HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2007-01-16MINUTES OF THE 937° PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
On Tuesday, January 16, 2007, the City Planning Commission of the City of
Livonia held its 937" Public Hearings and 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: William LaPine Deborah McDermott R. Lee Morrow
H. G. Shane Carol A. Smiley John Walsh
Ian Wilshaw
Members absent: None
Messrs. Mark Taormina, Planning Director; Al Nowak, Planner IV; and Ms. Marge
Watson, Program Supervisor; were also present.
Chairman Walsh informed the audience that if a pefition on tonight's agenda
involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the
City Council who, in tum, will hold its own public hearing and make the final
detennination as to whether a pefifion is approved or denied. The Planning
Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or
vacating pefifion. 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 pefifion requesting a waiver of use or site plan approval is denied tonight, the
petitioner has len 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 2006-11-02-29 THOMAS'S DINING
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2006-11-
02-29 submitted by Thomas's Family Dining requesting waiver
use approval to utilize a Class C liquor license at 33971
Plymouth Road, located on the south side of Plymouth Road
between Fannington Road and Stark Road in the Northeast''/.
of Section 33.
Jmrumy 16, 2W7
23799
Mr. Taormina
presented a map showing the property under petition plus tie
existing zoning oflhe 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 12, 2006, which
reads as follows: "In accordance wth your request, the
Engineering Division has reviewed the above-referenced
petition. We have no objection to the proposal at this time. No
additional right-of-way is required. The legal description is for
the portion of the parcel zoned C-2 and not for the entire
parcel." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City
Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue
Division, dated November 29, 2006, which reads as follows:
"This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection
with a request to operate a Class C liquor license on property
located at the above-referenced address. We have no
objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Andrew C.
Walker, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Inspection
Department, dated December 6, 2006, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request of November 27, 2006, the above-
referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted.
(1) The parking lot needs repair, resealing and double striping.
(2) Currently on site is a modular storage unit, which is not
allowed and must be removed. (3) The dumpster on site is
unenclosed. (4) There are two other licensees within 1000 feet
of this location. This may be waived by Council. 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 the staff? Seeing none, is the
petitioner in the audience? If so, would you please come
forward?
Joshua Mayes,
11552 Russell Avenue, Plymouth, Michigan 48170.
Mr. Walsh:
Thank you. Is there anything you'd like to add to the
presentation?
Mr. Mayes:
Not really. The presentation is pretty thorough. Basically, the
reason for our petition is to just get a little bit of edge on the
chain franchises that are moving in around us. As time goes on,
R becomes more and more difficult to compete with these chains
in order to stay there and have a home there.
Mr. Walsh:
Thank you. Are there any questions?
Jmiumy16,2001
23800
Mr.
Morrow:
Mr. Mayes, were you or a member of your family the owner of
the restaurant in 1992 when the requestfrst came before us?
Mr.
Mayes:
No.
Mr.
Morrow:
How long have you been affiliated with Thomas's?
Mr.
Mayes:
Five years, two months.
Mr.
Morrow:
Are you familiar with the Inspection Department's report?
Mr.
Mayes:
Yes.
Mr.
Morrow:
Should this be approved, are you willing to take those actions?
Mr.
Mayes:
Absolutely.
Mr.
Morrow:
Okay. Thank you.
Mr.
LaPine:
Mark, do we know how long Thomas's restaurant has been at
that location? It's got to be a long time - 30 years, at least.
Mr.
Nowak:
At least 25 to 30 years, yes.
Mr.
LaPine:
So you purchased this restaurant from the original owner. Is
that correct?
Mr.
Mayes:
Correct.
Mr.
LaPine:
That's what I figured. Are you in the restaurant business now?
Mr.
Mayes:
Yes.
Mr.
LaPine:
You are. Do you have a restaurant in the City of Plymouth?
Mr.
Mayes:
No, that's my home address.
Mr.
LaPine:
Okay. Where is your other restaurant?
Mr.
Mayes:
No, that's just the one location there.
Mr.
LaPine:
Just the one location. Have you ever been in the restaurant
business, worked in a restaurant? Do you know how
restaurants operate?
Mr.
Mayes:
Oh, yes.
Jmiumy16,2001
23801
Mr.
LaPine:
You have?
Mr.
Mayes:
I work every day.
Mr.
LaPine:
My question to you then is, the modular storage unit you have in
the rear. What do you use that for?
Mr.
Mayes:
We use that for some miscellaneous catering supplies, plates,
flatware, glasses, things like that.
Mr.
LaPine:
But you have no problem getting rid of that?
Mr.
Mayes:
No.
Mr.
LaPine:
Have you had a lot of requests for liquor and beer and wine at
your establishment?
Mr.
Mayes:
More so beer and wine from a lot of our regular clientele. The
feedback has been that they would be more apt to dine with us
if they had that choice.
Mr.
LaPine:
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That's all I have.
Mr.
Wilshaw:
To follow up on Mr. LaPine's question, if you were to have a
restriction that limited you to only beer and wine sales, would
you be opposed to that?
Mr.
Mayes:
No.
Mr.
Wilshaw:
Because that's the vast majority of your requests are beer and
wine?
Mr.
Mayes:
Yes.
Mr.
Wilshaw:
And you're okay with just having a service bar? You don't plan
on having a regular bar at any point in your restaurant?
Mr.
Mayes:
No.
Mr.
Wilshaw:
Do you plan on having any Keno sales or anything along those
lines?
Mr.
Mayes:
No.
Mr.
Wilshaw:
Okay. Do you have any idea what percentage of your business
the sale of alcohol would represent?
Mr.
Mayes:
Not at this time, no.
Jmiumy J6,2007
23802
Mr. Wilshaw:
Okay. If this petition were to be denied by either this
commission or by the City Council, how would this affect your
business?
Mr. Mayes:
Moving on and moving forward, I would say that we would lose
a bit of the edge that we're trying to gain. As you sit here today,
before you there's two more chains looking to move in, one
closer than the other to me. So I think it would make a
significant difference for us.
Mr. Wilshaw:
All right. Thank you.
Mr. Shane:
I've forgotten your hours of operation already, but if we were to
limit the serving of alcoholic beverages to 10:00 p.m., would that
be a problem?
Mr. Mayes:
Not a problem. In fact, we don't plan on being open any later
than that. Our latest hour of operation is 9:30 p.m.
Mr. Morrow:
Mr. Shane covered it. My intent was to ask him if he had any
intention of extending his hours should he gel this license, but
he indicated that he would maintain his current operation with
this added convenience for his customers.
Mr. LaPine:
The previous request we heard in 1992, the gentleman wanted
both hard liquor plus beer and wine, but you can live with only
beer and wine. It would probably make it a lot easier to get this
passed through the Council. I have no problem personally with
hard liquor, but most people go to restaurants, especially that
type, because it has a name of family restaurants. People get
the indication they don't want to be there where hard liquor is
being served around kids. But beer and wine, I guess that isn't
that big of a deal as far as I'm concerned. So if you're willing to
go with just the beer and wine, as one commissioner, I would be
more than happy to see that happen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion
would be in order.
Mr. LaPine:
I'll make the motion, but I just want to ask Mark, do we have to
amend this somehow from a Class C to another classification?
Mr. Taormina:
No. The waiver use could carry with it a condition that would
restrict this site to the sale of beer and wine only.
Mr. LaPine:
Does that have to be incorporated anywhere in the resolution?
Jmiumy16,2007
23803
Mr. Taormina: Yes, we would add a Condition filo the list of conditions.
Mr. La Pine: Okay. Thank you.
On a motion by La Pine, seconded by Morrow, and unanimously adopted, it was
#01-01-2007 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on January 16, 2007, on
Petition 2006-11-02-29 submitted by Thomas's Family Dining
requesting waiver use approval to utilize a Class C liquor
license at 33971 Plymouth Road, located on the south side of
Plymouth Road between Farmington Road and Stark Road in
the Northeast % of Section 33, the Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2006-11-02-
29 be approved subject to the waiving of the 1,000 fool
separation requirement as set forth in Section 11.03(h) of the
Zoning Ordinance by the City Council and also subject to the
following additional conditions:
1. Thatthe following issues as ou0ined in the correspondence
dated December 6, 2006, from the Inspection Department
shall be rectified to that department's satisfaction:
- That the parking lot shall be repaired and resealed as
needed and shall be double striped, including the
provision of properly sized, signed and striped
handicapped accessible parking spaces;
- That the existing modular storage unit on the site, which
is not allowed, shall be removed;
- That a dumpsler enclosure shall be provided on the
site, after obtaining a building permit, which shall be
constructed of brick or reinforced poured concrete walls
with simulated back pattern and with metal gales which
shall be properly maintained and, when not in use,
closed at all limes;
2. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition,
and any additional signage shall be submitted for review
and approval by the Planning Commission and City
Council;
3. That no LED lighlband or exposed neon shall be permitted
on the site including, but not limited to, the building or
around the windows;
Jmrumy J6,2007
23804
4. That no alcoholic beverages shall be served after 10:00
p.m.;
5. That the waiver use is limited to the property being used for
Class C liquor license purposes in connection with a
service bar only; and
6. That this waiver is granted for the sale of beer and wine
only, for consumption on the premises, and shall not
include mixed spin( dank or spirits as defined under the
Michigan Liquor Control Code.
Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for
the following reasons:
1. That the proposed use complies with all of the general
waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in
Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543;
2. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the
proposed use; and
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: Is there any discussion?
Mr. Wilshaw: I just wanted to say that coming into this, I was not necessarily
favorable toward a liquor license for a family dining restaurant,
but based on the comments made by the petitioner, the owner
of the restaurant, explaining the reasons behind it and also
agreeing to the limitation of the sale of beer and wine, I am
much more comfortable with it and I will be supporting this.
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving
resolution.
Jmiumy16,2001
23805
ITEM #2 PETITION 200641-0230 T.G.I. FRIDAY'S
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2006-
11-02-30 submitted by Jonna Companies requesting waiver use
approval to construct and operate a full service restaurant
(T.G.I. Friday's) on properly located on the east side of
Haggerty Road between Seven Mile Road and Eight Mile Road
in the Northwest''/. of Section 6.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning ofthe 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 December 19, 2006, which
reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the
Engineering Division has reviewed the above-referenced
petitions. No additional right-of-way is required. The legal
descriptions are comect. Detention facilities will be required in
accordance with Wayne County's Storm Water Management
Ordinance. It appears that no work will take place within the
wetlands conservation easement. The following concerns center
around the North/South driveway shown west of the two
restaurants. (1) It is unclear who will build this drive as it is
labeled 'by others.' (2) We assume that the purpose of the drive
is to provide access between the Target center and the
commercial center to the North. There is a City water main
located at 24 feet east of the section line, which will put it within
1' to 2' of the edge of the drive. The design consultant must
check that future loading will not negatively affect the water
main. (3) If southbound traffic on this drive will be permitted to
tum left toward the Target development, a significant conflict
point will be created because of the heavy volume of traffic
entering from and leaving to Haggerty Road. Adequate sight
distance must be provided together with traffic control devices to
make this intersection safe." The letter is signed by Robert J.
Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the
Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated December 22, 2006,
which reads as follows: 'This office has reviewed the site plan
submitted in connection with a request to construct and operate
a full service restaurant on property located on the east side of
Haggerty Road between Seven Mile Road and Eight Mile Road
in the northwest X of Section 6. We have no objections to this
proposal with the following stipulations: (1) If subject buflding(s)
are to be provided with an automatic sprinkler system, an on
site hydrant shall be located between 50 feet and 100 feet from
Jmivey J6,2007
23806
the Fire Department connection. (2) Adequate hydrants shall be
provided and located with spacing consistent with the use
group. (3) Hydrant spacing shall be consistent with City of
Livonia Ordinances. (4) The most remote hydrant shall Flow
(1,500) GPM with a 20 PSI residual pressure. (5) This Division
requests that the entrance drive from Target parking lot be
posted (on both sides) 'Fire Lane — No Parking.' (6) This
Division requests that the drive at the south side of Friday's be
posted 'Fire Lane — No Parking.' (7) Access around building
shall be provided for emergency vehicles with a minimum
vertical clearance of thirteen feet six inches, a turning radius of
fifty-three feet wall-to-wall and an inside turning radius of
twenty-nine feet six inches. (8) Any curves or comer of streets
shall accommodate emergency vehicles with a turning radius of
fifty-three feet wall-to-wall and an inside turning radius of
twenty-nine feet six inches. (9) Fire lanes shall be not less than
20 feet of unobstructed width, able to withstand live loads of fire
apparatus, and have a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical
clearance. (10) Fire lanes shall be marked with freestanding
signs that have the words FIRE LANE — NO PARKING painted
in contrasting colors (on both sides) at a size and spacing
approved by the authority having jurisdiction. (11) Loading zone
shall be adequate marked." The letter is signed by Donald F.
Donnelley, Sr. Fire Inspector. The third letter is from the
Division of Police, dated December 14, 2006, which reads as
follows: We have reviewed the plans in connection with a
proposal by Jonna Companies for the Friday's Restaurant
located at 20450 Haggerty Road. We have no objections or
recommendations to the plans as submitted." The letter is
signed by David W. Sludl, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth
letter is from the Inspection Department, dated December 18,
2006, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of
December 1, 2006, the above -referenced petition has been
reviewed. The following is noted. (1) This site wo uld be allowed
one wall sign of approximately 92 square feet. As proposed the
additional signs and square footage would require variances
from the Zoning Board of Appeals. 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 the staff? Seeing none, I know that
Mr. Jonna is in the audience. If you could join us please.
Frank Jonna, Jonna Companies, 26100 American Drive, Suite 550, Southfield,
Michigan 48034.
Mr. Walsh: Is there anything you'd like to add?
Jmiumy J6, 2W7
23807
Mr. Jonna:
With respect to the connection to the property to the north and
west, we also share that same concern about a left turn
movement, and in our agreement with that developer, we're
granting an easement. Most of the road work that he is doing is
in the old Haggerty right-of-way which was split between the two
properties. So we're granting an easement for that little radius
coming across our property and pushed it as far to the east as
we possibly could. We definitely will post it "no left turn' and
have made that suggestion to the developer that we cannot
have left turn movement from incoming traffic. We agree that
would be a detriment. We haven't figured out if we want to use
a T-bone or some other restrictive type of barrier to discourage
a left hand turn there. The intent of this connection is to allow
patrons from the developments to cross -shop without having to
go out on Haggerty Road, and we see it as an opportunity to
keep as many people off Haggerty as possible. So, we're
certainly willing to cooperate and allow that connection there.
The developer has obtained approval from the Wayne County
Road Commission for that as well. We're open to suggestions
from Engineering in terns of how to make sure there's no left
tum movement there.
Mr. Walsh:
Are there any questions for Mr. Jonna?
Mr. LaPine:
Explain to me, Mr. Jonna, I'm a little confused. Now the main
road coming in is the main road that's there now where the light
is where you can go out there, you can make a left hand turn to
go south, aright hand turn to go north, or you can go straight
across to Firestone or Kohl's. Right?
Mr. Jonna:
Correct.
Mr. LaPine:
Now that's still going to be the main entrance into your
development. Correct?
Mr. Jonna. That's correct
Mr. LaPine: Now there's a restaurant to the south of that road and a
restaurant to the north of that road. Is that correct?
Mr. Jonna: That's correct The existing surface that is there today makes a
very sharp right tum and goes through where the Friday's site is
proposed. So what we're doing is pushing the road significantly
to the east and reconfiguring the parking lot within our site to
allow a much longer slack in a better way. If you've ever used
that intersection, what happens is people get caught up on the
curb. So we feel this configuration is going to allow us to stack
Jmrumy J6,2W7
23808
people back, have a very adequate left turn lane, which isn't real
dear now.
Mr. LaPine: The curve you're referring to, as you come out of Costco's or
Target, and you want to come out where the light is, there's a
real swift current. You're going to straighten that curve out. Is
that what you were saying?
Mr. Jonna: That's correct.
Mr. LaPine: What I'm trying to figure in my mind, when people come in and
want to go to either of the two restaurants and they're coming
off of Haggerty Road, there's not going to be an island there.
There's just going to be strictly a road. You're not going to have
an island. So if somebody wants to go to the restaurant to the
south, they have to go to the right and to the left. I'm just
wondering if that is going to cause any jam-ups there of people
going in both directions. Where is the entrance or the driveways
into the two restaurants? How would you gel into those?
Mr. Jonna: The Panera Restaurant entrance is right up where its being
shown there, and Fridays actually can enter in several locations
along that main drag. We anticipate that customers will come
internally from within the site and externally. But somebody just
coming in off of Haggerty Road to go to the Panem site would
make a left tum at the easterly most entrance. There would be
a three-way slop there, which would make sure the traffic is
maneuvered appropriately.
Mr. LaPine: Right now, as you well know if you've been there many times,
It's a very busy intersection where that light is. And I just don't
want to compound the problems that are there now.
Mr. Jonna: We actually feel that this configuration will enhance that traffic
situation. The opening here is unchanged. The traffic signal
that's there is remaining as is. What we're adding is this left
tum lane because the existing road goes through something like
this now. And by swinging this up here, we feel we're going to
slow traffic down coming down this road. We're going to have a
slop sign here and then be able to queue traffic up a lot better
than its queued up now. When you try to queue up traffic on a
curve, it becomes very challenging.
Mr. LaPine: How far off of Haggerty Road is it to the front of the two
buildings approximately?
Mr. Jonna: Well, now when you say Haggerty Road, of course you realize it
shifts down here. So here, my guess is that we're well over 100
Mr. Jonna: Well, I agree with you. We want to prohibit a left tum movement
from this direction completely because we feel that will be a big
problem. So we asked that this either have some sort of striping,
bumps in the pavement, to strongly discourage people from
making a left turn. We do feel that would be a real traffic
problem. With people stacked up here to make the lett tum
movement or straight movement, we feel that kind of a cross
would not be very safe.
Jmiumy J6,20W7
23809
feel, and here it looks like about 37 feel and gels a little
narrower down here. And there is a triangle of land here that
MDOT recently transferred to the adjacent property owner. And
again, our agreement is that will remain undeveloped.
Mr. La Pine:
Okay. That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Morrow:
Mr. Jonna, just for my darification, that service road going to the
commercial to the north, that's not really a part of this plan at
this time. Right?
Mr. Jorma :
Correct. That is being developed by others on adjacent
property.
Mr. Morrow:
So we have a cursory entrance. What's happening on that is
not part of the program tonight?
Mr. Jorma :
That is correct.
Mr. Morrow:
We figure it will be worked out to everybody's satisfaction when
it goes in.
Mr. Jonna:
Yes. They've gone to Wayne County to discuss that road
improvement.
Mr. Morrow:
Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw:
In regard to that service road, even though it's not on the plate
today, I did have a couple comments. It reminds me very much
of the Novi West Oaks development which is west of 12 Oaks.
They have a situation where they have a service drive that runs
parallel to Novi Road and comes out very dose to the
intersection as well. What they did is they striped the
intersection as a "do not block" intersection or 'Wait here for light
to change' or something along those lines, so that cars would
queue up further back in your driveway and leave that clear so
incoming traffic would be able to make a lett tum and go down
that access road without being blocked.
Mr. Jonna: Well, I agree with you. We want to prohibit a left tum movement
from this direction completely because we feel that will be a big
problem. So we asked that this either have some sort of striping,
bumps in the pavement, to strongly discourage people from
making a left turn. We do feel that would be a real traffic
problem. With people stacked up here to make the lett tum
movement or straight movement, we feel that kind of a cross
would not be very safe.
Jmiumy16,2001
23810
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. I certainly share the concerns that most of the
commissioners have expressed about that drive and just traffic
in general in that area. Obviously, Target is very successful.
Costco is very successful. And there is a lot of traffic at that
intersection, which is good for those businesses obviously. I
think Fridays and Panera will also be successful but we need to
do it in such a way that it's not going to compromise traffic in
that area. As far as the building itself, the question I have for
you is, the back of the building, which is going to be quite visible
to travelers going into Costco and Target and other areas of
your development. Our notes indicate it is going to be a
concrete board of some sort. Can you explain that to me a little
bit more?
Mr. Jonna: A portion of it, yes, would be. There's the stone, brick and a
portion of it would have the concrete board on it. That is a
cement product, kind of a smooth textured product that the
joints would be highlighted on. This design, by the way, did
come from Friday's. It will be kind of black panel to create a
panel -type effect. I think in the past they've also in some of their
prototypes used E.I.F.S. to gel that same effect. We would
happen to use the concrete board here. If I could point out loo
that particular area also has an island, a long island adjacent to
R, that we would have our truck so that all of the, kind of the
daily truck drivers can pull in and pull out conveniently. We
have landscaping shown in that island also to enhance that
elevation. So that elevation is more aesthetically pleasing.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Okay. So some of the fascia, the building, the slate and stone
and so on will wrap around to that side and then the back
portion, maybe half of it, will be a concrete or cement color.
Mr. Jonna:
I'm not sure what color. The color will be approximately what's
shown. Its kind of an off while or cream color.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Okay. Complementary to the rest of the building?
Mr. Jonna:
Yes.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Now is this building basically going to look similar in nature to
the one in Canton or Troy, some of the newer Friday's that are
in the area?
Mr. Jonna:
Yes. This is actually for color. This is very accurate. Our plan
has the entrance moved to a comer so that was one of the little
detail changes they made, but the details, the iron work, the
stone, are all their new prototype.
Jmiumy16,2W7
23811
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Sounds good. Thank you.
Mr. LaPine: Going back to the previous picture, I'm still confused, and I
brought this up at our study session about this concrete board.
Now I just had some concrete board put in my bathroom at
home and the Tile put on it. The first thing I thought, is that what
they're going to put on the outside of this building, just a piece of
board that's gray looking. Are you going to plaster over it and
paint it or is that what it's going to look like? Have you ever
seen these panels?
Mr. Jonna:
I apologize, but I dont think our company has worked with this
particular panel at this point. I know we have insisted that this
area will be brick. So you're going to have brick on both sides
Of it.
Mr. LaPine:
Is there a reason why they don't wantto brick it?
Mr. Jonna:
I think its a combination of relief, texture type of thing that they'd
like. They have several different components in the elevation
now with brick and stone. I think they'd just like to create a ...
Mr. LaPine:
I wish you could have brought in a sample of that concrete
board because I'm really confused. Now the other question I
have, just to the right of that, is that storage right there? And
that's going to be all brick?
Mr. Jonna:
That's all brick.
Mr. LaPine:
Okay. That's fine. That makes me happy.
Mr. Jonna:
Unfortunately, they didn't draw it as brick, but that will be brick.
Mr. LaPine:
And ilwill match the brick on the rest of the building?
Mr. Jonna:
Yes.
Mr. LaPine:
It is just confusing why they wouldn't want to go ahead and do
the rest of it with brick. Okay.
Mr. Morrow:
That rendering doesn't do anythi ng for you. It's very stark. I'm
assuming the panel will last as long as the brick portion, and
that you will complement the colors so it's not so stark sticking
out as a while ...
Mr. Jonna:
I believe so. I apologize for not having a sample board. We've
asked Friday's to provide one, and we'll be getting one from
them, an updated sample board. But given the type of building
Jmiumy16,2W7
23812
they've been putting up elsewhere, they have definitely made a
commitment to a higher quality building than what they had in
this market previously.
Mr. Morrow: When you get that board, could you call the staff and indicate
what you have.
Mr. Jonna: Absolutely
Mr. Morrow: Mark, I'll lel you see how it blends in with the rest of the building.
Mr. Shane: I hale to beat a dead cement board to death. The material on
the right side of the building, is that stone?
Mr. Jonna: Yes.
Mr. Shane: Okay. Is the color of that anywhere near the color of the cement
board?
Mr. Jonna: It's intended to be a cream or off white color, and the cement
board is intended to be a little lighter. If I recall correctly, the
original submittal we brought you had E. 1. F.S. instead of cement
board. What we did was, and if you look at this color rendering,
the pleasure of the Planning Commission was not to have
E.I.F.S. come down to grade, so we put about four feel of brick
there. Now, my understanding is the cement board is a product
that is more durable and survives well when it comes down to
grade. But certainly adding that component back in to insure
that a brick line goes across, and it would look something like
what's in this color rendering. It could be easily added.
Mr. Shane: Do you know if the cement board is constructed of portions of
board, like a drywall? Do you know what I'm saying? Or is it
poured in one piece and then scored.
Mr. Jorma : No, It's panels that can be brought out to the site, modular
panels that would be cul probably on site to fit the situation with
a joint pattem.
Mr.
Shane:
And it's a smooth surface,
I take it?
Mr.
Jonna:
Yes.
Mr. Shane: Thank you.
Mr. Morrow: Were you offering a brick added to the base of that wall?
Jmiumy16,2007
23813
Mr. Jonna:
Sure. I think that would complement the building. The thing
about putting the brick down low, from a maintenance
perspective, it does make sure that we don't gel landscape
damage to the board. We'd be comfortable adding brick.
Mr. Morrow:
It makes the wall less stark.
Mr. Jonna:
Yeah, and again, I think that would give it a little more
enhancement.
Mr. LaPine:
Mr. Jonna, what's the operational hours of the T.G.I. Friday's?
Open from what hour to what hour? Do you know?
Mr. Jonna:
They're a two -meal operation - dinner and lunch, seven days a
week.
Mr. LaPine:
They're going to have a liquor license. Will they be open until
2:00 in the morning?
Mr. Jonna:
They will definitely apply for a liquor license. I'm not aware of
how late they will be open. Given the popularity of that stretch, I
assume they'll want to be competitive with all the restaurants in
that area with the attraction that the theater brings to the area
and such.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion
would be in order.
On a motion by Shane, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was
#01-02-2007
RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on January 16, 2007, on
Petition 2006-11-02-30 submitted by Jonna Companies
requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a full
service restaurant (T.G.I. Friday's) on property located on the
east side of Haggerty Road between Seven Mile Road and
Eight Mile Road in the Northwest''/. of Section 6, the Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 2006-11-02-30 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1. That the Site Plan marked Sheet SPA -1 prepared by Ron
Jona & Associates, dated October 6, 2006, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to;
2. That the Landscape Plans marked Sheets SPA -7 and
SPA -8 prepared by Ron Jona & Associates, both dated
Jmiumy16,2009
23814
October 6, 2006, are hereby approved and shall be
adhered to;
3. That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu of
hydroseeding;
4. That underground sprinklers shall be provided for all
landscaped and sodded areas, and all planted materials
shall be installed to the safisfacfion of the Inspection
Department and thereafter permanently maintained in a
healthy condition;
5. That the Building Elevalions Plans marked Sheets SPA -3
and SPA4, prepared by Ron Jona & Associates, both
dated October 6, 2006, are hereby approved and shall be
adhered to, except for the portions of the east, west and
north elevations that show the cement board, shall have
brick on the lower portions of the walls for a minimum
distance of four (4') feel above grade;
6. That the maximum number of customer seats shall not
exceed 281;
7. That the brick used in the construction of the building and
for the walls of the trash and service yard enclosure shall
be full face 4 -inch brick or a precast masonry unit system
with cast -in-place brick and shall meet ASTM C216
standards;
8. That all pole mounted light fixtures shall be shielded and
shall not exceed a maximum height of 20 feet above grade;
9. That all parking spaces provided in connection with this
use shall be double striped;
10. That no signs, either freestanding or wall mounted, are
approved with this petition. All such signage shall be
separately submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Commission and City Council;
11. That no LED Iighlband or exposed neon shall be permitted
on this site including, but not limited to, the building or
around the windows;
12. That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be concealed
from public view on all sides by screening that shall be of a
compatible character, material and color to other exterior
materials on the building;
Jmrumy16,2009
23815
13. That the petitioner shall secure the necessary perils,
including storm water management permits, wetland
permits and soil erosion and sedimentation control perils,
from Wayne County, the City of Livonia, and the Stale of
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality;
14. That the petitioner shall comply with the stipulations listed
in the correspondence dated December 22, 2006, from the
Livonia Fire and Rescue Division of the Department of
Public Safety;
15. That the petitioner shall resolve to the Engineering
Division's satisfaction the items of concern relating to the
North/South driveway shown west of the two restaurants
as outlined in the correspondence dated December 19,
2006; and
16. That the specific plans referenced in this approving
resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department
at the time the building permits are applied for.
Subject to 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 subject site has the capacity to accommodate the
proposed use; and
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: Is there any discussion?
Mr. La Pine: Are all the parking spaces 10 feet by 20 feet to meet the
requirement of the ordinance?
Mr. Taormina: As Mr. Nowak has indicated, some of the spaces adjacent to
some of the landscaping may be less than 20 feet in depth, but
Jmrumy16,2W7
23816
we do allow that where they do not conflict with any pedestrian
walkways.
Mr. La Pine: Okay. 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#3 PETITION 200641-0231 PANERA BREAD
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2006-
11-02-31 submitted by Jonna Companies requesting waiver use
approval to construct and operate a full service restaurant
(Panem Bread) on property located on the east side of Haggerty
Road between Seven Mile and Eight Mile Roads in the
Northwest %of Section 6.
Mr. Walsh: Mr. Taormina, I'm going to suggest, unless there's an objection,
we just focus on the building itself since we covered the
roadway and parking lot.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the
existing zoning of the surrounding area.
Mr. Walsh: Is there any specific correspondence to this item, Mr. Nowak?
Mr. Nowak: The correspondence from the Engineering Division, the Livonia
Fire and Rescue, and the Division of Police are essentially the
same as the letters in connection with T.G.I. Friday's. There is
a specific item from the Inspection Department, dated
December 18, 2006, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your
request of December 1, 2006, the above -referenced petition has
been reviewed. The following is noted. This site would be
allowed one wall sign of approximately 92 square feet As
proposed, the additional signs and square footage would require
variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals. 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 the staff? Seeing none, we will go
back to Mr. Jonna.
Frank Jonna, Jonna Companies, 26100 American Drive, Suite 550, Southfield,
Michigan 48034. One comment with respect to signage. We
Jmiumy 16, 2W7
23817
have illustrated a monument sign. It's not necessary to be part
of this request. We can bring all the signage back at one time,
but each component will be showing up with their own signage
package for the building, but we did have on the south side of
the proposed drive a brick sign that would illustrate both
tenants. If that's something that you are able to consider today,
that would be great. If not, we will bring back all the signs at
one time.
Mr. Walsh:
I think it would be our preference to see them all at one time.
Mr. Jonna:
Done.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there anybody contrary to that?
Mr. Jonna:
Other than that, no additional comments.
Mr. LaPine:
I would assume that Panera Bread does not have a liquor
license. Is that correct?
Mr. Jonna:
That is correct.
Mr. LaPine:
And I assume their hours wouldn't be as long as T.G.I. Friday's,
would they?
Mr. Jonna:
Typically, I believe they're closed early evening.
Mr. LaPine:
That's what I figured. That's all I have for you, but Mark, you
know the letter that we got from the Department of Public
Works, Engineering Division, and they talk about this city water
main located at 24 feet east of this section line which will put it
within one to two feet of the edge of the drive. They're talking
about the roads going in there. That will all be checked out with
the Engineering Division, right?
Mr. Taormina:
Yes, in fact, they're reviewing those plans currently. They've
been submitted by the developers of the property in Northville
Township.
Mr. LaPine:
You're aware oflhaltoo, Frank?
Mr. Jonna:
Yes. The existing water main - the old travel surface that once
was old Haggerty Road is still there, and that water main is just
off of that old gravel surface. We feel pretty comfortable that we
won't impact it with the primary portion of that drive. When we
get into that radius close to the Panem site, then they'll have to
make some considerations to make sure. There's a gate well
there that I know will have to be adjusted.
Jmiumy16,2W7
23818
Mr. LaPine:
Just one other question, Mr. Jonna. Once you develop this
parcel, is that all the property you have there?
Mr. Jonna:
You're done seeing this beautiful face.
Mr. LaPine:
Well, we like to see your nice jolly face here, but I just
wondered.
Mr. Jonna:
The balance of the site will be placed under a conservation
easement. There will be approximately nine acres in a
triangular configuration that will be placed in a conservation
easement for the benefit of MDEQ. We are technically filling
1.46 acres of wetlands on this project. You may notice from the
original zoning, at one point we were permitted to fill five acres
of wetland on this site, and part of the challenge that we've had
is working through that issue with MDEQ for 15 years now.
Mr. LaPine:
All your footings out there now are gone that you put in years
and years ago.
Mr. Jonna:
True definition of sunk costs.
Mr. LaPine:
Okay. Thank you.
Ms. McDermott:
Mr. Jonna, I'm not familiar with the Panera Bread as a stand-
alone site. Is this color scheme typical of their stand-alone
sites?
Mr. Jonna:
Yes. This is a trend that they're pursuing now, is to do more
stand-alone facilities and this scheme is something that I've
seen on several oftheir other buildings in the area.
Ms. Smiley:
Do you know of a standalone one that's near here?
Mr. Walsh:
There is one off of Drake on Grand River, but it's not this exact
color scheme.
Mr. Jonna:
That's a real old one. They just did one in Dearborn but I
believe that one is inline.
Mr. Walsh:
It is. I know where that's at.
Mr. Jonna:
Yes, right on Michigan Avenue.
Ms. Smiley:
I just thought there might be one nearby.
Jmiumy16,2009
23819
Mr. Jonna:
The one in Livonia on Middlebelt and 96, thats an end cap but
aren't the color schemes very similar? It's an end cap, but I think
it's tha t same theme.
Mr. Wilshaw:
I'm glad that the color rendering was put up. I was going to ask
you what Hot Apple Spice looked like. The awnings have a
pattern on them. What am I looking al? Is that some sort of
artistic statement or is that a misprint or what?
Mr. Jorma :
No, I believe that's the type of illustration or statement they'd
like to make for their image. I'm not sure of the architectural
intent other than to add some life or color to the building.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Okay. Its sort of a leaf pattern it looks like.
Mr. Walsh:
Its whatever you see in the design.
Mr. Wilshaw:
The other question I have for you is the hours of operation for
Panera. What would that be?
Mr. Jorma :
I think typically they're going to be open somewhere around
6:00 - 6:30 a.m. and into the evening. They don't slay open real
late, but I'm not sure exactly -just my knowledge of frequenting
the restaurant.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Okay. But they're not open into the wee hours of the night?
Mr. Jonna:
No.
Mr. Walsh:
Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion
would be in order.
On a motion by Wilshaw, seconded by Morrow, and unanimously adopted, it was
#01-03-2007
RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on January 16, 2007, on
Petition 2006-11-02-31 submitted by Jonna Companies
requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a full
service restaurant (Panera Bread) on properly located on the
east side of Haggerty Road between Seven Mile and Eight Mile
Roads in the Northwest % of Section 6, the Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 2006-11-02-31 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
Jmiumy J6,2007
23820
1. That the Site Plan marked Sheet SPA -1 prepared by Ron
Jona & Associates, dated October 6, 2006, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to;
2. That the Landscape Plans marked Sheets SPA -7 and
SPA -8 prepared by Ron Jona & Associates, both dated
October 6, 2006, are hereby approved and shall be
adhered to;
3. That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu of
hydroseeding;
4. That underground sprinklers shall be provided for all
landscaped and sodded areas, and all planted materials
shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Inspection
Department and thereafter permanently maintained in a
healthy condition;
5. That the Building Elevations Plan marked Sheet SPA -6
prepared by Ron Jona & Associates, dated October 6,
2006, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
6. That the maximum number of customer seats shall not
exceed 124;
7. That the brick used in the construction of the building shall
be full face 4 -inch brick or a precast masonry unit system
with cast -in-place brick and shall meet ASTM C216
standards;
8. That the three walls of the trash dumpster enclosure shall
be constructed 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 match that of the
building and the enclosure gates shall be of steel
construction and maintained, and when not in use closed
at all times;
9. That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be concealed
from public view on all sides by screening that shall be of a
compatible character, material and color to other exterior
materials on the building;
10. That all pole mounted light fixtures shall be shielded and
shall not exceed a maximum height of 20 feet above grade;
11. That all parking spaces provided in connection with this
use shall be double striped;
Jmiumy16,2009
23821
12. That no signs, either freestanding or wall mounted, are
approved with this petition. All such signage shall be
separately submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Commission and City Council;
13. That no LED lighlband or exposed neon shall be permitted
on this site including, but not limited to, the building or
around the windows;
14. That the petitioner shall secure the necessary perils,
including storm water management permits, wetland
permits and soil erosion and sedimentation control permits
from Wayne County, the City of Livonia, and the Stale of
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality;
15. That the petitioner shall comply with the stipulations listed
in the correspondence dated December 22, 2006, from the
Livonia Fire and Rescue Division of the Department of
Public Safety;
16. That the petitioner shall resolve to the Engineering
Division's satisfaction the items of concern relating to the
North/South driveway shown west of the two restaurants
as outlined in the correspondence dated December 19,
2006;and
17. That the specific plans referenced in this approving
resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department
at the time the building permits are applied for.
Subject to 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 subject site has the capacity to accommodate the
proposed use; and
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.
Jmiumy 16, 2W7
23822
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 #4 PETITION 200642-0232 CHILI'S GRILL 8. BAR
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2006-
12-02-32 submitted by Brinker Michigan, Inc. requesting waiver
use approval to construct and operate a full service restaurant
(Chili's Grill & Bar) on property located on the south side of
Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and Milburn Avenue
in the Northeast''/. of Section 35.
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 Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated December 22, 2006,
which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan
submitted in connection with a request to operate a full service
restaurant with a Class C Liquor License on property located on
the south side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and
Milburn Avenue in the northeast X of Section 35. We have no
objections to this proposal with the following stipulations: (1) An
onalte hydrant shall be located between 50 feet and 100 feet
from the Fire Department connection. (2) Adequate hydrants
shall be provided and located with spacing consistent with the
use group. (3) Hydrant spacing shall be consistent with City of
Livonia Ordinances. (4) The most remote hydrant shall Flow
(1,500) GPM with a 20 PSI residual pressure. (5) This division
requests that the entrance drive be posted (on both sides) 'Fire
Lane — No Parking.' (6) Access around building shall be
provided for emergency vehicles with a minimum vertical
cleamnce of thirteen feet six inches, a turning radius of fifty-
three feet wall-to-wall and an inside turning radius of twenty-
nine feet six inches. (7) Any curves or corner of streets shall
accommodate emergency vehicles with a turning radius of fifty-
three feet wall-to-wall and an inside turning radius of twenty-
nine feet six inches. (8) Fire lanes shall be not less than 20 feet
of unobstructed width, able to withstand live loads of fire
apparatus, and have a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical
clearance. (9) Fire lanes shall be marked with freestanding
signs that have the words FIRE LANE — NO PARKING painted
in contrasting colors (on both sides) at a size and spacing
Jmrumy 16, 2W7
23823
approved by the authority having jurisdiction. (10) If entire
`Retail E is to be sprinkled, individual occupancies shall be
zoned to provide address specific waterflow alarm notification."
The letter is signed by Donald F. Donnelley, Sr. Fire Inspector.
The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated December
21, 2006, which reads as follows: We have reviewed the plans
in connection with a proposal by Brinker Michigan, Inc. for the
Chili's Grill 8 Bar located at 29501 Plymouth Road. We have no
objections or recommendations to the plans as submitted." The
letter is signed by David W. Studt, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau.
The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated
December 14, 2006, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your
request of December 11, 2006, the above -referenced petition
has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) This site is
allowed one wall sign of approximately 75 square feet. Any
other wall signs would require a variance horn the Zoning Board
of Appeals. It appears as though they are proposing four wall
signs. 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 the staff?
Mr. Morrow.
How did the Inspection Department treat those peppers - as a
sign?
Mr. Taormina:
Yes. Theyve identified four signs as well and that would
include the chili pepper on the front elevation as one sign, as
well as a smaller sign located on the wing wall adjacent to the
side door.
Mr. Morrow:
Sothose are part ofthesign package?
Mr. Taormina:
Correct. There are two signs on the west elevaton and two
signs on the front or north elevation, the main sign here and
then the larger chili pepper below.
Mr. Morrow:
The peppers on the awning - I see some little peppers below
there.
Mr. Taormina:
Yes, those are on the fascia of the projecting canopy located
above the main entrance.
Mr. Morrow:
But those are not construed as signs?
Mr. Taormina:
We didn't really gel into the details. There are some imagery on
the fascia of this canopy, but I think we considered it small
Jmiumy16,2W7
23824
enough so that it would not constitute a sign under our
ordinance.
Mr. Morrow:
Il would be like five inches or less?
Mr. Taormina:
As long as the icons are four inches or less in height, then they
probably would not be considered as signs.
Mr. Morrow:
Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Walsh:
Is the petitioner here this evening?
Patrick Howe, Carlin, Edwards, Brown & Howe, PLLC, 2855 Coolidge Highway,
Suite 203, Troy, Michigan 48084. Good evening, Chairman
Walsh and members of the commission. We are the attorneys
representing
Brinker on behalf of the liquor license matters in
Michigan.
With me I have John Cuisio from Brinker; he's the
Project Manager. Also with me is Ray Gilliland, the Civil
Engineer for this project, and also Bill Coty, from Schoslak
Brothers. They're here to answer any of your questions. I
guess first just a little bit about Brinker of Michigan, the
applicant. They currently operate 29 restaurants here in
Michigan, 13 Chili's restaurants and one restaurant in Livonia,
being the Macaroni Grill. They have an impeccable record with
the Michigan Liquor Commission. The hours of operation for
this restaurant would be Sunday through Thursday until 11:00
p.m., Friday and Saturday until 12:00 a.m. Approximately 18
percent of their revenue average comes from alcoholic
beverages. The seating numbers represented are accurate - 77
in the bar and/or smoking area, and 148 in the rest of the dining
area. This liquor license that we propose would be transferred
through inter -county transfer. It would not be a new license.
Brinker has not entered into a purchase agreement yet for this
license, and we would do so after seeking waiver use approval.
From the discussion already and then also the discussion from
the study session, I believe that signage is an issue for
discussion tonight. I have representatives here to discuss that.
I also recognize that we have a pending ZBA application to
consider that signage. So I'm not sure if we want to talk about
the signage here or simply make that contingent upon us going
before the ZBA and discussing that with them. I will turn it over
to you for any questions for us regarding our applications.
Mr. Walsh:
Thank you. Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. Morrow:
What dale do you expect the restaurant to be in operation?
Mr. Howe:
October, 2007.
Jmiumy16,2W7
23825
Mr. Morrow: So it will be this year in the fall?
Mr. Howe: Yes.
Mr. Morrow: As it relates to the sign because it is such a large overage and
we're talking about something that is unprecedented in Livonia
by some four feel as far as relating to the three dimensional
aspect of it, as one commissioner I'd like to bang that back as a
separate item. Would your clients have any problem with that?
Mr. Howe: I don't believe that would be a problem.
Mr. Morrow: Okay. Thank you.
Mr. LaPine: I brought this up at our study session, and I think I got it clarified
by you. This is a restaurant and you have 225 seats in the
actual dining room. I'll call it a dining room. And 77 seats in the
bar, which to me is a lot of seats in a bar. If its a restaurant, I
would assume that most of the people would go there for dinner
and not to the bar just to sit and dank. But then you clarified it
by pu've got some seats in the bar. I've seen them on the site
plan. The bar area is strictly a smoking area. Is that correct?
Mr. Howe: That's correct. There are 77 seats in the smoking area and 148
in the non-smoking area. Is that correct, John?
John Cuisio: Yes.
Mr. LaPine: I've been to different restaurants where they have smoking and I
want to sit in a non-smoking area. I really don't think I'm in a
non-smoking area because the smoke from the smoking area
comes into my area. How do you regulate that so the smoke
that's in the smoking area does not gel into the area that's non-
smoking?
Mr. Howe: This is John Cuisio, the Project Manager for Brinker
Mr. Cuisio: There is a partition here, which is floor to ceiling. It actually has
glass in it. Obviously there's openings here and here. That
helps to control some of the smoke in this area, and the areas
are maintained on different ventilation systems.
Mr. LaPine: So over to the right here is where the bar is. Is that correct?
Mr. Cuisio: Yes. This is all the smoking seating here. When people check
in with the hostess, I believe they're asked for smoking or non-
smoking. So all these tables here are not used. Like if you just
Jmiumy16,2W7
23826
want to go in for a dank, these are not reserved. You
just go in
and gel a seat. But if there's a wait, you have to wait
to get the
non-smoking area.
Mr. LaPine:
Okay. That makes sense. So the ventilation is such that the
smoke does not go from the smoking area into the non-smoking
area. Is that correct?
Mr. Cuisio:
I share a similar concern as you do with the smoke being a non-
smoker. But it's the best that can possibly be achieved without
medically sealing this area off.
Mr. LaPine:
Okay. And I have to agree with Mr. Morrow that I think we
should have the signage come back because we have a
problem with the big pepper. We had a restaurant in town that
had a big tomato. We finally made them take the tomato down
because it
just wasn't to our way of signage in the city. But
that's something
we can look at a different time. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. Howe:
If we're going to proceed with coming back for a separate item,
could I
just get some clarification from Mr. Taormina
how he
would like us to proceed with our ZBA application? Should that
be held and come back to consider the pepper or should we
proceed with the ZBA application and then upon their ruling,
come back to the Planning Commission and then thereafter City
Council in light oftheir ruling?
Mr. Taormina:
Anything that is not included this evening should wait to go
before the Zoning Board of Appeals until after it has a chance to
be moved forward through this body. If all the signage this
evening is held back, then I would suggest that you not bring
any of the signage issues before the Zoning Board of Appeals
until the Planning Commission has an opportunity to consider
that. That would be my advice.
Mr. Walsh:
Mark, how do we look on our schedule? Do we have a
relatively light agenda for our next study session?
Mr. Taormina:
Yes.
Mr. Walsh:
So we could add you to the January 23 study session which
would be up for a vote a week later on the signs.
Mr. Howe:
We'd certainly want to get this before you as soon as possible.
Mr. Walsh:
That's as quick as we could do it in the next week if that's
desirable.
Jmiumy16,2007
23827
Mr. Howe:
That would be great.
Mr. Cuisio:
We appreciate you making a slot for us.
Mr. Walsh:
Just lel Mr. Taormina know and he will schedule you
accordingly.
Mr. Morrow:
Along that line, our intent bright is to move the major petition
forward and gel that on its way to the City Council. Signage
can subsequently follow at your convenience as long as the
Chairman can work it into the agenda.
Mr. Howe:
We appreciate that.
Mr. LaPine:
Can I just clarify something? We want to go out and look at this
Chili's. We have an address of 15201 Trenton Road,
Southgate. Is that the only location you have in the Metropolitan
Detroit Area that has this big pepper on it?
Mr. Howe:
That's the only one I'm aware of at this time. Its a new
prototype. I don't know when the last one was built. This is what
we're moving forward with.
Mr. LaPine:
So we can go out there. The restaurant is in operation and we
can look at it.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Are we looking to hold the entire sign package or just the chili
pepper?
Mr. Morrow:
Just the sign package.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Okay. Very good. I do have one question for the petitioner. Mr.
Howe, the color band that is around the lop third of the building.
There's sort of a seafoam green color ban that goes around it.
Is that an accurate color?
Mr. Howe:
I'd like to refer to Ray Gilliland. He's our Civil Engineer that has
done these renderings.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Okay. It's a little hard to tell from the picture.
Mr. Gilliland:
Should I pass this around?
Mr. Walsh:
Yes, if you hand it to Mr. Wilshaw, he will pass it around.
Mr. LaPine: Can you explain to me what the relationship of the pepper with
Chili's is? Chili peppers? I haven't been to that many Chili's
restaurants. Do they serve chili there? What's the relationship
of the two?
Mr. Howe: It speaks of the ... not just the spicy. The food isn't necessarily
spicy food but its the style, the freshness. It's part of our new
image that we're portraying. This is a nationally used trademark
that we're branding for our stores.
Mr. LaPine: What relationship does that have?
Mr. Howe: Its a southwestern themed restaurant.
Mr. LaPine: If you didn't have the pepper there, it would still be Chili's.
When I see that word "Chili's," I figure what they have in there is
a little spicy food.
Mr. Howe: Among other things that we have, yes.
Mr. LaPine: All right. I was just curious. Thank you.
Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion
would be in order.
Janumy J6, 2W7
23828
Mr. Wilshaw:
I'm just having a difficult time imagining how its going to look
with the other colors. It seems a little unusual. Is that color
scheme indicative of your other buildings?
Mr. Gilliland:
The one on this building is not. These are the prototypical
colors. This is a deep red color. So we're using a
beige/brownttan color to match up with the rest of the boards.
Mr. Wilshaw:
The tan color seems fine. It's the green band cutting through it
seems a little unusual, at least aesthetically.
Mr. Gilliland:
I'll have to talk to the designer to see if there's another color that
may be more appropriate.
Mr. Walsh:
I suggest we move forward, and Mr. Wilshaw, if you want to
make a suggestion, you may stand alone or it may stand with
seven. I don't know.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Its not that bad.
Mr. LaPine: Can you explain to me what the relationship of the pepper with
Chili's is? Chili peppers? I haven't been to that many Chili's
restaurants. Do they serve chili there? What's the relationship
of the two?
Mr. Howe: It speaks of the ... not just the spicy. The food isn't necessarily
spicy food but its the style, the freshness. It's part of our new
image that we're portraying. This is a nationally used trademark
that we're branding for our stores.
Mr. LaPine: What relationship does that have?
Mr. Howe: Its a southwestern themed restaurant.
Mr. LaPine: If you didn't have the pepper there, it would still be Chili's.
When I see that word "Chili's," I figure what they have in there is
a little spicy food.
Mr. Howe: Among other things that we have, yes.
Mr. LaPine: All right. I was just curious. Thank you.
Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion
would be in order.
Jmiumy16,2007
23829
On a motion by Morrow, seconded by La Pine, and unanimously adopted, it was
#01-04-2007 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on January 16, 2007, on
Petition 2006-12-02-32 submitted by Brinker Michigan, Inc.
requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a full
service restaurant (Chili's Grill & Bar) on property located on the
south side of Plymouth Road between Middlebell Road and
Milburn Avenue in the Northeast % of Section 35, the Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 2006-12-02-32 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1. That the site plan marked Sheet C-101 prepared by
Progressive AE, dated December 4, 2006, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to;
2. That the Landscape Plan marked Sheet L-101 prepared by
Progressive AE, dated December 4, 2006, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to;
3. That underground sprinklers shall be provided for all
landscaped and sodded areas, and all planted materials
shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Inspection
Department and thereafter permanently maintained in a
healthy condition;
4. That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu of
hydroseeding;
5. That the Exterior Elevations Plans marked Sheets A-2 and
A-3 prepared by GHA, F. Andrew Gerdes, Architect, dated
December 1, 2006, are hereby approved and shall be
adhered to;
6. That the maximum number of customer seats shall not
exceed 225;
7. That the brick used in the construction of the building and
for the walls of the trash and service yard enclosure shall
be full face 4 -inch brick or a precast masonry unit system
with cast -in-place brick and shall meet ASTM C216
standards;
8. That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be concealed
from public view on all sides by screening that shall be of a
compatible character, material and color to other exterior
materials on the building;
Jmrumy J6,2W7
23830
9. That no wall signage is approved with this petition. All
such signage shall be separately submitted for review and
approval by the Planning Commission and City Council;
10. That no LED lightband or exposed neon shall be permitted
on this site, including but not limited to, the building or
around the windows;
11. That the petitioner shall comply with the stipulations listed
in the correspondence dated December 22, 2006, from the
Livonia Fire and Rescue Division of the Department of
Public Safety; and
12. That the specific plans referenced in this approving
resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department
at the time the building permits are applied for.
Subject to 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 subject site has the capacity to accommodate the
proposed use;
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.
ITEM #5 PETITION 200642-0233 CHILI'S GRILL & BAR
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2006-
12-02-33 submitted by Brinker Michigan, Inc. requesting waiver
use approval to operate a Class C Liquor License in connection
with a full service restaurant (Chili's Grill & Bar) on property
located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Middlebell
Road and Milburn Avenue in the Northeast % of Section 35.
Jmiumy16,2007
23831
Mr. Walsh: Mr. Taormina, I don't think there's any new information. Mr.
Nowak, is there any new correspondence?
Mr. Nowak: Yes, there are two items of correspondence that are specific to
this use of a Class C License. The first item is from the
Inspection Department, dated December 14, 2006, which reads
as follows: "Pursuant to your request of December 11, 2006,
the above -referenced pe##on has been reviewed. The following
is noted. There is at least one Class C license within 1,000 feet
of this site. Council may waive the distance requirements. This
Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter
is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection.
There is also a letter in your packet from Marguerite Jonagan,
received by the Planning Commission on January 5, 2007, who
resides at 11274 Middlebelt Road. Ms. Jonagan objects to the
granting of the Class C License for reasons that are stated in
the letter. That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. Walsh: If there are no questions for the staff, I'll ask Mr. Howe to rejoin
us? Mr. Howe, unless you have any additional comments, we'll
go to the questions.
Patrick Howe, Carlin, Edwards, Brown & Howe, PLLC, 2855 Coolidge Highway,
Suite 203, Troy, Michigan 48084. Nothing further. I spoke to
both items earlier. A new license to be brought in, open until
11:00 on weekdays and midnight on Fridays and Saturdays.
Mr. Walsh: Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions for Mr. Howe?
Seeing none, we can simply go to a resolution. I think our entire
audience left after the last vote.
On a motion by Wilshaw, seconded by McDermott, and unanimously adopted, it
was
#01-05-2007 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on January 16, 2007, on
Petition 2006-12-02-33 submitted by Brinker Michigan, Inc.
requesting waiver use approval to operate a Class C Liquor
License in connection with a full service restaurant (Chili's Grill
& Bar) on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road
between Middlebelt Road and Milburn Avenue in the Northeast
% of Section 35, the Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2006-12-02-33 be
approved, subject to the City Council waiving the 1,000 foot
separation requirement between Class C licensed
establishments as set forth in Section 11.03(h) of the Zoning
Ordinance, for the following reasons:
Jmiumy J6,2W7
23832
1. That the proposed use complies with all of the general
waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in
Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543;
2. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the
proposed use; and
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.
ITEM#6 PETITION 200540-0849 TISEOARCHITECTS
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2005-
10-08-19 submitted by Tiseo Architects, which previously
received approval by the City Council on December 21, 2005
(CR 601-05), requesting a one-year extension of all plans in
connection with a proposal to construct an office building on
property located a129029 Eight Mile Road in the Northwest % of
Section 1.
Mr. Taormina: The approvals granted in connection with this petition were
dated December 2, 2005, under Council Resolution #601-05. In
the request letter dated November 30, 2006, the petitioner
explains that they are hoping that the economy will take an
upturn for the spring of 2007, which would then permit them to
sign up tenants and move forward with the construction. Mr.
Tiseo, the project architect, is available for any questions you
may have.
Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions for Mr. Tiseo?
Mr. Morrow: Yes, I'm trying to recall the building- exactly where it is.
Benedetto Tiseo, Tiseo Architects, Inc., 19815 Farmington Road, Livonia,
Michigan 48152. The building is on the south side of Eight Mile
Road, west of Middlebell. It is between the M" Plaza and the
Clarenceville Cemetery.
Jmrumy J6,2001
23833
Mr. Morrow:
Okay. Now I recall.
Mr. La Pine:
Is that the building where it was two stories and we were going
to have parking underneath it?
Mr. Tiseo:
That is correct.
Mr. La Pine:
Okay.
Mr. Morrow.
Is it a medical building?
Mr. Tiseo:
That is correct.
Mr. Walsh:
A motion is in order.
On a motion by LaPine, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously approved, it was
#01-06-2006
RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2005-10-08-19
submitted by Tiseo Architects requesting an extension of the
site plan, which previously received approval by the City Council
on December 21, 2005 (Council Resolution #601-05), in
connection with a proposal to construct an office building on
property located at 29029 Eight Mile Road in the Northwest % of
Section 1, be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. That the request for an extension of Site Plan Approval by
Tiseo Architects in a letter dated November 30, 2006, is
hereby approved for a one-year period; and
2. That all conditions imposed by Council Resolution #601-05
in connection with Petition 2005-10-08-19, which permitted
the construction of an office building on the subject
property, shall remain in effect to the extent that they are
not in conflict with the foregoing conditions.
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 9351h Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the
Minutes of the 935" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held
on November 14, 2006.
Jmiumy16,2W7
23834
On a motion by Morrow, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was
#01-07-2007 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 935" Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on
November 14, 2006, are hereby approved.
A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Morrow, Smiley, LaPine, McDermott, Wilshaw,
Walsh
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Shane
Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolu0on
adopted.
On a moton duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 937" Public
Hearings and Regular Meeting held on January 16, 2007, was adjourned at 9:06
p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Carol A. Smiley, Secretary
ATTEST:
John Walsh, Chairman