Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2001-04-0318436 MINUTES OF THE 822°a PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, April 3, 2001, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 822°a Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Nlichigan. Mr. James McCann, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm Members present James C. McCann Ilan Pierceccld H G. Shane William LaPme *Elaine Koons Members absent: Robert Alas uas *Avived A 7:40 pm Messrs. Mark Taomtina, Planning Director, Al Nowak, Planner IV, Scott Miller, Planner II, Bill Poppenger, Planner I and Robby Williams were also present Chama nn McCann informed the audience that if a petition on tonighfs agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recormnendation to the City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing make the final detemunztion as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning Connnission 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 Connmission become effective seven (7) days atter 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 Comntission with both approving and denying resolutions, which the Connmission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the proceedings tonight ITEM #1 PETITION 2001-01-01-01 Adele Avolio Mr. Piemerchi, Secretary, annunnced the first hent on the agenda is Petition 2001-01-01-01 by Adele Avcho requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Gary Lane and Fairlane Court in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 4 from RUFB to R 3. Mr. Twunama presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? 18437 Mr. Nowak: We have one letter from the Engineering Division dated Mach 8, 2001, which reads as fv➢ows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engueseang Division has reviewed the above referemedpention. The jollowingapproxomale Legal description should be used in connection with this petition: 'That part ofthe Southwest 114 ofSection 4, T. IS., R. 9E., Qty ofLivonia, Warne County, Michigan more particularly described as beginning ata paint dstantNorth89'57'40" Wes; 952.56 feet from the SouthI/4 corner of Section 4 and proceeding thence North 0017'07"East, 330.00 feet thence North 89'57'40" West, 16500 fed; thence South 00011 '07" West, 330.00 feet; thence South 89'5740"East, 16500 feet to the point ofbeginning.' We have an objections to the proposal at this time, but we would like to request that the developer dedicate the South 60 feet of the propertyfor Seven bide Road right -of way. We trust that this will provide you with the information requested" Thelettr is sipped by David Lea, PE., Civil Engineer Tbatistheestntofthecorrespondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitimer here this evening? Adele Avolio, 34750 W. Seven Mile Road, Livonia Mr. McCam: Can you 4dl us a little bit about why you want this rezoning? Mrs. Avolio: First of all ,since they widened Seven Mile, for me it is very scary when want to go to Seven Mile from my driveway. Number twu, I an getting too old to take care of all of that I want tojust keep a pamel. Mr. McCam: Are you going to be developing the property yourself! Mrs. Avolio: If it is possible, in the fuhue. Mr. McCam: Are there any questions firm the Commissimers? Mr. LaPine: Does your house currently face south? Mrs. Avolio: It faces Seven Mile. Mr. LaPine: The two lot that you are going to crew, is one on the north side and me on the south side of your loll Mrs. Avolio: Yes, north and south. Mr. LaPine: What are you going to do with your house? The side yard of one of the houses that are built on me of those lots is going to be the frmt ofymr house. Are you going[ohvn yourhousearis yourhousegoingto staythe way it is? Mrs. Avolio: No. Itisgoingtoshvythewayitis. Wesegoivgtoimproveittofsee Gary Lave. 18438 Mr. LaPme: So you are not going to man the house? You are going to make a new entrance and nowyou are going to enter in boom Gary Lane w yo r lot and the trent of you hose will be facing Gary Lane? Is that the way it is going to go? Mrs. Avolio: Right, if possible. That is what I intend to do. Mr. LaPme: You don't have any sketches to show me the way that is going to be done? Mrs. Avolio: No. Butthere is plenty ofroombetween thehouse and the line of the soult kit to build a garage and an entrance. My horse doesn't line up with the res[ of them Mr. LaPwe: Iunderstualthat Iwas out thee. Ijustcan'tvisualizemmy head how itis going to look Thankyor. Mr. Shane: You have a garage, do you vol? Mrs. Avolio: Yes, but it is on the side. Mr. Shane: So you idea is to build another garage? Mrs. Avolio: It can be taken off. Mr. Shane: You are going to take it off? You are going to re -orient a new garage towards Gary Lane? Mrs. Avolio: Yes. Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions from the Commissioners, I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience who wishes to speak for or againAtluis pets iun? Jamie Coobatis, 34730 Seven Mile, next door to Mrs. Avolio. We have a home there that we had purchased a couple of years ago. We have no problem with her rezoning the property. We have a tree row that lines up right on the property line, which actually is a couple of inches onto her side. The only thing we had a problem with was the fact that if they go ahead and build, are they going to tear the trees down cr anydting ofthat nature. ILese trees are30 yearsold and then some. I have pichmes ofthe trees and what not Actually, our property used to be a nursery so all the trees came boom the nursery area and were plaided amongst the whole area Mr. McCann: Have you brought this question up with Mrs. Avolio? Mr. Coobatis: She said as long as she is around, nothing will happen with the trees. But if she sells the property off, whose to say that somebody doesn't come in and ward to put a fence up and then they are going to take all the trees od which 18439 is a windbreak from my house to the west side and also a beaudfid old border between both homes. Mr.McCann: Have you talked to her about buying about 5 feet the length of your property? Mr. Cochatis: I did mention that and she mentioned that the property was rezoned at this time. I said I didn'tthink it was rezoned as of yet and if you look at the plans, what it shows is that there is a 25 foot strip dim runs in between the two houses. Mr. LaPine: You are talking about those trees that are to the west? That are about 8 feet tall and there is about 10 to 15 of them? Is that what we are talking about? Mr. Coobatis: No. There has got to be about 45 trees, at least Mr. LaPine: But it is the ones to the west? Mr. Coobatis: The ones to the west that ran north and south. Like she was saying when Seven Mile was widened, it also took a lot of frontage from my house as well as everybody else's there and took all the wind break out because you coWdbarelyseemyhomeatthefnnewhmlbougjrtit ItlookedlikeIlived inthewoods. Thatwas thereasonwhy wepurchased the home. Sincetheu since Seven Mile was widened, we have added another 13 pine trees in front of the house for sound barrier. Basically, I've got the picture here of before and after and the trees. Mr. LaPine: This is ane of the questions I asking about was what was going to happen to the house because if remember right, it is on the west side. If she puts in a garage, she only sbows 20 feet here, she cant put a garage over there. I dont see how she could I don'tthink he would be affected. I don'tsee how she can get a 20 foot garage over here. That would only leave her with 5 feet from the property line. I have no objection to the rezonwg but I would like to see some type of a plan of how they are going to develop the property. Mr. McCaw: Mr. Taormina, do you have a suggestion regarding the trees? Mr. Taormina: From your description it sounds as if the trees are presently located within the side yard of the house as A is oriented today. But with the division, the trees would be located in what will become the rear yard of the new homes. They would be located in what would be the required rear yard of those homesnotwiAimthetuildiagenvelopes. Thesemenvesthatexistfarly close to the property line. Mr. Coolants: When they came out and they staked it out, as we found out last week or wbenever they staked it, that some trees, when you look at them, some of them are on one side of the line and some of them are on the other side of the line. If the new people come in and they build a home there and they want to pert a fence up, if they have children or pets or anything like that, where are 18440 they going to pert thein fence? If they put it close to the fence, are they going to cut the trees down? That is my concaa If you look at the fence line back in the subdivision, all of those lots are 80' x 120'. Her lots are going to be deeper. Mr. Taormina: Correct Mr. Coobatis: Which would pert them right up agams[the tree live. Mr. Taormina: As I understand it, if the trees are right m the property line then they would either have to place that fence m one side or the other of the trees unless they remove those trees. Mr. Coobatis: I donYknow if you are looking at how the plan is m the property line, but she actually has a little parcel which is a 25 foot strip thatnms up the side, next to our property and then she has a 140 foot strip. She actually has two lots there, one Little one and one larger one. Mr. Taormina: This is a rezoning petition and unfordmate]y we dont have the amonnt of information provided on the plan to be able to address this gentleman's concerns. Mr. McCain: Would she be able to do this by lot spat? Mr. Taormina: Yes. Itwillrequae Council approval siviceitinvolves t1reeparcels. Mr. McCain: Would they have to provide a plan to the Council and can they restrict the land use A that time? Mr. Tammarso I think it would be incumbent upon us as well as the neighbors and as Mrs. Avolio, to work this out prior to that If it is the desire of the Commission this evening to move this item forward then I think A would really be to her benefit to work with this neighbor. Mr. McCain: Ijust want to make sure that it is addressed at some point prior to final approval. Mr. Taormina : I understand. There is nothing that is required at taus stage of the game. It is certainly something that the Council could consider at the time of the lot spy Mr. McCain: Ib you understand what we are saying There are several more processes. Right now it is just a zoning issue. If she comes back for a plat for the three lots, she would have to come back and speak before us and we could address the trees or if she decides to do it as a lot split, she would have to come back before the Council and the Planning Commission would have to review it again. At those times they can address the trees. Under a zoning issue we cannot put airy linutations m zoning. Our hands are tied in that respect I think in the meantime you should try and work with her especially, the idea 18441 of either purchasing five feet or getting an agreement as w maintenance of those trees should be worked out Mr. Coobatis: As it stands at this point, since we moved in we had to cut down a tree that was in that property line. It was a 120 foot cottonwood that had been struck bylightmg. Wepaid$1500 to have itremoved andnowwe find outthatthe property is in between. I have maintained them I have cleaned them Mr. McCain: I understand. It is a valid concern Wejust cannot take rare of it this eve ^g but the staff now aware of it and A is incumbent on you to follow up on it as well. Mr. Coobabs: Also, this rezoning will it affect our property taxes as far as the four other lots in the RUFB? Mr. McCain: No. Mr. Coobatis: And my for the fuNre development of that? Mr. McCain: Under Michigan law tight now yours iml going to change anyway. The value of your property may go up but the tax base will not change. Mr. Coobatis: Ib these homes have to be in ]me with the subdivision? Mr. McCann: I think that is, again, going to be when they address the site. I would suspect that that is something the Council will address during the lot split That is something that is typically done, if you are going to put it in to follow the ameot homes that you want them to match. Mr. Coolants: Then it would be, like I say, the lots that she has are larger than the subdivision Mr. McCain: They are the same. Yes, they are larger Gill Rufim, 34700 Seven Mile Road. I have the parcel next to Jamie's. My question is in the future is the Council going to take the RUF and rezone them? That is my main worry. Mr. McCain: No. I really believe that this isjust an extension of Gary Lane. Itis kind of Eke Gary Lane all of a sudden stops then you have the one parcel and it really appears to be good zoning to complete the subdivision with that one house. Mr. Rufino: This is the last of the parcels left in Livonia of that size. We are getting houses on all sides of us. These are the good size parcels. I dont have a problemwith the rezoning. I moved to whereI live now because ofthe lot size. I wanted somehang that size. I lice maintain ng it I like the size and I dmtwmtyou guys m come in in a few years, sphtus up and take us off the RUT. 18442 Mr. McCam: No. Mr. Radion: That is my worry. Mr. McCam: This is her request and it is only because it is facing Gary Lane. I donR see anybody else wishing to speak. Mrs. Avolio, do you have a last torment? Mrs. Avolio: My neighbor says that I have more than he has. All of the lots over there are 165 feet Ion not asking him to give me some of his property. Why does he ask me to give up mine m him? Who bent the tree over there? Its notmy fault I m not saying they are m my property and I want thm to be removed. I said no, as long as I five, they can stay over there for the beauty but they dml have my right to control me to sell my property to them If they ask them to sell me five feet they wouldnY do it Mr. McCann: May I quickly respond? I think mybe a tabling motim would be appropriate. theproblem is, you are askingher to agree wrezmingbis next door neighbor. He bought a piece of property that was rt # to RUF thatwas one large lot HedidnotbuypropertynesttoR3. Yonwontto go ahead and change you lot and split it up into three dillermthouses instead of me. So he does have a reasonable mncem when you are trying to intensify the use nest to his home. Ym do not have an automatic right to do that These are the considerations that we, as a planning body must look at If we are going to look at rezoning this property, we want to make sure it has as little or minimal impact m the neighboring homes as possible. We don't want to put somebody's backyard right on his Goat yard without having some type of separation. Mrs. Avolio: Thereis plenty of room over there because it is on Gary Lane and not on Seven Mile. It is half the property, half of the 165 feet is all empty. That is where the backyard is going to be. I wont to improve Livmia All my neighbors love whatI am doing. Ihey wanlyd two acres whenthey bought me. I amnot asking anybody for anything. Ijust wantto take careof myself. I vo ra to improve Livonia Instead of paying taxes m one house, there will be three houses in the future to pay City tax So what is wrong? What I not doing will improve then property. I not not doing anything to hurt anybody. I not doing it to improve A and everybody is happy m Gary Lane. They are the only ones that are not because they have plenty of room onthen home. I m mt telling themthat they have on the back. Mr. McCam: Is there mything else? Mrs. Avolio: No sir. Mr. LaPine: Mark, ifNw rezone this. my big concent is how the house is going to look m the three lots when the three homes are built Once she gets the rezoning she cmjust sell off each parcel individually and then somebody can come in to bold the house. How do we control that? There is no way we can 18443 control that I want to at least know how the houses are going to fit on the lots and how they are going to look and have some kind of an idea instead of having two different people budding houses and she is going to renovate her house, change it some how to make her driveway come off of Gary Lane. It seems to me we have to have some idea. I understand this is strictly a re on^g petition but All we have to have some kind of an idea of how it is going to look when it is done. Mr. Taormina: The budding codes of the City would govern Ibis. Mr. LaPive: If somebody comes in and submits a set of plans to the Building Inspection Department and they meet all the requirements of the side yards and the setbacks they can go ahead and build the house. Mr. Tenuous: Yes. Mr. LaPine: Then we lose a0 of our control. Thank you Mr. McCann: A cordon is in order. Mr. LaPive: I will make a motion to table this to give us more time to think about it On a motive by Mr. LaPme, seconded by Mrs. Rooms and unanimously approved it was #450-2001 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commussion on Ated 3, 2001, on Petition 2001-01-01-01 by Adele Avolio requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Gary Lane and Fairlone Court in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 4 tom RUFB to R 3, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition 2001-01-01-01 be tabled to April 24, 2001. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted This will be reheard on April 24, 2001 at 7:30 p.m in the auditorium At that time A will be a pending item Audience participation will requve unanimous consent of the Planning Commission. ITEM #2 PETITION 2001-02-01-03 James F. Duggan (American Classic Realty) Mr. Piemeccbi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-02-01-03 by James F. Duggan (American Classic Realty) requesting to rezone property located on the east side of Bainbridge Avenue between Five Mile Road and Lyndon Avenue in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 23 from RUF m R-2. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the properly under petition plus the exvRwg zomng of the sunnunding area. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? 18444 Mr. Nowak: There is a letter from the FEoinrmang Division dated Marl 7, 2001, which readsasfollows: "Pursuant toyour request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referencedpention. We have no objection to the proposal or legal description at this how. However, it should be noted that any development may need to meet the requirements ofthe new Wayne County Storm Water Management Ordinance We trust that this will provide you with the information requested." lbe letter is sipped by Sohn R Hill, AssistaitCity Fngmeer. Thereis a petition aguin.R this project The signatures were submitted attached to a letter signed by May F. Dudek, 14616 Bainbridge, Livonia, which reals as follows: "Attached is a petition with 50 signatures opposing this project signed by the people of Bainbridge Street andeaver letter regarding this matter which reads as follows: We ask that you please make copies accordingly so that all board members may review this matter for Tuesday's meeting." There is a second petition opposing this project with 61 signatures which reek as follows: "We the undersigned homeowners and residents of the City ofLwoma, are opposed to the rezoning of the property located on the east side of Bainbridge Avenue between Five Mile Road and Lyndon Avenue in the N. W. 114 of Sedi on 23 from RUF (Rural Urban Farm) to R-2 (single Famdy Residential) as proposed by James F. Duggan✓Amer ican Classic Realty." Wehave alelter from Gayle L. Fedoronko,14880Baivbridge, Livonia, dated Mach 30, 2001, which reals as follows: "Attached please finda copy ofa letter that 7 composed to Mi. Dawn Borregard backon November 3, 2000, concerning a letter that I had receivedfrom Mi. James F. Duggan In his correspondence he proposed a rezoning of the property located on Bainbridge sheet (south ofFive Mile Road) for the purposes of aresidentuddevelopment. Since the writing of that letter, Ihave been notified that a meeting has been scheduledon April 3, 2001, by the City Plarming Commission, to discuss that very matter. Upon inquiry with your office it has come to my attention that you are neither aware of the eristence of my letter, nor any ofthe concerns represented It a my intent to make you as wellas the other members ofthe City Planning Commission, aware that my husbandand7 are opposed to arty further development of this area be it residenhalor commercialfor a number of reasons. Spec firmly, as previously outliner{ it would be detrimental m the safety of the current residents to consider a proposal that seeks to add addtional traffic to an already congested area andfurther subject residents to additional noise levels presentty, endued due to the industrial park that is already located and operating in the vicinity. Most importantly, I would like m stress that this proposed action seeks to destroy the balance ofnatrue and the wildlife that u cuurentty inhabiting this area which u the main reason Ichose to live and raise my children here. In closing, Iwould like m imdteyou and arty ofyouu colleagues who are ma capacity to decide this issue, to personally come a& ands i for yourselves the beauty that exists in this area ofLwoma before you take any action that could adversely affect the neighborhood I realize that some situations may not present themselves clearly on paper and must be viewed to gam a full appreciation for what is truly at stake. I thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter and trust that this document 18445 will be properly fled to be considered al the upcoming meeting. " That is the extent of the cmrespondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Prank Kokmakes, appearing on behalf of Jim Duggan and American Classic Realty, 33300 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigm from the law firm of Brashear and Tangma. We arepursuing a cluster development as indicated by tonights proposal. The cuvevt district is zoned RI F. We are requesting that it be changed to R-2, single family residential. This proposed cluster development is in accordance with Section 20.02A ofLivonia Zoning Ordinance. The maximum density allowed is based upon the maximum density regulations of the R-2 zoning district standards. ILereare proposed 26 units. These are eight tlaee-unit clusters and one two -unit cluster. No more than 3 units can be attached w arty one cluster. We believe that this is an appropriate project and appropriate use of this land We would ask that the Comrmssion consider the rezoning. Why are we here asking this? We believe that there is a demand fm affordable empty nester housing in the Livonia area The project is to build 26 units of single story residences of the size and portion that would be attractive to citizens who no longer have children Irving with them, who wish to sell thein larger residences and move to more a manageable site. We are talking about 26 units which simple math would indicate would probably increase to approximately 52 residents living in that area That, we would submit, is not an overabundance of residences or is not an unduly increase in the traffic on that street It should be noted and as the Commission notes, this parcel abuts a commercial district, Livonia Plaza Shopping Center, to the north. To the east, it abuts an industrial complex The property owners of lots 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 and 55 have agreed to sell a portion of their lots to us in order to create this site. I would note that the original lots are approximately 640 feet in depth. We areproposing to purchase about half of that distance which is about 320 feet in depth I would suggest that if you look at the maps that we have provided, if you look to the eastjnst across Bainbridge, those homes and those residences have typically the same type of depth, approximately 300 feet in depth. So we are not really changing the characteristics that directly abut Bainbridge on both the east and on the west. We felt that a cluster proposal was the best utilization of that site and that is why we came forward with that alternative. We do not believe that the addition of these cluster homes would in anyway adversely affect the surrounding property owners. In fact, those cluster homes, once built, would in fact block the view of the industrial compleximmediately to the east. So I not not sure that the valid criticism, I guess it is in the eye of the beholder, whether you would rather bok at a new residence or you would rather look at an industrial site. We felt that this was an appropriate location for this type of cluster developmemt, which would target empty nesters because it would be close In shopping and other conveniences for those citizens. It is also located in the basic center of the City by the Five Mile Read corridor and close to City Hall and other amenities. It would also be close to the new 18446 Recreation Center coming up. So these residents, who are empty nesters, will have a chance to partake in the surrounding area and the businesses and establishments there. Since our goal is to target that group, we do not believe that it is likely that they will have cluldren there that would, in fact, be overburdening the area or the tic pattern Empty nesters could be retired. They could, in fact simply be working ladies and gentlemen who dual have children at home and leave at 6:00, 7:00 or 8:00 am and return at 5:00, 6:00 or 7:00 pm Ibereis really no legitimate concern for traffic. If there is an issue regarding some type of flow, that can be dealt with through the police powers of the City. In other words, we can install stop signs, and I have heard some of the comment; from the letters that there was some requests that police do look into that area and that may be taking place but I would suggest that adding 52 people to that area is not going to overflow the traffic problem I would also suggest that having exits at both Five Mile and Lyndon actually splits the traffic pattern and it would decrease the flow of traffic to my one direction. As I indicated, the proposal to provide for single story homes of moderate price is approximately $230,000 to $260,000, certainly affordable by today's standards. The site plan, which the Commission has in from of it is an appropriate utilization of the space. Ibereis a private drive that comes in off of Bainbridge so you dont have a situation where the residents of the developmerd would immediately pour off onto Bainbridge but actually there is a drive of some length for visitor parking there as well. Wejust believe that even though we are purchasing a portion of the lots that would be zoned RUE, that the depth of the lots are still maintained and there is really no difference in character to the lots immediately across the street from Bainbridge. We do not believe that there is any real disadvantage to allowmgfliNtypeofclu developme wbebudt Thankyou. Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. Shane: Number one, why did you pick R2 district for your proposal? Mr.Kokmakes: We picked that because we thought basically, we could maximize the number of mat; on that site which we felt made the projectmme beneficial and tryingwslaywithinthedictatesofthatzme,r feltthatr couldhave 26 omits and that was our goal under the plan to try to maintain as close to that many omits as we could. Mr. Shane: Do you own my other land an the area or are you attempting to purchase any other land? Mr. Kokenakes: I am not aware of whether my client owns other land in the area or not I am not aware of any kind of contingent contracts other than the ones that are dealing with the specific loll that we are dealing with tonight Mr. Shane: Thank you. 18447 Mr. LaPine: Does you client own this land now or is he buying it an contingency if he gets the rezoning Mr. Kokenakes: My understanding is that itis being purchased an a contingency. Mr. LaPue: How come we are purchasing two lots that are 320 fret. Why didnl you purchase enough so that we had all lots 320 feet in depth? Mr. Kok makes: Su, I asked that same question The answer is that apparently American Classic Realty was trying to wok with each individual owner as best they could. Some lot owners had swimming pools that they didnY want to move and A was those type of considerations where why the lines are somewhat meandering. Not that we had arty general plan to do that but that is bow we weretrying to cooperate with the neighbor: who were offering that to US. Mr. LaPine: Onre your client buys this property, is he selling it off to a developer and the developer is going to come in and develop this property? Mr. Kokenakes: Ibelievethatmy clientis consideringpartof the developmentteam He wants to be involved Mr. LaPive: You went to the R-2 because you want to maximize the number ofumts that you can put in there. Is that cared? Mr. Kokenakes: We thought that was an appropriate zoning designation fa that and would like to maximize the use of that property. Mr. LaPine: Based on what the area is zoned, how did you come up with the R-2? What made you think R-2 was better than R-47 Mr. Kokenakes: My understanding is that the subject site certain 5.960 acres or 219,780 sq. It that we would require 8,400 sq. It per unit and that is how we came up with that Because that was required under the R-2 we could have 26 units availabletous. Mr. LaPive: But if you go to a higher classification than R4 then we could haveless units to there. Maybe that would help the residents and we wouldnY have as many homes and cars going in and ort ofthe subdivision. But basically you guys wantkr nnxinnze, you wantw put w many amts w you can m there so you go to the least zoning fa that type of a complex Mr. Kokenakes: I would suggest that we do want to utilize the property appropnately and we think that 26 units would be appropriate. I wouldjust martian that these are not large, single family dwelling homes that would house mom and dad and several children.. We are talking abort homes that would not likely be occupied by two people and we feel that is reasonable that the plan fa 26 units connected as they are, and as proposed, would be reasonable and that there really is no reasonable basis to deny the proposal other than we are 18448 required to get the zoning changed I believe if we look at the property that is left from the original owners, in width and depth, A is no different[ from the width and depth of the property immediately to the east of Bainbridge which houses many, of the residents and citizens who live in the area and may be opposed to the project but really the land that is left is no different than what they already have. So we are not making arty major changes. We are simply providing for the cluster units, which abut coum<emial and industrial property. Mr. LaPine: Ibank you. Mr. Piercecchi: Has consideration been given to do this as a conventional subdiNision rather than as a cluster, even though I realize that you do have some of the qualifications that do fit the cluster because it is adjacent to a particular manufacturing site? Wouldn't it be more compatible if it were built as conventional subdivision rather than these three packages altogether! I assume they will have one car garages on them? Is that correct? Mr. Kokevakes: I am looking at a photograph of a similar unit and they would have two car garages. Mr. Piercecchi: They will all have two car garages? Mr. Kokenakes: Yes sir. Mr. Pierceechi: Mr. Duggan, have you considered doing this in a regular conventional subdiNision so we could cut down on some of the density in there? Samaw Duggan, 32639 Five Mile Road, Livonia Density actually would increase because we would have to maximize, and to rake the project econormcally feasible, instead of building homes for $230,000 or $250,000, would have to go about $350,000. We would have to build 2500 or 2600 sq. ft, two story homes and get 12 to 15 homes on the lot and if you have homes that large with fair and five bedrooms, you are going to have a lot more people Irving there than you will with a two bedroom ranch style home designed for those that want to stay in Livonia and want the amenities they have in their current home but they need something smaller and they don't warn to have to worry about the upkeep, the rairrtevance, the snow removal and the landscaping. Mr. Piercecchi: The reason why I brought that up is because looking at this plan, which is the first time I have seen it tonight because I have been on vacation, but looking over this plan, these are all attached three units. It is really not a residential package, in my opinion. It is more like a condominiumpackage. Mr. Duggan: We are hoping to attract people that curninly five in Livonia that have hen here for a number of years and that perhaps pioneered this area and want to stay in the City because of what the City has to offer. I have been here since 1955. I know what the City has been like and I know what it is now. I want 18449 itto shyhereandI am slue there are an awful hoof others. Theywadto stay in Livonia They dual want a 2500 sq. It., 2600 sq. ft or 2700 sq. ft tome to maintain. They waat something that is smaller and more comfortable and lacking maintenance and yes these are residences. We are going to sell them to Livonia citizens not to dogs, cats and pigs. Mr. Piemecchi: I dohtwantto take up any more time because I am surethere will be some audience participation. Mr. Kokenakes: Clearly these are residences. If it is a residence it is not a rental and these are not a rental. They happen to be attached but they are still a residence. Mr. McCann: Ifthere are no further questions from the Coamussioners I will go to the audience. We will lay a few ground rules and go to the audience. I take it from the c utnast that we have a number of people that are interested in tonight's petition. It's part of the record already. The letters and signatures attached to the letters have been made a part of this public record Also the statements have been made a part of the public record what I would like to do is get new and additional information thatwas not provided in the letters. I'll open Bre public hearing up for that If you all want to raise your hands and show you support of whose is against it That will give us a good indicationofwbatis going oahere. Nowweknowthataverylarge majority is against this proposal. What I would like you to do is, if you have representatives, come down or if there is new and additional information that you believe is pertinent beyond what was in the letters, please come down and give us you name and address and be considerate of other people in the audience and keep you remarks fairly brief. Thank you. Gayle Fedoronko, 14880 Bainbridge. I am two residences down from this proposed development You have already heard my views because you have so grecumst read my letter, thank you. I would like tojust say, upon hearing Mr. Duggan's representative try to tell us that these cluster home projects would only be empty nesters, is quite presumptuous. Quite fiavkly you earl guarantee who would buy those and to say that only 52 people would be actually present is quite understated. Even if they were empty nesters, you would have their children, their grandchildren and people coming to visit That, quote frankly, would put a lot more people m the area. I dolt tank that you can guarantee me who would buy those homes and quite frankly, if you tried to guarantee me, I would tank mat would be discrimination Thank you William Petermn.14585 Bainbridge, Livonia I would agree with what has been said already. I would add emphasis perhaps on the empty nesters. The petitionefs representative has mentioned mumerous times, "empty nesters." There are going to be no prior guarantees of that no prior limitations on who can buy these homes. I submit that is sheer speculation about who is going to bury it and I would not like to live the accuracy of that speculation I amnot good az speculation anyway and I tank his speculation is probably no better than mine. Second, the petitioners representative mentioned that he is not aware 18450 of any consideration or plans for additional development May I suggest that Mr. Duggan is present Perhaps we should ask him if there are any considerations or plans for future development I would wrap up by saying that I and my family moved to this area, we moved to Bainbridge less than a year ago and we moved there precisely because of the nature of that neighborhood and because of the nature of that street Development there in this form will obviously change the nature of that neighborhood. It can't do anything but change the nature of that neighborhood Ibere was mention ofa corrmiercial development Certainly thereis a cormmerciaz development to the north on Five Mile. Yes there is an industrial area, indistrialcornplextotheeast Thequestionwas,"Howmuchwouldvou prefer to look athoumes or in this case, multiple dwellings rather than an industrial area?" My question would be, "Hav much development is too much?" This will change the nature of that neighborhood and I submit it will change Afro the worse. Ibis will not be an ¢nprovementto tlhe City of Livonia. Itwill be a detractim from the quality ofthe City of Liv®& I am adamantly opposed to this. Mary Dudek, 14616 Bainbridge, Livonia I would like you folks to take five minutes of your time one day and please come down our street You are welcome to sit an my of our front porches and count the traffic. You are welcome to watch howmuch we have w put up with Ibis man is proposing to put a street, not an a mile road, not on a half -mile road but on a residential sheet where there are only two exits. There is Lyndon and there is Five Mile. Now this man proposes that he is going to have so many people in these homes, obviously that has been addressed That is not going to bappen. You are going to ask us to put 50 more cars an this street, plus their relatives, plus then friends. We have called the Livonia Police Department We do itona weekly basis. They cannot help us. Ibere is nothing they can do. They say we can get signs and then it is a petition but they tell us the signs won't work so we live with the way it is now. We watch am for each other's children. Are ym aware that m the Lyndon end of it Lyndon and Bainbridge, there is a handicapped residence there. Do you know how many of those handicapped people that five there walk my street on a daily basis to go to Y{ ager, to go to work or ride their bikes because that is a safe street for them. Do you know how many of them have bad to stop traffic or ask traffic to slow down, and they are handicapped and they know how bad the traffic is. Mr. James Duggan can take his plan somewhere else. I thank you for your time this eve t^g and please, I do mode you to come and sit an our front porches, please. Domenico I diano, 15115 Bainbridge. My son is going to take over for me because my English is not that great Thank you Frank Iuliano, 15115 Bainbridge. The only reason we are here is because the road is in front of his house and I have three small children that can't even play in front of the house became the traffic is so heavy. I have backed am of my dad's driveway andI have beenhittwice. Nowitisjustwohewyoftraffic. Now he is going to add mother 26 homes. That is mother 26 cars plus their 18451 families. Tbere is no guarantee that any cas coming firm that area fiom that long of a stretch that they are not going to go over the speed limit and go right into my dad's Dont yard There are no speed bumps proposed to slow the traffic down. There are no barriers in fiord of his lot, even to stop cars from coming into his lot Pretty much everybody is saying the same thing and I am not going to repeat it If they warn to build it, they can pert the exit somewhere else. I would rather see 12 big homes and have families that understand with the children than older people or another 26 cars coming around Mr. D. Iuhmo: The problem is the mad is going to come right to my living room. Plus he warts to make more money Everybody wards to make more money. Mr. McCain: Sir, please you have to address us. Please do not address each other. Mr. D. Iuhmo: I'm sorry bun being in America because America is a nice aurdry and a free cantry. I left my country a lot of years ago. I have been in business m Livonia since 1971. I pay my taxes and I do myjob and everybody has a rightto speak Mr. McCain: Sr, but we wart you to speak to us. Mr. D. huhmo: Thank you I know (mandible) very well. He is a customer of mine since 1971. The reasma l say so is because the road con es right to my doorway and plus we like to see the neighborhood much beth. Eric Moore, 14875 Bainbridge, on the east side with the smaller parcels. Ibejust got some prepared thoughts here. We are all here collectively to state our opposition In Mr. Duggan's project Mr. Duggan's project would do nothing for the neighborhood except increase ow traffic flow, adding approsmintely 52 more vehicles, fowl up the traffic patterns, raise the water table for a good majority of the block, remove trees that have been around longer than most of us have and in general, screw up the eco system in there. We do have a ]rot of wildlife on that street that doesn't exist anywhere else in Livonia anymore. Has proposal, to short, will benefit no one except Mr. Duggan. As I understand it Mr. Duggan will maintain ownership of the entre parcel and 99 foot of frontage along Bainbridge Street So he will be increasing o r traffic flow, the vehicles for construction will also be tearing up the road and when we have to repave Bainbridge Street, he is only going to get billed for 99 foot of fiordege. In order w accommodate the drainage for these units the private drive, which is too marrow, by the way, according to bis drawings, most be raised and properly sloped krwards Bainbridge Street In order to do that, that will cause flooding to all of the neighboring yards. The traffic flow issue, Mr. Duggan will tell you, that with the procarmy to Five Mile, these units probably will use Five Mile, the shortest distance of egress. This probably will be true unless they are intending to head west on Five Mile or sank an Merriman to the freeway, in which case they will use Bainbridge Street, right in firm of my home, right in fent of all ofour homes and that will increase our traffic flow. Again, the heavy conmuctiw 18452 equipment will be down that street tearing up the street If they do choose to go out Five Mile, and tum left, west on Five Mile, which is already unpleasant if not impossible, that will become a very dangerous mersectom Our Pohceand Fre Depa mtswillbethe lwillbetyou on a daily basis. This will become probably one of Wayne Comany's worst intersections. In closing, the drawings that have been provided to us are far from conclusive. Everything that he has sbown us sbows improper street width, side setbacks, unproper drainage, no fire drainage hydrants, no green areas, berms, types of walls or barriers between the new units and existing homes or businesses. That is according to the Livonia City code. Therefore, with far more questions than answers and no tnre beneficiaries except for Mr. Duggan, I, and all my neighbors, urge you to tum this proposal down. Thank you very much Betty Keliv, 15141 Bainbridge. We are on the west side. We are the second house, south of Five Mile. Actually I have three reasons that I object to this development, three major ones and a lot of We ones. Twenty nine years ago my husband and I were looking for our first home due to the fact that my husband was working m Detroit we were limned n how far out we could mwe. The expresswaywas mayet finished atthattme. Myhusbmd mat both grew up m the country and we knewwe did not wantto live in a typical subdivision with a small lot, sidewalks and sheetlights. After looking for sometime we looked at the house on Bainbridge and we knew right away that this was the type of area we were looking for. It was and is at the present time a little bit of country in the cuddle of the City. We bought our house and have been very happy here. We have put two children through Livonia schools and have paid our taxes and supported the City for all of these years. I do not feel that it would be fair for the City to change the zoning now. When we bought our house, we felt the zoning would protect the way of living we chose. We would like to feel that is still me. The second reason is a morepublic one. It is my befiefthat one ofthe reasons that Livonia is rated as a good place to live and raise a family is its diversity. Here you can find homes rmgmg from very expensive homes to wiHtm the reach of first time buyers. There are homes with more traditional subdivision lots and yes, there are still even a few larger lots available. I feel A is this very diversity of living evvuomnentthat keeps Livonia at the top. In my opinion, to lose some of this diversity by rezoning this area, would not be in the best nde¢st of the City. The thrd reason is a practical one. I sm sure that mos[ of this Board has driver down Bainbridge to see the exact location of this proposed remung. I ask you to think of the type of mad that Bainbridge is. This road will not be able to stand up to the heavy equipment imolvedm this type of construction and after the construction, you are looking at a very great increase in every day traffic. Before you know it Bainbridge will become another Henry Ruff. We, the current homernvners, will be an a position of being asked to pay for rebuilding a road that has been damaged by excessive traffic from this construction and development While the corma am company will be gone and the new residents will not five directly on this street this proposal will dump all of the additional traffic not on a main street but on a side 18453 street not designed or able to handle it I would like to also rebut two points made m the proposal when they asked wbether the residents would like to look at industrial or homes. Weare not looking at industrial. We are looking at a green area, trees, lots of trees, mature trees. Also, when did this new type of development require streetlights and if so, this is a great deal more fighting in an area that also has an increase in lighting from the shopping center that was put in. In conclusion, I would simply ask that the Plamting Commission, which is designed to represent the people of Livonia, to please listen to the residents who will be most affected by this change and do not grain thisreor^g Thank you for your hate. Brenda Johnson,14905 Bainbridge. Basically, I had some prepared notes and everyone has aboutcovered everything that I came here to say in the first place except thatI work for Livonia Public Schools. I drive a school bus. I see nowhere in the City of Livonia where you have a cluster home that comes in off of a residential street They may come m off a rule road. They may come m off half -rile road but taking a cluster home and bringing it off of residential street. I have not seen it anywhere in the City of Livonia. I have been there for sixteen years. I pun a lot of money into my property. I have added on twice because of the nature of the street, because there are trees, because everyone has big lots. I dual know wbere Mr. Duggan says the lot size will be the same. I think that is called fi=y math Three hundred thirty foot lots like everybody else, no, he is talking about putting in five homes in an area of a lot as it would be on the west side of the street but with five homes. We have 29 homes on our whole side of the street with 330fomfins. Sotakingforrhome mdsayingthatisgoingwbethesame lot size, I Pomk he is sadly mistaken. Basically, this isal going to benefit anybody but Mr. Duggan. The residents of the street carpool our children because they caul walk down the street, there are no sidewalks. We have to carpool our children because they dont get a bus. They have to walk nine tenths of rile to the elementary school and nine tenths of a rule to the middle school. We have to carpool because they coal walk already. So increasing irzffic flow, if in fact there are 26 units and each person has one car with a two car garage, I doubt that it would be ore car but with a two car garage, we are definitely talking about 30 to 40 cars per day. As was stated before, I strongly oppose and would ask that you do the right thing and deny this proposal. Thank you. Greg Goren, 15119 Bainbridge. I moved into this area in 1987 buying from a owner who loved the property but because he had a hearing unpaired child, he was not able to safely let his child play on the property so he had to move and I bought it from ban reluctantly. I started that year as normal buying Halloween candy on Halloween and I had maybe 10 kids come by. I scratched my head, "Whafa the problem?' Then I found out, all the haffrc. Parents are afraid to let their children walk for Halloween candy because of the heavy traffic coring down Bainbridge. It has gone on every year. I buy six bags of candy and use one. So the parents dual want the children to walk down Bainbridge and I am mind with these cluster homes back there, there is no guarantee that these people will not have small children and A 18454 will be a very big safety factor with little children coming out cram Bainbridge that they would be in peril with the increase in traffic. So, I please petition you and ask you to deny this petition for these cluster homes. Tbankyou. Fdif Rusci➢o, 30911 Lyndon. If Mr. Duggan thinks that empty nesters are going to move in there, empty nesters prefer apartments where they don't have to shovel snow. I'll tell you what is going to move in there, low income people with their children who are very disrespectful with then boom boxes and they will oII through or lots and mm the quality of or lives. If Mr. Duggan loves Livonia as much as he says he does, why does he wart to turn it into mother Detroit? Thank you John Ware, 15127 Bainbridge. I am totally opposed to this whole project I have been out of town for the last couple of weeks and didn't get a chance to sign that petition so you can add one more name to that petition that you have over there that am totally opposed to tiffs for all the reasons you have heard so far, plus I can bring up a couple more. Looking at the blueprint for this they are proposing a 25 -foot wide private road corning out onto Bainbridge. That is a 25 -foot private drive. If you measure Bainbridge right now, it is 18 feet wide. That is how much pavement ism Bainbridge. I know the right-of-way says 55 feet but if you take a tape measure and measure how wide that road is, i[ is 18 feet rightnow. Then I heard somebody else say tonight that they thought that that 25 -foot driveway wasn't wide enough. I counted the houses on that street There are 45 houses on Bainbridge between Five Mile and Lyndon You are going to have over a 50% increase in traffic on that road with the proposal that they have come up with no materhowyoulookatit Tbisisnotgoingwbmefittheresidmtsofthis street It is only going to benefit Mr. Duggan's pocketbook. Thankyo - Berme Pierce, 14600 Bainbridge. I, too, am a lifetime Livonia resident I was bom and raised in Livonia My pareuls sfill own a home m Livonia I went through [be public school here as did my for brothers and sisters. My husband and I bought a home in the states street area, on Nevada That was the first house we purchased here in Livonia and six years this month we purchased our home on Bainbridge. We were looking further west because we were booking for some property. We did not want to live in a small subdivision withjust a small coolie cutter type backyard We were overwhelmed to find Bainbridge Street and we bought immediately. It was exactly what we were looking for. Exactly where we wanted to be, which was Livonia This proposal will dramatically change and impact that street Itwill take away the beauty that is there that we saw eight years ago. The pheasants that go across the street the deer we see in the neighborhood and so on will be impacted by tiffs and I am dramatically opposed to it On top of all the track and eveMhing else, I have for cbddren. My youngest is five and my oldest is 16. I have to be very careful with my children on Bainbridge Street We have a line drawn on our driveway, a white line that says, "stop'. They cannot go any closer to the road than that for fear of the 18455 traffic. Ifyou pert 8iatmmy more cols on that road, I am going w mwe that line back. Ibank you Fd Larsen,14925 Bainbridge. I have been living theresince 1986. One ofthe problems is the water table. I have a basement m my house. My two neighborsdo not Both fried to put basements to wbm they put then additions on but they could not They had running water in those footings all the time so they couldn't put the basement in. My problem is I am across the street. Is putting those units to going to change the water table? A I going to have problems? I know when one addition was going on they pert two feetof soil betweanthe houses. I had water come into my house. When tbat soil was removed, I did not So I have a concent with this water table over in that area of Bainbridge and the fact that some people have basements and a lot of people have slabs. Secondly, I had talked to Mr. Duggan and his son, Brim just a week ago and they were at my office. They were looking to rent some space from the landlord. They said that they were looking at a mhmm m range of $300,000 houses, at that time. It sounded like they were going after the 12 unit houses and not the 26. It's like, 'I'm going to go for the 26 but I will settle for 12," type of attitude. I know you can have an attorney speak for you and he doesn't know everything because why, it is the client privilege. I would lie to hear from Mr. Duggan what his real initis. Mr. McCann: Sir, what is before us tonight, and I would like to keep our cormnents directed towards that is, whether R-2 zoning is appropriate in that area The site plans would have to come back if the zoning were changed But tonigbt we are trying to keep it to new information. Mr. Larsen: The other issue is that on that street they were looking atputting a'T' atthe end and they have approached other people on the street for property. If you are going to take time to look at this and rezone Ibis, you might as well look at that whole street Do you want a road down all the houses down that street on the east side? If you allow this to happen with this zoning, what is to say this isn't going to happen further down the street You can do the same subdivision three times on that side of the street My comment is, "no" I don't wart it because I don't want to see developers tear down houses and bring a separate zoning in when there is no zoning like that around that property. Thank you. Leo Delafafrmier,14681 Bredin Court I am adjacent to Bainbridge, the nent street to the east. My property backs on to the Bainbridge properties. I am concerned with justrezoning in tbis area It has been attempted before since I have been there. I have been Io many meetings to stop rezor ^g This is a wonderful area Itis zoned properly. Itis fully developed. It doesn't need the intensity that this proposal intends to do. How you could put a quarter number of houses on five lots is beyond me. The development that is right next to Kroger, the gentleman bought and wanted to put cluster homes in there. Ittook us two years to convince him and for him to finally put up the new houses tbat areright next there. Ibereareseven lots. They areRUF. 18456 He did a responsible development. If, indeed, the petitioner would like to develop, he should do it responsibly within the zoning laws, the existing zoning laws. Not change the zoning to fit his plan. Plan to fit the zoning. I think we are doing things a little backwards here. We are trying to force 26 homes into something that isn't designed for 26 homes. It is RUF. It sbould remain that and let the developers develop W that plan. Thank you Bob Kelava, 15141 Bainbridge. That is on the north end of Bainbridge close to Five Mile Road We have lived there for 29 years now and I have seen the changes, the shopping center, which came in and replaced houses. NowI am seeing some rare things such as a driveway replacing the neigbborhood houses that use to surmmd me wbmwe bought 29 years ago. What I guess I would say in summary to everybody who has commented here today and I agree with every one of these comments that were made is that the cost of this rezoning proposal is extremely high to the existing residents of Bainbridge and some of the other existing streets. In the fact that first we have that street coning in, a perpendicular street which is going to be the outlet street, and it is going to come perpendicular in to three or four houses in particular that are sitting right along side of that road right up from to Bainbridge. They are not sitting back For example, all the lights that are conning in at night will be sh®mg into this gentleman's bedroom and that person's bathroom and suburb. What a cost to those people who have lived there so long Secondly, the additional traffic to Bainbridge is going to be exactly an increase of 50%. Tbereare exactly 48 homes on thereright now. The proposal is 26 new homes. Thais actually a 55% increase. Toa street that is tom up, you almost have to slow down, you ahnost have to walk your car down that stmet every day. You are going to put 50% more cars on there? Once that project is built it coal be. So the cost is going to be great to us especially if someday somebody says we've got to repave this now and we are going W put sidewalks in and that could come. What kind of a cost is that going to be to the neighborhood and to the people that already live there. Not to the people who are buying or who are building this projectbut tons. Sol say, the cost is extremely great Tbanlr you John J. Lamnuma, Jr. and my father is over here and lives at 14860 Bainbridge and I would like to say a few words on his behalf because he cant stand very well. My father moved into this area in 1947. I grew up in Livonia in that particular house and I went to school here. My father has always paid his taxes, kept the property up and now in their latter years, my parents would like to enjoy themselves and be able to sit in the backyard, walk their property, what is left and be able to look at the stars with" the lights and the congestion and the noise problems and also the wildlife andjust be able W live their remaining years in peace and not have W worry about their taxes going up and this gentleman constantly coming around wanting them to sell him Poen property when they told him specifically on several occasions, "No, we don'twarttaseil." Tbankyou Mr. McCann: I will close the public hearing. Mr. Kokeoakes, do you have a las[ comment before we vote? 18457 Mr. Kokeoakes: I would like to thank you, an behalf of Mr. Duggan and American Classic Realty, and thank the Planning Commission for hearing our presentation this evening. I also want to thank the neighbors who came out and voiced then concerns. We appreciate having that kind of feedback. We want to be a good neighbor too. Being a good neighbor doesn't mean killing our project off. We took those issues into consideration and that is why we have come forward with this cluster proposal with the goal of targeting empty nester purchasers because, as was indicated, these homes are going to have two bedrooms, two baths and a basement There will be as part of the development storm sewers in the project which will allevide water problems not acerbate them We already indicated the price of these homes will be $230,000 and 5260,000. I don't believe you are going to be drawing in undesirable persons in the area as indicated by one of the neighbors. I believe that we are talking 26 units and I think the traffic interaction would be m¢timal. I will say that we believe that we presented enough information to get an approving resolution. Rout. then we ask that the matter be concluded this evening and that a tabling resolution be provided On a motion by Mrs. Koons, seconded by Mr. Piercecchi and unanimously approved it was #451-2001 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Comrmssion on April 3, 2001, on Petition 2001-02-01-03 by James F. Duggan (American Classic Realty) requesting to rezone property located an the east side of Bainbridge Avenue between Five Mile Road and Lyndon Avenue in the N.W. 1/4 of Sectio 23 from RUF to R-2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2001- 02-01-03 be denied for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed change of zoning will adversely after Poe character of the subject area; 2) That the proposed change of zoning is inconsistentwith Poeprevailing RUF zoning in the area; 3) That Poe proposed change of zoning will provide for an unacceptable increase in the overall population density in the area; 4) That the proposed change of zoning is not necessary for the continued use ofthe subject property for low density residential purposes in conformance with the recommendation of the Future Land Use Plan; and 5) That the proposed change of zoning will provide for developintent Pout will increases traffic in flue area FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above bearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended 18458 Mr. McCann: Is them my discussion? Mr. LaPme: Ijust want to say to the residents in the area, in all due respect to Mr. Duggan, he is not the culprit in this situation. You neighbors are selling off the back portion oftheir property so they are really what is creating this situation. If they were it selling off a portion oftheir property, we wo ldnY have that case before us tonight Being that as A may, I think Mr. Kokenakes has made the same statement twice. He says these lots are the same depth as the lots in front of them and the lots across the street, which in looking at the plot plan here is absolutely right Therefore, to me, if we are going to have to go for something like Ibis, then let's have one house on each one of those lots, which gives us five homes. It world be 99 feetby 330 feet deep. I don'tthink the R-2 in this area is what is needed for that area I think it is overbuilding a parcel therefore I am going to support the motion. Mr. McCam, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted It will go on to City Council with a denying resolution. ITEM #3 PETITION 2001-02-02-04 Pottery & Plants Mr. Piencecchi, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is petition 2001-02-02-04 by Pottery & Plants requesting waiver use approval for the seasonal outdoor display of home and garden supplies and materials on property located on the north side of Schmlcratf Road between Middlebelt Road and Beatrice Avenue in the SE. 1/4 of Section 23. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zomng of the surrounding area Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak Thee are fouritems ofcorspovdemz. Thefirstitemisalelhufrom Poe Division of police, dated Mach 9, 2001, which reads as follows: F'We have reviewed the site plan m regards to waiver use approval for the outdoor display ofhome and garden supplies. We have no objection to the plan as submitted." Time letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The second letter is from the Engineering Division, dated Mach 13, 2001, wfuchreadsisfollows: "Pursuant toyour request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. The Engmeermg Division has m objections to the proposal at this time. The following approximate legal deserphon should be used in connection therewith The South 300feetof Lot 10, Wolfram Estates Subdivision, T. IS., R. 9E., Livonia Township (now Cdy ofLtvoma), Wayne County, Michigan as recorded in Liber 69, page 14, Wayne County Records, except for the South 60 feet thereof. ' The above legal description excludes the South 60 feet of the property which a between the South Property line and the front of the building. We bust that this will provide you with the information requested" The letter is signed by 18459 John Is Bill, Assistant City Engineer. The third lei is from the Livma Fire & Rescue, dated March 14, 2001, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the supplant submitted in connection with a request m display home andgarden outside on property located at the above referenced address. We have an objections to this proposal." The lelkris signed by James I Coscorm, Fre Marshal. The fourth lefts is from the Inspection Department, dated March 14, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of March 7, 2001, the above referenced petition has been reviewed Thefollowmgis noted.. (1) Asproposed,thispemonwr7lrresda variance from the Zoning Board ofAppeals for a fence in the frontyard and a variance for front yard display ofmaterials within the required front yard setback of 60 feet or the Petitioner may relocate the southern edge of the area to Grte up with the front of the building. (2) The driveway approach needs repair and the parking area needs to be double striped. This Department has no further objection to this petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr.McCann: Isthepettionerheretbiseve ing? Mark Dalon,29460Schoolcrafl Road Iain aware after I filed this temporary peanut that cannot have the fence in the from vard and I have to move itback 30 feet I amwiflmg to do &tat They also asked me ifI could repair a little patch in Bre front duveway which l have no problem doing. The double stripingmthe driveway, I wasn't aware of It needs to be done so I have no problem doing that If am going to change the setback with the heave in the from yard, I awn going to lose some space. So instead of going maybe 12 foot wide, maybe I could do the same square footage and maybe it would be 15 foot wide. It is just a small chain link fence. Basically, right on the side ofthe bolding, which would be there from now through October fust for seasonal memhandise. I would request, I have no problem doing that I will move the fence back because I can't go in from of the building. I wouldjust like to go a little wider m get the square footage I need and I would keep it in with that same square footage that I requested However that would turn out whenever we calculated it Mr. McCain: Are there any questions from the C®missioners? Mr. Lapin: According m the notes we have, you do notintend to sell arty live plants. There will be no shrubs, flowers or arythmg hike that is going to be sold there? Mr. Dale: No sir. It is like bind baths and pottery. Mr. Lapive: You are not going to be selling arty top soil or anything like that? Mr. Dale: No, not at all. Just pottery and birdbaths and things like that and garden supplies but not like dirt and flowers or anything like that 18460 Mr. LaPme: You do agree that you will not have anyburg in the 60 foot 6ont yard that is required by the ordinance? Everything will be behind the 60 feet? Mr. Dalon: Absolutely. Mrs. Koons: A question for Mr. Taormina. Does he have room to increase that 15 feet? Mr. Taormina: Yes. The present setback between the building and the west property line is approximately 50 feet That would leave roughly 35 feet of space between the fenced in area and the property line. Mrs. Koons: So the width will now be 15 feet and what would you consider an appropriate depth at that point ifit is not to be in front of Poe budding? Mr. Taw®na: I believe the request ongjnally was for 90 feet but that included the 30 additional feet that was within the front yard. Byelmmunatingthe30feetand widening it kr 15 feet, I do not believe it is the petitioners intention to estend it airy further back, as a result Is itjust to make the area a little wider! Mr. Dalon: What I would like to do is basically, it was going to go the length of the building which I am guessing is 60 feet and A was going to go 30 feet out in the front So if I make it 60 feet, maybe by 15 feet or 18 feet or whatever, I would like to get the same squtre footage but it will be right next to the budding. It will start in the front, come down the side and go back so it will not be extending side by side to the building at all. Mrs. Koons: A lmof the things that you are going to be storing out there are large and heavy and after the date ends, will you have room inside far those? Mr. Dalon: Yes, I will I bring in merchandise for the season. In the fall my business is mainly silk plants and flowers. Mr. LaPine: How much parking do you have there? When I was out there I couldn't tell. You didn't have anything striped so I anal know how much parking you have and being that you are on the north side of SchoolcraR, which is one way, I just want to know where the parking is going to be. Is it going to be in the front or in the rear! How is it going to be arranged. Mr. Dalon: In the front, there is limited parking but there is a drive that goes to the back and the whole back is all parking. Mr. LaPme: Is it all paved? Mr. Dalon: Yes. It is all paved. It is at least 35 to 40 car parking. I would have to guess. Mr. Sbane: I was out there as wall and while you have parking in the rear, it appears to me that it needs a lot ofwork You can't see the stripes. You can'ttell whereyou are parking 18461 Mr. Dalin: It is important for me to make it easier for the customers. Mr. Shane: There are three big dumpsters sitting back there. Hopefully that is temporary. Mr. Dalin: That is an issue. Actually, I called the City of Livonia to put in some outdoor storage units. They told me I couldn't put anything outside and they told me it was O.K. to put some outdoor storage units in. Since then, they have told me they would like for me to remove them and I have talked to several people and if this proposal is approved, I am going to put that fence in, in those storage units as my seasonal merchandise which I plan m putting in that fenced area I will remove those storage mus numediately. They are actually sitting in some of the parking spaces. Mr. Shane: O.K Cmreuly you don't have any landscaping m the site. Are you planning to install some addNonal landscaping Mr. Dalin: I dm't own the property, actually. Mr. Shane: You don't? Mr. Dalm: I do plan m pulling in the bout of the building where there is a street sign that says, "Pottery Plus" and right in boot of the windows, there are some planting areas. Ido plan on planting those to make the property look better. Right now I took it over bom a radiator and auto repair shop so it has really been a project bom day me to get the inside good and the outside good. So little by little A is coming along, this fenced area and we will remove the containers. I will be striping the puking Im and I will be repaving the drive in the front. That I am doing on my own expense and I also plan on doing the landscaping A my own expense. Mr. Shane: Did yon have arty plans to the future ornowto upgrade the budding in arty way? Mr. Dalo: Actually the owner of the building is lalling about expanding the budding some where down the road and adding an addition He owns the Im next door also. But that is something that he has just talked about and he asked me if wood be interested in using more space if he bolt the budding and I told him I Would Mr. Shane: O.K. Thankym. Mr. McCann: If there are no bother questions bom the Commissioners, I will go to the audience. Is there anybody m the audience wfio wishes to speak for or against Us petitim? George Nicholas, 13904 Beatrice. I don't mind him having pottery, there as long as he posts a sign that states, 'No parking in grassy area" Idon't want them parking behind my house. That is not a parking lot 18462 Mr. McCann: Had is one of the conditions that he resurface and re -stripe the parking him make it appropriate. Mr. Nicholas: All I warn him to do is post signs, "No parking in this area" Then he can go ahead and to whatever he wavls. Mr. Dalon: That is agreeable. Mr. McCann: If there is nobody else wishing to speak, a motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Shane, seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimously approved it was #452-2001 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on April 3, 2001, on Petition 2001-02-02-04 by Pottery & Plants requesting waiver use approval for the seasonal outdoor display of home and garden supplies and materials on property located on the north side of Schoolcratt Road between Middlebelt Road and Beatrice Avenue in the SE. 1/4 of Section 23, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2001-02-02-04 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the outdoor display shall be confined to the area illustrated on the site plan submulad by Pottery and Plants, received by the Planning Commission on April 4, 2001, as amended; 2) That the outdoor display area shall be enclosed by a fence as required and shall be adjacent to the west side of the building as shown on the site plan, except that no part of the minimum front yard (60 foot setback from Schoolcraft Road to the hand of the building) shall be used for either the storage, placement or display of merchandise, 3) That the merchandise to be displayed within the fenced area shall be limited to clay pottery (such as "chimeneas") and other shmlar home and lawn decorations: 4) That the time period within which the outdoor display will tate place shall be limited to April 1 through October 1, inclusive; 5) TLaz the drive approach shall be repaired and the parking lot shall be double striped to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department; 6) That the petitioner shall install new landscaping adjacent to the fenced display area to provide for screening of the facility, subject to the approval of the Planning Depariusent 'n TLaz arty dumpstar, if provided on the site, shall be screened by means of a masonry enclosure with wood gates that shall be constructed near the northerly end of the rear parking lot 18463 8) That the site plan referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Depaz ent at the time the building permits are applied for; 9) That there sball be a sign posted stating, "No Parking in Grassy Area;" and 10) That the width of the outdoor display area shall be no greater than fifteen (15) feet For the following reasons: 1) That the proposed use is in compliance with all special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance 4543. 2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. 3) That the proposed use is compatible to and in hamnny with the surrounding uses in the area FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above bearing was given to accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance 4543, as amended. Mr. McCaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted ITEM#4 PETITION 2001-01-07-01 City Planning Commission (Part VII of Master Plan) Mr. Piemecclu, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-01-07-01 by the City Pla ^ ng Commission to amend Part VII of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Future Land Use Plan, so as to change the designation of land lymg west ofFamungam Road and north of Lyndon Avenue in the NE. 1/4 of Section 21 from Office to Medium Density Residential. Mr. Taommina: This map illustrates the land area involved in this request for the mundment ofthe Master Plan. The area shown in red and exists along the west side of Famungton Roadjust north of Lyndon Road, this is to the NE. 1/4 of Section 21. Section 21 being bounded by Five Mile Road to the north,Farmington Road to the east, Schoolcmft Road and the I-96 Expressway to the south There is a more detailed map that shows the location of the property in relationship to the surrounding properties and land uses. This site consists of several contiguous acreage parcels that begin along the westerly undeveloped portion of the Time Warner property and extend north and include five additional parcels, several ofwhich contain single-family residences. The Fudre Land Use Map presently shows this area for office. It is being requested this ewemng, by the City Plamang Commission, that ills area be reclassified for medium density residential. Ibis would correspond to a 18464 future development density of between 4 to 14 dwelling units per acre. Just to give you a little bit better information no the location of these properties, this is the Time Warner property, which is just north of Lyndon Road humediately to the west of the subject parcels is the Silver Village Senior Housing development and to the north of that is the Lutheran Village Senior Housing development The parcels that provide access to Lutheran Village liejust north of the area under consideration. Immediately to the north of that access drive are several other acreage parcels that have developed single - funny harries. Further to the north is the Livonia cemetery and behind that is property owned and used by the Livonia Public Schools as part of their administrative Lvdding. The area immediately to the north is also classified under our Master Plan as medium density residential. hmnediately east across Famrmgtnn Road is land that is developed primarily as office, including the Heritage Cormmnns office developm®t Thank you Mr.McCann: Since this is a Planning Coamtissiorfs motion I will go directly wthe audience. Is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing. A motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Piencecchi, seconded by Mr. Shave and unanimously approved it was #453-2001 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the provisions of Act 285 of the Public Acts ofMichigm, 1931, as ammded, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 23.01(b) of Ordnance 4543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, held a Public Hearing on April 3, 2001, for the purpose of amending Pm VQ of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Future Land Use Plan, the same is hereby amended by changing the designation of land located west ofFamrington Road and north of Lyndon Avenue in the N.E. 1/4 of Section 21 from Office to Medium Density Residential for the following reasons: 1) That the present frtnre land use designation is not in the best interests of the City or the surrounding properties from a planning standpoint 2) Thin the proposed new land use designation will provide for a variety of housing opportunities to serve the subject area; 3) That the proposed new land use designation is consistent with the residential uses in the surrounding area; and 4) That the proposed land use designation will discourage additional inappropriate nonresidential zoning requests for property located along Farmington Road in this area AND, having given proper notice of such hearing as required by Act 285 of Public Acts ofMichigan 1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission does hereby adopt said amendment as part of the Future Land Use Plan of the City of Lw ma which is incorporated herein by reference, the same having 18465 been adopted by resolution of the City Planning Commission with all amendments therekr, and father that this amendment shall be filed with the City Comin, City Clerk and the City Planning Commission and a caged copy shall also be forwarded to the Register of Deeds for the County of Wayne fermcording. Mr. McCa®, Chairman, declared the motion is canned and the foregoing resolution adopted ITEM#5 PETITION 2001-02-01-02 Craig Corbell(Hunter Homes, Inc) Mr. Piemeccbi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-02-01-02 by Craig Corbell (Flower Homes, Inc ) requesting to rezone property located on the east side of Newburgh Road between Five Mile Road and Ladywood Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 17 from R-9 to R -C. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property miler petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. McCain: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak The is a letter from the Engineering Division, dated Mm& 8, 2001, which readsasfollows: "Pursuant toyour request the EnguiceringDansion has reviewed the above referenced petition. The attached legal description a acceptable to this department Due to existing drainage capacityproblems in the area the developer will be required to provide 100year storm water detention jar the site in accordance with the Wayne County Storm Water Ahmagement Ordinance and we will be limiting nomffeapacity in 0.15 efs./acre. No open detention basin orforebay will be required The developer will be required to address the differential in grades at the rear of the property in the site grading plan To the developer's credit, we have already been in contact on this matter. On the attachedcopy, ofthe site plan, this offee has marked up a slight re- alignment of the South drive entrance and increased the entrance radius. Other than the abovementioned items, we have no objections to the proposal. We trust that this w$1 provide you with the information requested" Theletter is sipped by David Lear, PE., Civil Engineer. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Craig Cabell, Hunter Homes, 3941 Telegraph Road I would like to thank the members of the Commission for thein time tonight I would also like to thank the neighbors for thein time as well, fa holding meetings at then homes and raking the mmrerous phone calls throughout this entire process. I would especially like to thank the members of the different departments for all of thein help and assistance in understanding developing solutions to a lot of the concerns at this particular site. At this hearing, as year know, we are here 0 address the final issues of zoning and setbacks which are required fa a waiver use. 18466 Mr. McCamc The petition before us right now is why R C is more appropriate in this area than an R-9. Mr. Corbell: Fxactly. Ijustwanttomalwatwomim statem mndthatisesseutially what seems to be the case after meeting with numerous parties involved with the whole process and especially after meeting with the neighbors and hearing thein comments. We sat down with the various departments and took care of a lot of their concerns as well as the Comrmssion's. Ibe Engineering Deparhnent confirmed that we can solve the drainage problems as that was the firstandbiggestissue. The new street aligimmincels the needs of the neighbors to the west and the new residents. Mr. Sedestrom's comments have already been taken man consideration by the Engineering Department and I understand that they will be the final decision maker on that particular item The Planning Department confirmed that additional trees and landscaping along Newburgh Road would enhance the area as well as the new neighborhood and it is great to see that we are bringing back tree lined streets. The landscape wall will help reduce the traffic mise for the neighbors to the east and Country Home Estates w well m the newresider The new homes were designed with a lower profile and this allows the neighbors adjoining the parcel on Liverpool as well as Ladywood to not have to look at a towering building in then backyards. Manyofthedetailshavebeenworkedmtwith the planners, including Mr. Nowak, concerning the brick, irrigation. recreation and parking. We brought all the different parties involved together and pert together as many ideas as possible to resolve all the issues and it now appears the last item of concern is the Planning Corrmtission's apprehension about the appropriateness of the current zoning. For these types of homes being proposed it appears that the better fit would obviously be changing the zoning to R -C The setback issues would becoming up in the next item concerning the waiver use. To summarize we agree that the rezoning to a R -C zoning classification would be appropriate for the neighborhood It is the best alternative compared to anything else that has been proposed previously. Ibis type ofnewhousmg will meet area] need in the cmmmmity and this residential location is ideal for walling to everyfinmg There are sidewalks that literally allow access as well as exiting out cam, a main thoroughfare for shopping and dining, schools and swim clubs as well as being close to the churches and hospitals. Thenewhomeownerswillenjoythesenseof community displayed so graciously by the surrounding neighbors and lastly, these neighbors not only welcome the new neighborhood, but they do want i; as we heard at the last Commission hearing. It was great to see that type of a tmnmR WearehemwrequestthatthezaningbechmgedfmmR9to R -Cas well. Ibank you. Mr. McCann: Are thereany questions from the Commissioners? Mr. Piemecchi: I may not be vehemently opposed m R -C in that area but you are putting 36 units in there and some of these major units have 10 feet between them That is worse than public housing. 18467 Mr. Corbell: Public housing has a wall. Mr.Pierezrchi: Ilivedinpublichousingasakid Wehadmorelhavl0feetbetween buildings. But I think you ought to look this thing over a little bit and be a little bit more practical here and get some footage between these buildings. Mr. McCann: Dan, we are still dealing withjust the zon ^g Mr. Piencecchi: I realize that but we are discussing other things. I am stating here that I am not totally objecting to the R C zoning but I could never accept a plan like this. Tliat is the next step. Mr. Corbell: Should l address that concern now? Mr. McCain: You sure can. Mr. Corbell: First of all, the reason for the distance is because they are ranch homes rather than townhouses and so they obviously require more lot coverage than a townhouse. People would rather have more space inside their home than outside then home with this type of neighborhood The density in this R -C district actually allows for 49 units an this site and we have proposed 36 units. As far as the actual visibility in viewing of those units, I have not only seen numerous units and neighborhoods developed hike this but achadly have developed them within the City of Livonia, as well as in neighboring communities and I can show you homes that nm anywhere from $150,000 up to $550,000 within the last three years that are 10 feet apart Literally, across from the library is Civic Park Woods under construction now. That was recently approved and those are 10 feet aparL They arevery similar units to these so you can actually see how they look and they sell very well. People love them and we orient the windows. We orient the units views to eliminate the wall effect and it is the best alternative to having four-plexes, or frve-plexes or six-plexes or even tbree-plexes. Everyone gds an end unit this way and this is probably the best type of condominium living out there A this time. Mr. Pierceccbi: As I said, I am not opposed to the R -C package but, to me, this layout here doesn't have my ruagmatian to it Mr. Corbell: The site does limitthe creativity of the layaR Mr. McCain: Lets get back on track We are going to gd to that injust a rrtinfte. Are there any other questions regarding the zoning issue? If there are no further questions from the Commissioners, I am going to go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against the zo mg? Please come forward and give us your name and address. Gerald Smith, 37111 Ladywood, Livonia I have been out here since 1965 at the same location. I amright aramd the comer from this property this gentleman is talkingabaR He says he has talked to the neighbors. Imusthavebeen 18468 asleep because I have never seen this man before. To me, putting houses right off of Newburgh, clustering them in an area there, is a mistake. You've got nothing but resideranal property on the west side of Newburgh and on the east side you ve got homes, you've got schools. Pitting places like that, how are these people going to come out of there and turn to go south on Newburgh toward Five Mile? They are not They would go up through Ladywood and go through the subdivision I happen to live on a comer with a three way stop. I can't get out of my driveway now half of the time when it is busy. You can't pit another light there because you ve got a stop light at Myna and you've one at Hohnes School. To me, that is a total mistake putting in that type of a home. I donikoowwhat the value ofthe homes are. I didn't happen to hear that What value are the homes? Mr. McCann: $150,000 to $240,000I believe was the statement or in that ballpark M.S®th: That sounds like some of the property they have down in Wayne on Mchigm Avenue and Venoy Road, ranch type condomimnms, or townhouses orwhatever youwantto call them Ihaveapictureofoneof those in my briefease right here if that is sunilarto it and tome it is garage door after garage door in the front and the houses are right behind it. Being 10 feet apart, I can't see possibly putting houses 10 feet apart. That is abort two sidewalk widths between buildings. Itis ridiculous. That isjust jammmg them in. Right now I live on a street and I never go up to Ladywood to try to make a left tum ordo Newburgh. I have to go around to Ladywood then to Myna and come out at the stoplight to make my turns because there isjust wo much traffic. You ve got the mall, you ve got the freeway and it is just not a good setting. The best thing to put in that area, if my" would be single -firmly homes. The same as they have across the street and on Sherwood, Kingsbury and Lancaster andjust to the north of this area. Between Myna and the Hohnes School you've got a couple of resident places there. I doral think that is a good spot at all for cluster homes, townho us , tenements or whatever you warn w call them I amtotally against it Denise Diabiase, 156619 Liverpool. I think it would be a mistake not to develop this property the way M. Corbell has asked The reality of the times is thatnot everyone wants a single dwelling house. Not everyone can afford it You can't stop progress. This is supposed to be a City of progress. We need to offer more uboices forliving arrangements. I think that this style is acceptable. I don't find it tenement I don'tthink the plan needs tobe insulted I think it is just a choice and for people that are looking for a simpler lifestyle and don't want to mow their lawn, I doral see A as a problem I'm 10 feet from my neigbbor and I have a single dwelling home. I don't see that as problematic. Bill Ralston, 15631 Liverpool. I work for the Taubmarr shopping center and developer. This project that is being proposed is probably, from an aesthetic standpoint emiromn®tat as well as a tax base, the best possible project that we could have in this location I know there is some concern abet traffic. This gentleman mentioned single residential. Single residential would haw to 18469 back out into that street This site plan proposal creates a street where the complexes have easy access to the road. I guess that is about it I respectfully request that the Commission please approve this project I'm getting tired ofcon®g to these meetings. Henry Stein, 15552 Newburgh I own the property adjacent to where Mr. Corbell is planning on building. I see no problem with het budding the way he desires. But am wondering, are you going to rezone my property or do I come here again for that problem? I own the property right beside all of this. Mr. McCann: Southeast piece? Mr. Shw: Next to Ameritech Mr. McCain: Tbat would have to come back. Mr. Shw: All right Nancy Pierson, 15699 Liverpool. I have lived there for four years now and my experience bas been that there have been all kinds of issues with that property. I know all the neighbors have been opposed to anAmg but residential. That is why we are definitely for this R -C because that A will bring it into residential versus this conmmnity assisted Irving, which really isn'tresidential. It's both residential and commercial. Ijust wart kr let you know that I saw the plans for these houses and I feel they are very aesthetically pleasing and I also saw the condominiums that are out in the Plymouth area on M-14 and Beck Road, by the new fire department I was very pleased to see how they looked They look like homes. That is what I want I want homes, or those mimicking homes to be behind my house. I don't want arty type of commercial buildings or gigm4c plantation homes far assisted living folks. Ijust warted to let you know. I know you areconcerned about this 10 feet issue but if you would like to go out there and see those in Plymouth, they are already sold and built and completed I don't really see that they would be any different than other residential. They really appear to be single residential dwellings even these are duplex, what he is proposing. I don't see that being a problem Herman Felthaus, 37587 Kingsbury. I live two blocks north of Five Mile, five houses off of Newburgh Road I am not against anybody makmg money but I would just hope that you would look at both plans and see which one would give you the least amount of traffic on Newburgh Road Certain times daring the day the tmffrc gets blocks past my side street and the driver etiquette today, the people do not let you im You have to wait several minutes to get off onto Newburgh Road. I don't mind somebody making money but I would lilye the least amount of traffic on Newburgh Road Thank you Mr. McCain: Ib you have any last comments, Mr. Corbell, before we close the public hearing 18470 Mr. Corbell: Ijust wanted to thank you for you time and again. the neighbors. Unfortunately, I believe, that gentleman rmght have been on the other side of Ladywood because I believe all of the Ladywood residents, as well as the Liverpool who were adjoining this parcel, were here at the last hearing and are aware of this hearing. Most of them are here although they are not all necessarily standing up and speaking. I can assure you that all of the adjoining neighbors all have given us their full support for this proposal. Thank you Mr. McCann: A motion is in order. On a motion by Mrs. Kobus, seconded by Mr. LaPme and approved it was RESOLVED that, punmant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission an April 3, 2001, an Petition 2001-02-01-02 by Craig Corbell (Ruder Homes, Inc.) requesting to rezone property located on the east side of Newburgh Road between Five Mile Road and Ladywood Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 17 from R-9 to R- C. the Planning Commissibu does hereby recommend to the City Crowd that Petition 2001-02-01-02 be approved for the following reasbus: 1) That the proposed change of zoning will promoR a comprehensive development plan for the subject property, 2) That the proposed change of zoning represents a reasonable andlogical zoning plan for the subject property which adheres to the principles of sound land use planning; 3) That the proposed change of zoning will mane that the subject property is developed for condominium uses as opposed to rental housing facilities; and 4) That the proposed change of wring will provide for more of a variety of housing types in the area Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion? Hearing mine, I have a couple of comments. I looked at the lk 9, senior development It has very little impact an the traffic. There is very little prime time traffic as far as early morning or late evening, more open green space in the area and it really would fit into the area I understand Poe familiesin the area concern for residential. One ofthe things I looked at wben I went up and down this property was why R -2A wouldn't fit in there. If you go up and down Farmington Road and if you go up and down Su Mule and if you go up and down the adjoining areas, many of the homes are built with a road that has just a little median strip between it and the main mad and the homes back up to the neighbors so you have backyard to backyard You have front yards coming out buto a private mad and this could be developed with a 240 foot depth without a problem in that instance. It would match many oftheareasin Livonia IjustdbuYknowifthisidensivetypeofa 18471 development in this area is appropriate. Would the secretary please call the roll? Amll call vote was taken with the following result AYES: Koons NAYS: LaPlne, Piercecchi, Shane, McCann ABSENT: Alauskas Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion fails. Is there an alternative motion? On a motion by Mr. LaPive, seconded by Mr. Piercecchi, and approved it was #4542001 RESOLVED that, pursrantto a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on April 3, 2001, on Petition 2001-02-01-02 by Craig Corbell (Hunter Homes, Inc.) requesting to rezone property located m the east side of Newburgh Road between Five Mile Road and Ladywood Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 17 from R-9 to R C, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2001-02-01-02 be denied ter the following reasons: 1) 'Ibat the proposed change of zoning is incompatible to and not in hamhorry, with the surram ling zoning and land uses in the area; 2) Tbat the subjectproperty will be difficult to develop under the proposed R- C zoning classification because of its shallow depth necessitating the granting of variances or the waiving of various yard requiranents; 3) That the existing zoning class cation provides for the development of the subject property in an appropriate manner; and 4) That the proposed change of zoning would allow for an intensity of use that would be detrimental to the adjacent single family residential uses in the area. Mr. McCarm Is thereany discussion? Mr. Shane: While I am not sure the R-9 district is the right district either the R C district gives more density than what I would like to see in here and that is why I voted against it I think if we had a single -Family residential zone on this property it could do the same thing only with a few less units and a lilte bit care creative design That is where I am coming from I am going to vote for the denying resolution only because I think the R C is not the district we wart either. Mr. McCann: Will the secretary please call the roll? A roll call vote was talon with the following result 18472 AYES: LaPme, Piercecchi, Sbame, McCann NAYS: Koons ABSENT: Alanskas FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. McCaun, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted This petition will go on to City Council wrh a denying resoMion. This concludes the public hearing portion of Us meeting We will now proceed with the Pending Item section of our agenda These items have been discussed at length in prior meetings therefore, them will only be limned discussion tonight Audimn pa ipa min ll requve nmawmous runsent fro flee Commission. ITEM#6 PETITION 2000-12-02-35 Craig Corbell(Hmter Homes, Inc) Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2000-12-02-38 by Craig Corbell (Hunter Homes, Inc.) requesting waiver use approval to construct a Planned Residential Development on property located on the east side ofNewbrgb Road between Five Mile and Ladywood Roads in the S.W. 1/4 of Sectim 17. On a motion by Mr. Piercerchi, seconded by Mr. Shane and unanimously approved it was #455-2001 RESOLVED that, the Planning Commtissim does hereby recommend that Petition 2000-12-02-38 by Craig Corbell (Hunter Homes, Inc.) requesting waiver use approval to construct a Planned Residential Development on property located an the east side of Newburgh Road between Five Mile and Ladywood Roads in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 17 be taken fr m the table. Mr. McCain, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted Is there any additional correspondence? Mr. Taormina: There is an additional letter from the Inspection Department, dated March 14, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request ofMarch 2, 2001, the above referenced petition has been reviewed. The following u noted (1) This petition has been reviewed under RC Zoning requirements. (2) This petition, as presented, will require the following variances from the Zoning Board ofAppeals: (a) Deficient front yard setback- 75 feet required, 30 feet provided (b) Deficient rear yard setback- Sb feet required, 35 feet pnrvided (c) Brick screen wallin the front yard (3) The type ofexterior construction must be essentially ofa maintenance free type. This detail should be clarified Thu Department has no frvlher objection to this petition." The kttoris signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the con spmdence. 18473 Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner hem? I guess he left I Poink we want this to follow on with the resolution on the zoning. We have reviewed it. Are there any concerns from the Commissioners at this time? Hearing time, a motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Shave, seconded by Mrs. Koons and unanimously approved, it was #456-2001 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Covmuission on January 30, 2001, on Petition 2000-12-02-38 by Craig Corbell (Hunter Homes, Inc.) requesting waiver use approval to constant a Planned Residential Development on property located on the east side of Newburgh Road between Five Mile and Ladywood Roads in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 17, Poe Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2000-12-02-38 be denied subject to the following conditions: 1) That the petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use is in compliance with all of the general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance 4543; 2) That the petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use is in compliance with all the standards and requirements as set forth in Section 20.02 of the Zoning Ordinance #543 governing Planned Residential Developments. 3) That the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the needed modifications of the yard requirements as set forth in Section 7.04A(c) of the Zoning Ordinance #543 will result in more efficient use of the land and will not be injurious to surrounding land and to the public as a whole: 4) That the planned development does not provide enough open space (landscaped areas and passive and active recreation areas) for the number of units proposed; 5) That the proposed use is incompatible to and not in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area; and 6) That the proposed site layout and its relation to sheet access, particularly with respect to vehicular turning movements in relation to routes oftnffmc flow, will be hazardous and dimphtive to neighboring properties and the neigbbormg area in general. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing as given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance 4543, as amended. Mr. McCaw, Chairman, declared the motion is camel and the foregoing resolution adopted Mr. Taormina, would you make sure the petitioner is informed that he has 10 days in which to appeal in writing to the City Council? 18474 Mr. Taommma: We will do that ITEM#7 PETITION 2000-09-02-30 White Castle System, Inc. Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2000-09-02-30 by W le Castle System, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to consNuct and operate a fast food, limited service restaurant with drive -up windows as well as inside seating on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Farrington Road and Woodring Avenue in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 34. Mr.McCann: The Planning Department has received a letter from Joseph Baric, Detroit Area Construction Representative, dated March 30, 2001, which reads as follows: "With this correspondence While Castle System is normally withdrawing nor Waiver Use Application for Petition 2000-09-02-30, S.E..C. Shelden Center Outiot I ampleased to inform you that we have successfully negotiated along tent lease for nor existing Wonderland Mall cutlot location with a replacement reslaurmrt including nor own site & landscape. We will be contacting you for discussion when our site plans are available. Thank you for your assistance and the Planning Conmtission's time and efforts on the canceled Shelden Center plan." On a motion by Mr. LaPme, supported by Mrs. Koons and unanimously approved it was #457-2001 RESOLVED that, pmnmant to a Public Heaving having been held by the City Planning Commission on November 1, 2000, and pursuard to a request by Waite Castle System, Inc, dated Manch 30, 2001, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the withdrawal of Petition 2000-09-02-30 by W le Castle System, Inc., requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a fast food, limited service restaurant with drive -up windows as well as inside seating on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Farmington Road and Woodring Avenue in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 34. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above bearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 ofZomng Ordivauce 4543, as amended. Mr. McCa®, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted ITEM #S Motion to Hold a Public Hearing (Home Businesses) Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Motion to hold a public hearing to detemuine whether or not to amend Section 4.02 to establish various restrictions in connection with home businesses. On a motion by Lupine, seconded by Mr. Shane and unanimously approved it was 18475 #458-2001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission. pursued to Council Resolution #45-01. and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance 4543, the Zoning Ordnance of the City of Livonia, as amended, does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to amend Section 4.02 of Article N of the Zoning Ordinance to establish various restrictions in correction with home businesses. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of such hearing be given as provided in Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shall be a report and recournendation submitted to the City Council. A roll call vote was taken with the following result AYES: Koons, LaPine, Piercecchi, Shane, McCam NAYS: Now ABSENT Alawkas Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopt-& ITEM #9 Motion to hold a Public Hearing (Drug Stores & Pharmacies) Mr. Piercecchi, announced the next item on the agenda is Motion to hold a public hearing pursuant to Council Resolution 466-01 to determine wbether or not to amend Sections 10.02, 10.03, 11.02 and 11.03 to designate drug stores and pharmacies as waiver uses. On a motion by Mrs. Koms, seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimnously approved it was #459-2001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning(kmmission, purniot to Coursed Resolution N66-01, and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance 4543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to amend Sections 10.02, 10.03, 11.02 and 11.03 of Articles X and Xl of the Zoning Ordinance to designate drug stores and phamncies as waiver uses. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of such hearing be given as provided in Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shall be a report and rerommeadatim submitted to the City Council. Amll call vote was taken with the following result AYES: Koons, LaPine, Pierczcchi, Shane, McCann NAYS: Now ABSENT Alanskas Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopt-& 18476 ITEM #10 Motion to hold a Public Hearing Restaurants in C 1 District Mr. Piemzcchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Motive to hold a public hearing pursuant to Council Resolution 478-01 to deNmine whether or not to amend Section 10.03, seating limitations for restaunents in a C-1 district On a motion by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Piercecchi and umammausly approved it was #460.2001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Comrmssion, paursuantto Council Resolution 478-01, and punuarR to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance 4543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not w amend Section 10.03 of Article X of the Zoning Ordinance, seating limitations for restaurants in a C-1 district FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of such hearing be given as provided in Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shall be a report and recormnendamn submitted to the City Council A roll call vote was taken with the fdlowing result: AYES: Koons, LaPme, Pien ecebi, Shane, McCain NAYS: None ABSENT: Alanskas Mr. McCa®, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. This concludes the Pending Item section of our agenda We will now proceed with the Miscellaneous Site Plan of our agenda Members of the audience may speak in support or opposition to these items. ITEM#11 PETITION 2001-02-08-12 Recep%uftn BUchard's FamttyRest®umnt) Mr. Piemeccbi, Secretary, arnoumced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-02-08-12 by Recep Roma, on behalf of Richard's Familv Restaurant, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to renovate the exterior of the restaurant located at 3 93 05 Plymouth Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 30. Mr. Miller: This site is located on the south side of Plymouth between Eckles and Newburgh. The petitioner is requesting approval to renovate all four sides of the exterior of the Richard's Family Restrurmt Presently the outside of the restaurant has, what could be described as, an alpine motif. The petitioner is proposing to cover the existing masonry block walls, that the majority ofthe budding is coashucted out of, with dryviL A part of the from or north elevation is covered by brick This brick area would remain and be 18477 incorporated into the new Irak. The existing shingled roof would also remain as is. A hexagonal design feahue, composed of different color dryvit, would be integrated into the peak areas of each elevation. A color rendering has not been submitted at this time but the elevation plans do note that the dryvit would be a combination of light gray and dark green colors. The plans show that the dryvit would extend all the way to the grand. The petitioner has explained that part of the reason wants to renovate his restauram is because of the gas station across the street The station was recently rebuilt and is a major improvement to the area Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Tomorrow There are four ids of correspondence. The fust is a lett from the Dwisim ofPolice, da d Mamh 9, 2001, Nvmch reads as follows: "We have reviewed the plans regarding a proposal to renovate the exterior of the restaurant and have no objection to the plan as submitted " The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated March 13, 2001, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in correction with a request to renovate exterior of restaurant on property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal." The lett is signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal. The fluid letter is from the Engineering Division, dated March 20, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposal at this time. We trust that this will provideyou with the m oirmation requested." The letter is signed by David Lear, P.E., Civil Engineer. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated March 29, 2001, which reads as follows: 'Pursuant to our request ofMarch 6, 2001, the above referenced Petition has been reviewed The following a noted: (1) The rearparking area (south 12) needs repair and repaving. A Lghtpole has fallen down and was Lying in the tat (2) Ali parking needs reshriping (double} (3) The dumpster enclosure has bash and debris inside and outside. (a) The north 12 ofthe parking lot (bone front and rear of building) needs maintenance and resealing. (5) An EFTS system isproposed around enhy/exitdoors Consideration should be to give durabilly and damage resistance at Mose types ofareas. Therefore, a more durable EF6'should be specified Thu Department has no further objection to this Petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Directer of Inspection That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr.McCam: Isthepetitimerheretbiseve ing? Ron Myers, representing Richard's Family Restaurant, I am the architect, 865 Penniman Avenue, Plymouth, Michigan 48170-1621. Before you, you have a colored rendering showing the dryvit that we are going to end up using to do a facelift onto the restaurant We are going to a dark greea, light gray. The existing brick we ore keeping. We are going to wrap all four sides of the restaurant with the dryvit miming with the colo scheme that is noted on the plans. In regards to the driveway on the east side of the bolding, which according to 18478 one of the items, we are going to nm to an extra heavy down covering in there, another coating mesh and another skin coat of dryvit on there so that it will make it mare damage proof Mr. McCann: Are there arty questions firm the Commissimen? Mr. LaPine: On the east side of the restaurant you have a piece that comes out there. It looks like it was added on at some time. Is that All going to be there or is that going to be replaced? Mr. Myers: On the east side', Mr. LaPine: Is that where your entrance is, on the east side of the budding? Mr. Myers: No. The enhance is on the north side of the budding and also on the south side of the budding. Mr. LaPine: I know I was A the right place. Mr. Myers: Thee is a driveway along the east side and the west side. Mr. LaPine: o.K. PIl go out there and look again Mr. Shave: The green canopy, is that your enhance? Mr. Myers: Yes sir. Mr. Shave: Ib you intend to keep those newspaper stands out there? They really look tacky. Mr. Kurtis: They are right under the awning so I moved those to the other side. I don't like them myself but I will move those out of there. Richard Kurtis, owner of Richard's Faintly Restaurant I will redo some of Poe parking all the way back and do some patching. I will take care of those soon. That is no problem. The dumpshas, I have it all Bre way back I will make it look nicer and clean it up and A should be no problem Mr. Pie euchi: I assume I am looking at the enhance of this bu w. Mr. Myer: Yes sir. Mr. Piececchi: Is that ill or is that brick? I can't WH. It looks reddish. Mr. Myer: The reddish part is the existing brick that is on the restaurant right now. We arenot removing arty brick whalsoeve. We areworking wRh that existing brick It is more of a reddish, brownish type of a brick and the dryvit that we are adding is going to be a light gray and firer with a darker gee® on the other part of the dryvit You are going to have a two-tone type of a dryvit 18479 Mr. Pienerchi: Dryvit is not going to go on top of this? Correct? Mr. Myers: On the brick! Mr. Piemecchi: Yes. Mr. Myers: No. The dryvit is rot going on top of the brick We are keeping the brick The bricklooks mce. It gives you a warm feeling and we arekeeping the brick Mr. Piemecchi: It doeml get damaged by people going m and out of the budding either. Mr. Myers: You are right Mr. LaPme: The Iigbt fixture an the back that is down, does that light fixture work! Mr. Kurtis: All of the lights will be connng out. Mr. LaPme: Do you have any lighting m you parking lot? Mr. Kurtis: Yes I do. Mr. LaPme: What about the one that has fallen down? Mr. Kurtis: That one was good but sometimes we get those semi -tracks and they drive m close to those lights. Somebody knocked it down. As a matter offset, we moved that hgbt out of there today. Mr. LaPme: So its gone? Mr. Kurtis: Yes, it is gone. Mr. LaPme: The dumpster area, are you going to make sure that is repaired and fixed up and the gate that is on there is kept closed all the time? Because the day I was out there the garbage was laying aramd there. Whoever is dumping the geduagemust have a hit and miss attitude. Ifthey hitit they hit it and ifthey dont they don't Mr. Kurtis: I will make it look nice and clear. There is no problem there. Mr. LaPme: Thank you. Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions from the Commissioners, I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience who wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing nobody, a motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Piemacchi, seconded by Mrs. Koons and unanimously approved it was 18480 #461-2001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Contraission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2001-02-08-12 by Recep Ennis, on behalf of Richard's Family Reslaunart, requesting approNul of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to renovate the exterior of the restaurant located at 39305 Plymouth Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 30 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Exterior Budding Elevation Plans marked Shed 2 and Shed both dated August 31, 2000 prepared by Ronald G. Myers Architect, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2. That either brick or reinforced dryvit shall be exuded a least 3 & above grade on all far sides of the b ildmg; 3. That all brick wed mthe construction ofPoebudding shall bebill face 4 - inch brick no exceptions; 4. That the petitioner shall correct to the Inspection Department's satisfaction the following sale deficiencies as outlined in the correspondence dated March 29, 2001: that the entire parking lot shall be repaired, resealed and double striped that all handicap spaces shall be identified and comply with the Michigan Barrier Free Code that the fallen light pole in the parking lot shall either be put back up or removed that the trash and debris inside and outside the enclosed dumpster area shall be cleaned up 5. That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time the budding peanuts are applied for. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted R will go on to City Council with an approving resolution ITEM #12 PETITION 2001-03-05-13 Leo Soave (Chestnut Grove Site Condominiums) Mr. Pivicecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-08-13 by Leo Soave, on behalf of Chestnut Grove Site Condoutimunts requesting approval of the Master Deed, bylaws and site plan required by Section 18.62 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to amshuct sae condominiums on property located at 35195 Eight Mile Road in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 4. 18481 Mr. Miller This site is located south side of Eight Mile between Gill and Ellen The petitioner is requesting approval to develop a site condommium development on lots 4 through 7 of the Fainvzy Subdivision The submitted Site Plan shows that the new development would consist of twenty three (23) cmdomiruum lots. A 50 If wide public street would nm north and south off Eight Mile, curve east and west a short distance and then curve back north and south and end in a cul-de-sac. A 30 If greenbelt easemem would buffer the condominium development from Eight Mile Road Thesubtruned landscape plan shows that the greenbelt easement would be bermed 3 R to 3 VR and would be substantially planted with a combination of evergreen trees and deciduous trees. According to the submitted documentation the new development would be called "Chestnut Grove Condominiums'. Each condominium lot cant= to all requirements of an R-4 zoning district A copy of the Master Deed and bylaws for this new development has been submitted for review by the City. The documentation does call out the percentage of brick for the exterior of each unit. The first floor of each mit shall be brick on all tau sides, with the total amamt of brick on each dwelling being not less than 80% on one-story dwellings and 55% on two- story dwellings. All brick used in the construction of the condominiums shall be full face, 4 -inch brick Chinmeys of any dwelling shall be all brick Moment floor area for each one-story dwelling world be 1,850 sq. ft and 2,500 sq. ft for each two-story dwelling. All dwellings shall have a two -car attached garage, and with written approval from the developer or the Association, may have a three -car attached image. The petitioner is also requesting approval for a conforming entrance sign The sign would be located within the landscape ememem of lot 1 of the new development, on the east side of Maple Circle. Signage Permitted fur this site under Section 18.50E is one (1) entranceway sign, not to exceed 20 sq. ft in sign area, not to exceed 5 ft in height and setback 10 If from any R-O.W. line. Proposed Signage is one (1) entranceway sign, not to exceed 14 sq. If in sign area, not to exceed 3 ft in height and setback 10 If from intersection of Eight Mile and Maple Cr. Mr. McCain: Is there my correspondence? Mr. Taormina There are three ids of correspondence. The fust letter is from the Divisim of police, dartd March 23, 2001, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed the plans regarding a proposal to construct a site condominium development The plan does not indicate whether sidewalks are phmnedfor this development Ifsidewalks are not currently planned we would recommend that sidewalks be installed throughout the development for pedestrian safety. There a also an indication on the site plan regarding the installation of strein fights. We recommend the installation ofstreeHlghts for the crane prevention benefit they wall afford to the residents. A stop sign will also be required at Eight Mile Road" The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant Traffic Bureau The second letter is from the Inspection Department dmzd March 29, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to yarn request of March 20, 2001, the above referencedpention has been reviewed. Thefollowing a noted: This review has been made as though zoning is R 4. Thu Department has no objections to this pefifion I frust this provides the requested information." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection The third letter is from Poe Engineering Division, dated Mach 26, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition The Engineering Division cuirenHy, requires a minvnum ri&of-way width of saty(60) feet for standard residenhalroads. This allows the developer to provide a space between the edge ofroad and public sidewalkfor the placement ofutilmes outside ofthe pavement lines. However, given the site constraints, if no public sidewalk is to be required anda utility easement ofat least 10 jeet in width was in be created immediately adjacent in the right -of way, the Engineering Division would have an objections to the proposal. The development wouldalso have to meet the Wayne County Storm Water Management Ordinance requirements, which are cuirenHy, not shown on the plans. We mast that this will provide you with the information requested" The letter is signed by David Lem,P.E., Civil Engineer. That is the exert of thecomspondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner herelhis evemogl Leo Soave, 34822 Pembroke, Livonia This is going to be a paved street. In the case of a ranch, this is going to be 100% brick The two stories are going to be 65%to 70% brick and I'll answeryourquestions. Thaukyou Mr. McCain: Are there my questions from the Commissioners? Mr. LaPme: What about the sidewalks? Mr. Soave: Yes sir. Im sorry it doesnt show in the plan but we will have sidewalks. Mr. McCam: Iftlere are no father questions from the Commissioners, I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience who wishes to speak for or against this petition' Seeing nobody, a motion is in order. Mr. LaPme: If couldjust ask one question We are being asked to approve this site plan for the R4 but they don't really have the R4 zany; yet The Comm hasn't even voted on this yet It is on the agenda for uenx wnight Mr. Taormina: Thatiscomect. Itbasnotyetbeenfinalized Mr. LaPine: How do we do something when the zoning is not there? Actually, A isn't approved until the Council approves the minutes and it is advertised in the newspaper and we've got this before us already. Ijust dont is derstand how that operates. Mr. Taormina: Final authorization oflhe site plan would not go into effect urNl the Council acts on R What they would do in this issuance is hold the site plan back until the rezoning issue has been completed and then they would take a final action on the plan. 18483 Mr. LaPme: Should it even come to us before the Comcil acts an it? Mr. Taormina: There is nothing that prevents this body from reviewing the petition and forwarding its recommendation on to Council realizing that they are in the process of voting on it affimmtively. Mr. LaPme: But we don't know if they are going to vote affirmatively. It is not an the consent agenda. It is on the regular agenda, which means there most be some split votes. I assume it is going to go through but I amjust curious. Mr. McCann: This is similar to what we have done in the past for the Council when they ask for the zoning when they say they want the site plan caught up to the rezoning. Mr. LaPme: But that isn't happening in this case as far as I know. Mr. Mc Cam: I understand but we have done it in that instance. Mr. Shane: If it makes you feel better, Bill, put it in the conditions that it is subject to final rezoning by the City Co ncl. Mr. Taormina: That would be appropriate. Mr. LaPma It makes no difference. I amvoting against it anyway because I think at should have been R-5 anyway. Mr. McCann: A motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Shane, seconded by Mrs. Koons and approved it was #462-2001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commissiondoes herebyrecomumdto the City Council thatPetitim 2001-03-08-13 by Leo Soave, anbebalf of Chestnut Grove Sik Condominiums requesting approval of the master deed, bylaws and site plan required by Section 18.62 of the Zoning Ordinance in comencia with a proposal w construct site condominiums on property located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Gill Road and Ellen Drive in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 4 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Master Deed complies with the requirements ofthe Subdivision Control Ordinance, Title 16, Chapter 16.04-16.40 of the Livonia Code of Ordinance, and Article XX, Section 20.01-20.06 of Zoning Ordinance 4543, except for the fact the following shall be incorporated: that the first floor of each condommium unit shall be brick or stone, on all four sides, and the total amount of brick or stone on each two-story 18484 unit shall not be less than 65% and not less than 80% on one-skay dwellings; 2. That the brick used in the construction of each condonfinnm unit shall be full face 4 -inch brick no exceptions; 3. That the Site Plan marked Sheet 1 dated 3/1/01 prepared by Arpee/Donnan. Inc., is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 4. That the Landscape Plan marked Sheet 1 dated April 2, 2001, as revised, prepared by Arpee/Donoan, Inc., is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 5. That an Entrance Marker Application, as shown on the approved Landscape Plan, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 6. That the petitioner shall correct to the Engineering Depar[meut's satisfaction the following, as outlined in the correspondence dated March 26, 2001: - that a utility easement of at least 10 1 in width shall be created immediately adjacent to the RO.W. - that the development shall meet the Wayne County Storm Water Management Ordinance requiremeNs 7. That the plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Departimad at the time the budding pemrits are applied for; 8. That all required cash deposits, certified checks, irrevocable bank letters of credit and/or surely bonds which shall be established by the City Engineer pursuant to Article XVII] of Ordinance No. 543, Section 18.66 of the ordinance, shall be deposited with the City prior to the issuance of engineering pemuls for this site condammnnn development; 9. That fire hydrants shall be provided on Maple Circle with spacing of 300' between hydrants; 10. That skeet lights, sidewalks and stop signs shall be installed; and 11. TLatthis approval is subject to final approval of rem ng petition 2001-02- 01-02 by the City Cantil. Aroll call was taken with the following result: AYES: Koons, Pienwchi, Shave, McCana NAYS: IaPme 18485 ABSENT: Alanskas Mr. McCaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go an to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #13 PETITION 99-11-0531 Sunoco Gas Station Mr. Piemerchi, Secretary, announced the next item an the agenda is Petition 99-11-08-31 Sunoco Gas Station requesting approval of signage for the gas station located at 33234 SchoolcraR Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 22. Mr.Miller: This siteislocatadon the northeast comer of SchoolcraR and Farmington. On April 19, 2000 this site received site plan approval to renovate the existing gas station located on the subject site. As part ofthat approval it was conditioned: That no signs, either freestanding or wall mounted, are approved with this petition; all such signage shall be separately submitred for review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council In compliance with that requirement the applwant is requesting approval for a cmfirmaing sign package for the gas station. Signage Permitted for flus site under Section 18.50H is one (1) around sign, if containing fuel pricing information, not to exceed 40 sq. fit in sign area, not to exceed 12 ft in height and setback 5 ft from any R.O.W. line. Walt signs and all window signage, including canopy signage mote exceed 100 sq. ft in sign area Signage Proposed is one (1) grand sign containing fuel pricing information, 40 sq. ft in sign area, 12 ft in height setback 5 ft firm intersection of SchoolcraR and Farmington One (1) wall sign on service station, south elevation = `Sunoco Mad" =15 sq. ft in sign area. 2 canopy signs, West elev. (mcmq taavngon) _ "Sunoco"=13 sq. ft in sign area and south elev. (Lang smoomrrtp="Sunoco"= 13 sq. R in sign area The petitioner has stated that the signage shall conform to the colors specified by Sunoco, which is yellow, blue and red. Also, A this time, the petitioner is requesting to have one of the conditions that were specified in the approvingresolution ofPetition 99-11-8-31 removed. Aspart of the approval is was conditioned: That the gas pump island canopy shall not exceed Ig fit in height and its support columns shall be covered with the same brick use in the construction ofthe sanion1mm entence store; The petitioner is requesting to have the stipulation of the support columns being covered in brick removed The explanation of the petitioner is that the cost is not economically feasible, no other station in the area has brick columns, and the electric wrong for the canopy runs inside the columns. Should anything go wrong and the wining and needed to be accessed, the brick 18486 commis would present a problem The petitioner would like In have the canopy held up by the painted metal columns presently supporting it It has been the Planning Commission's fission's policy to require brick columns for canopies of any gas station that has proposed major renovations. The most resent gas station that was required In have brick columns is located at the northeast comer of Plymouth Road and Fckles Road, which is a Sunoco station This station's columns are stone or block near the bottom, with brick the rest of the way up. Mr. McCann: Is there any comespondence? Mr. Taormina: There a letteer form the Imspechom Department, dated March 29, 2001, which reads as follows: 'Pursuant to your request of March 20, 2001, the above referenced pentain has been reviewed Thefollowing a noted (i) This review has been conducted for signage only. (2) The ground sign as pictured would not be within ordinance. However, the typed wording of12 feet maximum height 40 squarefeet maximum signage (with prices) with proper setbacks would be dbwed (3) The other signage as depictedietals approximately 40.25 square feet and is less than the total aIIowabhe This Department has no further objechom to this petition other than as noted I trust the provides the requested unbrmahom" Theleter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection That is the exert of the correspondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evemn. Al Baay, 38888 Cbeshne, Northrille, Michigan 48167. The signage that we are requesting is pretty much standard over the Planning Commission's ]imiartion. The Stamen sign itself is going In be 8 feet as stated On the picture as shown it is a little larger than the 8 feet, as stated But it is going In be the 8 fret standard Mr. McCann: Will you do as a mommmt sign meaning that the base will go right into the ground and it will be solid from the around up? Mr. Barry: It is going In be a goal post sign.. Mr. McCann: The bottom will be above the ground or will t go unto the grand an a brick base? Mr. Barry: No. It is going In be above the grand Mr.McCann: Do you have an objection In making it me some type of foundation under the sign for aesthetic purposes? Mr. Barry: It is pretty diftcultbecause of the space limitation webe got there. We had to close down one of the driveways. When you close down one of those driveways, the armation of the space In put a sidewalk for crossing Farmington Road from me side In the other, so that kind of took some of the 18487 space plus Wayne County had some objections about a couple of things. There is limited space there. If try to bring in the sign and make it any smaller and make it into a ground aaunted sign, A will definitely stick art on the sidewalk The only way it can be done is by goal post signage. Mr. LaPtne: Directly across the street from the other side of the expressway, which is the Standard station, why cant you put a sign up hike that? Mr. Barzy: Because they have more space than I do for where there are. Their space is much bigger. Where then sign sits they have a much bigger sign area When the proposal was done by the Planning Commission to have one of the driveways shut down, it took some space away from us because we had to put in that additional sidewalk Mr. LaPtne: You could have put the sign out there anyway because that sidewalk was always there. If it wasnt a sidewalk, it was a driveway. I dont understand why you cant pert the sign back far enough so you can pert that type of mm up. If you can show me why it cant be done, then I mightbe able to understand. Mr. McCann: Maybe the staff could look at the drawing and how deep is that greenbelt area. Doeshehaveroomfa8 feet? I don'tknowhowheis going todeal with a pole-mmmted sign without going over the edge of the property. Mr. Miller: He has a five foot setback firm the property line. Mr. McCann That means he can only have a five fart wide sign Is that what you are saymg? Mr. Miller: Right Mr. McCam: It is basicallyjust budding up the fouvdationjust a little fit farther. You would build a foundation for you goal pasts and then build a foundation fn your bricks. Iheyjust come up to the bottom Itjust has a nicer affect That is what we are trying to get Is there anything else? Mr. Bazzy: The other thing was the canopy columns itself for the brick that was part of the resolution I dont have a problem with the canopy base with the bricks. The me issue that was brought to my attention, when those canopy columns are surrounded by brick there aretwo things that can go wrong. The electrical conduits are inside the columns. If there is a problem inside those canopy columns, those bricks have to come down. Mr. McCam: W. Mr. Bazzy: Ym have to tear into the brick to get to the canopy. Mr. McCam: Most of them put an access plate. 18488 Mr. Bazry: Correct That was brought up to me. Second was the drainage. The drainage is inside the canopy columns. Ifthere is a backup in drainage, which I have seen it happen, you have to tear into the brick to get the drainage out of there for the drainage backup. So that is a problem It was brought to my atte ma that we could go five to six feet on those, which I dont have an objection to that It was brought to my attention also, that it was part of the resolution was to do five to six feet on the canopy columns. Mr. LaPine: Iam kind of confused about the drainage. Areyou Oingme Poatthe roof drains down through these columns? Mr. Taormina: They have conductors that probably outlet near the base somewhere. Mr. LaPine: Cant they put drain spouts on the maside of them. Mr. Tammma: That is what they do have. Mr. McCann: You would have to have drain spouts on the inside. They might have base something shnilar to what you would use A home on any type of drain to clean it out Mr. Piemacchi: We have these posts covered with brick 100% in this City. To my knowledge, I dont know where you think there is a problem with that Mr. Bazzy: I dont have a problem with that I have another location in Livonia Ihaw a Mobil station on Plymouth and Farmington. My canopy columns are not bricked. Mr. Piececchi: They have been tiuere a long time then? Mr. Baazy: Correct There are quite a few locations that are not ]ricked. This is something that the City is plamung to do now. Mr. McCain: It was recently done at Seven Mile and Newburgh and other places. Mr. Bazzy: There are a few places that have it It looks great I understand that Iwent throughalotofresohutioastogettbislmatimupmdgoing. Youcanseeitis still closed down, hying to finalize and get things finished over there. Mr. McCain: You are doing a goodjob. Mr. Bazzy: I'm trying. Ifitneeds to be done, I dont have a problem with itbut my recommendation is thatI dont wantto run into a problem later on to the finure. One of the issues is that those issues can be surrounded by a metal base. Have you ever seen covers? They are round covers. They go all the way up to the top of the canopy. To me, those look really race too. They match Poe striping of the building itself. They match the color reading of the building and everything else that surrounds it It just fits it It is a total area on tivat fits around the canopy column. 18489 Mr. LaPine: So if you have a problem then they canjust soap off the column and make the reparr. Mr. Barzy: Correct. Any repair that meds to be done. It goes all the way up to the top of the canopy. Mr. McCain: Do you have a comment Mr. Taormina? Mr. Taormina: No, I am not familiar with that It sounds like it is some type of sleeve that fits over the support column. Mr. Piercerchi: I have seen that recently. In fact last week I saw a gas station in another part of the world that looked like map rings. But it doeml look as good as brick. Mr. McCann: If there are no lumber questions from the Commissioners, I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience who wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing nobody, a motion is in order. Mr. LaPine: Just one other question. This definitely is going to be a Sunoco station because there was some question if this was going to be or not going to be? Mr. Bazzy: It is not 100% guaranteed to be a Sunoco station. There are two coarpanies that am dealing with. One of the companies is Sunoco and the other one is Marathon. I am still debating of which possible company I am dealing with right now. Mr. LaPme: My next question is to you Mark Then how do we approve this because the color renderings could be different? Mr. Bazry: I brought another color rendering with me, a Marathon rendering,just in case. The colors are very different Mr. LaPme: But the square footage of the sign and everything else would be the same? Mr. Bazry: It is identical. Mr. Taormina: I will say this, all the information that has been supplied to us up to this point, has been based on this being a Sumco, including the renderings that were submitted to the City Council. On a motion by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mrs. Koons and unanimously approved it was #4-63 20 01 RESOVLED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that petition 99-11-08-31 Sunoco Gas Station requesting approval of signage for the gas station located at 33234 Schoolcraft Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 22 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Sign Package submitted by AI Bazzy, as received by the Planning Commission on March 20, 2001, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, except for the fact that the ground sign shall be a monument type sign, not to exceed 8 feet in height, and shall have a brick base constructed out of the same brick as the station; 2. That the signage shall not be illuminated beyond one (1) hour after this gas station closes; 3. That any additional signage shall come back before the Planning Conmussion and City Council for then review and approval; 4. ILat the request to have Council Resolution #279-00 modified so as to delete the condition spmfymg that the canopy columns most be brick, is hereby denied, on the basis that this development at me of the City's major intersections, the City has consistently required that brick columns be constmcled at several other new or renoNuted gas stations, and it would not be aesthetically pleasing to allow unfinished colurhms Athis location Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted The petition will go on to City Council with an approving resolution On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted the 822°a Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on April 3, 2001, was adjourned at 10:30 pm - James C. McCam, Charman IR7 Dan Piercecchi, Secretary 18490