HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2000-02-08 17479
MINUTES OF THE 800th REGULAR MEETING HELD BY
THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
On Tuesday, February 8, 2000, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its
800th Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. James C. McCann, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Members present: James C. McCann Robert Alanskas Dan Piercecchi
William LaPine Elaine Koons
Members absent: Michael Hale
H. G. Shane
Messrs. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, Al Nowak, Planner IV, Scott Miller, Planner II and
Bill Poppenger, Planner I were also present.
Chairman McCann 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 will 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
Na"" 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 is denied tonight, the petitioner has ten days in
which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City Council. Resolutions adopted by the City
Planning Commission become effective seven(7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning
Commission and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their filing.
The staff has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions which the
Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the proceedings tonight. We
will begin with the Miscellaneous Site Plans for our agenda.
ITEM #1 PETITION 99-05-02-16 Bahama Breeze Restaurant (Landscaping)
Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 99-05-02-
16 Bahama Breeze Restaurant Landscape Plan by GMRI, Inc., which received
waiver use approval to construct a full service restaurant on property located on
the east side of Haggerty Road between Seven Mile and Eight Mile Road in the
Southwest 1/4 of Section 6.
Mr. Miller: On October 13, 1999, this petition received waiver use approval to construct a
full service restaurant on the subject property. As part of that approval it was
conditioned:
17480
That a fully detailed landscape plan shall be submitted for approval
within 30 days following approval of this petition by the City
•10 or Council.
In compliance with that requirement, a landscape plan has been submitted. The
plan has been reviewed and found to be in compliance with all applicable
standards and requirements. The parking lot would be sufficiently planted with
a variety of plant materials such as junipers, hollies and evergreens. Within the
parking lot islands would be planted numerous red pine trees, white pine trees
or scotch pine trees. The landscaping around the building looks to be very well
done. The planting schedule specifies a large number of species including
boxwood,juniper, holly, hemlock and evergreens.
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina: There is no correspondence pertaining to this issue.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening?
Jack DeGagne, I represent Darden Restaurant, 5900 Lake Ellenor Drive, Orlando, FL 32809.
Mr. McCann: Is there anything additional you would like to tell us about your landscape plan?
Mr. DeGagne: As Mr. Miller has already stated, as far as the variety of plants that we are using
rr, on this site, the main thing I would like to point out in reference to our
landscape is with the Bahama Breeze theme is the extensive use of evergreen
materials so that we have that lush green look throughout the year. On the
overall planting schedule on both sheets Ll and L2 that you had in your packet,
I think you will notice that it is basically made up of a variety of different
shades of green and a variety of heights as far as what makes up the ground
covers and then the extensive use of pines in the parking lot and around the
building. Again, to give that overall evergreen look throughout the year.
Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mrs. Koons: Mr. DeGagne, the landscape plan is impressive but I am concerned a little bit
about upkeep. Do you have specific plans for care, specifically for salt in the
parking lot and the evergreens? Do you have a company that does regular
upkeep?
Mr. DeGagne: Yes, as far as all of our facilities, we do have contracts for maintenance. As far
as which company would take care of that, I wouldn't know at this time but yes,
we do keep a very ridig schedule as far as upkeep on all the plant materials.
Then again, in reference to the salt tolerance because of the snow, the use of
Junipers, especially in the parking lot area, are somewhat salt tolerant, and
depending on the Juniper, different degrees of salt tolerance.
Mrs. Koons: Will the manager, the onsite manager, be responsible for the upkeep of the
outdoors or will you have corporate people checking regularly?
17481
Mr. DeGagne: I believe that the general manager is responsible for the total restaurant, the
N.., inside as well as the outside.
Mr. Alanskas: On the elevation facing the west, could you explain to me what you are putting
in on the west elevation? The reason why I ask is because when you put in
Broadmoor, Holly and Hemlock, these are very low growing plants. They are
not high, and I, as one Commissioner, am really concerned because of the noise.
The taller plantings you can put in, the more it will absorb noises you have
outside in regards to your outside entertainment. I am concerned with the one
facing the west for the neighbors. What are you going to have in the front of
that building?
Mr. DeGagne: Yes, at this time, in reference to the materials here, again, we are looking at
mainly a ground cover type material in this area that would get to various
heights of 1, 2, 3 or 4 feet.
Mr. Alanskas: It would take 15 years to get that high.
Mr. DeGagne: It will take some growing time, I would agree with you on that. Again, in
reference to noise on this side, I believe from our past experience in reference to
the noise issue, that we are providing different means of making sure that the
noise does not unduly carry past the requirements set by the City.
Mr. Alanskas: By so many decibels?
Mr. DeGagne: Yes sir.
Mr. LaPine: Are there going to be any flowers planted here? Being this is kind of a
Caribbean type of a motif, calypso and that type of deal and you always get the
impression that when you go to those countries that you have beautiful flowers,
are there going to be any type of flowering shrubs or flowers planted during the
summer months?
Mr. DeGagne: From looking at this present plan, I don't see any flowers, like annuals so to
speak, but that is always a possibility. Once this plan is complete if the
opportunity allows, I could foresee some annuals being brought in. That might
be a recommendation going along with this landscape plan. I can definitely take
that idea back and present it.
Mr. LaPine: My position is that we've got all this green and then in the summer months
when we have an opportunity to spruce it up a little bit more with some flowers
and things like that, I think it would make the whole project look a little nicer.
Mr. DeGagne: That will be duly noted, yes sir.
Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions, I am going to go to the staff. What would the
staffs recommendation be along that west wall that Mr. Alanskas brought up
the point of trying to do something to absorb some of the sound.
17482
Mr. Taormina: As Mr. DeGagne pointed out, this issue was addressed by the Planning
Commission and the City Council during the review of the site plan. Most of
the discussion at that time centered around what ways we can mitigate the sound
level. The direction of the sound was oriented differently than it was originally
proposed. Limitations were placed on the hours of the performer's operation.
Sound baffling techniques will be used. There will be restrictions on the size of
the amplifiers and setting that at a certain decibel level. All those things were
looked at, absent this landscape plan. What is unique about this plan is that it
does incorporate primarily evergreens, in fact 100% evergreens, which will
provide some additional sound absorption that might not be provided with a
species that would be less full or dense. I don't think it is going to make a
significant difference, quite honestly. I think it will help only to a limited
extent. Probably the closer that that vegetation can exist there, and I note on
that particular plan, there are some trees that are going to be provided along the
west elevation. Once those plants achieve full height, I think they will
consume just about all those areas where they have them identified. One of
questions that came up earlier that the Planning Commission wanted staff to
look at was to compare the plantings along Haggerty Road. What was
originally approved for the Pentagon Center and interestingly as you continue
south along the frontage on Haggerty Road, is a continuous row of
honeysuckles. The landscape plan that was included for this site also included
honeysuckles along the entire frontage of Haggerty Road placed at about 30
foot centers. We calculated that there would be 18 trees required along the
Haggerty frontage if they were planted according to the original approved plan.
NoisyThe plan that you are looking at provides for 11 pine trees as opposed to
honeysuckles. Mr. DeGagne has presented a plan this evening that shows a
total of 16 trees along the frontage, I believe, or possibly 15 or 16, depending on
how you look at it. We would recommend, at a minimum, that the number of
trees planted along Haggerty Road be what was approved with the original
landscape plan for the Pentagon Center - 18..
Mr. McCann: My concern is that this is unique in that we are having outside decks here with
anywhere from 100 to 121 people sitting outside. That creates a tremendous
amount of noise itself beyond any amplifiers. You put 120 people together
talking above each other, it can be heard from quite a distance but it is going to
be a summer time use. Foliage trees, something with a leaf on it is going to get
absorbed as well as anything along that area. I think something, again fairly fast
growing, would be appropriate along that line. Will the honeysuckle do that?
Mr. Taormina: No, I don't think the honeysuckle would provide less of a buffering than the
type of plants that they are proposing with this plan.
Mr. McCann: I was thinking of a period of May through September.
Mr. Taormina: The evergreens would provide better sound attenuation. I just want to note also
that the trees, at least the way they are specified on this plan, are going to be 14
`+- feet at the time of planting. That is twice as high as what we normally see and
the site provides for a total of 68 evergreen trees. You can see where those are
17483
spaced out. We have quite a few within the islands in the parking lot.
Something else I failed to mention, and maybe there is some additional
No., opportunity here for planting but you will see along the west edge of the parking
lot closest to Haggerty Road, there are eyebrow islands and extend into the
parking lot, four. That was not shown on the original approved site plan for this
project so there is an opportunity for additional landscaping there that wasn't
provided with the original plan and then two more further to the west.
Mr. McCann: Thank you. I have nothing further. I will go to the audience. Is there anyone in
the audience wishing to speak for or against petition? Seeing no one, a motion
is in order.
On a motion by Mrs. Koons, seconded by Mr. LaPine, and unanimously approved, it was
#02-25-2000 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
the City Council that Petition 99-05-02-16 Bahama Breeze Restaurant
Landscape Plan by GMRI, Inc., which received waiver use approval to
construct a full service restaurant on property located on the east side of
Haggerty Road between Seven Mile and Eight Mile Roads in the Southwest 1/4
of Section 6 be approved subject to the following conditions:
1) That the Landscape Plans marked Sheet LI and Sheet L2 both dated
February 3, 2000 prepared by Wolfgang Doerschlag Architects & Engineers
is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
2) That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu of hydroseeding;
3) That underground sprinklers are to 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 the petitioner shall correct to the Inspection Department's satisfaction
the following site deficiency as outlined in the correspondence dated
February 1, 2000:
that the entire parking lot shall be double striped
Mr. Taormina: The change of the date should reflect the latest landscape plan, and if Mr.
DeGagne would accept this, if he would just reference the latest date on that
plan.
Mr. DeGagne: The latest date on the plan is February 3, 2000.
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the resolution adopted. It will go on
to City Council with an approving resolution.
Mr. Alanskas: When do you plan on having this project completed, as far as open for business?
17484
Mr. DeGagne: We submitted plans for building today so figure that process, it is roughly a five
�.. month building process, about six months from now. July?
Mr. McCann: O.K. Thank you.
ITEM #2 PETITION 99-01-08-02 Days Inn (by Stephen Gottleib)
Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 99-01-08-
02 Days Inn by Stephen Gottleib which received site plan approval to renovate
the exterior of the hotel located at 36655 Plymouth Road in the northwest 1/4 of
Section 32.
Mr. Miller: This site is located on the south side of Plymouth road between Ann Arbor
Road and Raleigh. On February 10, 1999, this property received site plan
approval to renovate the exterior of the hotel. On the approved elevation plan
dryvit bands were shown sticking out above and below the color bands of each
floor. These protruding stripes were to offer some relief and shadowing to the
building. The petitioner is requesting to substitute wood covered in white
aluminum in place of the dryvit. The petitioner has explained that this request is
based on budget restraints and allows the project to be more cost effective.
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina: There is one item of correspondence. It is a letter from the Inspection
Department dated February 1, 2000, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your
request of January 17, 2000, the above referenced petition has been reviewed.
The following is noted. (1) The 3/4" particle board currently in place and
painted has swelled at the joints and is bulging in other areas. The plan does not
specify if the build-ups referred to are new or existing. (2) The plan also does
not specify how to weather-seal the aluminum "C" shape where it creates a joint
at the building. (3) This would also be a color change from the previously
approved elevation." The letter is signed by David M. Woodcox, Director of
Inspection. Finally, there was a letter in response to his letter. Hopefully you
received copies.
Mr. McCann: Is Mr. Gluckman in? Why don't we let him address with this letter, the
concerns that the department has.
Mr. Taormina: That is no problem.
Mr. McCann: So we will let him address those to the Commission himself. Do you have a
letter from Joseph Bars, a letter from Horizon?
Mr. Taormina: No this is a letter dated February 8, 2000 from Alex Bishop to Scott Miller. I
think you are referring to the next petition.
17485
Mr. McCann: O.K. That is for a different one. The one from Alex Bishop, Senior Building
Inspector, please read that one into the record.
vow
Mr. Taormina: This letter is dated February 8, 2000 from the Inspection Department and reads
as follows: "At the request of Mr. Hank Gluckman a site meeting took place
February 7, 2000 to address the concerns in Mr. Woodcox's February 1, 2000
letter. Mr. Gluckman generated a response to this Department's concerns in a
letter dated February 8, 2000, with attached detail (copy attached). There would
be no color change from the previously approved petition. As a result of these
clarifications and changes, this Department has no objection to this petition. It
should be noted that normal maintenance would still be required." The letter is
signed by Alex Bishop, Senior Building Inspector.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening?
Hank Gluckman, 24500 Northwestern Highway, Southfield, Michigan.
Mr. McCann: Do you have anything additional in regard to this petition?
Mr. Gluckman: Only to finish the letter, dated February 8, 2000, that Mr. Taormina started to
read. "Pursuant to our meeting of February 7, 2000, at the Days Inn to review
the points raised in Mr. Woodcox's letter of February 1, 2000, we discussed and
agreed to the following steps in the preparation and installation of the aluminum
over the existing particle board bands: (1) Any joints which have swelled or
bulged in the particle board strips will be sanded smooth with a belt sander and
seamed tightly with additional screws, ready for the aluminum overlays. (2)
The aluminum "C" covering will have a lip top and bottom for further
protection against the weather. The caulk would be applied to both top and
bottom surfaces, then a heavy-duty mastic applied to the main area of the
aluminum. AT this point the section of aluminum would be pressed firmly into
place and nailed top and bottom with rust-proof nails. This would insure a tight
weather seal with the caulk. (3) The color of the white aluminum matches the
frames of the windows exactly and is compatible with the color of the building.
For whatever it means, the owner of Days Inn, Steven Gottleib, has seen the
material and the color and is in accord. Thank you for your attention to this
matter. I trust this provides you with the required information to pass on to the
Planning Commission."
Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. LaPine: Could you explain to us why he didn't stick to the original agreement we had
with the dryvit over the particle board? Why did you change? What was the
reason behind it?
Mr. Gluckman: It was financial The cost of the dryvit was probably $20,000 more than doing
it this way.
Mr. LaPine: By doing it this way, does this give us a longer life time of this improvement or
would we be better off with dryvit which would last longer?
17486
Mr. Gluckman: I think the aluminum will last longer than the dryvit. The dryvit is a tricky
material to begin with. It all depends on how it is applied. We have dryvit on
New the front part of the building. That was completed. But these strips would
probably have been more venerable if they had been dryvit. That is not the
reason we changed. The reason was financial.
Mr. LaPine: O.K. Thank you.
Mr. Alanskas: You say you are using white aluminum.
Mr. Gluckman: Yes.
Mr. Alanskas: Is that a paint based into the aluminum?
Mr. Gluckman: Yes.
Mr. Alanskas: Normally, aluminum will bleed after a while. The white will run down and
when it rains, the dirt in the rain will stick on the aluminum. You will see these
dirt patches and I am not denying the aluminum would last longer but the
appearance of it, how are you going to maintain the appearance of it?
Mr. Gluckman: I think it is easier to keep clean than the dryvit strips would have been.
Mr. Alanskas: How would you keep it clean?
Mr. Gluckman: Just by washing it.
Mr. Alanskas: You will be washing it?
Mr. Gluckman: Sure.
Mr. Alanskas: O.K. Thank you.
Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions from the Commissioners, I will go to the
audience. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak for or against this
petition? Seeing no one, a motion is in order.
On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mrs. Koons, and unanimously approved it was
#2-26-2000 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
the City Council that Petition 99-01-08-02 Days Inn by Stephen Gottleib to
amend the approved site plan to renovate the exterior of the hotel located at
36655 Plymouth Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 32 be denied for the
following reasons:
1) That this request to substitute wood covered in white aluminum in place of
dryvit is hereby denied for the following reasons:
17487
that the wood currently in place has swelled and is bulging in
areas
''e - that the color of the aluminum would not match that of the rest of
the building
2) That the petitioner shall install dryvit as originally approved in City Council
Resolution#93-99 and all conditions related thereto.
Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion?
Mrs. Koons: I will support with a potential of clarification. Mark, the new aluminum will
match, right?
Mr. Taormina: I think the statement on the part of the Inspection Department is that it would
match the window frames. Where did I see that?
Mr. LaPine: Number 3 in Mr. Gluckman's letter says the color of the white aluminum
matches the frames of the windows exactly and is compatible with the color of
the building.
Mr. Taormina: It would match the frames of the windows which are aluminum, but then the
dryvit is a slightly different color. I guess the question to Mr. Gluckman would
be, would the white aluminum match the color of the dryvit that it is adjacent
to?
olopr
Mr. Gluckman: There is no dryvit adjacent to it. This is the paint color of the building. We
didn't put dryvit on the sides of the building. It is on the corners of the building.
The rest of the building has been painted. That is all and it is compatible with
the paint.
Mr. Taormina: So it will match the existing color in addition to matching the frames?
Mr. Gluckman: Yes.
Mrs. Koons: I'll take my friendly amendment back then because I don't think it will match the
building. I will support it as read.
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the resolution adopted. The petition
is denied. You have ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City Council.
ITEM #3 PETITION 99-12-08-34 Horizon Properties
Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 99-12-8-34
Horizon Properties requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of
the Zoning Ordinance in Connection with a proposal to renovate the exterior
elevations of the commercial building located at 29055 Plymouth Road and
construct a parking lot on property located at 28905 Plymouth Road in the
Northwest 1/4 of Section 36.
17488
Mr. Miller: This site is located on the southwest and southeast corners of Plymouth Garden.
`,.. The petitioner is requesting approval to renovate the exterior of the old Lasky
Furniture Store and construct a parking lot across the street, behind the existing
Livonia Deli. At this time it is not known who would be occupying the building
but a note on the site plan reads: "proposed use would be business or
professional offices". The petitioner is proposing to completely renovate the
north, west and east elevations of the building. The submitted elevation plan
does not illustrate what would be done to the south (rear) elevation. The north
facade, or the elevation facing Plymouth Road, would become a combination of
dryvit and windows. A 3 ft. band of brick would run along the entire bottom
section, underneath the windows. A somewhat mansard looking standing seam
metal roof would enhance the top section of this elevation. Both the east and
west elevations would be similar in appearance to the north elevation, but would
not have as many windows and the 3 ft. band of brick would only wrap around
slightly from the front elevation. Also, the standing seam metal material along
the top of the two walls would be more like a flat panel. A note on the
submitted site plan indicates that the existing parking lot would be restriped and
contain 35 spaces. Another additional 18 spaces are proposed for a new lot
constructed behind the Livonia Deli across Garden Avenue. Because the site
would be deficient in parking, the petitioner would be required to be granted a
variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The site plan shows a new
enclosed trash dumpster area located at the southwest corner of the property.
The existing landscape areas on the site would remain but a note on the plan
explains that new plant material would be planted up next to the building. The
existing landscaping on the two sides of the driveway would remain as is and
seems to be conforming to the overall Plymouth Road Development Authority
plan. No additional landscaping is shown screening the additional parking lot
behind the deli or the new enclosed dumpster area. The landscaping shown on
the plan is not detailed, no sizes or type of species are given.
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina: There are three items of correspondence. One is a letter from the Engineering
Division, dated January 28, 2000, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your
request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition.
The Engineering Division has no objections to the proposal and detects no
traffic safety issues regarding this proposal. However, the Engineering Division
would like to note that local ordinance requires standard parking spaces to be 10
ft. wide with the spaces being double striped." The letter is signed by John P.
Hill, Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Inspection
Department, dated January 31, 2000, and reads as follows: "Pursuant to your
request of January 25, 2000, in regard to the above referenced petition, the
following is noted. (1) This site will need Zoning Board of Appeal variances
for deficient number of parking spaces (19) and also for 28 spaces at deficient
size (width). (2) Required double striping is not indicated in the plan. Due to
snow, the condition of the existing lot surface could not be reviewed. (3)
Lighting for both parking areas appears deficient and should be addressed. (4)
Proof of ownership of both properties should be provided to the satisfaction of
17489
the Council, or alternately a recorded legal instrument granting exclusive
perpetual parking from outlot A for outlot B. (5) This is a Change in Use
Group so the entire building must meet the current accessibility code. (6) The
proposed landscaping at 29055 Plymouth is deficient at approximately 3%
instead of the required 15%, which Council may waive. (7) The existing
protective wall at 29055 is leaning out of plumb and is in a sate of disrepair.
We would recommend it being replaced to current standards required by
Ordinance #543. (8) The site at 28905 Plymouth Road has a protective wall of
shadow block, approximately 5 feet high. The deli has a dumpster enclosure
with a damaged wall, damaged gate, wild brush by the enclosure and debris is
outside. The building is damaged at the southwest corner and the mansard is
open to animals and elements. Other than as noted for your consideration
above, this department has no objection to this petition." The letter is signed by
Alex Bishop, Senior Building Inspector. The third letter is from the Livonia
Fire & Rescue Division, dated February 1, 2000, and reads as follows: "This
office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to
renovate the exterior of the commercial building and construct a parking lot on
property located at the above referenced addresses. We have no objections to
this proposal." The letter is signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal. That is
the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening?
Joe Bars, 20400 Superior Road, Taylor, Michigan 48180.
r.. Mr. McCann: Can you address some of the concerns?
Mr. Bars: You bet. I have addressed a letter to Mark, going through each item, if you
would like, I can address each item as they are listed. Currently the lack of
parking spaces, part of team is up right now with the ZBA. Currently it is
deficient in parking spaces. Unfortunately, for the building, it is locked between
Plymouth Road, Garden and a car wash along side and then there is a wall
between the building and residential. So as far as the number of parking spots,
there are few choices, either you have less building in order to improve the
space or do what we did, purchase another lot, across from Garden to see if we
could bridge a gap between the parking ratio. As far as item number one, they
are upstairs representing it now to ZBA for a variance. Number two, as far as
the parking lot is concerned, yes, we are going to do everything necessary to get
a good product both to the City and our customer which is SEMCA which
includes crack filling, sealing, striping or whatever we need to do. The lot is in
pretty shape. It just needs crack filling, sealing and striping which we don't
have an issue with. Lighting poles, number three, is kind of similar to item
number one. There is not a whole lot of room to put much in this lot so if we
put lighting poles up, it is going to decrease the parking. If you bump out an
island somewhere in the parking lot, what we proposed is to put lighting on the
building which we have in the plan, if not, I have also referenced the type of
wall packs that are used on this type of building. That is number three. Number
four, I have copies of both purchase agreement for the building and the lot.
Mr. McCann: You can save that for the Council.
17490
Mr. Bars: Number five, we know it needs to be all accessible codes. We are prepared to
do that. Landscaping is limited out there. The PRDA did a nice job of
irrigation and landscape already. There is not a whole else to do. If there is,
you have bump outs in the parking lot, you can take away more additional
parking. Regarding the lot between the lot and the deli, if something needs to
be done there, we're more than agreeable to do that. The two walls, number 7
and 8, I have taken a look at them. Besides a stress crack in one or two of the
walls, it is something we can address. I don't think that is a big issue.
Mr. McCann: Have you met with the Plymouth Road Development Authority regarding this
property?
Mr. Bars: I have not.
Mr. Taormina: The PRDA had limited discussion of this item at their meeting last Thursday,
February 3, 2000. There was not an approving resolution offered at that time
because they didn't get into any detail with the plan. They understood it was an
improvement to the site and they were going to see what the Commission's
reaction to the proposal was.
Mr. McCann: Does there appear to be any additional room for landscaping, from the staff
since the last meeting? Any changes or recommendations from the staff before
we go to the Commissioners?
Mr. Taormina: I think there is very little opportunity on the principle site. As they do this
r.. renovation work along the side of the building, there are a number of low
growing shrubs across the front. Those would have to be replaced. On the
opposite side of Garden Street, where the new parking lot will go, we do believe
that there is some opportunity for additional plantings along the edge of the wall
at the south end and on the north side define the new parking lot with the
existing asphalt parking at the deli.
Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. Alanskas: First of all, it is nice what you are doing to the building. In regards to parking in
the lot, what type of use will this building be used for?
Mr. Bars: General office use.
Mr. Alanskas: What will the hours be? Will it be beyond 5:00 p.m.?
Mr. Bars: I don't believe so.
Mr. Alanskas: The reason why I ask is because in the winter time it gets dark very quickly.
Possibly on the east elevation, you could put some lights that shine straight
down that are shielded to put some light in that parking lot. That would take
care of not having the poles but you could still have lights where the parking lot
is. I was wondering in regards to how many people you will have during the
„`, day. Is it always full? Will you need all that parking?
17491
Mr. Bars: Jack O'Reilly that heads up SEMCA will be here. He is up at ZBA and will be
down here in just a few minutes and you can address any questions on use but
... he didn't need the extra lot. I need it as a landlord developer thinking beyond
his use. I didn't want to be under parked even though he didn't require it. So
that is why we went after the other lot.
Mr. Alanskas: O.K. Thank you.
Mr. LaPine: I too will want to know what is going in there and what it is going to be used
for. I checked the wall and the wall is leaning. I don't know if that can be
repaired or not. If it has to be torn down, it is a costly project to do. I don't
know how far we want to go but that wall is leaning. The second question is,
the property you are using across the street, the deli, or a small store in my
opinion, the whole store and the whole parcel is not in good shape. Are you
going to pave the lot behind there? It is partially paved but it has to be done
brand new.
Mr. Bars: It will be brand new. We are almost splitting that piece of property between the
deli which has their parking and the whole grassy area between where the
dumpster was recognized and where the wall separating the residential, that will
all be paved.
Mr. LaPine: Are you purchasing that property?
Mr. Bars: Correct.
NEW
Mr. LaPine: Purchasing it out right?
Mr. Bars: Right.
Mr. LaPine: Are you going to put a wall separating you from them because otherwise the
people are going to be parking there to go to the deli?
Mr. Bars: No. We are not going to put up a wall but there is going to be landscape there.
Mr. LaPine: So there is no way they can drive over that?
Mr. Bars: We wouldn't want that either.
Mr. LaPine: There is a wall behind there and that is not in too bad of shape.
Mr. Bars: I looked at them like you did, perpendicular to see if there was any bend. There
is a little bit in the one behind the subject larger building.
Mr. LaPine: The lights that you are going to put on the side of the building, which I would
assume that is on the building on the west side of Garden that will light the
parking lot on the west side. We don't want to get any lights that shine on the
property owners that are right behind you. Are you going to have any lights in
the lot across the street?
17492
Mr. Bars: It was not planned and the reason I say that is because it was usual business
hours as you mentioned, 8:00 to 5:00.
`'ew Mr. LaPine: That is the point, if it is normal business hours, you may not need it on that lot
but I think you would need them on this other lot because if people are going to
be working any overtime, they are going to be staying in that lot probably more
than the lot across the street.
Mr. Bars: I checked around to find out a little bit better but it is one stop assistance for
employment. They call it one stop for the State of Michigan. So for people
getting, not like an employment office, but more instructional on how to get
jobs and work on resumes, that type of thing.
Mr. LaPine: Where do these people come from?
Mr. Bars: That is a question for Jack O'Reilly. I would say probably within a ten mile
radius. He will be down here any minute to address those type of questions.
Mrs. Koons: Mr. Taormina, I understand from your earlier comments the Plymouth Road
Development Authority gave a first look at this and they are feeling positive
about it and how often does the Plymouth Road Authority meet? Do they have
regular meetings?
Mr. Taormina: Yes. They meet twice a month, every other week.
Mrs. Koons: Is it typical that they would offer a formal written letter of support at some
`r.► point?
Mr. Taormina: Yes, that has been their normal practice for the site plans that are presented
knowing that they will receive review by the Planning Commission. The
Council typically looks for a recommendation from the PRDA prior to their
taking final action
Mrs. Koons: O.K. Thank you.
Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions from the Commissioners, I will go to the
audience.
Mr. LaPine: Mr. Chairman, I would like to wait for the gentleman to come down from
upstairs to tell me what is going in the building and what the operation is going
to be and thinking along the same lines as Elaine, I would like to wait until we
get a formal approval from the Plymouth Road Development Authority before I
act on this. Maybe that is just one member but on all the other cases we had on
Plymouth Road we always got a letter from them that they approve it or
disapprove it. I don't know how well they went into this project but I think it
behooves us to get all the input we can, especially from them. I wouldn't hold it
up but that is my personal opinion, I think we should wait.
Mr. McCann: Go ahead sir.
17493
Mr. Bars: As a fellow Planning Commission member from a different city, I can
appreciate that. Is there any way we can maybe get approval to Council that is
subject to your approval.
Mr. LaPine: I have no objection with that
Mr. McCann: I don't want to make them a legislative body in this City and give them subject
control. My position is that we can take a look at Mr. Taormina's response and
that was that they were looking at it favorably. If they did have concerns, that
could be addressed to Council. I appreciate what you are saying. Normally the
PRDA has always had the letter to us before hand. Actually, we must be
moving along at a good pace. Either way, if you have no objection, we will
pass on this, take a couple of other items until he comes down.
Mr. Bars: That will be fine. He must have gotten into the details upstairs. Thank you.
Mr. McCann: This item was called back after the hearing on Petition 99-12-SN-17 Flooring
America.
Mr. Bars: I would like to introduce Mr. Jack O'Reilly, heads up SEMCA and the questions
on the type of use for this building. I think Mr. O'Reilly is the best one to
describe it.
Mr. LaPine: How did you make out at the ZBA?
Mr. Bars: It was approved subject to maintaining 10 foot wide spaces. We tried to balance
r.. between the new lot for 10 feet wide and keep the 9 feet at the existing building
and they said they approved it subject to an all 10 feet wide.
Mr. O'Reilly: Here is a little bit of information on us. We are new to Livonia. We are just a
tenant in this building but I know that is part of the reason for the use of the
building. Southeast Michigan Community Alliance is designated by the State of
Michigan as the work force development board for all of Wayne County except
for the City of Detroit and Monroe Counties. We deliver our services through a
series of one stop centers. These one stop centers, the primary piece is a
successor to what used to be the old employment service, one-half of the
combined unemployment, employment service, the labor match side. We use
an internet based system called Michigan's talent bank, Michigan's job bank and
our customers are both employers who are looking for qualified and people
seeking jobs. They go on a state wide system and register for jobs, registered
job openings. Through that process we help employers connect with job
seekers. Also in the one stops is the state agency which would be the Michigan
Rehab Services; their goal is to help the physically disabled access jobs. What
they do is they work with employers on work site accommodations. They work
on getting training from training providers to give people skills so people can be
hired, so while they have a very attached client base, they don't have a lot of
numbers. These are fewer numbers but they have very intense services and so
that is the activity that we engage in. We have veteran services for the same
thing but most of it is all done now through an internet based system. When
people come in, the front part of the facility will be what is called a "resource
17494
room." It will have self-initiated computers, about a bank of fifteen. We have
12 at our current site but there will be 15 here. People will go on, there would
be a staff there to help them, they would go on the computer. They can put the
resume on, they can look up job openings. You can also do that at home if you
have a computer at home or from the library. That is the nature of the business.
Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. LaPine: I believe it is like this in the shopping center around Farmington and Eight Mile
Road. It is the Michigan Unemployment Office and they place jobs. Does this
have any connection?
Mr. O'Reilly: Not anymore. That is only unemployment insurance. All they do from that
facility is unemployment insurance or people who are laid off from their jobs
and that is going away also. That will all be done by telephone with the new
system. There will no longer be any unemployment insurance offices where
people go in. That is going to be eliminated within the next year. What is left is
the labor match. That is what we will be doing. We are not a state agency. The
only state agency people in this facility will be Michigan Rehabilitation
Services and one Veteran's representative.
Mr. LaPine: This will be open five days a week?
Mr. O'Reilly: Right now all of our centers are open 8:30 to 5:00, Monday through Friday. We
have centers in Monroe County, Southgate, Redford right now but we are going
to phase that into here, Highland Park and Wayne, Michigan.
Mr. LaPine: Is this strictly for Wayne County?
Mr. O'Reilly: This will be the northwest quadrant. People from Livonia, Plymouth. Northville
and that area.
Mr. LaPine: Thank you.
Mrs. Koons: Mr. O'Reilly, I note that SEMCA is funded in part. Is there a fee?
Mr. O'Reilly: No. These services are funded in part, and we get funds from different sources.
state and federal. There is a federal act which gives the governor the money and
then the governor has to designate a local work force board. Our board is made
up of 42 members. Thirty of them are private sector business owners and 12
are public sector and that is the work force board. Our vice chair, as you will
note is Charlie Mahoney. She has been formerly with the private industry
council. She is currently the Vice Chair of SEMCA.
Mr. Alanskas: The people that come to you for employment or to find a job, are these all low
paying jobs or do they vary?
Mr. O'Reilly: Absolutely not. With this new system,just to give you an idea of the scope in
Michigan right now, Michigan is out ahead of this nationally. Every state in the
nation will have one-stop centers by July 1, 2000. That will be the primary
method of delivery of all the services under the federal acts. Right now in
17495
Michigan, we have 29,000 jobs from companies listed on the internes base
system and almost 300,000 resumes. They are purged every 30 days so those
are all current.
Mr. Alanskas: What did you say Charlie Mahoney does?
Mr. O'Reilly: She is the Vice Chair of our board.
Mr. Alanskas: O.K. Thank you.
Mr. O'Reilly; She will probably be Chair in March because that is when we hold an election.
Mr. McCann: Are there any more questions?
Mr. Taormina: I think Mr. Bars would like to present some modifications of the plans.
Mr. Bars: If you notice all of the elevations, we went up and down Plymouth Road and the
front elevation, which is the north elevation, we have the split seam. We are
bullying up our wall with new brick and all new windows, currently it is single
plate with accents of dryvit. Also looking at both elevations because of the line
of vision between the east and west coming down Plymouth Road, we have also
changed them so the difference of what we would like to do and the drawing
that shows the whole elevation. We don't want to go the whole way because of
economics to take it all the way down but we want to take it at least a quarter of
the way down, dryvit, windows, split seam and that combination. It shows it all
the way down and part of it is because we are putting windows in for the user
but we didn't want to put split seam metal all the way down and dryvit all the
way down just because of economics. The drawing shows it. It can be painted.
It can be bands. I didn't want to mislead the Commission on what we are
looking at. It is a great looking building. We are just not taking it all the way
down to the end going towards the residential.
Mr. Alanskas: On the brick that is on the east side of the building, can that be sandblasted?
Mr. Bars: We were thinking of that.
Mr. Alanskas: I know it can be because it looks terrible and if you want to make it match the
rest of the side of the building, we would have to do something.
Mr. Bars: It is such a small area between what we were going to plan and the front
elevation. The front elevation currently is 10 feet of glass from the top to the
bottom and there is no brick there. What we are proposing is like a brick 2-1/2
foot ledge there and I am sure that brick wouldn't match it going around the
corner.
Mr. Alanskas: Unless you put new brick in.
Mr. Bars: Right.
`.• Mr. LaPine: What I see is not what I am going to get?
17496
Mr. Bars: What you see there is what you are going to get except for part of the
building.... This is the proposed north elevation currently. This is the elevation
that stays the same. Right now you can see the standing seam metal roof with
an accent bump out to give a little dimension, all new windows. These
currently are single, plain windows, the air just blows through. The brick that is
proposed is to match what the P.R.D.A. has already proposed. So it is a
continuation of their project already. That is going to stay the same and the
entrance for SEMCA, we speculate an entrance in here, this is the proposed
west elevation. There is a former sign that was taken down and continues up a
little bit higher. This entrance is currently here in this location so for line of
vision, there is a car wash right here. We are going to take it to about here and
stop whether we paint it, dryvit or standard seam would have to be determined.
Economically, it is not viable for us to take it through the whole building all the
way to the back.
Mr. McCann What about the windows?
Mr. Bars: The windows are going to depend on the final layout of the user. So we are
going to add the windows and depend on where the final office lays out. So the
windows are going to continue as you see the dryvit is proposed and the metal
seam will not go all the way. On the other east elevation, which is driving east
to west, we are going to come to about similar to the other side. The reason we
are doing that is because it is all white and gray and we want to pick up because
there is a line of vision to see this building and we want to continue to wrap it
around the building.
Mr. Alanskas: How many feet is that?
Mr. Bars: It is probably 40 feet.
Mr. McCann; But isn't that along the street side there?
Mr. Bars: Yes, it is along the side street, Garden. We still think it is a proposed use.
What you have there now is painted black and gray and no windows.
Mr. McCann: What we had there was approved 30 years ago. We want this one to last and
look good.
Mr. Bars: And we do as well.
Mr. LaPine: When did you come to the conclusion you didn't want to continue with your
original idea?
Mr. Bars: Prior to submitting the plans between this and working with our general
contractor and cost.
Mr. LaPine: How much are we talking? We're not talking hundreds of thousands of dollars
here.
Mr. Bars: Probably about $100,000. As a developer, I've got to balance my cost between
my rental income I receive, the purchase of the property and the extra lot.
17497
Mr. LaPine: At this point, this plan that we've got, is this. Until we've got a new set of plans,
how can we pass on the site plan, Mr. Chairman?
N.. Mr. McCann: I agree. Considering that changes are being made, maybe we should wait for
P.R.D.A.
Mr. LaPine: I think you've got to come in and show us exactly what you want. If we were
voting on this tonight, I personally would deny it because that is what I looked
at, at our study session and that is what I assumed we were getting. That plan
needs to be updated because once we approve the plans, that is what we expect
to get.
Mr. McCann: I am going to look for a motion.
Mr. Bars: Well then I will step back and I will see if I can work it out economically to
present these plans.
Mr. McCann: You would like the time then?
Mr. Bars: No, I would like to see them approved.
Mr. McCann: Of these plans?
Mr. Bars: Yes.
Mr. McCann: Wrapped all the way around? I am willing to do that.
Mr. Bars: When I say wrapped all the way around, it doesn't go to the north side because
there is not an elevation there.
Mr. McCann: Right.
Mr. Piercecchi: When you talk about the wrap around, you are talking about the east and west
elevations?
Mr. Bars: Correct.
Mr. Piercecchi: But you don't want to go all the way down to the end of it?
Mr. Bars: I would prefer not to but from what I am hearing from the Commission, is that
they will deny it and I need to work for a customer to proceed down the road so
I'll have to figure out another way. Another suggestion Mark brought up is that
they did not want to put dryvit along the ground. I don't know if that is a
requirement of the Inspection Department or not.
Mr. LaPine: I thought we were getting brick on the bottom layer.
Mr. Bars: You are but it only wraps around a portion of the building. The other one is
going to be dryvit.
Mr. Piercecchi: We studied your plans. What we had, even if it is a modification right now and
we thought if would be a big improvement if that three foot brick was also
17498
extended all the way down on the east and west elevation as well as the south.
It would just give a much better balance. If you are willing to go 40 feet I don't
know how much more you've got to go.
Mr. Bars: The brick was never to be carried around the whole way. On the drawings you
had the brick and then the rest of it was dryvit. Through the Building Inspection
they say they don't approve dryvit that far down.
Mr. Piercecchi: That's right. That is one of the main reasons why we do this. We've seen too
many times where dryvit is damaged. Even putting landscaping there, the
landscaping maintenance can ruin dryvit. So we prefer dryvit being at least
three feet above the ground.
Mr. Bars: I don't mind not putting dryvit in I just don't know if there is a use between
adding brick over the block.
Mr. Piercecchi: Well for appearance. The whole building would balance then. Is that a problem
for you?
Mr. Bars: It is an additional cost that I didn't plan on.
Mr. Piercecchi: Well you can get more rent.
Mr. Alanskas: Are you saying you may change the amount of windows by the customer?
Mr. Bars: No. These are the minimal, due to the layout that you currently see in the plan.
\"' If the office gets moved three feet or four feet ....
Mr. Alanskas: What you saying is that you will have that amount of glass in the front?
Mr. Bars: Yes.
Mr. McCann: Mr. Taormina, you have a comment?
Mr. Taormina: Concerning the lower band along the east elevation, there is about a 2-1/2 foot
distance between the existing sidewalk and the wall of the building. I was
wondering if that could be concealed with landscaping.
Mr. McCann: Or just ground cover of some type. There are 2-1/2 feet between the sidewalk
and the dryvit itself so there would be some protection?
Mr. Taormina: Looking at the survey, I see a dimension of.21 feet. That would appear to be
the distance between the edge of the sidewalk and the .... although that may be a
set back from the property line. It is difficult to say. Mr. Bars probably knows
the answer to that question.
Mr. Bars: Between the sidewalk and the buildings? That is about right.
Mr. Taormina: Is it enough to allow for a low growing hedge?
17499
Mr. Bars: Some shrubs and similar to what is on the east elevation, that the P.R.D.A. has.
Yes, we can do that.
Mr. McCann: Can we come back with the landscape plan on that?
Mr. Taormina: Yes. That would be something they could come back to us as far as
landscaping. That was just an alternative seeing that the existing brick is
probably a light gray. The other option, and one we were discussing just prior
to the meeting, was cleaning off the brick and re-painting it, at least for a certain
portion.
Mr. Bars: This side right here?
Mr. Taormina: Yes. It looks right now the elevation plan shows that there is some kind of a
recess in the dryvit along the east elevation. There is a line that defines the first
three feet and I am assuming that is a shadow line or a recess in the dryvit,just
to break it up.
Mr. Bars: It kind of matches the ledge of the brick, right. We would prefer that.
Mr. Piercecchi: If you were putting dryvit, were you planning on going all the way to the
ground. That will never work.
Mr. Bars: No. We know that won't work. It's not going to go all the way to the ground.
Mr. McCann: But if you can put planting material between the sidewalk and the dryvit...
Mr. Piercecchi: It would be better if you put brick all the way around, it would match. That is
how we wrote it up too in our study session. We thought that the east and west
should have the three foot brick going around it and I personally I would like to
retain that thought.
Mrs. Koons: We've been tossing around a lot of ideas. I need to get some clarity. Are we
talking about dryvit around on the bottom or are we talking about painting the
brick around the bottom to match the new brick. What do you think we are
talking about?
Mr. Bars: Painting to match the brick and maybe with another alternative that was
recommended about putting in landscape screening for the first couple of feet.
That is no objection.
Mr. LaPine: Mr. Chairman, when we talk about landscaping for the first couple of feet are
we talking about landscaping the whole frontage along Plymouth Road?
Mr. McCann: Plymouth Road is going to have the brick, right?
Mr. Bars: Right.
Mr. LaPine: You were talking about the Garden Street side?
Mr. Bars: Correct.
17500
Mr. LaPine: I know the area because I use to live there. I used to turn up Garden every
single day for 23 years. Garden on the north side where the main store is there a
solid wall and on the side facing the auto wash is basically a solid wall too so
the only two walls I am concerned about is on the east side and on the front. On
the west side, I don't really care because the parking lot is there and right next
door you've got the auto wash. Along Plymouth Road if we are going to have
the brick three feet up, is that the way I understand it at this point?
Mr. Bars: Along Plymouth Road?
Mr. LaPine: Right.
Mr. Bars: Correct and we are going to go beyond Plymouth Road to wrap it around a
certain dimension around both corners, Garden and the car wash, with the brick.
When you say that, there is a column right here where that is about an equal
dimension.
Mr. LaPine: I've just got one other question. I understand you are going to have two
openings, two doorways, one on the corner of Garden and Plymouth and
another opening in the center of the building? Are you going to have another
tenant in there?
Mr. Bars: No. There is only one tenant. SEMCA is taking the whole building. Since we
are doing all this renovation, I am just putting another entrance in there if they
want to use it for employees.
Mr. McCann: Do we have some concurrence at this point?
Mr. LaPine: I think I understand it now.
Mr. Bars: I didn't mean to be misleading with these plans but that is just ....
Mr. McCann: That is what we are trying to get is something to get you moving and I think we
are getting a great product.
On a motion by Mrs. Koons, seconded by Mr. Piercecchi, and unanimously approved, it was
#2-27-2000 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
the City Council that Petition 99-12-8-34 by Horizon Properties requesting
approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the Zoning Ordinance in
connection with a proposal to renovate the exterior elevations of the commercial
building located at 29055 Plymouth Road and construct a parking lot on
property located at 28905 Plymouth Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 36, be
approved subject to the following conditions:
1) That the site plan marked Sheet P-1 B dated January 24, 2000 prepared by
Yaps & Wilkie Architects, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
2) That the exterior building elevation plan marked Sheet P-3B dated January
24, 2000, prepared by Yaps& Wilkie Architects, is hereby approved and
shall be adhered to, except that the bottom 3 ft. of the west and east
17501
elevations beginning at a point no less than 40 feet from the front of the
building shall consist of brick;
3) That the brick used in the construction of the building shall be full face 4-
inch brick, no exceptions;
4) That the three walls of the trash dumpster area shall be constructed out of
the same brick used in the construction of the building and the enclosure
gates shall be maintained and when not in use, closed at all times;
5) That the south elevation of the building shall be painted to match the rest of
the building;
6) That all roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view;
7) That if the Inspection Department deems it necessary, the entire parking lot
shall be repaired, resealed and double striped to their satisfaction;
8) That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted a variance from
the Zoning Board of Appeals for deficient parking spaces and any
conditions related thereto.
9) That the existing brick along the east and west elevations shall be painted to
match the new brick and that the landscaping be placed on the east side - full
length of the building and irrigated.
10)That the protective screen on both properties walls shall be repaired to the
satisfaction of the Inspection Department
11)That the landscaping plan for the auxiliary parking lot shall be brought back
for review and approval by the Planning Commission and the City Council.
Mrs. Koons: I just wanted to say to Mr. O'Reilly I am familiar with your work and I am
happy to have SEMCA here in Livonia. Thank you.
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the resolution adopted. You will go
on with an approving resolution.
ITEM #4 PETITION 99-12-SN-16 CVS/Michigan National Bank
Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 99-12-SN-
16 CVS/Michigan National Bank requesting approval for signage for the
property located at 19120 Middlebelt Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section.
Mr. Miller: This site is located on the Northeast corner of Seven Mile and Middlebelt. On
September 23, 1998, Petition 98-6-8-21 received site plan approval to construct
a retail store and a bank on the subject site. As part of the approval it was
'""' conditioned:
17502
That this approval does not authorize consent of any signage shown on the
plans, and that all signage shall come back before the Planning Commission
`.�. and City Council for their review and approval.
In compliance with that requirement, the applicant is requesting Planning
Commission approval for five (5) wall signs and a ground sign. According to the
submitted site plan the proposed ground sign would be located 10 ft. back from
the intersection of Seven Mile Road and Middlebelt Road. All signage would be
internally illuminated. Because the proposed signage is in excess of the number
of signs and the amount of sign area allowed by the sign ordinance, the applicant
would be required to be granted a variance form the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina: There is one item of correspondence. It is a letter from the Inspection
Department, dated January 27, 2000, and reads as follows: "Pursuant to your
request of January 17, 2000, the above referenced petition has been reviewed.
The following is noted. (1) The petitioner is allowed a 30 square foot
freestanding ground sign not exceeding 6 feet in height with equal space for
each business at a 10 foot setback per Ordinance #543, Section 18.50(a)1;
therefore site #1 meets the code. (2) The CVS tenant is allowed one wall sign
along Middlebelt Road not to exceed 136 square feet. A second wall sign along
Seven Mile Road is permitted not to exceed 68 square feet; therefore, wall sign
#3c at 133 square feet and sign #2c at 67.92 square feet meet the code. (3) The
Michigan National Bank tenant would be allowed one wall sign of 46 square
,w feet; therefore, this sign is in compliance at the proposed 32.16 square feet. (4)
Sign #4 and#3 are excessive wall signs and would require a variance from the
Zoning Board of Appeals for excess number of signs and excess sign area. (5)
Signs #6, #7, #8 and#9 are traffic directional signs and would not require a
permit if meeting all conditions of Ordinance #543. They must not exceed 4
square feet each (for entrance/exit only) or 3 square feet for other directional
signage. The maximum height for entrance and exit signs is 3 feet with a
minimum setback of 2 feet. All other directional signage has a maximum height
of 5 feet with a setback of 10 feet. Therefore, signs 6 through 9 would be
entrance and exit signs and would comply if reduced to 3 feet in height. As
proposed they would need a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals." The
letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Senior Building Inspector. That is the extent of
the correspondence.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening?
Christina Cadwell, representing Sign Art/ CVS Bank from Kalamazoo.
Mr. McCann: Want to tell us anything additional about your need for the additional signs
here?
Ms. Cadwell: Essentially all we are looking for is identification on the drive-thru so that the
traffic doesn't enter the drive-thru on the wrong side and so that in the parking
r•• lot they can see what side they are entering through. That is essentially the only
reason we are asking for those two signs.
17503
Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. Piercecchi: Are you talking about signs #4 and #5?
Ms. Cadwell: Yes.
Mr. Piercecchi: Where else can they go? All you need it to say is "Enter" really. They know it
is going to the drive-thru pharmacy.
Ms. Cadwell: What we are looking at is sign number 5 which is the exit drive-thru pharmacy.
If you are in the front parking lot, you could very easily confuse that for the
entrance and go in the wrong way.
Mr. Piercecchi: Not if you have an exit sign there.
Ms. Cadwell: We could limit that sign to just read "exit" if that is what the board is asking.
Mr. Piercecchi: I spent a lot of time looking over your signage and we discussed it in great
detail in our planning session and I think the way it is summarized here, that the
staff did define any opinions that we had which you received a copy of it,
correct?
Ms. Cadwell: Yes.
Mr. Piercecchi: I think that is more than adequate for that corner myself. Thank you.
.or, Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions from the Commissioners, I will go to the
audience. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak for or against this
petition? Seeing no one, a motion is in order.
Ms. Cadwell: If I may, before the motion, we have modified the directional signs to meet the
ordinance, if I may pass them around to the board.
Mrs. Koons: I may be the only person confused, but they look the same to me.
Ms. Cadwell: What has been modified on them is that they now read "enter drive-thru
pharmacy" on sign#6 and #7 read "drive-thru pharmacy" as opposed to just
"enter" which is what I believe we previously presented to the board.
Mrs. Koons: What you just gave us is the same as what we have in our packet.
Ms. Cadwell: O.K. I wasn't aware that we re-submitted those signs to you. They are only
three feet in height which is in conformance with what Mr. Bishop indicated in
his correspondence of the 27t.
Mrs. Koons: Isn't it our intention that the sign say solely "enter" and that is it. Wasn't that the
intention of our study meeting?
Mr. Alanskas: Yes.
...
Mrs. Koons: We are still seeing signs that say enter drive-thru pharmacy.
17504
Mr. McCann: If there is nothing else, a motion is in order.
�.. On a motion by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mr. Alanskas, and approved, it was
#2-28-2000 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
the City Council that Petition 99-12-SN-16 CVS/Michigan National Bank
requesting approval for signage for the property located at 19120 Middlebelt
Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 1 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1) That the sign package submitted by Sign Art, Inc., as received by the
Planning Commission on January 18, 2000, is hereby approved and shall be
adhered to, except for the following:
that the directional signs, identified as signs#6, #7, #8 and#9,
are seen as redundant and shall not be permitted
- that the drive-thru pharmacy signs, identified as signs #4 and #5,
are hereby considered directional signs and each shall not exceed
4 sq. ft. in sign area
that the sign on the west elevation of the canopy, identified as
sign#5, shall only contain the graphic "Exit"
2) That all signage shall not be illuminated between the hours of midnight and
5:00 a.m.;
3) That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted a variance from
the Zoning Board of Appeals for excess of the number of signs and the
amount of sign area allowed by the sign ordinance;
4) That any additional signage shall come back before the Planning
Commission and City Council for their review and approval.
A roll call vote was taken with the following result:
AYES: Alanskas, Piercecchi, Koons, McCann
NAYS: LaPine
ABSENT: Hale, Shane
Mr. McCann, 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 99-12-SN-17 FLOORING AMERICA
17505
Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 99-12-SN-
17 Flooring America requesting approval for signage for the commercial
'+- building located at 30295 Plymouth Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36.
Mr. Miller: This site is located on the south side of Plymouth between Middlebelt and Henry
Ruff. The applicant is requesting Planning Commission approval for two (2)
wall signs for the commercial building that was most recently occupied by New
York Carpet World. Both signs would be internally illuminated. Because the
proposed signage is in excess of the number of signs and the amount of sign area
allowed by the sign ordinance, the applicant would be required to be granted a
variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina: There is one item of correspondence. It is a letter dated January 27, 2000, from
the Inspection Department and reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of
January 17, 2000, the above referenced petition has been reviewed. The
following is noted: (1) One wall sign is permitted not to exceed one square foot
for each one lineal foot of building frontage. This Department's records indicate
the building is forty-four (44) feet wide by one hundred and sixty-five (165) feet
deep; therefore, a wall sign with a maximum of forth-four (44) square feet would
be allowed on street frontage side and no signage would be allowed on the east,
west or south sides. This petition would require a variance from the Zoning
Board of Appeals for the excess number of signs and the exceeds sign area." The
letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Senior Building Inspector. That is the extent of
the correspondence.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening?
Ian Dainyo, 30295 Plymouth Road. I am a district supervisor for Flooring America.
Mr. McCann: Is the person who prepared the drawings for us here tonight?
Brad Heil, 2021 Adams Street, Toledo, Ohio 43624.
Mr. McCann: We had some concerns. We were going over your numbers for your proposed
signs before I open it up to the Commissioners. One of my pet peeves is that
people bring us drawings showing us how it would look but the trees are 60 feet
tall and they are not proportioned to what we are going to get. My concern was
that the proposed drawing for Flooring America on the front side of the building
according to the staff worked out to about 50 sq. ft., not 96 sq. ft. as you are
requesting. Did you draw that to scale?
Mr. Heil: No that drawing was not done to scale. We figured it was better to give a full
color rendition of what the sign will look like.
Mr. McCann: But you are giving us a full rendition of what a 50 sq. ft. or 45 sq. ft. sign would
look like not a 96 sq. ft. sign like you are requesting. That is my problem. Here
is what we want but it is not really what you are going to get.
17506
Mr. Heil: We did try to draw it as closely to scale as we could. The drawing on the north
elevation on the street side was for 96 sq. ft.
Mr. McCann: So you are saying the drawing on the right up there is what a 96 sq. ft. sign
would look like? We were sitting out there at a study session with paper and
pencil and we weren't quite sure.
Mr. Heil: This drawing does show the 96 sq. ft. sign.
Mr. McCann: On the building?
Mr. Heil: On the building in the pen drawing and then up above a three color rendition. It
shows it as good as we can get to a 96 sq. ft. sign.
Mr. McCann: O.K. Thank you. Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. Alanskas: Sir, is there a reason why you need that large of a sign?
Mr. Dainyo: Yes there is. New York Carpet World, now Flooring America, when Flooring
America purchased New York Carpet World was under the same company for
the last two years. If I can come forward, I didn't know I had to make copies I
have never been to one of these meetings before, if I could show you a few
pictures.
Mr. Heil: From my understanding, in the past, the signs at that location were the largest by
r.P, a considerable amount in the City of Livonia. By my calculations I looked and
there was 1140 sq. ft. of sign at that location for three signs. We are proposing to
go down to two signs which would total 268 sq. ft. which is nearly a 1200 sq. ft.
reduction in sign area. Also the sign would be an internally illuminated sign of a
far higher quality than what was previously up there. The previous sign was
getting to be in disarray. It was a plywood sign. As far as I understand, it has
been up there for 30 years and it was ready to come down.
Mr. Alanskas: The reason I ask is because I was in your store twice this week, not as a
Commissioner but as a customer, and a sign that large, you are right at the front
of Plymouth Road. You don't even have a set back. We don't even have a sign
in Livonia that size allowable. Even at 44 sq. ft. that is plenty large enough to
show the name of your product.
Mr. Dainyo: What I would be asking is the 44 sq. ft. in front but if you look at the side of the
building, that is where most of the traffic comes down the road.
Mr. Alanskas: Right now you've got a banner sign on the side of the building?
Mr. Dainyo: That is correct.
Mr. Alanskas: That is no where near the size of the sign, and you can see it fine.
�.. Mr. Dainyo: I am just saying that when you come down the side from the other direction that
actually the main sign that stood out for Carpet World now Flooring America.
17507
Mr. McCann: Would you accept two 44 sq. ft. signs? One on the front of the building and one
on the side of the building?
New
Mr. Alanskas: That is what is allowable.
Mr. Dainyo: I would accept that, yes.
Mr. LaPine: The sign that you just erected on the New York Carpet building on the north side
of Eight Mile Road just east of Telegraph, what is the size of that sign?
Mr. Dainyo: It is a Flooring America sign. I believe it is 3 feet.
Mr. LaPine: It is not a very large sign, at least in my estimation. When you take that New
York Carpet World sign down...
Mr. Dainyo: It has already been taken down.
Mr. LaPine: I will be honest with you, I didn't go out and site check this particular location
because I lived in that location for over 27 years and I knew what the size was
and what it looked like. I noticed the sign they took down on the one on Eight
Mile and after the sign was removed you could still see New York Carpet. Are
you going to paint that or are they going to do anything to eliminate all of that?
Mr. Dainyo: The one in Southfield?
Mr. LaPine: I don't care about the one in Southfield I want to know what you are going to do
about the one in Livonia.
Mr. Dainyo: If it stands out. we will take care of it.
Mr. LaPine: You'll take care of it?
Mr. Dainyo: Yes sir.
Mr. LaPine: O.K. Thank you.
Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions from the Commissioners, I will go the audience.
Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition?
Seeing no one, a motion is in order.
On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by LaPine, and unanimously approved, it was
#2-29-2000 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 99-12-SN-17 Flooring America requesting approval
for signage for the commercial building located at 30295 Plymouth Road in the
Northeast 1/4 of Section 36 be approved subject to the following conditions:
1) That the sign package submitted by Toledo Sign, as received by the Planning
Commission on December 17, 1999, is hereby approved and shall be adhered
to, except for the following:
17508
that the wall sign for the north elevation of the building shall not
exceed 44 sq. ft. in sign area
r..
that the wall sign for the east elevation of the building shall not
exceed 44 sq. ft. in sign area
2) That all signage shall not be illuminated between the hours of midnight and
5:00 a.m.;
3) That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted a variance from
the Zoning Board of Appeals for excess of the number of signs and the
amount of sign area allowed by the sign ordinance;
4) That any additional signage shall come back before the Planning
Commission and City Council for their review and approval.
5) That any "bleeding" of the letters that appears to the mansard roof shall be
repainted so as not to show.
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. This
concludes the Miscellaneous Portion of the agenda. We will now proceed with the Pending
Item section of our agenda. These items have been discussed at length in prior meetings
therefore, there will only be limited discussion tonight. Audience participation will require
unanimous consent from the Commission.
ITEM #6 PETITION 99-11-SN-14 Millennium Park, L.L.C. (Commercial Building)
Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 99-11-SN-
14 by Millennium Park, L.L.C. requesting approval for signage for the commercial
development located at 13500 Middlebelt Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 25.
Mr. McCann: Is there anything new?
Mr. Taormina: No, there is no additional information.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening?
Mark Drane, Rogvoy Architects, 6735 Telegraph Road, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan.
Mr. McCann: Is there anything additional or any changes in your proposed plan since the last
time you appeared before us?
Mr. Drane: The only additional thing I have is that I wanted to submit this correspondence
for the record.
Mr. McCann: What is the correspondence?
�.. Mr. Drane: The correspondence is the Zoning Board of Appeals ruling. I don't know if you
had the opportunity to see that the last time I was here.
17509
Mr. McCann: That is already part of the record, isn't it Mr. Taormina?
Mr. Taormina:Yes, I believe it is.
Mr. McCann: There was no change in the site plan since the last time you were here?
Mr. Drane: We have not changed anything on the plan.
Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
Mr. LaPine: So what you are telling us is that you don't want to make any compromises and
that what you want is what you are proposing to us this evening?
Mr. Drane: Yes. I would like to preface that with when we started off this design process,
we were asked by the tenants to put more signs on here so we could negotiate
down. Our approach was, "let's do the right thing the first time."
On a motion by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mrs. Koons, and unanimously, approved it was
#2-30-2000 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 99-11-SN-14 by Millennium Park, L.L.C. requesting
approval for signage for the commercial development located at 13500
Middlebelt Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 25 be denied for the following
reasons:
1) That the applicant has failed to comply with all the requirements outlined
in Section 18.50H of the Zoning Ordinance;
2) That the applicant has not justified the need for signage which is in
excess of sign area and height allowed by the sign ordinance;
3) That a business center sign should only identify the development itself
and not single out individual tenants;
4) That approving this sign request would set an undesirable precedent for
the area;
5) Approving this application would not be aesthetically in the City's best
interest.
Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion?
Mr. Alanskas: Usually when we have a petitioner come before us there is always a give and
take but if they don't want to change any of the signs, then there is nothing I as a
Commissioner can do but go with a denial. Thank you.
Mr. McCann: If there is no further discussion I guess I will have to go along with a denying
resolution. One, that for an entrance sign 18 feet above the ground, 18 feet 10
inches, is not for the people driving by who are trying to find a place to enter, it
�.. is obviously for advertising purposes only. It is going to create more accidents
with tenants trying to look at the signs taking their eyes off the road than people
17510
trying to find the entrance. So if you are trying to cause major problems with the
traffic in the City that is what is will be doing. Further, it doesn't comply with
the ZBA approval because you are listing six signs as opposed to the two major
tenants that they approved. So you are in violation with the ZBA and you don't
conform with that so I will have to go along with the resolution.
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
You have ten days in which to appeal it to the City Council.
ITEM #7 PETITION 99-10-8-25 Big Lots (by Redford Oak Plaza)
Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 99-10-8-25
Big Lots by Redford Oak Playa requesting approval of all plans required by
Section 18.47 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to
renovate a portion of the exterior building elevation of the commercial building
located at 30000 Plymouth Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 26.
Mr. McCann: Is there anything additional?
Mr. Taormina: Mr. Chairman, there is nothing to report
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening?
r... Ed Schrecongost, Consolidated Stores, 300 Phillipi Road, Columbus, Ohio 43228.
Mr. McCann: Are there any changes since the last time you before us?
Mr. Schrecongost: No sir. But I brought you a copy of our annual report because there were
some questions about our company. I brought some pictures of one of our other
sites, Owosso. Also, I felt that there were some questions that you asked that I
couldn't answer so I brought support from our operations and from our landlord
so that they could possibly answer your questions better than I did the last time.
Mr. McCann: Your landlord for the Livonia store?
Mr. Schrecongost: Yes sir.
Mr. McCann: Who would that be?
Shayne Damian, Media Play, Music Land, 10400 Yellow Circle Dr., Minitoka, Minn. 55343
Mr. McCann: You are responsible for all the maintenance, parking lot and all the
improvements?
Ms. Damian: Yes we are.
Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
17511
Mr. LaPine: What are your plans for doing the parking lot. It needs repair. It really needs a
whole new repair.
No .
Ms. Damian: Yes it does. Right now we have been soliciting bids so that this spring, once the
weather clears, we are going to be repairing and re-striping.
Mr. LaPine: How long of a lease does Media Play have?
Ms. Damian: Actually I am not really sure. I believe we entered into an agreement with the
original landlord which is, I believe, K-Mart and it has gone through a couple of
different hands at this time. So I am not exactly sure who our landlord is on this
building. I tried to get that information prior to coming to this meeting.
Mr. LaPine: Is this one of Media Plays better stores? Does it look like Media Play is going to
be there for a long period of time?
Ms. Damian: Yes.
Mr. LaPine: How long of a lease do you have with Big Lots?
Ms. Damian: Do you know how long your lease is?
Mr. Schrecongost: That is what I am looking for.
Mr. LaPine: While you are looking for that, let me ask you this question. How many other
tenants looked at this property?
Ms. Damian: I do not know.
Mr. LaPine: Did Media Play go out and look at any of their stores before they leased to this
tenant?
Ms. Damian: Yes we did.
Mr. LaPine: And what was your impression?
Ms. Damian: In regard to Consolidated Stores or Big Lots?
Mr. LaPine: Big Lots.
Ms. Damian: We believed they would be a good generating revenue into this site itself which
that in turn would
Mr. LaPine: Which stores did you look at?
Ms. Damian: I know our real estate people have. I am the construction manager for the site. I
know myself I stopped at one or two of them in my travels around the city.
Mr. LaPine: You think they are an asset to your store?
r._.r
Ms. Damian: We do. We believe that they are a generating base business.
17512
Mr. Alanskas: Are you the manager of the stores?
Bob Shanks, Big Lots, General Manager, 23852 Chipmunk, Novi, Michigan.
Mr. Alanskas: On all the stores that you have open now, do they have a janitorial service that
takes care of the facilities on site.
Mr. Shanks: As far as floor care?
Mr. Alanskas: As far as floor care, bathrooms?
Mr. Shanks: Yes. In most of the bathrooms we use a consolidated program.
Mr. Alanskas: Do you have your own employees or a janitorial service that does that?
Mr. Shanks: It is a janitorial service.
Mr. Alanskas: Are they there eight hours a day?
Mr. Shanks: As far as general maintenance clean up of the stores, that is done by store
employees.
Mr. Alanskas: By a maintenance employee or just any employee?
Mr. Shanks: Normally there are people in the store that are designated to the maintenance
area.
Mr. Alanskas: Are they full time employees or part time?
Mr. Shanks: They could be either one.
Mr. Alanskas: Mainly part time?
Mr. Shanks: Basically if you want to see what the make up of the store is, the typical store
would have ...
Mr. Alanskas: Let's take the store over on Wayne Road, I have visited it five times already.
How long have you been in that facility?
Mr. Shanks: They have been in there approximately 12 years.
Mr. Alanskas: Have you tried to maintain the inside of the building? You have ceiling tiles that
are ready to fall apart, fall on the floors. Have you been in that building?
Mr. Shanks: Yes, I have been in that building.
Mr. Alanskas: Do you know what I am talking about then?
Mr. Shanks: Yes, I do.
'�" Mr. Alanskas: How come that hasn't been taken care of?
17513
Mr. Shanks: Primarily because it is the landlord's obligation and he has not taken care of his
obligation. That is something we probably need to litigate or fix ourselves and
,M, take it from that point.
Mr. Alanskas: Let me ask you this. In the Livonia store, who is responsible for taking care of
the facility on the inside?
Mr. Shanks: We will be.
Mr. LaPine: The store on Greenfield, in Detroit, I think it was 10 or 11 Mile. Have you been
in that store lately?
Mr. Shanks: Yes.
Mr. LaPine: You can barely get down the aisles. There is so much stuff laying out in the
isles.
Mr. Shanks: I beg to differ with you. I invite you to go there tomorrow and you will not find
that situation.
Mr. LaPine: Maybe you have cleaned it up since I have been there.
Mr. Shanks: You see, in the course of business, everyday business, when the store is not in
the condition we would like it to be. However there are plans that are already in
place. Last Sunday I started a complete remodeling of our store in Eastpointe.
We are going to spend between $400,000 and $500,000 and we are completely
selling the store out and gutting the store, putting new fixtures in it, repainting,
fixing all the bathrooms, adding a furniture addition. We just opened new stores
in Taylor on Ecorse Road, a beautiful store. We opened a new store on Eurika
Road just west of Ford,just west of Fort in Southgate, a beautiful store. I am
opening a store tomorrow in West Bloomfield on Commerce Road. You are all
invited to come out and see that store. That is the direction we are going in.
Companies evolve just like cities. Perhaps you start out and you become
successful and yes there are stores that perhaps we are not as proud of as we
would like to be but I came here to Detroit in September of 1999 and my primary
objective in getting here was to take these stores well beyond where they are
now. On my progress this year we will this year, including all the ones you are
talking about, will be painted. They will be refixtured in areas where they need
fixturing and we are going to go through an entire process. It will not happen in
one month. It will happen in 18 months or two years.
Mr. LaPine: Is this store that you are opening here will have all new fixtures, new shelving?
We were led to believe is was going to be 50/50.
Mr. Shanks: All I can tell you is that the three that I have opened here in the last 8 months,
and there has been two of them in the last three months, at least 95% of the
shelving was new. We have one opening tomorrow. I invite you all to come and
see it.
Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions, a motion is in order.
17514
Mr. Alanskas: You people have been here twice before us and we asked you certain things and I
got the impression from the people who answered the questions that said because
%or I asked about the shelving and the store being in disarray, I was told this is our
type of business, what you see is what you get. If someone had said to me, I can
understand your concerns and we will try to do this but it hasn't been the case.
Mr. Shanks: Can I answer?
Mr. Alanskas: You sure can.
Mr. Shanks: You are looking at the gentleman that controls what happens in Detroit and I am
here to tell you that I was not happy with what was going on in Detroit and that
is why I am here now. I have been with the company almost 13 years now and I
have seen it evolve from what it was at one time. We brought product in. We
cut boxes. We put it out and we sold it to people. We are evolving to a lot more
main stream retailer with still keeping our identity to where we are giving great
bargains to people because we go out and we buy merchandise at very very
competitive prices and we pass that on to people. We are evolving into where at
one time when you went into one of our stores you may have seen 5% to 10%
name brands, now you see 60%, 70% or 80% of our stuff is name brands and we
are getting better and better at that. It all goes along with that as we get larger
and stronger our buying power gets better. We have more push.
Mr. Alanskas: Let me ask you one more question before I give a resolution. In this store what
percentage will be full time employees?
Mr. Shanks: Normally our stores will have 30 hourly employees and anywhere will be from 8
to 12 will be full time. So to answer your question probably 40%
On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Piercecchi, and approved it was
RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 99-10-8-25 Big Lots by Redford Oak Plaza are
requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of the Zoning
Ordinance in connection with a proposal to renovate a portion of the exterior
building elevation of the commercial building located at 30000 Plymouth Road
in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 26 be denied for the following reasons:
1) That the petitioner has failed to comply with all general standards and
requirements as set forth in Sections 18.58and 19.06 of the Zoning
Ordinance;
2) That the proposed use and exterior renovations are not in harmony with the
character of the surrounding area;
3) That the proposed use for this portion of the building is contrary to the type
of use that was anticipated when the City approved the site plan for Media
Play; and
r..
4) That the petitioner has failed to comply with all the concerns deemed
necessary for the safety and welfare of the City and its residents.
17515
Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion?
r Mr. Piercecchi: Mr. Chairman, I have a few remarks I would like to give here even if I have
made my position clear at previous meetings and for the sake of brevity I will
limit my remarks. Some things are worth repeating and I want to address this
very sincerely to our fellow Commissioners. I remain opposed to this petition
because I find it impossible to accept that this operation complies with our
standards and requirements as set forth in Section 19.06 of our Zoning
Ordinance. I refer, for example, to those portions pertaining to character and
harmony with its surroundings. Whether it will impair the values to the
neighboring properties and whether it will be a nuisance. In my opinion, based
on my visits to other locations operated by this petitioner and graphically
described by Commissioner Alanskas and LaPine, it's mode of operation,
product line and housekeeping do not come up to those standards we expect
from those businesses operating in Livonia and from those we encourage to do
business here. As such, this enterprise would not be an asset toward retaining
property values nor will it harmonize nor will it fill any compelling need in our
City. At this point in time, the only positive feature associated with this petition
is that it will fill empty space in a building. However, this advantage will only
be realized in the profits for the leaser, not the City in terms of finances or
otherwise.
Mr. McCann: Will the secretary please call the roll?
A roll call vote was taken with the following result:
Nftir
AYES: Piercecchi, Alanskas
NAYS: LaPine, Koons, McCann
ABSENT: Hale, Shane
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the MOTION FAILED. Is there an alternative motion?
On a motion by Mrs. Koons, seconded by Mr. LaPine, and approved it was
#2-31-2000 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 99-10-8-25 Big Lots by Redford Oak Plaza requesting
approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of the Zoning Ordinance in
connection with a proposal to renovate a portion of the exterior building
elevation of the commercial building located at 30000 Plymouth Road in the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 26 be approved subject to the following conditions:
1) That the exterior building elevation plan dated 1/5/99, as revised, prepared by
Consolidated Stores, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
2) That the red painted accent band, as illustrated on the submitted color
rendering dated 9/23/99, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
17516
3) That the petitioner shall correct to the Inspection Department's satisfaction
the following site deficiencies as outlined in the correspondence dated
ti.- November 8, 1999;
that the entire parking lot shall be repaired, resealed and double
striped
that the dumpsters shall be enclosed at the rear of the building
that the graffiti on the building shall be removed
that the pallets and debris behind the building shall be removed
4) That only the 111 sq. ft. "Big Lots" wall sign, as shown on the approved
elevation plan and the sign packet by all Star Signs, is hereby approved and
shall be adhered to;
5) That no part of the awning shall be illuminated;
6) That the panels of the ground sign shall be equally divided between the two
tenants at 15 sq. ft. each or no additional graphics shall be permitted;
7) That any additional signage for this site shall come back before the Planning
Commission and City Council for their review and approval.
Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion?
Mr. LaPine: I am voting for this proposal and let me tell you very very reluctantly I am doing
it. I am not happy with it. Based on what I have seen at the two locations I have
been to and based on what I was told by the first gentleman who came here and
told us, and it is just as you stated, you usually just walk in, rent a building,
dump your stuff and start selling. I am hoping you are going to renovate this
building and run a business there and that it is going to be an asset to Livonia.
This is a good area and most of the people who come into this town make
money. But let me tell you, I am going to be checking out that store and if I am
not happy with it, you are going to get some phone calls from me. You give me
your number, because I am really not happy with it but I am going along with it
because it is an empty store. It has been empty for quite a while and I am hoping
you will come in there and be a good corporate citizen and make us proud of
you.
Mrs. Koons: Mr. McCann, I brought this motion to approve, and Mr. Shanks I would also like
your phone number. I would also like to visit the store but I would also like to
say for the record, I appreciate the tenacity, the hard work, the dedication that my
fellow Commissioners who still are not happy with this proposal, have done. It
is not that I don't share some of their concerns but it is that I am basically putting
my faith in you. Seeing that you are local, you do live in this area and I am
hoping and having faith and I do want your cell phone number. Thank you.
Mr. McCann: Will the secretary please call the roll?
17517
A roll call vote was taken with the following result:
AYES: LaPine, Koons, McCann
NAYS: Piercecchi, Alanskas
ABSENT: Hale, Shane
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It
will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. Thank you.
ITEM #8 Motion to hold a Public Hearing Bobby's Country House
Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is a Motion to hold a
Public Hearing to consider the rezoning of Bobby's Country House located on the north side of
Five Mile Road between Ellen Drive and Golfview Drive in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 17
from PL to C-2.
On a motion by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Alanskas, and unanimously approved, it was
#2-32-2000 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 23.01(b)
of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended,
does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine
`.• whether or not to rezone the City owned property located on the north side of
Five Mile Road between Ellen Drive and Golfview Drive in the Southeast 1/4 of
Section 17 from PL to C-2.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that, notice of such hearing shall be given as provided
in 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as
amended, and that thereafter there shall be a report and recommendation
submitted to the City Council.
A roll call vote was taken with the following result:
AYES: LaPine, Koons, Alanskas, Piercecchi, McCann
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Hale, Shane
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
ITEM #9 Approval of the Minutes - 798th Regular Meeting
Mr. Piercecchi, Acting Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Approval of the
Minutes of the 798th Regular Meeting held on January 11, 2000.
17518
On a motion by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Alanskas, and unanimously approved, it was
New #2-33-2000 RESOLVED that, the Minutes of the 798th Regular Meeting held by the City
Planning Commission of January 11, 2000, are hereby approved.
A roll call vote was taken with the following result:
AYES: Alanskas, Piercecchi, LaPine, Koons, McCann
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Michael Hale, H. G. Shane
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted the 800th Regular Meeting held on
February 8, 2000, was adjourned at 9:20 P.M.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
C 2 c 2.
Dan Piercecchi, Acting Secretary
ATTEST: '
J. es C. Cann, Chairman
r..