Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPUBLIC HEARING - PH 2016-02-10 - REZONING - AJAMCO INC CITY OF LIVONIA PUBLIC HEARING Minutes of Meeting Held on Wednesday, February 10, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________ A Public Hearing of the Council of the City of Livonia was held at the City Hall Auditorium on Wednesday, February 10, 2016. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kathleen E. McIntyre, President Brandon M. Kritzman, Vice President Scott Bahr Maureen Miller Brosnan Brian Meakin Cathy K. White MEMBERS ABSENT: Jim Jolly OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Taormina, Director of Planning Todd Zilincik, City Engineer Paul Bernier, Assistant City Attorney Bonnie J. Murphy, CER-2300, Certified Electronic Recorder This is a Public Hearing relative to Petition 2015-12-01-11 submitted by Ajamco, Inc. to rezone the north 100 feet of the property located at the west side of Middlebelt Road between Munger Avenue and Six Mile Road, 16825 Middlebelt Road in the Northeast ¼ of Section 14 from P (Parking) to C-2 (General Business). And again, the City Clerk has mailed notices to all persons in this area affected and have fulfilled all the other requirements of Ordinance No. 543 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Public Hearing was called to order at 7:25 p.m. with President Kathleen McIntyre presiding. There were five people in the audience. The Public Hearing is now open for comments. Please state your name and address before making your comments. McIntyre: We’ll begin with Mr. Taormina. Taormina: Thank you, Madam President. This is again a rezoning request involving a parcel of land that is located on Middlebelt Road just south of Six Mile Road. The overall property is roughly 1.2 acres in area and it includes approximately 165 feet of frontage on Middlebelt Road. And this is, actually it’s part of the former site of Moy’s Chinese Restaurant, Japanese Steak House, and the zoning on this property was established in 1970, actually in connection with a request to expand the restaurant at that time. And the parking district that we’re looking at this evening, the area 2 highlighted on the map was established in order to accommodate additional off street parking that was needed to accommodate the expansion. Now this site lies as you can see, it’s surrounded by commercial zoning to the north and to the south. When the property was originally demolished and then split for development, Tim Horton’s was developed on the southerly portion of the property. There’s a Teacher’s Store directly to the north of this site, there’s RUF zoning in the form of two churches lying to the northwest and to the southwest and then if you look across Middlebelt Road you’ll see a combination of commercial zoning including OS (Office Service) and C-2 (General Business). So the area to be rezoned is roughly 8/10ths of an acre in area and includes 100 feet of frontage on Middlebelt Road and the purpose of the rezoning is to facilitate the development of the site with a credit union or bank that would contain drive-thru facilities. Banks and credit unions are treated as a permitted use within the C-2 Zoning District but the drive-thru facilities do require waiver use approval. A conceptual site plan has been submitted with this rezoning petition and it does show how the site might be developed should the zoning move forward. This plan shows about a 2,800 square foot building that would be located near the middle of the property with parking on the north and south sides. A bank of this size would require roughly twenty-four parking spaces. The plan shows ample parking, thirty spaces. The drive-up operation for the bank would be located on the back side of the building or the west side of the building, there’s four drive-up service units shown on the plan and you can see that direct access to the site would be provided by Middlebelt Road but there would also be secondary access or linked access with the Tim Horton’s business immediately to the south. Future Land Use Plan does show this property as general commercial, just to refresh everyone’s memories on this, this is actually the second request to have this property rezoned to C-2. It was back in 2007 that the same Petitioner requested the rezoning from P to C-2 under separate petition. There was a first reading given on that rezoning back on October th 10 of 2007 and then second reading and roll call were put on hold pending a review of the site plan. At the time that rezoning plan was proposed, the Petitioner did not have a specific use for the property and never did submit any plans to develop the site and because of the significant lapse in time it was decided that a new petition should be filed for your review. The Planning Commission is recommending approval of the rezoning as submitted. Thank you. McIntyre: Thank you. Mr. Meakin. Meakin: Through the Chair to Mark, do we plan on doing the same thing, holding up a site plan until one is submitted, would you hold them up until they’re both approved at the same time? 3 Taormina: I think it would be appropriate. I think it’s been Council’s customary method of assuring that a site plan is submitted that is consistent with the plan that’s presented at the time of rezoning so if it’s your desire to do that, that’s fine. Meakin: Is the Petitioner here? Taormina: He is. Meakin: I’d like to ask him how close he is to having a signed agreement with a financial institution. Ajami: Good evening. McIntyre: Good evening. Ajami: No, not as yet. McIntyre: Could you please introduce yourself, sir? Ajami: That’s fine. Ali K. Ajami, 12950 South Murrow Circle, Dearborn, Michigan. McIntyre: Thank you. Meakin: So basically we’d be going through the same process we went through in 2007? Ajami: In 2007 there wasn’t anything complete, in 2007 we were negotiating with Fifth Third Bank and the banking industry collapsed, you should remember at the time, so they put everything on hold. Now we are seriously discussing this issue with a representative of a financial institution. Meakin: So you have someone that you’re actually negotiating with at this time? Ajami: Yes, me and the architect as well are involved, my architect. Meakin: Well, I think the C-2 is appropriate zoning for this lot and I’ll offer an approving resolution. McIntyre: Does anyone else have any questions for the Petitioner? All right. Do you have anything to add before we go to the audience, sir? Ajami: No. Thank you. McIntyre: Thank you. Would anyone else from the audience like to speak on this item? All right, seeing none, we will close this item. Sir, I just wanted to 4 make sure that you are aware that you will need to be present at the th voting meeting which is Wednesday, March 9, 2016. Ajami: Yes, I will be there. th McIntyre: Wednesday, March 9. Ajami: Thank you. McIntyre: All right. Thank you very much. With that, we will close the public hearing. As there were no further questions or comments, the Public Hearing was declared closed at 7:32 p.m. SUSAN M. NASH, CITY CLERK