HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2017-12-12 MINUTES OF THE 1,115th PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
On Tuesday, December 12, 2017, the City Planning Commission of the City of
Livonia held its 1,115th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City
Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Ian Wilshaw, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Members present: Sam Caramagno Glen Long Betsy McCue
Carol Smiley Kevin Priddy Peter Ventura
Ian Wilshaw
Members absent: None
Mr. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, and Ms. Margie Watson, Program
Supervisor, were also present.
Chairman Wilshaw informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda
involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City
Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and make the final
determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning
Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or
vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City
Council for the final determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected. If a
petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan approval is denied tonight, the
petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City
Council. Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Commission become effective
seven (7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning Commission and the
professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their filing. The staff
has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions, which
the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the
proceedings tonight.
ITEM #1 PETITION 2017-11-02-15 BJ'S SDM LICENSE
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2017-
11-02-15 submitted by BJ's Restaurant, Inc. requesting waiver
use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(r) of the City of Livonia
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to utilize an SDM liquor
license (sale of packaged beer and wine) in connection with the
operations of a full-service restaurant (BJ's Restaurant &
Brewhouse) at 19470 Haggerty Road, located on the east side of
Haggerty Road between Seven Mile and Eight Mile Roads in the
Southwest 1/4 of Section 6.
December 12, 2017
28384
Mr. Taormina: This is a request to utilize an SDM liquor license in connection
with the opening of a new full-service restaurant, BJ's restaurant
and Brewhouse. This is the site of the former Champps
Americana restaurant located on Haggerty Road. It was on May
22 of this year, following the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, that the City Council granted site plan and waiver
use approval for the new restaurant building to replace the former
Champps restaurant. I understand it is currently in the process of
being demolished. BJ's offers its own selection of craft beer that
will be available to customers for consumption on the premises
under the approved Class C Liquor License that was previously
owned and operated by Champps and transferred to BJ's as part
of the sale of that property. Having the SDM license would allow
BJ's to sell packaged beer and wine products for consumption off
the premises. BJ's has indicated that the primary use of the
license at this location will be limited to BJ's brand of microbrews
and six packs, growlers and kegs. At this time, the craft beer
products under BJ's label would be manufactured at a different
location and would be shipped to the Livonia site for sale. The
available microbrews would be in bottles and cans and would be
displayed in a case located near the restaurant's takeout area.
There are two special requirements that apply to these types of
licenses. One is that they cannot be located without 500 feet of a
similar licensed establishment. In this case the closest SDM
licensed business is the Brass Mug Party Store which is located
at Newburgh and Seven Mile Roads, almost a mile away. So it
complies with that provision of the ordinance. Secondly, there is
requirement that the SDM-licensed establishment not be within
400 feet of any church or school building. No church or school
buildings exists within 400 feet of the subject restaurant. With
that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the departmental
correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Yes. I believe we have a number of items.
Mr. Taormina: There are several items of correspondence. The first item is from
the Engineering Division, dated November 17, 2017, which reads
as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering
Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no
objections to the waiver use at this time. The existing parcel is
assigned the address of#19470 Haggerty. The submitted legal
description appears to be correct and should be used in
conjunction with this petition. The existing building is currently
serviced by public water main, sanitary sewer and storm sewer.
Should renovations to the building require alterations to the
existing services, drawings will need to be submitted to this
department to determine if permits will be required. Also, should
December 12, 2017
28385
the owner need to complete work within the Haggerty Road right-
of-way, permits from the Wayne County Department of Public
Services will be required."The letter is signed by David W. Lear,
P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the
Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated November 22, 2017, which
reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted
in connection with a request to utilize a SDM liquor license (sale
of packaged beer and wine) in connection with the operations of
a full-service restaurant (BJ's Restaurant & Brewhouse) on
property located at the above referenced address. We have no
objections to this proposal."The letter is signed by Keith Bo, Fire
Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated
December 5, 2017, which reads as follows: "I have reviewed the
plans in connection with the petition. I have no objections to the
proposal." The letter is signed by Brian Leigh, Sergeant, Traffic
Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Special Services Division of
Police, dated December 4, 2017, which reads as follows: "We
reviewed the plans submitted by BJ's Restaurant, Inc., requesting
waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(r) of the City of
Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to utilize an SDM
liquor license (sale of packaged beer & wine) in connection with
the operations of a full-service restaurant (BJ's Restaurant &
Brewhouse) located at 19470 Haggerty Road, on the east side
of Haggerty Road between Seven Mile and Eight Mile Roads in
the southwest quarter of Section 6. After reviewing the plans with
the Chief of Police, we have no objections to the waiver being
granted, contingent that the petitioner complies with All State
Laws, City Ordinances, Stipulations and conditions set by the
Livonia Police Department, Liquor Investigation Unit, as
approved by the Chief of Police, Stipulations and conditions set
by the Traffic Bureau of the Livonia Police Department. We are
available to provide any additional information you may desire on
this subject." The letter is signed by Jeffrey Ronayne, Special
Services Bureau. The fifth letter is from the Inspection
Department, dated December 8, 2017, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request, the above-referenced petition has
been reviewed. This Department has no objection to this petition."
The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Director of Inspection. The
sixth letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated November
16, 2017, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your
request, the Treasurer's Office has reviewed the address
connected with the above noted petition. At this time, there are
no outstanding amounts receivable for taxes. Therefore, I have
no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Lynda
Scheel, Treasurer. The seventh letter is from the Finance
Department, dated November 16, 2017, which reads as follows:
"I have reviewed the addresses connected with the above noted
December 12, 2017
28386
petition. As there are no outstanding amounts receivable, general
or water and sewer, I have no objections to the proposal." The
letter is signed by Coline Coleman, Chief Accountant. The next
letter is from Gary Bloom, dated November 24, 2017, which reads
as follows: "I will not be in attendance at the meeting on Tuesday,
December 12, 2017, concerning the above petition from BJ's
Restaurant, Inc. However, I want you to know that I am the owner
of the historic building and received a notice that there will be a
public hearing. I enclose a copy of that notice for your reference.
I want you to know that I fully support BJ's Restaurant, Inc.
requesting waiver use approval of a liquor license in connection
with the operation of the full-service restaurant at 19470 Haggerty
Road, Livonia, Michigan."The letter is signed by Gary M. Bloom,
39040 W. Seven Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan 48152. That is the
extent of the correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Seeing none,
the petitioner is here. Ms. Leguay, would you like to come
forward?
Joan Leguay, BJ's Restaurant, Inc., 7755 Center Avenue, Suite 300, Huntington
Beach, California 92647. Hello again. I'm glad to be here again
tonight in another climate. I've seen summer, spring, fall, and
now winter. I'm here tonight to answer any questions you might
have and ask your support. Actually, it was just an oversight. I
thought I was applying for this initially. When I recognized that we
hadn't covered this part of our application, I contacted Mark and
made this submittal. We'd just would like the opportunity to be
able to sell our own. We only package six of our micro brews. We
put them in a display case in six packs. I think you've all seen a
photo of what it looks like. It's an attractive display case. We also
offer growlers and kegs if you want to go to the bartender and ask
for one. We don't advertise it, so it's not a huge part of our
business but when people enjoy our beer, we like to give them an
opportunity to take some home.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. I appreciate that. Is there any questions for our
petitioner?
Mr. Priddy: Good evening. This is consistent with all the other restaurants
that do you?
Ms. Leguay: It is.
Mr. Priddy: It's not unique just to this location?
•
Ms. Leguay: Not at all. No.
December 12, 2017
28387
Mr. Priddy: Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Caramagno: A couple questions for you. So if you order a keg from the
bartender, what do you do? Roll it out the front door and throw it
in the back of the station wagon?
Ms. Leguay: I think they would carry it out for you.
Mr. Caramagno: Right out the front door or do you have to go out back to get it?
Ms. Leguay: I think they'd go out the front door. I don't think they'd take
anybody through the kitchen. Well, they might ask you to pull your
car around. They might do that actually because the keg storage
is in the kitchen, now that you say that. Maybe they would walk it
out and carry it to your car. I'm not sure.
Mr. Caramagno: Okay. And then secondly, I see the building is starting to be
knocked down. Yesterday it looked like it was about half down
when I drove by. So you're making progress already. When would
you expect to be open?
Ms. Leguay: It generally takes us about six months until we open the doors. I
would say June opening or maybe late Mary or early June
opening.
Mr. Caramagno: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Caramagno. I think you've identified that they
have curbside service. Is there any other questions for our
petitioner? Seeing none, is there anybody in the audience that
wishes to speak for or against this item? Seeing no one coming
forward, I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion.
On a motion by McCue, seconded by Ventura, and unanimously adopted, it was
#12-75-2017 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on December 12, 2017, on
2017-11-02-15 submitted by BJ's Restaurant, Inc. requesting
waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(r) of the City of
Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to utilize an SDM
liquor license (sale of packaged beer and wine) in connection with
the operations of a full-service restaurant (BJ's Restaurant &
Brewhouse) at 19470 Haggerty Road, located on the east side of
Haggerty Road between Seven Mile and Eight Mile Roads in the
Southwest 1/4 of Section 6, which property is zoned C-2, the
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
December 12, 2017
28388
Council that Petition 2017-11-02-15 be approved subject to the
following condition:
SDM sales for consumption off the premises shall be
restricted to BJ's brand of beer and wine products including,
but not limited to, bottles, cans, growlers and kegs.
Subject to the preceding condition, this petition is approved for
the following reasons:
1. That the proposed use of an SDM liquor license at this
location complies with all the special and general waiver use
standards and requirements as set forth in Sections 11.03
and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; and
2. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the
proposed SDM liquor license.
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. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution.
ITEM #2 PETITION 2016-03-08-03 KROGER COMPANY
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2016-
03-08-03 submitted by The Project Collaborative, on behalf of
The Kroger Company of Michigan, requesting a one-year
extension of the plans in connection with a proposal to demolish
the existing gas station and construct a new fueling facility at
31338 Five Mile Road, located on the northeast corner of Five
Mile Road and Merriman Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 14.
Mr. Taormina: This is a request for a one-year extension of all the plans that
were previously approved involving the construction of the new
Kroger fueling facility at the corner of Five Mile and Merriman
Roads. The City Council granted approval back in June for the
new fueling station. Subsequent to that, the petitioner obtained
all of the necessary permits and was tentatively scheduled to
begin construction. However, issues with DTE involving rerouting
the power to the site have caused delays and that pushed the
scheduled construction start date to next spring. For that reason,
December 12, 2017
28389
the petitioner is requesting a one-year extension of the site plan.
Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina: There is no additional correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Very good. Thank you. And we have our petitioner here.
Matthew Pisko, The Project Collaborative, 37704 Hills Tech Drive, Farmington
Hills, Michigan 48331. I think I've been to 500 of the 1,100
meetings. I appreciate your consideration. If you have any
questions, I'd be glad to answer them.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? As we
understand it, you're requesting an extension because of a DTE
delay.
Mr. Pisko: That's correct, and we didn't want to enter into winter
construction. So April commencement, which is going to have to
happen because our building permit will expire in the month of
April. Everything is in order at this juncture with DTE.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. If there are no additional questions, and there's
no one else in the audience wishing to speak for or against this
item. With that, a motion would be in order.
On a motion by Priddy, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was
#12-76-2017 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2016-03-08-03
submitted by The Project Collaborative, on behalf of The Kroger
Company of Michigan, requesting a one-year extension of the
plans in connection with a proposal to demolish the existing gas
station and construct a new fueling facility at 31338 Five Mile
Road, located on the northeast corner of Five Mile Road and
Merriman Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 14, be approved
subject to the following conditions:
1. That the request for a one-year extension of site plan
approval by The Project Collaborative, on behalf of The
Kroger Company of Michigan, in a letter dated November 6,
2017, is hereby approved; and
2. That all conditions imposed by Council Resolution #227-16
in connection with Petition 2016-03-08-03, which permitted
the demolition of the existing gas station and construct a
December 12, 2017
28390
new fueling facility at 31338 Five Mile Road, shall remain in
effect to the extent that they are not in conflict with the
foregoing condition.
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution.
ITEM #3 PETITION 2017-10-01-07 FELDMAN AUTOMOTIVE
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2017-
; 10-01-07 submitted by Feldman Automotive, Inc., pursuant to
Section 23.01 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as
amended, requesting to rezone the rear portion of the property at
33850 Plymouth Road, located on the north side of Plymouth
Road between Farmington and Stark Roads in the Southeast 1/4
of Section 28, from M-1 (Light Manufacturing) to C-2 (General
Business).
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. We'll first ask that this item be removed from the table.
It was tabled at our last meeting. Is there a motion for that?
On a motion by Smiley, seconded by McCue, and unanimously adopted, it was
#12-77-2017 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 2017, on
Petition 2017-10-01-07 submitted by Feldman Automotive, Inc.,
pursuant to Section 23.01 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance
#543, as amended, requesting to rezone the rear portion of the
property at 33850 Plymouth Road, located on the north side of
Plymouth Road between Farmington and Stark Roads in the
Southeast 14 of Section 28, from M-1 to C-2, the Planning
Commission does hereby remove this item from the table.
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and this item is removed
from the table. With that, Mr. Taormina, is there any new
information?
Mr. Taormina: There is no new information.
Mr. Wilshaw: Our petitioner is here tonight.
Dave Katarski, Chief Operating Officer, Feldman Automotive. Yes, sir. How are
you? It's good to see you guys all again. Just here obviously
tonight to see if there's any lingering questions. Obviously, we've
been to the planning sessions and the last meeting and just want
to hopefully move forward with this project. We're excited about
December 12, 2017
28391
it. Our business is strong in Livonia. We really like doing business
here and want to grow in the community. We think this is not only
the best use for this property but we're really excited about it. So
we want to employ some more people and generate some more
tax revenue and take a piece of property that we think is going to
be a great spot for us. Just want to see if there's any other
questions or anything that you guys had that I could answer.
Mr. Wilshaw: Let's see. Thank you, Mr. Katarski, for that. Because this is an
item that was tabled, we already had a public hearing so we're
certainly aren't going to go through the entire presentation again.
Are there any questions?
Ms. Smiley: Where are all your vehicles now? Are they throughout the city or
are they outside of the city?
Mr. Katarski: They are in the city. They are in a number of spots. We're renting
from some businesses that are obviously no longer in business
along Plymouth Road. We've got about 450 cars right now off
site. We're probably at the lower water level right now as far as
where we've been because of the production cycles. We had at
one point this summer 800 cars around just because that was the
high water level. They are currently right along Plymouth Road
and Merriman Road as well. We have a site there off of Merriman
Road.
Ms. Smiley: Would you expect that if this were to go through that you would
have all your vehicles that are wherever at this one location?
Mr. Katarski: I can answer that two ways. First and foremost, the cash
investment that we've made to buy this property is for the
business of the 800-Preowned. We're going to build a state of the
art building like we did in Waterford. It's going to be a nice
building. I want to make sure that that's clear and that everyone
understands that. That is the intention. We didn't buy this frontage
on this road to store cars. So the first part of this is business.
Obviously, it's a big parcel, so we're going to have the back part
where we're going to have some inventory and where we do plan
to store some cars obviously arranged neatly, professionally and
to order. I want to make sure that that's clear. We're not buying
this, spending the money on this piece of property to technically
store cars. This is a business where we're going to retail cars,
and it just so happens that there is some use with that back part
where we can actually store some of the inventory as well.
Ms. Smiley: That would be new and used, pre-owned?
December 12, 2017
28392
Mr. Katarski: It would be pre-owned for the business that we're building there
and new vehicles, new Chevys for the store right down the street.
Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Smiley: Thank you.
Mr. Priddy: You said that you want to make it clear that it was just for the 800
cars, which my understanding is it's just for . . . they're not new
cars obviously. They're pre-owned. But then you said, you
followed on with that saying it would be open to storing new
vehicles in the back.
Mr. Katarski: Yes, sir. It's a large parcel. So we're going to have the 800-
Preowned business where we'll have 200 to 250 for sale
preowned vehicles that will be for that business. And then we
anticipate with that back storage to be able to store 400 to 600
probably at times new Chevys for our location down the street.
We've just outgrown that location which obviously is a great thing.
Business is really good. That store has grown in your community
here. It's going to finish the year in the top five Chevy stores in
the country. It was a store that was quite frankly, GM was, before
we got involved, was shut down. Tennyson was going to lose the
business and we partnered with them and obviously you saw the
investment we put into that facility. It's one of the nicest stores.
GM shoots commercials there. It's a very nice store, and we've
turned it around and made a very good business we feel for your
community and we want to do the same with this location. That's
our goal. I hope that answers your question. We're not buying this
property to store cars. Believe me. It's a big investment for us.
We're looking to generate another 200 used car sales out of this
location.
Mr. Priddy: The question then would be for all that acreage, you have 10
acres roughly. How many of those acres are you thinking would
be dedicated for the 800 used cars as opposed to new storage,
let's say.
Mr. Katarski: Look at the building we're going to build on the frontage, 5,000 to
7,500 square feet building showroom. And then space for 250.
That's kind of our planning right now. Obviously, if it grows, it
could grow to 300, 400 used cars. You look at what we're selling
out of that. We've got a pretty good idea of what we think we can
do out of there. I think 250 to 350 used cars is what we would
need to store there for the 800-Preowned business.
December 12, 2017
28393
Mr. Priddy: Okay. Now is that in conjunction with the Tennyson or is the 250
just the 800? You'd also be selling out of the other location down
the road.
Mr. Katarski: Yes, sir. Business is normal at the Chevy store. Nothing would
change. This would quite frankly in a lot of ways help us present
that store even more. We do the best we can shuffling cars
around and keeping customers, but we are busting at the seams
at that location. If you've seen any of our other stores around,
you've seen what we've done there. We pride ourselves on
having world class facilities, making them stand tall, look nice. I'll
be honest with you. We don't like having our cars scattered
around at businesses down Plymouth Road. We really don't. If
there's anything I could say, I would love to be able to open
another business in your community, employ some more people,
generate some more tax revenue, and then really just have
something that looks good. This was a site that, I believe you
were in a couple of the earlier meetings, this was a site that kind
of by your guidance you directed us to. We had another parcel
across from Thomas' that we were looking at. From your advice,
you guys guided us to this one because it was always and has
always been a car dealership and it's been obviously, I don't want
to call it an eyesore, but it's been a vacant lot along Plymouth
Road for a while now. It's been for sale for a long time. With your
kind of direction, we thought it would be a great idea to build
another business there.
Mr. Priddy: Let's talk about the storage of those new vehicles. Are these only
for the store in Livonia or are there going to be other stores'?
Mr. Katarski: Only for the store in Livonia, yes. Obviously, that would be our
business model, but then also GM would only allow us to store
because of our franchise laws, we could not store other vehicles.
Mr. Priddy: So you're not going to be storing for other people or anything like
that?
Mr. Katarski: No. Not at all. Nor will we have service vehicles down there. We
won't have lease turn in. None of that. All of that we're going to
keep on our franchised site. This will be purely an 800-Pre-owned
business, retail merchandise, and then the overflow of new cars
arranged neatly and stored properly.
Mr. Priddy: I visited the site a couple times in the last few weeks. It's an
expansive site. There is a gate and some asphalt and something
that's there currently.
Mr. Katarski: Yes.
December 12, 2017
28394
Mr. Priddy: Just kind of given me an idea of relative . . . how far do you think
the 800 business would envelope currently? Probably to the
woods or maybe the fence?
Mr. Katarski: It's going to go back a good ways because of the way I think to
look and obviously we'd get into the planning and the zoning and
everything. But the way Plymouth Road and other businesses
are, we would have most likely the building closer to the street to
look uniform with the rest of Plymouth Road and address that. So
a lot of their inventory subsequently would be behind the store
with customer parking in the front. And then behind that is where
we would ideally store the existing vehicles.
Mr. Priddy: Have you looked at other locations just to store new inventory
rather than combining the two?
Mr. Katarski: Oh, yeah. Again, the storing of the inventory is secondary. We're
currently storing these cars in your community. They're there
now. Probably not the way you want them and we don't like
renting from a shut down restaurant. We want those to be filled
with other businesses like ourselves coming in, but that's where
the vehicles are currently being stored.
Mr. Priddy: I think at the last meeting there was some talk about phase one.
Is phase one like saying the current to 200 - 250 is the 800 used
cars, and if it grew, you'd grow bigger. Is that what I'm
understanding?
Mr. Katarski: I think, Trey, may have when you were talking about the phasing
may have . . .
Mr. Priddy: It's not really a phase then.
Mr. Katarski: No. It's not. What I would say is, I mean, we would love to grow
this business to where we're selling 500-600 used cars out of
there. That's not out of the realm of possibility. This is a great
community. When you look at what us and what Bill Brown, Ford
and Chevy store, you're talking about two of the biggest
businesses for Ford and Chevy, respectively, in the country in
your community. Heck, we might be able to sell 500, 600 used
cars out of this location. That would be awesome.
Mr. Priddy: Thank you.
Ms. Smiley: Just for clarification. You're not selling 800 cars. The name of
your pre-owned business is 800-Preowned.
December 12, 2017
28395
Mr. Katarski: Correct. It's Feldman 800-Preowned. It's the url and it's what we
brand the store.
Ms. Smiley: But there's not going to be 800 cars there. There will probably be
about how many?
Mr. Katarski: There will be 250 used cars and then like I said, maybe some
over flow, the storage of the new cars. So, no, I wouldn't . . . I
mean if the business grew. Yeah, if the business grew, we could
potentially have that, but again, it would be stored in accordance
with the way we store all of our vehicles, neatly, properly.
> II
Ms. Smiley: I m sure. I was just saying, I don't want people confused that your
800-Preowned cars, you don't have 800 preowned cars. That's
your business name.
Mr. Katarski: It's the phone number. 800-Preowned is the phone number. The
URL is 800-Preowned.
Ms. Smiley: And these are typically lease cars. Would that be fair to say'?
Mr. Katarski: Yes, ma'am, and I think we showed you some of the pictures
overhead of our existing location. We are not a B lot type. This is
a very late model, the current model to a couple year older
vehicles. We don't do buy here, pay here. We're not going to have
the thing out there with $500 cars and things like that. That's not
what we do. We are going to be more late model, very
professional business. If you check our reviews, our facilities,
you'll find that's the way we operate.
Ms. Smiley: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: I also want to note that Mr. Priddy was the member that was not
at our previous voting meeting which is why he had a number of
questions to ask, which is excellent.
Mr. Katarski: They're great questions. That's why we're here.
Mr. Ventura: Mr. Chairman, I'm a little confused now. This is a 10-acre site.
And based on the drawing that's on the board, the sales portion
of this appears to be roughly 300 by 300 or is this misrepresented
in some way?
Mr. Katarski: As far as the building?
December 12, 2017
28396
Mr. Ventura: No. The site itself is 340 feet width and there's a dimension on
here from the road line to the back of what appears to be the back
of the sales area and certainly to the rear of the 5,500 square feet
building, not 7,500 square feet building. So that's about 90,000
square feet which is just a shade over two acres out of 10 acres.
So then, in fact, 8 acres of this are devoted to storage.
Mr. Katarski: Do you want to speak to the drawings? I don't have the drawings
in front of me. So the building . . . .
Mr. Taormina: If I may, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, Mr. Taormina.
Mr. Taormina: I think the line that Mr. Ventura is referring to is actually the
distinction between the C-2 zoning on the property, which is the
southerly 300 feet of the property, and then the area to the north,
which is the subject of the zoning petition. So that's really the
zoning boundary. If the property is rezoned and the entire site
becomes C-2, then what I'm hearing from the petitioner is the
area within that rear storage lot or the rear portion of the site, that
line between the cars being retailed from this location would vary.
It may be 250 cars; it may be 300 cars; it may be 350 cars. So
that line would move up and down depending on sales and
inventory, the difference between the preowned operation and
then the surplus inventory that he has for down the street. Is that
accurate?
Mr. Katarski: Yeah. I couldn't see it in front of me, so I apologize as far as the
line that you were talking about. When you put it up here, it does
look like that was the boundary for it. And to answer your question
on the building, we've had some conversations even with you
guys as far as I think one of you suggested maybe a wider
building. We know we have to have a minimum of the 5,500
footprint. So that's where we're at and again, just sort of the basis
for the building. That's what we operate out of in Waterford, a little
bit over 5,500 square foot building. Hopefully, that answers your
question.
Mr. Ventura: Yes, it does.
Mr. Katarski: When you look at 250 retail spots to hold cars, we're going to
need a big chunk of that frontage to do that.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any other questions, Mr. Ventura?
Mr. Ventura: No, that does it.
December 12, 2017
28397
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay.
Mr. Caramagno: I had a question for you. Early on you mentioned that you're going
to buy this property or you've bought this property. I know you've
got money invested in it, but you bought or you're going to buy
this property?
Mr. Katarski: Oh, I mean, we're under contract. Yeah, we're pending.
Mr. Caramagno: So your purchase is pending the approval of this process.
Mr. Katarski: Sure. Absolutely.
Mr. Caramagno: Okay. I thought you said you bought the property already, but
you're in agreement to buy it.
Mr. Katarski: Yes, sir. We're in agreement. We've done all the obviously the
test phase one, phase two and we're going through all that. We're
just waiting for the approval to move forward because we'd love
to do this.
Mr. Caramagno: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: One thing I just want to point out for my fellow Commissioners
and even the audience, this is a zoning petition that's before us.
Really what we're looking at tonight is the zoning of the rear
property, which is currently M-1, to C-2. Any site plans that we're
looking at or building envelopes or parking lot configurations are
purely conceptual at this point.
Mr. Katarski: Yes, sir.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any other questions?
} Mr. Ventura: Chairman, I'd like to respond to your comment. As you know, I
was the person that presented the denying resolution the last time
around. You've made an excellent presentation, and I thank you
for that. And you appear to be an asset to the community.
However, I haven't changed my mind. And I'll tell you why. There
are a number of considerations and I guess the fact that if you
drive Plymouth Road between Inkster and Newburgh, there are
currently 16 places to buy a car. This would be the 17th. As the
land use that fronts on Plymouth Road currently stands, there are
over 44 acres of car dealerships. Another 10 acres is a lot to ask.
So, from a land use standpoint, there is no shortage of places
where Livonia residents and residents from any surrounding
December 12, 2017
28398
community can come to acquire an automobile. Also, you
currently have the largest single site on the strip with seven acres.
Nobody else has a site that big. So you're already the top dog in
terms of a single site. Now, there are others. You mentioned Bill
Brown. He's got two or three sites and if we aggregate what
Brown's got, he's right up there with you.
Mr. Katarski: Yes, sir.
Mr. Ventura: All that said, as a member of the Planning Commission and as a
member of the Master Plan Steering Committee, I'm looking at
this from the perspective of what do we do with one of the last 10
acre parcels in town that's zoned industrial. And I can't get my
arms around making it into a parking lot, which is essentially what
this is. You're going to build a building there that's 5,500 square
feet. This site could accommodate hundreds of thousands of
square feet of industrial buildings or any other kind of building.
And the investment in dollars and resultant employment would
dwarf what you're talking about. I think at the last meeting you
talked about 20 to 30 employees. And that's not bad, okay? But
this 10-acre parcel would accommodate far more than that if it
were put to a different use. So, I forget who it was, Ms. McCue or
Ms. Smiley asked if you were storing these cars somewhere
already and the answer is yes. So what's new here? It's not
storage. It's the new Feldman retail.
Mr. Katarski: It's a business. Yes, sir.
Mr. Ventura: And as I've already said, we already have lots of places to buy a
used car or a new car in town. So, I guess I'm telling you why
can't support this. Not for any reason that I can say you're doing
something bad for the city. You're not. Okay. You're a successful
business in a successful community. I just can't, in good faith, say
that this 10-acre parcel ought to be another car dealership. Thank
you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Priddy: You said you had that 800-Preowned cars in Waterford also.
Mr. Katarski: Yes.
Mr. Priddy; I've driven by it earlier in the year when we were discussing it.
The question is, how big is that location?
Mr. Katarski: That location is just under six acres.
Mr. Priddy: Is that all devoted to preowned? There's no storage there.
December 12, 2017
28399
Mr. Katarski: Yeah. Obviously, there are cars there for the business. We have
about 350 to 400 cars there. We sell almost 200 a month there.
Mr. Priddy: So would there be about 350 used cars there?
Mr. Katarski: Yes, sir.
Mr. Priddy: And that's on six acres. So this one is 10 acres and we're talking
200 to 250. So it seems like we're trying to use it as a storage lot.
Mr. Katarski: The one difference too is Waterford operates a service facility
there as well. It was an existing building that we re-did so the
5,500 does not include the shop business. We are not proposing
putting bays at this location.
Mr. Long: Mr. Taormina, the front, the southern section of this parcel is
currently C-2 because it was a car dealership previously. Is that
correct?
Mr. Taormina: Yes. There were a few different operators of automobile
dealerships - Action Olds, Olson Olds.
Mr. Long: Okay. I just wanted to make sure I was correct on that. Then for
the petitioner, with the cars that you have stored in other places
around the city, do you secure those during off-hours?
Mr. Katarski: No, sir. It's a challenge. We're kind of at the mercy of the public if
you will. We've had some theft issues and vandalism issues on
cars off site at some of those places. Again, we want to operate
a business here. It's going to be dedicated to selling cars.
Mr. Long: Thank you.
Mr. Katarski: It's not a storage lot. It would be an expensive storage lot.
Trey Brice, Jaffe Raitt Heuer & Weiss, P.C., 27777 Franklin, Southfield, Michigan
48034. I'm Feldman's counsel. I just wanted to touch on a point
that Commission Long made, following up on Commissioner
Ventura's point which is good, but I want to make sure we have
a clarification. We're not talking about 10 acres of cars. The front
portion, 2.3 acres already, a car dealership could go there right
now. So we're not really talking about that. The back portion, if
Mark has the conceptual site plan, is about 2.5 acres in the back
which has a detention pond, has a communications tower right
now. The plan is not to be disturbing that at all except for creating
the detention pond. So there is parking back there. Again, we've
lessened the 10 acres, which was one of the concerns, which
December 12, 2017
28400
goes into the rightful thought of what's the property going to be
used for. And your point is good. The part I think that needs to be
realized is that this has been vacant for 16 years and nobody has
come and wanted to build any light industrial property, any sort of
business there. This is the first real viable offer that's come to turn
this from a blight into something that's nice, a productive use for
the community, brings back a productive tax base. And the other
thought is if somebody couldn't just go back and start an M-1 use
at this point because the front is C-2. So somebody would come
back here with a reverse trying to ask for some sort of approval,
and at that point then your parking is all in the front. You actually
would have parking. The proposal now would be to have a nice
architectural-pleasing building that essentially acts as a shield
parking behind it. So I just want to make sure we're looking at
kind of what we're doing and that the acreage and the right points
are really what we are talking about here and the end, yes, it's a
business, but it's the only business that is trying to use this spot.
And as David said, we kind of got here because looking at
another property, the city said, hey, here's one because it goes
along with the Master Plan of trying to keep your commercial uses
similar, keep them in the same area, even the Master Plan has
the front commercial, which is what it is. The Middle section has
a mixed use. It isn't envisioning light industrial or any sort of
manufacturing on the middle section. So our commercial use
actually fits in better with the Master Plan than potentially a
different M-1 use that would try to come more to the road. So I
just wanted to make sure we had an idea of really what we were
talking about here.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. I appreciate your comments. Because this is a
pending item, we've already had a public hearing. There is no
section for audience comments. We've certainly heard from the
petitioner. We've heard from the members. Mr. Ventura?
Mr. Ventura: I will respond to two things. Number one, everybody is aware that
in 2008, we had what everybody terms a recession, which was
calamitous and stopped all developments in its tracks
everywhere in the United States. And we're just now climbing out
of that thankfully. And in the commercial real estate business,
land is starting to sell again for the first time. So it's not that this
is an undesirable site that you're coming along and saving. This
is a very desirable site that I'm confident will have another use if
it's not this one in the relatively near future. So I can't say that
there's not a tomorrow for this site. There is a tomorrow for this
site with another use.
December 12, 2017
28401
Mr. Katarski: I'd just like to say one thing, and that's a very valid point. I'd like
to at least say that during those tough times, we ,as a company,
chose to come to your community with roughly $6 million of our
money to save a business that was going to be shut down and
could be sitting empty along Plymouth Road out of business. I
think that's something to be considered when you look at that.
We're an existing business owner in your community that did that.
We took a big gamble at that point to come in and take a business
that GM was shutting down literally. That's not speculation. It was
shut down and out of business and we came in, and I don't want
to say to the rescue, but we came in. We invested a lot of money,
not only in the facility but people, advertising, and like I said,
ultimately, our hard work and our investment paid off, but we don't
look at that lightly. We look at the community in which we came
to and we take pride in the communities we operate in. We chose
a good place to come do business and that is why we're sitting
here in front of you looking to spend a lot more money in your
community to build another business, employ more people, and
you know, I would just ask that you take that into consideration
when you're thinking about your decision. We're not here for the
short term. We're here for the long term and we're not coming
here just because it's good times. We came here and you can
look at what we did in the tough times. We invest in the
community. So I respect your opinion. I certainly understand
where you're coming from. I just thought that was a fair point for
me to say.
Mr. Wilshaw: That you, Mr. Katarski. With that, I believe we're at the point, if
there's no other questions, that a motion would be in order.
Mr. Priddy: I just have one question.
Mr. Wilshaw: Go ahead, Mr. Priddy.
Mr. Priddy: To Mark, is any change to the zoning conditional on just this
particular petition or does it go toward the future as well?
Mr. Taormina: That would be a decision that ultimately Council would make. As
this moves forward, the filing did include a statement of conditions
offered by the applicant that would be in the form of a conditional
zoning agreement. The Council can either accept or reject those
conditions. To answer your question, that is to be determined but
the offer has been presented as part of the application, and it
would be something that Council ultimately would decide
following the Planning Commission's action.
Mr. Wilshaw: Does that answer your question, Mr. Priddy?
December 12, 2017
28402
Mr. Priddy: Yes. Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: With that, I believe a motion would be in order.
On a motion by Ventura, it was
RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 2017, and
December 12, 2017, on Petition 2017-10-01-07 submitted by
Feldman Automotive, Inc., pursuant to Section 23.01 of the City
of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, requesting to
rezone the rear portion of the property at 33850 Plymouth Road,
located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Farmington
and Stark Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 28, from M-1 to
C-2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 2017-10-01-07 be denied for the
following reasons:
1. That this area of the City is already well served with
commercial zoning, and the proposed rezoning is not
needed to serve the neighborhood or community;
2. That the anticipated commercial use would unduly tax and
conflict with the established and normal traffic flow of the
area;
y 3. That the existing zoning is more consistent with the
established pattern of development and character of the
adjacent properties; and
4. That C-2 zoning is not supported by the Future Land Use
Plan which recommends Mix Use and Industrial.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Is there support for the denying motion? Again, is
there support for the denying motion? Hearing none, the motion
will fail. Is there another motion on the floor?
On a motion by Long, seconded by McCue, and adopted, it was
#12-78-2017 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 2017, and
December 12, 2017, on Petition 2017-10-01-07 submitted by
Feldman Automotive, Inc., pursuant to Section 23.01 of the City
of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, requesting to
rezone the rear portion of the property at 33850 Plymouth Road,
located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Farmington
December 12, 2017
28403
and Stark Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 28, from M-1 to
C-2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 2017-10-01-07 be approved for the
following reasons:
1. That C-2 zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the
surrounding zoning districts and land uses in the area;
2. That C-2 zoning would allow for the development of the site
for retail and/or service commercial purposes; and
3. That C-2 zoning is consistent with the developing character
of the area.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Long, McCue, Priddy, Smiley
NAYS: Ventura, Caramagno, Wilshaw
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to the City Council with an approving
recommendation. We wish you luck with your project.
Mr. Katarski: Thank you guys very much. We appreciate it. And I have to say,
you guys do a great job looking out for the community and the
best interests. This has been a fun process.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Katarski.
Mr. Katarski: I mean it. What I'm saying is, we like doing business in
communities where people care about their community. I think
{
through this process, I've learned and certainly Jay and I were
talking about this, that you guys truly care about the community
as do we. So we do appreciate and we look forward to staying
here for a long time. Thank you. guys very much.
Mr. Wilshaw: Very good.
ITEM #4 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,114TH Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of
the Minutes of the 1,114th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting
held on November 14, 2017.
December 12, 2017
28404
On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Long, and adopted, it was
#12-79-2017 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 1,114th Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on November
14, 2017, are hereby approved.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Smiley, Long, McCue, Ventura, Caramagno,
Wilshaw
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Priddy
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 1,115th Public
Hearings and Regular Meeting held on December 12, 2017, wap adjourned at 7:53
p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Sam Ca a agno, Secretary
ATTEST:
Ian Wilshaw,'Cha rman