HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2005-01-2522004
MINUTES OF THE 8W PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
On Tuesday, January 25, 2005, the City Planning Commission of the City of
Livonia held its 899" Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center
Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. John Walsh, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Members present: Robert Alanskas William LaPine R. Lee Morrow
Dan Piercecchi H. G. Shane Carol Smiley
John Walsh
kviwn,:Sm:T"=iIGeT--
Messrs. Mark Taormina, Planning Director; At Nowak, Planner IV; and Ms. Marge
Roney, Program Supervisor, were also present.
Chairman Walsh informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda
involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the
City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and make the final
determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning
Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or
vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City
Council for the final determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected. If
a petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan approval is denied tonight, the
petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City
Council. Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Commission become
effective seven (7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning Commission
and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their fling.
The staff has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying
resolutions, which the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the
outcome of the proceedings tonight.
ITEM #1 PETITION 20044 1-01 4 6 PINETREE
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2004-11-
01-16 submitted by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to
Council Resolution #514-04, and pursuant to Section 23.01(a)
of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia,
as amended, requesting to rezone property at 34451 Pinelree,
located on the south side of Pinelree Avenue between Stark
Road and Laurel Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33
from RUF to R-1.
22005
Mr. Taormina
presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning
of the surrounding area.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there any correspondence for us to consider this evening?
Mr. Nowak:
There is one item of correspondence from the Engineering
Division, dated December 8, 2004, which reads as follows:
`Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has
reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objection
to the proposal or legal description provided at this time.
Additional fight -of -way is not required at this time." The letter is
signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. That is the
extent of the correspondence.
Mr. Walsh:
Are there any questions from the Commissioners for staff?
Mr. Piercecchi:
Mark or Al, this petition, in effect, is basically a revisit of Petition
2003-10-01-19 to induce the property which adjoins the western
boundary of the area involved in that previous petition. Is that
the case?
Mr. Taormina:
Thais correct.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Walsh:
Are there any other questions for staff? Seeing none, ladies
and gentlemen, what we will do this evening is the staff will give
a report first and then we will go the petitioner. They will have a
chance to speak. Following questions from the Commission, we
will go to the audience. So I will ask if the petitioner is in the
audience, if they could please come forward. We'll start with the
petitioner first this evening.
Mr. Taormina:
Mr. Chair?
Mr. Walsh:
Yes.
Mr. Taormina:
As a point of clarification, the City is the petitioner in this case.
The Deamuds were involved in the original petition, but certainly
may have something to add.
Mr. Walsh:
You're absolutely correct, Mark. Ladies and gentleman, I
apologize for that. Is there anything you'd like to add to Mr.
Taormina's presentation?
22006
Alfreda Stokes:
I live there, and I would like to give the property to my children
so they can build a house, finally. That's all I got to say.
Mr. Walsh:
Okay. I think Mr. Taormina did a nice job, and honestly, it
slipped that we had brought you back to try and do this because
we think it makes some sense. But with that, if you'll just have a
seat close by in case there are questions.
Mr. Alanskas:
Just one question because it's going to be a modular home. Do
you know what percent is going to be siding on the house? I
know the front will be all brick.
Charles Deamud:
Yes, it will.
Mr. Alanskas:
What percent of the rest will be siding? The whole three sides?
Mr. Deamud:
The other three sides will be aluminum sided. It's just the front
thatwill be brick.
Mr. Alanskas:
All right. Thank you.
Mr. Walsh:
Are there any other questions from the Commissioners? Seeing
none, then what we will do is go the audience. Is there anybody
in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition?
Seeing no one in the audience, a motion is in order.
On a motion by Shane, seconded by Morrow, and unanimously adopted, itwas
#01-06-2005
RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on January 25, 2005, on
Petition 2004-11-01-16 submitted by the City Planning
Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #514-04, and
Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of
the City of Livonia, as amended, requesting to rezone property
at 34451 Pinetree, located on the south side of Pinetree Avenue
between Stark Road and Laurel Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of
Section 33 from RUF to R7, the Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 200411-01-
16 be approved for the following reasons:
1. That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in
harmony with the surrounding uses and zoning dishicts in
the area;
22007
2. That the proposed change of zonng would provide a
zoning classification that would more reasonably relate to
the size of the subject property;
3. That the proposed change of zoning would represent a
minor extension of the zoning classification that
encompasses the land areas lying east and south of the
subject property; and
4. That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the
Future Land Use Plan designation of Low Density
Residential land use in this general area.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was
given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving
resolution.
ITEM#2 PETMON200442-0147 NIXON
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2004-
12-01-17, submitted by Gary and Helen Nixon, requesting to
rezone property at 34625 Eight Mile Road, located on the south
side of Eight Mile Road between Gill Road and Ellen Drive in
the Northwest''/. of Section 4 from RUFB to OS and R-4.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak: There are two items of correspondence. The first item is from
the Engineering Division, dated December 27, 2004, which
reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering
Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have
no objection to the proposal or legal description provided at this
time. No additional right-of-way is required. The following
descriptfons are provided. Detention facilitfes for both uses and
the drive approach to Eight Mile Road will require approval from
Wayne County." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E.,
City Engineer. The second item is an email from Dennis
Behrendsen, President of the Deer Creek Homeowners
22008
Association Board, dated January 24, 2005, which reads as
follows: "The Deer Creek Homeowners Association Board has
authorized me to submit the following. We believe it is in the
best interest of our subdivision and neighborhood for the
property at 34625 Eight Mile Road to be rezoned entirely to R4
residential and urge the Planning Commission to so recommend
to City Council." That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. Walsh:
Are there any questions from the Commissioners for the staff?
Ms. Smiley:
I'm sure you said that, but both the north and the south lots in
the future site plan are R4. Right? Or low density?
Mr. Taormina:
Yes, the land use designation shown on the Future Land Use
Plan for all of Lot 14 is low density residential.
Ms. Smiley:
Thankyou.
Mr. Walsh:
Is the petitioner here this evening?
Mr. Gary Nixon,
9826 Auburndale, Livonia, Michigan 48150.
Mr. Walsh:
Good evening.
Mr. Nixon:
Good evening.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there anything you'd like to add to the staffs presentation?
Mr. Nixon:
I would just say that you're familiar with this property. We were
here not loo long ago, and this is something we've been
considering for a long time. The proposed development that
we're talking about would satisfy both requirements of what we
want to do, but also of what the Sarah Estates Plan would be,
that being that the Sarah Estates development would then be
able to wrap around this comer, and it wouldn't affect any of the
homes that are going to be built there. Theyre all going to be
backing up to OS, and without this approval, the property that
we currently own basically is unusable for R4. It doesn't have
the appropriate width and there would be no access to this
properly, so basically it would be an unusable piece of land.
This just seems like a good altemative to that in a way that we
could satisfy both the requirements of the City and also the
development of Sarah Estates without affecting the current
homemners.
Mr. Shane:
Sir, who would operate the daycare center?
22009
Mr. Nixon:
Basically, I would manage it and own it and operate it.
Mr. Shane:
Have you done that kind of work before?
Mr. Nixon:
I haven't owned a daycare facility, but I have been a resident of
Livonia for a long time, and I've been a business owner here in
Livonia for the past 18 years.
Mr.Shane:
Thankyou.
Mr. LaPine:
You said, in your opinion, the land can't be used as P.A. It is
my understanding that Mr. Baki is interested in buying that
parcel from you, and you didn't want to sell because I assume
you have plans for the daycare center. He must feel that it can
be developed.
Mr. Nixon:
He must what? I'm sorry.
Mr. LaPine:
He must feel that the property can be developed and used as R-
4 as far as his Sarah Estates.
Mr. Nixon:
If he were to purchase the property, he has indicated that there
would be a way for him to be this property into this development,
although his current development has already been proposed
without using this property.
Mr. LaPine:
But if your petition is denied, you could sell to him and he could
incorporate it into his development.
Mr. Nixon:
At this time we're not interested in selling it to him, but if we
were, we've negotiated and we've talked about a sales price,
but we have not been able to come to terms with him.
Mr. LaPine:
Now, you said that you've owned this property for long time?
Mr. Nixon:
Since Eight Mile was dirt.
Mr. LaPine:
Okay. Since I've been on this Commission, we've had two
proposals along that area for commercial and for OS. We have
been very emphatic that the stoppage of the commercial or OS
was going to be on the comer of Gill Road and Eight Mile Road.
Were you ever up here and fought to see that rezoned, so
apparently you weren't opposed to it not being rezoned at that
time?
22010
Mr. Nixon: No.
Mr. Walsh: Are there any other questions for the petitioner? Seeing none,
is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? Seeing no one, a motion would be in
order.
On a motion by La Pine, seconded by Pieroecchi, and unanimously adopted, it
was
#01-07-2005 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on January 25, 2005, on
Petition 2004-12-01-17, submitted by Gary Nixon and Helen
Nixon, requesting to rezone property at 34625 Eight Mile Road,
located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Gill Road
and Ellen Drive h the Northwest ''/ of Section 4 from RUFB to
OS and R-4, the Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2004-12-01-17, as
amended, be approved so as to rezone the entire land area of
the subject project to R-4, for the following reasons:
1. That the proposed change of zoning to R-4 is supported by
the Future Land Use Plan which designates the subject
area for low density residential land use;
2. That the proposed change of zoning to R-4 is compatible to
and in harmony with the surrounding uses and zoning
districts in the area;
3. That the proposed change of zoning to R-4 will provide for
a single family residential development similar in density to
what is existing in the neighboring area;
4. That the proposed change of zoning to I-4 will provide for
lot sizes which are consistent with other developed
properties in the area; and
5. That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the
developing character of the area.
IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that the petitioners request that a
portion of the subject property be rezoned to OS be denied for
the following reasons:
22011
1. That the proposed change of zoning to OS is inconsistent
with the Future Land Use Plan designation of low density
residential land use for the subject area;
2. That existing Office Service zoning in the vicinity of the
Eight Mile Road and Gill Road intersection adequately
provides for uses such as are allowed in the OS district,
and there is no demonstrated need for additional OS
zoning in this area;
3. That the proposed change of zoning to the OS
classification would represent a further encroachment of
non-residential zoning into a residential area and would be
detrimental to the residentially zoned properties to the west
and south; and
4. That the proposed OS zoning district will not provide for the
development of the subject property in a manner that will
be complementary to surrounding land uses in the area.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was
given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there any discussion from the Commissioners?
Mr. Morrow:
Mr. Chairman, I have a comment that I'd like to make. I
certainly recognize the petitioner's right to petition for the OS,
but as long as I've been associated with the Board, it's been our
feeling that the Master Plan established how we want to see
that property go, as residential. When Mr. Dinan had his project
approved, I think we tried to make it dear at that time that that
was the end of any type of development other than residential.
For that reason, I will be supporting the resolution.
Mr. Walsh, Chairman,
declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving
resolution. Sir, what we are recommending to the Council is
that the entire parcel be rezoned to R-4, and we denied the
request for OS zoning.
Mr. Nixon:
Okay. Do I have anything else I can say here?
Mr. Walsh:
No. The public hearing is closed.
Mr. Nixon:
Well, I am a taxpayer. I'd like losay a couple more things here.
22012
Mr. Walsh: But sir, we accorded you an opportunity to speak.
Mr. Nixon: I understand. Right, but I slopped, so you could speak, and
now I'd like to say one more thing. If this property does not get
rezoned to OS and R4, the property will not be sold. It will be
basically a piece of property that's going to sit there. So, what
does the City propose that we do with this piece of properly?
Its going to be vacant now with these houses surrounding it.
What are the people who have been paying taxing to the City for
so long, what are we supposed to do with this properly?
Mr. Walsh: Sir, you're the property owner?
Mr. Nixon: Yes.
Mr. Walsh: We wouldn't have a recommendation for that other than what
we just made, which is R-4.
Mr. Nixon: Right.
Mr. Walsh: And at this point, we're going to move on to the next agenda
item.
Mr. Nixon: Okay. Well, see you again. Thank you.
ITEM #3 PETITION 200442-0148 MOWETT
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2004-
12-01-18, submitted by David Mowett and Wing Chan,
requesting to rezone properties at 29001, 29005 and 29015
Five Mile Road, located on the south side of Five Mile Road
between Paderewski Avenue and Haller Avenue in the
Northwest 1/4 of Section 24 from R-1 to C-1.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak: There is one item of correspondence from the Engineering
Division, dated December 29, 2004, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has
reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections
to the proposal and see no discrepancies in the right -of my or
22013
need for additional right-of-way at this time. The following legal
description should be used in connection with this petition.
Should the property be redeveloped, it would be a requirement
to meet the Wayne County Storm Water Management
Ordinance in connection detention and storm water runoff.
Further, any proposed drive approach to Five Mile will require a
permit from Wayne County." The letter is signed by John P. Hill,
Assistant City Engineer. That is the extent of the
correspondence.
Mr. Walsh:
Is the petitioner here this evening?
Mr. David Mowefl, 22529 Milner, St. Clair Shores, Michigan 48081.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there anything you'd like to add to the presentation thus far?
Mr. Mowett:
Again, it's in reference to when I was first up here on September
14 of last year. It's a great overview in respect to where the
property is and the current zoning. I know the last time I was
here we were requesting the OS, to change from RI to OS
zoning. Since that time, as you guys have staled, I did speak
with the neighbor of the adjoining property, Mr. Chan, and he is
in favor of the rezoning. I know there was a comment made that
the City feels there is an abundance of commercial property
within the surrounding area of the Five Elm Park Subdivision.
With reference to wanting to change from l-1 to C-1, we have a
total of five lots, or three addresses, to go for the rezoning
request, to complete it from Paderewski to Haller on the south
side of Five Mile there, is that the adjoining properties all the
way that wrap from the property that adjoins us, which is now
being used as Chet's Rent All, has been G2 for many, many
years extending all the way from there to Middlebelt, and then
from Middlebelt south a few blocks. This is one of the oldest
homes in that Five Elm Park region that was originally zoned R-
1, probably because there was really no commercial at the time
the house was constructed in the mid -30's. We're mainly trying
to keep the zoning continuous to run with the land and feel that
would be able to better serve the residents in the area and the
City of Livonia.
Mr. Walsh:
Thank you. Are there any questions for the petitioner?
Ms. Smiley:
Are you aware that with the Gl you'd have to have a 75 -foot
setback?
22014
Mr. Mowell: Okay. Yes, I know the setbacks are more restrictive than the
OS, but in reference to the other properties that are ... we're
going for a less intensive use instead of continuing C-2, the
general business, continue the lower use of the G1. All the
other properties that have been there, I guess, are, my
understanding, would be grandfathered in under the setback
compared to the current setback requirements. We probably
wouldn't need ZBA approval of anything along that line, but as
far as some of the uses, I think this limits the use of the properly
a lot. With the existing home, it could be converted to various
types of businesses, but we, some of the people that have
approached us, for instance, one being a hair salon, it requires
a C-1 zoning. That wouldn't fit the OS requirements. As far as
how the setbacks relate in relation to the current structure, I
guess that would be with site plan approval which would be able
to be provided.
Mr. Piercecchi: Most of what I was going to say has been very well covered, but
I do want to express some compliments to the organizer here
for getting all the property east of the C-2 parcel, between Haller
and Paderewski, for rezoning. If you will recall, earlier when you
came here, you were sandwiching residential between C-2 and
OS lots and that was a condition, as you recall, that the
Planning Commission did not look friendly on. My question is,
why are you now requesting G7 zoning when you heard from
our Director and others about the setback requirements? I don't
know where you come up with this grandfathering. Some things
happened many years ago but, sir, we do not rely on past
mistakes to set precedent for future developments. We don't do
that, and if I may repeal some of this data, you've got 75 and
20, its 95, that leaves you 15 feet for development. Fifteen feet.
If you were at the C-1 classification, which you earlier
requested, you would have roughly, let's say, its 95, that leaves
you 15 feel for development. Fifteen feel. If you were at the OS
classification, which you earlier requested, you would have
roughly, let's say 55 feel to develop it. That's a much more
logical set of data. In addition, going OS in there, which was in
your earlier petition, is consistent with our Future Land Use Plan
for this particular area. I think, sir, that's you'd be much better
off with OS in this area. With G7, you'll never be able to build
on it. You're assuming you're going to gel waivers and those
kinds of things. You are on very thin ice, in my opinion here,
though I don't make those decisions. So I suggest that you look
at this thing seriously as you can see, that basically this
particular Board here thinks it should be OS. Because, why?
This is our Future Land Use Plan. It fits. C-1 does not fit. So
22015
that may come up that we may recommend that. I want you to
be prepared for that.
Mr. LaPine: Mr. Pieroecohi brought up most of the things I had in my mind.
One thing I just want to get clear. Did you say again that if you
got G1 zoning here, you were going to keep the house and a
beauty salon would go in there?
Mr. Mowett: That was one of the proposals that we had received.
Mr. LaPine: If my memory is correct, one of the reasons we sent you out of
here was to try to get together with the other landowner. We
thought then, at that point, those two houses are older homes.
They could be knocked down and a nice new building put in
there. I'm not in favor of you talang that house and moving a
beauty salon in there when its an old home. Its just not
compatible. If we're going to rezone this property to Gi, I think
we should at least get a new building. That's my personal
opinion.
Mr. Mowett:
There would always be that . . . that definitely improves the
possibilities down the road for something very nice to go on
those pieces. As far as the conversion of the home to a
business, there are other types of beauty salons I've seen that
have done a nice job using decorative trim, facia board, signs,
retaining walls. I mean to continue with more of the aesthetics
of a residential look for the community. Realize that would take
quite some investment, but I would see that as feasible. In
addition, I had spoken with, in addition to Mr. Chan who owns
the property in the middle, I've spoken to Mr. Chris Titus who
owns the property Chefs Rent All is using, and he is also quite
in favor of having it all zoned a commercial classification, so the
whole piece from Paderewski to Haller would be ... I'm going
back to my main points ... of having the zoning run consistent
with the land. And I realize it does bring various conflicts with
the current setback requirements.
Mr. Shane:
My quesfion is similar to Mr. La Pine's. In addition to a beauty
salon, do you have any other tenants firmly in mind for this
property?
Mr. Mowett:
Another one was a karate studio, a martial arts school.
Mr. Shane:
Is this firm orjust an idea?
22016
Mr. Mowett:
Between the two, the beauty salon was much more serous in
their approach than the martial arts studio.
Mr.Shane:
Thankyou.
Mr. Alanskas:
Yes, I want to reverse the process a litlle bit. When you first
came before us and we had at that time recommended possibly
to change the rezoning to OS, have you tried to get OS tenants
in there?
Mr. Mowett:
I'm sorry?
Mr. Alanskas:
Have you fired to get OS tenants, if it was zoned OS?
Mr. Mowett:
Another possibility was a loan center, a local bank was thinking
of setting up as a loan center, but that was pretty much just in
developmental stages. There was no offer along that line as far
as lease agreements or offers of buying the properly.
Mr. Alanskas:
So you've only tried one person in regard to the OS
classification?
Mr. Mowett:
Yes. We'd like to keep the options open.
Mr. Alanskas:
I'm just one Commissioner, but I really dont think that on that
property, where it's at, you'd have a problem getting OS tenants
in that area. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow:
I wasn't here last December when the petition went through the
first time, but just what I'm hearing tonight is that all the waivers
that would be required to work the G1 in here, regardless of
what you're going to use, because we're just talking about
zoning here tonight, you know, whether it's good to be O7 or
OS. But looking at it from the standpoint of just the rezoning
ordinance, it would almost preclude in itself rezoning it to G7.
Because I cant worry about whether or not you're going to
operate out of that home or if you can afford to build a wall to
the south. From a planning standpoint, it just seems to be that
OS would be the proper zoning for those parcels. Thank you.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? Seeing no one, do you have anything to
add before I dose the public hearing?
Mr. Mowett:
Soyour next slepwould be to make a motion in regards to ....
22017
Mr. Walsh: We're going to go to a motion, and once its passed, we will then
move on to the next item.
Mr. Mowett: Okay. I mean as far as ... my general feeling is pretty much
everybody is in favor of ... as far as rezoning the property, if its
going to be rezoned, to rezone it to OS compared to C-1, and
then that recommendation would be passed on City Council. I
mean that's pretty much how I see things at this point, which is
acceptable as well. I mean, it does better serve the interests of
the community as far as development going on in those pieces,
the OS or C-1 related business. Gl allows more flexibility in
relation to the surrounding properties. Other than that, that's all
I have to say for tonight.
Mr. LaPine: Have you had any conversation with the owner of the rental
shop at all?
Mr. Mowett: Yes. His name is Chris Titus.
Mr. LaPine: The ideal situation would have been, as I mentioned this the last
time you were here, because I don't think the rental shop does
that well, it's not in the best of conditions either. That all those
parcels from Paderewski to Haller could be rezoned to OS and
a nice office complex could go in there. Maybe you could get a
joint agreement with him as a partner and a building. I mean
that's another solution for you.
Mr. Mowefl: Yes.
Mr. LaPine: Once we rezone these to OS, and talk him into it, maybe you
can get a joint venture and build something on all the parcels.
Thankyou, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mowett: Yes, we were mentioning that. He's quite in favor of the whole
thing being rezoned, and it does bring out more options for
everybody and for future use that the whole piece could be
something very nice. He also stated that he would, if the City of
Livonia would like any correspondence, you know, written and a
notary public, that he would provide that in regards to his
support for the rezoning.
Mr. Walsh: We will dose the public hearing. A motion is in order.
On a motion by Piercecchi, seconded by Alanskas, and unanimously adopted, it
was
22018
#01-08-2005 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on January 25, 2005, on
Petition 2004-12-01-18, submitted by David Mowett and Wing
Chan, requesting to rezone properties at 29001, 29005 and
29015 Five Mile Road, located on the south side of Five Mile
Road between Paderewski Avenue and Haller Avenue in the
Northwest 1/4 of Section 24 from R-1 to C-1, the Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 2004-12-01-18, as amended, be approved so as to
rezone this property to OS, for the following reasons:
1. That the proposed change of zoning to OS is compatible to
and in harmony with the surrounding zoning and land uses
in the area;
2. That the proposed change of zoning represents a logical
extension of existing OS zoning that occurs on land
immediately to the east of the subject property;
3. That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the
nonresidential character of the Five Mile Road frontage
properties on the south side of Five Mile Road east of
Middlebelt Road;
4. That the proposed change of zoning is supported by the
Future Land Use Plan which recommends office use in this
area; and
5. That the proposed change of zoning will provide for
additional office uses to serve the area.
IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that the petitioners request that
the subject property be rezoned to C-1 is hereby denied for the
following reasons:
1. That the proposed change of zoning to C-1 will be
detrimental to and will adversely affect the residential
properties in the area to the south;
2. That the existing commercial zoning in the vicinity of the
Five Mile Road and Middlebelt Road intersection
adequately provides for commercial uses in this area;
3. That the petitioner has failed to adequately demonstrate a
need in this area for additional commercial uses such as
are permitted by the C-1 dishict; and
22019
4. That the proposed change of zoning to G7 is inconsistent
with the Future Land Use Plan designation of office use for
the subject area.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was
given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving
resolution.
ITEM #4 PETITION 200442-0235 MID AMERICA SHOWS
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2004-
12-02-35 submitted by Mid America Shows, Inc. requesting
waiver use approval to conduct a carnival sponsored by the
Livonia Mall Merchants Association consisting of amusement
rides, games and food concessions from Thursday, April 28,
2005, through Sunday, May 8, 2005, inclusive, on property
located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between
Middlebelt Road and Pudingbrook Road in the Southeast''/.of
Section 2.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from
the Engineering Division, dated November 24, 2004, which
reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering
Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have
no objection to the proposal or legal description provided at this
time." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City
Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue
Division, dated December 16, 2004, which reads as follows:
"This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection
with a request to conduct a carnival sponsored by the Livonia
Mall Merchant's Association consisting of amusement rides,
games and food concessions from April 28, 2005, through May
8, 2005, on property located at the above -referenced address.
The Fire Department has no concerns about this plan. This is
the same configuration as previous years." The letter is signed
22020
by Andrew C. Walker, Sr. Fire Inspector. The third letter is from
the Division of Police, dated December 28, 2004, which reads
as follows: We have reviewed the plans in connection with a
proposal by Mid America Shows requesting to conduct a
carnival at the Livonia Mall. It appears to be the same plan in
previous years with security provided by the Police
Department's CSO Bureau. We have no objections to the plans
as submitted." The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant,
Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection
Department, dated December 27, 2004, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request of December 14, 2004, the above -
referenced petition has been reviewed. This Department has no
objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop,
Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the
correspondence.
Mr. Walsh:
Is the petitioner here this evening? Is there anything you'd like
to add?
James Wegerly,
Vice President of Mid America Shows, Inc., 3041 Serenity,
Oakland, Michigan 48363. Just briefly, I think Mr. Taormina and
Mr. Nowak have done a great job for me. Our pefition is
consistent with the same circumstances as the Commission has
approved many times in the past, and we hope you'll look
favorably upon us once again.
Mr. Walsh:
Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. Alanskas:
Sir, on our notes, it says "select management will be living
inside the concession areas." How many are we talking about?
Mr. Wegedy:
Again, it will be consistent with past years. It consists usually of
about five or six living quarters. They're completely out of site of
the public, and theyre very lovely units and things like that.
Mr. Alanskas:
When you say living quarters, what do they consist of?
Mr. Wegedy:
My business partner, Danny Houston, has a lovely motor coach
that's there, and there's a couple other very, very nice travel
trailers, that type of thing. But very deluxe units, if you know
what I'm saying.
Mr. Alanskas:
And it says your remaining personnel will be housed off site.
Are they the operators that con the rides?
22021
Mr. Wegedy:
Yes. What we do is, we have a number of living quarters for our
personnel, and we actually this week send them out to a camp
ground near Wixom, is where the rest of them are housed.
Mr. Alanskas:
My last question is, you know a lot of these carnivals, when you
go to them, a lot of the operators wear bluejeans with holes in
them and their tennis shoes have blow outs. I mean do you
have any uniforms that your people wear?
Mr. Wegedy:
Oh, we do. They're completely uniformed every single day with
hats, shirts, pants, coats, jackets.
Mr. Alanskas:
And how many porta-johns are you going to have this year?
Mr. Wegedy:
We always have six on-site for the public, then we have a
couple out of sight that are for our employees. And then there
are restrooms available inside the mall also.
Mr. Alanskas:
All right. Thank you very much.
Mr. LaPine:
Just a couple questions. Is this your third or fourth year at the
Livonia Mall?
Mr. Wegedy:
Gosh, Mr. LaPine, I'd have to look back, but I believe it's more
than that even. I forgot to mention Ms. Bobby Gelman is here
from the Livonia Mall. Five, she says.
Mr. LaPine:
My next question is, looking at your schedule, on Friday and
Saturday nights, you're open to 11:00. Once 11:00 comes and
you dont accept anybody else on the rides or anything, after the
11:00 hour, how long does it take to clear out the area?
Mr. Wegedy:
It takes about 15 minutes generally. As you may well be aware,
we actually hire the Livonia Police for security for this event, and
we keep them after that time to help clear the area.
Mr. La Pine:
So there's somebody there to clear the area?
Mr. Wegedy:
Oh, absolutely. We very conscientious about that.
Mr. LaPine:
My third question, I know the mall has been having problems
over the years and they dont have the traffic they had there 10 -
15 years ago. Have your sales gone down over the Iasi couple
years or have they stayed pretty steady?
22022
Mr. Wegedy:
Well, unfortunately, we've had very indement weather, and I
really can't answer that with an educated answer. We feel when
the weather is favorable at that site, we sti l do okay. You know
it's a high traffic area.
Mr. La Pine:
I was just curious. Thank you.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Welcome back.
Mr. Wegedy:
Thank you. Its good to be here.
Mr. Piercecchi:
How many rides are you bringing in this time around?
Mr. Wegedy:
Usually, we put 18 to 20 rides in this installation.
Mr. Piercecchi:
And how many food dispensers?
Mr. Wegedy:
There's usually about four or five food concessions.
Mr. Piercecchi:
And games?
Mr. Wegedy:
Yep. There will be about probably 10 to 12 games.
Mr. Piercecchi:
I'm doing a little advertisement for you.
Mr. Wegedy:
Well, I appreciate that. Thank you. We need all the help we
can get.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Lee and I have work two shows which Mr. Wegedy ran for many
years, and I think he will agree with me that these are
outstanding people here. These are really high class individuals
that run this operation.
Mr. Wegedy:
I might mention to you, if I may, we're very proud of something,
and I'll be very brief There's a national trade organization
called the Outdoor Amusement Business Association that
carnivals all over the country belong to. They started a refing
system actually to rale carnivals. They send a team of four
individuals that stay with you for three days, and they go
through every aspect of your operation. I won't bore you with it,
but we were the first carnival in the United Slates to be certified
on a national level, and we're very proud of that. We've gained
national recognition as being one of the finest carnivals in the
country, and we're very proud of that. And to go back to Mr.
Alanskas's question, our personnel are all drug tested. A male
can't wear an earning. We are very, very conscientious. Our
22023
safety director is a gentleman named Allen Chester who worked
for the State of Michigan for 30 years. He was the head
inspector for the State of Michigan. He retired and he asked to
come with us. He requested to work with us. So we're very
proud of our carnival, and thank you for your kind remarks loo.
That's very kind, but we do try hard. We really do.
Mr. Alanskas: Just one comment. I had the pleasure of going through the mall
Monday because I had to do some shopping there. The Livonia
Mall is far from having any empty stores there. They are pretty
well full and doing a good job. Thank you.
Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? Seeing no one, I'm going to close the
public hearing. A mofion would be in order.
On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Shane, and unanimously adopted, it was
#01-09-2005 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on January 25, 2005, on
Petition 2004-12-02-35, submitted by Mid America Shows, Inc.,
requesting waiver use approval to conduct a carnival sponsored
by the Livonia Mall Merchants Association consisfing of
amusement rides, games and food concessions from Thursday,
April 28, 2005 through Sunday, May 8, 2005, inclusive, on
properly located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between
Middlebell Road and Purlingbrook Road in the Southeast''/.of
Section 2 the Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 200412-02-35 be approved
subject to the following conditions:
1. That the carnival shall be limited to the dales as specified
by Mid America Shows, Inc., which are April 28, 2005,
through May 8, 2005, inclusive;
2. That the proposed carnival operation shall be confined to
the area as illustrated on the Site Plan submitted with this
request;
3. That all rides, food concessions, booths and all other
equipment and apparatus relating to the operation of the
carnival shall be located at least 60 feet distant from the
Seven Mile Road right-of-way line;
4. That all trucks and other transportation equipment shall be
parked or stored within the northwesterly portion of the
22024
Livonia Mall parking lot, but no doser than 100 feet from
the west property line abutting the Ziegler Place site or 250
feet from the south property line abutting Hunters Brook
Condominiums;
5. That there shall be no motors running on the stored trucks
during late hours, especially between 11:00 p.m. to 7:00
a.m., inducing motors on any refigeralion trucks;
6. That there shall be no living quarters at the location of the
stored trucks;
7. That adequate access to nearest local hydrants be
provided for firefighting and that adequate access be
provided for medical units and personnel;
8. That adequate security shall be provided to insure a safe
and orderly event;
9. That temporary fences/bandcades shall be placed along
north, east and west perimeters to prevent
pedestrians/children from walking or running into traffic
areas; and
10. That the hours of operation of the carnival shall be as
stated in a letter dated December 8, 2004, from James K.
Wegerly, Vice President of Mid America Shows, Inc., which
have been approved bythe Police Department.
Subjectto the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for
the following reasons:
1. That the proposed use complies with all of the special and
general waiver use standards and requirements as set
forth in Sections 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance
#543;
2. That the site has the capacity to accommodate the
proposed use;
3. That the use of the subject property for carnival purposes
will not interrupt the normal traffic flow and circulation in the
area and will not impede access to the Livonia Mall; and
4. That no reporting City department objects to the proposed
use.
22025
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. Walsh: Is there any discussion?
Ms. Smiley: Congratulations on your certification
Mr. Wegeriy: Thank you very much.
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving
resolution.
It 1=1 Ai E:'S"M9=1 0 IEel 7 W11115:iW-1s]0ATPU
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2004-
12-02-36, submitted by RC Screwz requesting waiver use
approval to operate a remote control car race track in an
industrial building at 12119 Levan Road, located on the west
side of Levan Road between Plymouth Road and Commerce
Street in the Southwest%of Section 29.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is from
the Engineering Division, dated December 22, 2004, which
reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering
Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have
no objection to the proposal and orlegal description provided at
this time. No additional right -0f -way is required. As no parking
calculations are provided, we recommend that this be provided
or discussed with the owner at your meeting." The letter is
signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second
letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated January
4, 2005, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the
site plan submitted in connection with a request to operate a
remote control car racetrack in an industrial building on property
located at the above -referenced address. We have no
objections to this proposal with the following stipulations: (1)
Provide plans to this office for review. (2) Egress shall comply
22026
with the requirements of A,3 Occupancy. (3) Double -sided `No
Parking Fire Lane'signs shall be posted on the south side of the
building." The letter is signed by Andrew C. Walker, Sr. Fire
Inspector. The third letter is from the Inspection Department,
dated January 10, 2005, revised, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request of December 22, 2004, the above -
referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted.
(1) Should a waiver use be granted for this expanded use, this
petitioner will need to complete the following. (a) Submit a
detailed exit and egress plan for review and add emergency
egress lights and exit signage as may be needed. (b) Submit a
plan for all construction proposed or existing without permit.
Combustible construction may not be permitted in this type of
structure and may need to be demolished or removed. If none
has been done, no plan will be needed. (c) Complete
corrections already issued by this Department. This
Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter
is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection. That
is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. Walsh:
Are there any questions for staff? Hearing none, let's go
straight them to the petitioner.
Keith Bergeuin,
42774 Redlein, Canton, Michigan 48187.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there anything you'd like to add to the presentation thus far?
Mr. Bergeuin:
No, you guys covered pretty much everything. I'm here to just
answer any questions you might have.
Mr. Walsh:
Are there any questions for the petitioner?
Mr. La Pine:
When I was at your place today, you showed me the packs of
screws. Do you actually manufacture those screws there?
Mr. Bergeuin:
We actually have a place that manufactures them out in Texas.
They ship them back to us. We warehouse the bulk of them,
and then we package up the kits. We have approximately 1,500
different kits that we package everyday.
Mr. La Pine:
Okay. The second question I have is, do you actually sell those
little cars?
Mr. Bergeuin:
Most of the time we just sell replacement parts because when
they go out there, sometimes they have a tendency to crack
something. So we'll sell the anus or the pins that need to be
22027
replaced. And then most of the time, we sell our screw kits to
the customers.
Mr. LaPine:
Are these racing cars at your location all ran by battery? Is that
correct?
Mr. Bergeuin:
That is correct. We've had no other submission to go with what
they call nitro, which is just a two-cycle combustion engine.
We've no request to do that. I've been in the hobby myself for
about 15 - 16 years now. Everybody runs electric. Its just
easier to maintain, easier to ran.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Good evening. It is my understanding that there are 48 parking
spots in this particular facility, which you share with Guardian.
Is that correct?
Mr. Bergeuin:
That's what I've been told. When I moved in there, they were
just starting to redo a new blacktop because the old lines are
gone. So I didn't know how many were there in the first place,
bu148 is what I was told is available.
Mr. Piercecchi:
This shows that Guardian occupied 10 plus parking spaces for
trailer storage and disassembled bodies. If and when you're
having a large show in there with your cars, will those spaces be
available to you or do they stay there all the time outside?
Mr. Bergeuin:
The cars, from what I understand, are going to be staying there,
but the two big trailers there in the back, they belong to the
owner. I guess he was doing something with them, but those
are going to be moved. So I'm fleeing up three to five spots in
that back area, but usually when we have the racers come out,
they either carpool or its just like a father and son. So if we
have like a 30 racer turnout, there's really only about 16 - 17
cars there because a lot of the guys will actually carpool
together because they're coming from other cities. Were only
the third one in Michigan as opposed to having 70 down in Ohio.
So everybody who travels down to Ohio is not traveling to ours
from the Ann Arbor area, Canton, Ypsilanti, and they're
carpooling to make it easier so they only have to drive one car.
Mr. Piercecchi:
What you're just saying kind of indicates that there may be
times when you need a lot of parking.
Mr. Bergeuin:
It could come out like that, but from what we've seen, weve
basically reached everybody whos into the hobby. We've got
mainly what our mainstay is going to be between 30 to 35
22028
racers. These are the guys that are pretty much dedicated to
racing. During the week, we might have five or six guys come
out just to run the track, but for the club racing, its just the guys
who are into the hobby that do the club racing. Some of these
beginner guys just come out, look for parts, or just do a test run.
The club racing is just for the members that come and are
serious about it. We've got pretty much all of them right now
that come out.
Mr. Piercecchi:
You have to land of forgive my questioning here, sir, because
this is a new venture for me here for this type of activity. We
have no handle on what it takes for the parking.
Mr. Bergeuin:
Sure.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Generally, everybody says they have enough parking but
sometimes they don't have enough. I dont know if there's
anything available for parking, Mark, on Levan or the main
street up there?
Mr. Walsh:
Mr. Piercecchi, I want to make sure you understood. He may
have 35 racers, but he's saying he's counting only 16 - 17 cars
amongstlhem. So he didn't indicate that he had a problem.
Mr. Piercecchi:
You don't have spectators that come in?
Mr. Bergeuin:
Very rarely. No. I mean most of the guys that actually come to
do this ... its not really too much of a spectator sport. You just
watch a bunch of cars go on a track. The guys who are coming
are the guys who are actually bringing the cars and they want to
have the competition with their friends. So that's who is really
there. I mean we have spectator seating. I dont think over the
past two months that we've been having people there we've had
more than two or three spectators at the most.
Mr. Piercecchi:
I'm just concerned that you could get in bind on parking. That's
all. Hopefully, youwon'l.
Mr. Bergeuin:
No. I don't think we will because we really haven't run into any,
even being close, running into a parking problem yet.
Mr. Piercecchi:
You only can really count on 24. Right?
Mr. Bergeuin:
As in what?
Mr. Piercecchi:
If you're sharing with Guardian.
22029
Mr. Bergeuin:
Yes, pretty much. And like I said, we've got a lot of guys, like
tonight, we have some light club racing going on, and there is
like seven guys from Ann Arbor. And they all just drove one car
because they didn't want to drive seven different cars coming
from Ann Arbor. So mainly the guys who are out of reach, they
try to gel together because everybody knows everybody in this
Iitlle hobby. Its kind of funny. You go up to Sterling Heights
where the other racetrack is at, and everybody knows
everybody down in this area. So they all get together and they
all just make a drive.
Mr. Piercecchi:
I would assume that its advantageous for your business,
making the parts, that you do have a lot of people.
Mr. Bergeuin:
Really, the racing is just an after part of what we do. My
business is for the screws. I do a lot of distribution through
hobby distributors. There's three of them in the U.S. and I'm in
17 different countries. So my mainstay is the screw business
I'm in. We just thought we'd make it convenient because there
are no other facilities in Michigan that they could do any kind of
a club race like they have in Ohio. You can go in every city and
there's a racetrack. So we just tried to go with rent. Like in
Canton, we could afford so much. In Livonia, the rent was a
little better. We were able to gel the bigger building and provide
an actual facility for them to ran at. So really, the business from
the racetrack doesn't drive our business. Its the screw
business that's upfront. We're just giving something back to the
racers, giving them an area to go, because with Michigan
weather it's so hard to go outside even during the summer with
min all the time. So we make an indoor facility and they can
race whenever they want.
Mr. Pieroecchi:
Thank you for your remarks.
Mr. Shane:
Sir, do your hours of operation coincide with Guardian at all?
Mr. Bergeuin:
Pretty much. When we looked at the building, Mr. Gold, who
owns the buildings, we were talking with Keith, one of the part
owners over at Guardian. They said for the past number of
years that theyre done at 5:00 - 5:30. With the club racing, we
schedule that 7:00 on a Tuesday. We try to work with people's
schedule. So they want to gel home, they want to eat, and then
they come and race. So we're pretty much given permission to
use any part of the parking we want at that lme because during
the day we only have two employees. If we have two guys
22030
come out, the front covers the parking, and theyre allowed to
use anything they want in the back. I don't mind if they park in
our spots. Theyve already known that. And Saturdays, if they
work it's a skeleton crew, five or six people are there. We still
have full run of the back of the lot.
Mr. Shane:
So basically you're operating much of the time when theyre not
there?
Mr. Bergeuin:
F�actly.
Mr. Shane:
I don't see what parking problem you'll encounter.
Mr. Bergeuin:
Very seldom do we have people come in before noon. I mean,
most of the time they come in, they want to just buy a screw kit
or get some information on the tracks or ask about the times.
That's our basic business. Other than that, it's just me and the
other two workers there, and we're just doing our business in
the front half.
Mr. Morrow:
If you will just bear with me. I want to make sure I'm following
this correctly. Are you Guardian?
Mr. Bergeuin:
No, I'm not.
Mr. Morrow:
So in other words, there are two businesses within that
building?
Mr. Bergeuin:
Yes. Its been subdivided. There's a solid partition wall going
up to the ceiling. We're in about 8,800 square feet and they
have the remaining half. Theyre on their business. They have
their own stuff running.
Mr. Morrow: How many employees do they have?
Mr. Bergeuin: Ten, 12. I've counted cars in the back.
Mr. Morrow: Is that the 10 that we were referring lo? And you've only got
two or three?
Mr. Bergeuin: Yes, its myself. Somefimes my wife and I have one worker.
Mr. Morrow: Well, we have total parking of approximately 13 people, and
we've got 48 parking spots.
Mr. Bergeuin: During business hours, correct.
22031
Mr.
Morrow:
Okay. I wasn't sure if you were Guardian or what.
Mr.
Bergeuin:
No, I'm RC Screwz.
Mr.
Morrow:
I didn't go inside. But I did go outside and look around.
Mr.
Bergeuin:
All right.
Mr.
Morrow:
Do you rent that space?
Mr.
Bergeuin:
Yes, I do. I have a two-year lease on it right now.
Mr.
Morrow:
Are you aware of some of the conditions placed on his
property?
Mr.
Bergeuin:
As in ... what were you referring to, just so I know?
Mr.
Morrow:
Well, we had one from the Fire Department that indicated there
had to be some signa ge put up.
Mr.
Bergeuin:
Okay. We had all the egress lighting done. In the back
warehouse where the track is at, there's an east and west door
for exits. We had the egress lighting put there with a safety light
in the middle of the building to show a pathway. We had egress
lighting in the front pro shop and by the front door. We've had
all that done.
Mr.
Morrow:
How about the no parking?
Mr. Bergeuin: The no parking - we have a sign that says "no parking" but I
talked to the owner and with the parking spot lines, that was all
supposed to be done this spring when he's having the back re -
black topped. He didn't finish it. When I moved in, they were
just starting the front and then they called it quits and said
would be finished next year.
Mr. Morrow: Okay. Well, basically, I just wanted to make sure, because
you're not the property owner, that there are some conditions.
Mr. Bergeuin: Right. And we had the Fire Marshal come through and then we
had a couple inspectors come through. We did all the stuff they
wrote except for on the two doors. There's supposed to be
push bar exits. Those are being done now. We just had to get
approval from the owner since he was responsible for half of it.
22032
Mr. Morrow:
Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Alanskas:
Sir, for my information, is this a 12 -month operation -these
races?
Mr. Bergeuin:
Now, that it's indoors, yes. It would be year round.
Mr. Alanskas:
Okay. Its a 12 -month operation.
Mr. Bergeuin:
Right, usually with this particular hobby, it's restricted only to
summer.
Mr. Alanskas:
And these people, when they have these races, what does the
winner gel? Anything? A monetary thing or trophy?
Mr. Bergeuin:
Not really. They just come in and rent out the time they're going
to race. Basically,
its friendly competition. They go out there
knowing that they're going to race against Fred and Joe, and
last week Joe beat him by how many laps, and now their
competition is to gel him. It's just a thing that they like to do.
That's all.
Mr. Alanskas:
I was reading your rules. It says that the racers themselves are
their own marshals forsaying who wins the race?
Mr. Bergeuin:
Marshalling means, if you have like 30 racers, we divide them
into groups of five. When those five guys are running, there's
going to be the next group and they are the marshaling group.
So if the car gets stuck on a board, they move the car because
the car only goes forward. It cant go backwards. The cars are
set for forward only so if they get stuck in a corner, the marshals
go out there and turn them, and the car continues going. That's
what the marshalling means.
Mr. Alanskas:
What is the speed that these little cars go?
Mr. Bergeuin:
They're really fast, but when you have a tight course, like if
you're outdoors and you have a outdoor track in a 300 - 400 fool
parking lot, cars will easily go 35 - 40 miles an hours. With our
computer system, the fastest car that we have averages 12-1/2
miles on average.
Mr. Alanskas:
I was there last Tuesday around 12:30, and you're building was
empty. I mean there was no one in the building, including you.
I went in the side door, and it was cold as heck in there.
22033
Mr. Bergeuin:
We keep it cold uml it's actually race lime because back there,
there's no one ever there. So I don't even heat that part. I was
probably just at the comer getting a pizza or something.
Mr. Alanskas:
Now, on your track you had there where you say, don't step on
the track. Does that mean people can't step on there when
they're racing the cars?
Mr. Bergeuin:
Not when they're racing the cars. What it means is the border.
We dont want people leaning on that border because usually
the trades dont have anything to contain it. It's just wide open
whenever you go somewhere. There's really no containment for
a trade, but we made a containment just in case someone was
walking down there. We made a six inch high containment
because the cars can't launch, but theyre only 4-1/2 inches
high, so they can't dear the wall. What we have is just, you
know, you don't stand on it. You dont try to lean over and look
at them. You just stand back.
Mr. Alanskas:
I just wanted to make sure that you're safety -wise and no one
trips on those little walls and falls.
Mr. Bergeum:
No. These guys who come in here pretty much know. If they
are not racing and theyre not marshalling, theyre not even
worried about the race. Theyre over there working on their cars
getting ready for their next heal. So the only ones that are there
are the marshals, and theyre just watching to make sure
nothing gets hit.
Mr. Alanskas:
All right. Thank you.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? I don't see anybody in the audience. A
motion is in order at this time.
On a motion byAlanskas,
seconded by Shane, and unanimously adopted, it was
#01-10-2005 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on January 25, 2005, on
Petition 2004-12-02-36, submitted by RC Screwz, requesting
waiver use approval to operate a remote control car race track
in an industrial building at 12119 Levan Road, located on the
west side of Levan Road between Plymouth Road and
Commerce Street in the Southwest % of Section 29, the
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
22034
Council that Petition 200412-02-36 be approved subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the following issues as outlined in the correspondence
dated January 10, 2005, from the Inspection Department
shall be resolved to that departments satisfaction:
2. That the petitioner shall submit a detailed exit and egress
plan for review and shall add emergency egress lights and
exit signage as may be needed;
3. That a plan for all construction proposed or existing without
permit shall be submitted to the Inspection Department for
their review;
4. That the petitioner shall complete all corrections already
issued by the Inspection Department;
5. That this approval shall incorporate the following items
listed in the correspondence dated January 4, 2005 from
the Livonia Fire and Rescue Division of the Department of
Public Safety:
- That an egress plan, which shall fully comply with the
requirements of A-3 Occupancy, shall be provided to
the Fire Department for review;
- That a double -sided "No Parking Fire Lane' sign shall
be posted on the south side of the building; and
6. That all the plans required as part of this approval shall be
submitted to the Inspection Department at the time the
building and/or occupancy permits are applied for.
Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for
the following reasons:
1. That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the
special and general waiver use standards and
requirements as set forth in Sections 16.11 and 19.06 of
the Zoning Ordinance #543;
2. That the subject property has the capacity to accommodate
the proposed use; and
22035
3. That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony
with the surrounding uses in the area.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was
given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving
resolution.
Y 1 � r5 Ft ice» Y Y V NL f'ZrIrL!¢�Erilrp I� 111 ilJ :7 � I_1. Ul1lay � � 4V
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2004-
08-07-01 submitted by the City Planning Commission, pursuant
to Council Resolution #480-04, to determine whether or not to
amend Part VII of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, Future
Land Use Plan, so as to change the land use designation of
various properties located throughout the City.
Mr. Walsh: We have a number of changes, and Mark is going to con
through them for the benefit of our audience and those watching
on tv.
Mr. Taormina: The Planning Commission is seeking to update the Future Land
Use Map with respect to 23 various locations throughout the
city. For each of the proposed changes, the staff has prepared
a map with information relating to location, size of the subject
land area, as well as the current zoning, existing land use, and
current and proposed Future Land Use Plan designations. The
purpose of the proposed amendments is to have the Future
Land Use Plan brought up -lo -dale and made current so as to be
consistent with recent zoning changes and to reflect changes
with respect to actual and/or proposed land uses. The Planning
Department has distributed the plan amendments to the various
entities as prescribed by Slate law. We have concluded the
public notice period. This evening we are holding the public
hearing, and following it we will be looking for a
recommendation to go on to Council for their certification.
Reference No. 2-01. This first proposed land use amendment
occurs in Section 2. It's the area just north of St. Martins Road
and west of Middlebelt. It's comprised of about 7.2 acres, and
it's the site of the recent request by Phoenix Land Development
to develop this site as St. Martins Condominiums. The current
land use classification is High Density Residential, and we are
22036
requesting that it be lowered to the Medium Density Residential
classification to be consistent with the proposed development
plan and vision for this particular property.
Reference No. 5-01. The next occurs in Section 5. This is 47.2
acres of land that consists of the westerly undeveloped portion
of the Glen Eden Cemetery. Recent petitions involved the
rezoning of this land to R-4 and site plan approval for a
detached condominium project known as Golf Ridge. We are
requesting that the classification be amended from its current
designation of Community Service to Low Density Residential,
which is consistent with the density that is proposed as part of
the Golf Ridge development.
Reference No. 502. The next is a small triangular portion of
land in the same general vicinity. This is 2.92 acres that was
deeded to the City for recreational purposes. It links the area
between the southeast comer of Whispering Willows Golf
Course with the northwest corner of Fox Creek Golf Course.
Current land use designation is Community Service. We are
proposing to change that to Recreation -Open Space to make it
consistent with the land use classifications of the adjacent golf
courses.
Reference No. 601. The next change is on the north side of
Seven Mile Road just east of 4275 and west of Newburgh Road.
This is 5.95 acres that was part of the land previously proposed
to be developed by Oakwood Health Systems as an ambulatory
care facility. This was part of the Consent Judgment where it
was agreed that the area north of the stream would be
developed as a combination of Medium Density Residential and
Open Space. The easterly portion is the area that would be
developed ultimately under the RC or Residential Condominium
classificafion. The land use designation consistent with the RC
zoning for this site would be Medium Density Residential. So
we're proposing to change the classification here from Office to
Medium Density Residential.
Reference No. 6-02. And then the area immediately to the west
contains an addifional two acres. The terms and conditions of
the Consent Judgment require that this two acres be retained as
Recreation -Open Space. So we are proposing to change the
Future Land Use designation to reflect that Consent Judgment.
Reference No. 6-03. Also in the same vicinity is the area
immediately west of Bethany and north of Seven Mile Road.
This is a small area consisfing of .82 acres. There's been a
recent proposal to rezone this site to Office for the development
22037
of a small dental practice. That petition is pending, but
consistent with that proposal, we would change the Land Use
designation from Low Density Residential to Office.
Reference No. 7-01. Next is the area that is part of the College
Park development. The larger portion, which will ultimately be
developed as office, is about 40.86 acres in size and lies just
west of the 1-275 expressway between Six Mile Road and
Seven Mile Road, east of Haggerty Road. The request here is
to change the classification from Community Service, a
reflection of its ownership currently by that of SchoolcraR
College, to Office, which again is consistent with the patchwork
of zoning that has already taken place for this property, which is
a combination of OS, Office Services, and PO, High Rise
Professional Offices.
Reference No. 7-02. The next area, also in connection with the
College Park development, is the frontage along Haggerty
Road. This is 9.96 acres in size. This is he commercial retail
portion of the development, which includes the three
restaurants, Bravo, Mitchell's and Claddaugh Irish Pub, as well
as the Marketplace. The request here again is to go from
Community Service to General Commercial, consistent with the
retail nature of the use that's being developed on this site.
Reference No. 8-01. The next area is a Recreation -Open
Space area that is part of the Calibum Estates Subdivision to
the south and the Calibum Estates No. 2 Subidivision to the
north. We noticed as we were going through our maps that this
area was still shown as Low Density Residential. We felt that it
would be more appropriate to be shown as Recreation -Open
Space consistent with the use, which is part of a natural
drainage course in this area and is city -owned land (6.55 acres).
Reference No. 501. The next area is the northwest comer of
Six Mile Road and Farmington Road. This is the site of the
former Manufacturers Bank property that was recently
redeveloped as a surgical eye clinic. The previous land use
designation for that property was General Commercial. As part
of that redevelopment process, we rezoned the property to
Office, so that would also be the proposed Land Use
classification for that parcel (1.73 acres).
Reference No. 9-02. Next is an area at the east end of Vargo
Avenue just east of Ellen Drive. This was an area, for whatever
reason, shown on our Future Land Use Plan as Community
Service. There are homes located on this 2.04 acres of land, so
22038
we propose to change the Land Use classification to Low
Density Residential.
Reference No. 503. The next is on the south side of Seven
Mile Road west of Farmington Road. This is the site of the
Stamford Plaza. Its 1.41 acres in size. The Future Land Use
plan currently shows this area as Low Density Residential, but
consistent with the longstanding use of this property, we
propose to change it to General Commercial.
Reference No. 14-01. The next area is the site of the Kingsrow
Shopping Center, which is west of Middlebelt Road and south of
Six Mile Road. This property is 1.05 acres in size and it, loo,
has been developed for a long time as a commercial strip
center. So we propose to change the classification from it's
current designation of Low Density Residential to General
Commercial to reflect the current use of the property.
Reference No. 23-01. The next area is located south of the
Livonia Plaza, which is east of Merriman and south of Five Mile
Road. The Kroger grocery store lies immediately north of the
area that is proposed to be changed. This is an area that is
currently shown on the Future Land Use Plan as Medium
Density Residential. It consists of portions of single family
residential lots as well as an industrial properly. We propose to
change the long range land use classification for this area to
Low Density Residential (5.27 acres).
Reference No. 24-02. The next area is a city -owned park that is
2.30 acres in size. It's referred to as the Bai-Lynn Play Field,
which is south of Lyndon and east of Merriman. We propose to
change that from the classification of Low Density Residential to
Recreation pen Space.
Reference No. 24-03. Similarly, there is a small 1.12 acre park
known as Gaylord Tot Lot. It is city -owned properly that is
located west of Middlebelt and north of SchoolcraR Road. We
propose to change it from Low Density Residential to
Recreation -Open Space to reflect it's current use of park space.
Reference No. 24-01. The next area is a small existing office
building that is located north of Schoolcraft and west of Inkster.
Its currently shown on the Future Land Use Plan as Low
Density Residential, and we propose to change it to Office (.87
acres).
Reference No. 27-01. The next area is the site of the Fountain
Park residential development. This is east of Farmington and
north of Plymouth Road. The Future Land Use Plan currently
22039
shoes it as High Density Residential; however, the density that
was finally established for this site with the development of 94
homes over the 7.65 acres is more consistent with a Medium
Density Residential classification and so we propose to change
itfrom High Density to Medium Density.
Reference No. 27-02. Also in this area is the large preserved
wetland area, which lies immediately east to the developed
portion of the condominiums. That area is about 6.56 acres in
size. It is shown presently on the Future Land Use Plan as High
Density Residential, and we propose to change that to
Recreation -Open Space.
Reference No. 28-01. The next area is immediately west of the
area we just spoke of. This is on the west side of Farmington
Road, north of Plymouth. Ifs an area that consists of a variety
of commercial and industrial properties. The land area
altogether comprises about 17.56, acres and the long range
vision by the Planning Commission would be to see this area
developed in a manner that would be consistent with whafs
been done across the street at Fountain Park because of the
success of that project. We could like to continue that same
pattern of development across the street some day to include
some of the under-utilized commercial and industrial property.
We propose to change this from its current classification of
Industrial to Medium Density Residential.
Reference No. 34-01. The next area is the site of the Klienerl
Park. The Land Use Plan currently shows this area as
Community Service. However, it is used for park purposes, so
we propose to change the classification as such from
Community Service to Recreation -Open Space (4.06 acres).
Reference No. 34-02. Also in this area is what will be
developed for single family homes. Ifs the area just west of
Cranston Avenue between West Chicago and Orengelawn. This
is the site of the homes that were approved for this area. Its
about 1.44 acres in size. Its current classification still reflects
the former use of this property as an elementary school. We
propose to change the Land Use designation from Community
Service to Low Density Residential.
Reference No. 36-01. The last property is actually comprised of
three parcels that lie just north of Joy Road and west of
Harrison. The Future Land Use Plan currently shows this area
as future development for Office, but the Planning Department
is proposing to change it to Medium Density Residenfial, which
is a land use designation consistent with the designation of the
22040
properties immediately to the west and would serve as a good
transitional use between those uses and the existing office to
the east at the corner of Joy Road and Harrison. (2.6 acres)
That is the extent of the changes.
Mr. Walsh: Thank you, Mr. Taormina. That was a very good report, and we
did have an opportunity to study this at some length. Are there
any questions from the Commissioners? Seeing none, is there
anybody in the audience that wishes to address any of these
changes? Good evening.
Glen Moon, 34461 Wood, Livonia. Good evening. What was the number on
those changes you just ran through, Mr. Taormina? How
many?
Mr. Walsh: In total?
Mr. Moon: Total.
Mr. Walsh: Twen"even, wasn't it?
Mr. Taormina: Twenty4hree.
Mr. Moon: Twenty-three. Out of those 23, what is it zoning? Okay. I am
not specifically knowledgeable of the actions of this
Commission. Okay? I don't follow whafs going on here. I am
reacting to having been in the City Hall Friday and seeing the
agenda and the bottom, the sixth item listed as changing
rezoning land in the City of Livonia.
Mr. Walsh: Well, sir, first we're not rezoning the land. This is the Future
Land Use Plan. This is what we think as planners the City
should do in the future. Now some of it reflects changes that
have occurred from a legislative body in the past. On a going
forward basis as the City evolves, we amend this plan to reflect
what we think is the appropriate use in the future. But this
makes no change.
Mr. Moon: Does the Planning Commission see in the City of Livonia any
zoning changes that would involve replacing current land use
with churches, houses of God?
Mr. Walsh: We haven't had any zoning requests and none were covered in
this.
22041
Mr. Moon: All right. Do you all know who I am? Are you familiar with some
of my activities involving this room and churches in the City of
Livonia? Is there any question about who I am and what I
represent?
Mr. Walsh: Sir, we're going to keep your comments tonight specifically to
these 23 items.
Mr. Moon:
None of these 23 items involve changing land use to be used for
a house of God, for a church. Correct?
Mr. Walsh:
That is correct.
Mr. Moon:
All right. I am here tonight as a representative of the kingdom of
God. Is there anybody here that would question by spiritual
authority as a representative of the kingdom of God this
evening?
Mr. Walsh:
Sir, sir.
Mr. Moon:
Is there anybody who would question my spiritual authority in
that respect?
Mr. Walsh:
We're not going to debate with you on that point.
Mr. Moon:
Okay. Very good. Good thinking.
Mr. Walsh:
If you will ...
Mr. Moon: So here's the point. The point is, the City of Livonia ayes the
kingdom of God a church. The size of the church, the land that
the church will stand on, will equal the amount of land that stood
atthe southeast comer of Six Mile and Farmington Road.
Mr. Walsh: All right, sir. That is a petition that has taken place years ago.
Mr. Moon: Right. And we're not tallang about that petition. What we're
talking about is the fact that the City of Livonia owes the
kingdom of God one church. And what you're going to do, from
this moment on, this Commission is going to figure out a way to
pay back that debt.
Mr. Walsh: All right, sir, thank you for your comments this evening.
Mr. Moon:: We'll be talking again.
22042
Mr. Walsh: Thank you. Is there anybody else in the audience that wishes to
speak for or against this item? Seeing no one, and if there is no
further discussion, a motion is in order.
On a motion by La Pine, seconded by Pieroecchi, and unanimously adopted, it
was
#01-11-2005 RESOLVED, that pursuant to the provisions of Act 285 of the
Public Ads of Michigan 1931, as amended, and the City
Planning Commission of lh City of Livonia having held a Public
Hearing on January 25, 2005, for the purpose of amending Part
VII of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Future Land
Use Plan, so as to change the land use designation of various
properties located throughout the City, for the following reasons:
1. That the amendments are necessary to have the Future
Land Use Plan brought up-to-date and made current so as
to be consistent with recent zoning changes and to refiect
changes with respect to actual and/or proposed land uses;
2. That the Future Land Use Plan amendments are
recommended by the City Planning Commission.
AND, having given proper notice of such hearing as required by
act 285 of Public Acts of Michigan 1931, as amended, the City
Planning Commission does hereby adopt said amendment as
part of the Future Land Use Plan of the City of Livonia which is
incorporated herein by reference, the same having been
adopted by resolution of the City Planning Commission with all
amendments thereto, and further that this amendment shall be
filed with the City Council, City Clerk and the City Planning
Commission and a certified copy shall also be forwarded to the
Register of Deeds forthe County of Wayne for recording.
Mr. Walsh: Is there any further discussion, other than, Mark, thanking you
for a lot of good work on your and your staffs part.
Mr. La Pine: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the good remarks you made to
Mark and I concur with you 100 percent. I also, Mark, am very
impressed by the letter we got from Mr. McCarthy from
Northville and his input. It affirms my belief that when we had
the big battle over the Schoolcmft College project, that we have
to look collectively at what's going to happen with the Seven
Mile and Six Mile and Haggerty Road corridor. I think we should
try to get together with those people as much as we can and
work out whatever problems we're going to have when the
22043
traffic really starts building up in that area. You and I have
talked to that on a number of occasions. Thank you.
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving
resolution.
ITEM #7 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 897TM PUBLIC HEARINGS
AND REGULAR MEETING
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the
Minutes of the 897" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held
on December 14, 2004.
On a motion by Alanskas, seconded by Shane, and unanimously adopted, it was
#01-12-2005 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 897" Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on
December 14, 2004, are hereby approved.
A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Alanskas, Shane, La Pine, Piercecchi, Morrow,
Walsh
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABTAIN: Smiley
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 899" Public
Hearings and Regular Meeting held on January 25, 2005, was adjourned at 9:06
p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Carol A. Smiley, Secretary
ATTEST:
John Walsh, Chairman