The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPLANNING MINUTES 1991-07-23 11710 MINUTES OF THE 627th REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA wr On Tuesday, July 23, 1991, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 627th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia Michigan. Mr. Jack Engebretson, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with approximately 250 interested persons in the audience. Members present: William LaPine Jack Engebretson Herman Kluver Brenda Lee Fandrei Conrad Gniewek R. Lee Morrow Donald Vyhnalek Raymond W. Tent Members absent: James C. McCann Messrs. H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director, and Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner TV, were also present. Mr. Engebretson informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and decide the question. If a petition involves a waiver of use request and the request is denied, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City Council, otherwise the petition is terminated. The Planning Commission holds the only public hearing on a preliminary plat and/or a vacating petition. Planning Commission resolutions do not become effective until seven days after the resolutions are adopted. The Planning Commission has reviewed the petitions upon their filing and have been furnished by the staff with approving and denying `'' resolutions. The Commission may use them or not use them depending upon the outcome of the hearing tonight. Ms. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 91-5-2-14 by Michael S. Downes & Assoc. requesting waiver use approval to construct a single family cluster development on property located on the west side of Harrison Avenue between Five Mile Road and Broadmoor Avenue in the SW 1/4 of Section 13. Mr. Engebretson: We have had a previous Public Hearing on this particular issue and because this case is governed by a Consent Degree entered into by the City of Livonia, the developer and the circuit court, there are some things about this proposal that are certain to happen. There are 83 cluster units going to this area. The developer, however, must abide by and take into consideration all health, safety and welfare issues as determined by the city ordinance. At the Last public hearing the petitioner held a firm line on what they would or wouldn't do. So the petitioner has reconsidered his point of view and asked that we reconsider this item. Tonight we are going to deal only with those parts that address the changes we asked for. We will not be discussing road patterns, density and any of those other things tonight. Now we are going to deal with those things, mainly sidewalks and on-site parking. 4.. 11711 Mr. Bakewell presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Shane: Depicted on the screen you can see an outline of the development as it is proposed in terms of a street plan and in terms of the location of units. Also we have a display copy which shows a detailed site plan and there are three basic areas which have changed since the last time it was considered. 1. Provides a system of internal walkways on both sides of each of the streets and a walkway which goes out to Harrison Avenue and Rayburn. 2. They have added 24 additional off street parking spaces strategically placed throughout the plan. 3. Provided for a detailed cross section of the private road the way it would be developed. This is an 83 unit project, 42 one-story and 41 two-story buildings, all contained in approximately 28 clusters. All are two bedrooms. The parking, the sidewalks and the cross section have been added. We have one new piece of correspondence and this is a piece which was directed to Michael Downes from the Fire Marshal of the City of Livonia: Dear Sir: Per our telephone conversation on Tuesday, July 23, 1991, regarding the above referenced single family cluster development, a road 28 ft. wide is adequate and poses no problem for arriving fire apparatus in an event of an emergency. Michael Downes, 23332 Orchard Lake Road, Farmington Hills: I am the architect and the petitioner for the Southwood Construction Company. Thank you for your reconsideration of this situation. We had a long discussion with my client after our last meeting and we have come into some conclusions as far as what the sidewalk situation should be. Since that time, between Mr. Nagy, Mr. Shane, myself and the developer, we have redone the site plan as to the pedestrian situation and what I have is the drawing which I will show to you. As you can see from the previous drawing, the configuration of the buildings have remained the same per the Consent Agreement and the drawing approved by the court. The roadway system has also not changed. What I have added to the drawing has been a walk system that leads from Harrison into the site and then around the entire site on the interior and around the entire site on the exterior with a connection from this cul-de-sac and the other cul-de-sac. I have also added six four-car extra parking spaces to distribute in case some guests come in. Essentially those were the remaining two situations that the Planning Commission had discussed. We made those corrections with the approval of the Planning Department. Ms. Fandrei: At the northeast corner where another person's property comes close to the road, there is a break at the sidewalk by quite a distance. Why is there such a wide range? Mr. Downes: In the first place there is nothing back there. This is the rear yard of that particular house. The reason there's a break in the sidewalk is because our roadway comes right against this property line. Ms. Fandrei: Why don't you come closer to the property line? 11712 Mr. Dowries: I wouldn't want people walking that close to a neighbor's property line. Secondly, pedestrian traffic is going to come in from Harrison. It can't come in here and go around. That was one of the things that Mr. Shane came up with. I don't see why we can't extend it to the property line. Ms. Fandrei: I would prefer seeing it come closer to the property line. ft doesn't make sense to end it where it does. Mr. Share: The fact is that because of the configuration of the street, it touches another property line. What we are trying to accomplish here is to get people from the interior of the site to Harrison Road. Whether they cross the street from the property line or a little further back, they still have to cross the street because they can't cross that spot where the property lines meet. We felt that the further away from someone else's property you walk across the street, the better you are. Mr. Tent: I am pleased you put sidewalks in. Thank you for that. The sprinkling system, will that be sprinkled as far as the open spaces are concerned? Mr. Downes: I can't really give you an exact answer to that. I can tell you that in the previous projects my client has done, we have sprinkled all of the grass area. Mr. Tent: Does this show on the plat? if not, I would like to have that added. Mr. Downes: I am realty reluctant to add that without having discussed it with my client because that never came up. That would normally come up �• during the course of final engineering drawings. Mr. Tent: All it. would be is a notation that you would sprinkle this area. Mr. Shane: Maybe I can help. One thing we do not have for this project is a landscape plan. The approving resolution requires a call back of a landscape plan to be approved and at that time we can discuss the sprinkling system. Mr. Downe: And by that time I will discuss it with my client. Mr. LaPine: With the adding of the additional 24 parking spaces, with the adding of the sidewalks, we still have basically four parking spots on site for each unit, two in the garage and two in the approach. All units can utilize the 24 spaces for visitors. Mr. Downes: That's correct. Mr. Morrow: Is this a cluster mailbox situation? Mr. Downes: Yes, it is. Mr. Morrow: Will you show us where that is and how it will work. 11713 Mr. Dowries: I had a. discussion with the postmaster of the City of Livonia and at his request I have located along the entrance of the main driveway in, and of course what will. happen is the postal truck will pull up to these boxes, open from the back and fill up these 84 mail boxes. The residents will come in here and either park their car at their dwelling and walk back, or park their car here `w and run back in. The sidewalk does get to the mail boxes. Mr. Engebretson: The parking issue four per unit, two in the garage and two in the driveway, plus 24 scattered on site - at the last public tearing, Mr. Nagy addressed this issue and this is from the minutes of our last public hearing, page 11679: "the association will decide whether they will allow on street or off street parking within the roadway, but the City will not regulate it by the 1tuceiuent of signs because as indicated these are now private roads not public roads." Mr. Downes: As a matter of further enlightenment, I had a discussion with the f.re iaarshal. and he indicated to me that on projects of this type Jet the city does not like to come in here and request that the streets become fire lanes. They would request. .instead that we post with no parking signs on the street in which case the condominium association becomes the complainant if somebody parks ;n the street rather than the Fire Department. They may require the association to make the streets fire .Lanes. Lillian Edney, 15405 Harrison: I just wondered which postmaster Mr. Downes spoke with. After we received the notification, T went to the postmaster myself and asked regarding the cluster mail boxes. He said he did receive a call from him and nothing has been approved. We would prefer cluster mail boxes. We do not go house-to-house. I would ;` express my great concern that 83 boxes on Harrison would encourage everyone to use Harrison Avenue. He said he has not seen or approved of any plans that he would have cluster mail. Most young children just love to get the mail. I would hope that no parent would let a child from Rayburn walk down Harrison to prick up mail.. Mr. Engebretson: Which postmaster did you speak to? Ms. Edney: His assistant called him Mike. It was at the Middlebeit post office. Mr. Downes: I talked to Mike. I don't recall his last name. The reason he �oe ,rr't have a final plan is because there is no final plan. We ere in the process of approving the final site plan. The post office does have jurisdiction over where the mailboxes are located. After they tell me what they want, that is what we are going to put in. I don't expect anyone from Rayburn to cross over and get mail. These are for the 84 residents in our particular condominium association. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 91-5-2--74 closed. 11714 There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 91-5-2-14 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Gniewek and seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously approved, it was #7-118-91 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a reconsideration Public Hearing having been held on July 23, 1991 on Petition 91-5-2-14 by Michael S. Downes & Assoc. requesting waiver use approval to construct a single family cluster development on property located on the west side of Harrison Avenue between Five Mile Road and Broadmoor Avenue in. the SW 1/4 of Section 13, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 91-5-2-14 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the Site Plan marked Sheet 1 dated 7-23-91, as revised, prepared by Michael S. Downes, Associates, Inc. which is hereby approved and shall be adhered to and that the plan is in compliance with the Consent Judgment that indicates that this particular site is permitted the number of units as indicated and the street patterns as indicated; 2) That the Building Elevations Plans marked Sheet 3, 5, 7 and 8 dated 5-16-91 prepared by Michael S. Downes, Associates, Inc. which are hereby approved shall be adhered to; 3) That a landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for their approval within thirty (30) days of the date of this resolution; for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 20.02A and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; 3) That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Ms. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 91-6-1-13 by Truman Strong requesting to rezone property located on the southeast corner of Middlebelt Road and Graridon Avenue in the SW 1/4 of Section 36 from OS (office services) to C-1 (local business) . 11715 Mr. Bakewell presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Shane: We have a letter from our Engineering Department stating that they have no objections to the rezoning proposal. A letter from the Detroit Edison Company states they have no objection to this petition. That is the extent of our correspondence. Andrew Dillon, attorney for Dr. Strong: We wish to ask you tonight to table the petition if you would. Pursuant to a conversation I had today with Mr. Shane, I realize there may be an alternative to the actual :rezoning of the property. I would like to have a little more time to discuss the option with Dr. Strong, the property owner, and his prospective purchaser so that possibly we can avoid the rezoning and still accomplish what we would Like to and not address the concerns here. If the Commission would consider tabling it for one month, we would appreciate it, and if not we are prepared to make our proposal. tonight, but I would dearly like to have the opportunity to table it for one month. Mr. Engebret.son: As you are well aware, the Public Hearing has been announced, it has been advertised and we are really obligated to proceed with the hearing. The intensity with which we proceed of course is variable. We would certainly, at a bare minimum, look to the audience to see if there are any neighbors here for or against the petitioner as filed. We will leave it to you as to whether or not you want to proceed with your case tonight. I think you should to make the record complete, and if it is appropriate to table the item for a month as you requested, that is very likely to happen. Mr. Dillon: Would you like me to proceed with our case first or go to the .. residents? Mr. Engebretson: We would like to hear your case. Mr. Dillon: Let me ask for Dr. Strong and the prospective purchaser to please come down. Dr. Strong has owned the subject property for approximately 20 years. He has attempted to sell the property for the last ten years with no success. All the potential purchasers have complained about the zoning limitation. Originally it was PS and now it's zoned by Livonia as OS, and all his opportunities have arisen from people interested in a C-1 zoning classification. In May of 1990 there is an article in Crain's Magazine where Mr. Shane was quoted as saying that Livonia has an over supply of office space, and I think that is a problem that is well known in Livonia. I have a report here from Cushman & Wakefield that identifies Livonia as of April 1990 as having 15.6% vacancy rate of its office buildings and 100% vacancy of its speculation buildings. I think a building for its professional services such as Dr. Strong's is very difficult to rent out, in fact he built this building in December 1989. It's been in existence for 2-1/2 years and at this point it is only 25% leased. It's been sitting 75% vacant for. 2-1/2 years. Dr. Strong has been trying to find tenants for the premises for 4 years. He built the premises on 11716 spec and he's been pursuing for 4 years. The only tenants that have come to him with an interest in the property would require a variance or waiver of the OS zoning and every time they seek it, they are denied. At this time his property has rendered a burden on him, losing several thousand dollars a month, and basically the +r., property is rendered useless. He would have opportunities for tenants if it could be changed to C-1. For that reason I brought to you today a prospective purchaser who is willing to occupy the premises if it goes to C-1. His business is a TV repair business, and I will let him explain to you exactly what his business entails. Herbert Singleton, the owner of Lon's TV and VCR Service Center, Westland: Our business contains nothing more than service. We do not sell anything. A very low key type of business. I feel that in that area we would fit in very well with the residents of Livonia. Truman Strong: Lon's business does not have hardly any street traffic. It is not a business where it is depending upon traffic from up and down Middlebelt. I really believe that his type of business would cut down on the actual amount of traffic and would not present any type of parking problem. I really feel that this would be of great advantage to the neighborhood. Besides that, the building would now be owner occupied. If the building is owner occupied, the owner can pick up the trash, papers and things that are in the parking lot. When you have an absentee owner of a small size building, every week or two I have to get over there to pull the weeds and pick up the papers and in the meantime it could be an eyesore in the neighborhood. Mr. LaPine: Mr. Dillon, regarding the study from Wakefield, we have all kinds of studies. We are oversaturated with C-1 property. There is more C-1 property than there is PS property. The situation in Livonia, as with a lot of communities, a lot of developers come in here and speculators and they build buildings and they can't lease them and then they run into a problem and come to us and they want us to relieve them of their problem. I have no objections to this gentlemen going in there, because if what he is saying is `the truth, he has a low key operation. But for me tonight to rezone that property, I have a problem. South of you is some vacant land. As soon as we rezone this property, the first thing we are going to have is those people wanting their property to be rezoned to C-1. I am not in favor of rezoning any more property to C-1. What is happening is we are getting new buildings up in the north end of town, people moving from the south to the new buildings and we are getting all these eye sores, so I am not in favor of rezoning. So if you claim you talked to Mr. Shane and something can be worked out so that this operation could go in there without a rezoning, I want to hear it. Everything from West Chicago going south is now zoned Office Services, and for us now to go in to C-1 to me is just spot zoning and is not good planning. Mr. Morrow: In the Cushman & Wakefield study, did you say 15% of all of the office space in Livonia is vacant and the balance is full? 11717 Mr. Dillon: The report says 15.6% vacancy rate of existing buildings in Livonia. Mr. Morrow: Our City Assessor indicated that they consider 10-15% vacancy as full occupancy. To achieve 100% occupancy would be extremely difficult. The 10-15% vacancy rate would be to him full occupancy, not a shortfall. Mr, Kluver. : To the petitioner, when you originally petitioned the commission and you had your original zoning granted, it did conform to the future land use of the City which is OS. Sara Matusz, 29197 Grandon: I live right next door to the property you are talking about. We are going on 15 years here. When we bought our house, we bought it because the property was professional and we believe the area is good and that is where we want to live and we are not for changing to C-l. I believe what you just said--it would open up the next property and I would be surrounded by I don't know what, a party store, who knows. Mr. Vyhnalek: Three-quarters of this building is vacant. Has there been any problem with vandalism or kids parked there in the evenings or disturbance? Mrs. Matusz: No, not that I know of. One other thing I was going to mention, the property across the street has 8 office spaces and he didn't seem to have any problem filling them. There are 7 filled. He has 5 and I don't understand why he is having such a problem. Maybe if he would have built a better building he wouldn't have this problem. John F. Crocket, 29160 Grandon: About three years ago, Dr. Strong came up and wanted to change it to C-1 and we opposed it then. He said there would be no trouble with traffic. Now that he's put up a building and he's got two in there. He has a travel agency which isn't too much of a problem, but in that little cubby hole behind he has Melody Maids. He said it doesn't cause any problem with traffic, but these Melody Maids when they check in and out don't park in the parking lot and we have a tremendous problem with traffic on Middlebelt for the simple reason that Middlebelt has become more run than any street I've ever seen. We have people coming down Middlebelt Road and instead of going to the light and going east on Joy Road will go down Grandon and go down Oxbow. Now that they've paved Oxbow, we are seeing a lot more traffic going down there. Crandon takes all the traffic down to Harrison. Talk about accidents! The only fun we have is watching the accidents. They come down Middlebelt from the light at Joy Road like a bat out of hell and all of a sudden if you stop at Grandon to make a turn, you will. be hit in the rear. And if you put this C-1, the rest of them will want to go C-l. We don't need that kind of traffic. Robert Nigohosian, 29196 Grandon: I am against the rezoning. He had every 11718 chance in the world not to build that type of building. When he tried to get the rezoning before, he went and built the building anyway and he got refused then. He should have built office-type buildings and he could have rented them. If he is going to be that stubborn, then he deserves what he gets. Tom Charnley, 291.84 Grandon: I had mixed emotions until I got this thing from the lawyer. They have all. these stores here. The only thing that is not on here is the gas station. Now this changed my mind. I don't think we should change the zoning. Mr. Dillon: Dr. Strong and I did travel. the neighborhood last week and met with neighbors and at that. time there did seem to be some dissension. One of the contentions that Dr. Strong has that even the professional service businesses have the same amount of traffic as a C-1. Dr. Strong's dental office at Merriman and Schoolcraft has four offices and they generally have over 150 cars a day going through, so we don't believe that changing from OS to C-1 will change the amount of traffic. Also the comment that there is plenty of C-1 vacancy in Livonia, the fact is that Dr. Strong is approached all the time with tenants who would go in if they had a C-l. In fact we now have a purchaser who will go in if we have a C-1., so the C-1 zoning is more conducive to the owner. There was mention of spot zoning, but it already exists. One year ago today the Mid-Plaza Associates got a rezoning from OS to C-l. In 1969 the 7-Eleven got the C-1 zoning as well. Those properties are not but several hundred feet from Dr. Strong's property. I've read all the minutes from those meetings and everyone keeps saying they don't want to this because the neighbors are going to get C-1 . Dr. Strong just wants to be treated as the Mid-Plaza Associates and the owner of 7-Eleven. I don't think he is going `sr to be treated equally if you deny him the C--1 zoning because his situation is no different. Ms. Fandrei: In the past there may have been some spot zoning. We are commissioned to consider the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the City of Livonia and considering the tremendous amount of traffic in that area, I cannot be supportive of a change of zoning, but I am very strongly against any spot zoning. Our main objective besides the health, safety and welfare is planning the community and realizing that we are overburdened with commercial and OS, I couldn't be supportive of a change of zoning. Mr. Tent: Mr. Dillon, I agree with all the comments here tonight because this is really a problem area now. I was interested in what you said at the beginning of your presentation. I hate to see vacant buildings here in Livonia. You indicated you do have a tenant that could comply with with the OS zoning. If we could get a tenant in there that would comply with the OS zoning, we don't like empty buildings, we want compatible tenants. Mr. Dillon: The proposed possibility for us working around this would be to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals and ask for a waiver which would get the same business in but keep the existing zoning. Because 11719 we've gone all this way today, I don't know it it makes sense to table the matter. I don't think the neighbors object to the present purchaser. I think their objection is to the actual rezoning. If we got the waiver from the ZBA, that problem may be alleviated. I can't speak for the neighbors, and I can't speak for what the ZBA would do, but I think because we've gone down the road, we may as well continue. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 91-6-1-13 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Ms. Fandrei and unanimously approved, it was #7--119-91 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 23, 1991 on Petition 91-6-1-13 by Truman Strong requesting to rezone property located on the southeast corner of Middiebelt Road and Grandon Avenue in the SW 1./4 of Section 36 from OS to C-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 91-6-1-13 be denied for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed change of zoning is contrary to the Future Land Use Plan recommendation of office use for the subject property. 2) That the proposed change of zoning will encourage similar requests for changes of zoning all along the Middlebelt Road corridor. 3) That the proposed change of zoning represents spot zoning which is contrary to good land use planning and zoning. 4) That. the proposed change of zoning is detrimental to and not in harmony with the surrounding uses in the neighborhood. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 91-6-1-14 by Marvin Walkon, Hampik Kzirian & McDonalds Corp. requesting to rezone property located on the west side of Newburgh Road south of Five Mile Road in the NE 1/4 of Section 19 from C-i (local business) to C-2 (general business) . Mr. Bakewell presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Shane: We have a letter from the Engineering Department stating they have no objections to the proposal. We have a letter from the Detroit Edison Company stating they have no objection to the petition. We have at least 22 letters and a couple of petitions from various individuals in the particular area and unless there is an w.. 11720 objection, I would suggest that I :read who the letter is from and give you an idea of whether they approve or disapprove. Mr. Engebretson: Each of these letters will become an important part of the record and our purpose in considering hearing a synopsis of each `\rr of these letters is in the interest of time. However, we are prepared to stay here for the duration. Is there an objection to the proposal? (none) Mr. Shane: The first letter is from Donna McMillan, president of St. Edith's Parent-Teacher Guild. She is opposed because of the traffic. We have children who walk to school. Also McDonald's would encourage people to use our parking lot for additional parking or for turnarounds. A letter from Mary Schoenborn of 37644 Mallory strongly opposes a McDonald's. She is concerned about school children attending elementary school and their safety. Concerned about the increased traffic in the area and the kinds of people drawn to this type of restaurant. A letter from I.. A. Rohrig, 15131 Newburgh Road opposes a. McDonald's because of additional traffic, school buses entering and leaving. Traffic flow increasing on Newburgh Road. A long letter from Tom and Pat Plenda, 15614 Blue Skies Ct. N. strongly opposes a McDonald's because of the safety of the children who walk or ride their bikes to school. Concerned about the school 's proximity to McDonald's as a temptation for loitering. A letter from J. A. Plank, 15123 Farmbrook, Plymouth is opposed to a rezoning. He writes that a request for a McDonald's at Six Mile and Haggerty was rejected by Northville. Being a high traffic area already, this would only add to the existing conditions. The proximity to a church, elementary school and a senior citizen's complex is inappropriate. We have some letters addressed to the Mayor. Mr. & Mrs. Friend are opposed to a McDonald's. They tell of the young people using the tennis courts in back of their home and their littering and the proximity of a McDonald's would have a detrimental effect on the tennis courts and their cleanup. Also mentions that there are three pizza places and a chicken and ribs place besides the Farmer Jack which has fast food. From Mr. Valentine Krawczyk, 14833 Bassett, to the Mayor. He is opposed and mentions the low water pressure. A letter from Frank & Mary Hughes of 15156 Blue Skies, mentions the amount of trash that is thrown in the neighborhood near the Five Mile and Haggerty McDonald's. Also, the noise and traffic would increase. There is also a petition that reads as follows: We, the undersigned, would also like to protest the re-zoning of a parcel 11721 of land at Newburgh and Five Mile Roads for the use of a McDonald's restaurant. (This is signed by six persons, all residing on Blue Skies) Next is a letter from Manufacturers Bank. Gentlemen: Please be Nor advised that Manufacturers Bank has reviewed the preliminary site plan for the proposed McDonald's restaurant at Five Mile and Newburgh Roads. We have no objection to the plan as proposed. That is signed by Gregory J. Demanski, Vice President and Senior Properties Officer. A letter from Susie's Flowers & Gifts reads: Please be advised that we are a tenant at the above mentioned property. It is our opinion that a McDonald's Restaurant on the adjoining outlot would increase the customer base for the adjoining shopping center. It is further our opinion that building additional stores on the adjoining property would have a negative effect. A letter from Century 21, Hartford South, Inc. , signed by Frank D'Angelo states that a McDonald's would increase the customer base for the adjoining shopping center and building additional stores on the adjoining property would have a negative effect. From Michele A. Nicola, president of The Party Specialists, says it would increase the customer base for the adjoining shopping center. Donald Schmid, 16771 Park, states that having 4 children and living within 2 miles of the location is in total support of a new McDonald's. We have more than enough shopping in the area, but not nearly enough fast food restaurants. Nr.• Travel Masters, Inc. would welcome the possibility of added traffic. That is signed by Diana DeLuca-Socha, CTC, president. A letter from Farmer Jack/A&P Supermarkets advises that we believe that this use would constitute an excellent addition as a co-tenancy for this shopping center. That is signed by Ted J. Simon, Vice President. Steve Kuhlman of 39007 Grennada strongly endorses and looks forward to the completion of a McDonald's. With the closing of McDonald's at 5 Mile and Haggerty, the area would be left without a drive-through restaurant in the area. With a financially strapped shopping plaza in that area, such an addition would provide additional support where it is needed most. Elizabeth Curl, 35499 Leon, would be in favor of a McDonald's at Five Mile and Newburgh. She thinks it is needed much more than another shopping center. From Gary M. Stein, Vice President of Real Estate for Perry Drug Stores writes that as a tenant at the shopping center, it is their opinion that a McDonald's restaurant on the adjoining outlot would 11722 be a. complementary use for the property and would serve to increase the customer traffic for our center. William F. Ul.le, III of Woodside Drive supports the rezoning for a McDonald's and does not believe that the added traffic would be a burden on the residents and it is important that the corner not be allowed to become an outdated strip mall. Craig Gates of Roycroft Street. believes that a McDonald's would be convenient for the residents of the surrounding area, especially since the Haggerty Road location is scheduled to close. He does not. believe that the increased traffic would hinder the quality of life for the residents. Next is a petition which reads as follows: We, the undersigned members of St. Edith Church, support rezoning and waiver use approval to allow a McDonald's Restaurant on the west side of Newburgh Road south of Five Mile Road (between St. Edith Church and the Manufacturers Bank) . That is signed by 25 persons. (mother petition reads: We, the undersigned residents of Livonia support rezoning and waiver use approval to allow a McDonald's Restaurant on the west side of Newburgh Rd. south of Five Mile Rd. (between St. Edith Church and the Manufacturers Bank) . We believe that this restaurant service should be easily accessible to our area and can replace the McDonald's restaurant which is located at Five Mile Rd. west of 1-275, which is closing. That is signed by about 150 persons of various addresses. Next, a petition reading: We, the undersigned employees of Madonna University support rezoning and waiver use approval to 104111. allow a McDonald's Restaurant on the west side of Newburgh Road south of Five Mile Road (between St. Edith Church and the Manufacturers Bank) . We believe that this restaurant service should be easily accessible to our area and can replace the McDonald's restaurant which is located at Five Mile Road west of 1-275, which will be closed. That is signed by 23 persons. And finally a petition reading: We, the undersigned members of the Castle Gardens Subdivision and/or the Castle Gardens Swim Club support rezoning and waiver use approval to allow a McDonald's Restaurant on the east side of Newburgh Road south of Five Mile Road (between St. Edith Church and the Manufacturers Bank) . We believe that this restaurant service should be easily accessible to our area and can replace the McDonald's restaurant which is located at Five Mile Road west of I-275, which will be closed. That is signed by 4 persons. Mr. Engebretson: This petition is a. matter of rezoning from one classification to another, namely C-1 to C-2 which has permitted uses which aren't allowable in the C-1 district. The issue is zoning, not the tenant, however, it will be difficult to keep those two issues separate. If the rezoning happens to be successful, it moves on to the council, they hold a public hearing, they act on the 11723 matter. , it goes to the Law Department for a preparation of an ordinance, it comes back to Council and gets a first reading. Subsequently, at some meeting it will have a second reading at which point it then becomes published in the Livonia Observer and the ordinance takes effect in due course. There's a parallel that `rr goes with this case, that being a waiver use because a restaurant is not a permitted use in C-2 zoning. It requires additional approval. City Council will sometimes hold up the second reading until they see the site plan so that they are guaranteed so the City gets what they were promised. Alan Heimkamp, attorney, representing McDonald's Corporation and Mr. Marvin Walkon, Developer: I know there are many people who wish to speak. I will keep my comments briefly at this time, mainly for the purpose of associating those present with the basic proposal and site plan. This is a 1.9 acre site. The location has been identified. The building in question would be 4841 square feet which is 5.9% of the entire site. The height is 16'5", series 90 restaurant which we are proposing, same as the one on Middlebelt. The decor will change, but basic store is what is proposed. It will allow seating of approximately 100 people. The site plan calls for 70 parking spaces. Landscaping exceeds the 15% required. The restaurant will employ 50-70 people. One significant difference is it calls for a face-to-face drive thru. People coming through will place an order with a person, not a squawk box. There are three primary reasons for the proposal: The current restaurant at Five Mile between Haggerty and 1.-275 will be closing, as well as Oasis and all the small businesses there. This restaurant is proposed to replace that restaurant. This is a family restaurant to benefit northwest Livonia where historically we have had none. We believe that this proposal is crucial to the vitality of that corner. As a resident of the neighborhood at Five Mile and Levan, I'm here to tell you that the worse thing that can happen to the neighborhood, and therefore to the property values of our homes, is for stores to close, and our strip center. at Five and Levan sat idle for 2 years. People talk about safety and concerns, talk about glass in the parking lot, talk about kids congregating there. It wasn't until Frank's Nursery came in that we turned that corner around. Newburgh is a strip center that is in bankruptcy. Three stores have closed and there is a threat that there will be more closing. Third and finally, we feel that. this restaurant is preferable to what you may see in the current C-1 zoning. As was noted earlier, we have an over-abundance of C-1 and under C-1 you can have music stores, you can have delicatessens, tobacco stores. Please weigh that and consider the concerns for kids safety and compare that with our proposal tonight. Mr. Morrow: Is there any truth of McDonald's going into Six Mile and Haggerty? Mr. Helmkamp: That is Northville Township and my understanding is that there is one proposed for there. There was litigation. No building permit has been pulled as yet, but I think it is fair to say that there will be a McDonald's there at some point. 11724 Mr. Morrow: So the area will not be quite as devoid of McDonald's as one might think. Mr. Helmkamp: It depends upon what radius you want to take. In the proximity of northwest Livonia, there are none. Mr. Tent: Will this be corporation owned or privately owned? Mr, Helmkamp: it will he a corporate store, not franchised. Mr. Tent: So you do have some privately owned McDonald's in Livonia? Mr. Helmkamp: There are some .franchises. The trend is to corporate-owned stores. That is preferable because that allows me to stand here and give you more assurance as to quality control and maintenance. Al Fadool, 14523 Newburgh: I am against the rezoning. I have a petition here that is against that and it is signed by the majority of citizens on Newburgh with 120 signatures. One of the things we can take a look at is the character of Newburgh Road. There is not a single fast food restaurant from West Bloomfield through Livonia into Westland. McDonald's presently has a store at Eight Mile and Haggerty Road which. is close to northwest Livonia. McDonald's also has a habit of having 99 year leases on their stores. Clearly, this is McDonald's decision to close. They can serve the community by keeping their store open. Today in Crain's Magazine announcing companies leaving Livonia, going to Plymouth. What is going to go up in the other city, I believe it 's Northville, where the McDonald's is now? Why is Northville getting rid of McDonald's? We are in competition with other cities. McDonald's passed around a flyer that says there is not going to be any increase in traffic. We have heard from every single retail person that it is going to bring increased traffic. You mentioned about relieving the burden of businesses with the bankruptcy. It's up to the individuals who own the store to make it profitable and acceptable. Newburgh Road is at 40 miles per hour. It's mostly residential. There is a sign that says trucks are not allowed down this road. Clearly that's a reason that they don't want to have traffic. Not only do I have traffic, I can't get out of my driveway. I have trash on the property, I've even had a. bullet come through my front door. We do not need additional traffic. There was no notice to the residents in the form of a letter, instead there was a sign put up under two trees. The other people here for other petitions got a list of what actually C-1 and C-2 was. Two years before Frank's Nursery, the area's properties experienced the highest rate of appreciation ever for those homes. Being a residential loan officer for a local bank, I understand how main roads and what businesses can affect the value of property. There's a recent home for sale not five blocks down and it did not sell. Right now we have homes being built at Seven Mile and Newburgh. Let's take and put a McDonald's at Seven Mile and Newburgh and see how many of those homes sell. The reason people buy homes is for the neighborhoods as they are, not as they will be. The people do not want a. McDonald's. The jobs they 11725 bring are $5.00 an hour jobs. Your property values will decrease. I don't see anything wrong with a record store or a record shop. Mr. Engebretson: Relative to your statement that property values would decrease with the presence of a McDonald's there, what evidence would you back that up with? Mr. Fadool: The Society of Real Estate Appraisers. Any fast food restaurant, or any commercial property that exhibits a lot of traffic has an effect on value. Right now we have property values in there of $90,000 to $100,000. You could not get that on any of the homes on Newburgh Road. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Shane, he also gave reference to the fact that no one was given notice. Would you please review what the requirements are relative to giving notice and how the City has complied with that requirement. Mr. Shane: There are three ways in which a notice is given. There is a sign put on the site, there is a notice in the local newspaper at least 15 days prior to the hearing, and third, a notice is sent to all property owners within 500 feet by letter. Mr. Engebretson: Were all of those things done? Mr. Shane: Yes. Mr. LaPine: The gentleman mentioned the sign. That came about because of the action of this body, plus the City Council, for the reason that people said they didn't know the rezoning was going on. I had no problem seeing that sign. Regarding the $5.00 an hour wage, my 'sow son going to college worked at McDonald's and I think it is good employment for teenagers who want to work summer months. Mr. Fadool: The main thing is that it is McDonald's choice to move the restaurant. Karl Burnett, 31705 Haldane: Recently I was contacted regarding the rezoning issue. Immediately I asked for those people to describe to me the issues and facts and why and what might happen if it is. As soon as they advised me that it might. be a McDonald's restaurant, I. reminded them that I was aware of the one that exists over at I-275 and Five Mile Road. I believe that that property is probably going to rezone with the closing of those businesses. Then it was described to me that the mall we are talking about is under receivership and what they are looking for in that area is for something to boost the traffic and reinforce the property values in that area. I asked if the McDonald's doesn't get in, what might? They proposed that there might be another strip mall or something like that. About the traffic and safety concerns expressed tonight, my thoughts were that whether it's a McDonald's or strip mall would produce traffic and the same kind of exposure. Right now I think a study would reveal that most of the patrons that go to the Five Mile McDonald's right now are better than half 11726 Livonia residents. It might be a real shot in the arm for that mall.. If we have another strip mall there in the future, well we have plenty of those places in the City right now. It's hard to keep the retail space occupied. McDonald's I think is a viable organization. If I had my choice between McDonald's or a strip Nor mall - I think of McDonald's as a very good corporation. As a police officer reserve in this town, I also have the privilege of being on duty in October of every year distributing McDonald's good goblin award to children. I am speaking in support of it obviously, I think it is the right thing to do. This will not distract, but enhance the area. Nick Salino, a neighbor of the new McDonald's on Middlebelt Road: I come here from. a businessman's perspective as one who knows that they moved in there a month ago. My business turned right around. I have read large increases since they started. They are very good neighbors. They work with the existing businesses that surround them. They included us in their grand opening. They run a very clean operation. They are very family oriented. They majority of the time I see senior citizens there. Charles Gargle, 14408 Lyons. I have lived in Livonia 7 years. I am for the petition and I think that according to economic conditions we need something like McDonald's to help out. It is a good location. Diane Secen, 19273 Glen Eagle: I am a frequent shopper in that area. Up and down Newburgh is our regular traffic pattern and I am in favor of the petition. I am concerned that there are three empty stores currently in that shopping center. There is another one empty across the street near the Daman Hardware. I feel that a strong shopping district there is the best support for the property values. 1 am definitely for this petition. Phil Bommarito, 19273 Glen Eagle: I am for the rezoning also simply because I think it would be good for the community. The three stores that are vacant there already shows how the area is going down. With the McDonald's going in there, I think it will boost the area. Jim Scheick, Pastor of St. Edith: We are the largest land owner next to the proposed site. For your consideration we have a petition signed by 550 people from St. Edith' s Catholic Church who are also residents of Livonia. The petition reads "We respectfully request you decline rezoning of Petition 91-6-1-14 for the property located on the west side Newburgh Road, south of Five Mile in the NE 1/4 of Section 19 from C-1 to C-2 for the following reasons: In the past, spot rezoning for other properties in Livonia have been disapproved. For example, in his letter of June 17, 1991 to Livonia citizens, Mayor Bennett during his first term of Mayor, enumerated his accomplishments achieved during his first term as mayor which included among other things "a veto of a McDonald's at a proposed rezoning of several parcels from commercial to office for residential classification." 2. We are deeply concerned that the construction of a fast food restaurant adjacent to our property would jeopardize the safety, health and general welfare 11727 of our children. That 's 300 children in our school. Senior citizens--there are 100 residents behind the parish at Villa Maria complex. Because of the wall, they have to walk around the area that will be the entrance and exit to the McDonald's. 3. In June of 1990, we dedicated an all new $2.6 million facility which included all design and landscaping features required by the City of Livonia. At that time they even held up our plans because of the traffic. They were concerned that we wanted too wide of an area to get into the church. It is disturbing to think that the sight line of our beautiful church would be compromised by the construction of a fast food restaurant flying multi-colored pendants. 4. The incremental traffic generated by a fast food restaurant would further add to the Five Mile-Newburgh intersection traffic congestion. 5. Environmental concerns--littering, potential misuse of our church property. We see that already from the shopping area. We have a gazebo and a public park out there in front and we know the patrons could move over there too. We are still collecting petitions. We heard from Dale Jur_is.in that there were going to be some changes and we certainly would have mobilized our efforts, but it is hard to find where all the people are, so we had short meetings with McDonald's, who we do believe are good neighbors. We are not against McDonald's moving into the area. It is that spot. There is constant change in that area. McDonald's has offered a lot of great ideas to improve the area, but that spot, and it is the spot you're changing rather than the whole area, is immediately adjacent to where all our people pull up, and it could happen three times a day. The greatest traffic is peak time, 12:00 to 1:00. That is also the time when buses are loading for Kindergarten. We are not against McDonald's, but we would rather see it in the shopping center, or behind the tennis courts or Now maybe the area of Five Mile and Levan. From our research we found that there were a lot of problems at the Northville McDonald's as well as the Plymouth McDonald's. There is a lot of concern from a lot of our people that some of that same traffic will overflow into our area. I live right there and I can already see that kids skating are going into our new parking lot. It's becoming an arena. We also have a constant problem with trucks. We are constantly chasing out trucks and with McDonald's we are going to have more trucks. They drive over our new landscaping. We see a lot of accidents. We know there has been a traffic study, but we are questioning some of this because we know the traffic study was done on Saturday which is a low day for our. area. We believe McDonald's are good neighbors and there are some senior citizens that would value it, but overall we are against a change of zoning because it would affect our facility and also because we have children involved. Also this coming in the middle of summer, most of our parents are away on vacation so it is very difficult to even contact them and to get their viewpoint. McDonald's encouraged us to meet and not publicize. We have gone along with that until recently when we started collecting petitions because obviously they have done a lot of publicity on it. Mr. Engebretson: You said you did not receive a notice? 11728 Fr. Scheick: I did receive a letter about two weeks ago, but when you are trying to get an opinion (1 don't make all the decisions) , we should certainly get other voices. We put it in the paper. Many people are away and there isn't really a chance to get their opinion, so we made that effort by our petition. err• Mr. Engebretson: The petition that you have with the 500 signatures, have you filed that? Fr. Scheick: No, we have them here tonight. We are still collecting signatures and will file some of the petitions tonight. Mr. LaPine: Your school is K through what? Fr. Scheick: K through 8. Mr. LaPirle: You say you have 300 students. How many ride bikes, walk, and how many go by bus? Fr. Scheick: I couldn't answer that. Mr. Vyhnaiek: About how many parishioners do you have? Fr. Scheick: About 1800. Jim Karas, 9399 Patton: I have lived in Livonia for 23 years. I think McDonald's is a good corporate citizen. I think they are willing to work with the community regarding landscaping, architecture, surroundings and maintaining the property. This isn't the first time that. McDonald's has worked with groups that were initially resistant with becoming neighbors, but they have proved themselves over the years with a record of good citizenship. A comment on the McDonald's that was built. about a year ago on the Ann Arbor Road, Ann Arbor Trail area - that store replaced a decrepit beverage store, and I think if you were to poll people in that neighborhood, they would be unanimous in that. McDonald's is a vast improvement in that location. These are the fact: The shopping center is in bankruptcy. The property we are talking about is zoned commercial right now. It could be used for a strip center, furniture store, ice cream parlor, arcade video store and the like. In these uses, there would be no hearing, no public debate. Is it better for the neighborhood to have another strip center, or is it better to have a stable McDonald's? Let's talk about property values. Again, this center is in bankruptcy. It needs help. McDonald's would help stabilize the other businesses. That's the reason many of them wrote letters. Think about the property values of the neighborhood. What happens if the center goes under? McDonald's will maintain the property value and probably increase property value. McDonald's does charity work both nationally and locally in the schools and in the community and, of course, with Ronald McDonald house. It is going to support our neighborhood, our charities and our community and our activities. This is a movement from one location to another. McDonald's at Five & Haggerty has been sold as part of a large 11729 development and this would be a replacement. As a Livonia resident, I am quite upset at this flyer. It is an unsigned flyer. As far as I am concerned, the flyer is a pack of lies and I would like to know who the lie mongers are in Livonia. The first thing they say is that McDonald's will lower the property ♦.• values. I disagree. A bankrupted center will lower the property values. Then they insinuate that the City did something wrong in not sending letters to all the neighbors, but the City has complied with the ordinance of sending letters within 500 feet. I think it. is one thing to make an honest, legitimate mistake and I think it is another thing to tell outright lies to people. Let's stick with the facts. Patrick Devlin, 15799 Southampton: This flyer passed around tonight to the crowd that reads "People come first in Livonia ahead of opportunistic developers from Southfield", I would like to go on record that .I am saddened by the underlying tone of what this flyer is trying to say. One has to wonder what its author's intent was. In my estimation, it just falls short of an attempt that looks and smells like an attack on an ethnic group. What I am in favor of is what McDonald's will represent, and that is jobs for the people in the surrounding community. In response to the first speaker, what's wrong with a tobacco store moving in? As the father of two children and with a choice, I 'll take McDonald's. Madaline Dobis, I live on Newburgh Road: I am coming to you today as a working mother. I have lived in Livonia for 14 years. My children have been raised in Livonia. I have had kids in both Catholic and public schools. One of my greatest fears is that when I go to work in i the morning is the safety of my children. Every day I go at the same time. I leave within five minutes. The children ti.. leave the same time every day. They walk to school. I am very concerned about a place like McDonald's moving in an area like this where my children can be seen leaving the house at the same time every day. I am very concerned about. the all girl school across the street. They have a lot of sports activities and some of these do run into the evening. They run track and they don't all come in as a group. It really frightens me to think that someone could be coming in to the area and see this. There is also a wooded area in the neighborhood. There are also the older people in the area that walk the streets during the day and evening. Once we put in the Jacobson's shopping center, we bring in people to Livonia. Right now there is no place for these people to stop. It frightens me to think that we are going to allow a place for people with maybe not the best intentions to stop. I would also like to say that in San Diego 21 people were shot at a McDonald's. That person probably didn't live in the neighborhood. About a year ago in Mt. Clemens, 3 girls were abducted from McDonald's, and their abductor probably did not live in the area. Recently a nun was killed and he stopped at Hardee's to examine the contents of her purse. If you are truly concerned about the health, safety and welfare of the people of Livonia and our children, please do not approve this. I feel very strongly 11730 that we are creating a very potentially dangerous situation for our children. Joe Medved, 14102. Blue Skies: I happened to notice that sign when I was jogging one day and I became very concerned because I know there is another McDonald's a. mile away. What I did is call City Council and talked to a few people and I had a meeting with Mr. Walkon. A lot of people that support this claim that it is going to bring in business to the Farmer Jack complex. My concern is that I think most people that go to McDonald's are impulse buyers. They go in there, get their food and leave. I don't think they go to McDonald's and say I'm going to the travel agent, or I'm going to buy some balloons, or do my grocery shopping. Another is that I drive down Plymouth Road and it disturbs me. I think it is an eyesore with so many vacant buildings, and I don't want to see Newburgh Road look like that. Newburgh Road is taking on a nice look. This issue has been brought up that it will bring jobs. The McDonald's at Five Mile and Haggerty has had a sign up there for months. They cannot get people to work there. If this McDonald' s does come into existence, there's a few things I would like you to consider. I drove by the other McDonald's on Middlebelt Road and I notice that there are huge, black poles. As a St. Edith's church member, I don't think the parishioners there would like to view that. I wouldn't want to see the golden arches, just a nice sign. Another. thing, I would like to see it landscaped nicely. A lot. of people who probably work at those establishments probably don't even live in Livonia. Sean Cox, 14308 Knolson: If you would have asked me six or seven years ago that I would be coming before you as a proponent of McDonald's, I would have said you were crazy, but since that time I've gotten married and have three children and going to McDonald's is quite an event. In our area, there are lots and lots of young families and McDonald's is certainly a very desirable thing. Hopefully, something can be worked out with St. Edith's. And whoever wrote that flyer which was extremely anti-semetic has no business being associated with any public issue in our. City and hopefully the gentlemen who are the developers will not feel that this community is an anti-semetic community. I apologize for that flyer. Diane Socha: I own Travel Masters. I am in the retail center where the McDonald's is going in. I am for McDonald's because the way it is currently zoned for more retail space there, we can't fill the retail space we have now. Our shopping center is dying. To have another semi-anchor store in that area, I think is needed. Contrary to what one of the gentlemen said, he said he didn't think more retail space would go in, I take issue with that because I just renegotiated my lease and for awhile it looked like we may not come to terms. The retail shopping centers are mushrooming up and down the roads. These people were calling me back and asking what do you want me to do? Do you want me to paint it, what can I do to get you more space? I would really like to see McDonald's go in there. Richard O'Meara, 35765 Vargo: I am the president of Villa Marie which is the 11731 retirement home they speak of to the rear of St. Edith's. Fr. Jim has already told you plenty of reasons why we shouldn't have this McDonald's, but I wanted to make a few things clear. We have approximately .100 residents, most of whom are women and as we all know, the women outlive the men. The vast majority of them are in their late SOs. We just had one woman who was assaulted who was 93 years old. The Board of Directors met last Saturday and voted not to approve the construction of this new McDonald's. We have talked to the residents. Mr. Walkon was very kind to have the residents join him for dinner last Wednesday at the Ground Round, and 19 of the residents took him up on that and I did meet a couple of people who were in favor of it. Most of them were people who were looking to get a cup of coffee in mid-morning. We have breakfast at 7: 15 over there and lunch at 11:00 so the residents would be out at the mid time hour. On a personal note, I will be talking to the administrator on Thursday about putting a coffee pot for the residents at mid day so that they wouldn't have to embark at fast food establishments. On a personal note, 15, 16 years ago I stood before this august body and asked for permission to put a Wendy's old fashioned hamburger to the rear of Don Showerman's establishment on Five Mile and Merriman. Don gave me his approval and the Baptist Church to the rear also gave me their. approval. When I appeared before this august body, well my wife asked me tonight how I had the courage to come back. You practically threw me out of here. If I heard it once, 1 heard it ten times that we had too many fast food establishments in the City right now. This was 15 years ago. There isn't anybody who's been a resident for 26 years as I have who hasn't heard about Plymouth Road and all the restaurants there. It's already been established here tonight that we have a McDonald's within a radius of three miles. No one is going to be foolish enough to close the r... one at Five Mile and Haggerty as long as it is producing money. In 1975 we opened Wendy's in Michigan. We opened up four stores. In that era, we were doing with four stores $3 million a year. That $750,000 a store. There are a lot of fast foods today, 15 years later, that aren't doing $750,000 a store. We talked about McDonald's the savior. I thought it was the welfare program they were going to do. McDonald's is going to save the shopping mall. My father told me there is no such thing as a bad business, there are only bad people running it. McDonald's is not a savior. We just closed a party store right over here on Wayne Road. Two of those four Wendy's I opened 15 years ago are closed. McDonald's isn't going to make this thing go, it's the people that are in this shopping center that are going to make it go. When we lay it all on McDonald's, we give them a hell of a burden to carry to make that shopping mall go. If it goes into bankruptcy, maybe Fr. Scheick will open a high school there. John Michniak, 14097 Park: I am the vice president of S.M.B. Estates Homeowners Association. I was able to meet with Mr. O'Meara last night. I. want to address the flyer also. You have a difficult job. You have to listen to everybody on both sides. Slanted journalism is what you are hearing. That flyer didn't change my mind about the rezoning one way or another, so I don't think that's an issue. r 11732 Last night at St. Edith's we had a short meeting and we talked about a number of things. It came down to two major things, and that was child safety and dealing with vehicles coming into our parking lot and the security aspects of students starting to hang out at McDonald's as they do at Five Mile. There are two security officers there. I have been in the security field for private _industry for five years. Last night we talked about McDonald's bringing security in if that was a real concern. In my personal experience, when you have to bring security in, it is too late. We like McDonald's. St. Edith has nothing against McDonald's. It is just: the location. We are concerned about our children's safety. When I came home from work tonight, my daughter asked me why I didn't change my clothes. I told her I had to go somewhere. I was going to stop a McDonald's from coming in. She got a real sad look on her face. Not to be melodramatic, but I would rather see my daughter's sad face than to have a child's face in a coffin. You can't tell me it would not happen. Bernice Hudak, 14408 Lyons: I am a senior as you can see. I am also a commissioner on the board of Aging and Human Resources. If you are familiar with the SCAN program, McDonald's has helped us all the way. We are about $20,000 ahead to purchase our next bus for seniors that don't drive. I have two nephews that graduated from college by working part-time at McDonald's and never reported any kidnappings or killings. Everything they do seems to be above board. Mike Orr, 18478 Westbrook: I am a 25 year resident of northwest Livonia and I have seen a great deal of change in that time. I was delighted when the McDonald's opened up so many years ago. As a real estate broker at this northwest Livonia market, I feel compeled to correct an appalling statement I heard earlier, and that was that the empty strip mall at Five and Levan contributed in some way to decreased property values. That is simply not true. That was a notorious eyesore for a number of years until Frank's Nursery moved in there and now it's a viable mall. I was disturbed to hear that the mall at Five Mile and Newburgh is in bankruptcy and I am not sure that we want to repeat the same condition a mile to the west of Five and Levan. What I would like to suggest to you is very simple. We are not asking for an additional McDonald's, we are simply asking to approve moving the restaurant a mile to the east. Thaddeus McCotter, 14601 Huff: I am an elected official and my mother is the Livonia City Council president. What I am about to say may not be politically popular, I say it because there is a more important principal involved. It is that I must be a good neighbor. We are torn between a rezoning of C-1 to allow a McDonald's or we can retain the C-1. We can take our chances with the rezoning where we will have a known commodity with the McDonald's or we can erect a strip center and whatever else may come in there. Now I for one think McDonald's is a better commodity and a safer bet. I think that what could happen and what I would like to see is perhaps more work between the church and the developer, for all the 11733 interested parties, to reach a conciliatory position on this issue. All assembled here today are simply looking for what's best for their community. My wife and I became members of Castle Gardens. I 've lived in Livonia since 1972 and I wanted to stay in Livonia and wanted to raise my children in Livonia. I. also want to be a member of St. Edith's Church, if they will still have me. The point is that we have invested in the future in that community and we want to see the best for it.. [ will abide by the decision of the neighborhood, but in my own mind, I am compelled to ask that we have the McDonald's because I believe that that is the best solution to the situation. We live in a mailed city and I am sure you all know and the fact that the mall cannot survive does not mean that it will not be built. So bear that in mind. There are no assurances. Let. us deal with what is before us, come to a solution and do the best for our neighborhood. Ron Rowe, 37020 Vargo: I have been a Livonia resident for 25 years. I also stood before the Planning Commission not too many months ago when we were talking about building the new St. Edith's Church. That was five years in the planning, saving funds, fund raising, etc. At that point in time, the Planning Commission was very concerned as were we, as well as the archdiocese, about what the church looked like. We talked. frequently about the church making a statement in the community. Any church, regardless of denomination, will have the very strong statement it should represent tranquility, peace, serenity, the things we like our churches to stand for. Putting a McDonald's right next door to it is directly opposed to that type of situation. In fact it's almost to the point where we think it is an insult to what we have already constructed there. The second point is the traffic. It's heavy now and is only going to get worse. The biggest problem is `r.. that our traffic comes in surges. You can't use averages when you are looking at the type of traffic we are talking about. We have things like funeral processions, Sunday mass where we have 300 cars coming in and out within a 15-20 minute period. We have social events. We have school buses, pedestrians. We have young school children and senior citizens. The third point I want to make is the risk to the senior citizens. You can walk or drive by there at any point in time and you will see senior citizens strolling around that area. We also, with the Planning Commission's recommendation made sure that the entrance way was such that the senior citizen's driveway came right along that side of the wall, the closest area to the proposed McDonald's. We had a problem before where the senior citizen traffic was getting mixed up with the bus traffic. The Planning Commission didn't even want us to widen that apron because it was too close to the opening now that is going to be proposed for the McDonald's restaurant entrance and exit. That is a conflict as well. Would the Planning Commission ever consider putting a fast food restaurant next door to a public school? Would the Board of Education ever consider it? I think whatever decision you make there, you are going to be setting a precedent. Our playground is in fact our parking lot. We wish we had more property for a playground, but we don't have that. Our parking lot is where our 11734 kids go for recess, That's the same area that is going to pick up the extra traffic that will very well come from the McDonald's people. I would like the Planning Commission to OK the McDonald's, do whatever to make it official, that any concessions or agreements, amenities that are agreed to by McDonald's become official and are approved by St. Edith. There has been a lot of talk about the things that they would do for us in terms of additional landscaping and things of that nature. I would like to see that become very official. I would also like to see the Planning Commission, if in fact this is rejected, and if Council rejects it, that that rejection remains firm for as long as the church and school exist. Carl Short, 15065 Woodside: I am here to voice the opinion of Rennolds Ravine Civic Association in that we are opposed to spot rezoning of any area in the northwest area of Livonia. We have been before the Planning Commission several times in the past years to protect our interests. Our homes are our business. We have most of our money and most of our assets tied up in our homes. Why did we buy our homes in the location we bought them in? Because of the zoning and the firm commitment of the City of Livonia that that zoning will stay the way it is. It will take a good reason and a lot of trouble to rezone something. Now we come along and you want to spot rezone to save a shopping center. It is unfortunate that the shopping center is in financial straits right now, however let's not jeopardize our businesses to accommodate a McDonald's to save 4 or 5 businesses. That may or may not happen. It definitely will happen that we will have our families. There are 1900 homes in Section 19. I don't know what the home concentration is in my area, but I do know that the Civic Associations in my area are against spot rezoning. Ed Ptasznik, 28021 Buckingham: I am in favor of it. I think it is a good idea for the community. If I can I think I will get a couple of petitions going too. Len Schoenborn, 37644 Mallory: First I would like to comment on the letter that was written by my wife. We know that the majority of people who go to McDonald's are not undesirables, although McDonald's does attract people on the go also. With the Dickenson Center up the road, it attracts people from all areas who go up Newburgh. I think the McDonald's would be a handy place for them to stop. If they happen to see a senior citizen walk by, they just may think they are an easy prey. I wish you would have continued on with the letter. My wife did talk with the City Planning Department and asked the question that would the City consider putting a McDonald's next to a public school. And the comment was that the City of Livonia would never permit it. That is a quote. I also know that when the changes to the zoning are made, there seems to be a lack of follow-up. I live near the corner of Six and Newburgh where there is a residential street that you can cut that corner and go through Bill Knapps, etc. and the traffic is horrendous on my residential street. I would like to see it become a dead end street, but the City won't allow it because of the fire department 11735 requirements or whatever. Our kids do go to the St. Edith School and walk or ride their bikes and I would be less apt to allow that. In hearing from most of the other. people, it seems like that with. few exceptions the people in favor of this are residents from outside the Livonia area, and if your decision is based on the 4111. welfare of Livonia residents, I think your decision would be rather an easy one. Mr. Engebretson: So there is no misunderstanding in the inquiry as to what kind of people she was referring to, that was not meant sarcastically or disrespectfully, but an honest attempt to clarify what exactly did that mean. I would also like to say that whatever action we take, it doesn't become official until we meet again seven days from tonight. We have an opportunity to reconsider. I can guarantee you, absolutely, that some of us, I certainly will, read every word of every one of those letters. So don't think for one minute that there is any frivolity intended here. It is important to me that you understand it was an honest attempt to understand precisely what things people write. Jim Crowley, 15108 Blue Skies: I am opposed to McDonald's at Five and Newburgh for several reasons. One not mentioned was odor. We live behind the Farmer Jack's and if you come home on a Friday night, you can smell the donuts clear from where I live and I am about 11 houses from it. You can't cover that up with the most beautiful landscaping and that's another point that I want to bring up. About 10 or 12 years ago they did the same thing at the Five and Haggerty location. Now those bushes are overgrown and the grass is not as green as it once was. Also the argument that they are going to help save that shopping mall and improve the property values and it was compared to the Frank's Nursery at Five and �.. Levan. That building was already there. They did not add another building. You want to add another building? It was argued that with changing the C-1, stores such as music and tobacco stores and possible an arcade, well how could that stop it? They could still go into one of those vacant stores. I would think it will actually help bring it because they will have the traffic from the young kids. Also it was argued that it was going to help our property values. Our neighborhood is a beautiful neighborhood and I don't think we are depending on McDonald's to sustain their property values. Abraham Dunn, 38231 Donald: I am against the rezoning. McDonald's is a good company, but it wouldn't be good in our area. There's other areas for them. Other developers are building stores all over in competition. That's why stores are empty. Who are the people who keep these businesses going? Where is the money coming from? There is only so much money in the neighborhood. Each individual only has so much money. We want to keep our values up. Having a fast food place there would hinder our school, our children, traffic and everything else around there. Like everyone else said, there's people that come by, children that come by, and this is our main concern. The reason businesses aren't going is because of bad management. If McDonald's comes in, that's some 11736 money that people are going to spend at McDonald's, what are these other places going to do? Some of the people that go to McDonald's are from our area, but some are from people way out that know there's a new McDonald's here. We are talking about the safety of our neighborhood and the value of our neighborhood keeping up. Mike Suznowski, 18454 Queensbury: I am a parishioner at St. Edith. My wife and I have 2 daughters who attend school there. There was a flyer handed out as I walked in by Mr. Burnett that said a traffic study was performed and the result of that study concluded that the restaurant would not generate sufficient traffic to produce any negative impact on the current traffic operations. Well that confuses me. If there is no impact on traffic, does that mean that. this McDonald's will rely on pedestrian traffic? I doubt it. If they don't generate automobile traffic, then why are we even considering letting them build there? A McDonald's that doesn't generate traffic will be a vacant lot. The only way they can do business is on volume. This is going to be a standard McDonald's with an entrance and exit on Newburgh Road, just immediately north of the entrance to St. Edith's parking lot. Our children use that parking lot to play on at lunch hour. I can foresee some idiot coming up northbound on Newburgh, missing the turn into McDonald's and hitting our parking lot at lunch hour. The potential for a very serious accident exists. As a parent, I am concerned about our children obviously. We have had instances this past year where there have been older kids disrupting our classrooms by walking up and down the wall that separates the strip mall from St. Edith's. If a fast food restaurant comes in, think of the potential for more of this type of activity. Cars have been vandalized. If McDonald's draws business, the potential exists `r.w for more of this type of activity. Not only is St. Edith's busy during the day with school, we are busy at night. If the opportunity exists for somebody to congregate at McDonald's, the potential exists for more activities of vandalism, muggings, etc. I know McDonald's has guaranteed security, but that's security in that 1.9 acres we are talking about. Once they take care of security in that building, where does the overflow go? McDonald's has no legal obligation to provide security for St. Edith's. To sum up, I am not against McDonald's. They are a good neighbor, they do charitable work. There are other viable, alternative sites for location of this restaurant. This decision does not require business sense. It requires common sense. I urge you to please exercise that common sense and deny this petition. Isobel Burrell, 14957 Newburgh: I have a problem getting in and out of my driveway now. The visiting nurses that come to my 95 year old mother park in the SEMTA parking lot, come down and walk to the house because they cannot get in and out of my driveway. The man who cuts my grass parks his truck in the SEMTA parking lot and wheels his mower down from the SEMTA parking lot to my house, 3 houses from St. Edith's church. Now I wonder just what's going to happen when we get the McDonald's. I received no notice and I 11737 checked the houses on either side of me, so I don't know about this business of the mail. Mr. Engebretson: Would you say that your house is located within 500' of this property? ‘4•11.. Ms. Burrell: I don't know if T am 500' or. not . But I don't want any more problems. We have enough trouble coming out on Newburgh now. If there is some other way they can come out on Five Mile, I'd love to have that. Rose Dykas, 28508 Sunnydale: I think Livonia is a super place to live, but I think we have to consider the safety, health and welfare of its citizens. I am a member of St. Edith' s. All I can think of is the horrendous traffic that would occur. I want you to understand that on Sunday's we don't just have one service, we have services all morning from 7:30 until 1:30. On Saturday, a service at 5:00. We also have weddings. Our children are a big concern. I hope you would consider this as you would consider it for any school in Livonia. We also have meetings and classes sometimes in the evenings. Stan Kuzia, 15507 Williams: Is McDonald's Corporation involved in the site at Six Mile and Haggerty as well as the site at Five and Newburgh? If so, even though there are two different cities involved, why are two stores needed to replace one? McDonald's has had a three mile radius between stores. That appears now to be down to a one mile radius. There are 10,000 stores now and there would be 30,000 stores in the future. Is McDonald's in the real estate business or the hamburger business? Everyone keeps talking about the mall being in bankruptcy. That mall has been in bankruptcy *m, for about five years now. Why doesn't McDonald's consider going into one of the vacant areas in that mall and provide a walk-up service as opposed to drive-thru service? Carol Mellon, 14535 Newburgh: I've been in Livonia for 15 years. I think that Newburgh Road is very little patrolled by the police. We do not have enough protection. There are cars on Newburgh all night long. You can come home any hour of he evening and cars are speeding by. Where are our police? We are not going to have any more protection if we get a McDonald's. What happened to our nice City? We're becoming a fast food city. We've had Bates for 25 years and everyone has found that one. Bill Bartolomeo, 37215 Ladywood: I have been a resident of Livonia for 25 years and a parishioner of St. Edith's for 25 years. I am unalterably opposed to a petition to rezone that property. It is not a knock at McDonald's. I will add a little tale to the usage of our church facility. We also have religious education classes for our children on Monday after school, Tuesday after school and on Saturday. So that's another consideration. I would like to touch lightly on the particular problem that the existing mall is having. We understand that they have gone from Chapter 11 to Chapter 7. They are in very bad financial straits. I think part 11738 of the problem lies with the owners of the businesses that are in there now. That particular mall is not a very attractive looking mall. The stores are not kept clean. There's debris on the sidewalks. I think that if those businesses are really concerned with helping themselves they have to begin by cleaning up the appearances outside their stores and make them more attractive. I don't think they can rely on a fast food restaurant going into that site and saving them. I think if they do that, they just might increase their traffic. Clare Kalayjian, 16575 Middlebelt: I support McDonald's petition. Patrick Cannon, 1497 / Country Club: There's been a couple of items overlooked. You are a Planning Commission, planning for the future of our city. I am a two time resident of Livonia. I grew up here and graduated from a school that is no longer in existence, Bentley, but I liked the city and I wanted to come back. One of the reasons I wanted to come back was because of the schools and the planning that this city has put forth. To look at the area I live in and the ambiance look and the fact that. there were no fast food restaurants is very important to me. The second reason that I am opposed to rezoning is the fact that you would not even consider putting a fast food restaurant across from Stevenson High School or Churchill. Ladywood is a factor here. You have athletic events, you have dances. The propensity for those teenagers to run across the street to McDonald's versus getting in a car causes a great potential hazard. George Boller, 36270 Hammer: I am a fee holder and also happen to be a member of St. Edith's. May I approach the chair for the purpose of giving you a copy of the Wall Street Journal? (does so) The title of the article is called "Sagging Arches" and we are not talking about sore feet. We are talking about McDonald's Corporation. I will not go into any details of the article, I will simply ask that the members consider it before they render their decision on it. I am opposed to the rezoning. I would like to give a number of other reasons why I think the Commission should be also. There's a traffic survey that has been mentioned and there is some confusion on this issue. When I checked the file yesterday afternoon, there was a 40-some odd page traffic study that was submitted on behalf of McDonald's. I don't know whether that was a copy, it did not appear to be an originally signed or authenticated document. I don't know if the Engineering Department had an opportunity to consider that when it gave its comments when read earlier. I also have not heard as to whether the Public Safety Department has been asked for its opinion. Police and Fire protection, EMS Service, I have heard none of those concerns addressed. I believe this commission should address those. I think the most forceful legal argument is that there is absolutely no precedent for this type of spot. rezoning. I am not aware of there being an existing fast food restaurant of this type next to a church or a school in the City of Livonia. One of the speakers in the previous petition case made a point on behalf of his client. He said that all my client is doing is 11739 seeking the same consideration that you have given to other previous petitions. You started the ball rolling. All I'm doing is asking for fair treatment for my client. In this situation, if this petition is granted for rezoning, it will start the ball rolling in this immediate traffic area of Five and Newburgh for this type of facility. One of the other speakers earlier made reference to the fact that Newburgh Road is a major thoroughfare. I believe it is a County Road. North of Five Mile on the east side of Newburgh Road is a substantial amount of vacant property that fronts on Newburgh Road. Some time in the future another petitioner may ask that that property be rezoned for the purpose of pursuing the American dream to have his own business to compete with McDonald's. A Wendy's, a Burger King, who knows what? I would ask that this commission pay very close attention to the precedent that it would set if in fact it approves this rezoning petition. There were some comments made earlier by some speakers that quite frankly surprised me. There was reference made to certain flyers. There is one flyer in particular that I would like to display. I am the author of this flyer. I am proud of it. If anyone has taken offense on account of this flyer, I give them my sincerest apology. The people that spoke before objecting to the possible inferences that might be drawn from this flyer, are obviously not aware of what's been happening in Livonia for the past number of years. We only need go back to the Seven Mile and Newburgh project. I am talking about the Shenkman project. Mr. Chairman, I know you were involved as a private citizen at that time. There were ample remarks at that time in the press, amongst individuals, undoubtedly even communications in public hearings in this body that talked about the "Southfieldizing" of Livonia, and I see nothing wrong in this flyer when I say "People Come First in Livonia". That's the City motto. When I say that `vr,., that means ahead of opportunistic developers from Southfield, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that because that is the out-and-out truth. I want to conclude with one final point. McDonald's Corporation is one of the petitioners in this petition. McDonald's Corporation is a publicly traded company on the New York Stock Exchange. In fact it is one of the components of the Dow Jones Industrial Average. I would ask that the members of this body make a public disclosure, each and every one of them, whether or not they are the owners either directly or beneficially, or if any of their family members are owners or beneficiaries of the stock of McDonald's Corporation. Frank Hughes, 15156 Blue Skies: I don't have children at home, but I do have 12 grandchildren who come and visit us quite often. We do have a lot of traffic that comes down Blue Skies from the Castle Gardens area. I have a fear that people are going to miss the entrance of these areas and are going to come around Jamison to Richfield to Blue Skies and make one continuous circle. We are going to get a lot of that traffic. We get a lot of traffic from the other McDonald's. We can tell because we get a lot of their debris. I don't know if you've ever had a kid or someone in your family get hurt, but I had one who was in a coma and I don't want any part of it. 11740 Patrick Hirami, 9741 Bassett: This country has been founded on the pursuit of freedom. On this handout. it says the City motto is People Come First in Livonia. I went to a meeting :Last night at St. Edith's Church and I was undecided until. I heard about the concern for children. If people come first, then perhaps our heritage, our No .. children, come even before we adults. There are ordinances where a liquor establishment is not put within so many feet of a religious institution. This question was raised last night, is there an ordinance or policy where a fast food place is not next to a school? Mr. Shane: There is no ordinance that would prevent fast food restaurants being placed next to a school. Mr. Hirami: Somebody said they had called and were told that no way would a fast food restaurant be next to a. school. Mrs. Fandrei: All the schools are placed in residential neighborhoods and of course that eliminates the possibility of commercial. Mr. Hirami: Would the church be considered residential? Mr. Engebretson: Yes. Mr. Hirami: So fast food places are riot in residential areas. Of all our schools in Livonia, how many of the schools have a fast food restaurant next to them? Mr. Engebretson: There are none. Mr. Vyhnalek: How many churches are next to a shopping center? Mr. Shane: There are several, this being one of them. Mr. Engebretson: I think we could look into that. Sharon Burnett, 31705 Huldane: I am for the McDonald's. Doreen Vivyan, 38710 Five Mile: Our family have been residents for 18 years and we've watched the city grow. Some of these issues that have been addressed, I thought I could make a comment on. We have three adult children, 2 of whom were employed by McDonald's. They are a reputable company, they do much charitable work in the community and I applaud them. However, our younger son was a manager at McDonald' s for a couple of years and one of the stores he helped managed was the 1-275, Five Mile store. During the school year, with competition between the high schools, sometimes the competition got a little unhealthy, and it seemed to me they had a direct hot line to the Northville Police Department. They would intercede for him. There were times when he had to close the store. So I guess I'm suggesting that if the Northville store at 275 and Haggerty is closed, would our Livonia Police Department then pick up the demand? There were other factors I could raise, such as all the time and energy that was put into St. Edith's 11741 Church, the traffic pattern, as well as other property probably being available in Livonia that might be more suitable. I would not be opposed to going to the Six Mile and Haggerty store if one were built there and I live in northwest Livonia. It was suggested that McDonald's could not save the strip mall. It was also mentioned that a squawk box was not going to be incorporated into the planning, and I wonder if maybe a larger parcel of property could not accommodate a squawk box maybe making it a little more profitable. So I am opposed to building a McDonald's and I hope you consider those factors. Janet Fadool, 14523 Newburgh: I am opposed to a McDonald's because I believe it would be hazardous to my neighborhood. I believe it would be hazardous to the health and safety of the neighborhood I enjoy so much. Now I can take my dog for a walk and feel comfortable about walking up and down the streets at any time of the day or night. If I'm out and I know there's been some type of gathering of children in the high school years, they sometimes get rowdy, and I won't feel as comfortable and I would consider selling my home if a McDonald's is put there. Barbara Boller, 36270 Hammer: I also am a member of St. Edith Parish and I am opposed. I would be opposed if I were a member of any other church in the city. I think it would be a horrendous mistake to build a McDonald's in this area with this beautiful church and school. I would like to make a comment tonight that most of the people who are for the rezoning do not live in this area. Karl Burnett lives six miles away. Richard L. Kelly, 36824 Sunnydale: I have lived in Livonia for 23 years. I will not attempt to repeat what you've already heard, so I will summarize. This proposal is just a simple case of a desirable operation in the wrong location. A fast food operation next to an existing place of worship next to a 300 student body school is just incompatible, not to mention Villa Maria with a population of 100 senior citizens. I wish to go on record of opposing this proposal and your vote not to recommend this rezoning would be appreciated. Alan Helmkamp: I appreciate the fact that the people of St. Edith's feel so strongly about their community and church that they are here tonight, and I trust that my friends Mr. & Mrs. Boller and most of the rest of them are here in good faith, but I have concerns. I have concerns that for those people who are so fearful that I could not attempt to persuade people who say keep McDonald's out of Livonia any more than I would say keep all universities out of Livonia because another crazy, sick person shot people to death from a bell tower at the University of Texas. People who say they will put my children in a casket. Where is the evidence that sick people or bad drivers or psychotics are the people who go to McDonald's? I take offense. I will address the points that make logical sense. You had a meeting last night and most of you who were there are here tonight, and by your mere presence and numbers and attitude and by your applause, I am concerned that good people 11742 were intimidated not to speak. A woman by the name of Laurie Schwartz and another by the name of Kim Hatch who are neighbors of the Middlebelt store who came here voluntarily, not to talk about my crystal ball or all these people's crystal balls or what's going to happen in the future, but to talk about fact and how the restaurant in their neighborhood does not cause problems for their children in terms of traffic. I am concerned by the fact that much information apparently has been withheld because we were not invited to participate in your meeting last night. We could have been there and provided the answers. For example I've heard, why put it by a church or school. Good people of St. Edith, you know that four weeks ago that your representatives of your church were told that McDonald's restaurants are next to Sacred Heart Church, Holy Redeemer, and a suburban church, St. Thomas Lutheran Church. We offered the representatives of St. Edith's to take them to these churches to talk about if there have been problems for those parochial schools. Our offer was rejected. You know we have made many commitments out of concern for your seniors at Villa Maria and your children of your school to put a cap on the wall to increase security so that people can't climb over. That's why 25 people of Villa Maria signed that petition. Do you know that we have offered to do nice programs for your school? Let's talk about schools. People want to know that we wouldn't put it by a public school and there is perceived there is some discrimination there. A year and a half ago, I stood in front of a similar body in Westland for a store at Merriman and Joy Road, 1-1/2 blocks from Franklin High School answering all the same questions many of you have raised tonight. That store is there, and do you know, good people of St. Edith, that I told your representative three weeks ago that I would arrange a meeting with the representatives of the Livonia school district and tell you of the problems of students loitering there during the school day because we have a policy of calling the school and telling them that your students are there, that we worked with Franklin's and Livonia Public Schools and there is not a problem. Our offer was not taken up. We are concerned about your children. I have two little boys myself. I wouldn't stand here for $1000 if I thought I was going to harm anyone's children. I take offense. Spot zoning: This is not spot zoning, this is one commercial district transitional to another and there has been a reference that there is C-2 on the corner already, a gas station. I don't see a problem about spot. zoning. We stand ready to meet with anyone at any time and any place to talk about legitimate concerns and to meet you more than halfway to try to allay those concerns. We have only the best interests of the community in mind and I can only say that people of good faith and good will will pick up that offer. Let us not turn this into a popularity contest. Think logically about the facts. Mrs. Fandrei: I would like clarification of some of the things the parishioners of St. Edith's referred to. We have not heard any comments on the landscaping on St. Edith's side of the wall. Mr. Helmkamp: That is also a commitment we made. We don't want to put an 11743 eyesore next. to a church. We've agreed in writing to limit tenants the first 30 days of the grand opening. We have agreed to extensively landscape the parcel including the entire length of the St. Edith side of the wall. Mr. Rowe who said he was insulted by the proposal, I don't know what walking out of your church and ,` looking at the back of the expanse of the strip center does for anyone's sensibility. We have offered to extensively tree that and to put growing vine on your side of the wall so that your residents of Villa Maria don't have to look at the back of the wall. The building will be no larger than your rectory on the south side of your property. We made that commitment in writing and it would be at a cost of $8,000 to landscape St. Edith's side of the wall. Mr. Morrow: We have spent very little time talking about the zoning. We talked about C--1 and some of the other possible uses. We first have to consider the zoning and all the uses that could go in there. I have no reason to think that McDonald's won't go in there, but they may not. Let me give you some of the things that could also go in the C-2 zoning. If the C-2 zoning should go through and McDonald's not go in there, you could have auction houses, automobile accessory stores, marine sales, monument sales, second hand stores, rummage shops, laundries, bowling alleys, motorcycle sales, billiard parlors, to name some. We are talking about zoning tonight. If I had to pick a fast food to go in an area, 1 would pick a McDonald's. They have the best operation, the cleanest, the best landscaped. That's what I'm going to come to terms with tonight when I cast my vote. Is the C-2 proper zoning there. When the waiver should come back to see if the McDonald's is a viable waiver use, then we will talk about a lot of the things we talked about tonight. Now Mrs. Fandrei: There's been a lot of reference to the spot zoning. We are not looking at spot zoning if we are to rezone it to C-2. There is C-2 just several feet to the north. Mr. Engebretson: I would like to say for the record that neither I nor my wife own any publicly traded stock in McDonald's. Mr. Helmkamp: We are agreeable to allowing any favorable resolution contingent upon it being a McDonald's. There would be nothing other than a McDonald's restaurant if the C-2 goes in. Mr. Engebretson: I think the point Mr. Morrow was making was that we cannot condition the zoning but we have all come to learn that the Council has their own way of controlling those kinds of issues where they don't give the final approval of a zoning issue in controversial kinds of issues until that site plan catches up, and they are handled in the same meeting as consecutive items on the agenda. The point Mr. Morrow is making has some other implications and if the McDonald's plan were approved, that property then would become subject to being used in a manner that you described. A C-1 isn't a panacea either. In addition to the uses mentioned earlier, I looked up in the zoning ordinance and I 11744 find that a delicatessen, a dairy store, party store, pet store, various kinds of health establishments, even a post office, so it's nice when it's a parking lot, but without a zoning change it has the potential of holding the types of places I mentioned, and the City can't do anything about it. If a proper site plan is fir.► submitted, it will be approved or it will be approved by the court. There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 91-6-1-14 closed. Mr. Engebretson: Let's ask the Chief of Police to give us a report on experiences in similar situations in Livonia that he would have direct control over. In addition let's ask the Chief to communicate with the Northville and Plymouth Police Departments to ask for some understanding of what's going on in those stores. On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent and seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek it was #7-120-91 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 23, 1991 on Petition 91-6-1-14 by Marvin Walkon, Hampik Kzirian & McDonald's Corp. requesting to rezone property located on the west side of Newburgh Road south of Five Mile Road in the NE 1/4 of Section 19 from C-1 to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 91-6-1-14 until the study meeting of August 13, 1991. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23,05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Tent, Kluver, LaPine, Morrow, Vyhnalek, Fandrei, Engebretson NAYS: Gniewek ABSENT: McCann Ms. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 91-6-1-15 by Americo Ciatti requesting to rezone property located south of Vassar Avenue between Middlebeit and Parkville in the SW 1/4 of Section 1 from R-1 to R-6. Mr. Bakewell presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Gniewek: Mr. Bakewell, what is the approximate distance from the single family residences to the edge of this particular property? Mr. Bakewell: I would say 150° . Mr. Shane: We have a letter from the Engineering Department advising that there are no sanitary sewers readily available to service the site. It may be necessary to cross Vassar Avenue to the sanitary sewer located in a public easement area within the Livonia Office Pavilion. That's signed by Gary D. Clark, Assistant City 11745 Engineer. We also have a letter from the Detroit Edison Company saying they have no objection to this petition. Mr. Gniewek: What does the Engineering Department mean when they say there are no sanitary sewers readily available? `,41011. Mr. Sane: It means that he has to cross Vassar Avenue to pick up the sewer which is in that location and bring it south to this site. He may have to get an easement on the property, bring it across the street physically to service this property. Mr. Engebretson: Is the petitioner here? (The petitioner was not) . Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against this petition? Mr. Morrow: Is this a. duplex that they are thinking about? Mr. Engebretson: Yes. That's what this zoning would permit. George Beard, 19261 Parkville: I am opposed to the change here, and furthermore, we had other neighbors that were here earlier, but due to the lengthy meeting they left and they were not aware of anything happening like this. I understand that this is supposed to be a two-family unit and I believe that you or no one on this commission would like to have a two family unit. built next to you, because people who live in two family places don't have the pride to take care of their property. A person who has a single home has more interest and desire. Mr. LaPine: In. most duplexes, most people buy them for one reason. They Live in one unit and rent out the other unit. It gives them an income. I don't know if that's what is going to happen here. Mr. Beard: We have a situation behind Sea Food Bay on Parkville. We have two family units there. This is what I have to look at. The guy who bought it rents both of them out for income, and I don't want to see the same thing again. Mr. LaPine: Mr. Ciatti is not here tonight so we can't answer that question. What we can do is table this until the petitioner is here and at least then we can know what his intentions are. Mr. Engebretson: We will probably do that, but we will proceed with the public hearing because it was properly advertised and we want to see that everyone has a chance to speak. Mr. Beard, which is the parcel that you were referring to that has a two unit building on it presently. Mr. Beard: That' s the first house off of Seven Mile Road. Mr. Musico, 19205 Parkville: I am also opposed to this change. I live to the south of this property (422a) , and in my opinion this piece of property is not. ideal for any type of residence. There is an eight story office building directly across the street and an 11746 alley right to the west. It seems like a bad piece of property, no use for residential in that particular spot. Mr. LaPine: Someone owns that piece of property and pays taxes. I. was out there and I thought who in the heck would want to live here �.. looking at an office building with a parking lot, a driveway. On the other hand, what could it be used for? You are not going to build an office building there or a commercial establishment there. You can't put a doctor's office there because no one would ever find it. So if a guy thinks he can build a house here and rent it and someone wants to live in it, I don't know what else you could do with the property. Mr. Musico: I notice that the property does have a pitch to it approximately 2 feet going from west to east and we get a lot of water on that property. I. don't know if that would be addressed. Mr. LaPine: The ideal situation would be that for the people who own those three lots to buy it and split it. Mrs. Fandrei: You do know that he could build a house on it just as it. is? Mr. Musico: Yes, I know it is an R-1. It is not an ideal piece for a residence as far as I am concerned. Randy Moore, 19227 Parkville: I am lot 42b4. I am opposed to it. Like Ron said, I don't know why anyone would want to build a house there. There's Kids R Us, which is the big building there. It's just a big wall. I don't want to see anything built there, but that's the way it is. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 91-6-1-15 closed. On a motion made by Mr. Tent and seconded by Mr. Gniewek, it was #7-121-91 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 23, 1991 on Petition 91-6-1-15 by .Americo Ciatti. requesting to rezone property located south of Vassar Avenue between Middlebelt and Parkville in the SW 1/4 of Section 1 from R-1 to R-6, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 91-6-1-15 until the Study Meeting of July 30, 1991. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Tent, Gniewek, Kluver, LaPine, Morrow, Fandrei, Engebretson NAYS: Vyhaniek ABSENT: McCann 11747 Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition *. - 91-6-2-17 by S. D, Joshi requesting waiver use approval to construct an Arby's Restaurant on the north side of Plymouth Road between Farmington and Stark Roads in the SE 1/4 of Section 28. Mr. Bakewell presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Shane: We have a letter from the Department of Public Safety, Division of Fire, stating they have no objection to the proposal. That is signed by Arnold Klinger, Fire Marshal. We have a letter from the Engineering Department stating "We note that Plymouth Road has not been dedicated to its fullest extent (60 feet) in accordance with the City's Master Thoroughfare Plan. There are no objections to the waiver use proposal. Signed by Gary D. Clark, Assistant City Engineer. Next is a letter from the Police Department. Reference the captioned petition, the following is submitted for your consideration: 1. South exit drive - "Right Turn Only" sign must be placed at this point due to the driveway's proximity to Farmington Road and the heavy left-turn traffic. 2. East driveway - a "No Left Turn" sign must be placed facing Farmington Road and a "Right Turn Only" sign facing the exiting traffic. This is also due to heavy traffic south on Farmington Road. 3. All three driveways need a 25 foot radius on the approach cuts at �` - the street. That is signed by Thomas G. Green, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. A letter from the Inspection Department reads: Pursuant to your request, the Inspection Department conducted a zoning review of the above referenced petition. The following deficiencies or problems were found: 1. A complete sign package should be submitted for review. 2. The city should acquire the balance of the right of way. 3. The site plan does not indicate complete underground sprinklers. That is signed by William J. MacDonald, Supervisor, Ordinance Enforcement Division. Also, there is a letter from Plymouth Farms Associates, signed by David G. Miles, Managing Partner. Ladies/Gentlemen: Please be advised that we are the owners of the property immediately adjacent to the subject property to the west, commonly known as the Wonderland Marine building. We certainly would welcome any improvement to the subject property as it has been an eyesore over the years. Our only concern is that there is adequate parking on the petition site for a restaurant, and that provision will be made in the site plan approval so customers for the restaurant cannot or will not be able to park on our property. 11748 Finally, a letter form the Detroit Edison states they have no objection to this proposal. Mr. Gniewek: According to our notes, the proposed zoning is C-2, general commercial. Isn't it already C-2? *my Mr. Shane: Yes, it is zoned C-2. Mr. Gniewek: For clarification, since it is C-2, is a waiver necessary for a restaurant since a restaurant already existed previously there? Mr. Shane: Yes, it is because the other restaurant has been abandoned. Mr. Gniewek: Has it been used for another use other than a restaurant? Mr. Shane: No, it simply has been vacant for a long enough period of time and all of the equipment taken out of the building sufficiently to determine that it is an abandoned use and, therefore, would require a new waiver use for a new restaurant. Mr. Gniewek: So the zoning is not an issue on this? Mr. Shane: No, it is already C-2. Doug Falzon, 3080 Barrington, Madison Heights: I am the architect for the petitioner, Mr. Josh'. We have submitted a specific site plan. You have heard the planner's comments. There were only three planning issues, an underground sprinkler system which is not a problem. We can provide it. The sign package will be submitted at an appropriate time, and the right-of-way, I don't know how to deal with that. I would think that the owner would within reason be willing to grant the right-of-way. I don't know the City's ,o"' position. Mr. Engebretson: Let. me suggest to you that you can advise your client that it is a high probability that in order to get this passed by the Council that that issue be settled to the City's satisfaction. Mr. Falzon: The site plan that we submitted would appear to conform to the Planning Department. For all intensive purposes, we are looking for the reestablishment of the use. It's been a restaurant for 20 plus years. I guess it's been closed for the last 3 or 4 years. That's basically all we are trying to do. Mr. Gniewek: As far as the site is concerned, you are planning on razing the building and redoing the entire site as far as landscaping, paving, striping and putting up a new building? Mr. Falzon: That's correct. Mr. Gniewek: The site has been used as a restaurant facility for over 20 years. Mr. Falzon: There is an access easement and we are talking about restricting left hand turns. We are razing the restaurant, regrading and new landscaping. There is a one-way circulation pattern. It is a drive-thru with parking in the rear. 11749 The one way pattern turns out to Plymouth or circulates through parking lot, a complete circulation through the site. We have more than the required number of parking spots. it is a 50 seat, new style Arby's Restaurant; a contemporary restaurant. The parking spots are 10x20. We meet the landscaping requirements. .., Mr. Fandrei: Has the petitioner owned other Arby's? Has he done a study on the fast food restaurants in the area? Mr. Falzon: Yes, he has. A representative from Arby's is here. Ted Williams, Louisville, Kentucky: I am the Construction Project Manager for Arby's, Incorporated. In answer to your question, yes, the Real Estate Department has looked at this property. The Construction Department has looked at this property. The traffic counts, the demographics suggests to us that it will support a restaurant of our criteria. Mr. LaPine: I heard the same argument when we approved an Arby's on Eight Mile Road, west of Farmington Road. How is that restaurant doing? Mr. Williams: I don't have those figures, sir. If it is critical to your decision, I can get those figures. Mr. LaPine: I was just curious. I never see anyone in that store and I wonder if it is going to make it. If you could get that information, I would appreciate it. Mr. Shane, how much right-of-way does the City require at this location? Mr. Shane: 60 feet. Mr. LaPine: To the architect: The road from this property out to Farmington 'N" Road, is that part of this parcel? Mr. Falzon: Yes. Mr. LaPine: Is that going to be paved too? Mr. Falzon: Yes, it is. Mr. LaPine: Are you going to request any signage on the Farmington entrance. Mr. Falzon: Yes. Obviously, we want as much signage as practical. There is some precedence for at least directional with a company logo. For example, if you are familiar with the Burger King at Seven Mile and Middlebelt Road, it's almost an identical arrangement. Mr. LaPine: So you will ask for a normal Arby sign on Plymouth Road and just a directional sign on Farmington? Mr. Falzon: That's correct. Mr. Tent: Mr. Williams, have you taken an actual study of that location? The reason I ask. this is because there are 58 restaurants on Plymouth Road presently. That 's a lot of restaurants. When the 11750 Flaming Pit was approved 22 years ago, there was a Windjammer right next door and that was a restaurant. The Flaming Pit was always arguing that they were serving food next door and it was affecting its business, and he was right. Now it's Newport Ritchie and they are still serving food. Now if he was the cause of the Flaming Pit to close down, what are you going to do t.• differently? Mr. Williams: We offer a little different product. We offer a little different approach for the customer than sit down restaurants that are not chain restaurants. We have the drive-thru, we have the interior dining. There's a product mix of the sandwiches. You can have a quick meal, you can have a nice meal, and we feel it's all in how you run the business. Mr. Tent: You own the property now or do you have an option to buy in the event the zoning goes through? Mr. Williams: There is a contingency on the purchase of the property. Construction looks at. the property for water, for sewers, for ingress and egress. The real estate people look at traffic counts, businesses, a draw card to the restaurant, our type of customer, age, occupations, incomes. We don't go for the same customer as McDonald's. They cater to kids, we cater to people my age and the commission's age. Cary Ferguson, 34070 Richland: We always get hit pretty hard with the landscaping. There has to be 15% requirement and I didn't notice that there. Where will that landscaping be placed? Secondly, we had to miniaturize our sign to fit in Livonia and I wonder what size sign will be going up on Plymouth. Mr. Engebretson: The landscaped area at 15.2% meets the ordinance. The ordinance also dictates the size of signs and are very precise in the limits as to what is permitted and what is not. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 91-6-2-17 closed. On a motion duly made by Ms. Fandrei and seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, it was #7-122-91 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on July 23, 1991 on Petition 91-6-2-17 by S. D. Joshi requesting waiver use approval to construct an Arby's restaurant on the north side of Plymouth Road between Farmington and Stark Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 28, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 91-6-2-17 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the Site Plan dated 6-11-91 prepared by Ventura & Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; 11751 2) That the landscaping shown on the approved Site Plan shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and shall thereafter be permanently maintained in a healthy condition, and shall include an underground sprinkler system; 3) That the Floor Plan and Building Elevation Plan marked Sheet 41► A-2 dated 6-11-91 prepared by Ventura & Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; 4) That the number of customer seats shall not exceed 50; 5) That the deficiencies listed in the letter from the Inspection Department shall be adhered to; 6) A complete sign package shall be submitted to the Planning Commission and City Council for their approval. for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed use complies with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; 3) That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Gniewek, LaPine, Vyhnalek, Fandrei, Engebretson NAYS: Tent, Kluver, Morrow ABSENT: McCann Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. LaPine: I have a concern about the right-of-way on Plymouth Road. Will we have no jurisdiction on it? Can we condition that on our approval? Mr. Shane: You could, but normally it 's handled at the Council level. Mr. LaPine: Let the record show that we were concerned and we expect the Council to address that problem. Mr. Tent: I am going to vote against this petition. I am delighted that Arby's came forth and wants to do something with that building, but we have 58 restaurants up and down Plymouth Road and I don't want. to get a message to all the other developers here that just because we have a dilapidated building they can turn it into a `�.,. fast food restaurant. I feel that this has already exhausted 11752 itself. It's vacant now, it's waiver use has run out, why can't we have a flower shop there or some type of business. I am totally against. another restaurant. Mr. Kluver: If you look at all the restaurants on Plymouth Road for a mile and half traveling from Merriman to Wayne Road, there's 23 eating establishments out of a total of 58 on Plymouth Road. I have some concerns too. Farmington and Plymouth alone has 15 restaurants. It just seems like saturation. Ms. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 91-6-2-18 by Livonia Auto Wash requesting waiver use approval to operate an oil change facility in connection with an existing car wash located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt Road and Parkville Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 1. Mr. Bakewell presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Shane: We have a letter from the Department of Public Safety, Division of Fire, stating they have no objection to this proposal. However, this facility will have (2) different use groups within the same structure. According to the B.O.C.A/1957 Code, Section 313.1. 1, (Nonseparated Uses) , if there are conflicting provisions, the requirements securing the greater public safety shall apply to the entire building. That's signed by Arnold Klinger, Fire Marshal. A letter from Thomas G. Green, Sargeant, Traffic Bureau, states that they find nothing on the site plans that is inconsistent with the Police Department's mission of public safety. Aft. We also have a letter from the Engineering Department noting that Seven Mile Road has not been dedicated to its fullest extent, (60) feet. adjacent to the subject parcel in accordance with the Master Thoroughfare Plan. They would have no objections to the waiver use proposal. Signed by Gary D. Clark, Assistant City Engineer. A letter from the Inspection Department states: Pursuant to your request, the Inspection Department conducted a zoning review of the above referenced petition. No deficiencies or problems were found. This office has no objections to the proposal. We would like to point out that this site is under a waiver from the Zoning Board of Appeals for excess signage and that any additional signs will require Board approval as well as Control Zone approval. That's signed by William J. MacDonald, Supervisor, Ordinance Enforcement Division. Last, a letter from the Detroit Edison company states they have no objections to this petition. Basher Succar, 362 Caswick, Bloomfield Hills: I am the owner of the auto wash. We've owned this car wash now for three years and business is really bad. There are a lot of car washes in the City and a lot 11753 of competition. The way we try to compete is to improve our business and maintain it in good standards. We studied the situation and we felt that we could have an excellent addition to the car wash. Mr. LaPine: When we were out to your establishment, you told us you were ,r changing from 76 to Mobil. The lift you have in there now, what has that been used for up to this time. Mr. Succar: It used to be for an oil change before I owned it. Mr. LaPine: I never knew that they had an oil change there. Explain to me how this will work. I understand the oil change will be by appointment. Mr. Succar: Appointment or if somebody is driving through the car wash. The cashier will tell them that we have an oil change and we could do it at that time if we have an opening. Mr. LaPine: You would take it in first, give it a car wash, pull it out and back it in on a hoist. It would be in back at Seven Mile Road. Mrs. Fandrei.: Are you going to be requesting additional signage? Mr. Succar: Not for the oil change. We are going to change the sign from 76 into Mobil . There will not be an extra sign for the oil change. Mr. Tent: Is this a franchise operation, or are you just doing this on your own? Mr. Succar: A franchise. No.. Mr. Tent: Does Mobil approve of that type of setup? There are so many fast oil changes now that get you in and out in 12 minutes or so. How are you going to compete with them? Does Mobil Oil have any input on this? do they approve? Mr. Succar: It's not going to be any different from any gas station going in and change the oil. Mr. Tent: Will your prices be competitive? Mr. Succar: It will be $17 including the car wash. Mr. Tent: Have you had any experience doing this? Mr. Succar: No. We are going to get somebody who knows how to. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 91-6-2-18 closed. On a motion made by Mr. Vyhnalek and seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was 11754 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on July 23, 1991 on Petition 91-6-2-18 by Livonia Auto Wash requesting waiver use approval to operate an oil change facility in connection with an existing car wash located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt Road and Parkville Avenue in the SW 1/4 of Section 1, the Planning Commission does hereby .,.. recommend to the City Council that Petition 91-6-2-18 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the Site Plan as submitted dated 7-18-91 which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; 2) That the Floor Plan depicting the proposed location of the oil change facility dated 7-18-91 which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed use complies with all of the special and general waiver use standards as set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; 3) That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning '"-- Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Morrow, Vyhnalek, Fandrei, Engebretson NAYS: Tent, Gniewek, Kluver, LaPine ABSENT: McCann Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion failed for lack of support. Mr. Engebretson: I think that this is a good idea. I think that this is a natural extension of the car. wash. The fact that this was used before is an indication that it is a viable use, and I think that if a business person wants to expand a business and take a risk, hopefully they will do that in a profitable manner to benefit the business, they have every right to do that. I don't think it is our place to decide what is or isn't a good business venture unless of course it's in conflict with our ordinance. Mrs. Frandei: I frequent this car wash. They do a nice job. They are polite and courteous and I hope that it is successful. Mr. Gniewek: Mr. Shane, the waiver that is being granted, does this entail 11755 anything else or could it entail any other kind of use with the waiver that's being granted for that particular facility should the car wash fail completely? Mr. Shane: No. This is specific in connection with the car wash. Mr. Kluver: The other car washes would have the same opportunity to come back and apply for this waiver. We seem to be increasing the volume of the quick change oil changes. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Shane, are there any risks here from the City's standpoint with respect to future uses of that property along the lines that Mr. Gniewek is pursuing? Would it be limited to just that one area? Mr. Shane: Yes, because if you approve this resolution, it is based on a site plan which specifies one hoist. If you would want to expand that at all, it would require an additional waiver use. On a motion made by Mr. Gniewek, seconded by Mr. Tent and unanimously adopted, it was #7-123-91 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 23, 1991 on Petition 91-6-2-18 by Livonia Auto Wash requesting waiver use approval to operate an oil change facility in connection with an existing car wash located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt Road and Parkville Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 1, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 91-6-2-18 until the next Regular Meeting of August 6, 1991 . FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in New accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Ms. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 91-6-2-19 by Homestead Development requesting waiver use approval to construct a detached single family condominium project on property located on the north side of Clarita between Middlebelt Road and Melvin Avenue in the NE 1/4 of Section 11. Mr. Bakewell presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Shane: We have a letter from the Engineering Department stating they have no objection to the waiver use proposal. A letter from the Department of Safety, Division of Fire: The Fire Marshal's Division has no objection to this development. However, in a letter dated June 26, 1991 this Division was opposed to the typical 12' separation and recommended a wider separation 0 11756 between units. In review of the revised plans we find that the separation has been decreased from 12' to 10' instead of being increased. It is our feeling that in the event of fire, possible fire extension could result in damage to the adjacent structures due to the combustible construction. Mr. Shane then announced that the latest plan shows the separation has been increased to ,.� 13' . A letter from the Department of Public Safety, Division of Police, reads: In reference to the captioned petition, the following is submitted for your consideration: 1. No sidewalks are provided for. 2. No street lighting is shown. Mr. Shane announced that again the revised plan does provide for sidewalks. A letter from the Ordinance Enforcement Division states that the following deficiency or problem was found: There is no protective wall across the north property line and approximately 205' of the east property line, at the north end. In 1980, when the Art Van property was developed, this property was not zoned for residential use and no protective wall was required. Now that the property is being developed, the wall should be the responsibility of the developer. That is signed by William J. MacDonald, Supervisor. Finally, a letter from the Detroit Edison company states they have no objection to this petition. Mr. Gniewek: Mr. MacDonald had mentioned the fact that a wall had not been constructed. The wall is riot required to be put up by this petitioner. It's only if he desires to put that wall up to separate himself, is that correct? *o" Mr. Shane: That's my opinion, yes. If this property would be subdivided for a normal subdivision, then the subdivider would be required to put the wall up. Since this is not to be subdivided, this is a cluster housing project, the rule would not apply. Mr. Gniewek: It would occur to me that perhaps the wall that has been waived by the Zoning Board of Appeals is not a permanent waiver. I would imagine that if Art Van does come back at some future date, there might be a reconsideration of whether the waiver of the wall exists there and it would be upon the commercial development to construct the wall there. Mr. Shane: There is no waiver of a wall because when Art Van was constructed, the subject property was in an OS classification and would not have required a protective wall. Brent Snyder, 8169 Beacon Lane, Northville: I represent a part owner of Homestead Development. We have seen this property go from OS to R-7, which was 20 condominium units, down to R-2 with condominium cluster with approximately 12 units. We think it is a nice project and would like to proceed with it. We have tried to provide the city with some changes this past week like the 11757 sidewalks. We have not addressed the lighting nor have we really wanted to change from providing a wall, but keep it at a natural screening by putting in some evergreen plantings. We would like to proceed with it as soon as possible. We think it is a good project. We have staggered some of the front yards. It's a combination of bungalows and ranches and I think it will be a good contribution to the area. Mrs. Fandrei: Have you provided landscaping so that we could see what your plan is at the north end of the property? Mr. Snyder: Yes. Mrs. Fandrei: This is a little different setup from your average condominium association, is that true? Mr. Snyder: That's true to some extent. What you've got is called a site condo lot. Each person has limited use legal description on which they can dwell in their house or physical structure that dwells within that limited use. Beyond that is a common area use on which all the unit owners share that common area. The landscaping is a combination of existing trees and new plantings which Mr. Schrader could address. Mrs. Fandrei: Back to the amount the different property owners spend. He takes care of his own exterior and a limited amount of his property's exterior, say his grounds, correct? Mr. Snyder: That's correct. What our intentions are is to hopefully lead this group of people into their own association which then the large common area out back would be maintained by the group themselves. Beyond that, there are no roads or parking lots as such to take care of. Their own driveways and sidewalks would be maintained by themselves. Vern Schrader: (showed landscaped plan) . These are existing trees. We are going to berm here. We have purchased evergreens and shrubs. The whole area in essence will be screened. Mrs. Fandrei: What kind of evergreens are you talking about? Mr. Schrader: Scotch pine, Colorado spruce, cranberries, some dogwood and forsythia. Mrs. Fandrei: How many evergreens along that Art Van area? Mr. Schrader: Eight evergreens and some existing and some shrubberies. Mrs. Fandrei: How large are they? Mr. Schrader: Five to Six feet. Robert Detter, 29764 Clarita: There are a lot of big trees along the boarder 11758 there. Wil.i they remain there? It looks like a good idea to me. I have lived there 32 years and that's a long time for a piece of property to be tossed back and forth and not ever do anything with it. This seems to be better than that 20 unit one and it's much better than single family like they were proposing because there won't be any fences because I would have everybody's backyard going into my yard. So I am in favor of this. Mr. Tent: Mr. Schrader, are all those trees going to stay? Mr. Schrader: All the existing trees, yes. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 91-6-2-19 closed. On a motion made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimously adopted, it was #7-124-91 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on July 23, 1991 on Petition 91-6-2-19 by Homestead Development requesting waiver use approval to construct a detached single family condominium project on property located on the north side of Clarita between Middlebelt Road and Melvin Avenue in the NE 1/4 of Section 11, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 91-6-2-19 be approved subject to the City Council taking final action to rezone the subject property to an R-2 classification and to the following additional conditions: 1) That the Site Plan dated 7-17-91, as revised, prepared by Schrader-Porter & Associates, Inc. which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; 2) That the landscaping shown on the approved Site Plan shall be 44.11. installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and shall thereafter be maintained in a healthy condition; 3) That all landscaped areas shall be serviced by an automatic sprinkler system; 4) That the building elevations as shown on the approved Site Plan which are hereby approved shall be adhered to; for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 20.02A and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; 3) That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area; 11759 4) That the proposed use will provide for a single family development in keeping with the existing residential character of the neighborhood. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance .. #543, as amended. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Brent Snyder: Mr. Tent, the sprinklers should be on the front yard only? Mr. Tent: The whole thing. Common area too. Ms. Fandrei, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 91-6-2-20 by The Castillo Company, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to construct an insurance company service center office building to be located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Schoolcraft Road and Bentley Avenue in the SE 1/4 of Section 23. Mr. Bakewell presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Shane: The Engineering Department states in their letter that they have no objections to the waiver use proposal. A letter from the Inspection Department states that pursuant to your request, the Inspection Department conducted a zoning review of the above referenced petition. No deficiencies or problems were found. This office has no objections to the proposal. Signed by William J. MacDonald, Supervisor, Ordinance Enforcement %11' Division. A letter from the Department of Public Safety, Division of Fire, states they have no objection to this proposal. The Traffic Bureau's letter states that they find nothing on the site plan that is inconsistent with the Police Department's mission of public safety. The letter from The Detroit Edison company indicates they have no objection to the petition. We also have a letter from the Castillo Company addressed to Mr. Shane as follows: As you requested, we are enclosing a copy of our typical trash enclosure for your use prior to our upcoming meeting with the Planning Commission. Also enclosed is a copy of an employee patio that State Farm proposes for the site, not yet shown on the drawing. In addition, we offer the following information to address the recent concerns of the Planning Commission: 1. We have submitted a plan to the Wayne County Department of Public Services for review. They are not currently aware of any roadway improvements that will be required. However 11760 State Farm is aware that they must obtain all necessary permits for utility construction within the right-of-way, and they are willing to comply with any road improvements required by the County. Any review comments available by the date of our upcoming Planning Commission meeting will be made available. 2. A Nh materials sample board will be presented by State Farm at the ,,,,, meeting. 3. Signs currently shown (one 30 sq. ft. monument and two wall signs) will have to be approved by variance request to the Zoning Board of Adjustment. We ask that they be approved contingent on obtaining this approval. If not successful, we will comply with the ordinance restrictions. 4. We have currently shown the required fencing as a screen to residential. State Farm agrees with the Planning Commission and even prefers to screen with natural materials instead of a wall. This can be accomplished by infilling landscape material with the existing stand of trees, and will in fact limit any possible damage to these trees that the wall construction would have caused. Previous meetings have not indicated as yet that the residents concur with the Planning Commission on this subject. State Farm is therefore willing to seek a variance from the Zoning Board of Adjustment to replace the required wall with landscape screening if both the Planning Commission and the residents concur. 5. Landscape areas will have an automatic sprinkler system. State Farm will address these issues at the upcoming meeting. You may wish to copy this letter to the Commission members for clarification. Signed by Dorian F. Fortney, AIA. Rodney Jackson, staff architect with State Farm, Bloomington, Illinois: We have gone through the site plan somewhat and the rezoning issue. We have had some discussions with the homeowners and we felt that the �-- plans we submitted goes along with the feelings of the homeowners. The trash enclosure will be a brick enclosure with metal doors. Nor Another issue that was brought up was about the screen wall. I understand the Planning Commission would like to see landscaping back there in lieu of the wall, but from the feelings we got from the homeowners, they would rather see the wall. If it turns out that landscaping is what everybody wants, the only conflict I would have is that since the zoning ordinance requires that we have a screen wall between OS and residential zoning, we will have to get a variance saying that we won't have to get one. On the sign issue, as mentioned we show three signs, two building mounted and one ground. We are aware that the ordinance says the ground sign must be no more than 10 sq.ft. , however, our typical ground sign is 30 sq.ft. each side and we will be seeking a variance from the zoning board for this. (Mr. Jackson then showed brick samples and a drawing of the building to the commissioners) . The area will be sprinklered by automatic sprinkler system. I had a phone conversation this afternoon with John Less of Wayne County Department of Public Services and he sent out a letter Friday after an initial review of our preliminary site plan and there was some comment about permitting work in the right-of-way. There was one coimnent that he had that we feel seriously impacts our site plan and that is that our south driveway be an exit only driveway and that is due to the conflict with Buckingham Avenue as to left 11761 hand turn traffic being conflicting with each other and traffic backing up. They said our north driveway was fine as an enter and exit driveway. The problem is with our on-site traffic. What we would like to propose is to flip the site plan from top to bottom so that the front of the building moves here and then the north driveway becomes an enter/exit and the south driveway is exit only. We feel that that would provide better on-site traffic flow and that way we could comply with the County's requirements. Also the picnic area would be two 1.2' square concrete slabs with landscaping around for an outdoor eating area. I would like to request for a conditional approval of our site plan based on the sign variance and to include the picnic area. The main thing would be to flip the site plan, top to bottom. We would comply with any other County requirements for our work in the right-of-way. Mr. LaPine: I am curious about the flopping. What you would do is take the building and push it closer to the north and then there would be less landscaping and more on the south, is that right? Mr. Jackson: True, the front of the building would end up being to the north. Mr. LaPine: The front of the building now faces Middlebelt? Mr. Jackson: No, now the end of the building faces Middlebelt. Mr. LaPine: What faces Middlebelt is a solid brick wall, or does it have windows in it? Mr. Jackson: There would be windows in the center. Mr. Vyhnalek: If he is going to flipflop the whole plan, he has to put it on a New plan and he also has to have the site plan with the picnic area in there. We have to see it to approve it. Mr. Kluver: Mr. Shane, any major problems from your aspect with flipflopping this plan? Mr. Shane: No. Mr. Vyhnalek: Who is going to make the decision on the wall? I thought the neighbors were involved in this. Mr. Shane: If they should come before the Zoning Board of Appeals, the issue will go to the public. Mr. Gniewek: The wall is included at this point in time. If they want a waiver they can go to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The only point Mr. Jackson made is that if the wall is constructed, they would loose some of the trees along the property line. I don't see the Zoning Board of Appeals granting a permanent waiver. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 91-6-2-20 closed. 11762 Mr. LaPine: Mr. Jackson, do you have an elevation plan of the east side? Mr. Jackson: Yes. (Mr. Jackson displayed the elevation plan) Mr. LaPine: To me thatis just stark. Mr. Jackson: The landscape plan will dress it up quite a bit. Mr. LaPine: What you have there now is all brick and to me it is just ugly. On a motion duly made by Mr. Gniewek, seconded by Mr. Tent and unanimously approved, it was #7-125-91 RESOLVED that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 23, 1991 on Petition 91-6-2-20 by the Castillo Company, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to construct an insurance company service center office building to be located on the west side of Middiebeit Road between Schoolcraft Road and Bentley Avenue in the SE 1/4 of Section 23, the City Planning Commission does hereby detemine to table Petition 91-6-2-20 until the Study Meeting of July 30, 1991. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, announced that the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed at 12:49 and the Commission would proceed with items pending --- before it. 4m. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr Vyhnalek and unanimously approved, it was #7-126-91 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Final Plat for Western Golf Estates Subdivision proposed to be located north of Lyndon, west of Inkster in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 24 subject to the resolution of the matter concerning the relocation of an existing storm sewer easement currently bisecting a portion of Lot 54 and to the following additional condition: 1) That the proprietor shall submit a plan for a Subdivision Entrance Marker to the Planning Commission for its approval within thirty (30) days of the date of this Resolution. for the following reasons: 1) That the Final Plat is drawn in substantial conformance with the Preliminary Plat; 2) That the Engineering Department does not object to approval of the Final Plat; 11763 3) That all of the financial obligations imposed by the City upon the proprietor have been taken care of. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ,r, On a motion duly made and seconded, it was #7-12.7-91 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 626th Regular Meeting held on July 9, 1991 are approved as corrected. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Tent, Gniewek, Kluver, LaPine, Vyhnalek, Fandrei, Engebretson NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Morrow ABSENT: McCann Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously approved, it was #7-128-91 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 367th Special Meeting held on July 16, 1991 are approved. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 627th Regular �-- Meeting and Public Hearings held on July 23, 1991 was adjourned at 12:55 p.m. `— CITY PLANNING COMMISSION '/Z '�i 1. �- Brenda Lee Fandrei, Secretary /. c � ATTEST: Jack 'Engebreison, Chairman du