We can look at relocating that top soil.
On a motion duly made by Mr. McCann, seconded by Mr. Gniewek and unanimously
approved, it was
#3-252-92 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to
table Petition 92-3-8-5 by Emmanuel Evangelical Lutheran Church
requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Zoning
Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to construct a new church
to replace the previous one destroyed by fire on the south side of Seven
Mile just west of Gill Road in Section 9, until April 14, 1992.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mrs. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Request by
Cantoro Italian Market to illumiante awning on the front of the building
located on the east side of Middlebelt between St. Martins and Breton in
Section 1.
Mr. Engebretson: The proposal is to light that existing awning and in exchange for
that the petitioner has offered to remove, within 30 days of that
approval, the sign on the standard out front and come back within
the next 12 months to seek approval of a complying ground sign to
take its place. I see the petitioner has not joined us tonight. I
don't think it is necessary that he be here.
On a motion duly made by Mr. McCann and seconded by Mr. Gniewek, it was
#3-353-92 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that the request by Cantoro Italian Market to illuminate
awning on the front of the building located on the east side of
Middlebelt between St. Martins and Breton in Section 1, be approved
subject to the following conditions:
1) That the petitioner's request for illumination is approved upon the
condition that the awning only be illuminated until 10:00 p.m.
2) That the petitioner, on his own initiative, has agreed to remove
the existing pole sign within 30 days of this approval.
3) That the site be inspected by the Planning staff 35 days following
the date of approval and to report back to the Planning Commission
the status of the condition to remove the free standing sign.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: McCann, Gniewek, LaPine, Vyhnalek, Engebretson
NAYS: Tent, Kluver, Morrow, Fandrei
ABSENT: None
11997
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
Mr. Morrow: I have a concern about lighting up more and more awnings and still
not face the fact that they could be considered signs. We look
forward to Livonia being around a long time and I can see an
`. evolution of other types of signs being replaced by awnings and
having the whole City with illuminated awnings with signs on them.
I think the Commission has to come to grips with that sooner or
later. I would like to take that under advisement and bring it
before the Commission and either feel it has merits and move it
along or let it die.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, I think the time has come to add an item to a study
meeting regarding the subject of illuminated awnings in the context
of when is an awning an awning and when is an awning a sign.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 640th Regular Meeting
and Public Hearings held on March 31, 1992 was adjourned at 11:05 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Brenda Lee Fandrei, Secretary
ATTEST: Lj t.6?`'" (/"
Priv Jac Engebr:tson, Chairman
jg
\.•