Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2001-05-0818522 MINUTES OF THE 824th PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING FIELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMFSSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, May 8, 2001, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 824me Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Cent Drive, Lwoma, Michigan. Mr. James McCann. Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm Members present James C. MCC= Dan Piemecchi H G. Shane William LaPme RobertAlanskas *Blaine Koons Members absent: Now $Arnived A 8:05 pm Messrs. Mak Taormina, Planning Director, Scolt Miller, Planer 11, Bill Poppenger, Planer I and Robby Willians, Program Supervisor, were also present Chaimuan McCann informed the audience that if a petition on tonighYs agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in hum, will hold its own public hearing make the find determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied The Planning Connmssion holds the only public hexing on a request for preliminary plat and/or vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City Council for the foal detemtination 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 Planing Commission become effective seven (7) days atter the date of adoption The Planning Commission and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon then filing The staff has famished the Comussion with both approving and denying resolutions, which the Commtission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the proceedings tonight ITEM #1 PETITION 2001-04-01-04 Hurley Homes, Inc. Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 2001-04-01-04 by Hurley Homes, Inc. requesting to rezone property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between Middlebelt Road and Oporto Street in the N.E. 1/4 of Section 14 from OS to RUFA. Mr. Poppenger presented a map showmg the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding mea. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? 18523 Mr. Tamnina: We have me later and it is from the Engineering Division dated April 17, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no objections to the legaldescriphon contaveled thereon. It should be noted that the Engineering Division currently requires a minenum rightof-way width ofsaty (60) feet for standard residential roads. This allows the developer to provide a space between the edge ofrood and public sidewalk for theplacement ofutdrues outside of the pavement lines. However, given the site constraints, jno public sidewalk ism be required and a utility easement ofat least l0 feet in width was m be created m mediately adjacent to the rightofway, the Engineering Division would have an objections to the proposal. We trust that this will provide you with the mformation requested." The letter is signed by David Lear, PE., Civil Engineer. That is the ea4nt of the correspondence. Mr. McCain: Is the petitioner here this evening Raymond Hurley, President of Hurley Homes, Inc., 32511 Norfo➢r, Livonia My petition is In rezone property Gam OS, office services, to the highest residential zoning classification which is RUFA, half acre building sites, as defined by The Livonia Zoning Ordinance. The effect of this proposed zoning change would remove surplus and mused office zoning that intrudes into the adjoining residential neigbborhmd Also, the approval of this petition would be compatible and in hannorry with the adjoining RUFA neighborhood. It would prevent the development of the adjoining RUFA vacant property for a small housing developrrent made up of five find] half - acre single-family home sites. Thank yon for your consideratim and I l answer any questions you have. Mr. McCann: Are fere any questions Goon the Commissimers? Mr. Alawkas: In regards to sidewalks, wereym pla a ^g unpinning sidewalks in Gmtof fesehomes? Mr. Hurley: At This point, it is up in The aa. Mr. Alanskas: Because as you heard in The leter, you are asking for a 50 foot sheet and if you go with 50 feet and have no sidewalks, it would be an problem. I was wondering what your answer would be in regard to sidewalks. Mr. Healey: My original plan was to not have sidewalks. Mr. Alawkas: Are you going to have a'1" runaround? Mr. Hurley: Yes sir. Mr. Alawkas: All right Thankym 18524 Mr. McCann: Are there any more questions? Hearing none, I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience who wishes to speak for or against this petition? Gayle Caswell, 29930 Munger. I brought a picture I would like to hand out to everyone of our backyard showing the big concern we have, and have always had of any development going in back there and the water drainage problem. We are always flooded out We are the lowest area. Our property is the lowest of the entire area so any water drainage comes through our yard It gets flooded a lot Than is a concern Ideally nothing would ever be built back there. As you can see the trees, we do love the trees and all the wild creatures but they dont seem to be important to a lot of decisions made in Livonia. Our biggest concern would be the drainage. We have been here many times about this property and at one proof it was stated, I cant remember if it was the Planning Commission or the City Crowd, that this property is something that should never be built up. I felt real good about leaving that meeting but obviously that didnt stand. The land behind un is even with ours because I know the few times that I have looked over that wall, there is always standing water. The mosquito problem is unbelievable. Thank you. Mr. Alanskas: Have you even called the FEgmaenng Division and have them come out and look A your home for drainage problems because it looks like your property is very low! Have you evertned building up your property with dirt? Mrs. Caswell: Slowly but surely, yes. Mr. Alaaskas: Because famayom picture it kooks likeit is concave. Mrs. Caswell: That might be the quality of the picture. I taped two pictures together. You can see where the water drains from the west to the east Iam right at the back comer of the property in question Mr. Alacskas: All right Thank you Mr. Piemecchi: Did you say you abutted the property? Mrs. Caswell: Yes. That wall would be right back there. That is the corner that would be the southeast comer of the property where the wall ends on the right side of the picture. It then goes north and that is the farthest east side of the property and the farthest south. Mr. Piemecchi: 'Hark you Nancy Henderson, 29900 Munger. I am the property that is directly east of what is now zoned as Office Services - lot27 onyom map. I have a couple of questions and concerns. One of my concerns is also what Mrs. Caswell brought up, which is the water problem because I am low also and I have a 18525 water problem There is a retaining Lyall that ams from north to south which would be on the west side of my property and that wall was put up, I believe in 1980 or 1981, because of the water problem. I do have the Hautes and I brought them to previous meetings when this issue came up at a meeting in 1980 form the Zoning Board of Appeals with the water problem I would hope that if this petition does pass, I anal want it to pass but if it does, that the wall remain Bhere and not be taken down. Another question I had was, has all of this property been sold already and by that I mean not just what is currently zoned Office Services but the adjacent property to the west, the RUF, with these new sites? Mr. McCann: We are going to back up here because this isn't an information gathering as towhatisgoingoninalloftheareas. Whatwe have before us tonight is Ste issue as to whether the section behind the two buildings directly behind the yards and the brick wall is currently zoned OS, Office Services, should be rezoned to RUF. The proposed zoning RUF, Rural Urban Farm, is the largest residentialzo ing we have in Bre City. Theissuethatsbouldbe addressed before us tonight is whether or not the zone is better zoned as office services or residential This is cur concern. As far as Hooding, that is a concern but we do have built into our ordinances that they have to take care of the water that is existing on the property and provide for drainage of R They cannot drain A onto you yards. By doing Brat it will, in fact, help Poe drainage situation an your yards because it appears from the pictures that the wideris corning onto yo ryards finm flus area Ihat flus is wbere it is stored Mr. Taormina, does this come in with the new Wayne County provision or is this under the old provisions, depending on the drainage system? Mr. Taormina: I don't know exactly what regulations they will have to comply with Whether it will be Livnma'ss[omh water guidelines or the County's. But can tell you that Bre Engineering Division is aware of some of these concerns and in fact. I had a conversation with John Full the aftemoon where we discussed this issue and he will be looking carefully at the engineering plans when they do come his way far this development Obviously, the wall that borders these properties is probably the biggest constraint that they have to deal with There is no question, as you motioned earlier, that he will have to handle the drainage from the development The question is how can they pick up the additional offsite damage that right be beneficial with the wall in place where it is. He is aware of it and there will be a requirement for detention for the new development. Mrs. Henderson: Do all of these lot sizes confirm to the RUE? Mr. McCann: At this point we only have a preliminary drawing. They will have to come back for that at another time. This is justzo ing so we dont have any final drawings. When the subdivision cores in then they will have to come back andmeetthoseregnnemerls. Right now they arejust proposing to scale that this is what could be donee RUF type Hmuly zoning. 18526 Mrs. Henderson: O.K. Thank you I have nothing else. Harty Caswell, 29930 Monger. With the road being only 50 fen wide coming in there, it looks like it is taking part of those lots. The nrnarowud, is that going to be big enough for fire tracks and emergencies vehicles to come in and make a turn around down there? Mr. McCain: That is what the Fre Department will pass on when they come back for preluninary plat approval. The Fre Deparhneot will reviewthe plans and make them comply so that they can access it Mr. Caswell: O.K. Thamcyou. Mr. McCann: I a ngoivg to go to the petitioner. Is there anything that you would like to 0 us, sit! Mr. Hurley: Those are legitimate concerns on the drainage but those will be addressed. You are correct The ordinance does state that we have to contain all the drainage on our lot and in fact the Wayne County ordinances are even a little bit morestringent They are real particular about that and I am sure d will alleviate some of the drainage Haat the neighbors will have. Iluere is going to be a retention area onthis site so hopefully Htatwill address their drainage problems. Mr. McCann: I am going to close the public bearing A motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Shane and unannnously approved it was #5-742001 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on May 8, 2001, on Petition 2001-04-01-04 by Hurley Homes, Inc. requesting to rezone property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between Middlebelt Road and Oporto Street in the NE. 1/4 of Section 14 from OS to RUFA, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council Haat Petition 2001-04-01-04 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed change ofzomng is consistent with the prevailing RUF zoning in the area; 2. That the change ofzoning will provide for lot sizes which are consistent with the majority of existing lots in this general area; 3. That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the general chmacter of the area; and 4. That the proposed change ofzoning will remove unneeded OS zoning in the area. 18527 FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above heanngwas given m accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. McCain: Is there arty discussion? Hearing none, I do have a couple of commeuts because I don'tthink the comment that Livonia doesn't care about woods and open space is faun. Livonia is one of the leading rmmwtities will regard to park]ands, nature preserves and everything else. But anybody who owns property in this City, has a right to develop it in a reasonable way. They pay taxes on the property. They, nnpowe then property. Under the lawym have a rigbt w development A in m appropriate way ifit is not detrimental to your neighbors. In this instance, the zoning is for OS. It would be proper for him to put an office building to there. Has petition is for RUFA, the largest class of zoning for single fine ly residential we have within the City. I am grog to vote for this because I can'tthink of anything better to go back in there and to preserve the quiet nature of the neighborhood than other homes wish larger lots. Will the secretary please call the roll? A roll call vote was taken with the following result AYES: A]anskas, Shane, LaPine, Pieucecchi, Mc Ca® NAYS: Now ABSENT: Koons Mr. McCann, Cbairmao, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted It will go on to City Caawd with an approving resolution ITEM #2 PETITION 2001-03-02-05 Haggerty Road Investments Mr. Piemecehi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-02-05 by Haggerty Road Investments requesting waiver use approval to remodel and expand an existing building in connection with a proposal to operate a M service restaurant on property located on the east side of Haggerty Road between Seven Mile Road and Eight Mile Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 6. Mr. Poppenger presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: We have four departmental items of correspondence and a letter from Arthur O. Carmichael, the petitioner. The fust itent is a letter from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated April 6, 2001, which reads as Inflows: "Thu office has reviewed the siwplan submitted to connection with a request to consirwt an addldon ofopproxanately 810 square feet and remodel the exuhng buddmgfor a restaurant on property located at 18528 the above referenced address. We have no objections to thisproposal" The letter is sipped by James E. Corcmen, Fire Marshal. The second lett is from the Engineering Division, dated April 10, 2001, winch reads as follows: "Pursuant toyour request, the Engineering Division has review ed the above referencedpetition The Engineering Drvlslon has no objections in the proposal or the legal deserquien contained therein. However, it los our understanding that the County a allowing storm sewer discharge into its storm sewer main located along Haggerty Road We trust that this will provideyou with the information requested" The leiter is signed by David Lear, PE, Civil Engineer. The third leis is fr® the Division of Police, dated April 17, 2001, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed the site plans for remodeling the existing bufldingfor a restaurant. There is no indication on the plans submitted for a dece/erahon lane for northbound traffic turning into the driveway. Due to the traffic volume and congestion experienced in this area, a deceleration lane u strongly recommended We have mother objections to the plan as submitted." The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau The fourth letter is firm the Inspection Deparhnevt, dated April 23, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request ofApril 2, 2001, the above referenced petition has been reviewed. The following ds noted: (I) This petition, as put forth, will notpass inspection plan review. This buildings proposed to undergo a change of usegroup and therefore, most be constructed as though new in regards an the barrier free and accessibility codes, both interior and exterior ofthe building. In addition, this plan will not work as it is lacking the required separate employee restroom (2) This petition will need the following variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals (fthe property is G2). (a) Deficient front yard setback 60 feet required, 25 f feet proposed, deficient 35 f feet (b) Deficient one (l) ingreWegress driveway. ABndmum two (2) required (40 feet apart), only one (I) prrvided (3) Eightpoles are in question at 25 feet tall, not 20 feet. (4) The existing parking lot needs to be redone and double striped The fencing needs an be removed. (S) As stated, this petition meets the min mum parking requirements. However, we believe the employee figure to be artficia4 low by a minimum offrve (S) and the serving counter looks like a bar area Mat will have seats. Therefore, at a minimum, this petition would need a Zoning variance from the Zoning Board ofAppeals for deficient parking (a minvnum offrve (S) spaces). If the counter willhave customers more Man five (S) parking spaces will be required (6) The dumpster enclosure has no height specified and should be charified to the Commission and Council's satisfaction. (7) A note (#Ib) on GI speaks to seeding some areas. This should he changed m sod Clarification should be obtained on the exaetpercent of landscaping provided, as itis not dear from the plane. (8) No signage has been reviewed Thu Department has unfit ther objections to this petition other than as noted " The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection. We see in receipt of a letter from Arthur O. Carmichael addressed to the Inspection Deparhnent, dated May 8, 2001, which reads as follows: "We are in receipt ofyour review letter dated April 23, 2001, and offer the following comments. (I) The required 18529 separate employee toilet room will be shown on the tenant drawings as part ofthe tenant food service drawings. (2) Per your advice, we will seek ZBA approval for both items. (3) Light poles will be 25 feet tall (4) A civil engineering drawing note calls for double striping ofparking stabs. Ifyou think this is imujrcien4 the stalls will be redrawn. The fence will be removed by the end of construction, but might be used to secure bales ofhay required for erosion control during construction. (5) The "serving counter" is shown in order to show its position relative to the tables and booths. It t better noted as "display case" as in most delicatessens. Amore definitive drawing ofthe display case willbe apart ofthe tenant food servicedrawings (6) The dumpuer enclosure height wiBhe afsujrcientheight to hide the dumpsbs. (7) sodwibbe provided Theperceniage oflandscapings on the civilenghwering drawings and meets City requirement. (g) Actualsignage t unknown at this time and willbe presenbd to the City for approvalonce known. We trust lht response adequately answers your review. Ifnot please so inform us." The letter is signed by Arthur O. Ca nichael. That is the exert of the correspondence. Mr. McCain: Is the petitioner here this evening Art Carmichael, general partner for Haggerty Road Investments, 7830 Bambury, West Bloomfield Ianherehranswermyquestionsymmighthaveorsome that were brought up, one was the deceleration lane. I wanted one. I showed one. I submitted it to Wayne County Road Commission and they told me not to do it. I asked them to re -review R I am willing to spend more money for a safer situation and they rejected it I went back and appealed it, informally, and they rejected it They don't warn a deceleration lane there. I don't know why. I think it is better but they told mean. I don't kmowwhat to do about that Mr. McCann: I think there was a mistake in your letter. You meant that you would go with a 20 foot light pole instead of 25 feet Is that correct? Mr. Carmichael: I an responding to the Building Department Mr. McCam; The ordinance requires 20 fret. Mr. Ca nichael: They said 25 feet and so I am responding to it I an willing to do nkat they want us to do. They said they wanted 25 feet Mr. McCain: Have you addressed the puking situation? Mr. Ca nichael: The puking should be fine. It was my emu and I called that off as a counter. It was never intended to be a counter. I drew up the tables. Mr. McCain: Even without the counter the Inspection Department indicated that you are still five spaces deficierd. 18530 Mr. Carmichael: No. They said with the canter there would be seals at the canter and would be five deficient because of that Mr. McCann: Is that coned Mr. Taormina? Is he foe deficient with" seats at the counter or five deficient with the canter? Mr. Taunton: I think the Inspection Department has indicated that if, in fact, seats were going to be placed around the counter, that an additional deficiency would result In addition to this, they believe that the parking requveumtis artificially low as a result of the number of employees that were indicated on the plans and that they believe that to be low by a m ustarm of five. The deficiency is based on the m ober of employees. The deficiency could actually increase if, in fact, you include additional seats around the canes. Mr. McCaw: What they are saying is that ym are already five short and if ym have seats around the conte; it is going to create even more shortage. Mr. Carmichael: There never was intended to be seats around the counter. Mr. McCann: All right Then ym are still five short Mr. Carmichael: Then we either have to go to ZBA and ask for a variance or wajust eliminate the number of seats appropriate to adjust for that We will do me or the other. Mr. McCann: Sir, the addition, how necessary is that? Ym have the upstairs seating area. Mr. Carmichael: That seemed to be the target There are two different people that were interested to the property. One wanted to buy and me wanted to lease. Both were looking for about 100 seats. Ibat was what our target was. Itis a verylimited site. It is a difficult site. I think we did pretty well with what we have there. If we have to take seats not then we have to do it That is the bottom line. I suspect we would go to ZBA and at least appeal it and if it were rejected, we would take out the seats. It is that simple. Mr. Alaoskas: Sr,, are you pla®ng on havmg only suc employees? Mr. Carmichael: They are not my employees. Mr. Alanskas: For the restaurant, it says that there will be six employees, then of course, you will be mane deficient for parking. Mr. Carmichael: Understood. I dml know the exit number the delicatessen would have. The other people that were involved, there are two people. One is the Stage Delicatessen and they would like to lease it The other is the Bone Yard people and they would like to purchase it. So, I would have to query them and ask them how many employees they have. 18531 Mr. Alanskas: What I sm thinking is, for example, if you have the Bone Yard which is sit down seating for both places, I can'tvisualize for 100 seats only sift people taking rare of the whole facility. Mr. Carmichael: It depends on how they operate. Mr. Alanskas: Ifym go into any average restaurant and it is 100 seats, there is certainly care than six employees. Mr. Camtichael: True. I think that is true of the Bone Yard Mr. Alanskas: If it is a busy restaurant, you may have six just in the kitchen alone cocking - Mr. Carmichael: It depends on how they operate. I can't answer the question. Mr. Alanskas: Parking is always a concern no matter where it is and if we are going in here with five A the very least, six employees, if that figure grows to more, you could be as far as between 20 and 30 spaces deficient Mr. Carmichael : Then we would have to sacrifice the seats. Mr. A]anskas: You know, it is very hard to prove something when you my, "We will do this on an if come basis." I, as one Commissiorm, like to knmv exactly what I am voting on and it sounds like tight now that we are saying 'It could be Ibis" or "It could be that" I don't hike voting on something that is not cast in cem®t Thank you Mr. Carmichael: That is fair. Mr. Shane: Do either one of your teuaNs have a problem with cmrmutting to this absent the approval? If you gave them a contingency deal where if it gets approved, they can either buy it or lease it are you having a problem pinning down one ofthem? Mr. Carmichael: I don'treally think so. Mr. Shane: Wouldn't itbe in your bestinterestto try topin one down sothen ifyou had to go to the Zoning Board, you would have all of your information as In how marry seals they want, employees and so Fath Mr. Carmichael: I think we will do that One of my difficulties is that I have been out of the country fora monthand Ijust got back I really didn't have all the time necessary to prepare for this, nor notify them As you can see my letter addressed to the Inspection Department is today. You areright and perhaps the best way to handle this is we have to go to the ZBA for other ihmgs. When we go to ZBA we will have the exactnumbers. 18532 Mr. Sbane: I am a little bit reluctant, also, to act on Pols without knowing who A is, who your tenant is or who your buyer is. Mr. Carmichael: At the moment it would be Stage Delicatessen They are the ones who sent me the letter that they want me to proceed but we dont have a signed agreemantyet Mr. Sbane: Thank you Mr. LaPme: One of the problems I have with the location is the way it sits up so high. You are the highest building along Haggerty Road When you are driving down Haggerty Road, you really can'tsee the other restaurants because of Mr. LaPine: your building. I was reading here a condition m the consentjudgment states that: "Such proposed waiver use shall be reviewed according to the following criteria: (1) Compatibility of the proposed use with the goal of fostafi^g a high quality 'enterlmarroa d district' in the area; and (2) Mr. Carmichael: Aesthetic compatibility with umprovemems already conn cted m the entertainment district" In my opinion, the aesthetic compatibility or improvements in the district, this is not compatible with the other buildings in that they are down and you sit up so high. Has there been arty thinking about tearing the budding down and starting from scratch? Mr. Carmichael: I asked fin Gl zoning years ago before the lawsuit My intention at that time was w put in a conanercial building, not a restaumant It was the City who wanted the restnurmq not me. So I am complying with the City. I am doing the best I can with that property. I amtrying to satisfy the City in my mind and evidentially I am not When I was Poere it was a dirt road. The reason we put the second story on was the mad was so high out in front of us. We were halfway through construction and Wayne County came and lowered the mad and now we are high above the road. Had we known they were going to cut that road down, we probably wouldn't have built the second story on that building. That was 23 years ago. Mr. LaPine: Icanumderstand. Ibis isjust one Planning Commission member. Wheal drive down there, the first thing I see is the budding. If the building was Iowa, I don't even know if that is possible because wasp'tthat a water tower at one time? Mr. Carmichael: ILe City owned it The City ofLivoma sold thatto me. It was a water tank and it supplied the water to the City of Livonia and if anything, we have been sitting there for 23 years and if things are inconsistent around us, they dug a hole around us. It is a matter of viewpoint Who is incompatible with whom? Mr. LaPine: Thank you Mr. Shane: When you say the City wanted a restamart, could you explain it a little bit further? 18533 Mr. Carmichael: Drum; the consentjudgment it was the City who, wbm we were consistently asking for what was acceptable, it was the City who came up with the restaurant, not us. So we are trying to comply with it I sm trying the best can and I am having difficulty doing that Mr. McCann: I think one of the things of your consaujudgnent was that you would comply with all the City ordinances with your reslaumvt and you keep telling us, '711 have a variance here' or'TH need another variance there." We are seeing that it is not really complying with all of the ordinances like the Consent Judgnent said it would Mr. Camucbael: I really didn'tthink I would have a problem with those two ids that came U Mr. McCann: We're not saying that you are going to. We arejust saying that these are concerns that we have and we have to look at the whole picture. What would like to do now is go to the audience firs[ because this is a public bearing. We wart the audience input We warn your input and I'll give you the last cormnent afterwards. Bull amjust saying there are legitimate concerns that we have to look at Nobody is trying to beat up on you or do anyfhingelse. Wejustwartto see the bestprojecttherepossible. Mr. Carmichael: O.K. Mr. McCain: Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing. Nowyon can give nue any last cormnent that you have, sir. Mr. Carmichael : As far as the two items that were brought up for ZBA, I thought it was a non -issue. I am m engineer. I am in construction but I dont get m on this end of it The architect annually does and I am blind sided by this part of the action as part as far as construction. When we purchased the site from the City it didn't comply with the setbacks at that time and in fact, the concrete cylinder was there and at that time we went to ZBA and we were approved for the setback that we have. The addition we are putting on is behind the setback requirement that is mentioned here. I didn't realize the whole building had to go behind but the addition, in fact, is. We were cognizant of that and tried to do that The other issue was there is the fact thatwehaveadmmgroomupinthe dining room now, barrier free. When we designed the budding originally, again we put the second story an there because of the road being so high which vanished on us and disappeared but we had a drafting room downstairs and a drafting room upstairs so anybody in a wheelchair could work downstairs in that dashing room So when we were designing this we said well, "We have a diming room downstairs and a dining room upstairs", the same kind of scenario. We didn't think it was an issue. We didn'trealize the use change made you go back to pount one and start all over agun. So I sm responding to that We will go back to point one and start all over again. If we are rejected, we are rejected. We are trying. 18534 Mr. McCain: I know you are. We arejust trying to go through A wilh you Don't get frustrated Mr. Carmichael: Well, A is mish-Aing. Mr. McCain: Ifdiere are no further questions, a motion is in order. Mr. Alanskas: Mr. Chairman, because of all the questions that we have arising I think this should be tabled to an indefinite date until we have more particulars in regards to who is going to have the restaurant Mr. McCain: Is Poere a data when you world know when you would be able to 5nalis negotiations. What we would like to have is a person who is going to be coating in there. If it is Stage Deli, they will be able to address the number of employees. They will address the hours and they will give us some feeling of the type of irnpact that is going to have there. Mr. Cmmichaeb So four weeks would be suffuctent time? Mr. McCain: Certainly. On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Shane and approved it was #5-75-2001 RESOLVED that, pursuant b a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on May 8, 2001, on Petition 2001-03-02-05 by Haggerty Road Investments requesting waiver use approval to remodel and expand an existing building in connection with a proposal in operate a fiull service restaurant on property located on the east side of Haggerty Road between Seven Mile Road and Eight Mile Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 6, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that petition 200 1- lau ingCommissiondcesherebyrecmmnendthatpetition2001- 03-02- 05 03-02-05 be tabled to June 12, 2001. A roll call was taken with the following result: AYES: A]ayskas, Sbane, LaPine, Piemecchi, Mc Ca® NAYS: Now ABSENT: Now ABSTAIN: Koons Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted ITEM #3 PETITION 2001-03-02-06 U -Haul Corporation Mr. Piemeccbi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-02-06 by U -Haul Corporation iquesting waiver use approval to rent ticks on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Stark and Farmington Roads in the NH 1/4 of Serf cm 33. 18535 Mr. Poppenger presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: There are four ids of correspondence. The fast itent is a letter form Poe Livania Fre & Rescue Division, dated April 6, 2001, which reads as follows: "Thu office has reviewed the siteplan submitted in connection with a request to rent jour trucks on property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal" Thelettaris signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal- The second item is from the Engineering Division, dated April 10, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division hos reviewed the above referencedpetition. The Engineering Division has no objections to the proposal at this tune. The jollowmg legal description should be used in connection with the above referenced pe66on: Em209, except the South 629.00 feet also except the North 27.00 feet of Supervisor's Plat #2, T. IS, R. 9E, Livonia Township (now Qty of Livonia), Wayne County, Michigan as recorded in Liber 66, Page 1, Wayne County Record&' We trust that this will provide you with the information requested" The lister B signed by David Lear, PE., Civil Engineer. The third liner is from the Division of Police, Tri fic Bureau, dated April 10, 2001, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed the proposed site plan far truck rentals. One handicap parking space a requ redfor this property. (1) The handicap space must conform to City Ordinance and be individually signed (2) The property should he adequately lighledfor crime deterrence. We have no other objections to this proposed site plan." The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated April 23, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of April 2, 2001, the above referenced petition has been reviewed The following is noted: (1) A site visit April 20, 2001 revealed the following conditions: (a) Du rpster enclosure gates all being left open. (b) Two (2) trees of the previously required landscaping are rmssing at the rear south property line. (c) The landscaping is ant being nominated alongside of the east wall of the budding. (d) the parking spaces arenot being properly utilized (2) The number ofresdal tracks allowed at any one time should be specified This Deparhnent has no further objections to this petition other than as noted" The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening has Geiger, representing U -Haul on behalf of Ed Weiss, owner of the property. Ed Weiss: Just to correct the record, I am not the owner of the property.I am the owner of the business on the property. 18536 Mr. McCann: Thank you Are there any additional comments over our presentation, sit! Mr. Geiger: No. I have no objections to any of the things I heard other than the handicapped I wasn't aware of that and of the lighting. Ed Weiss, owner of All Night Auto, 37729 Plymouth Road Justwaddresspartofthe concern, I believe it was the Inspection Department or Engineering Deparhnent that said the tushes were missing in the back There is construction going on back there on property that we don't own. I moved into that location and took over an empty building on August 18, 2000. In September they started excavating back there and if any of you have been back there, I am right next to Woodland Bowling. On the other side of me is a florist Directly behind me they are budding a building and they excavated. This is not on the property that I am on. They have unloaded brick and it has been sitting back there since last September. Notting has been done. They knocked over those bushes and those bushes died. I can't do anything until they move everything out of there. Also, the problem with the dumpsle; I have been having discussions, if you will, as the people who are doing construction, or whatever, move in and out of there occasionally. They use my dumpster. We come in in the morning and the gates to the dumpsfer are open and we close them We do our best There is no hwb lying around. You didn't hear that It is just the gates and A is a small dumpster. Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Cor missiooas? Mr. Alanskas: Whatpercemageofbsiness areyoulockivg togetfsma this U-Hanlwith the business thatyou have now! Mr. Weiss: Very small. As you heard we are only looking to have four trucks there. We are not looking to have a huge U -Haul center there. The reason is that we have had numerous requests. Nmetv-sixpercemofourctiemeleare Livonia residents. We have had numerous requests from clientele, from not only residents but business owners. We have commercial accounts who need to replace trucks that are being serviced for a day, that type of thing. We have numerous requests firm residents rowing kids in and out of college, parents in and am of homes, people rowing info the area and that type of thing. We are only looking to have four trucks there at arty given time. Mr. Alanskas: You say four trucks, sav that you open A 8:00 in the morning and by 10:00 am you have rented all four trucks and you get more calls for more U - Hauls. What would you do, get another four! Mr. Geiger No. It would be whataver is available no the lot that would be available for himmuse. Mr. Alanskas: But could he get another 4, or 5 or 10 from somewhere else? 18537 Mr. Geiger: Not under normal circumstances for local, no. He could have trucks delivered there for another customer if it was a one-way trip out of town. Mr. A]anskas: When people return these trailers, is it feasible that even through he only has four spots, that he could get as high as 15 or 20 U -Hauls returned? Mr. Geiger: Not normally. Mr. A]anskas: Butcouldthathappen? Mr. Geiger: Itwould be highly unlikely and the reason is, I would take me ofour eters, which are high volume centers, and we normally get 10 to 13 into a center, as an independent dealership I would be tickled to death to see that many come in from any dealer but I dont think that is ever going to happen. Mr. Alaoskas: What hours can the people return the U -Hauls, up to what time? Mr. Geiger: That can be either way. We've got what is considered a drop box so they could do it anytime during the evening if they wanted to, if he goes with the drop box or they could be restricted to the opening hours. Mr. Alaoskas: With the drop box, how would these people know where to park the trucks? Could they put them anywhere in the lot or an someone else's property if it was easier to do instead of backing up where this spot would be? Mr. Geiger: In reality, they probably will drop them m a place that is very easy and accessible w get out of and they probably will not try and put them into a parking space. Mr. Alanskas: But they could drop them off anywhere at all? Mr. Geiger: Yes sir. Mr. Alauskas: Thankyou. Mr. Piercecchi: How did this request for storage originate, the request from U -Haul? Mr. Weiss 'IherequestwasnIfrom U -Haul. Iherequestwasfrommeandthisstarted with me because of the requests I was getting from my clientele. I never in my wildest imagination thought about renting any mucks but webejust gotten numerous requests for track rental from or clientele and again, as I said, it really came from people this past Septerber, moving kids in and out of college. Over the wintertime, in Livonia's older established area, there are a lot of people that go to Florida for the winter. We have requests to rent small trucks to go down to Florida, not trailers but trucks. We've bud that type of thing. Again, as Mr. Geiger said, and I dont mean to impress you that I have 10 to 15 requests per week I don't That is not true. 18538 Mr. Piemeceld If hear von correctly, sir, you are going to in effect have another rental facility only on a small scale. Mr. Weiss: No s¢ You mean another bolding? Mr. Piemecchi: Itis a rental facility. ILese four trucks, who is going m oau these trucks, You? Mr. Weiss: LT -Hand. I would be an independent dealer for U -Haul Mr. Piemecchi: Does itregiwe special licensing for that? Mr. Weiss: No,just an agreement between IJ -Had and myself. Mr. Piereecchi You mean the state or the City doesn'trequre arty special licensing? Mr. Weiss: No sir. This is the only special permit that I need Mr. Piemecchi: One of the concerns that I have is that down the street we have a U -Haid facility down there that is really very crowded all the time and I don'tthink any numbers were ever specified when that area was granted as a storage facility. Mr. Geiger: I think you are refcvring to Ryder. Mr. Piemecchi: That is correct. That is what I am referring to at Shark and Plymouth It is a very crowded facility. Itis almost impossible to drive through it. Mr. Geiger: Ijust speak for them. Mr. Weiss: That is Budget, not U -Haul. Mr. Geiger: They are a competitor of ours and I guess they recognize the need because they have a lot of trucks there. Mr. Piemecchi: Do you think this would have arty negative effects an Plymouth Road, which a lot of time and money are being invested in that road? Mr. Weiss: No I dont Iwouldn't be here if thought that was the case. I am business owner and this is very minor to wbatmy business is. Thos is an accommodation to my clientele and to have four trucks as a max, at any given time. Mr. Piemecchi: How are you going to guarantee that? Mr. Weiss: That is what my application is for. I would assume that is what I will be approved for. I don't have a background of not abiding by the laws. I assume there is an Inspection Department and I would assume there is a barna rthatwill comedown mine if don't abide bythe laws. Iamnot 18539 looking to have a problem over a LF -Had. Do you know what I mean? I donrphm cn having arty more than fom tmcks. Itis is not my main business. There is not enough involvement to get into unable with this. Mr. Piemerchi: The reason why I ask that is because you door really have a ton of parking w itis. Ifyou tried to get 10 tracks in you woddnr be able w handle your ovn business, W. Mr. Weiss: I duitneed a lot of parking. I have 20 spots and if you see those parking spot, they are generous. They are not all crammed in. They are 20' plus X 8'. If arty of you have ever passed by the facility, you wi➢ notice that since we have been open at any given time in the lot masa ma we've had 10 tacks. Mr. Piemecchi: At ora study meeting I brought up the subject of screening. Do you think those trucks should be screened Behind you there is a wall and there are residences, correct, east? Mr. Weiss: East? There is no wall. East. I can look all the way down to Buddy's parking lot Mr. Piemecchi: There is an wall behind that! Mr. Weiss: No sm. I start right up to whoevers property line A is which is a florist and they atart right up to Buddy's. There are all kinds of commercial traffic. On the other side of me is Woodland Lanes and they've got more beer and wine trucks coming in and out of there all day long Mr. Pie cecchi: This is a waiver but it will probably have to go to the ZBA, Mr. Chairman? Mr. McCann: Forwfiat? Wearegivinghimthewaiver. Mr. Weiss: It is my understanding that we are coned correctly. Wejustneed a special use perm t Mrs. Koros: Mr. Geiger, is there a typical number for bucks, 4 trucks, 5 trucks or 1 truck Is there a typical member? Mr. Geiger: The typical member depends on the age of the dealer. They tend to get more secure and have more clientele as the years go by. Normally starting art you arelooking at abort two trucks. ILere are two different factors involved m U -Haul. Ibere is the local Easiness and there is the one way business. Ibe local is done, obviously, with a truck on site. Then the one- way business is done with trucks being sent to the location for the customer. Mrs. Koros: Then do you monitor that centrally or does the business owner! Mr. Geiger: Yes through the business with a computer on site. 18540 Mr. Weiss: Not yet Mr. Geiger: But there would be a computer there that would hook into our cenhal.I would not be concerned with the four hocks going to seven or eight First of all, if it does ever do that, all you have to do is call us and they will be gone. Mrs. Koos: And how far away would they ger? Mr.Geiger: Inkster would be closes[ to the center. We also have owe in Redford. Mrs. Koos: Mr. Weiss, is the handicapped space a problem? Mr. Weiss: It is there already. I am glad you mentioned that The lot is striped. The handicapped space is painted and marked It was already done when I moved in. Mrs. Koons: Mark, does that mean we are looking at an additional handicapped space? Mr. Taornvna: Itjust says that the handicap space must conform to the City ordinance and must be individually signed Whether or not it was based an the Traffic Bureau's inspection of the site is not indicated It couldjust be stated as a reminder. Mrs. Koons: O.K. Thanks. I have a request to the staff that we look into the abutting property problems with bricks lying around so this gentleman can replace the trees that need to be replaced. Mr. Weiss: There are two bushes m the back and it is where they are excavating, not where they have all the bricks, 95 feet behind there. Mrs. Koos: But you cant do anything until they are fmshed? Mr. Weiss: Ob, I could. I could do it mmomrw if that is what you want but I know they would disappear. Mrs. Koos: O.K 'hawk you Mr. LaPine: Right now you operate a repay shop. Mr. Weiss: Yes sir. Mr. LaPine: You have customers come m from time to lure, commercial especially, and they need a truck to replace a truck that is in your facility to be repaired. Mr. Weiss: It is not especially. It is split 50/50 that the requests are made. 18541 Mr. LaPine: You are not out there advertsing you are renting bucks. These are strictly for your customers. Is there going to be a sign out there saying,'rU-Hauls forrenthere." Mr. Weiss: There will be a decal, not a sign. I coal put up any additional signs. I am at my signage limit now. Mr. LaPine: I can be assured that if we approve only four vehicles and today you have six people that are in your esFeblishment and all six of them need a buck, four of them get a track and the other two you coal help out Is that correct? Mr. Geiger: Four would be the max that we would be able to help. Mr. LaPine: These are strictly local, nobody can rent a track from here and take it from here to another state and leave it', Mr. Geiger: There are two different ways to handle R Mr. LaPine: I understand you told me there are ttvo differeatways. But this location would be strictly local? Mr. Geiger: Yes sir. Mr. LaPine: If a track was not ranted at this location and somebody wants to return it, can they retvn it In this ]oration? Mr. Geiger: Yes. In the U -Haul system they can return A to any location in the United States. Mr. LaPine: My question gels back to, if you have only four tracks there, but two people come there and want to return tacks that did not rent them fromthere, than Pve got six tracks. Mr. Geiger: If the four are still an sem? Yes sir. Yoube got a legdon de question If there are four tracks there and two people reI n trucks you have a total of six In that situatim we can either call Redford and they cm be here m five minutes. Mr. LaPine: That is the questionI wanted answered ]hereis a possibility that there could be more than four at anv one time and he has to call someone and they have to come and pick them up. Mr. Geiger: Yes. Mr. LaPine: Will they be picked up within a reasonable amount of time, twelve hours, twanty-fora hams? 18542 Mr. Geiger: Trucks are very valuable to U -Haul so yes, they will be picked up almost i®adiaRly. Mr.LaPme: WegotirRothisproblemwith Budget We really got snookered and before we koew it, we had twice w many trucks w r thmghtwe were going to have there and this is what worries me wben we talk about only four trucks that he is going to have. That he is going to lease but there is always the possibility that people can return a truck there and we dual know how many of those people it is going to be. It could be one. It could be two. It could be never ending but Ijust want to make sure I understand it Mr. Geiger: As anile, dealers do not get a lot of trucks returned. Most of the time the trucks are sent in to cents. It is just the nature of the business and if a contract is being set up in California they are probably going to look up and say, "There is one in Redford. Fine, that is pretty close and that is where it goy, Mr. LaPive: O.K. Thank you Mr. Alaaskas: Of the four trucks, what class would these tacks be? Mr. Geiger: We go by footage. A ten foot tack which is a small tack a fourteen foot truck a seventeen foot truck a 24 foot truck and a 26 foot truck. Mr. Alaaskes: I am going by weight Class I is 6,000 pounds, Class II is 6,000 to 10,000 pounds. Class IB is 10,000 to 14,000 pounds. Mr.Geiger: The randnuanwoukl be the JH, which is a 26 feet and Poatis going to run 18,000 pounds. That is 10% ofU-Haul's business. Mr. ellansskas: 18,000 pounds, that would be a Class VI. Mr. Geiger: Chances of those being there are slim Mr. Alaaskas: Whatdoyouthingwillbethere? Whatsis? Mr. Geiger: The fnuteen and the seventeen. Mr. Alaaskas: That would be the Class III, 10,000 to 14,000? Mr. Geiger: That would be right aramd 10,000. Mr. Alaaskas: All right Thank you Robert Okerstmm, 13520 Merriman, Livonia I am an up and naming U-Hml dealer in the City of Livonia right now, for the lasttwelve months. I put a call into Joe. Because of my contract and payment, it says I am the only one in the City of Livonia. Obviously, that is not right My point is, do you wart a truck rental on every major thoroughfare in Livonia? 18543 Mr. McCann: Two issues you brought forlh, me, whether or not the location is appropriate. We coal interfere with people's rights to do business with the City and we have no right to say, "We can only have two truck renals but we can have 10 McDonalds and 34 pharmacies." We are in a situation of looking at whether or not this area is appropriate zu ing for the type of use he has. Now, comments addressed to that issue we can deal with whether or not you have a contract with U -Had as to being the sole location within the City, I think that is something between you and U -Had. Mr.Okershom: Hereistbecontrzct Mr. McCann: I was just saying that is not something we need to deal with here at the Planning Commissim Mr. Okershom: I never got an answer so I thoughtI would get one today. Mr. Geiger: I think that is a moot point because he is petitioner comber far and I think he is applying for space for storage. Mr. McCann: You know what gentlemen, Please address the Planning Commission and please keep to the issue at hand and that is whether or not this location is appropriate for the U -Haul waiver use. Mr. Okershom: Tbat is a11I have. Mr. McCain: Is there anybody else in the audience who wishes to speak for or against this petition' Seeing nobody, I will give the last comment to the petitioners. Is there anything additional that we haven't heard that we need to hear? Mr. Geiger: No Sr. Mr. Weiss: No. Sr. Mr. McCann: I will close the pubkc hearing A motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Pietcecchi, seconded by Mrs. Koros and approved it was #5-762001RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Coamussion on May 8,200 1, on Petition 2001-03-02-06 by U -Haul Corporation requesting waiver use approval to rent trucks on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Stark and Partington Roads in the NH 1/4 of Section 33, the Planning Cominssion does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2001-03-02-06 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That Poe maximum nnmber of rental tanks to be parked on Poe site at any one time shall be limited to far (4); 18544 2. That the parking of rental trucks shall ocau only wilbin Poe designated Mr. McCain: parking spaces located in the rear parking lot adjacent to the east Mr. Alawkas: property line as shown on the site plan submitted with this request 3. That the prohibition ofoveraight outdoor parking or storage of vehicles on the site, imposed by Council Resolution #873-98 in connection with Petition 98-8-2-15 which pemtitted the vehicle repair business currently existing on the subject site, is amended to the extent that A Mr. LaPine: conflicts with conditions (1) and (2) above; 4. Thin the dumpsiar enclosure gates shall be properly maimained and, wbm not in use, closed at all tomes; 5. That any lighting equipment provided on the subject site shall be shielded from adjacent properties, and all light standards shall not exceed 20 feet in height; and 6. That the largest rental vehicle to be parked on the subject property would be a tock with a hotel overall length of 27 feet For the following reasons: 1. That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirement as set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance 4543; 2. Thin the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use: and 3. That the proposed use is compatible to and inbarmovy with the adjacent uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended Mr. Geiger: The 27 foot is the bad size. The truck is just about 32 feel Mr. McCain: Is there any discussion? Mr. Alawkas: I fir one am going to vole an on this because I know we are starting with only fru trucks and by listening to the petitioner and the gentleman firm U -Haul that this could be a growing business and it could go from 4 to 6, from 6 to 8, 8 hr10 and Ijust don't think we need a U -Haul or any other additional tock rental on Plymouth Road. Mr. LaPine: Iam also goingtovote against onthe fnctfl t, number one,Ijustthink we are spending so much money on Plymouth Road We've got a truck rental business right down the street from here and I dual think we need 18545 another one. Thirdly, the fact that when the repair facility was approved there, there was a condition in the original approval that there shall be no overnight or outdoor storage of vehicles on the site and I think this contradicts what was approved when the repair facility went m there. Therefore, I an going to be voting against this. Mr. McCann: I am going to be voting in favor partly because I do have a lot of the same concems, as Mr. Alanskas and Mr. Supine. We all feel like we got a little boned by the rental service down the street from you They told us they were going to limit the number of trucks to be under 10 at arty one time. It wasn't in writing and in this instance it is going to be n wrung and you are going to be hunted to four. If it grows and you need more or if you have a problem with having more trucks on there, we would have to relook at the issue. As long as A is ]etited to fan and that you immediately return the out of state vehicles to either Inkster or Redford, which makes sense to me, they cant re-matthem if they dont have them Youwauldthmkthey would want to get them out of there right away. I dont believe fan would be a problem and I think it would benefit the neighbors m that area and for your customers. Will the secretary please call the roll? A roll call vote was taken with the following result YES: Piemecchi, Koros, Shane, McCann NAYS: Alanskas, LaPine ABSENT: Now Mr. McCam, Chairmam, declared the nation is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution ITEM #4 PETITION 2001-04-02-07 Robert Okerstrom Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-04-02-07 by Robert Okerstrom requesting waiver use approval to utilize a porion of property at 13520 Menimm for an RV, boat and travel hailer outdoor storage facility to be located an property an the east side ofMerrim m Road between SchoolcraR and Plymouth Roads in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 26. Mr. Poppenger presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zming of the surrounding area. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Tanmina: There are four ids ofcomespondence. The fust one is a letter from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated April 12, 2001, which reads as Inflows: r7hu office has reviewed the siteplan submitted m connectun with a request to store RV, boat (aver 20 feet) and traler on property /ocatedat the above referenced address. We have no objectuns to this 18546 proposal with thefollowing stipulations: (1) Provide adequate number of fire hydrants with spacing consistent with commercialproperty (300' within arty point ofsite). (2) Provide access in the form off re hent& Arty cul-de-sac or turnaround should accommodate emergency vehicles with a wall to wall turning radius ofat least 45 feet." the letter is signed by James E. Caveman, Fre Marshal. The second letter is from the Division of Police, dated April 16, 2001, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed the site plim in connection with a proposalfor a RV, boat, and trader outdoor storagefacility. We have one concern regarding the security of the factlity at the gate on the east side of the property where the wooded two acre lot is. We wouldrecommend that there be an gate on the east side since this wouht possibly be the fust point for an unlawful entry onto the property. Ifremoval ofthe gate is not possible, we would then recommend that a monsoon often feet ofground be kept clear along the east side of the fence line in order to discourage break-in attempts by using the wooded mea for concealment We have mother objections to this proposal " The letter is sipped by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The ihmd letter is from the Enginrig Division, dated April 17, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. The following approximate legal description should be used in connection with the above referenced propos al: 'That part of the N. W. 114 of Section 26, T. IS., 11. 9t,, City ofLiawma, Wayne County, Michigan, more particularly described as beginning at a point distant due south, 1,001.80 feet from the Northwest comer ofSection 26 and proceeding thence due South, 100 feet,; thence due Eas;1,788.91 feet,' thence North 0029'56" Ea%4 200.01 feet,; thence due Wes41,290.65 feet,'theme due South 100.00 feet; thence due West 500. 00feet to the point ofbegimeing except the West 1,45500 feet also except theEast 217.80 feet thereof.' We have no objections to the proposal, but it is our understandng local ordinances require parking areas to be paved and to provide for storm drainage for the paved areas. Ifstorm water drainage a to be required the developer will need in either obtain apermit from Wayne County to conevel the parking lot drainage to they storm sewer system or obtain an easement from neighboring properties to connect the storm drainage to the City of Livoma's storm system located approximately 200 feet South of the subject property. We trust that this will provide you with the information requested" The letter is signed by David Lear, P.E, Civil Engineer. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated April 23, 2001, which reads as Hallows: "Pursuant in your request of April 6, 2001, the above referenced petition has been reviewed The following a noted (1) A site visit (April 20, 2001) revealedpet4ioner is already conducting this business. There arepiles ofserap, old vehicles junk vehicles and stared vehicles now on the property. The barbed wire is currently in plan. (2) This petition will need a variance porn theZoning Board ofAppeals as the primary building is nonconforming due to a deficient front yard .setback: required 100 fee; existing 44 feet, deficient 56feet (3) This petition will also require the hatowing variances from the Zoning Board ofAppeals: (a) Defident the hard surfbce afthe entire lot or parcel (not 18547 just gravelor stone as indicated). (b) Deficient Landscaping. The eni re pont yard must be Landscaped and no other plan has been presented for review. (c) Barbed wire fence is not allowed The plan also has inconsistencies as to height ofthe fence. (4) The site plan is very rudimemary. Where are the drains going? Where is the access to the proposed storage? This plan should be clar#led and detailed property and then resubmitted with aft required information provided -including all buildings now on this property -for a further review. this Department has no farther objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director ofImpection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Robert Okerstrom, 13520 Merriman Road. Mr. McCann: Sir, would you like to address some of the issues. Mr. 01e- tr m: The lad me from Mr. Bishop, I deal understand We deal have myjunk vehicles, as he says. We don't have arty scrap at all. So I'm not sure what thatmeans. Every vehicle on au property, that doesn't belong to the company is licensed and insured. Dat is a must and all of our vebicles are licensed and have been insured So, I don't know where that statement comes been. I don't know where the piles of scrap are. We do recycle aluminum Unless he was there when we were recycling. Idon't know. That is part of the business also. As far as the drainage, the drainage hasn't been in there for 10 years, I think So it is not a problem Ihave a sketch here if you would like to look at it As far as the landscaping, the existing office building that we occupy has not been landscaped for years. So don't exactly know what that means either. That parking area is 700 feet off of Marmon Road It is in the middle of my properties. So,I don't know exactly what he is saying there. As far as the gate to the wooded lot, that is a man gate that put in so I can inspect my property back there because it has been violated by commercial dumping for the last seven years and wejust caught them last December. Thstgateisused by me to inspect the property. It is chained and locked so there is nobody getting in there but me. The wooded area is two acres that goes to Industrial Road As far as the parking area, it is lighted Itwas done by Edison. The drainage is proper. It is all pitched It has two inches of clay topping with 12 inches base. It has four inches of 1 x 3 gravel with two inches of quarter by three quarter limestone on top of R So it is very solid. We use it for the company until we down sized and we don'twe it any longer. The purpose of this parking area started out with the company employees. Then I saw that some tax burden could be relieved there so I kind of opened it to the public a bit It seems to be working quite well. Mrs. Koons: Mr. Okersurm, the gate, you are calling it a man gate. Does did mean A is a door size? 18548 yh Okerstmrn: It is a three-foot gate. Yes Mrs. Koons: I am hearing, in a lot of the reports that it needs to be a hard surface. Are you considering limestone a hard surface? Should I consider limestone a hard surface? Mr. Okerstrom: Yes. If you are building a mad, that is the basis of your road before you put black top over it To black top four acres is quite an expense. As far as the surface now, it is as hard as concrete. The drainage is perfect There is no water standing at all. We built A ourselves. We are general contractors so we know what we are doing It is sufficient Mrs. Koros: Thankyou. Mr. Shane: The parcel that we are tailing about, this is not a separate tax parcel is it? Mr. Oknrstrom No. Mr. Sbane: Ib you know how many RVs you can park in this site? Mr. Okerstrom: 200. It is 650' X 2001. Mr. Shane: Thaukyou. Mr. Alanskas: IIowmany doyouhave there now! fhwmanyareyoutakingforrental therenow! Mr. Okerstrom: There are probably 20 private owners. Mr. Alanskas: Unfortunately, I did not get a chance to get there before tonighPs meeting Will you also be taking popcorn machines, hike the storage place on Eckles Road? Mr. Okerstrom: No. Mr. Alanskas: It will be strictly RVs and boats? Mr. Okerstrom: It will be anything over 20 feet I dont want rowboats and little trailers and snow machines and things like that Somebody that has a 20 foot hailer generally takes care of it and generally looks after it and that is what I warn Mr. Alanskas: Are the people that read there allowed to go during the winter in case they want to go and see thein vehicle or RV and work an it, or whatever! Mr. Okerstrom: We have two roads, actually it is a cul-de-sac road to the south. It is 45 feet and to the north it is 45 feet so the entire road is about 90 feet wide. It goes up to the back east fence and is a cul-de-sac. 18549 Mr. Alanskas: But ifit is locked, how would they get in there? Mr. Okerstrom: The main gate is locked. Ihat is the east fence going into the woods. Mr. Alanskas: So you are saying there is an area that is open where anybody can walk in there? Mr. Okerstrom: Off ofMemman, you can drive in there. We keep the roads clear. Mr. Alanskas: Are there my theft problems with rentals? Mr. Okmstrom: We had one theft last year and it was one of our lessee's employees that broke into his vehicle and that was about the size of it Mr. Alanskas: Has the Police Depaztnent ever had to go there for any problems? Mr. Okers orm: Just for that one break-in. We didn'twantto get involved in that Mr. Alanskas: Was there a Police report taken on that? Mr. Okmstrom: I think there was. Mr. Alanskas: Ibmkyou. Mr. Stone What are the lighting facilities for Pois particular location? Do you have lighting facilities? Mr. 01 e-�m: Yes we do. On that little sketch I gave you there are three poles running down through the center with dual lights on each side. They cover 150 fret each side. It actually scans 150 feet circumference. It looks like Brick Stadium at night Mr. Shane: Do you have barbed wire on the fence? Mr. 01e- tr m: We have barbed wire all the way except to the south which the person that owns that property now didnI agree with putting barbed wire up so we didn't do it Mr. Shane: Do you have a problem with talong that down? Mr. Okerstrom: Taking the barbed wire down? Do I have a problem with it? Mr. Shane: Yes. Mr. Okerstrorc Why? Is necessary? Mr. Shane: It could be. We generally have a problem with the barbed wire because of the safely of the kids and that kind of Poing. 18550 Mr. Okersuma It is an industrial area What would kids be doing there? Mr. McCann: The problem is that kids get in to there at night and get caught in it Kits will do bad thing,.. Mr. Okerstrom: Yeah. I am aware of that Mr. McCann: The City ordinance now, I believe, prohibits barbed wire. Mr. Okerstron: The guy that put the fence up was supposed to have been pemdtad. Is it illegal for industrial properties to have it? Mr. McCann: No. Industrial is one area where you can have it Mr. Okerstrom: That is what I thought We did it because of what I explained to you earlier. WerraimainedthatpropertyurNlwedownsized. Itisjust vacant So I decided to do this. Mr. LaPine: Do you still opemb your roofing company out of there? Mr. Okerstrom: Inver did. That is my brother's. Are you tallying about my father's business? Mr. LaPine: Yes. HowloW have you been using this as a stmege for renw? Mr. Okerstrom: For employees, aboutime months, for the general public, maybe six months. Mr. LaPine: Do they lease these on a seasonal basis or is Ajust monthly? Mr. Okerstro n: Yearly. Mr. McCann: If there are no firrlher questions from the Commissioners, I am going to go b the audience. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? Seeing nobody, I will close the public hearing A motion is in order. Mr. Alanskas: I would like to table this petition pending receipt of a properly developed site plan. I dont call this a site plan Mr. Okerstrom: That is a rough sketch I put together. Mr. Alanskas: I am sure you are in no hurry because you are already doing this. It will be up to us to get a date where you could get a site plan and through the Chart, I would like to see exactly what percent of landscaping he has in the front of the office now In see if he complies with the 15%. I want b make sure he is in compliance. Is you landscapingirrigated? Mr. Okerstrom: Yes. We are under a sprinkler system 18551 Mr. McCann: Mr. Taormina, as long as we under the process, he can continue to operate as he is, correct? Mr. Taormina: I am not aware of any enforcemeu t action involving this property but itis ldcely the conditions could be maintained as is. He should not lease any more space out there without having the proper approval. Mr. Shane: The landscaping requirement, are they referring to this specific property or the entire property together? Mr. Twmnna: The m lication is that the deficiency exists in the front yard of this property which I believe would be the area between Memmw Road and the building of the office. Mr. Sbane: So we are tallong about the office? Mr. Taomana: Ibelieve so. Mr. Shane: That is why I asked whether this was a separate tax parcel. Mr. Okerstrom: Wejustwent through with a 40' X 50' addition on our building and they said it was O%., landscaping and all. Mr. McCann: How sow would it take you to get a plan drawn up that is going to be little bit more to scale? What other conditions were we talking about? Mr. Alanskes: Instead of gravel, something else for the lot Mr. McCann: I think we need a recommendation from Engineering whether that would constitute a hard surface. Mr. Taw arric The ordinance is quite specific as to the type of surface material and that is that it either be concrete or a plant mixed bituminous material. Mr. McCann: So it is either concrete or asphalt? Mr. Tacmmma Yes. I think that was the indication by the Inspection Department and they would have to seek a variance for the washed limestone that they are showing on the plan Mr. McCann: The ZBA could grantthe crushed limestone', Mr. Tacmmma Yes. I think that was the indication Mr. McCann: That is something thatwe will have to look at ourselves. My conrsn was also that there was some question with regard as to the adequacy of the light pales. Are they wooden fight pales at this point? 18552 Mr. Okerstrem: No. They were put up by Edison. Mr. McCann: O.K. Mr. Okerstsmm: I have a light scheme ifyou need it On a motive by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Piemecchi and unanimously approved it was #5-77-2001 RESOLVED that, pmvaR to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on May 8,200 1, on Petition 2001-04-02-07 by Robert Okentrom requesting waiver use approval to utilize a portion of property at 13520 Merriman for an RV, boat and travel hailer outdoor storage facility to be located on property on the east side ofMerriman Road behveen Schoolmfr and Plymouth Roads in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 26, the Pla i ^g Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2001-04-02-07 be tabled July 10, 2001. Mr. McCam, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopt-& ITEM #5 PETITION 2001-02-03-01 Thomas & Sherry Louisigna Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-02-03-01 by Thomas and Sherry Louisigna requesting to vacate a 12' wide easement running east and west on the south border on their property located A 11446 Loveland (Lot 1638 of the Rosedale Gardens No. 9) in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 34. Mr. Poppenger presented a map showing the property under petition plus the exishug noting of the surrounding area. Mr. McCain: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: Them is a letter from the Engineering Divisiou dated Marl 7, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referencedpe6doa Please be advised that the 6' backyard easement has an exuarg (in use) sanitary main and cannot be vacated Astor the 12' wide rode yard easement, the City has no utilities in this area however, a fw1d inspection revealed the existence of Detroit Edison overhead liner within the easement Please contact Detroit Edison for their opinion as to the vacating of the 12'side yard easement. For the 12'side yard easement, the following legal description should be used. 'The South12 feet ofthe following described parcel Lot1638, Rosedate Garden No. 9, part of the NW. 114 ofSedion 34, T. IS., R. 9E., City of Livonia Wayne County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 73, Page 41 of Way" County Record&' We Gust that this will provide you with the information requested." The letter is signed by Jahn P. Hill, Assistant City Engineer. 18553 Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? I dont see the petitioner. Are there arty comments or questions from the Conwissioners? If there are no questions, I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? Seeing nobody, I will close the public hearing. Mr. Lupine: I have no objection and I wdl make an approving resolution only that it is approved based on the fact that they get approval of the mtility On a motive by Mr. LaPorte, seconded by Mr. Shane, and unanimously approved it was #5-7g-2001 RESOLVED that, pmsiam to a Public Hearing having been hell by the City Planning Conwission on May 8,200 1, on Petition 2001-02-03-01 by Thomas and Sherry Louisiana requesting to vacate a 12' wide easement running east and west on the south border on their property located A 11446 Loveland (Lot 1638 of the Rosedale Gardens No. 9) in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 34, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2001-02-03-01 be approved, assuming there are no objections from any public utility company, for the following reasons: 1. That there are no City maintained utilities within the subject easement 2. Ted the land area covered by the subject easemeratcan be more advantageously uNized by the property owner if un -encumbered by the easement and 3. That the City Engineer has no objections to the proposed vacating. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above bearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code or Ordinances. Mr. McCaw, Chaumont, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopt-& ITEM#6 PETITION 2001-03-06-02 City Planning Commission (Home Businesses) Mr. Piemeccbi, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-06-02 by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution 945-01, and Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance 4543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, to amend Section 4.02 of Article IV of the Zoning Ordinance to establish various reshictions in connection with home businesses. Mr. Taonniw: Council Resolution 4877-00, adopted on December 11, 2000, requested the Law Department to prepare a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance in connection with home businesses. This proposed language amendment is designed to establish new restrictions that would make home 18554 occupations more compatible and harmonious with single -Family districts. It would also clean-up the existing language of Sections 2.08(4), which provides for a definition of home occupation and Section 4.02(8) which eslablisbes and governs all permitted accessory buildings and uses in the single family districts, including home occupations. The ordinance is based on the premise that home occupations are best controlled through a strict set of performance standards rather than establishing a list of permitted home occupations or professions. Thus, instead of listing the various types of home businesses, the proposed ordinance attempts to impose reasonable conditions and restrictions and prohibits those general activities that are likely to be incompatible to a neighborhood setting. Mr. McCain: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? Seeing nobody, I will close the public hearing. Amotion ism order. On a motion by Mrs. Koons, seconded by Mr. Alanskas and unanimously approved it was #5-79-2001 RESOLVED that, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition 2001-03-06-02 by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #45-01, and Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, to amend Section 4.02 of Article IV of the Zoning Ordinance to establish various restrictions in connection with home businesses, the Planning Commission does hereby recovmrend to the City Council that Petition 2001-03-06-02 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the proposed language amendment will address the issue ofhome businesses by regulating those areas which present the potential for conflicts with the residential nature of the zoning district; 2. That Poe proposed language amaidment will control or prohibit those general activities likely to prove obnoxious to residential neighbors and will coram mtrictions that will immunize disruptions to the neighborhood; and 3. That the proposed language amendment is consistent with the indent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance, which among other things, is to protect the health, safety and welfare of its cities. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above bearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance 4543, as amended. Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion. Hearing none, Ijust have one comment I flunk it is a needed improvement I like the language and it does not affect the family day care ordinance or the group day care home ordinance, which we did so much work on last year. Will the secretary please call the roll? 18555 Aroll mllvate was taken with the following result AYES: Koons, Alanskas, LaPine, Piercerchi, Shane, McCann NAYS: Now ABSENT: None Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopt-& It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution ITEM#7 PETITION2001-03-06-03 City Planning Commission (Drug Stores & Pharmacies as Waiver Uses) Mr. Pie Cecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-06-03 by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #66-01, and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance 4543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, to amend Sections 10.02, 10.03, 11.02 and 11.03 of Articles X and XI of the Zoning Ordinance to designate drug stores and pharmacies as waiver uses. Mr. Taormina: This proposed language amendment to the Zoning Ordinance was initiated by the City Law Department and the City Council, pm atran to Council Resolution 466-01 adopted on Febmazp7, 2001, whereby the City Planting Commission was directed to conduct a public hearing on the question of whether amendments should be made to Article X, Sections 10.02 and 10.03 and Article M, Sections 11.02 and 11.03 of Zoning Ordinance 4543, as amended, to designate drug stores and pharmacies as waiver uses instead of pertained uses in comonercially zoned districts, and to thereafter submit its report and recommendation to the City Conrail. In a report dated March 28, 2001 to the City Council, the Law Department identified at least two (2) other nearby cornnnnities, Westland and Lathrop Village that treat drug stores and/or pharrnacies as waiver uses in their commercial zoning districts. Waiver uses are permitted only where there is a finding by the City Planning Commission and approved by the City Cancel that the use complies with the special requirerneurts and regulations for the waiver use bring sought and the general standards of Section 19.06 of the ordinance. In reviewing possible alternatives, it was discovered that a third community, Troy, allows drug stores and pbannzcies as permitted uses, bort restricts the use ofdrive-up window facilities which are a common feature ofmost freestanding drug stores as well as other commercial businesses. In Troy's local business district which is sinWar to om C-1 district, drive -up windows are prohibited, while its general business district allows them as a conditional use. Mr. McCann: Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing. A motion is in order. 18556 Mr. Sbane: I want to make a denying resolution but I want to make sae that the minutes reflect the fact that, while I don't see the merit fox treating drug stores as waiver uses, there may be same merit in consideration of the drive -up window concept regardless of what type of business we aretall®g about as a waiver use. On a motive by Mr. Shane, seconded by Mr. Piercecchi and unsummously approved it was #5-80-2001 RESOLVED that, the Planning Commussam does hereby recommend that Petition 2001-03-06-03 by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #66-01, and Section 23.0 Ila) of Ordinance 4543, the Zommg Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, to amend Sections of 10.02, 10.03, 11.02 and 11.03 of Articles X and XI of the Zoning Ordinance to designaia drug stores and pharmacies as waiver uses, the Planning Coo rissiw does hereby nommumd to the City Council that Petition 2001-03-06-03 be denied for the following reasons: 1. That the curum language contained in the Zoning Ordinance provides adequate control over the location and nature of the subject use, 2. That the proposed language amendment will impose unneeded additional regulations with respect to the subject use, and 3. That the proposed language amendment will add an unnecessary burden on private enterprise attempting to establish the subject use. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as ammded. Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion? Hearing none, Ijust have a comment inaddition w what Mr. Shane said and that is that the audience at home and that the Council understands that the Planning Commission does have a lot of concern with regard to the number of pharmacies that have popped up around the City. However, after spending considerable time discussing the issue, we felt that the drive-tluu was something that should be treated as a wavier use and that the pharmacy, itself, is not unusual or unique m arty way that would requve the health, safety and welfare of the community to become a waiver use. Therefore, I am going to vote along with the denying resolution. Will the secretary please call the roll? A roll call vote was taken with the fo0owing result: AYES: Shane, Pierceccbi, Alonskas, LaPine, Koons, McCaua NAYS: Now ABSENT: Now Mr. McCain, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted 18557 ITEM #8 PETITION 2001-03-06-04 City Planning Commission (Sealing limitations for restaurants in a C-1 district) Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, amrnmced the nextitem on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-06-04 by the City Planning Coun fission, pmsuantto Council Resolution #78-01 and parsuam to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, to amend Section 10.03 of Article X of the Zoning Ordinance, seating humorous for restaurmG in a C-1 district. Mr. Taormina: Council Resolution #78-01, adopted by the City Coma on February 7, 2001, requested the Planning Commission to consider an amendment to Article X, Section 10.03 of the Zoning Ordinance to amend the restaurant seating In diations in C-1 districts. The proposed language as prepared by the Law Deparenent would add "full service" restaurants as a waiver use under the C-1 dishictregulations. If approved, both boated service and bill service reslaurards would be provided for as waiver uses in a C-1 district (the different being that limited service restomms have a limit of 30 seats whereas full service restaumrils would have more than 30 seats). This issue arose in connection with a request by the Dumesi Restaurant located in the Four Oaks shopping center on the northwest comer of Joy and Newburgh Roads, to expand the seating of its restaurant Since the C- l inning at Itis location provides for a maximum of only 30 seats under the "limited service" type ofrestaumrd as defined by the ordinance, the petitioner unsuccessfully sought the rezoning of the tenard space to C-2 to allow for "lu0-service" type restaurants. The restraint operator ultimately resorted to obtaining avariance from the ZBA hrhave more than 30 seats. Puerto 1968, restaurants, except for drive-ins and nationals, weretreated as a permitted use m C-1 districts. 13etween 1968-1991, restaurants were prohibited in C-1 zones. The most recunt amendment occurred in 1991, establishing hunted service restaurmU as a waiver use in C-1 districts. Mr. McCain: Again, this is something that the Planning Coumussion did spend considerable time with On a motion by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mrs. Know and unanimously approved it was #5-81-2001 RESOLVED that, Petition2001-03-06-04 by the City Planning Commission, pmsuara to Council Resolution 478-01 and pursuant to Section 23.0 Ila) of Ordinance 4543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, to amend Section 10.03 of Article X of the Zoning Ordinance, seating limitations for reslauranU in a C-1 district, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2001-03-06-04 be denied due to the fact that the proposed language amaidment to add full service reslauranU as a waiver use in the C-1 district would allow for reslaormts with more than 30 seats and should be denied fir the following reasons: 18558 1. That the proposed language amendment is not needed to accommodate full service resmunama in the City; 2. That the Zoning Ordinance currently commas sufficient language to adequately provide for full service restramos in proper locations other than C-1 districts; and 3. That the proposed language amendment will promote larger resmurmU in a district which, in general, is intended to drew customers from a small service area FURTHER RESOLVED that, nobee of such hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance 4543, as amended. Mr. McCann: Is thereany discussion? Mr. LaPine: I believe that if we allow this, we are going to get more restaurants and I think we should by and control them as much as we can in the C-2 districts. Mr. Sbane: There may be some merit to this but I hope the City Council deliberates this for a while and gets some empirical data that wouldjustify opening up the C-1 district for additional seats. I am going w mpporttbe denying resolution because we spent a lot of time determining that the C-1 district would be a proper place fora smaller restaurerR and I dont see ibat anything would change that at this point. Mr. McCann: My only comment would be that we are trying to change the ordinance on me particular event and I think we need to find a broader problem before we change the ordinance. Will the secretary please call the roll? Aroll call vote was taken withthe following result AYES: Piercecchi, Koons, Alauskas, LaPine, Shane, McCann NAYS: Kone ABSENT: None Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted This concludes the public hearing portion of the agenda We will now proceed with the Miscellaneous Site Plan portion of our agenda ITEM #9 PETITION 2001-04-05-16 Ameritech Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is Petition 2001-04-08-16 by Ameritech requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to construct a second 18559 floor addition to the building located at 15550 Newburgh Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 17. Mr. Miller: This site is located an the east side of Newburgh Road between Five Mile and Ladywood The petitioner is requesting approval to construct a second floor addition to the existing Ameritech building located an the subject site. This site is located just north of the Newburgh Shopping Center. The existing budding is one-story in height and 10,400 sq. It. in size. The addition would add a second floor In the top of the building and double the size of building. To allow access to the second floor, a small stair tower addition would be constructed to the rear of the building Once the proposed addition is completed, the building would be expanded to approximately 21,030 sq. It In a letter that accompanied the plans, it is explained that `the proposed addition would not change the existing use of the building, which is far housing telephone communication equipment only" The letter also goes an to staff that `the occupancy would remain at frve full time day shift employees'. This facility does not cater to or receive any type of outside customer traffic. Parking required is one (1) some per employee=5 spaces. Parking providedis 15 spaces. The Building Elevation Plan shows and notes that the new addition would be constructed not of "newface brick__ to match the existing construction'. Theexisting building is conshuxkd out of a dark brownish -rod brick. The plan shows that all roof ope mechanical equipment would be screened by a metal siding enclosure. The only type of openings proposed for the second floor addition would be louvered covered windows an the north and south (sides) elevations. The submitted plans only make reference to the addition. No other changes to the site, including landscaping are proposed. At the May 1, 2001 Study Meeting, the Planning Commission expressed some concerns about the aesthetics of the solid, two-story bigb, brick walls of the structure. They understood security reasons this building had to be somewhat fortified but thought something architecturally needed to be done to help it blend in with the surrounding neighborhood It was suggested that some type of fake windows and possibly a different brick pattern be incorporated into the design of the building to help break up the vastness of the walls. On May 7, 2001, the petitioner submitted a revised elevation plan. The new plan shows that the building would have a mw of windows along the north and soutin elevations. These windows would be positioned approximately in the middle of the first and second floors and would be defined by two bands of soldier cause brick Mr. McCain: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: There are four ids of correspondence. The first letter is from the Engineering Division, dated May 1, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to our request, the Engineermg Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have an objection to the proposal or legal description contained thereto. It should be noted that the existing sidewalk located along Newburgh Road u to remain and that any damaged or misalignedsections should be replaced during construction. Wetnastthat 18560 this will provide you rrith the information requested.." The lelRris signed by David Lear, PP., Civil Engineer. The second letter is from the Inspection Deparhnmt, dated May 3, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to yam request ofAprd 25, 2001, the above referenced petition has been reviewed The follownig is noted: (1) Due to the increase in site, this structure as proposed, will be required to be in full compliance with all Michigan Barrier Free Codes. The only en6typermitted bylaw to greaten accessibility waiver is the State Barrier Free Design Board (2) This petition proposed no increase in parking while doubling the site of the building. Therefore, a variance for deficientparking from the Zoning Board of Appeals will be required Originally a standard ofone spaceper 500 usable square feet was utilised Using the some standard, another 17 spaces would be required This standard would apply only to this usage and others permitted in 18.38(19). Therefore, this site would be deficient 16spaces. (3) Theparking lot will require some repaving,repair, restoration and double striping. (4) There is a dumpster placed on site without an enclosure. (5) The protective wall cap needs repair and/or replacement in severalareas and the west Di feet ofthe north wall needs to be restored and repaired to three (3) feet in height (6) The site's landscaping needs maintenance and there are broken curbs at the north parking island This Department has no further objections to this petition other than as noted" The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Dimcferoflnspection. Thedh¢dletterisfro die Livonia Fire&Resme Division, dated May 7, 2001, which reads as follows: "This ojfree has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct a secondfloor addition to the building on property located at the above referencedaddress. We have m objections to this proposaC" The lett is signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal. The fourth letter is from the Divisim ofPohee, dated May 8, 2001, NvMch reads m follows: "We have reviewed the plane in connection with a proposal to construct a second floes addition. We have no objections to the plans as submitted." The Inver is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau That is the extent of thecorrespondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evenmgl Marian Jasla la, Ameritech, 1365 Cass Avenue, Brom 1218, Detroit, MI 48226. Mr. McCann: Is there amfifi.ng additional yon would like to hll us that hasnY been brought forward by our staff! Ms. Jaskula: Only that the need to increase the size of the building is the need for Ameritech to add additional equipment to service the comrnmity. The space is scheduled to exhaust probably in the second quarter of next year. In order to keep up with all the technology changes we need to add to the budding and we are limited on the facility on the site so that brought forth the need to go to a second floor. Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? 18561 Mrs. Koons: Ms. Jaskula, I have read our Inspection Departments concern about the barrier free design and your response to that. Your response to that is that the mainframes are 76" to 12' in height Ms. Jaskula: Yes. Mrs. Koons: It appears to me though thatyna still need pemvssim or a waiver from the State Barrer Free Design Board. Ms. Jaskula: If we do need that, then we will by and acquire it Elton Anderson Associates, I work for the archnecnaal firm Carter & Burgess, 30800 Telegraph Road, Suite 4900, Bingham Fames, Michigan 48025. We had submitted to the City a copy of the BOCA National Code 1996 version, and it is Chapter 11 and it is Section 11.03.0 Accessibility. Ihere is a statement in there that says, "All buildings and artiOares, including their associated sites and facilities, shall be accessible to persons with physical disabilities including, but not limited to, occupants, employees, students, spectators, participants and visitors." Under the exceptions category, item 42, "areas wbere work cannot reasonably be performed by persons having a severe turpzrtment mobility, sight or hearing are not required to have the speck features providing accessibility to such persons." Mr. McCann: Are the only people that work in there, maintenance people? Mr. Anderson: They are telephone equipment fume people, sir. Mr. McCann: There are no operators, no person thatjust monitors the equipment? Mr. Anderson: The people that work in there have computers that monitor the equipment Mr. McCann: Are they the repair people themselves? Mr. Anderson: No sir. Mr. McCann: So, are you saying a handicapped person could not monitor the equipment and work the computers? Mr. Anderson: Yes sir, because they in tum are wiring wbat we would call telephone equipment They are not repot people. They are people who wre the fumes up and connect telephone lines. Mr. McCann: You anal need arty staff in there thatjust operates the computers during the day? Mr. Anderson: No sir. They are dual function people. 18562 Mrs. Koons Referring back to what you just read about mobility, vision and hearing, will you read that section again? Mr. Anderson: Areas of work cannot reasonably be performed by persons having a severe imlsarmanC mobility, sight or hearing, are not required W have the specific feahues providing accessibility to such persons. This is the BOCA code, which the City goes by. Mrs. Koons: I needed to now if it was the end"and/or." Thank you Mr. LaPine: How many employees do you have there? Ms. Jaskula: There are five. Mr. LaPine: All you basically need is five parking spaces and maybe on occasion smm seven? Ms. Jwkula: There are outside technicians that stop at the building but are not stationed there. Mr. LaPine: How many parking spaces does the ordinance say they need Mr. Taormina: The ordinance is generally silent with respect to this type of use. I believe A is one space for 500 sq. ft of gross floor area. Mr. LaPine: So that is where they have to go to Zoning Board of Appeals to get a variance for the number of deficient parking they have? Mr. Tasmania: That has been suggested by the Inspection Department and that will probably be subject to fiather discussion before malong the decision as to thein need to be before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. LaPine: Are we putting in mare switching here m equipment for more phone lines? Whaz exactly is going in the bildingl Ms. Jaskula: It is switching equipment It is fiames and switches. Mr. LaPne: Thank you Mr. Alanskes: Does this have anything to do with cell phones? Ms. Jaskula: No. Mr. Piercecchi: SN, did you say you are the architect for this building? Mr. Anderson: I am one of the architects. I have another architect here who is a consultant. 18563 Mr. Piercecchi: I hate fe be critical but adjacent to you nn the south is a me-storybudding and that budding doesn't really have much imagmation at all- It looks more like a warehouse that is brick, if I can be so blunt Mr. Anderson: I coal believe the pictures that you are looking at (inaudible) Mr. Piercecchi: Itis a limrible looking building. Donlym agree? What about the frout? Mr. McCann: Is there a reason there are no windows on the west elevation? Ms. Jaskala: Our telephone equipmantbuildmgs smuply donlhave windows for secu ity reasons. We added those at the request of the City. Haresh Dhana, Elton Anderson Association, 407 E Port Sheet Suite 303, Detroit Michigan 48226. After I got the call from Scott Miller, we added the windows on the north side and the south side. There are no windows in the front because on the one comer there is just an area for fresh air and supply air so we do not put windows nextkr there. Ifyou look at the floor plan, nextkr that thereis a staircase going from the main floor In the second floor and next to that is a verysmall area Ifyou insist, we can add a window. Thatwouldnl be a big problem but normally equipment buildings dont have the windows for safety and secuity. Mr. Piercecchi: I was interested in breaking up that brick Mr. Dharia: If you look at the west elevation, the area which is oper, that is the area for the fresh air next In the stair fewer and only the wall left over here, is where you can put a window or two if you need. I would have no objection to putting in a couple ofwindows ifyou would like to do that But those would be more like a standard glass window, you cant see from inside to outside. It will just be awindov look Mr. Piercecchi: Is lhis the planned view here? Mr. Dharia: Yes. Mr. Piercecchi: If you break up all of that brick, you ve got two rows going across there and I Poink you can even make it better now. In that drawing there you show a lighter color going on the vertical Is that going fe be final? Is itnotgoing In be all one color! Mr. Dharia: The brick is going In match on top and bottom It could be broken up with a different band and use a different color brick. Again, as you desire, we can break up this elevation. Mr. Piercecchi: I amjust really flindang of your people. It is your building and the prettier you make it the better manage Ameritech will have too, right? And there are an signs on this budding are there? 18564 Mr. Dharia: Ihere is a small sign that says, "Ameritech" Mr. Piem utchi: Ijust think itis too much brick and not enough of splitting itup and getting somemorebalanceinitmthertbmjustonebigblurofbrick ThatisjuAa comment. It is your budding. I guess you can do what you want with it I was just suggesting that you might consider something like that Mr. McCann: I assume all ofyuur lines nm underground mc, this location? Ms. Jaskula: Yes. Mr. McCann: One of my concerns is that technology changes quickly and is there a possibility of 10 or 20 years down the line that this building is just going to be outgrown and you are going to abandon it? Mr. Anderson: My honest answer probably would be, 'No, sir." But I really can't see 20 years in advance. Normally, what would happen, is equipment changes and they will come into the budding and do an internal tmvsfarjob from one switch to another. Take the old equipment out and put in a newer generation of equipmerR Mr. McCann: My concern is that satellite may take over and the bard line location like this may not be necessary then we've got a building that should have 40 to 50 parking spots and has 17 and the next owner comes in and says, "Welt, we've grandfathered in and there is no parking and doesn't meet any ofthe City requirements." I think that b ilding bas been there since I was a yomhg kid It's been there a long time and I don't see it changing because all of the hand wires nm into itbut that is a concern and you don'tbeheve you see that as a problem? Mr. Anderson: I really can say because I can't look into a crystal ball and say what is going to happen. Mr. Dharia: I haven't seen Ameritech, formally Michigm Bell, selling arty oftheir holdings. They always had the equipment changes in the building. Some building are vacrot at this time with minmial equipment bII they still own the whole bolding Mr. LaPme: The windows that are going in, are they regular windows? Mr. Dharia: The windows that are going m are regular windows. They are fixed windows. They are 6' x 5' windows with insulated glass. Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions, a motion is in order. On a motim by Mrs. Koons, seconded by Mr. Shane and unanimously approved it was #5-82-2001 RESOLVED that, the City Pla ung Commissmn does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2001-04-08-16 by Ameritech requesting 18565 approval of all plans required by Section 15.58 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to construct a second floor addition to the budding located az 15550 Newburgh Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 17 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Site Plan marked Sheet C-1 dated 4/24/01, as revised, prepared by Elton Anderson Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2. That the ExRrim Building Elevation Plan marked Sheet A-6 dated 5/04/01, as revised, prepared by Elton Anderson Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 3. That the brick used in the construction shall match that of the existing budding and shall be full face 4 inch brick no exceptions; 4. Thar the petitioner shall correct to the Inspection Department's satisfaction the following as outlined in the correspondence dated May 3,2001: thaz this structure shall be in bill compliance with all Michigan Barrer Free Codes; that the entire parking lot shall be repaired, resealed and double striped that the protective wall shall be repaired and the west 10 tt of the north wall shall be restored to 3 tt in height thaz the site's landscaping shall be revitalized and thereafter permanently maintained in ahealthy condition; thaz the broken curbs of the north parking island shall be reported 5. That the dumpster area shall be enclosed and the three walls of the area shall be contracted out of the same brick used in the construction of the building or in the event a poured wall is substituted, the wall's design, texture and color shall march that of the building and the enclosure gates shall be maintained and when not in use closed at all times; 6. That no signs, either freestanding or wall mounted, are approved with us petition; 7. Thst the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Departrnent az the time the building permits are applied for. S. Thatwindows will be placed on the west elevation with the approval of the Inspection and Planning Deparfta n 18566 Mr. McCann: Is Poere any discussion? Mr. Alanskas: Wi0 those windows be tined? Mr. Dharia: Yes. Mr. Alanskas: Like a green cold! Mr. Dharia: More like a bronze, dark brovn or block Mr. Alanskas: Thank you Mr. McCaw, Chairmw, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted It will go on to City Council with an approvng resolution. This concludes the Miscellaneous Site Plan portion of our agenda We will now proceed with the Pending Item section of our agenda ITEM#10 APPROVAL OFMINUTES 822°a Public Hearing&Regular Meeting Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is Approval of the Minu es of the 822°a Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on April 3, 2001. On a motion by Mr. Shane, seconded by Mrs. Koons and unanimously approved, it was #5-83-2001 RESOLVED that, the Minutes of the 822°a Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission an April 3, 2001, are hereby approved. A roll call vote was taken with the following result AYES: LaPine, Koons, Shane, McCann, Pierceccbi NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Alamkas On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted the 824ue Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on May 8, 2001, was adjourned at 9:36 pm CM PLANNING COMMISSION James C. McCaw, Chairman /rw Dan Piercerchi, Secretary 15567