Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1982-06-22 7706 MINUTES OF THI' 435th REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, June 22, ' 982, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 435th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center ,Drive, Livonia, Michigan. * . Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. with approximately 25 interested persons in the audience. Members Present: Danl_el R. Andrew Sue Sobolewski Lee R. Morrow Joseph Falk Donna Naidow Donald Vyhnalek Jerome Zimmer Members Absent: **Herman Kluver *Judith Scurto Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H G Shane, Assistant Planning Director and Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV, were also present. _ Mr. Andrew informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, thi ; Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council who in turn holds its own public hearing and decides the question. If a petition involves a waiver use request and the petition is denied by the Planning Commission, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the Council. Otherwise, the petition is terminated. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 82-4-1-8 by W. Thoma ; to rezone property located on the south side of Schoolcraft east of Eck!_es Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 19, from C-4 to M-1. ID. rs. Scurto entered the meeting at 8:07 p.m. r. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating that there are no City maintained storm sewers +readily available to serve the site, and a letter from Centri-Spray Corporation dated June 16, 1982, and signed by Milton M Schimpke, President, stating that in his judgement the best use fo'- this property is the continuing occupancy of the house. Mr. Andrew: Is the pe =itioner or his representative present? D. W. Thomas, 10451 W Warren, Dearborn: I've had this property for years and have been paying taxes on it. I have a little house there that doesn't even pay the rent. I ha 'e discussed these plans with the Planning Department and I was back-stoppel about ten years ago when I had plans to build a motel. So, my problem is his. I would like to utilize the property and would like you to let me build my office and warehouse. Mr. Andrew: Do you o'in the property and do you live in the house or is it rented? Mr. Thomas: I own th . property. The house is rented temporarily. Mr. Falk: He is awa e of the utility easement and knows what his restrictions are, right? 7707 Mr. Thomas: I believe I discussed this with Mr. Nagy - that we were going to put in a dry well to take care cf water and there isn't going to be anything inside tie warehouse itself except the floor. Utilizing the house as an office s ,ems like something Lhat is a lot more feasible. You didn't go through :he house. The man next door does painting and all the smog and all that goes into the kitchen and we have problems. Half my tenants don't watt to pay the rent and I have to get a court order to get them evicted Ind it's really not doing me any good to pay $3,500 in taxes. Mr. Falk: As long a he can live with the restrictions, that's okay with me. Mr. Thomas: It should work. Mr. Morrow: I wonder if you understand about the easement, and you are aware of it. The developer is uncertain what the restrictions are. **Mr. Kluver entered the meeting at 8:17 p.m. Mr. Thomas: We discu:;sed everthing with the Planning Department. Richard Stover, Vice 'resident of Centri-Spray Corporation: I believe Centri-Spray went along{ with the last rezoning to bring it up to high-rise. Mr. Thomas has stated that Centri-Spray stabbed him in the back. We feel that is just too much building for what little land he has to work with. The 50' setback, the 33' easement and the other 20' setback on the other lot line; the run-o -f of water, no storm sewer accessibility. We were led to believe this was an office and warehouse, how many we don't know. Where is the parking. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Stover, the question before us tonight, of course, is simply one of zoning a: opposed to site plan or waiver use when we will get to the parking a setback and things of that nature. Those questions are vaild but not valid as far as the hearing tonight is concerned. We will note that you object to the change of zoning. • Mr. Vyhnalek: Where are you located? Mr. Stover: The ,1-:'. all the way around. Mr. Vyhnalek: What i:; next to your property? Mr. Stover: A park ng lot. Mr. Vyhnalek: Is it 1eved or gravel? Mr. Stover: Gravel Mr. Vyhnalek: What de you do about the water? Mr. Stover; We are hooked into the storm sewer. We have drain tile in here. No problems with water. Mr. Thomas: Let's lo' k at this carefully. This is old Schoolcraft Trail and this is old Schoo craft Road, He doesn't have access to this. There is a 60' road here; 33 is mine and 33' is his. As far as run-off, he doesn't have nothing but a clear field over here. My little 14' warehouse is less objectionable than the ('-4 he wanted me to build ten years that he promised to go ahead and underwrite half the capital for. I don't know what his objections are at this s time because he has a law suit in the City of Detroit court aginst Centri- t 't Spray at .he present time. I don't want to become part of it. 7708 Mr. Stover: May I answer that we have a law suit with the one on the corner. Mr. Andrew: We don't want to get involved in litigation. t*IOM r. Stover: There is no litigation. That's long been settled. Old Schoolcraft has been •acated. You got your 33 feet and we got ours. r. Zimmer: Does he 125' leg - north/south dimension include the 33'? Mr. Nagy: Yes. Mr. Andrew: When he road was vacated, half went to the north and half to the south. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-4-1-8 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer and seconded by Mrs. Scurto, it was #6-106-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 22, 1982 on Petition 82-4-1-8 as submitted by D: W. Thomas to rezone property located on the sou' h side of Schoolcraft Road, east of Eckles Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Sec' ion 19, from C-4 to M-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend ':o the City Council that Petition 82-4-1-8 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed zoning district will provide for uses that are compatible to the surrounding uses in the area. (2) The proposed change in zoning is consistent with the recommendation of the Future Land Use Plan for the area. (3) The proposed change in zoning is consistent with the zoning districts norma- ly found within the City's industrial corridor. 4 FURTHER RErOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Sectiont23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as revised . A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Mor ow, Scurto, Naidow, Sobolewski, Vyhnaleke Falk, Zimmer, Andrew NAYS: None ABSTAIN: l;luver Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary, . nnounced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-5-2-13 by Thomas P. ( 'Rourke requesting waiver use approval to utilize a Class C Liquor License within a catering hall proposed to be constructed on the east side of Haggerty Road between Seven Mile and Phillips Roads in the Southwest /4 of Section 6. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Traffic Bureau stating that the proposed s to appears to be satisfactory relative to vehicle traffic and parking pa terns. There is a letter also from the Fire Marshall and a letter from the WHyne County Road Commission. 7709 Mr. Thomas O'Rourke, 15818 Beacon Hill Ciicle, Plymouth: This is the architect, Mr. Richa -d Zischke, 8832 Puritan, Detroit. I am sorry I wasn't here at the w >rk session. I didn't know it was open to the public. I under- stand you had several questions regarding the site plan which I would like :o go over with the Architect. #Mr. Andrew: Some )f the Commissioners were concerned about the location on the site. There was some indication from the staff that this was due primarily because of soil conditions. We were supposed to get some kind of document verif7ing soil conditions. Mr. O'Rourke: The people who take the borings, Orchard/Papke, are on vacation. We went in there with a backhoe and found excellent soil up to 10' of the north:rn border. Our intent is to have it approved subject to soil borinjs. We think that the building should be centered and would like it celtered depending on the borings. Mr. Zischke: I was at Hiltz's office. They will not release any information at this time. We intend to keep our building in the best area. We are willing to build north once we obtain substantial soil borings providing we can move i_t up there. Mr. O'Rourke: We woild prefer it centered due to the location of the building to the parking spaces and the view of the hall between Seven and Eight Mile would be better. We have asked the Architect to put in the far corner just :o make sure it would. We will have to have the soil borings in order to build the building. : Mr. Andrew: Inasmich as we are into site plan approval, I am reluctant to go ahead and process the petition on the assumption that it likely would be changed The l )cation of the building will affect parking, landscaping, etc. I have to ask you, do you want us to take action on this site plan as a definitive, viable site Plan? Otherwise, if you change the location of the bzilding after the approval process, invariably the Building Depart- ment will send it back here. t Mr. Nagy: I explainel that to him; that any alteration in the plan would necessitate his coming back again for an amendment or alteration to it. Mr. O'Rourke: We ars aware of that and we are coming back. This is unfortunate. Mr. Andrew: Do yoi have any idea when the soil borings can be done? Mr. O'Rourke: We sh )uld know within two or three weeks. Mr. Andrew: The brings have been taken? Mr. O'Rourke: Yes. Mr. Andrew: Then :e will proceed on the basis that the site plan before us is the site )lan with which you will start construction. Mr. Falk: Are you go _ng to proceed on this site plan? . Mr. O'Rourke: Yes. 4 (1 ) Mr. Falk: What ( ood would the borim-qs do if we proceed on this. If we approve this, we could care less ,41)out the borings. The reason I pursued this last geek was because someone stated definitely that the building was to th( south because of the borings. Last week I insisted on the boring sampl( s to prove that you couldn't build to the north. Mr. Andrew: The ar .hitect has indicated that the building can't go to the north. Mr. Falk: I wou d like to see something in writing. It's a big parcel of land; a new area. We start with ten acres, we ,cut it down to seven, we move the b4ilding south. I get apprehensive. I'm sorry, that's my nature. I'm a Commissioner, I'm supposed to be here representing the people. When see something that bothers me, I ask questions. I'm not question- ing anyone's integrity but we were told last week the building had to go south because of the borings. I would like to see something in writing from a reputable firm who does that work saying this is the way it is; then -. have no question. Mr. Andrew: On the other side of the coin, Joe, Mr. Zischke is a professional architect and if the building falls down, his reputation is at stake. Mr. O'Rourke: We wi-_1 have the borings and we will submit them. Discussion was held oii the proposed site plan. Mr. Andrew: One o '' the questions we have regards the height of the parking lot lights. Mr. Zischke: The height is proposed to cut down on the number of lights needed in the lot. We have seven major poles and if we change the §ystem, it will require twice that number. We don't feel the height of the pole is detrimental. There are 35' poles in major lots throughout Livonia. Mr, Andrew: 4 Where do they stand on parking? Mr. Nagy: They have surplus parking available bn the site. Mr. O'Rourke: There was further questions in regard to the signage. The concern we have ,about interior illumination is breakage, especially located in this area where there is no pedestrians or large volumes of traffic. Mr. Andrew: Does .he sign conform to the Ordinance? Mr. Nagy: Yes. Mr. Andrew: We ha (e a question about the material used on the exterior. Mr. Zischke: I broight a sample of the material this evening. We are willing to see what four needs and requirements are. Mr. Zischke showed a ;ample of exterior material to the members of the Commission. Mr. Zischke: It is cheaper for us to provide an aggregate panel and the texture on the panel comes in different textures. Mrs. Scurto: I understand that what we are going through with the courthouse is not becau3e it is dirty but because the gravelling part is wearing off. Is 1 that correct. 4 r. Andrew: Both. 7711 Mr. Zischke: That is an application on top of plywood. The plywood deteriorates and the c >ating falls off. This is asbestos board and it does not split like plywood, and the coating will not fall off. Mr. Zimmer: Is th :re a significant width for curbing to protect the building? Mr. Zischke: a Yes, :here is a curb 7' high. Mrs. Scurto: What s the oldest building where this material has been in use? Mr. Zischke: I don t think I am old enough to say when it was first used and I am 36. C could bring in manufacturer's data and specifications and ages of buildings. Mr. Zimmer: Is some of the contemporary block more expensive than this system? Mr. Zischke: In the long run, yes. Mr. Zimmer: For maintenance? Mr. Zischke: Yes. You have to paint masonry block every so many years. Fluted block would be more cost-wise than these panels. Mr. Andrew: We have some problems with the freezer/cooler. Mr. Zischke: The f -eezer/cooler will be surrounded by an 8' high masonry wall. The coole-s are standard 8'8" high and it is bricked up the side to obscure the cooler. The roof of the cooler is the roof of this area. It will not bQ seen. We have also screened the transformer. Mr. Andrew: Is thc: freezer/cooler attached to the building? 4 Mr. Zischke: No, is is a self-supporting structure. We opted to put the freezer/ cooler outside rather than inside the building. Mr. Zimmer: Will .here by any problems with debris 'or rodents with this system? Mr. Andrew: The n'tention pond; will it be fenced? Mr. Zischke: No, is will be flashed completely. .The retention area as required by Engineering will be fenced; the material we will leave up to you gentlemen. Mrs. Scurto: I wou d much rather see the excess parking area in green rather than in brick We will not be able to get away from setting a precedent on the 35' 1 ghts. I would prefer something other than those panels on the three sides of the building. I like the externally illuminated signs. I would prefe - some of the block we have seen on the exterior of the building. There is a vast viewing area from both the north and south and I just don't trust those panels. We were told the same thing on the courthouse. I wou d certainly appreciate split block. Mr. Kluver: The 1 ght standards at Schoolcraft Community College - are they in excess of 30' high? Mr. Zischke: I thick they might be 40' . 7712 (lr. Kluver: That could be a good stan�iard. I looked at the adjacent site and it is surroznded by an 8' cyclone fence which is a deterrant to a very viable, i_nteristing area. I look upon this as a development that will brighten the area ;ince he will not enclose it with an 8' fence. r. Zimmer: The 1 ,_ght standards - what about the ones at Six Mile and Newburgh? They ire very high. Mr. Nagy: Those are about comparable to these. ` Mr. Vyhnalek: What is the distance from the front door to the last parking spot north? Mr. Zischke: Probaily 300' . If the soil borings say we should go back north, we will go back north. Mr. Vyhnalek: I agree with Judy that people will be parking on the south side between the lot line and your building. I would prefer to wait for the borings befor making a determination. Mr. Andrew: Do we have a landscape plan? Mr. Bakewell explained to the Commission the details of the proposed landscape plan. Mr. Andrew: We aro incorporating the recommendation of the staff - 10' x 40' and a loss of five parking spaces. Mr. O'Rourke:I: We world like to hold to 35' . We have gone along with your staff's recomnendation on the landscape except for the islands. We would like to kelp those small as possible and we want to go exterior on the site. Mr. Vyhnalek: If we approve this and if they come back in two weeks and want to move the biilding, do they have to go through this 'again? t Mr. Andrew: Not a public hearing. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared thi public hearing on Petition 82-5-2-13 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it was #6-107-82 RESOLVED tiat, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 22, 1982 on Petition 82-5-2-13 as submitted by Thomas P. O'Rourke requesting waiver use approval to utilize a Class C Liquor License within a catering hall proposed to be constructed on the east side of Haggerty Road between Seven Mile and Philips Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 6, the City Planning Cxmmission does hereby recommend to the City Couticil that Petition 82-5-2-13 ie approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that :he Site Plan, Sheet I, dated 7/9/82 , prepared by Richard Zisch:e, Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that the Landscape Plan, Sheet 2, as revised 7/9/92 , prepared by Richard Zischke, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to and ail landscape materials installed on the site prior to issuance of a 'ertificate of Occupancy and thereafter permanently maintained t in a iealthy condition; 7713 (3) that :he Building Elevations, Sheet 3 and 4, dated 6/14/82, prepared by Richard Zischke, Architect, which are hereby approved shall be adher-d to; (4) that he Floor Plan, Sheet 5, dated 6/14/82, prepared by Richard Zisch':e, Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (5) that he free-standing sign shall be ground lighted; (6) that he retention pond shall be enclosed with an 8' high cyclone fence with a gate; and (7) that :he external material used on three sides of the building shall match the color of the brick. for the fo' lowing reasons: (1) The site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. (2) All of the special and general standards of Zoning Ordinance #543, as am. nded, as contained in Sections 11.03 and 19.06 have been complied with. (3) The p oposed use is compatible with the existing and planned uses of th area. FURTHER RE OLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in accorda ce with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance 1!: #543, as a ended. Mr. Andrew: I not ce the total absence of landscaping around the proposed fencing. Are ynu in agreement with that? Mr. Bakewell: Essen .ially, we try to keep retention basins as clear as possible. i Mr. Andrew: Is there a gate for the retention pond?. Mr.Zischke: That i_s an omission on my part. We could not put any type of solid fence such as masonry because we would defeat our purpose which is to have ;he water run off into the retention pond. Wood fencing would not be good and it would create more problems. Mrs. Scurto: I am concerned about that huge parking area with all the trash blowing with i westerly wind - like at Roma Hall; you can't see the fence but when ,ou go back there it looks terrible. How about Vicary? Mr. Zischke: Plant ; would conceal trash as well as a fence. Mrs. Scurto: Does :he asphalt go all the way up to the fence? Mr. Zischke: There will be a green strip of sodding or grass between the two. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. r. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-5-2-14 by 4 II:: Bottles & 'Muff Ltd. , II requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD License in connection with an existing party store located on the northwest corner of lewburgh and Five Mile Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18. 7714 r. Nagy: There is a letter dated Juice 2, 1982 in the file from the Engineering Divisi m stating that there appear to be no engineering problems connected with this proposal. JDonald Laidlaw, 32669 ;rennada, Livonia; I am one of the partners. r. Andrew: Mr. Laidlaw, are you aware that under our Ordinance, an SDD Licensed businc ;s cannot be located within 1,000 feet of another SDD License? Mr. Laidlaw: I don' t know exactly what the requirements are. Mr. Andrew: Within 1,000 feet of your store, we have another SDD License in operation. This Commission cannot waive the requirement of the Ordinance. The City Council may waive it. This Commission, therefore, has little choice but to deny your petition. Mrs. Scurto: I would like to add that I certainly have not seen a place improved the way you have improved yours. There are few businesses who do that much renovation without a club over their heads. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-5-2-14 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Naidow and unanimously adopted, it was #6-108-82 'lESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 22, 11: 1982 on Petition 82-5-2-14 as submitted by Bottles & Stuff Ltd. , II requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD License in connection with an existing party store located on the northwest corner of Newburgh and Five Mile Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-5-2-14 be denied for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use fails to comply with Section 11.03(r) , Paragraph (1) , of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. (2) The petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the proposed use complies with all of the general waiver use standards contained in Secticn 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. (3) The p? oposed use would be incompatible with and detrimental to the sirrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RE: OLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in accordaice with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as a::ended. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Andrew: Mr. L, idlaw, you have ten days from today in which to appeal this decision to the. Council for relief; a very simple letter to the City Clerk asking relie - from the decision of the Planning Commission. 1r. Falk, Secretary, .,renounced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-5-2-15 by tli y Animal Hea Services, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to locate a veterina: y clinic within a shopping center located on the northwest corner of :'choolcraft and Inkster Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 24. 7715 Mr. Nagy: There is a letter dated Jnne 2, 1982 from the Engineering Division in thi file stating that here appears to be no engineering problems conne -ted with this propc al. Bruce Bunting, 931 W. Eleven Mile Road, Madison Heights: We plan on putting in a vet 'rinary clinic to provide a birth control for dogs and cats. We have me in Madison Heights and Rochester. It is a public service that irDr. hasn' t been brought to the metropolitan area that pets certainly need. Mr. Andrew: Can y )u describe how long the dogs or cats would remain with you and how oitdoor rubbish is handled, noise, odor, etc. Dr. Bunting: We adm t them between 7:00 and 9:00 in the morning and discharge them before 5:00 p.m. No animals are kept overnight. The trash and rubbish we have utilized a dumpster for and have had no problems. If you are wondering about biological waste, there is very little of that and it is kep : in the building until the trash is picked up. There is no odor. Mrs. Sobolewski: Are there any sick or diseased animals? Dr. Bunting: No, we do not do diagnostic work. We would refer those to a hospital in the area. WE also have restrictions regarding age and health. There is a seven-year age limit. We do not do any treatment on animals, just operat ons. Mrs. Sobolewski: How many people will there be? Dr. Bunting: Only one at any one time. One Vet would do the surgery and that is in the morning. )Mrs. Sobolewski: Then you would have a secretary or someone watch these animals until they are picked up? 4 Dr. Bunting: Right. Mrs. Scurto: It is possible that a dog die during this process? Dr. Bunting: We don' t want that to happen. In fact, we have not had that problem. If you are concerned about what we would do with the dog should that happen we have equipment in the hospital in Madison Heights for that. It would not be something we would keep in the building. We have done severa' thousand surgeries at the other building and have not had a fatalily. • Mrs. Scurto: My con( ern is that you are in a shopping center. Dr. Bunting: We don' t want to take any risks and we do a physical exam. We are trying to do something about all the dogs and I think it is about time this service is provided. We refer sick animals to veterinarians and there zre quite a few in Livonia. Mrs. Scurto: Is you' facility in Madison Heights in a shopping center? Dr. Bunting: It is in a complex with three or four other stores and a restaurant. Ir. Andrew: Where in Madison Heights? How do you handle noise? r. Bunting: Eleven Mile and I-75. 934 West Eleven Mile Road. rs. Scurto: I commend your service. 7716 Dr. Bunting: On one side of the facilit•.- is a double 12" concrete block wall and on the oder is a single concrete wall. Mr. Morrow:IF: I realize you are talking about a professional service. My difficulty with tris is its location. When we grant a waiver, it runs with the land. If today we say you can do this, tomorrow we could get a full- fledge ] veterinarian. Dr. Bunting: Our laidlord made us sign a lease as to what we can do. The space of this biilding would not be capable of handling diagnostic services. Mr. Morrow: I don' - believe the location in the shopping area with the traffic and other stores is the place for this. Dr. Bunting: We would be happy to have any limitations such as not keeping animals overnijht as they did in Rochester. We want to be in Livonia and we want t� be near the Freeway. Veterinary medicine has come a long way from waat you think is a veterinary clinic. A lot of the prior fears just don't exist any more. We have a lot of people who come from Livonia to Madison Heights. Mr. Falk: I shar> Mr. Morrow's concerns. The location. Is this service readily availaile from all veterinary clinics in Livonia? Dr. Bunting: No. Tie service restricts itself to total spaying or neutering. This can be very expensive. That is why people are not having it done. We believ> limiting the practice to just this operation can lower the cost and that is what our intent is. 111: Mr. Zimmer: How world you describe the condition of the dog when he exits your buildi ig? 4 Dr. Bunting: Very g Sod. Mr. Zimmer: An aggravated animal on a leash; that is what bothers me. Dr. Bunting: These logs are in very good shape when they leave. Things are different now in;luding the anesthesia. Mr. Vyhnalek: Do you know what is on either side of this proposed site? Dr. Bunting: 1. Yes, a podiatrist on one side and on the west side a bakery. Mr. Vyhnalek: You saLd there is no smell. How many surgeries in one day? Dr. Bunting: Ten to twelve. Mr. Vyhnalek: How will you prevent odor? Dr. Bunting: There ire nice ways to take care of this. Plastic containers and plastic barrel :. There are air cleaning techniques also. I am having a hard time removing your fears. I don't think the service would represent itself very well if our clients came in to all these odors. There is a petsto:e in the shopping center also and there are a lot more pets there than ii ours. I guess I am having a hard time removing your fears. • J 7717 Dennis Cooper, 27541 13uckingham: I am concerned about smell. He may put the trash in plasti - bags when he is there but you mentioned you did not live in Livoni1. Who is going to pend the night there. There is not even a back dl)or. Dr. Bunting: I can ;how you our building plans. We have made provision to keep the waste nside the building until trash day. We have been in Rochester for tw-'lve years. Mr. Cooper: How is it removed? Dr. Bunting: We have a dumpster. The trash goes in the dumpster on pick-up day and the dumpster is enclosed. Mr. Cooper: Where ;.s the dumpster located? Dr. Bunting: There : s a dumpster in the parking area. Mr. Cooper: This has been a major problem. I am concerned that your trash being put in the dumpster isn't going to stay in the dumpster. Why did you pick this location? Dr. Bunting: Because it is centrally located and near the Freeway. There is nocdor and we have never had a problem with odor. I am a veterinarian but also a humanitarian. I don't want to cause any waste problems for anybody. Mr. Cooper: I have some reservations. There are very few dogs in this area who would need your service. There is a problem here with odor already and I believe it is my responsibility to keep it from getting any worse and adding to the problem. I question this because of the bakery, bar and a restaurant in this area. t Richard Smith, 2; 529 Buckingham: I also object. I have been taking note of where vet shops are located and I just wish it were not in a area so close to a resicential distrcit. Many of my concerns have been mentioned and I will not repeat them. Mrs. Sobolewski: Mr. Cooper, is there a pet shop in Buckingham Shopping Center? Mr. Cooper: There ' s a fish store there to the east. Dr. Bunting: It is E pet store. Mrs. Sobolewski: Do they keep pets there overnight? Dr. Bunting: Yes. J didn't spend a lot of time there but I thought they had puppies. I just stopped and gave them our card. Mrs. Cooper, 27541 Buckingham: The whole point is that the fish store is not behind our hot se. Our concern is the trash. We have a rat problem as it is and I cont care to add to it. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nacy, the commercial trash people - they are allowed to have the City pick ul ten gallons of garbage per week. 1lr. Nagy: Provided tley do not have to go on private property. 'rs. Sobolewski: I jtst have one more thought. I don't know if the neighbors have 4 thorouchly convinced me that they are against this operation but that they axe against the garbage. If he was a barber or a tailor, he would have txssh. I think trash is the problem and I think you do have a problem. 7718 Mr. Cooper: I don' t think this is the ame type of trash that you would get with a barb )r or a tailor. -'Dr. Bunting: It's n )t that big a thing, believe me. IMr. Kluver: If there is an existing pet store in that shopping center I would person illy like to know the nature of the contents of that particular store, I think it has a bearing on this petition. I suggest that we ascertain by site review and investigate the fish and/or pet store to proper y determine what the contents of that store is and what is being done it that facility. Perhaps when that' question is answered we can better look at this petition with a more objective viewpoint. Mrs. Scurto: That i ; not going to change my opinion. I believe the service is despara tely needed. My concern is that dog being walked, carried, whatevi)r, back from the car where people, children, etc. , are being Brough : into the shopping center, carried into this facility and walked out la :er. I appreciate the fact that they may not be in a bad frame of mind but I am concerned that it_wouldn't take too many bad-framed animal:; before we had the problem of biting. I don't think the entrails colleced will be that much of a problem the way the doctor explained it but I don't see any way of getting those dogs and cats to and from the facili :y without endangering peoples' lives. Dr. Bunting: This has never been a problem in our other shops. We would be liable if someone is bitten. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-5-2-15 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto and seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 22, 1982 on Petition 82-5-2-15 by Animal Healthy Services, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to locate a veterinary clinic within a shopping center located on the northwest corner of Schoolcraft and Inkster Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 24, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-5-2-15 be denied for the following reasons: (1) Tlie petitioner has failed to demonstrate thatthis proposal complies with all of the specific and general standards contained is Sections 11.03 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. (2) Si ch use is incompatible with and detrimental to the surrounding u: es in the shopping center due to the nature of veterinary clinics aid their dealings with diseased animals. (3) Ti ere is no evidence to substantiate that there will be separate refuse disposal facilities for animal waste products and adequate s( und proofing and ventilating systems to prevent noise and odors f_ om permeating the surrounding area. FURTHEI RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in accordrnce with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amei ded. 7719 Mr. Zimmer: Dog ani cat grooming facil' ties keep them for a number of hours. Are they p -rmitted uses; could you put them in there? Mr. Nagy: Yes, it is a general commercial district. `Mr. Andrew: I, for one, support Mr. Kluver - to find out whether there is a pet store in the : shopping center and to investigate his office in Madison Heights. And, I think he has proven that he has complied with the general standards of the Ordinance. How long is your lease? Dr. Bunting: One yezr. Mr. Andrew: With az option to renew? Dr. Bunting: Yes. Mr. Andrew: How long? Dr. Bunting: For an additional year. Mr. Andrew: Any after that? Dr. Bunting: No, we have an option to negotiate. Mr. Kluver: On the question of the pet store - I as one would like to table this until these questions can be resolved and until we can make an objective recom- mendation. I can't objectively vote on this petition at this time. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, it was 4#6-109-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 22, 1982 on Petition 82-5-2-15 as submitted by Animal Healthy Services, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to locate a veterinary clinic within a shopping center located on the northwest corner of*Schoolcraft and Inkster Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 24, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 82-5-2-15 until the study meeting to be conducted on June 29, 1982 Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-6-2-16 by Marathon OiL Company requesting waiver use approval to construct a self- serve gas Station on the northwest corner of Five Mile and Merriman Roads in the Southec'St 1/4 of Section 15. Mr. Nagy: There is E letter in the file from the Police Department dated 6/22/82 indicating the possible exposure of vehicles to rear-end collisions when negotiatinc a. left turn from Merriman into the proposed facility while waiting for approaching traffic to clear. There is also a letter from Donald Showerman, Showerman' Party Store, offering his objection to the proposal, and a letter from the F- re Marshal stating they have no objection to the location of this structure z- s shown on the site plan. There is a letter from the Engineering Division Mr. Andrew: itdicating that there appears to be no engineering problems connected with this proposal. Nothitg from the Wayne County Road Commission? 4 Mr. Nagy: They palled and said they would get it to us but we do not have it tonight. 7720 William Brashear, 329')0 Five Mile Road, Livonia 48154: I have a couple representatives here. The representatives introduced them selves as Robert Shoupe, 2034 Windsor Place, Findlay Jhio, representing Ma'athon Oil Company, and Don Tremile representing Speedway. 'Mr. Brashear: We filed additional drawings with the City Planner pursuant to discussion at the study session. He tells us the sign is too large for the regula- tions n the area so we have a new sign which conforms which we would like t( submit. We also submitted another site plan. There is a slight error on it in that the drawings show that the site ends 95' south of the north property line where, in fact, our original drawing was correct in that it ends 100' from the church property so as to conform to the require- ment to be 100' from church property. This gives us a slight deficiency. We are about 100 square feet short in area of the 22,500 square foot requirement. We feel it more reasonable to request a variance on the small shortage in area than on the 100' requirement from the church. This is a petition to put a self serve gas station on the site. Marathon acquired this site in 1970 when they disposed of the site on Farmington and Five Mile to the City. They immediately open a station on that site but the stEtion they opened involved a portion of the property owned by Mr. Showernan so the station was partly on their property. The lease expired after ten years and they had to tear down the station but never intended to abandon the site but I think technically there was an abandonment of the use, so we lave come back with a new waiver use petition and have the requistite number of signatures - 65%. This will be a smaller building and there will be an air compressor. That has been added to the site plan. There are drawincs of the light installations you asked for. ThQ. drawings of the building has been revised. There was a little error before and we didn't show tie door on the outside to the restroom. There will be no vending on the premises except cigaretts. ti Hr. Andrew: The entrance to the toilet room is on the north. side of the structure. t Mr. Brashear: That is correct. Mr. Andrew: Does the operator or attendant have to go outside in order to go to the toilet facility? Mr. Brashear: No, there is a door on the inside. We are having to ask for some variances on this and I understand this will have to be tabled until we go to the Zoning Board of Appeals to seek the variances. Mr. Andrew: We canrpt approve a petition that is in violation of the Zoning Ordinance as far 3s area and setbacks. For that reason, we will conclude the public hearinc and then table it until you have gone to the Zoning Board of Appeals then bring it back for another meeting. Mr. Zimmer: I happened to be driving by what looked like a similar building on Ten Mile ar3 Novi Road. They had a bunch of stuff on the roof. It looked obscene . I just wondered if that is what we will have here. Mr. Shoupe: That it our air conditioning. 11:lr. Zimmer: It is almost as big as the building. It looked terrible. Could you put a screen around it. Everthing else was streamlined; red, white and blue, then this gross metal mess on the roof. I . Shoupe: We couli put a screen around it. 7721 Mr. Kluver: This site will encompass t',e canopy-type roof? r. Shoupe. Yes, 2i' x 55' . '�Mr. Kluver: One or two. Mr. Shoupe: Two caiopies, 25' x 55' . Mr. Kluver: I woull like to have the most available and latest traffic count on the inters 'ction of Five Mile and Merriman; the peak hours in the morning and evening. Also, in view of the tardiness of the Wayne County Road Commis ;ion in getting their facts together, I would appreciate it if the staff :ould make an overlay of that corner going as far east on Five Mile as the Merribowl and as far west as the second residential home and in both directions north and south on Merriman showing the number of curb cuts of Five Mile and Merriman Roads. Mr. Vyhnalek: Is Merriman going to be widened between Five Mile and Eight Mile? Mr. Nagy: It is in the Six Year Capital Improvement Program. Mr. Vyhnalek: That could affect this intersection. Mr. Nagy: Correc . Mr. Falk: Why di,i they want 100' on that northerly portion next to the Church? Mr. Brashear: The original plan showed 95' . WE need 100' . Mrs. Scurto: Is the landscaping detailed? Discussion was held ou the landscaping and Mr. Bakewell explained the landscape plan to the Commission. , There was no one else present wishing to be heard Agarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-6-.2-16 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted, it was #6-110-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 22, 1982 on Petition 82-6-2-16 as submitted by Marathon Oil Company requesting waiver use approva to construct a self-serve gas station on the northwest corner of Five Mile a Merriman Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 15, the City Planning Col mission does hereby determine to table Petition 82=6-2-16 pending action on t' is matter by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer and seconded by Mr. Kluver, it was RESOLVED th t, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 25, 1982 on Petition 82-5-2-12 as submitted by A-1 Transmission, Inc. requesting waiver use approva . to enlarge an existing auto transmission repair and replacement + building uses located on the southwest corner of Eight Mile and Middlebelt Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-5-2-12 be denied for the following reasons: 7722 (1) T'ie petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the proposed use is in compliance with all of the special and general waiver use standards contained in Section 16.11 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance 4 # i43, as amended. 1 (2) Tie proposed use would overburden the site, thus necessitating an a ternate means of storing or parking vehicles off-site. (3) TLe subject site does not have the capacity to support the proposed expansion of this waiver use. (4) Tie proposed use will be incompatible with and detrimental to the sn rrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in accord ince 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: Kluvor, Naidow, Zimmer, Andrew NAYS: Morrow, Scurto, Sobolewski, Vyhnalek, Falk ABSENT: None Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the resolution fails. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski and seconded by Mrs. Scurto, it was I#6-111-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 25, 1982 on Petition 82-5-2-12 as submitted by A-1 Transmission, Inc. , requesting waiver use ,approval to enlarge an existing auto transmission repair and replacement building and uses located on the southwest corner of Eight Mile and Middlebolt Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-5-2-12 be approved subject to the following condlOons: (1) that the Site and Landscape Plan marked '81D561, dated 6/11/82, as revised, prepared by Affiliated Engineers, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that tie floor plan and building elevation plan revised 12/28/81, marked 81D561, Sheet 2, prepared by Affiliated Engineering, Inc. , which s hereby approved shall be adhered to; (3) that t le additional landscaping shown on the approved Site and Landscape Plan siall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter permanently maintained; and (4) that tie dumpster enclosure as delineated on the approved Site and Landscape Plan shall be constructed using concrete block painted to match the material and color of the building wall to which it is to be attached; for the fol owing reasons: (1) The suaject site has the capacity to support the proposed use. ti (2) The pr >posed use will be compatible to and in harmony with thesurrouiding uses in the area. 7723 (3) The petitioner has demonstrated that the proposed use will not over- burden the site because of the additional vehicular parking areas being availa')1e. lit (4) The proposal does comply with the requirements and standards of Zoning Ordina ice #543, as amended. (5) The petitioner has upgraded the site from its original state and no compla nts about the existing business have been received from the neighb )rs in the area. (6) The petitioner, being fully aware of this Board's concern regarding a possLble parking problem on the site, has submitted a letter from March ''ower Tools, Inc. , outlining a mutual agreement in giving the petitioner access to the driveway for access to an additional eight parkinij spaces located on the south side of the petitioner's property. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Secti6n 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution res 'lted in the following: AYES: Morrow, Scurto, Sobolewski, Vyhnalek, Falk NAYS: Kluvor, Naidow, Zimmer, Andrew ABSENT: None Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Naidow and unanimously adopted, it was #6-112-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #1567, the City Planning Commission does hereby • recommend to the City Council that Petitioh 82-6-8-11 as submitted by Nathan Levine requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 in connection with a proposal to remodel an existing building located within the shopping center at the northeast corner of Plymouth and Middlebolt Roads in Section 35, be approved subject to the follow- ing conditi ms: (1) that F oor Plan #83-15, dated 6/14/82, prepared by Nathan Levine & Asso •iates, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (2) that tie Storefront Plan #83.15, dated 6/21/82, prepared by Nathan Levine & Associates, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, it was #6-113-82 RESOLVED teat, the minutes of the 434th Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on June 8, 1982 are approved. 11::r. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 7724 On a motion duly made seconded and unanim3usly adopted, the 435th Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commir;aion on June 22, 1982 was adjourned at 4 10:45 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION _.„-/--- c: Jo4eph J. Falk,/Secretary /, Ci �- ATTEST: C��'(li1 ;--7e- --e--(7--- Daniel R. And -ew, Chairman s t t d