HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2016-06-28 MINUTES OF THE 1,090TH PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
On Tuesday, June 28, 2016, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 1,090th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000
Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Ian Wilshaw, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Members present: Sam Caramagno Elizabeth McCue Glen Long
Carol A. Smiley Peter Ventura Ian Wilshaw
Members absent: None
Mr. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, and Ms. Margie Watson, Program
Supervisor, were also present.
Chairman Wilshaw informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda
involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City
Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and make the final
determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning
Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or
vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City
Council for the final determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected. If a
petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan approval is denied tonight, the
petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City
Council. Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Commission become effective
seven (7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning Commission and the
professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their filing. The staff
has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions, which
the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the
proceedings tonight. At our Special Meeting last week, we had the election of
officers. I would like to congratulate Mr. Long on becoming Vice Chairman. I would
also like to congratulate Mr. Caramagno on taking on the role of Secretary. With
that, I also want to thank Mrs. Smiley for about 12 years of service as our
Secretary. Thank you very much for doing that.
ITEM #1 PETITION 2016-05-02-10 MAC YARD
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2016-
05-02-10 submitted by MN Express — MAC Yard, L.L.C.
requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 16.11(b) of
the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to
expand the operation of a truck terminal at 13586 Merriman
Road, located on the east side of Merriman Road between the
June 28, 2016
27650
CSX Railroad right-of-way and Schoolcraft Road in the Northwest
1/4 of Section 26.
Mr. Taormina: This is a request to expand the operation of an existing truck
terminal. The property is on the east side of Merriman Road
between the CSX Railroad and Schoolcraft Road. The zoning of
the property is M-1, Light Manufacturing. The site is surrounded
on all four sides by similar M-1 zoned parcels. This property is
about 2.68 acres in area. The subject property consists of a single
tax parcel that is currently vacant and undeveloped. It contains a
stand of trees and undergrowth. The parcel is contiguous to and
owned in common with three other parcels that are located to the
east, all of which contain buildings that are owned by McKesson,
a provider of medical supplies and pharmaceuticals. The
purchaser of the property, MN Express, owns the abutting
property to the south, which is 13520 Merriman Road. In 2012,
MN Express received waiver use approval to utilize their current
site as a trucking terminal and to relocate and expand a pre-
existing RV storage yard. Previous to MN Express, the former
owner of the property, Robert Okerstrom, obtained waiver use
approval in 2001 to utilize a portion of the site for RV storage. MN
Express relocated the RV operation to the rear of the property
and developed the front part of the site as part of the company's
core business, which is trucking. The current proposal would
expand the area of the outdoor truck terminal. The new yard
would be developed with a gravel surface that would be properly
graded and drained, similar to what presently exists for a large
portion of the current truck terminal as well as the RV storage lot.
There would be a new six foot high chain link fence that would be
installed around the outer boundaries of the truck yard, and
between the two properties are openings that would allow trucks
to enter and exit. There would be no new curb cuts to Merriman,
Schoolcraft or Industrial Roads. The site would be fully lighted.
They would provide LED lighting that would match what is
existing on the site. The plan indicates that the new light
standards would be a maximum of 20 feet in height. The plan also
illustrates the location of a stormwater detention basin that would
be located at the east end of the property. With that, Mr.
Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Please.
Mr. Taormina: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from
the Engineering Division, dated June 14, 2016, which reads as
follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering
Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no
objections to the proposed waiver use petition at this time. The
June 28, 2016
27651
existing property is assigned an address of 13586 Merriman
Road. The included legal description has a misclosure of 1.64
feet which is not within the current survey standards of 1'in 5,000'
of boundary length. While the legal description provided is
sufficient for Planning Department purposes, the surveyor should
correct the issues prior to submitting for any Engineering
Department permits. The property currently has access to public
sanitary sewer and water main within the Merriman Road right-
of-way through an existing easement over the parcel to the west.
Any connections to utilities within Merriman Road will need to be
permitted through Wayne County. The plans indicate that the
owner is intending the site to be serviced by an existing storm
sewer on the parcel to the south. While we do not object to the
proposed connection, the existing sewer is private, and not under
our jurisdiction. The owner will need to obtain easements from
the abutting property owner to tie into their private storm sewer.
Also, the owner will need to show calculations for the neighboring
storm sewer, to show that it will be able to handle the proposed
flows without surcharging the downstream piping." The letter is
signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The
second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated
June 9, 2016, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed
the site plan submitted in connection with a request to improve
the property for the outdoor storage of recreational equipment on
property located at the above referenced address. We have no
objections to this proposal with the following stipulations: Knox
Box must be installed at the front gate with keys inside." The
letter is signed by Keith Bo, Senior Fire Inspector. The third letter
is from the Division of Police, dated June 21, 2016, which reads
as follows: "I have reviewed the plans in connection with the
petition. I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed
by Brian Leigh, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from
the Inspection Department, dated June 14, 2016, which reads as
follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above-referenced petition
has been reviewed. The parking lot is required to be hard
surfaced with concrete or plant mixed bituminous material. This
requirement can be waived only by a super majority of City
Council. This Department has no further objections to this
petition."The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Assistant Director
of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Seeing none,
if the petitioner is here, please state your name and address for
the record please.
John Romano, D&G Building Company, 30735 Cypress, Romulus, Michigan.
June 28, 2016
27652
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anything you would like to add to what you've heard so
far?
Mr. Romano: No. Not at this time.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for the petitioner from the Commission?
Mr. Caramagno: You're representing the Mac truck yard?
Mr. Romano: Yes.
Mr. Caramagno: Do you have interest in this property?
Mr. Romano: Other than that we are working with him, we are the developer for
his current facility and we're working together on developing this
piece.
Mr. Caramagno: When you say developer, you're developing the building, the lot?
Mr. Romano: General contractor, I'm sorry.
Mr. Caramagno: I noticed the lot was a little bit dusty the other day when I was
there. I know we haven't had any rain. Are there plans to chloride
that lot or put some sort of dust treatment down?
Mr. Romano: We can definitely look into that.
Mr. Caramagno: It seems like an odd year, but it's awful dry and it's maintained
exceptionally. There's no doubt about that, including the striping
on the gravel. I was impressed with that. But it just seemed a little
bit dusty. I don't know if that will bother the neighbors as truck
traffic goes in and out.
Mr. Romano: We'll definitely take a look at that.
Mr. Caramagno: Thank you.
Mr. Taormina: This was a question that came up the at the study meeting, and
that was, the landscaping treatment of the detention basin and
what the plans are for that. If maybe the petitioner could respond
to that.
Mr. Romano: We could try to put some landscaping within the detention basin
area, but our biggest issue is, there is no water available at that
site currently. We don't mind putting it in, but there's no guarantee
or assurances that it's going to last. To drag the water in, we'd
have to bring it in from Merriman.
June 28, 2016
27653
Mr. Taormina: Would this function as a dry detention basin?
Mr. Romano: That I do not know.
Mr. Taormina: When I say dry, I'm wondering if it would contain any permanent
standing water.
Mr. Romano: I do not know if they've gone deep enough into the engineering
to determine that or not. Yeah, usually you're right. Sometimes
they have four feet of water in the bottom of the pond but I'm not
sure in this situation if it's dry or if they are going to maintain that
water until we get into engineering.
Mr. Taormina: Okay. Thank you. The prepared resolution does address that. It
doesn't place any specific requirement in terms of landscaping,
but it would allow staff to work with the designers to find some
solution relative to landscaping.
Mr. Ventura: Is there any reason that you couldn't bring water from the
adjacent facility onto the site instead of going to Merriman Road?
Mr. Romano: Like I say, we would have to tap it along Merriman Road. So we're
talking probably over 500 feet.
Mr. Ventura: Isn't there water to the truck terminal that exists to the south of
this?
Mr. Romano: Yes, but I think the building, like I say, to get the water to the pond
from the building would be over 500 feet. All the irrigation is along
Merriman Road. The water, the building, everything, is all along
Merriman Road. Even the building that's in that one corner there,
you're probably still talking 400 feet to try to bring it over there,
and the water is in the front of the building. So we'd have to start
from the front and work back.
Mr. Ventura: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: As we spoke at our study meeting, the Commission was
concerned that the gravel and just the natural dirt that exists in
this lot could permeate over into that retention pond and basically
clog it. There needs to be some sort of barrier or some way to
sort of soften that gap.
Mr. Romano: We could berm the pond so that way there is no filtration from the
gravel. We can do that. We can seed it. I mean we can use
highway mix just like doing the highway. The highway doesn't
June 28, 2016
27654
have any type of irrigation as well. We can seed it. I'm just
concerned about the plantings. I guess my concern is whether or
not the plantings would take good. Absolutely seeding the pond,
berming it, no issues at all. That would all be part of the plan.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. That sounds reasonable. Thank you. Is there anything else
you'd like to add?
Mr. Romano: No.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, I will close
the public hearing and ask for a motion.
On a motion by Ventura, seconded by McCue, and unanimously adopted, it was
#06-64-2016 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on June 28, 2016, on Petition
2016-05-02-10 submitted by MN Express — MAC Yard, L.L.C.
requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 16.11(b) of
the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to
expand the operation of a truck terminal at 13586 Merriman
Road, located on the east side of Merriman Road between the
CSX Railroad right-of-way and Schoolcraft Road in the Northwest
1/4 of Section 26, which property is zoned M-1, the Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 2016-05-02-10 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1. That the Grading Plan marked Sheet CE2 dated May 31,
2016, as revised, prepared by Hennessey Engineers, Inc.,
is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
2. That the outdoor storage of trucks and tractor trailers shall
be limited to the designated locations as shown on the
above referenced Grading Plan and shall be maintained in
an orderly manner;
3. That the maximum number of trucks and tractor trailers
parked on the site shall not exceed a total of seventy-seven
(77);
4. That the parking areas for the truck terminal shall be hard
surfaced with crushed rock, gravel or other material as
approved by the Engineering Division prior to the issuance
of the Certificate of Occupancy by the Inspection
Department;
June 28, 2016
27655
5. That the parking areas for the truck terminal shall be
maintained in a dust free condition, and shall be properly
graded and drained to dispose of all surface water in a
manner as approved by the Engineering Division;
6. That there shall be no outdoor storage of vehicle parts,
equipment, scrap material, waste, petroleum products,
junked, unlicensed or inoperable vehicles or trailers, or other
similar items in connection with this operation;
7. That this site shall meet either the City of Livonia or the
Wayne County Storm Water Management Ordinance,
whichever applies, and shall secure any required permits,
including storm water management permits, wetlands
permits and soil erosion and sedimentation control permits,
from Wayne County, the City of Livonia, and/or the State of
Michigan Department of Natural Resources and
Environment (DNRE);
8. That prior to City Council approval, the Petitioner shall
submit a landscaping plan that includes plantings around the
site and storm water detention area;
9. That the plan referenced in this approving resolution shall
be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time of
application for the Certificate of Occupancy.
Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for
the following reasons:
1. That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the special
and general waiver use standards and requirements as set
forth in sections 16.11 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance
#543;
2. That the subject property has the capacity to accommodate
the proposed use; and,
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.
June 28, 2016
27656
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution.
ITEM #2 PETITION 2012-09-02-22 MARX COLLISION
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2012-
09-02-22 submitted by Marx Collision requesting to modify
Council Resolution #462-12 in connection with a previously-
approved waiver use adopted on November 21, 2012, in order to
allow the overnight outdoor parking and storage of vehicles in
connection with the auto repair business at 30731 Eight Mile
Road, located on the southwest corner of Eight Mile Road and
Milburn Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 2.
Mr. Taormina: This is a request to modify a condition of approval of a waiver use
that was originally granted in 2012 in connection with an auto
repair business. Marx Collision is located at the southwest corner
of Eight Mile and Milburn Avenue. On November 21, 2012, Marx
Collision received waiver use approval to operate an auto repair
facility with a condition that stated, "there shall not be any
overnight outdoor parking or storage of vehicles on the site."
Apparently, the Petitioner's current business operation is such
that it is difficult for them to adhere to this requirement, and they
are now seeking permission to modify the condition so that it
reads: "That there shall be no overnight outdoor parking or
storage of any un-plated or damaged vehicles on the site." This
change is largely motivated as a means for the Petitioners to
come into compliance and, once this is done, hopefully enable
them to secure Class B (Used Vehicle Dealer) and Class C (Used
Vehicle Parts Dealer) licenses. Part of the Marx Collision
business model is buying damaged vehicles at auction. The
vehicles are salvaged for parts that are used to fix customer
vehicles. The Class B and C auto dealer licenses will allow them
to buy clear and salvage titled vehicles at a low cost, dismantle
the vehicles for parts, and then re-sell the "carcass" of the vehicle
at a future auction. Turnaround time, according to the petitioner,
is approximately 48 hours. The Petitioner is indicating that no
vehicles would be displayed or held out for sale at their place of
business on Eight Mile Road. The licenses would only be used to
buy vehicles for parts and sell afterword at auction. Before issuing
or transferring an auto dealer license, the State of Michigan
requires that the local community grant the necessary Municipal
and Zoning approvals. In Livonia, new and used car dealers are
not allowed in any M-1 zoning district. However, where Municipal
and Zoning approval is necessary to operate a dealer license and
June 28, 2016
27657
where no vehicles are stored, displayed or sold on the premises,
the city administration has, on a case-by-case basis, granted
such approvals. This typically applies to Class B (Used Vehicle
Dealer) and Class W(Automotive Wholesaler) licenses issued by
the Michigan Department of State (MDOS) Business Licensing
Section. MDOS requires the licensees to have a business
address, which oftentimes serves solely as an office. Typical with
this sort of arrangement, vehicles are purchased at auction and
then shipped directly to an off-site dealer, not the home office.
The M-1 zoned areas contain several businesses licensed to
conduct such transactions, but with a condition placed on their
Certificate of Occupancy that there can be no vehicles stored or
displayed on the premises. In May of 2015, Marx Collision filed
a request for MDOS Municipal and Zoning approvals for both a
Class B (Used Vehicle Dealer) and Class C (Used Vehicle Parts
Dealer). The Planning Department, after conducting several
inspections of the premises at times when the business was
closed, determined that the aforementioned condition was not
being complied with and, in fact, damaged and unlicensed
vehicles were being stored outside. As such, the Planning
Department refused to approve the MDOS Municipal and Zoning
Approval forms. The zoning map shows the location of the
property at the southwest corner of Milburn and Eight Mile Road.
The building occupies probably 60 to 70 percent of the available
land area. There is parking that runs perpendicular to Milburn
Avenue. The vehicles back directly onto the side street there, but
there is additional parking provided along the front of the building
adjacent to Eight Mile Road. There is some limited storage on the
west side and south side of the building, areas that are currently
fenced in. In 2012, Marx Collision submitted their request to
operate the auto repair business. They took an existing mechanic
shop and expanded that to include a body shop on the easterly
half of the building. With that, Mr. Chairman, we have one item of
correspondence I can read out.
Mr. Wilshaw: Please.
Mr. Taormina: There is one item of correspondence from the Inspection
Department, dated June 14, 2016, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request, the above-referenced petition has
been reviewed. This Department has no objections to this
petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Assistant
Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? If the petitioner
is here, please come forward. We will need your name and
address for the record please.
June 28, 2016
27658
Keith Beals, Auto Dealer Manager, 37891 Lans Cruze, Harrison Township,
Michigan 48045.
Mr. Wilshaw: Do you have anything to add?
Mr. Beals: I want to thank the City and Mark for their help in getting our
waiver, which really helped our business. Now we've grown. We
have an early bird drop off box so the customers can drop their
vehicles off and then they can pick them up at night as well.
Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for the petitioner?
Mr. Caramagno: Can you explain to us, you agreed to an original plan from the
Council that changed and I saw pictures of cars. I drive by your
place just about daily. What changed where you couldn't comply
and why? How did we go by to find that and you didn't come to
us and say, hey, listen, I can't comply with your resolution any
longer?
Mr. Beals: Well, at the time when we first started, we received that waiver,
we thought it was storage of unrepaired vehicles, parts, parked
cars. We didn't realize it was for all cars and that was our mistake.
So then the business grew and we didn't have all the space so
we had to put the cars outside. When we started talking with
Mark, he explained that to us. So then we recognized it and we've
been working very hard and diligently to keep all unplated or
damaged vehicles inside the building. We've acquired additional
parking space behind our building on the contiguous property so
we can put more vehicles over there, and that's in a fenced in
area as well.
Mr. Caramagno: Those vehicles you put in the fenced in property behind you, do
you put them in there at night or during the day, and you pull them
out in the morning? How does that work?
Mr. Beals: We pull them out as we need. So if we need to work on the
vehicle, get it inside, fix it and then put it out front for the customer
to pick it up. So if we have excess vehicles, we can now utilize
this other lot.
Mr. Caramagno: What does licensed versus unlicensed vehicles mean to you?
Mr. Beals: To us?
Mr. Caramagno: Yes.
June 28, 2016
27659
Mr. Beals: Well, it's a vehicle without a plate. So if it was a vehicle we
purchased for parts, that vehicle wouldn't come with a plate. It
wouldn't be registered.
Mr. Caramagno: So that vehicle has to stay inside?
Mr. Beals: Yes. The vehicle would stay inside or in our acquired lot behind
the building.
Mr. Caramagno: How do you move those cars? Normally, they're wrecked. How
do you move them around?
Mr. Beals: We could either use a hi-lo or a tow truck.
Mr. Caramagno: In transit repair, you consider that a plated vehicle if you had
something that was an in transit repair or a temporary tag on a
car? Would that be considered by you to be a plated vehicle?
Mr. Beals: In transit would come with a plate. So in that transit period, they
would be required at our lot to leave the plate on the car. If it was
a vehicle that hadn't received its plate yet, it would have a sticker
in the window.
Mr. Caramagno: The reason I'm asking these questions is because that's what the
problem is. You've got or had vehicles out there that were not
plated just sitting there and it's not very slightly. I'll tell you that
from my opinion. Let me ask you about the boat. The boat goes
in and comes out every night hooked to the four wheeler?
Mr. Beals: Yes.
Mr. Caramagno: Is that something being repaired or is it just stored there?
Mr. Beals: No, that boat is being repaired. It will be gone this weekend.
Mr. Caramagno: Thank you.
Ms. Smiley: I didn't know you were licensed to do boats too.
Mr. Beals: Yes. The mechanic's license allows us to do that.
Ms. Smiley: So it's not just cars. It's boats and . . .
Mr. Beals: Cars, boats, hi-los, any mechanical gas-operated item.
June 28, 2016
27660
Ms. Smiley: And what is the turnaround time when you get a vehicle before
it's either repaired or chopped up?
Mr. Beals: Depending on the severity, say if it was $10,000 job, it would
normally be 10 days. The vehicle that we purchase the parts for,
that would only take us the 48 hour period to strip the parts and
have the vehicle taken away.
Ms. Smiley: And where does it go after you have it taken away?
Mr. Beals: It goes back to an auction because with a dealer license, then we
can sell the vehicle at the auction under this salvage state. But if
we don't have a dealer license, we cannot sell that vehicle at an
auction.
Ms. Smiley: As one Commissioner, I'm not sure this is the best site to do any
more there. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Ventura: Back to Mr. Taormina. After the granting of the permission in
2012, to your knowledge, is it fair to say that generally the
business did not comply with the requirements of the Planning
Commission and Council?
Mr. Taormina: I can't really speak to the condition of the site for a year or two
following the approvals. While I would drive by occasionally after
hours and notice a couple of vehicles, I really didn't examine the
site that closely to see if there were plated or damage vehicles. I
took some photographic evidence, I think late last year, but that
was in connection with their request to have the dealer licenses.
I was reviewing the compliance under the original approvals to
make a determination as to whether or not to issue those
licenses. When I noticed non-compliance and told them about
that, it was the decision then that they would try to seek to amend
that approval to better their chances to secure those licenses. I
can really only speak to the non-compliance issue probably going
back a little less than a year.
Mr. Ventura: Thank you.
Mr. Caramagno: How long have you been in business, sir?
Mr. Beals: We've been in business for 10 years.
Mr. Caramagno: At this location, for how long?
Mr. Beals: At this location, four years.
June 28, 2016
27661
Mr. Caramagno: Where were you before this?
Mr. Beals: We were in the City of Detroit. We had some difficulties
maintaining the vehicles from having damage and theft and we
moved to Livonia because you have a much better city for the
policing and it was very difficult there. So when we moved, we
had a dealers license in Detroit. We were able to utilize that. The
landlord rented the building to another dealer so we couldn't keep
our license there. That's what brought us to the request to get
approval in the City of Livonia.
Mr. Caramagno: This building that you're in here, do you own it or lease it?
Mr. Beals: We own it.
Mr. Caramagno: Have you outgrown it?
Mr. Beals: Not really. We're getting better production now that we have more
employees and we have more work. We can afford to hire more
people so we can get the production, do it faster and we've
acquired the lot behind us for the storage so there would be less
vehicles on the property.
Mr. Caramagno: The lot behind you is a little different type situation. It looks like a
couple garages and offices. Do you own that lot as well now?
Mr. Beals: No. Jeff Bore owns it. He's in the audience. We lease the property
from him.
Mr. Caramagno: You lease the parking and the outdoor storage there.
Mr. Beals: Yes.
Mr. Caramagno: Is that zoned for outside storage, that property?
Mr. Beals: The property is all fenced in so there is no outdoor storage
outside the fencing.
Mr. Taormina: It's not something that I'm aware of. We haven't reviewed it for
compliance with zoning if it's strictly used for storage. That would
really have to go to the Inspection and Enforcement division.
There would be obvious concerns in terms of how many vehicles.
If we start seeing cars being stored there continuously and that
are damaged, that could very well constitute a violation as well.
I'd have some concerns relative to how that lot was being utilized
for storage, especially if the vehicles aren't moving.
June 28, 2016
27662
Mr. Caramagno: Thank you.
Mr. Long: Do you have a relationship with your neighbors? How do they
feel about this? Have they talked to you at all, both the
neighboring businesses and the houses that are around there on
Milburn?
Mr. Beals: We have a good relationship. We haven't had any complaints that
we're aware of. We service many of them and we're happy about
that.
Mr. Long: Thank you.
Mr. Caramagno: Have you done any research on any other property in the area
that allows outdoor storage somewhere close where you can park
these cars if you get in a jam? Across the street? Are there any
lots there that allow for outdoor storage that are local enough for
you to comply with the initial Council Resolution?
Mr. Beals: We haven't pursued that. Directly across the street is Farmington.
I haven't seen a lot available but we could look into that.
Mr. Caramagno: I'm just asking if you've looked into the option. That's all. In case
this doesn't fly tonight.
Mr. Beals: This was the closest option that we found for storage.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition?
Jeff Bore, 11626 Riverside, Plymouth, Michigan. I own the building, me and wife
do, that is directly behind Marx Collision at 20525 Milburn. I
couldn't ask for a better business to be next door. I'm very
particular about my property and the look of my surroundings, and
they do a great job. I have no issues with them. He mentioned
before about the lease, the additional parking. It's just an
agreement. It's not a money thing. If he has overflow, his
employees will park their cars there. Every once in a while they
have a customer's car. But it's a quick turnaround because I don't
want anything stored in my lot. I do allow that because they are
great neighbors. That's what I'd like to say.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you.
Ms. Smiley What is your business?
June 28, 2016
27663
Mr. Bore: We work with racing products. We're a manufacturer/distributor
of racing products. It's light manufacturing. There's four other
tenants in our unit.
Ms. Smiley: You're the one that's offering him some property to place his
overflow?
Mr. Bore: Yes,
Ms. Smiley: And you don't have a problem with how his yard looks?
Mr. Bore: No. Not at all. In fact, he gets better every day. They keep it clean
and like where my office sits, I look at the back of his building,
and that's where the scrap cars come and go, and they're never
there more than eight hours. His scrap guy is always there taking
the stuff away. His dumpster is behind the fence. When the
dumpster guy comes, he has to unlock the fence and dump his
dumpster and put it back. The fence is always closed. The only
thing I'll see during the day is they'll bring some cars outside that
are getting worked on, and then they go back inside. The
turnaround is very quick on these cars. I don't feel like there are
junk cars sitting next to my building in his lot.
Ms. Smiley: Thank you.
Mr. Taormina: Just a quick question for the neighbor. Are all the units leased
right now in your building?
Mr. Bore: All but one.
Mr. Taormina: Is that space ever available for storage or is that something
you've discussed with the petitioner, the possibility if they needed
additional storage within that unit?
Mr. Bore: Yes. Oh, absolutely.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Bore, for coming forward and speaking. I
appreciate it. Is there anybody else wishing to speak? If not, I'll
give the petitioner one more opportunity if you'd like to make any
closing comments or add to anything he's already heard.
Mr. Beals: No, thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: With that, I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion.
On a motion by McCue, seconded by Ventura, and adopted, it was
June 28, 2016
27664
#06-65-2016 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on June 28, 2016, on Petition
2012-09-02-22 submitted by Marx Collision requesting to modify
Council Resolution #462-12 in connection with a previously-
approved waiver use adopted on November 21, 2012, in order to
allow the overnight outdoor parking and storage of vehicles in
connection with the auto repair business at 30731 Eight Mile
Road, located on the southwest corner of Eight Mile Road and
Milburn Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 2, which property
is zoned M-1, the Planning Commission does hereby deny the
request to modify Council Resolution #462-12 in connection with
Petition 2012-09-02-22 for the following reasons:
1. That the petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the
proposed modification is in the best interest of the City of
Livonia;
2. That the proposed modification is incompatible to and not in
harmony with the surrounding uses in the area;
3. That the proposed modification would have a detrimental
effect upon the neighboring properties;
4. Allowing the proposed modification would be detrimental to
the aesthetic quality and appeal of the surrounding area,
and thereby inappropriately altering the character of the
neighborhood; and
5. That approving this request would allow elements that are
inconsistent with the surrounding land uses.
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. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion?
Ms. Smiley: I was leaning towards denying myself, but in light of the neighbor
and the possibility of cleaning this up, I think I'm going to vote no
on the denying resolution at this time.
Mr. Long: I think I am like-minded with Mrs. Smiley. Given the neighbor's
testimony, I would vote note no on the denying resolution.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anyone else? If not, please call the roll on the denying
resolution.
June 28, 2016
27665
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: McCue, Ventura, Caramagno, Wilshaw
NAYS: Long, Smiley
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. The petitioner will have ten days in which to appeal the
decision of the Planning Commission in writing to the City
Council.
Mr. Beal: Does it have to be sent registered mail or can we deliver it?
Mr. Taormina: I'll explain the process if you want to give me a call tomorrow.
Mr. Wilshaw: Yes. Mr. Taormina can help you. It's just in writing. Thank you,
sir.
ITEM #3 PETITION 2002-02-02-04 CHINESE GOSPEL CHURCH
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2002-
02-02-04 submitted by Chinese Gospel Church requesting to
modify Council Resolution #224-02 in connection with a
previously-approved waiver use adopted on April 24, 2002, in
order to allow the temporary use of a mobile/modular classroom
and worship area in connection with the existing church at 35301
Five Mile Road, located on the south side of Five Mile Road
between Farmington Road and Yale Avenue in the Northwest 1/4
of Section 21.
Mr. Taormina: This is another request to modify a condition that was previously
imposed by the City Council as part of the granting of a waiver of
use. It is the site of the Chinese Gospel Church, which is on the
south side of Five Mile Road between Farmington and Yale
Roads. In 2002, the Church received waiver use approval to
construct an addition and expand the sanctuary. At the time of
the approval, the Church maintained a mobile classroom in the
parking lot that was located at the rear of the property. One of the
conditions of approval specified "that the temporary mobile
classroom shall be removed prior to the issuance of the
Certificate of Occupancy." Following completion of the addition,
the temporary mobile classroom was removed. In a letter dated
June 6, 2016, Richard Goers, English Pastor at the Church,
explains that a growing number of parishioners desire to learn
and worship in English. Currently, space at the church is limited,
June 28, 2016
27666
and they're unable to hold concurrent Chinese and English
speaking services. As the Church explores the possibility of
expanding the facilities in order to meet long-term needs, they are
asking permission to once again utilize a temporary modular
structure for classrooms and worship space. The modular
structure would measure 24 feet by 40 feet in overall size. It would
be placed behind the church at the north end of the rear parking
lot. The parking lot is divided between an upper level and a lower
level with a set of concrete stairs that connect the two. The
structure would be placed near the base of the stairs in the lower
lot, and in an area that appears to be seldom used for parking.
These are some photographs where the mobile classroom would
be provided. Again, this is the lower area of the parking lot. Off to
the left is the stairwell that connects the two parking lots. The
trailer would be situated at the north end of the parking lot that is
directly behind the church. Ideally, use of a temporary structure
such as this would be addressed as part of the site plan review
process involving the permanent accommodations for the use.
However, in this case, no site plan has been submitted. The
petitioner is therefore requesting to modify condition #9 of Council
Resolution #224-02 to read: "That the Chinese Gospel Church of
Livonia will be permitted to use a 24 foot by 40 foot modular
classroom and worship area until the completion of a permanent
addition to the church or for a period of three (3) years from City
Council approval." With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the
departmental correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Please.
Mr. Taormina: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from
the Engineering Division, dated June 14, 2016, which reads as
follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering
Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no
objections to the proposed waiver use at this time. The legal
description on record with the City of Livonia Assessing
Department appears to be correct and should be used in
conjunction with this petition. The existing property is assigned
an address of 35301 Five Mile Road. The property is currently
serviced with public storm and sanitary sewer, and water main,
and the included drawings indicate that the project will consist of
placing a temporary building with no connections to public
utilities. Based on the provided information, there should be no
impact to existing utilities. If the owner intends to connect the
structure to City facilities, the owner shall provide drawings to this
department to determine if permits will be required. Please note
that any work within the Five Mile Road right-of-way will require
permits from the Wayne County Department of Public Service."
June 28, 2016
27667
The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City
Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue
Division, dated June 9, 2016, which reads as follows: "This office
has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request
to allow the temporary use of a mobile/modular classroom and
worship area in connection with the existing church on property
located at the above referenced address. We have no objections
to this proposal with the following stipulations: The proposed
structure does not diminish the required number of parking
spaces needed for the current facility." The letter is signed by
Daniel Lee, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of
Police, dated June 20, 2016, which reads as follows: "I have
reviewed the plans in connection with the petition. I have no
objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Brian Leigh,
Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection
Department, dated June 14, 2016, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request, the above referenced petition has
been reviewed. (1) A temporary modular building would only be
granted a building permit for six months. If the structure is needed
for more than six months, then a variance from the Building Code
Board of Appeals would be required. (2) The modular trailers are
required to meet all Michigan Barrier Free codes and have
restrooms provided. (3) All unlicensed vehicles shall be removed
from the property. This Department has no further objections to
this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Assistant
Director of Inspection.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for Mr. Taormina? I have one quick
question. As I look through the different diagrams in our packet
and some that you displayed on the screen this evening, the
location of the trailer itself seems to move around. One indicates
it further into the parking area; one sort of shows it up in the corner
of the parking area. I've seen it oriented a number of different
ways. I'm just curious if we know exactly where the proposed
location is?
Mr. Taormina: It is my understanding that this is the most accurate depiction of
where the trailer would be placed. It is as far north in that lot as
you can go without impacting the sidewalk areas.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. And that's where the current barrier free spaces are
located.
Mr. Taormina: There are some barrier free spaces at that location. That's
correct.
June 28, 2016
27668
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Taormina. If there are no other questions
for the Planning Department, if the petitioner would come
forward. We will need your name and address for the record
please, and is there anything you would like to add to what you've
heard so far?
Richard Goers, 9128 Stonehouse Avenue, Livonia, Michigan 48150. I appreciate
the opportunity to answer any questions. II think there are two
technical issues in this situation that I can see, electricity in the
modular structures. They come with circuit panels already
installed so we would need to hire a professional electrician to
hook up electricity from the church. There are also heating and
air conditioning units built in. Both sides of the double wide have
electrical and air conditioning possibilities, so they're combined.
So that's the electrical issue. The other issue is the bathrooms.
We plan to have a holding tank/septic system that would be
similar something on an airplane or RV or boat, where there is a
tank to hold human waste. I've been in contact with an
organization called Jay's Septic that provides facilities here in
Michigan. In our situation, we would have a 100 gallon holding
tank placed underneath the modular structure. Every week they
would come and pump it out. Also, there would be chemicals.
There's also a 60-gallon water tank of the non-drinkable water
that's a part of the process and that's tended to weekly as well.
So there would be no smell. As far as I understand, there is no
State law or State problem with having a septic system like this
in conjunction with a trailer. In fact, the people who are selling this
to us recommended this situation. They're employing similar
situations at Ford Motor Company and other sites, temporary
construction sites. So we plan to have all the barrier free
structures put in as required with a septic holding tank. So those
are the two main technical issues or engineering issues,
electricity and the water. Since we're not going into any city sewer
system, it seems simple and straightforward. So we would
appreciate that consideration
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Goers. You did highlight a couple of the items that
came up at our study meeting that we asked about, so I
appreciate your following up on those with responses. Are there
any questions from the Commission?
Ms. Smiley What do you think is temporary because it seems different from
what the City thinks is temporary.
Mr. Goers: I would like to shoot for three years. I think that's a reasonable
thing to enable us to finish the expansion. So we would have to
have a variance for the current six-month approach. If this is
June 28, 2016
27669
approved here, then I'll go down to the process with the Board of
Appeals for a variance on that timeframe.
Ms. Smiley: And three years is realistic? You're going to build classrooms or
you'll be done building onto your building in three years?
Mr. Goers: I think that's the best guess, and it's been confirmed with a few
people. I think it's reasonable.
Ms. Smiley I'm wondering have you had plans drawn up? Do you have
finances available?
Mr. Goers: We have plans that are being tweaked as you might say. We've
been working with Beaver Construction Company in the past. We
have a rough site plan. Our deacon board considers this as stage
one, the modular thing, and that will enable us to move right onto
stage two, which is more directly relevant to the expansion of the
current structure.
Ms. Smiley Stage two is what?
Mr. Goers: It's expansion to the east of the existing structure to provide
partially a worship structure that would make this modular one
obsolete, replace it, and other classrooms and facilities, wash
rooms, restrooms, etc. That's the next phase after we get this
modular building in place. Then we will build onto the church.
Ms. Smiley And the timeframe between your modular building and when
you're going to start building, is that the three years?
Mr. Goers: No. I think the three years is the end of that process. The building
will be done in three years. That's what I think.
Ms. Smiley: It will be done in three years.
Mr. Goers: That's what I think.
Ms. Smiley I'm going through remodeling myself, so I'm real conscious of
timeframes. Okay. Thank you.
Ms. McCue: Mr. Taormina, is there any problem with their suggestion in regard
to restrooms and the septic setup or whatever you want to call it?
Is that something that is going to conform to the City?
Mr. Taormina: Yes. I don't think that's unusual. It's done elsewhere in these
types of situations. As Mr. Goers has indicated, construction
trailers and the like often have similar types of facilities that
June 28, 2016
27670
require regular maintenance. But it's much, much less costly than
trying to tap into a sanitary sewer. On a temporary basis, that
would be cost prohibitive. Alternatively, they would look to some
kind of a pump out system
Ms. McCue: And I suppose this would be part of the consideration for the
variance too, considering they're looking at three years versus a
six-month time frame?
Mr. Taormina: There will be several levels of approval. There will be permit
review, but also Building Code Board of Appeals would consider
the length of time for this structure, in addition to the action you
take. So regardless of what you approve this evening, that may
or may not match what the Building Code Board of Appeals
approves because they may have other issues that they want to
regularly look at. So they may only grant six month extensions
each time and review compliance under their codes and
regulations. That will require a whole separate and more detailed
review. Our concern here is placement of the structure, it's
potential impact on the neighborhood and other issues involving
arrangement of the site.
Mr. Ventura: Mr. Goers, how is this actually going to work? I understand you
have a Chinese congregation and a mixed congregation of
Chinese and non-Chinese parishioners that are now all
worshipping together? Is that correct?
Mr. Goers: We have a current timeframe for the English worship at 1:00 in
the afternoon which really doesn't work. The main reason it
doesn't work is that we don't have a Sunday school program and
nursery program at that time. Only single people can come or
people without children. Since there are other families who want
to be a part of the English ministry, if they come at 10:00, then
they can have their children in the Sunday school program and
they can have them in the nursery. So we have something small
that's really non-functional. It's not survivable.
Mr. Ventura: When you put this temporary structure there, you're going to have
parishioners walking from your permanent building to this
structure. Is that right?
Mr. Goers: Yes, some of them. If they, for example, have children and they
want their children in the children's program, they'll drop the kids
off and come out.
Mr. Ventura: How is that going to work in inclement weather?
June 28, 2016
27671
Mr. Goers: Again, we've done this before, so apparently they're used to
doing this. I don't see a real problem.
Mr. Ventura: Is the location where the other temporary structure was?
Mr. Goers: You know I don't exactly know that. Although, I think Mark
mentioned it's kind of in the same area I think. I think if we keep
the sidewalks clean, it shouldn't be a problem.
Mr. Ventura: There is significant grade separation there with stairways. In the
wintertime, you're going to have snow and ice and all kinds of
things there. It sounds to me like a fair amount of traffic. How do
you solve that? Would it be reasonable to put some kind of a
canopy over the stairway to keep the parishioners out of the rain?
Mr. Goers: I don't think so. I think the main issue would be salting it and
shoveling it thoroughly. There would be two ways to come. One
down from the top where you can come down the stairway. The
other way is to come out through the kitchen in the back of the
church. So there's two different ways. Because of that, it will
alleviate any congestion problems on the foot traffic.
Mr. Ventura: Do I understand that there will be no potable water in the
structure?
Mr. Goers: I think there will be a water tank that goes with the septic system.
That would be one thing. But if somebody wants to have a drink
of water, we'll have water available that's separate from that.
Mr. Ventura: But there will be no social gatherings after the services where you
serve coffee and refreshments and so forth in the temporary
structure?
Mr. Goers: We haven't done that. But if there is coffee, again we would have
to evaluate how that would be possible.
Mr. Ventura: Thank you.
Mr. Long: What is the size of the congregation?
Mr. Goers: About 250 to 300 people are involved.
Mr. Long: What is your estimated number of people who would be using this
temporary structure?
Mr. Goers: It's hard to say over the total three years, but I would say 40 to 50
people.
June 28, 2016
27672
Mr. Long: So about 15 to 20 percent of your congregation. You mentioned
that everything with the church elders is not in place yet. You're
98 percent certain you're going forward with this, but everything
is not approved with the Deacons of the church. If we were to
grant this for the three years that you're looking for, if it didn't go
forward, what happens? What would get reevaluated and would
the classroom be pulled. What is your thought process on that?
Mr. Goers: I'm no prophet, but it seems to be it's pretty close to 100 percent.
Mr. Long: Thank you.
Mr. Caramagno: A couple other things that we talked about the last time was the
abandoned vehicles in the back. There's, four, five SUVs of some
sort. I noticed a couple of them are gone. There's still a couple
there. What's the plan with that?
Mr. Goers: If I recall, there were four vehicles. One was licensed and three
were not. Since that time, an additional one has been licensed.
One has been taken away. So now we just have one more issue
that's not regulated. I was under the impression that it was going
to be taken this afternoon but I got a text just before I came. The
guy said it's going to be another week.
Mr. Caramagno: it's going to be another week before its gone?
Mr. Goers: Yes.
Mr. Caramagno: What was the thought process behind them? Are they using it for
parts vehicles? They're completely disabled.
Mr. Goers: You know, there is a custodian who is a very conscientious guy
that goes to all lengths to save something. I'm not sure exactly
how that all happened. But he and I are in discussion, and it
should be solved either this weekend or the following weekend.
Mr. Caramagno: Does the same apply to the lawnmowers that are up on blocks
and bricks. It seems like a little collection there as well in back.
Mr. Goers: Yeah. That's something that we can address.
Mr. Caramagno: I think you need to. I think it looks terrible back there. You've got
half a dozen lawnmowers up on bricks and blocks and tarped it.
It's unsightly.
Mr. Goers: I agree with you. I think something will be done with that.
June 28, 2016
27673
Mr. Caramagno: The 40 by 24 trailer, you said you were going to buy that or lease
that?
Mr. Goers: I originally presented both options, tending towards the leasing.
They said, no, we want to buy it, and then we'll sell it.
Mr. Caramagno: My question with buying it is, if you're approved for one or three
years, and you build your extension, and now all of sudden that
trailer doesn't sell, and it gets moved to another part of the
parking lot because it won't sell for two years, what's the thought
behind that? Where could that trailer go?
Mr. Goers: It couldn't go anywhere on our property. I think they feel this, that
if we lease it, it's just money gone. If we buy it and we sell it for
anything, that's a better financial return. So even if we had to cut
the price in half or down to a third, at least they'll get something.
If they get something more than just a pure leasing flow of money,
they would feel good. So I think if they had that attitude, then
they'll sell it at a big loss if they have to get rid of it and still have
a gain overall.
Mr. Caramagno: Have you put any thought to lighting around this building, any type
of outdoor lighting around it?
Mr. Goers: I think there is some lighting out there. Are you talking about for
security purposes?
Mr. Caramagno: Security. If you put that temporary building where you're saying
to put it, does it block the light coming off the building? Sometimes
people put lighting on the side of those things. Any thoughts to
that?
Mr. Goers: Frankly, I haven't thought about it much. I'll make a note of that
and I will think about it.
Mr. Caramagno: I'm not familiar with these structures. How about skirting around
the sides of it? Is it going to be just up in the air, two or three feet
off the ground with nothing coming down?
Mr. Goers: No, there will be skirting.
Mr. Caramagno: Skirting on it as well.
Mr. Goers: Definitely. It looks much better.
June 28, 2016
27674
Ms. Smiley What hours will the temporary building be open?
Mr. Goers: Sunday morning basically.
Ms. Smiley So it's just for Sunday morning?
Mr. Goers: Pretty much. We haven't looked at all the options. It's possible
that it would be one evening a week in addition to that.
Ms. Smiley: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or
against this petition?
Thomas Dunn, 15115 Ellen Drive, Livonia, Michigan. My backyard backs up to the
Chinese Gospel Church. As far as the temporary structure, again,
it sounds like it's potentially a three year deal or whatever. I don't
know that I have necessarily any problem with that particular
structure. Like you mentioned before, the additional vehicles,
what the lower parking lot is turning into. There were three
vehicles and three trailers tonight. One of the vehicles earlier this
week was towed away. And like you said, there's a lot of
equipment, older yard equipment, stuff like that. As they have
upgraded equipment, it sits down by the bottom corner. To me,
that's the unsightly portion of it. If all the rest of that was cleared
out, it would not be a problem at all with the trailer itself going in
there. But it just seems like that's continuing to add more and
more unused equipment. This would not be, but the unsightly
portion of that. To me, I would request that the other equipment
has to go as a condition of approval. Thank you.
Joseph Boley, 15139 Ellen Drive, Livonia, Michigan. I live two houses away behind
the church property adjacent to this gentleman, two houses to the
right. My concern would be and the question I would like the
gentleman to answer is, we have a couple things. I've been there
32 years. It's my first house. I stayed there all along. My biggest
concern is, when they added onto this property before, they
purchased a house that's over to the next. It was more or less
abandoned. It was a problem home. But they added on to this
property before and they put a trailer up there before. When they
did that, they added onto the property. Since then, it took them a
while to do it. It did take probably three years for them to build the
last time. Probably at least two as I remember. At that time, they
added onto the parking structure. When they added on to the
parking structure, they said that at they needed more parking just
as much as they do to add onto the church. At that time, if you
look at it, the whole parking lot that they planning to put that on
June 28, 2016
27675
down there has basically become a lot of storage. If you look at
the building that they put there for their maintenance, the
maintenance in itself has been stuff just piled up ridiculously. And
when you guys first approved this, you guys approved that they
were going to create a basin there for the water to flow because
that property was supposed to be, if you look at the property
behind it, it was city property that was drainage and we lost all the
animals and everything in there. Deer used to live in there and
everything like that. I understand we have to grow, but at the
same time, what's happened there, they haven't maintained it the
way they said they were going to. They put a line of trees there
that were supposed to be put up along the fence line. Those trees
have now since died. They never watered them and they never
replaced them. Those trees now would have been grown up to
protect our property. Instead, we get dandelions growing across
our property and we spend tons of money to try . . . they'll all tell
you that, to try to keep the dandelions out of our property. And
like I said, they did that because you guys asked them to do it
before, and they haven't maintained it. My question is, where are
they growing now? They said they needed this to expand. What's
wrong with them having the church session at a different time?
She asked the question, 7:00 in the morning. This parking lot it
not full all the time. They do not have sessions all the time. Why
can't they have a different timeframe? Why do they have to add
on? If that's their problem, I understand that, but I haven't heard
anything to say why. They just want to have an open spot from
7:00 in the morning to until whenever, and what this is going to
become is an outhouse because they don't have the people into
the main church lot, is my question. Why don't they add on and
live with the space they have now and add onto the church in the
meantime in three years? What's forcing them to do it now? He
said 20 percent. I'd like to look at those numbers and say, hey, is
that really fair?Why should we all have to live with this while they
are expanding? What are they growing in three years or are they
going to want to grow out farther and do the same thing to us
again? Have they outgrown the property just like the gentleman
you guys talked to earlier today? Are they outgrowing that
property to the point of where maybe they should consider
moving somewhere else? Those would be the questions I'd like
to have answered.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. We've heard your questions and we'll try to get
those addressed for you. Thank you.
Matthew Gasperoni, 15103 Ellen Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Similar to the other
gentleman who spoke, we're on that similar side of Ellen Drive
backing up to the property. I'm a little bit more in the back corner
June 28, 2016
27676
of the end of the property. My general concern is, my neighbor
Tom mentioned too, it's not so much the structure. I'm actually all
for expansion of God's church. My issue is the maintenance.
There is to me a lot of red flags with the storage of the equipment.
Yeah, we want to buy it so we can sell it for a profit or at least
recover some of the funds back. When you have somebody who
likes to collect things because it could be useful one day down
the road, what does that mean when we have now a structure
that we can place somewhere. Yes, to the dandelion comment.
Even when we get mowed around our grass, right, it doesn't go
into their property. I get all the weeds and dandelions blowing
right in my yard as the big tractor goes by. Can we at least go in
the other direction first? But it's these general red flags of not
wanting to take care of the property is. My question is, is the
church building itself not containable for the members? I've heard
250 members.
Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, sir. I think they said about 250 to 300.
Mr. Gasperoni: Is there not room on the structure or is there existing issues with
the structure? The lot seems to be a lot larger than the building
seems to provide them. It's a little confusing to me how large the
lot is and how little they're able to contain. I don't see cars
bumped up against all these parking lots, so why do we even
have a lot that large if the church can't contain that much. It begs
the question when I see other maintenance issues and red flags.
What's going on inside the building? Are there things that could
be addressed to accommodate the needs of the growing English
congregation within the building? My general concern is, I think
there's a lot of unanswered questions for me in this situation. If
those were answered, I don't necessarily have an issue with a
temporary structure. Three years does seem a little long without
any plans in my back pocket to do that. But I'm fine for the
expansion. I would be okay with that. It just seems like there's a
lot of details that aren't tied in and information that I'm not
receiving to make a clear recommendation and say, yes, this
sounds great. I just feel like I'm not hearing the whole story.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. I appreciate your comments. Is there anybody else
wishing to speak?
Mark Carrier, 15075 Ellen Drive, Livonia, Michigan. I actually live right next door to
Matt. I'm two doors down from Tom. My view is to the back of the
parking lot. For the last, well I've owned the house for a year now,
and my view has always been of the cars in the back that have
been sitting there and they never move. I was wondering about
that until today. So my concerns are a couple things. The one,
June 28, 2016
27677
without having a plan to expand the building, it sounds like the
expanding congregation is going to be funding the expansion. So
if they put up a temporary structure, would it enable them to
expand? However, without having a plan for expansion, it seems
like . . . so three years is a long temporary time. Right? Especially
a long time without a plan. If at that time they are accruing funds
in order to expand, what does that mean for the start of
construction? Moreover, for project management, construction
management, projects tend to take twice as long as planned, cost
twice as much as planned. I practice project management as a
professional career, so maybe that's what it is. I have those
concerns too. I'm just wondering about funding. Are they
prepared to spend twice as much as they think it might cost and
three years could turn into six, I heard. Those are my concerns.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing
none, if the petitioner would please come forward. You've heard
from some of the residents in the area. Are there any questions
from the Commissioners?
Ms. Smiley Through the Chair to Mr. Taormina. Do we have the original site
plan that shows a greenbelt or barrier between the neighbors? It
sounds like it's not being maintained.
Mr. Taormina: Yes, we do. I haven't checked the site conditions against the
original plan. That is something we can do. I know it was
mentioned that some of the landscaping that was installed in
connection with the 2012 addition has since died. So that is
something that should be taken care of. Either way, if this project
moves forward or it doesn't, it's something that we should follow-
up on.
Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Goers, you've heard a number of comments so far. Is there
anything else you would like to add?
Mr. Goers: First, related to the additional parts, messy condition. I agree. I
think they've done us a favor in bringing it up. I hope to solve that
problem. I've come in and I have a different culture. I come from
another culture that the group of people I'm working with. So
there's a cultural difference. Most people there would tell you that
I made a difference in the neatness and cleanliness factor of that
church already, even in the two years that I've been there. And
not difficult. Not with conflict or harshness or arguing or anything.
It's just, oh, okay. Okay, we can do that. I think that I can make
these men happy. In fact, I'd like to get their information or I'll
give them mine so they can call me and tell me when they're
happy about the extra parts. I think that needs to be done. I agree
June 28, 2016
27678
with it. I think I can make them happy. As far as the planning or I
want to know more about it, I think we can solve that problem to.
I will promise you that I will do my very best to solve those two
problems, and I can't see that I would fail. I mean you never know,
but I'm pretty sure I'll be able to solve both of these issues.
Mr. Wilshaw: It seems the two primary issues that the residents pointed out
was the storage of outdoor equipment, the cleanliness of the lot
and then the landscaping.
Mr. Goers: I think I can deal with both of those issues. In fact, I promise you
I will do my very best and I would like to give them my phone
numbers and have them call me, or email me or text me. We can
work it out together so that I will not only do what's right in a
general context, but right so that they're happy. They're
homeowners. I don't want any homeowners around us thinking,
hey, this is not good for my property. My values are going down
or this bugs me or something is blowing over. I think those are
solvable problems, and I am very conscientious about that aspect
of whatever I do in terms of neighbors. I will do something about
that.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. It's good to have that on the record, and I think these
things will also be incorporated into any resolution that's probably
made this evening.
Mr. Goers: Sure. Absolutely. You're helping me and you're helping us. I
appreciate you guys. I appreciate it. And I think I can maybe not
solve 100 percent of every conceivable issue, but those two
issues of the parts outside and the trees that have died, those are
two things to me that are solvable without any problem. I mean,
they'll be done.
Mr. Caramagno: So I am clear about the time frame because it's troubling me still.
You've been there two years. When was the thought of putting an
addition on for English service, when did that thought come
about?
Mr. Goers: The plan to make a building expansion was there in place before
I even got there, but it was clarified that the English part would be
a part of the expansion now that I'm there. But the plan and the
drawings from the Beaver Construction Company were given to
the church for the expansion plan before I got there.
Mr. Caramagno: Was bringing you into the church to do the English teaching, was
that part of their plan?
June 28, 2016
27679
Mr. Goers: No. They had a plan to expand the church apart from the English
ministry. I think I've added to the momentum of that.
Mr. Caramagno: It sounds like you have in some ways. Is the lack of wanting to
have a plan prior to the temporary trailer, a written plan,
something put together, a sketch, a drawing, something that's
visual, is the lack of that plan due to disagreement within the
church?
Mr. Goers: No. I think there is a rough plan. They have drawings. They have
sketches from the Beaver Construction Company that I've given
to Mark. That's part of it right there. That is part of a couple phase
expansion plan. So we have those drawings and they need to be
refined and clarified and made more action oriented. I think,
again, I believe I am going to help them with that.
Mr. Caramagno: Thank you.
Mr. Goers: Let me just say one other thing. In Christian terminology, there's
such a thing as spiritual gifts, certain abilities that God gives
people. In human possibilities, we all know that certain people
have certain abilities. Part of my ability as a human being is a gift
of administration or project management. I've been involved in
some large projects, Christian ministries, city-wide evangelistic
campaigns, large organizational activities. I've been successful
to move people along, get people working together in
accomplishing goals. So that makes me think I will be likewise
similarly effective as I have been in the past, in continuing to help
this group of people move ahead. Now a lot of the people in our
church are engineers, but that doesn't mean they're all
managers. There's a difference between an engineer and a
manager. So I am more of a manager and I think I can really help.
I think I will make happy the people around here who are saying,
hey, we need some changes in these two areas of the spare
parts, the trees, landscaping. I will pray. I will work hard to see if
we can solve that problem and I'm sure that we can.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you for your closing comments. With that, I will close the
public hearing and ask for a motion.
On a motion by Long, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was
#06-66-2016 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on June 28, 2016, on Petition
2002-02-02-04 submitted by Chinese Gospel Church requesting
to modify Council Resolution #224-02 in connection with a
previously-approved waiver use adopted on April 24, 2002, in
June 28, 2016
27680
order to allow the temporary use of a mobile/modular classroom
and worship area in connection with the existing church at 35301
Five Mile Road, located on the south side of Five Mile Road
between Farmington Road and Yale Avenue in the Northwest 1/4
of Section 21, which property is zoned R-2, the Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the
request to modify Council Resolution #224-01 be approved
subject to the following conditions:
1. That condition #9 of Council Resolution #224-02 which
reads, "That the temporary mobile classroom shall be
removed prior to the issuance of the Certificate of
Occupancy." shall be replaced with the following language;
That the Chinese Gospel Church of Livonia shall
be allowed the temporary use of a mobile/modular
classroom and worship area in connection with the
existing church for a period of one (1) year from
the date of City Council approval of this
amendment.
2. That the one (1) year time limit can be extended only with
City Council approval;
3. That the temporary mobile/modular classroom and worship
area shall be located behind the church at the north end of
the lower parking lot;
4. That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted
a variance from the Building Code Board of Appeals for a
temporary building permit in excess of six (6) months and
any conditions related thereto;
5. That the temporary mobile/modular classroom and worship
area shall meet all Michigan Barrier Free codes and have
restrooms provided;
6. That all unlicensed vehicles and all lawn and other
equipment shall either be removed from the property or
placed inside a storage structure as approved by the
Inspection Department;
7. That all dying, dead, diseased or missing landscaping shall
be replaced in accordance with the previously approved
landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Inspection
Department;
June 28, 2016
27681
8. That adequate site lighting shall be provided for the
temporary structure. All such fixtures shall not exceed
twenty feet (20') in height and shall be aimed and shielded
so as to minimize stray light trespassing across property
lines and glaring into adjacent roadways;
9. That there shall be no outdoor storage of equipment,
material or other similar items
10. That all other conditions imposed by Council Resolution
#224-02, which granted approval to construct an addition
onto the existing church building, shall remain in effect to the
extent that they are not in conflict with the foregoing
conditions.
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. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion?
Ms. Smiley Does this resolution include the landscaping plan that was
previously approved. Could we add some verbiage so that they
not only remove the unworking machinery, but that they also do
some landscaping to repair the greenwall?
Mr. Wilshaw: I think it would be appropriate to add that just to make that
abundantly clear to the Council as this moves forward.
Mr. Long: I would be willing to add that to my resolution.
Mr. Taormina: Mr. Chairman, if the makers of the motion and the supporter
would also accept the change that would remove the other
materials from the property. If we could modify that language to
indicate that it has to be placed inside either the storage building
or some other means. It just simply can't be stored outside, I think
is the intent of the motion. We will craft language to address that
properly because I'm assuming some of that equipment is still
utilized. Also, the question of lighting came up that we provide
adequate lighting facilities for the trailer, but in a manner that
won't interfere with or be a nuisance to the neighbors. And then
with respect to the landscaping, we'll add a condition that would
restore the landscaping, replace any dead, dying or diseased
landscape material that's found at the site in accordance with the
previously approved landscape plan.
Mr. Long: The maker of the motion is fine with all of those changes.
June 28, 2016
27682
Mr. Wilshaw: The supporter is okay with those?
Ms. Smiley: Absolutely.
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution.
ITEM #4 PETITION 2016-06-08-07 JOE'S PRODUCE
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2016-
06-08-07 submitted by Joe's Produce requesting approval of all
plans required by Section 18.47 of the City of Livonia Zoning
Ordinance #543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to
remodel the exterior of the commercial shopping center
(Maiorana Plaza) at 33000-33152 Seven Mile Road, located on
the north side of Seven Mile Road between Merriman and
Farmington Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3.
Mr. Taormina: This is the location of Joe's Produce, which is an approximate
30,000 square foot single unit commercial building located on the
westerly portion of the site. What we are looking at this evening
is Maiorana Plaza, which is a multi-tenant retail complex located
on the easterly portion of the site. This building is about 17,000
square feet. It has roughly eight tenants, including Joe's Meat &
Seafood, The Art of Bread, a UPS Store, Chinese restaurant, as
well as a Fantastic Sam's haircutting establishment. In 2004,
renovations took place to the produce center. This evening we
are looking at renovations to the retail center. The plan shows a
side-by-side comparison of what exists today and what is
proposed. The architect is here to explain all of the various
changes, but it essentially involves a complete remodeling of the
shopping center's storefront elevation. The changes will include
removing much of the material that is there today, including
standing seam metal, and replacing that with a combination of
materials including panel brick, cement fiber board, E.I.F.S. and
other accent materials. With that, I'm going to let the architect
describe in greater detail some of the changes and answer any
questions you might have. We do have a couple items of
correspondence. I'll read those out.
Mr. Wilshaw: Sure.
Mr. Taormina: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the
Engineering Division, dated June 14, 2016, which reads as
follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering
June 28, 2016
27683
Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no
objections to the proposed petition at this time. The included legal
description appears to be correct and should be used in
conjunction with this petition. The existing property is assigned
an address of 33100 Seven Mile Road for the overall parcel, with
the range of addresses including 33000 thru 33152 Seven Mile
Road for the individual suites within the plaza. The plaza is
currently serviced with public storm and sanitary sewer, and
water main, and the included drawings indicate that the project
will consist of building renovations only. Based on the provided
information, there should be no impact to existing utilities. If utility
renovations are required, the owner shall provide drawings to this
department to determine if permits will be required. Please note
that any work within the Seven Mile Road right-of-way will require
permits from the Wayne County Department of Public Service."
The letter is signed by David Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer.
The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division,
dated June 14, 2016, which reads as follows: "This office has
reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to
remodel the exterior of the commercial shopping center on
property located at the above referenced address. We have no
objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Daniel Lee,
Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated
June 20, 2016, which reads as follows: "I have reviewed the plans
in connection with the petition. I have no objections to the
proposal." The letter is signed by Brian Leigh, Sergeant, Traffic
Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department,
dated June 14, 2016, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your
request, the above-referenced petition has been reviewed. This
Department has no objections to this petition."The letter is signed
by Jerome Hanna, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the
extent of the correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for the Planning Department? Seeing
none, the petitioner is here. We will need your name and address
for the record please.
Kevin D. Hart, AIA, Kevin Hart Associates, 700 E. Maple Road, Suite 101,
Birmingham, Michigan 48009. Good evening. I'm an architect for
Joe's Produce. I've been Joe's architect for the last three or four
projects that he's done. As Mark aptly described the work here,
the existing building is kind of an early 70's masonry building that
is a very high quality building. It's very dated as you can see. Joe
felt that the existing building could be greatly enhanced with the
removal of the large mansard that has long faded and it's starting
to really show a lot of wear. The columns out in front are starting
to fall and crack. Joe has gotten some advice from several retail
June 28, 2016
27684
designers and some people in the marketing studies that have
shown that the site would probably perform very, very well if it had
a much newer and more clean, open feel to it. I have brought a
sample board that I would like to pass along to all of you.
Ms. Smiley: Actually, you could hold it up by the microphone and we could
see it on TV.
Mr. Hart: Oh, okay. As I mentioned, the existing building is an early 70's
building. It's block wall construction, steel bar joists with metal
decking, very high quality built up roof that since has been
covered with a rubber membrane. The affected area is roughly
220 lineal feet of space that we're trying to renovate. The existing
mansard roof and all the masonry columns in front past Joe's
Seafood area will be removed and we'll create kind of this larger
façade that has varying heights and textures and differences so
that each of the units has sort of an identity that it doesn't have
now. That uniformity is sort of redundant and it's very difficult for
people running a business to get noticed to get some sort of an
identity. And that's what Joe wanted to do. We're talking about
removing the existing planters in the front, all the concrete
flatwork that is in front, and all the sidewalks. We're planning to
demo that and come back in with some nice textured changes
with stamped concrete with some cobble stone and mixed
textures along that line. The inside corner of The Art of Bread and
where the proposed credit union is going to go, we're planning to
make like sort of a common pergola area that will act as a
gathering area, and Joe's been counseled to have the tenants
use that right now so it doesn't become the identity that's in front
of the credit unit. It's something, an amenity, for the public to walk
down there. We mentioned at the study session that Joe's Meat
& Seafood has that long foyer that comes along the edge, and
during the wintertime people are encouraged to walk through
from one end to the other, get a little break from the cold and it's
heated and the doors are automatic. It makes kind of a nice
promenade to go from one store to the other and then ultimately
go down to Joe's Produce, the large market. The materials, as I
mentioned, are varying in type. We have some of the masonry
piers that you'd see on some of the larger taller structures. We
have these piers or monoliths that are going to be stacking on top
of the metal. Each of these divisions of the tenant spaces have a
masonry wall separation and then 20 feet on center are very large
beams that are running north and south to allow us to change
some of the bearing or to add additional bearing. We studied the
building pretty extensively and we know that we can stack
masonry on top of there, and then between the masonry piers,
we can either use light gauge sheet metal studs with Durock and
June 28, 2016
27685
a backing for brick and panel brick. I wanted to go through some
of the items that we do have that we're planning to use. They are
very sustainable products, very long lasting products. One of the
things that Joe is really committed to is he wants this to be the
same level of quality that we see on Joe's Meat & Seafood and
on the Joe's Produce main building. He really is committed to the
community and really wants this to look like an extension, almost
like a campus quality is what we were using as we described our
work, is to make this look like an old town storefront where people
could wander and gather and do their business and enjoy their
time there. It's a wonderful façade. Actually, the face is south so
there is a lot of sunlight that we're capturing, getting rid of that
mansard is going to open it up. The plan is to also remove all the
fenestration. All the windows and doors are going to be coming
out. We're going to use a Conair high quality dark anodized
aluminum bronze system that is going to be a little bit different
that Joe's Produce and Joe's Meat & Seafood, but we think the
contrast also adds to the diversity of the project. That is one of
the items that we're using right here. The composite panels is a
new product called Trespa. It's molded mill work and it's synthetic
recycled material, 100 percent recycled material that has a 100
year lifespan. That's going to be used like cladding for siding and
some of the horizontal wood-looking pieces that are between
some of the masonry units that we're using. We have varying
colors here. Joe and Cathy Maiorana have picked up on a few of
these colors that they would like to use, and we tried to match
them pretty closely to what you see on the rendering on the
screen. As we move down, some of the fabric canopies, the fabric
awnings, those are also a material that is a recycled material by
a product call Sunbrella. It's very long lasting. Some of the tensile
structure you see like at Denver Airport, some of those permanent
tensile-type tent structures or fabric are using that material. It's
100 percent acrylic fiber and it also has an extremely long
lifespan. Some of the other ones that we're going to be using -
metal awnings that will be supported by metal rods being
attached back at the building to add a little bit of difference. But
again, the colors are hinting at that same kind of Seafog Green
that you see on Joe's Meat & Seafood and part of the metal
structuring of the main building has that same color. So we're
trying to kind of tie the two together subtly. On the crown moldings
at the top of each of these new parapet walls that are varying
heights, we want to use a molded millwork called Fypon. There's
a newer version that's a little bit denser. It's called Fountainhead
and that gives sort of a transitional traditional look to the top of it
to make the building look like it's been there for a long time. We
want it to have that sort of longevity and we think that this look is
something that will be long lasting, not just a fad. I brought some
June 28, 2016
27686
samples of the bricks we'll be using for the piers. We want to use
a metal lath and plaster type of system. We've done a little bit of
research and we found a really good product that we think is
going to last a long time. Even the dryvit, we're looking at an
acrylic resin that goes on. A product called Outsulation that
doesn't allow for birds and insects to penetrate. It's a very dense
board so this is not your typical E.I.F.S. This is probably a 50 year
acrylic resin finish that really closely matches a masonry stucco
material. That's really about it. Some of the stacked stone things
are from real stone, a company that uses tailings off of larger
slabs to create panels that are going to give it a stacked stone
look. We're going to mix it up a little bit if we can. We're really
excited about it. The lighting is going to be much brighter, a little
bit more transitional lighting. We'll mix it up there too. We'll have
some older colonial style lighting mixed in with American
Craftsmen and even some Asian-type light fixtures along the way.
It will be very well lit. It will be very well maintained and, again,
the flat work will all be changed as well. We're really excited about
the project. I'd be very happy to answer any questions you might
have.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Hart. That was an excellent presentation. We
certainly learned a lot about these different materials that you've
highlighted for us. Are there any questions for Mr. Hart at this
point from the Commission?
Mr. Caramagno: How long does a project like this take?
Mr. Hart: That's a good question. Also, Joe wanted to apologize for not
being here. He had travel plans that kind of went array at the last
minute, a couple of plane flights delayed. But I wanted to mention
our schedule discussion tonight. Joe really wants to get this
going. Probably, if we can get our approvals in, we'd like to get
started late August and try to get as much done before the
holidays. One of the things we really like about the rhythm of this
elevation is that we can stage the material, stage the work as we
go. We want to keep all these tenants in business while this is
going on. So we think this is going to be somewhere between four
and six months.
Mr. Caramagno: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Anyone else? Mr. Hart, your presentation was so thorough that
you answered all our questions for us apparently. Thank you. Is
there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against
this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion would be
in order.
June 28, 2016
27687
On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Ventura, and unanimously adopted, it was
#06-67-2016 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2016-06-08-07
submitted by Joe's Produce requesting approval of all plans
required by Section 18.47 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance
#543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to remodel the
exterior of the commercial shopping center (Maiorana Plaza) at
33000-33152 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of
Seven Mile Road between Merriman and Farmington Roads in
the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3, be approved subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the set of drawings and plans prepared by Studio/H2G
dated May 19, 2016, and as received by the Planning
Commission on June 3, 2016, are hereby approved and
shall be adhered to;
2. That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be concealed
from public view on all sides by screening that shall be of a
compatible character, material and color to other exterior
materials on the building;
3. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition,
and any additional signage shall be separately submitted for
review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals;
4. That no LED lightband or exposed neon shall be permitted
on this site including, but not limited to, the building or
around the windows;
5. That the specific plans referenced in this approving
resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department
at the time the building permits are applied for; and,
6. Pursuant to Section 19.10 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Livonia, this approval is valid for a
period of ONE YEAR ONLY from the date of approval by
City Council, and unless a building permit is obtained, this
approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said
period.
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution.
June 28, 2016
27688
Mr. Taormina: Mr. Chair, to help expedite this project, if the Commission might
be willing to grant a seven day waiver. I think it would be
appropriate in this case.
On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Ventura, and unanimously adopted, it was
#06-68-2016 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
determine to waive the provisions of Section 10 of Article VI of
the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure, regarding the
effective date of a resolution after the seven-day period from the
date of adoption by the Planning Commission, in connection with
Petition 2016-06-08-07 submitted by Joe's Produce requesting
approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of the City of
Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, in connection with
a proposal to remodel the exterior of the commercial shopping
center (Maiorana Plaza) at 33000-33152 Seven Mile Road,
located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Merriman
and Farmington Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3.
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. The seven day waiver is approved. That will help speed
you up a little big to go to Council. Thank you.
ITEM #5 PETITION 2016-04-02-07 PANERA BREAD
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2016-
04-02-07 submitted by Laurel Park Retail Properties, L.L.C.
requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(c)(1)
of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to
construct and operate a freestanding full service restaurant with
drive-up window facilities (Panera Bread) within the parking lot of
the Laurel Park Place shopping center at 37700 Six Mile Road,
located on the north side of Six Mile Road between Newburgh
Road and the 1-275/96 Expressway in the Southeast 1/4 of
Section 7.
Mr. Wilshaw: This item was tabled at a previous meeting. Do we have a motion
to remove this item from the table?
On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Long, and unanimously adopted, it was
#06-69-2016 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend that Petition 2016-04-02-07 submitted by Laurel
Park Retail Properties, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval
pursuant to Section 11.03(c)(1) of the City of Livonia Zoning
Ordinance #543, as amended, to construct and operate a
June 28, 2016
27689
freestanding full service restaurant with drive-up window facilities
(Panera Bread) within the parking lot of the Laurel Park Place
shopping center at 37700 Six Mile Road, located on the north side
of Six Mile Road between Newburgh Road and the 1-275/96
Expressway in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7, be removed from
the table.
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Taormina: This is a request to construct and operate a freestanding full
service restaurant with drive-up window facilities. The subject site
is generally located in the northeast corner of Six Mile and Laurel
Park Drive. The area under consideration measures roughly 1.27
acres in area. It includes 262 feet of frontage along Six Mile and
about 250 feet along Laurel Park Drive. The area is presently
used for off-street parking in connection with the operation of
Laurel Park Place mall. The aerial photograph shows the location
and the existing conditions of the site. No additional curb-cuts to
Six Mile or Laurel Park are proposed in connection with this
development. Access would be provided via connections to the
mall's existing drive aisles. The proposed restaurant would be
one-story in height, roughly 4,500 square feet of gross floor area,
and contain 110 indoor seats as well 17 outdoor patio seats for a
combined total of 127 seats. The building is positioned near the
middle of the property with parking and access on all four sides.
The building would be setback roughly 130 feet from Six Mile
Road and 82 feet from Laurel Park Drive. The outdoor dining
patio is shown on the west side of the building facing Laurel Park
Drive. The patio measures roughly 40 feet by 15 feet. In terms of
the drive-up facilities, the pick-up window for the drive-up
operation is located on the east side of the building. The traffic
lane serving the drive-up would commence on the west side of
the building. The traffic lane would have the capacity to stack
about eight to nine vehicles. Several of the spaces, including the
menu signage and ordering kiosk, are located on the south side
of the building which faces Six Mile. Typically, these operations
occur along the sides or at the rear of the building, which—more
often than not—is opposite the road. In this case, the drive-up
operations would be partially concealed to traffic on Six Mile Road
by the berm and landscaping that exists along the front of the
property. Drive-up establishments are also required to provide a
by-pass lane. The plan shows an opening to a traffic aisle just
before the ordering station on the south side of the building to
allow vehicles to exit the lane prior to ordering. In terms of
parking, restaurants require one space for each two interior seats
plus one space for each three patio seats, one space for each
June 28, 2016
27690
employee, and two spaces beyond the drive-up. This proposed
restaurant would require an additional 83 parking spaces. The
site plan shows 99 parking spaces where there are currently 162
spaces. This would result in roughly 63 fewer spaces at this
location. Currently, the shopping center operates under a parking
variance that was approved in 1986. According to the record, a
grand total of 3,574 parking spaces are required for the mixed
use development including the mall, hotels and office. Adding the
restaurant increases the total parking requirement to 3,657. The
1986 variance allowed for a total deficiency of 119 parking
spaces. According to the Petitioner, Laurel Park Place currently
has a total of 3,497 spaces, and with a net reduction of 63 spaces,
the total number of available spaces would be lowered to 3,434,
thus increasing the deficiency to 223 spaces. According to our
calculations, a variance would be needed for an additional 104
spaces. This is calculated by taking the total deficiency of 223
and subtracting what was already approved for a variance, 119,
and that results in the 104 additional spaces that would be
required to obtain a variance. There is a dumpster shown in the
southeast corner of the near Six Mile Road. Building materials
are masonry to match the building and the dumpster would have
Trex enclosure gates. They removed the wood gates and
replaced those with a composite material. The enclosure would
accommodate a couple dumpster sand the doors of the gates
would face north towards the mall. In terms of site lighting, the
plans indicate where the parking lot light poles would be located
but we do not have any details relative to site lighting. The
landscaping on the property constitutes about 34 percent of the
total site area. The plan shows all new landscaping around the
perimeter of the building as well as the drive-up. The existing
berms and landscaping along Six Mile and Laure Park Drive
North would remain according to the plan. The exterior of the
proposed restaurant would consist mostly of brick and E.I.F.S.
The lower half of the building and extending up portions of the
building, including the entrance and drive-up features, include
brick. The remaining exterior wall sections, mostly along the
upper part of the building, would consist of E.I.F.S. The windows
and entrance areas would be highlighted with fabric awnings. The
highest point of building is shown be 21 feet. In terms of signage,
one wall sign would be allowed totally not more than 73 square
feet. The plan shows multiple identification wall signs on the
north, south, east and west sides of the building. Each building
side includes a Panera identification sign at 24.5 square feet, plus
a "Drive-Thru" sign measuring 7 square feet, for a total of eight
signs at 126.64 square feet. That would require a variance. Also
shown is a ground sign. I don't believe any details were shown of
the ground sign, but it would be limited to 30 square feet and
June 28, 2016
27691
height of 6 feet. With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the
departmental correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please.
Mr. Taormina: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from
the Engineering Division, dated April 22, 2016, which reads as
follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering
Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. The legal
description provided with the submitted drawings appears to be
correct and is acceptable to this office. The existing Laurel Park
Mall parcel is assigned an address of 37700 Six Mile Road, while
the proposed Panera Bread parcel will be assigned the address
of 37800 Six Mile Road. The proposed parcel is currently serviced
by public storm sewer and water main. Sanitary sewer is available
to the parcel, but it is located under the travel lanes of westbound
Six Mile Road. There is another public sanitary sewer that circles
the existing Laurel Park Mall, but the petitioners would need to
secure easements from the Mall property to be able to access the
sewer. Any work within the Six Mile Road right-of-way will require
permits from the Wayne County Department of Public Services.
The submitted drawings do not indicate any proposed services,
so we are unable to comment on those issues at this time. It
should be noted that the proposed parcel will be required to
provide storm water detention per the Wayne County Storm
Water Ordinance as noted in the City of Livonia's Design
Standards. The proposed restaurant will also need to conform to
the City's Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) Ordinance." The letter is
signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The
second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated
April 26, 2016, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed
the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct
and operate a freestanding full service restaurant with drive-up
window facilities within the parking lot of the Laurel Park Place
shopping center located at the above referenced address. We
have no objections to this proposal with the following stipulations:
(1) Knox box will be required. (2) Fire lanes shall be marked with
wall or pole mounted signs that have the words FIRE LANE—NO
PARKING painted on both sides, in contrasting colors at a size
and spacing approved by the authority having jurisdiction.
18.2.3.5.1 NFPA 1, 2009. (3) These and other issues will be
reviewed during the Plan review process." The letter is signed by
Daniel Lee, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of
Police, dated April 27, 2016, which reads as follows: "I have
reviewed the plans in connection with the petitions. I have no
objections to the proposals. Recommendations: Posted stop
signs at each driveway exit." The letter is signed by Brian Leigh,
June 28, 2016
27692
Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection
Department, dated May 5, 2016, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request, the above-referenced petition has
been reviewed. A variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals
would be required for the deficient number of parking spaces on
the site. A variance already exists for deficient parking and would
be increased by this proposed petition. This Department has no
further objections to this petition."The letter is signed by Jerome
Hanna, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the
correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director?
Ms. Smiley In the letter from David Lear, it says that "The submitted drawings
do not indicate any proposed services, so we are unable to
comment on those issues at this time. It should be noted that the
proposed parcel will be required to provide storm water
detention." What does that mean?
Mr. Taormina: That means they will have to detain the storm water generated
on the area of impact, the construction area, whether it's above
ground or underground. The engineer is here and he will be able
to respond to your question in greater detail, but I'm assuming in
this case that they will provide an underground storm water
collection and detention system for the area that is impacted, and
that storm water then releases back to the storm system at a
restricted or controlled rate of flow. It's something that is required
on all new developments of this magnitude.
Ms. Smiley I'm thinking detention pond.
Mr. Taormina: It could be, but in this case because of the limited amount of land
area, they'll more than likely place the system underground. In
fact, they are constructing a very large underground detention
system right across the street for the new Holiday Inn.
Ms. Smiley When the mall was originally constructed, at any time did we
decide to do out lots at Laurel Park?
Mr. Taormina: I went through the records and, unfortunately, there was not a
whole lot of discussion during the time the original mall was
approved, at least not at the Planning Commission level. I did not
receive the City Council records and of course I wasn't here at
the time. I know there were some issues regarding the
development of what was originally the NBD at the corner, but I
did not have a chance to research that to be able to provide you
with some degree of history relative to the discussions. It's clear,
June 28, 2016
27693
though, from reading the Planning Commission minutes when the
mall was approved, or at least the Zoning Board of Appeals
review of this item, that they were looking at a single
development. There was no discussion relative to outlot
development in 1986 when the Zoning Board of Appeals was
considering the variance for parking. That is clear.
Ms. Smiley I'm having a real problem with outlots at this particular site
because it's not even Christmas or that time of year and, you
know, the other day, just going to Von Maur I had to hike it out
there, and now you wouldn't be able to hike it out there. Thank
you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is the petitioner here this evening? We will need your name and
address for the record please. As we indicated, this is a pending
item which is one that has typically previously been discussed,
but this item has been tabled several times. It's been discussed
in study meetings but it has not had an opportunity to really get a
full presentation by the petitioner. So please go ahead, sir.
Norman Hyman, Strobl & Sharp, PC, 300 E. Long Lake Road, Suite 200,
Bloomfield Hills, Michigan 48304. I am representing the mall,
which is the owner of the property, Laurel Place, and I will note
quickly that the proposed parcel is not an outlot. It is part of the
overall mall property. The mall will continue be the landowner and
will be the landlord to Panera of this property. We're requesting
a recommendation of approval for the subject to favorable action
by the Zoning Board of Appeals on such various action or
whatever is required of the ZBA. The team is here. I will introduce
them quickly and then pass the presentation over to them. The
Senior Development person from Panera is Brian Barnard, and
he will go over what is proposed here. At the study session you
did see that substantial changes have been made and are before
you now compared with what was originally proposed. He will
review that with you. Our engineering consultant, John Dell'Isola,
is here and he, I hope, will answer any questions you have,
including particularly the question that was raised about drainage.
Our traffic consultant, Michael Labadie, is here and he will be
present to discuss traffic questions you may have and also to
discuss the parking requirements. In that regard by the way, and
I've spoken with Mr. Taormina about this, we've been unable to
determine what that 3,500 square foot requirement is. I checked
the minutes of the Zoning Board of Appeals hearing in 1986. It's
not revealing. The 300 space requirement is obviously the result
of some kind of a blend because we have a mixed use
development here. We believe that we can easily meet the
parking needs for this development with what's being proposed.
June 28, 2016
27694
And finally, part of the team is Skip Alexander, who is the Senior
Project Manager for this particular development, and he is with
the owner of Laurel Park Place Mall. With that, I'm going to give
you Brian Barnard to get this started.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Mr. Hyman. Hello, Mr. Barnard.
Brian Barnard, Panera Bread, 3630 South Dire Road, St. Louis, Missouri. I want
to thank you guys for the time and especially the multiple
workshops we've gone through kind of going through the
iterations of the building itself. I think Mr. Taormina kind of
covered the look of the building that we've put together here. You
can see the changes that were done from the previous to the
current building here, increasing the brick line up to the window
mullion, kind of darkening the building so that it does fit it more,
we felt, with the look what's down at that Von Maur end of the
mall, and then also changing some of the colors there and adding
the scored E.I.F.S., the recessed E.I.F.S. on the south elevation.
One of the questions that I think was brought up during our last
workshop is why we didn't consider spandrel. I kind of want to
address that first. Spandrel glass is really just glass with an
opaque film that is applied to the back of it and then put into a
building. Anytime you're adding doors or windows to a building,
you're creating inefficiencies. In the dead of winter or in the heat
of summer, you can go touch a wall or touch near a window or a
door and that's where you're going to feel the difference in the
temperature there. But beyond that, especially to the presentation
toward Six Mile, you go and cover up windows with black film and
you're presenting black windows to traffic. Unless you're an
expensive steak house, black windows present a closed
business. And that's actually been the comment we've received
from customers in locations out east where we have been forced
to put spandrel glass in. As customers drive by, and they've come
back later and said we thought you were closed because we saw
your black windows So we've tried to address that with the
colored E.I.F.S., the faux windows there that are recessed into
the wall about an inch in, so they'll be boxed in and then colored.
So it's a similar color to the awning but it is going to reflect
separately because they will be, one, shaded by the awning, but
also boxed cut into the wall. The greenish color, it's called
Alligator Green for whatever reason because it does provide an
offset to the brick brown and to the Royal Ivory on the E.I.F.S.
You go any darker and you start to give the same presentation of
a closed business with windows. You go any lighter and you start
to not really offset much from the building itself. We really are just
doing the two primary building materials, the brick and the
E.I.F.S., and then of course the dark anodized storefront and the
June 28, 2016
27695
glazing there. We did bump up the parapet there on the southeast
corner of the building. Again, as we discussed at the workshop,
that one presents a little bit better of a presentation for westbound
traffic on Six Mile but also creates additional screening for the
rooftop equipment from people on the street side. I'm not really
sure what more to cover right now. I'm definitely here to cover
any questions or anything else.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir.
John Dell'Isola, PEA, Inc., 2430 Rochester Court, Suite 100, Troy, Michigan
48083. With respect to the first question that was asked about the
storm water detention, we are doing the site across the street as
well for the new hotel. It is a substantial detention system over
there. It consists of a network of underground pipes that are sized
to store water as it is slowly released to the downstream system.
The city and the county have different requirements, but each will
require that when a new development comes in, if it fits within an
existing space that's been developed, they want the storage
provided.
Mr. Wilshaw: This is a similar kind of system to what you propose to put into
this location, an underground system?
Mr. Dell'Isola: It will be substantially smaller than the one across the street, but
it will be sized according to the county's requirements.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Dell'Isola: As far as the services, we typically don't show them although we
work with the engineering group. So far I know that we can
provide the water to the main that's along Six Mile and the sewer
towards the mall where the public sewer is. One thing we wanted
to discuss was the orientation of the site and why we selected to
have the front of the restaurant facing to the north. I've got some
pictures I'd like to share if I can pass those out. In the first photo,
an aerial image of the site. There is no project area indicated here
and we kind of just arbitrarily picked one for the sake of the site
plan. We're not defining a lease area other than the limits of the
building itself. So there's no particular outlot per se, but you'll
notice in the corner of the lot, furthest from the doors, is where
we would locate the building. In Picture #2, we have a view from
Six Mile Road right where the restaurant would be situated. This
is a Google street view picture so it's from a point about 12 feet
in the air. The berm is 5 to 6 feet high. When you are in a car, it
is complete obstruction. Turning to Picture#3, you can see a view
from the entrance from Laurel Park Drive into the mall. On your
June 28, 2016
27696
right is much greater visibility on a level elevation with minimal
trees and full visibility of the area. We added Picture #4 which is
a similar view from Laurel Park Drive just to indicate that this
particular area was selected for the construction staging
operation, and it was completely fenced off with a number of
storage containers and trash dumpsters just to show that this
area is not highly utilized in a typical day. The final Picture #5,
we're just indicating how the different uses to the north would
trend down to the south and have the restaurant in view as
opposed to from Six Mile, which is obstructed. That is how that
selection came about. I would also like to speak to the internal
movements within the site. We have submitted a truck movement
diagram to show that the existing site can handle truck traffic and
the proposed site can as well. There is an existing throat area that
was discussed as you come in from Laurel Park Drive. It's the
first entrance on your right where you have an opportunity to turn
into the parking lot. If you wanted to be in that row of parking
nearest that entry drive, which would be north of our building, it
would likely turn into that first two-way entry. The existing site also
serves as a two-way, an entrance and an exit, although it's all one
way drives within the existing lot. This maintains that outbound
one-way drive out, but it does serve an incoming movement.
Realize too that truck movements won't happen when cars are
situated in those areas and that's quite often how all of the, even
our residential streets, would work, but all the truck movements
can be made within there and we've conveniently located the
dumpsters so that a head-on movement to that space could
happen with the truck departing to the east. The landscape plan
was up earlier and it shows some screening. We're increasing the
screening around the trash enclosure, which will also have a
fascia on it to match the consistency of the building. We've added
some additional plantings to help fill that area. Internal to the site,
you'll notice different opportunities we've taken with landscape,
which is typical of Panera to get as green around the building as
possible and that really softens what would be a former sea of
parking, now breaks it up and the drive thru space has got it on
either side. With respect to the parking count, as Norman
mentioned, we did not have an opportunity to see how they
arrived at the requirement for 3,500 spaces for this complex. We
do have a picture on a board of the entire complex. We've gone
out and done a space count and it was 3,497. I believe the
variance said approximately 3,500 and that was right. But it's
3,497. Since we didn't have a basis for the existing parking, we've
looked at the acceptable ratios that the industry has indicated are
and should be the requirements. What we cited was the Urban
Land Institute and the International Council of Shopping Centers
who put out a shared parking study. Almost all mall sites are
June 28, 2016
27697
shared parking situations. They refer to a number of spaces per
thousand square feet of gross leasable area. We just looked at
some different scenarios to see how the site would measure up
with the Panera introducing the 81 spaces that it demands by
ordinance. What we've come up with is an exceedance of the 4
to 4.5 spaces. I should note that the 4 to 4.5 spaces was a
reduction from the 5 spaces per thousand square feet of GLA and
that's been the accepted norm for many years although they've
done more studies and they've arrived at 4 to 4.5 for sites that
have no more than 20 percent restaurant or entertain uses and
that's right where this one falls. It's right below the 20 percent. So
we've look at the ratio and we're at 6.97 spaces per thousand
square feet of gross leasable area and that, of course, is greater
than the 4.5 required. But then we thought, looking at the site,
there are some remote parking lots. What if we were to remove
some of those from the count. How would that work out or us. So
we went and removed the two northwestern most lots from the
site and we found that brings us to 5.97. We went a little farther
on our next analysis, and we can actually continue this, but we
took out two levels of the parking deck. There are four available.
We took two of those out, in additional to those surface lots that I
mentioned, and we're still at 5.29. This is after the Panera
demand is in there as well. I'm going to turn this same discussion
over to Mike Labadie, our traffic engineer, who has taken it a little
bit farther and actually measured some of the current demand on
the site and looked at some peak days and he is going to discuss
a little bit how the peaks for the Panera and the mall correspond
or not.
Mike Labadie, Fleis & Vandenbrink, 27725 Stansbury Boulevard, Suite 150,
Farmington Hills, Michigan 48334. This is an engineering
company in Farmington Hills. I missed out on a couple of the
workshops. A couple of things. If you look at the area that's . . .
can I walk up there and kind of outline it?
Mr. Wilshaw: We need to keep you on the microphone.
Mr. Labadie: I'll just point to what I want to talk about, and then I'll be back
here.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay.
Mr. Labadie: This is the area right here.
Mr. Wilshaw: So the diagram you're referring to is Section A?
Mr. Labadie: Yes. I'm a little over 30 so I didn't see that part.
June 28, 2016
27698
Mr. Wilshaw: Mark is really good with the zoom here. He'll help you through
this.
Mr. Labadie: Okay. A couple of things. Just talking about that area and the
impact on that area. How is it working now? Where does it fit?
How does it fit with what is accepted practice now? John gave
you a little bit of an idea on how the site is, how the parking ratios
and parking number of spaces were arrived at back in the day, I
don't know. We don't know. We haven't been able to figure that
out. But what we can tell you is, it's quite a bit more than what
accepted practice would be even back then, because the ratios
go back that far, at least accepted practice information does. So
there's an awful lot of extra parking there based on what would
be accepted practice. Now, I've heard a couple of you say that,
well, wait a minute, I can't get there at Christmas. Well, they're
not designed for Christmas. Parking lots are designed for
something close to the peak day, but they're not designed for
Christmas Eve or any of that. They're designed for about two
weeks before Christmas on a Saturday. Almost any site that's the
time of year that you go to especially if there's retail and food
involved. But that being said, if you put the Panera Bread on this
site that I just outlined there for you, you end up with 457 spaces
with the Panera Bread on site. It has 521 now. We went out and
looked at the number of spaces that were occupied and what you
would need sometime in May. Now, remember I said what you're
designing for would be sometime in December. So, somehow or
another, you need to figure out whether doing an occupancy
study in May correlates to something done in December. I'm not
trying to confuse you. This isn't a shell game here. You could
question me if I come up here and say, well, it's good. We looked
at it in May and we're done. No, that's not really the way it is. We
have to somehow figure out what the impact is going to be in
December, right?Two weeks before. So, if you look at it from that
point of view, and John also mentioned an organization called the
Urban Land Institute and the shared parking. And shared parking
is the accepted standard, especially for a center like this. This is
perfect for this where you can occupy a space more than once in
a day. Like for example, office buildings are not good all by
themselves because people are there all day. This you trade
spaces. You turn them over. That's kind of the idea you want.
When we went out there and looked at it, the occupancy was . . .
there were 206 spaces occupied when we looked at it in May.
How do I get from May to December? Well, ULI has that
information. So you can look that up and plug it in and say, what
should it be in December?Well in December, it should be 278. In
other words, the design day should have 278 spaces in there for
June 28, 2016
27699
that use. So, you have an existing supply. So let me add this. The
demand then would be 287. If you put it in for December, it's 359.
Well, you have 457. So in May, you have a 37 percent surplus. In
December, the design day, you have a 21 percent surplus of that
area. Now there might be other parts of the mall, parking lots and
things like that, that might be less, a lower percentage of surplus,
but overall, the site should have somewhere around . . . I mean
you have like 1,000 extra based on what is accepted practice. So,
without confusing you any more, I mean, I don't want to do that
but the bottom line is, we look at it in May and kind of correlated
with May. Then we took that number, upped it to December, May
we have a 37 percent surplus, December we have a 21 percent
surplus. That's a big surplus. Accepted practice would let you go
down as low as 5. If you were going to design a parking lot, maybe
as high as 15, but you would never go nearly as high as what we
have here. I think I'm finished. Do you have any questions of me?
Mr. Wilshaw: Any questions of Mr. Labadie? I think we'll probably circle back.
We may have some questions in the future.
Mr. Hyman: In earlier comments both from Mark and from the Planning
Commission, there was a focus on two issues, the exterior
aesthetics, and as you can see, we've made substantial changes
from the original proposal that was presented to you. With respect
to the traffic concerns, we hope we have resolved those. You
have the traffic impact analysis. I hope you looked at it, and
because we were concerned about the issue of parking, we
added a supplement, which I believe is part of your packet which
explains why there is more than adequate parking and goes
through the numbers. You have to understand that the Urban
Land Institute's numbers and the conclusion that 4.5 per
thousand works. We're way over 4.5 per thousand. But that's not
an arbitrary number. That's based on studies throughout the
United States of shopping centers that are similar in essence to
the shopping center at Laurel Park. So those are actual
experiential numbers. We searched your files. He searched the
files. We can't figure out where the 3,500 came from. We'll go
over that at the appropriate time with the Zoning Board of
Appeals. All I can tell you is that it's an arbitrary number, and
based on some calculations I've done, Mark can go over what we
call the default rate, but based on some calculations I've done,
we should actually, assuming that we're using a retail measure,
we should actually reduce that 3,497 by up to 900 spaces based
on the calculations I've done of actual experience at this mall as
opposed to arbitrary numbers and the default rate which is a
calculation that planners and engineers use when they don't have
better numbers. So we think we've met the test in terms of
June 28, 2016
27700
parking. We're going to have to satisfy the Zoning Board of
Appeals that we have, and we think we've gone a long, long way
in terms of meeting the variance comments that you've made with
respect to the exterior aesthetics. We're here to answer
questions.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. I'm sure we will have some. I appreciate your
presentation. Are there any questions for the petitioner?
Mr. Caramagno: I have a question for the parking issue. When you talk about a
national average of parking, how does that national average work
or is there an average that works differently in a seasonal state
like Michigan where there is snow in the wintertime that takes up
obvious parking. Is there anything that correlates that? Obviously,
California, Florida, there's never any parking spaces obstructed.
It's always wide open. How about Michigan where we have
different situations in the wintertime?
Mr. Labadie: First of all, it's not an average.
Mr. Caramagno: That's not what was said. It was just said an average.
Mr. Labadie: Accepted practice is the way it's figured out.
Mr. Caramagno: Wait a minute. I just heard accepted national average is what I
heard two minutes ago. Is that not true?
Mr. Labadie: No.
Mr. Caramagno: Okay. So it's different then.
Mr. Labadie: I don't know about different. It's just not . . . that was not spoken
the right term. What I said was accepted practice and there's a
process to go through to figure it out. It's not an average. So
getting more to your question though, there are like 500 shopping
centers for the data for the ULI information. That data is
occupancy study and occupancy information for those sites year
round. So it's not just they look at it in December and they didn't
look at it in February and they're kind of extrapolating. They've
collected data from all over the country from 500 sites almost year
around. So like I said, I was able to collect the data in May and
relate that to December when I was talking about that. So the
answer to your question is, the demand during the peak time, is
that two weeks before Christmas and that's the same wherever
you are in the country? Everybody is shopping at Christmas,
whether you're Florida when it's 80 and it's 2 below here. Now, if
you're trying to factor in the number of spaces that might be lost
June 28, 2016
27701
in a parking lot because snow is piled up, if that was I sort of felt
that might be a question.
Mr. Caramagno: Just what is obviously taken with snowplow equipment, snow
piles, things of this nature, because I understand what you're
saying. On the average day you have parking covered. Okay? I
hear that. But in the peak season, that's what we kind of plan for.
I realize the property has x capacity for parking spots, but if you
put this restaurant in this portion of the parking lot, I'm not going
to park four blocks away to get in the mall because there's a
parking spot over there.
Mr. Labadie: You won't have to do that. That was kind of the point I tried to
make is that you'll have a 21 percent surplus, extra spaces. So it
would be like almost 100 spaces available to you on that part that
I outlined at the peak time. In May, you're going to have more
than that.
Mr. Caramagno: Obviously.
Mr. Labadie: So that was my point, is that you have excess parking on the site.
Placing the Panera on the site and you're removing some spaces.
You're losing 61 spaces or something like that. Losing those is all
you're really doing is displacing anybody that might park there to
another place in the same parking lot. You're not forcing
somebody to walk half a mile in December or any other time. If
they want to use this area in December, they will and they can.
There will be at least 21 percent of the spaces available.
Mr. Caramagno: Thank you.
Mr. Labadie: You're welcome.
Mr. Caramagno: I have another question too. I don't know who can answer this.
When you showed the picture from Six Mile Road with all the
trees and the berm, and you really can't see the restaurant, how
does that make sense for you?
Mr. Dell'Isola: The way we presented it was, we tried to identify where would
people see the restaurant from the street. We found the best
opportunity would be Laurel Park Drive.
Mr. Caramagno: So this restaurant will support itself just off of mall traffic. You
don't really even need Six Mile Road traffic.
Mr. Dell'Isola: There's two different questions there. The pictures that we offer,
we're just from a visibility standpoint because there was some
June 28, 2016
27702
concern, why are we facing north versus south. Traditionally,
everyone wants to face the main street that would be adjacent to
it. We've got the unique situation where we've got a retail area
that is heavily screened from view, which is not what a retailer
would want, but that's what we have. And we decided that in this
orientation, considering too the one-way traffic and the flow that
would happen in there, the orientation of the building is supported
by what we've presented there in the pictures. Now as far as
people coming to the restaurant, I think everyone is going to learn
where they are. The existing location of the Panera is very difficult
to find. It's hidden. Even the sign is obstructed within 20 feet of
the face of the store. This provides us with a better opportunity as
people come and go from the offices and go north and south
down Laurel Park Drive. They will learn that it's there. When the
new hotel comes in, when they exit, they will be able to see it
there as opposed to traffic flowing west on six Mile.
Mr. Caramagno: Thank you.
Brian Bernard: Do you mind if I go a little bit farther with that just to kind of answer
his question. He was asking about the visibility aspect of it. That
is one of the reasons . . . should we raise the parapet on that
southeast corner and put the signage there so the traffic
westbound, there is a break in the trees as you're heading there
before you get to the site and before you get to that corner. That's
on that picture, where the 21 foot parapet that Mr. Taormina
mentioned earlier, does rise above that berm line. Additionally,
on that site plan in the lower right corner, the southeast corner,
we are proposing a monument that will require a variance
because we're not a separate parcel. With that monument, that
definitely reduces the building signage that we would need and
what we would even try to propose. But that's really where we're
getting the visibility on Six Mile to traffic, not just from inside the
mall ring road.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Ventura: Gentlemen, I guess I have to say, in all honesty, that I can't
accept the assertions with regard to parking adequacy. I have
extensive experience in retail, and I understand how critical
parking is in retail at the peak time of the year. The peak time of
year starts before Thanksgiving and ends in January. If a store
is not successful in that period of time, they don't make it. I just
can't, in good conscious, vote for something that is going to take
any parking away from this mall. It's already struggling. There's
high turnover in this mall. I shop there. I've been shopping there
since the mall was built. I park where this restaurant goes. During
June 28, 2016
27703
the high season, the Christmas season, there's always plenty of
cars there and there's always a walk. That's not a projection. It's
not based on any surveys. It's based on my real experience over
years. And to suggest that there's 900 excess parking spaces in
this mall, based on national surveys, is ludicrous because it's not
true at any place at the mall, unless you might hike yourself out
to the northwest corner of the mall on the other side of the office
buildings. You might find some over there but I can guarantee
you there aren't any customers that are going to park over there
and walk down to Von Maur.
Mr. Hyman: May I respond and Skip Alexander is here also.
Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Hyman, Mr. Ventura was making a statement. I don't think he
was asking a question. We will give you an opportunity to speak
at the end of this.
Ms. McCue: Going back to Six Mile and the berm and the trees where we have
reduced visibility, and that's why we've got the building situated
to face the other residential direction because that's going to be
your great visibility section. You also said that you were going to
ask for a monument sign on Six Mile. Correct? There's a lot of
trees here. My assumption would be, what is the thought process
as far as the monument sign, and how many trees and how we're
going to have to adjust that berm.
Mr. Dell'Isola: The proposal would place the sign on the southern side of the
berm and would not require the removal of any trees, probably
we could even add some low landscape around it, but it would
give you an opportunity to say, as you're going west on Six Mile,
that there's a Panera. You would have to turn onto Laurel Park
Drive to locate it. Now if there was an entrance off Six Mile, I
would say that it would probably factor into the placement of the
restaurant and it would be more visible. But there isn't, so an
additional monument sign is a request to add to that location.
Ms. McCue: Thank you.
Mr. Long: Mr. Labadie, going back to the overview, Mark, if we could see
the different parking areas. So you outlined Section A at the
bottom there and your calculations were 37 percent of spaces are
available in May, and when you run your calculations, you thought
it would be 21. No, you're shaking your head.
Mr. Labadie: No, a surplus.
Mr. Long: A surplus of 37 percent.
June 28, 2016
27704
Mr. Labadie: In other words, a percent of what's there. In other words, if it was
parked at the max at that time of the year, you would have that
many extra spaces there.
Mr. Long: Okay. Thirty-seven percent extra spaces in May, 21 percent extra
spaces in December. So did you do similar calculations for the
other . . .
Mr. Labadie: May I interrupt?
Mr. Long: Absolutely.
Mr. Labadie: In May, that surplus means 170. In December, that means 98.
Mr. Long: What were the calculations for, let's say, Section G or Section H,
which are the ones on the right hand side.
Mr. Labadie: I didn't go through any of that.
Mr. Long: You didn't go through any of that. Okay. Again, speaking from
experience, you can see they're sort of narrower and they tend to
get more of the parking. In May or in June more people park in
those areas that would probably park in Section A. So I'm not
sure that the factoring, the calculation, is necessarily apples to
apples then.
Mr. Labadie: We're not even impacting that. My point is, is that if you park the
max, the excess parking that you have in this area where the
Panera is going, peak demand in December, you're going to have
an extra 98 spaces in the place where we are impacting. We're
not displacing 150 to 200 and some odd spaces to someplace
else in the parking lot. They're just moving over in the same
parking area. You are going to have an extra 170 spaces, spaces
in A and in December you're going to have an extra 98. Period.
We're not displacing anything over to any other lot.
Mr. Long: Does that assume that people are parking in all of these
specifically designated areas on an equal basis? In other words,
more people park on the east side of it in the summer, but it is so
full over there during Christmastime or the peak time, November,
that they don't have any choice but to go into this overload area.
Just put me at ease, if you can, that the calculation is right.
Mr. Labadie: I'll try not to confuse you. The concept is something called shared
parking for the mall itself. Shared parking is when you have uses
that have their peak demands at different times, sometimes
June 28, 2016
27705
different days. But all of their demands for the most part are
different by day of year too. So the Urban Land Institute collected
all of this information, parking occupancy for these land uses,
over a whole year. So I can tell you what it's going to be in May
15 or May 18. I can tell you what it's going to be in July 2, what
demands are going to be, what percent of that peak day that you
should design for. You don't design for the worse day ever.
That's sometimes why you run into some problems out on your
roads. The same thing with speed limits, 85th percentile speed. In
this case, though, the peak demand for Area A in May will be 287.
The area has 457 spaces in it. In December, you'll have a peak
demand of 359. You'll have an extra 98 left over. So there's no
reason for anybody that wants to park in this lot, not to, one, to
be able to park there, but two, so if they want to move over to the
east, they're going to move over to the east not because they
don't have a space in Lot A, but because they want to be over in
that east lot for some reason because they're closer to some
other store.
Mr. Long: I understand everything that you just said. You did a great job of
explaining it. Hear me out on this. Let's take Section H for
example. That's the lower one that's kind of like a home plate,
right there. So that area there has 146 known spaces according
to the table per your count. I'm assuming this is where that came
from. So if the peak in A in May was 287 . . .
Mr. Labadie: Would be, including the Panera. When we counted, it was 206.
Mr. Long: Okay. The peak in May there, and I don't have any numbers, but
the peak in A with Panera was 287 out of 457. So that's about 63
percent.
Mr. Labadie: Sixty-five.
Mr. Long: Sixty-five percent. I would submit that the peak in H in May is
probably around 80 percent.
Mr. Labadie: Okay. I don't know.
Mr. Long: So therefore, what I'm concerned about is that the peak in
December for that is 100 percent and you have overflow. I think
that your peak in A in December would be higher than 359. This
is your business. This is what you do every day. I'm just using my
own, who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes, right?
I'm just trying to use my own experience in that. That's where my
disconnect is on this.
June 28, 2016
27706
Mr. Labadie: So it's not so much in your mind that people in A are going to
displace the H, than people in H are going to displace the A.
Mr. Long: Correct.
Mr. Labadie: They can do that. There's a minimum 21 percent surplus in A.
M. Long: I understand your point. Thank you. I have one other question
about the Six Mile landscaping and the view from there. So we're
putting the back side of the building towards Six Mile because of
the visibility. What about in the fall and winter and things like that,
when the trees lose their foliage so now it's easier to see from Six
Mile. I have concerns about the back end of the building showing
in Michigan where we're going to have six months of nothing
really blocking it.
Mr. Dell'Isola: Yeah. We've got some deciduous trees there, which is what
you're referring to in the fall. They'll drop their leaves and you'll
be abler to see a little bit better in there. Now, many of them are
not. So you'll have a consistent stream. But in the case that you
can, we've been asked to landscape what is typically, when it's in
the true back of the building, that little island as you're passing
through the drive-thru. It would be on your right. That island there
would typically be a raised concrete pavement, but we've added
some landscape to that as well. Panera has moved and not many
have so far, but to really not identifying a front. They've got their
name proposed on each side and every side is now presentable
as opposed to many of the retailers that we see. In elevation, they
look beautiful, but then on the sides and back they're horrible.
This presents well on each side and there is landscape on all
sides and that's going to pick up and break up that brick exterior
along the back.
Mr. Long: This second from the left elevation, that's the one that will face
Six Mile?
Mr. Barnard: Correct. And the other piece of that that I think is kind of being
overlooked and this is something we went through very early on
as we talked with Engineering and the city, is the traffic flow
around the center. So if we flip the building around so that it did
face Six Mile, using the drive-thru, you have to come in and
basically circle the building twice before you would be able to
leave, whereas here, you come in, you circle the building and
you're going right back out again.
Mr. Long: I understand. Thank you.
June 28, 2016
27707
Ms. Smiley Just for clarity, that 100 extra spaces I have is after you put in
Panera and all their parking spots.
Mr. Labadie That is correct.
Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any other questions? Well, there is nobody else in the
audience. We're going to give Mr. Hyman the last word.
Mr. Hyman: Two seconds or maybe five. Just to correct something that Mr.
Ventura posited. He talked about the turnover in the mall. The
fact is that the mall has 86 percent occupancy currently, which is
a pretty good occupancy rate. In addition to that, obviously this
proposal is not a secret to the tenants of the mall, and Skip
Alexander is here but I can tell you that the two major retailers in
the mall, Carson's and Van Maur, are both very comfortable with
this proposal. They're not concerned about any parking impact.
Ms. Smiley Are you telling me that they think that Panera is going to bring
business into Von Maur?
Mr. Hyman: No. I'm not saying that at all. All I'm saying is, that Von Maur is
not uncomfortable with the fact that Panera will be there and will
be taking up some parking spaces. Obviously, there is, in fact,
going to be some sharing, if you can say that. That there will be,
and it's one of the concepts in terms of sharing, there will be some
mixing between the people who go the retailer and also go to eat
at Panera. Likewise, you've got an office building in the back.
Those office building occupants are going to want to eat lunch
somewhere. They're going to want to eat breakfast somewhere.
And by the way, obviously, breakfast, there is no conflict at all
between the Panera business and the mall business. So there
will be some aid, if you will, some support for the mall by having
the Panera there, but I don't think we're making a big thing out of
that at this point. It's just one of the shared parking concepts.
Mr. Ventura: Mr. Hyman, what did you say was the occupancy in the mall is?
Mr. Hyman: Eight-six percent.
Mr. Ventura: That mall used to be 100 percent. Occupancy there has declined
steadily over the years. I understand that one of the factors is on-
line shopping. And that's becoming a bigger and bigger factor for
brick and mortar shopping retail centers. Again, I can't see
exacerbating the parking shortage when the retailers there
already have no shortage of challenges.
June 28, 2016
27708
Mr. Hyman: You know, it's interesting. I pulled off the internet today a
comment that maybe I should send to you, Peter, about the fact
that the retailers are adjusting to e trade and changing the way
they are doing their on-site retailing as a result of that. But in
addition to that, an 80 occupancy rate is a good occupancy rate.
It may not be 100 percent, but it's a good occupancy rate.
Mr. Ventura: Norman, come on. No landlord wants 80 percent occupancy. I'm
in the real estate business.
Mr. Hyman: Every landlord wants 100 percent, 110 percent, but Peter, that's
no basis for turning this down. I'm sorry.
Mr. Ventura: Okay. That's your opinion.
Mr. Long: What's the proposed ending hours of the Panera location? Will
they be open until 9:00 p.m.? Will they close at 5:00 p.m.?
Mr. Barnard: They hold the same hours at the current location at Newburgh
Plaza. I believe it's 5:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Mr. Long: Thank you.
Mr. Labadie: The exchange between Mr. Hyman and Mr. Ventura, I just want
to make sure that it doesn't confuse the rest of you. The
calculations regarding parking and parking demand and all that
stuff is based on 100 percent occupancy. So the 86 just makes it
from a parking standpoint better, but all the numbers I gave you
are based on 100 percent occupancy.
Mr. Wilshaw: It's based on the total square footage of the center.
Mr. Labadie: Correct. Hopefully you weren't confused, but oh, wait a minute. Is
he fibbing to us now? I don't want to do that. It's 100 percent.
Okay?
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. A motion is in order.
On a motion by Ventura, seconded by McCue, and adopted, it was
#06-70-2016 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on June 28, 2016, on Petition
2016-04-02-07 submitted by Laurel Park Retail Properties, L.L.C.
requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(c)(1)
of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to
construct and operate a freestanding full service restaurant with
June 28, 2016
27709
drive-up window facilities (Panera Bread) within the parking lot of
the Laurel Park Place shopping center at 37700 Six Mile Road,
located on the north side of Six Mile Road between Newburgh
Road and the 1-275/96 Expressway in the Southeast 1/4 of
Section 7, which property is zoned C-2, the Planning Commission
does hereby deny Petition 2016-04-02-07 for the following
reasons:
1. That the petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the
proposed use is in compliance with all of the special and
general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth
in Sections 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance;
2. That a full-service drive-up restaurant at this location will
increase traffic congestion at the mall as well as increase
the parking deficiency, which—especially during the holiday
season—would have an adverse effect on mall tenants that
rely heavily on this time of the year for a high percentage of
their annual sales;
3. That Laurel Park Mall was not designed or intended for the
development of separate outlots, and especially free-
standing, full service restaurants with drive-up window
facilities;
4. That the increase in intensity associated with a restaurant
would be detrimental to and not in harmony with the
character of the existing shopping center;
5. That the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the site has
the capacity to accommodate a restaurant; and
6. That the proposal fails to conclusively deal with all the
concerns deemed necessary for the safety and welfare of
the City and its residents.
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: Ventura, McCue, Long, Smiley, Wilshaw
NAYS: Caramagno
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
June 28, 2016
27710
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. Because this is a waiver use, the petitioner will have 10
days in which to appeal this decision in writing to the City Council.
Thank you, gentlemen.
ITEM #6 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,089TH Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of
the Minutes of the 1,089th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting
held on June 7, 2016.
On a motion by Smiley, seconded by McCue, and adopted, it was
#06-71-2016 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 1,089th Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on June 7,
2016, are hereby approved.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Smiley, McCue, Long, Ventura, Wilshaw
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Caramagno
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
ITEM #7 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 408TH Special
Regular Meeting
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of
the Minutes of the 408th Special Regular Meeting held on June
14, 2016.
On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Long, and unanimously adopted, it was
#06-72-2016 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 408th Special Regular Meeting
held by the Planning Commission on June 14, 2016, are hereby
approved.
June 28, 2016
27711
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Smiley, Long, McCue, Ventura, Caramagno,
Wilshaw
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 1,090th Public
Hearings and Regular Meeting held on June 28, 2016, ' :s adjourned at 10:00
p.m.
CITY PL ING COMMISSION
m Ca Tmagno, Secretary
ATTEST:
Ian Wilshaw, Chairman