Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING HELD JANUARY 28, 2014ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF LIVONIA MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING HELD JANUARY 28, 2014 A Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Livonia was held in the Gallery of the Livonia City Hall on Tuesday, January 28, 2014. MEMBERS PRESENT: Matthew Henzi, Chairman Sam Caramagno, Secretary Ed Duggan, Jr., Elizabeth H. McCue MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert E. Sills Craig Pastor Kathleen McIntyre OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Fisher, Assistant City Attorney Steve Banko, City Inspector Patricia C. Burklow, CER -8225 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Henzi then explained the Rules of Procedure to those interested parties. Each petitioner must give their name and address and declare hardship for appeal. Appeals of the Zoning Board's decisions are made to the Wayne County Circuit Court. The Chairman advised the audience that appeals can be filed within 21 days of the date tonight's minutes are approved. The decision of the Zoning Board shall become final within five (5) calendar days following the hearing and the applicant shall be mailed a copy of the decision. There are four decisions the Board can make: to deny, to grant, to grant as modified by the Board, or to table for further information. Each petitioner may ask to be heard by a full seven (7) member Board. Four (4) members were present this evening. The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard by a full Board and no one wished to do so. The Secretary then read the Agenda and Legal Notice to each appeal, and each petitioner indicated their presence. Appeals came up for hearing after due legal notice was given to all interested parties within 300 feet, petitioners and City Departments. There were 4 people present in the audience. (7:05) City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 of 41 January 28, 2014 APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-01-05: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Greg Errigo/Michigan Auto Recovery Service, 15510 Surrey, Livonia, MI 48154, seeking to maintain a 6-foot tall privacy fence within the side yard which is not allowed. Privacy fences must not be placed forward of the rear line of the home. The property is located on the east side of Surrey, (15510), between Roycroft and Five Mile, Lot No. 064-01-0317-001, R-413 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Fence Ordinance, Section 15.44.090(B) "Residential District Regulations." Henzi: Mr. Banko, anything to add to this case? Banko: Not at this time, sir. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? If there are none, would the petitioner please come to the table? Good evening. Stitum: Good evening, my name is Thomas Stitum. I'm appearing also on behalf of Michigan Auto Recovery Service, Incorporated and seated next to me is Mr. Gregory Errigo. Errigo: Good evening. Henzi: Good evening. Mr. Stitum, go ahead and tell us about the application. Stitum: Well the application is essentially a--when Mister--when Michigan Auto Recovery purchased the home there was historically--there was an existing fence that had been a six foot fence as I understand it--that had either been existing or constructed by the original developer, Steven King. And I believe that Mr. King submitted some correspondence to the City explaining that he had removed that fence. Thereafter the home--I think it went through the foreclosure process. When the petitioner purchased the home his contractor mistakenly believed that the fence--this particular fence--or a portion of the fence was covered under this permit. There is only really--the key sections of the fence that are at issue today are a small portion along the side of the home. The fence has been constructed; I believe it is approximately thirty feet. And a small portion along the front. And I have some photographs if this body hasn't seen any in your packets, I don't know if you've-- Henzi: Can we settle what portions we are talking about? Stitum: Sure. Henzi: Is it the south portion--the south side of the property and then the west side of the property closest to Surrey? Stitum: Yes --yes, that is correct. I have a diagram as well. Henzi: Then there is a rear but you're not here for the rear tonight? Stitum: Well the rear-- Henzi: That's not an issue. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 of 41 January 28, 2014 Stitum: That's correct, yes. Henzi: Got it. Stitum: So tonight it's just a small portion on the side of the house and then forward across the front. Henzi: Okay. Stitum: And may I-- Henzi: Sure. Stitum: --submit these photographs. Banko: Thank you. Stitum: And through the --through the application process Mr. Errigo did converse with obviously with the inspector. Also there is was lot input from several of the surrounding neighbors including the funeral home. I think each neighbor has --or at least some of the affected neighbors has submitted their approvals of the --their approval letters approving the variance. In fact, interestingly one neighbor directly across the street has himself a six foot privacy fence. And I haven't seen any opposition, Mr. Errigo hasn't --has only received favorable responses to this small variance. So I won't regurgitate the application unless this body wants me to. We believe it's --and I don't know if this body does have all the letters, I know you'll read them later, but I do have one from Mr. Fitzpatrick that I just recently received. Henzi: John Fitzpatrick? Stitum: Yes, John Fitzpatrick. Henzi: Dated January 20th? Stitum: Correct. Henzi: Yeah, we have that. Stitum: Okay. And 1--1 believe that the funeral home has submitted one as well as --as one --as well as --excuse me --as well as the immediate adjacent neighbor. Henzi: I have a couple questions if we can go back to the preexisting --as far --it's a little hard for me to follow. Is it the claim that there was a preexisting fence that had been erected by the developer and that's why your client thought--1--1--you know--thought-- was led to believe he could have the fence because one existed when he bought the property? Stitum: Well no, Mr. King, who was the developer had--has--he ripped that fence down as I understand it. And --but in doing so Mr. Errigo communicated with Mr. King and Mr. King advised him that he had put a six foot fence up initially. I don't know if he put it up or that there was an existing six foot fence when he --Mr. King had the property. Henzi: Got it. When was the fence erected, at least these two sections that we're talking about? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 of 41 January 28, 2014 Stitum: I believe it was in late summer, early fall --I believe it was August though Henzi: And did your client have the contractor pull a permit? Stitum: Yes --oh not for the fence my --the general contractor pulled the permit but the general contractor believed as my client --led my client to believe that his permit covered the erection of this fence --or this section of the fence. Henzi: Okay. And the last question I have is, you know we get these applications from time to time. As far as I'm concerned the main portion at issue is the one toward the front of the house. So explain why the fence has to be toward the front of the house, why it can't start at the rear of the house in accordance with the ordinance? Stitum: Why the fence-- Henzi: That would be the western portion, that part that goes from the house to the side yard. If that started at the rear of the house you wouldn't even need a variance, it doesn't it starts towards the front of the house. Stitum: Correct. Henzi: Why do you need to pull it towards the front? Stitum: Well, the --I think the primary reason for why it needs to start at the fence (sic) is to --as one of the neighbors said number one, I think it enhances the property, but more importantly from a functional standpoint it certainly safeguards and shields my client's privacy and their use --and the way that they are using their yard. It allows them a zone of privacy that they would otherwise not enjoy had they started the fence toward the latter part of the yard. And --and as Mr. Errigo just pointed out to me the funeral home itself, its operations in the back kind of interrupts --or interferes with some of their privacy. That's one of the reasons they wanted to start it back there at the rear portion of the property. Henzi: When you're talking about privacy there, you're saying that there's --there's windows, there's an entrance up along the front that you want to pull the front --that you want to pull the fence up to the front? Stitum: Is there an entrance right there? Can Mr. Errigo address that directly? Henzi: Absolutely. Errigo: Good evening Board. My name is Greg Errigo, Michigan Auto Recovery Service; we're the owners of the house. The reason why we --that the front of that fence is so important that we have to have there, that's our privacy we have a side door there and a nice porch that the City --that we pulled permits to put --and we have our patio there and our picnic area and our privacy. I have pictures to show. And it's the only place on our property that we can go and have privacy because the backyard is open and the parking lot for the funeral home is right adjacent to our house there. And we don't have the side fence put up there yet. It was to be addressed at tonight's meeting but it didn't get address by the City as one packet. And I questioned John Deshamp (sic) --whatever his name is --and why he didn't put it on there and he said I didn't get back to him fast enough whatever --but that's neither here nor there. But to answer the question at hand, that's our privacy area where we have a porch, patio and what have City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 of 41 January 28, 2014 you for our place to go --we don't have nowhere else to go. To the east of us if all driveway, to the west of me is the side street where the cars are coming up and down in the parking lot for the funeral home. And on the south side of our house which is what we're asking to have enclosed here is our privacy area, it's the only area we go. We have a door there, to come out there, that's the only thing could have. And we would appreciate the Board to approve. And it's very much a pleasure for us to move into your City by the way also. Everything that was addressed --to be addressed on this house by the City of Livonia this house was a real thorn in their side for a real long time. We corrected it. We worked together with all the inspectors at the City and we're still working with them to make it a hundred percent and to get this thing resolved. So I would appreciate it if this thing could be approved tonight and I have a picture here if you want to see it. Henzi: Yes, if you could pass it. Errigo: Thank you very much, sir. Henzi: Does anyone have any questions for the petitioner? Duggan: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: What year did you buy the house? Errigo: We just bought the house in April 7th Duggan: April 7t"? So you bought it and you knew the funeral home was there. Did you buy it with the assumption that you could put up a privacy fence? Errigo: Well, I didn't see a --I mean every backyard that I've always ever had and everything there's always been a fence up for my privacy and for safe keeping. And to -- for example, we didn't have the fence up when we had the fireworks here last year and you would have thought my house was a backyard park. They're coming through this way, from the alley, from the side street, going through the bushes, going through the side of my house and everything. And we're just sitting there looking at all these people and they just thought it was an open --an open area for them to walk through like a field. So I feel it's a matter of right we have the fence be put back up that was there at one point and it got taken down sir when the construction was going on the house. And the back part, the side part we were able to find a picture from way back in the farm days of all that fence up and as you seen the rest of the fence was up all the way in the front. But even to have the fence --the picture where it was up in the front where Steve King took it down when he was doing construction to get his trucks in there, the cement, to pour a foundation and everything and he has a letter that he has submitted and notarized that there was a fence up there and it got submitted to Livonia okay. And were just trying to keep the-- Stitum: Okay, that's answers his question. Duggan: Thanks. Errigo: Thank you sir. Henzi: Any other questions? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5 of 41 January 28, 2014 Caramagno: Question, Mr. Chair Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: The picture you submit on the south side is very helpful. You can see there's an entrance there and you can see that's your area of relaxation. What about the rest of the fence you said you're going to be applying for soon. What is that --what does that mean, tell me about that? Errigo: What we have is --the diagram you have there, sir of a --the fence there, on the -- on the south --on the north side of the house there sir, you'll see--I--I--I'm allowed to erect a fence for what John told me from the inspector office, a twenty one foot from the sidewalk going up to my driveway. Well me --my appeal would be to the Board --to be -- but it's not to be in place tonight because John didn't put it on there --you see I have dotted lines there. I have to --in order for me to put a fence twenty one foot that will run right along my driveway line which is fine but I can't get out my back porch there. So all I want is five --five feet on the --I would be asking for five feet to go right along the side of my porch there so when I come down the steps on the porch I'm right there in the back yard. And that way I could shield out from the parking lot of the funeral home what have you. Caramagno: Okay so it --what you requested --I see the dotted line there? Errigo: Yes. Caramagno: This will totally enclose this back yard in six foot fence, is that what's going-- Errigo: Yes, sir, but they only said that they --I could put like shadow box fence. But it would secure my privacy and it would secure that the --you know keep the people from come --from walking through the yard there. I mean-- Caramagno: If you --if you had that piece of fence that you're going to impose later on, that takes away your argument that there's a parking lot over to the side because people can see right in your back yard, they will no longer be able to see that. So then why do you need all the fence in front again? Errigo: In the front? Caramagno: Yes. Errigo: Right now, that's--that's--my side door's right there for our privacy. That's where we have our patio there, our picnic table, we have our privacy right there, there's nowhere else I could go. Where am I going to go the parking lot --I mean in my backyard? There's nothing there I can't --I can't even sit there --we sat out there the other --when it was summer we were sitting there in the garage, the doors were open -- and we were sitting there and there were people in cars going by making smart remarks to my wife sitting there. Hey you're pretty, what are you doing here, stuff like that. I don't --I don't condone things like that. Caramagno: You shouldn't have --you shouldn't have to deal with that. Okay, that's -- that's --so I understand the fence. Tell me about the wrecker sitting in the yard. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6 of 41 January 28, 2014 Errigo: I own Michigan Auto Recovery, we're a police impound yard and the wrecker in the yard, it's --it's what I drive every day, that's my car. It' goes in the garage, it comes out, it goes in the garage, comes out, okay. If I have a fence there you wouldn't be able to see that. But I would try to and as well I would never disrespect anybody okay, the fence --the car --the truck can go in the garage and it does go in the garage. A lot of time I come home for lunch or to do a contract or talk on the phone or have a three way conversation on the phone with somebody, I don't put the truck in the garage. I park it there, I'm there ten--fifteen--twenty minutes and I leave. My truck --my truck is not a regular --regular pull truck, I mean, you can go in there with a white tux and come out as clean as when you went in as you come out it's not your typical Fred Sanford Company that I own. Caramagno: How many wreckers you got? Errigo: I've got twelve sir. Caramagno: Twelve wreckers, where do you keep the rest of them? Errigo: In my yard, sir, there are --none of my wreckers ever come to my house. I own Michigan Auto Recovery which is at Joy Road and Southfield. We tow for Detroit Police Department and every aspect of it. We've been doing it for thirty years sir. But I have all flatbeds, I'm the only one that has a truck like I have I'm a backup truck. We use it for wenching and for what have you as a backup truck for my flatbeds. Caramagno: Okay, at night that sits in the garage? Errigo: Pardon me? Caramagno: At night it sits in the garage-- Errigo: Yes, sir-- Caramagno: -when you hang it up for the day? Errigo: --absolutely, that's what the garage is higher for. The workers --one door that's up higher-- Caramagno: Yes. Errigo: -- than the other sir, and it fits right in there, in the--when--when sometimes when I'm home sir, there's --well not today because I parked it right along the side of the driveway today, I parked it right along the back there, along the fence around the corner where nobody could see it. But we do --we do --I do try to park it in the garage as much as I can, but I'm hardly never home --I'm hardly never home. Caramagno: Mike, what's --what's the ordinance regarding commercial vehicles in the house? Fisher: If they park it in the garage and close the door they're straight. But obviously there's a concern if it's sitting out in the driveway or the yard. Caramagno: Thank you. Errigo: It's --it's in the yard way in the back off the street but if I had a fence there to finish up to do it, then you wouldn't be able to see it. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 7 of 41 January 28, 2014 Fisher: It would still be illegal though. Errigo: It wouldn't be outside, I would put it in the garage to--to--I'm here to work together with the City not to have a problem with it. I'm not one to give a problem to anybody. Caramagno: That's all the questions I've got, thank you. Errigo: Thank you very much, sir. Henzi: I just want to clear something up for the record. This is your residence right? Errigo: I'm the owner of Michigan Auto Recovery Services, Incorporated, yes sir. Henzi: So the business owns the property but you use it as your personal residence? Errigo: I haven't moved in yet because we're still doing--but it's going to be yes sir, we're still doing construction, okay and I haven't sold my other house yet. But my end result is to be here. Henzi: Right, and then--and then you've got a business location, you're not going to be running a business out of this house right? Errigo: Oh no-- Stitum: Sir, let me just clarify. Michigan Auto Recovery Service, Incorporated and all Mr. Errigo's other businesses have all been in existence for nearly thirty years, most of them over thirty years. And all have various headquarters and yards and facilities throughout southeastern Michigan. So it's not like he's going to be operating a business out of his home. Henzi: Any other questions? Fisher: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Fisher. Fisher: Why is the house owned by Michigan Auto Recovery, that is a somewhat unusual situation? Stitum: It is, it's a long answer but in a short--in a nutshell it's for certain planning purposes--tax planning. Errigo: That house is no way shape or form ever, will never, ever--ever--ever be an office for me because I have properties that hold six thousand cars. We don't tow one or two cars. Fisher: Okay. Henzi: Anything else? Is there anybody in the audience that wants to speak for or against the project? Seeing no one coming forward, can you read the letters? Caramagno: We have an approval from Katherine Bohnert at 15496 Edington. We have an objection from Natalia Mayorchak at 15493 Surrey (letter read), Jenny Cupler sends in an approval at 15604 Edington, (letter read), Andrew Foley, Junior, 15507 Surrey (letter read), and an approval from John Fitzpatrick, 15517 Surrey (letter read). Henzi: Gentlemen, anything you would like to say in closing? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8 of 41 January 28, 2014 Stitum: No, I don't believe so. We just ask that this body approve this small variance Henzi: Thank you. I'll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board's comments with Mrs. McCue. McCue: I kind of struggle with this but it goes back to the same conversation that we have often is that there was no permit pulled. And I understand --I understand the thought process of why we assumed it was fine and all of that type of thing. But typically speaking when we're putting a fence up a permit needs to be pulled. And you know--and--and 1--it's--1 struggle with it sometimes because I know it's a contractor, I know that it's somebody else that was theoretically was responsible for pulling that permit, however, it's always a little bit of a problem for me when we don't have a permit pulled. I'm not completely convinced either that I see a true hardship here which is obviously what our mission is is to show a hardship and that's where variance is granted. Especially if you go back to Mr. Caramagno's comment that if the rest of that fence was completed and that would go along with the ordinance that your privacy would be reinstated with that. So I'll be honest with you right now I don't know which side I fall on, I want to hear what everybody else has to say before I make my decision. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I will be in support of the privacy fence here. You're right off of Five Mile Road and Farmington Road you just along the street there, you have a number of businesses that line up on Farmington Road. You want your privacy I understand that, you should have pulled the permit. I know that generally --you know --the general contractor's fault but it's still yours so I would want to do a fine there. But other than that I do understand your unique location there on the corner with businesses all around and people. I wouldn't be surprised if people parked there along the street at times and walked over to some of them. So I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Mr. Caramagno: It's nice to see you've got support from your neighbors here on this -- on this property. It's a --it's actually comes as kind of a surprise to me, I would have thought you'd have some opposition there myself in that neighborhood. In the picture you passed around earlier with the patio and the door and the steps coming down I can appreciate that, that's a --that's almost a dedicated area for privacy from what I can see. As you look at your other pictures here especially the one that's all driveway I understand there's not a whole lot of room to sit there. My other concern was of course the wrecker sitting in the driveway and the fact that you put it away and tell us that you do is something that we would take your word on. But we're back to the whole reason you're here and that's the fence in the front. I don't find it to be terribly --a terrible problem I should say. The fact that the permit wasn't pulled for a general contractor to not know that if shame on them and as Mr. Duggan said we should probably assess a fine somehow to correct that problem. But I would --I'll be in support but I will strongly take you at your word that this isn't going to turn into an impound yard for local vehicles. Errigo: If I may say something please. As soon as I found out that the permit --the general permits that we pulled --there was eighteen permits pulled for that house --as soon as I found out that it didn't cover any of that I went immediately to the building and City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 9 of 41 January 28, 2014 safety to pull one and they said just hold on a minute it's only eighty one dollars, I said I'll pay a fine, I'll pay whatever you want because I didn't do it with any malice. I did it with not knowing whatever --I mean I didn't even do it. But as soon as I found out about it I went to correct it, they had told me to do what I'm doing now and then if everything's approved --which he hopefully didn't see a problem, to come the next day and pay it. I told him I'll pay penalties whatever because 1 --and they know I didn't do nothing wrong to or know of anything wrong to do --to get over anybody. I went there immediately, they told me to do what I'm doing and come to them tomorrow and if it's approved I'm going to pay them eighty one dollars plus a fine whatever they tells me and they were happy with that. Henzi: Thank you. I agree with Mr. Caramagno, I'm going to grant this --or I'm going to vote to grant this for three reasons. Number one, somebody who's house backs up to a funeral home, I'm --you know --apt to work with them a little bit more than somebody that home's backs up to a golf course. Number two, this is a peculiar lot the way the house is oriented. You've got a big driveway and garage on one side, the back yard slash side yard is not huge and you use that south side for your patio etcetera, I can understand you don't want everybody driving down Surrey to be looking at you while you're having dinner in the summer, I get that --I understand that. And then number three is the fact that you've shown pictures that indicate that historically there is a lot of fence on this property. In fact, part of your application has been grandfathered, you wouldn't even need approval. So for all those reasons I think that it's reasonable. I think that you've got safety concerns to bring that west side closer to the front of the house than the rear. So 1--1 would grant that. Errigo: Thank you. Henzi: So the floors open for a motion. Mr. Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Mr. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Upon Motion by Caramagno supported by Duggan it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-01-05: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Greg Errigo/Michigan Auto Recovery Service, 15510 Surrey, Livonia, MI 48154, seeking to maintain a 6 -foot tall privacy fence within the side yard which is not allowed. Privacy fences must not be placed forward of the rear line of the home. The property is located on the east side of Surrey, (15510), between Roycroft and Five Mile, Lot No. 064-01-0317-001, R-413 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Fence Ordinance, Section 15.44.090(B) "Residential District Regulations" was granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because this house sits on a piece of property that backs up to a funeral parlor. There is a lot of driveway at the City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10 of 41 January 28, 2014 home, so there is little space for outdoor recreation except for the south side of the home. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the petitioner because he wouldn't be allowed a comfortable dining area in the summer time or a place to relax outdoors that is not essentially in a parking lot. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because there are similar fences in the area and this property did have many fences on it as well at one time. 4. The Board received four letters of approval and one objection letter from neighboring property owners. 5. The property is classified as "residential" in the Master Plan and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That a proper permit be pulled for the installation of the fence at double the permit cost. 2. That the fence be inspected to ensure that it has been built properly. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Caramagno, Duggan, McCue, Henzi NAYS: None ABSENT: Sills, Pastor, McIntyre Henzi: The variance is granted with those two conditions. You've got to go ahead and pull the permit and get it inspected, pay the double fine which I guess will be another one hundred sixty six bucks. Stitum: Thank you very much. Errigo: Yeah, thank you. Henzi: Thank you, good luck. Errigo: Thank you very much. May we have those extra photographs? Henzi: There right over here. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 11 of 41 January 28, 2014 APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-01-06: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by TSFR Apple Venture, LLC, (Applebee's), 17800 Laurel Park, #200C, Livonia, MI, seeking to erect a ground sign and wall/awning signs resulting in excess ground sign height, area and electronic message boards as part of this ground sign which is not allowed due to nonconforming signage being proposed; also, excess number of wall/awning signs and wall sign area. Ground Sign Height Ground Sign Area Number of Wall/Awning Signs Allowed: 6 feet Allowed: 30 sq. ft. Allowed: One Oc Proposed: 14 feet Proposed: 54 sq. ft. Proposed: Seven (Two Awning and 5 Wall Signs) Excess: 8 feet Excess: 24 sq. ft. Excess: Six Signs Wall Sign Area Allowed: 97 sq. ft. Proposed: 147 sq. ft. Excess: 50 sq. ft. The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt (13301), between Industrial and CSX Railroad, Lot No. 101-99-0008-010, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50H(a), 1, 2, and 18.50H(o)"Sign Regulations in C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts. Henzi: Mr. Banko anything to add to this case? Banko: I've got nothing to add sir. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? Steve, I have one. I just want to go over there's a letter from August., it looks like it's from the planning director, Mr. Fisher and Alex Bishop and it talks about the determination of their --I guess it's Apples were regarded as signage and I just want to ask you, it gives an analysis in the letter but is that these window signs that are shown? Banko: Well they--if--if there --if I have-- Henzi: It shows a portion of an apple, is that what we're talking about? Fisher: Yes. Banko: Yes. Henzi: Okay. That's all I wanted to know. Any other questions for Mr. Banko? Hearing none, will the petitioner's representative please come forward? Good evening. Jones: Hello, I'm Ryan Jones, I represent TSFR Apple Venture, address is 17800 Laurel Park Drive North, right here in Livonia. I'm just going to give you a little background of our company. We --we've always --we operate right here in the city of Livonia, we're a Michigan based restaurant company. We have 63 Burger Kings in Michigan and we recently purchased 65 Applebee's just about a year ago from Applebee's corporate. So now we are a franchisee for Applebee's. We have an agreement with Applebee's to remodel almost all of our existing restaurants and we actually have to construct new Applebee's over the next several years. And from being City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 12 of 41 January 28, 2014 here in Livonia for four generations the Schostak family has worked with the community, we decided to choose Livonia as a first new build for our Applebee's program. It would actually be the first new Applebee's prototype in the State of Michigan. So we're proud to work with Livonia and hopefully everything works out on that side of things. So basically I'm here --well I'm here for three reasons but the first on we'll just discuss the Applebee's and the signage portion. I have several boards that I can show you. The first one that I would like to show is a colored elevation of the actual restaurant that I can point out exactly what we're asking for tonight. The one --this would be the Applebee's standalone restaurant, there's also a Del Taco and a retail space next to it which is coming up on the agenda. This is actually the front of the building you would see off of Middlebelt Road. Here's the rear of the two buildings and here are the two side elevations of the Applebee's. So the first sign is a front sign that's on the front tower of the Applebee's which is conforming I believe and we're not asking for a variance for that one, that would be our one building sign. Some of the other additional signage are the awnings here, and they do have a small apple graphic on them. And that letter Mr. Henzi was just reading is --they told us based on these small apples the only ones that actually count as signage are the ones that have the color in them. Some of them are just a gray faded logo and then there's a few that actual red logo on the awning. So in the front we have one colored awning, on that --I believe that's the north side, we have another colored awning, and the same on the south side. And then I believe another wall sign is this small logo here that says "Carside To Go", it's actually where customers come in and pick up their food, it tells them where to park and where the server's run their food out. So really it's just more of a directional sign, I would like to call it more than a building sign. So those are the signs that we're looking for tonight for the Applebee's along with a ground sign that --I'm sorry --that would look like this. We --first of all I'll show you the site plan where that would sit. You have Middlebelt running here north south. You have Industrial Drive here, the Applebee's actually sits here, it's a freestanding restaurant. And you have --I call it Menard's Drive, it's the main entrance into Menards which we only have access off Industrial Drive here at the rear and off of Menard's Drive at the rear at this small one way in. We have no access off of Middlebelt Road. So the ground sign for the Applebee's would be here in this corner closest to the Applebee's of course. It's a ten foot setback which meets the ordinance. So really the items we're looking for are height, and square footage and the reader board. We have actually constructed this sign at our Westland location, some of the City Council members actually visited the Westland Applebee's to get a firsthand look at this sign and they actually thought it was very good looking sign, it wasn't obnoxious. And actually the City of Livonia, your ordinance is much tougher on reader boards than Westland so, so Westland's blinks, moves, does all the that your ordinance won't allow that so it will be just static images. We promote --you know --like Military Monday's, the Military members get thirty percent off. This is actually kids eat free on Tuesday, so we would promote that on the reader board. We also will put local events on that board, local high school sporting events scores and things like that. Also they --Applebee's changes their menu six times a year so they like to promote the new products that come out every --every quarter or so. So that --that being said some of the hardships we feel this site has, the big one being the --the traffic volumes in this area. There's --I believe there are seven lanes of traffic, the area is growing rapidly with commercial City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 13 of 41 January 28, 2014 development. It's very difficult to --you know --move safely throughout all those lanes of traffic if you actually can't see the buildings or the sign where you want to enter. Another hardship is we feel we don't have direct access off of Middlebelt so like I pointed out before, you'd have to enter our site kind of at the rear of the site off of Industrial Drive and this Menard's Drive. So we feel signage is very important for our customers and community members to know how to access our site. Also, Middlebelt has I call its own hardship in the fact that as you go --sorry I'll point this out --where Applebee's is sitting here, here's Middlebelt, Applebee's ground sign would be here, there's the train tracks here as you go under these train tracks the road dips down in grade and then actually you can --you can't really see anything here until you're back out on top of the hill and by that time you don't really have time to safely make your left turn into our development. So we feel additional height on the ground sign provides more time to react safely to enter our site. Also, I call it the great wall of Menards. It is a huge Menard's sign that sits right adjacent to us. It totally blocks visibility coming north bound. The thing is actually 600 square feet if you count the brick and the sign. So we're competing with that and it sits right adjacent to our Del Taco which is on the other side. So --you know--we--we--and also the future retailers coming in front of Menard's will be allowed to put their signs here so we have to compete with that as well. And these panels are actually bigger than what we're proposing for the Applebee's and Del Taco as well. I know they got a Goodwill coming and they have like twelve thousand foot of retail coming as well that will be able to utilize that sign. We met with the Planning Department they actually went out there and did their own tests, held up --you know --different heights of signs and things and they worked with us. And we will actually be --this is a twenty foot tall sign, we're going to be actually at about fourteen foot so we're going to be below the Menard sign which is one of their key points was they did not want us to block them or them to block us. So we're going to be below this sign to keep visibility of all the signs out there --you know --visible. So that's --that's really some of the hardships there. The bank next door to the north is heavily landscaped as you come down southbound Middlebelt, it's almost impossible to see the building with the trees that they have planted there. So that was another hardship we felt. And also Industrial Drive which is named Industrial for a reason, there are many semis and large vehicles that actually --you know --this is a stop light and they're sitting here this is Industrial, many vehicles park here for long durations of time, large semis, large vehicles, that you driving southbound you definitely you see no visibility through some of those large trucks that are always parked there because of the traffic lights. So any questions, I'm open to them. I think I covered most of our difficulties with the Applebee's. Henzi: I've couple of questions, I'll start in reverse with the ground sign Jones: Okay. Henzi: And --and I'm looking at the sign they have right there, do you anticipate that most folks are going to turn onto Industrial to gain access to Applebee's? Jones: We had this debate actually with Del Taco Corporate. We --they were claiming most people will come in Industrial Drive here and come to the Del Taco, we felt that most people would actually come in here because Del Taco is actually closer to this side, so we thought they would come in here. For the Applebee's, you know we're City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 of 41 January 28, 2014 really not sure which direction they will come in but in most cases once a customer passes a restaurant it's very slim that they ever turn around to return to a restaurant. So it they don't --if they miss this drive and they see the Applebee's sitting here most people may not even realize you can come in here to access the Applebee's. So we're hoping most learn to use the light for the Applebee's and even the Del Taco eventually. But at first we feel --you know --most may come in here for the Del Taco at least. For Applebee's we're not --we're really aren't sure. Henzi: But the ground sign's at the south end right? Jones: That would be the north end. Henzi: North end, I'm sorry. Jones: Yes. Henzi: Got it. And on the size, I mean you --your excess on the ground sign that includes the brick, the reader board, and the top right? Jones: As in square-- Henzi: Square footage. Jones: I don't think it --I don't think it includes the brick, it's the square footage-- Henzi: So just the reader board and -- Jones: Yeah, the reader board, the reader's board is twenty one square foot and the panel is thirty two square foot. Henzi: Okay. Jones: So-- Henzi: Then I have a couple questions about the wall signs. Jones: Yeah. Henzi: If you calculated how close you would be on wall sign area if we didn't count those things like "Carside To Go", those apple -- Jones: Have I-- Henzi: --logos, if we didn't count those do you know how close you'd be? If you didn't that's fine I can go through -- Jones: Yeah, I had --I did not count that myself. Henzi: It would seem you'd be pretty close to --you know --on the money if we didn't count those. Jones: So we're fifty square feet over, and the Carside sign here is 6.18, you know I don't think we call --we don't show the square footage of those apples actually. So I'm not sure how they calculated those on the --on the awnings. Henzi: Well twenty square foot each, I found it. Jones: So that would be forty plus so I guess that's six -- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 of 41 January 28, 2014 Henzi: Plus six-- Jones: It would be forty six and we're fifty over, so yeah we'd be very--very close. Henzi: And then the neighborhood grill and bar that wasn't signs that's-- Jones: Yeah, you know they count that as three different signs because its three different cabinets, but really its one slogan, Neighborhood Grill and Bar, that's the corporate slogan. If we had to we could probably combine that and make that one sign if we combined the three cabinets, but I don't know if that's really necessary. Henzi: I think the only other question I have for you regarding signs, is that you said that is going to be the prototype for the new Applebee's of Michigan? Jones: Yes. Henzi: Is it the prototype sign package too? Jones: Actually the true prototype has a patio; we got rid of the patio because of Michigan weather. So that patio would sit right where this is, so this design here is not truly prototype. They have large garage bay doors that we eliminated and I don't think they--they may not have a sign on the--this side of the building which would be the north side but we feel with Industrial Drive being such a major business route and actually our main entrance coming off of Industrial Drive that we almost consider that a frontage as well. So that's why we have added a sign there. And actually ordinance would allow a second sign being on a corner if Industrial Drive was considered a major thoroughfare but it's not considered. Henzi: Thank you very much. Any other questions? Duggan: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: Just--so outside of the one sign that you have on the north side, this is pretty much the standard corporate package of signs? Jones: Yeah--yeah, they may have a few more colored apples on their awnings, but I'm not positive on that. But yeah, basically this is--this is their prototype. They've only built four of them actually throughout the country so this would be the fifth one. Like I said we had to modify it a little bit, we've actually--we've actually modified it quite a bit wit the cultured stone, that was one thing the planning department wanted to--you know-- upgrade I'll call it. It was all efface, we brought in cultured stone along the whole rear of the building, on the tower and along the back even and the sides. So we've actually improved it from the prototype we feel which actually obviously added costs but we think it's a good look--you know--all this stone too was efface. Duggan: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Hearing none, is there anyone in the audience that wants to speak for or against the project, if so come on up. Seeing no one, are the any letters? Caramagno: No letters. Henzi: Mr. Jones anything you want to say in closing? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 of 41 January 28, 2014 Jones: No, that's it. Henzi: Okay, I'll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board's comments with Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I will be in support as the plan was presented tonight. I think you've got the hardship with the unique location. You don't really have a natural entrance you know that Industrial Drive you're not going to be able to see where the Applebee's is so I get the sign there. You know the awning signs are just the --a lot of them are the gray so they don't even count. But overall just considering the level of traffic on Middlebelt, your location there and seeing the Menard's with their amount of signage I will --I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Well this is a real nice --real nice presentation, you did a very nice job laying this out for us and help me understand it completely. Other restaurants that have asked for similar signage, one that pops immediately in my head would be Chili's. They've got their peppers, they've got their side door entrance as well. We've approved things very similar to this. Your hardship for your location and traffic, that's may be a hardship in some case, it's an absolute benefit in others, all the traffic and cars coming through here so. I like the fact that you put together it's been through the Planning Commission and the Council they like it, it looks good to me, I'm in support. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I agree nice presentation, very clear, it helps at least for myself when somebody points all of those things out, the items that we are really looking at. What we're qualifying as signs, what we're not qualifying as signs. And you definitely have some hardship with that space. I agree with what Mr. Caramagno said it can also be obviously to your benefit that's why you're going there, we know that. And the location right on that corner I think you're right you are going to get a bit of a challenge there is already a bit of a challenge with traffic there and I think it can only magnify. So I will support. Henzi: I too will support. I mean I'm thrilled that we have the petitions that we have here tonight developing Middlebelt Road near Schoolcraft. I think it's fantastic I think this is a very nice sign package. I know that our City's consistently ruled that architectural elements in some circumstances are signs and I agree with that, however, I also know that we've granted variances and I will do so here because quite frankly I think it looks better with the signs, the apples, the "Carside To Go", looks better than if you didn't' do it. Especially on the north side which faces Industrial, it would just --to deny would make it a plain building and I think that would defeat the purpose. And the other one, the ground sign, 1 --you laid it out, you've convinced me why you need it, I think it's entirely appropriate. So I would approve it as presented. The floors open for a motion. McCue: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Ms. McCue Upon Motion by McCue supported by Caramagno it was: City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 17 of 41 January 28, 2014 RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-01-06: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by TSFR Apple Venture, LLC, (Applebee's), 17800 Laurel Park, #200C, Livonia, MI, seeking to erect a ground sign and wall/awning signs resulting in excess ground sign height, area and electronic message boards as part of this ground sign which is not allowed due to nonconforming signage being proposed; also, excess number of wall/awning signs and wall sign area. Ground Sign Height Ground Sign Area Number of Wall/Awning Signs Allowed: 6 feet Allowed: 30 sq. ft. Allowed: One Oc Proposed: 14 feet Proposed: 54 sq. ft. Proposed: Seven (Two Awning and 5 Wall Signs) Excess: 8 feet Excess: 24 sq. ft. Excess: Six Signs Wall Sign Area Allowed: 97 sq. ft. Proposed: 147 sq. ft. Excess: 50 sq. ft. The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt (13301), between Industrial and CSX Railroad, Lot No. 101-99-0008-010, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50H(a), 1, 2, and 18.50H(o)"Sign Regulations in C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts" was granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 6. The uniqueness requirement is met because of the location of the property and the traffic flow in that location. 7. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because it would reduce visibility and possibly obstruct traffic. 8. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because we have allowed other variances for similar properties in the past. 9. The Board received no letters of approval and no objection letters from neighboring property owners. 10. The property is classified as "general commercial" in the Master Plan and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That the project be completed within twelve months. 2. That the project be built as presented to the Board. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 18 of 41 January 28, 2014 3. That it is constructed according to the conditions set by the Planning Commission and City Council. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: McCue, Caramagno, Duggan, Henzi NAYS: None ABSENT: McIntyre, Pastor, Sills Henzi: The variance is granted, I'll go over those conditions one more time Mr. Jones. You've got to construct the building sign package as presented, meaning the signs in the same place and the same materials etcetera. This is in accordance with all Council and Planning Commission requirements. And then you have twelve months --that doesn't mean that it expires in twelve months, it means you have twelve months in which to complete construction. Jones: Thank you. Henzi: If that ever became a problem you would just deal with the inspection department. Jones: Thank you. Henzi: That takes care of one. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 19 of 41 January 28, 2014 APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-01-07: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by TSFR Apple Venture, LLC, (Applebee's), 17800 Laurel Park, #200C, Livonia, MI, seeking to erect a new restaurant resulting in deficient number of parking spaces. Number of Parking Spaces Required: 123 Proposed: 84 Deficient: 39 The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt (13301), between Industrial and CSX Railroad, Lot No. 101-99-0008-010, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.38,(17) "Off -Street Parking." Henzi: Mr. Banko anything to add to this case? Banko: No, I do not. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? Go ahead, Mr. Jones, tell us about the parking. Jones: This --this property was purchased from the Kroger plant actually that sits behind us. It was a --kind of like a parking lot for semi -trucks. When we purchased it, we purchased the whole entire parcel as one parcel. We've had to rezone it, we've had to go through Planning Commission, City Council and that's why we are here now. The parcel has now been split into two parcels so the Applebee's has its own parcel and retail spaces and the Del Taco has it's --it's a separate parcel. It was designed as one development always in mind that they would always share parking. They share parking lot lighting, entrances points and all that. It's all the same owner, both parcels are still the same owner which is TSFR Apple Venture, we already have an agreement drafted and in place between the two parcels for parking, for maintenance, for lighting things of that nature. So there will be no issues with the ownership at all. The retail and the Del Taco parcel is actually over parked for their specific parcel. I believe --I believe there are 75 spaces on this parcel and 80 --I'm sorry --84 on the Applebee's parcel. So when you combine those there's a 159 spaces which we feel as an operator that's more than enough parking for that development. And like I said this over parked, this is under parked so when you share, we're pretty close to where we need to be. I know the ordinance requires a 103--123 spaces for the Applebee's, out of all of our restaurants in the Applebee's system our highest performers only have generally a 100 parking spaces. So we feel right up front that that the ordinance is requiring more than we even feel we need which as an operator we don't want to under park the site, that means less business less customers. So we have no concern with the shortage of parking and like I said if you combine the two sites we're only I believe 18 spaces short per ordinance. And another consideration was Applebee's is more of a dinner time customer base where the retailer and the Del Taco is going to be more of lunch time base we feel. So we shouldn't have conflicting time frames and we feel there is plenty of parking for both parcels. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 20 of 41 January 28, 2014 Henzi: Are all the Applebee's that Schostak family restaurant group owns throughout the Midwest? Jones: They're just Michigan. Henzi: When you say that 100 is the number that you need, does that mean that 100 is the number --you know the highest number that you're required to have or 100 is the number of spaces that you already used. Jones: One hundred spaces is typically is what we try to achieve and that's with our higher end restaurants. So you know that's probably dinner time, it's the only time you hit that 100 spaces if they ever get full. Any other time --you know --there's never been a parking issue with any of our other Applebee's. Henzi: So do you think that's like Saturday night dinner time? Jones: Yeah, I would say so. Henzi: Okay. Jones: It's probably weekend dinner time that's probably when it will be the most busiest. Henzi: And then in here that you got that you would only need ten employee's spots, is that right? Jones: Well, no we--were--we included fifteen in the count right now, but once again the peak performance you're going to need at least fifteen employees when you're not -- you know --morning rush hour-- or morning time, weekday time we feel that maybe you can get away with ten employees. So you're not going to need that fifteen employee count every day of the week every time of the day is basically what I was trying to explain. Henzi: Okay. Do you have employee parking designated? Jones: We do not show it on the plan but operationally they always make their employees --they're going to make their employees park in the back because they want to keep the nice parking spaces open for the customers. So that's just something operational they always make their employees --we could put signs up if we needed but really we don't --most employees listen to their boss. So-- Henzi: Okay, thank you. Any questions for the petitioner? I just thought of one for Mike because there's an easement and there's a --you know these are two parcels do we have to condition this on the existence of that easement or one ownership? Fisher: Well I guess you don't have to but I think that's the prudent thing to do. Henzi: I was thinking if Del Taco gets sold to -- Fisher: Yes, the site gets sold to somebody else and they come to blows they -- Jones: Well the easement how it's drafted right now it runs with the land. So if ownership changes for either parcel that easement runs with the land so there's never going to be a conflict between the two parcels, we specifically created it that way. Actually I submitted a copy of the easement but we definitely had the attorneys draft it to run with the land is how they term it. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 21 of 41 January 28, 2014 Fisher: Yes, in answer to your question, yes, I think that's a good condition. Henzi: Any other questions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Sir, the two retail pieces that are empty of course --or will be empty right now, what do you envision --what type of people do you envision being in there and what parking do you think they'll have? Jones: They're required to have 27 spaces between both of them. We've had a --we've actually lost a dental office deal already, so that has died. We've spoken to Radio Shack, we've spoken to like a hair cutter --hair cut place, things of that nature right now. But we definitely --we don't have any deals signed for those two spaces at this time. Caramagno: And between the two of them there's 27 spots that are required? Jones: Yes --yes. Caramagno: In all the --in all the properties that you manage and all, do you find that the square footage of those buildings will require that kind of parking? Jones: They're 2000 square foot each, you know if it's a Radio Shack really I think traffic is very low for Radio Shack it's you're not parked very long I don't believe either for Radio Shack. For a haircut place you know if it's a good place where people go often there might be a little bit more parking used because people actually wait in line to get their haircut. But we --we really aren't concerned with the retail users and parking at this time. We actually have a --we actually created also this rear parking area. There's a dedicated walkway from the rear parking that would directly wrap around to the retail spaces. And so we created that as well to help with some of that retail traffic. Caramagno: Let me ask you this question, this year although it's a little odd you notice a lot of parking lots loaded with snow losing multiple spots. What would be the plan on this property for getting that snow out of here on a big year like this? Jones: Well, actually there's a --I believe it's 30 or even wider --there's an existing easement back here area that is --Kroger sits behind us-- Caramagno: Right. Jones: --really you'd push your snow back behind the restaurant, this easement area. There's enough space where our property ends and Kroger and this easement is actually with Kroger, us and Menards so they would have no issue with us plowing and pushing the snow back behind the property line there. It's just open field right now. Caramagno: Was there ever any consideration to add more parking back there? Jones: At this time no, there was consideration by City Council to actually eliminate all this parking and use it for future land bank parking if we ever wanted to add parking, they were talking about eliminating that and adding green space. And then if we ever needed parking come back and install those. But really that conversation died with City Council and they just kind of let it go as is --as proposed. So they were actually looking to reduce parking at one point. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 22 of 41 January 28, 2014 Caramagno: Okay. Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Jones: I have one more comment. Henzi: Sure. Jones: Looking at the easement actually it does state right here that TSFR which is our restaurant group hereby grants for the use, benefit and enjoyment of all present and future property owners and persons claiming through under such persons that--you know--we can use the parking together. So it's written with the land so the ownership of the parcels can't--they won't--there will be no issue down the road with that. Henzi: I agree except it also says that this could be modified by all owners of the property. Jones: Oh, yeah-- Henzi: So, just to-- Jones: Okay. Henzi: --I'm probably going to suggest to condition that because shared parking is so critical to granting the variance in my opinion. Jones: Yeah. Henzi: Because of the shared parking you're only 18 short. Jones: Right. Henzi: That we insert a condition along the lines of that as long as the easement is in effect and or common ownership. Jones: Okay, that shouldn't be an issue. Henzi: Anybody in the audience want to speak for or against the project? Seeing no one come forward are there any letters? Caramagno: No. Henzi: Mr. Jones anything you want to say closing on this one? Jones: That's it. Henzi: Okay, I'll close the public portion of this case and begin the Board's comments with Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: It looks like it--like you say the shared parking is about a ten percent variance, 18 spots on a 177 need. There's no way that you'd build a couple of restaurants here and not have sufficient parking for these people and risk this being a bad eating area. So I am comfortable that you've done your research and you know what you need based upon your other Applebee's and what your needs will be here. And I don't find the 10 percent to be overwhelming and I'll be in support. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 23 of 41 January 28, 2014 McCue: I agree, I'll be in support as well. Together when you look at those combined it's a small difference. And again even when you add the other retailers I don't think that that should be a problem. Like Mr. Caramagno said you guys have done your research, you know --you know what you need in order to have a thriving business there. And it doesn't do you any good to have a shortage of parking so I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I too will be in support. You had the property split in two parcels and that's enough of a hardship for me and yeah there's no way you guys are opening up a restaurant that can't fit everyone. So I'll be in support. Henzi: I too will support the variance. Thank you for being prepared with the issue of what your typical store requires because this Board often relies on the petitioner, especially a petitioner that owns many restaurants throughout a large geographical area. You know what you need and I think this is the plenty of parking obviously I would just suggest the one condition that we talked about earlier today. So the floor's open for a motion. Duggan: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Upon Motion by Duggan supported by McCue, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-01-07: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by TSFR Apple Venture, LLC, (Applebee's), 17800 Laurel Park, #200C, Livonia, MI, seeking to erect a new restaurant resulting in deficient number of parking spaces. Number of Parking Spaces Required: 123 Proposed: 84 Deficient: 39 The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt (13301), between Industrial and CSX Railroad, Lot No. 101-99-0008-010, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.38,(17) "Off -Street Parking" was granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 11. The uniqueness requirement is met because the property was originally 2.95 acres then was divided in two parcels. 12. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because the property when combined with the property next door that they own as well, will have sufficient parking. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 24 of 41 January 28, 2014 13. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because none of the neighboring businesses have objected. 14. The Board received no letters of approval and no objection letters from neighboring property owners. 15. The property is classified as "general commercial" in the Master Plan and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions - 1 . onditions: 1. That the project be built as it was presented to the Board. 2. That the parking lot comply with conditions set by the Planning Commission and City Council. 3. That the resolution is contingent upon a permanent shared parking easement running with the land. 4. That the project be completed within one year. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Duggan, McCue, Caramagno, Henzi NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mclntrye, Pastor, Sills Henzi: The variance is granted with four conditions. Parking has got to be as presented. You're to comply with any Planning Commission and City Council requirements. It's contingent with the easement running with the land. And it's good for one year which again doesn't mean it expires it mean you've got one year in which to complete it. Jones: Thank you. Henzi: Sure. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 25 of 41 January 28, 2014 APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-01-08: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by TSFR Apple Venture, LLC, (Del Taco), 17800 Laurel Park, #200C, Livonia, MI, seeking to erect a ground sign with electronic message board, two menu board ground signs and wall signs resulting in excess ground sigh height, area and excess number of wall signs, wall sign area and excess number of menu boards. The electronic message board is not allowed due to the nonconforming signage proposed. Ground Sign Height Ground Sign Area Number of Wall Signs Wall Sign Area Allowed: 8 feet Allowed: 40 sq. ft. Allowed: One Allowed: 31 sq. ft. Proposed: 14 feet Proposed: 72 sq. ft. Proposed: Four Proposed: 122 sq. ft. Excess: 6 feet Excess: 32 sq. ft. Excess: Three Excess: 91 sq. ft. Number of Menu Boards Allowed: One Proposed: Two Excess: One The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt (13201), between Industrial and CSX Railroad, Lot No. 101-99-0008-011, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50H(b), 1, 2, (o), "Sign Regulations in C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts." Henzi: Mr. Banko anything to add to this case? Banko: No, I do not, sir. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? Mr. Jones go ahead and talk about Del Taco. Jones: Once again I represent TSFR Apple Venture, we are also Del Taco franchisee. We operate three Del Taco existing in Michigan. This would be our fourth location. The Del Taco brand is a difficult brand. It's based out of California it's very similar to Taco Bell but the food quality is much higher and everything is prepared on site. We have no national advertising for this area or for this market based on the low volume of stores in the area. So all advertising that is done is paid for us --or paid by us on the radio, on signage, flyers, whatever we can do to get brand out there which makes this brand very difficult and relies on signage heavily we feel. I'm going to walk you through the building signs for the Del Taco. Once again you've got the Applebee's here, the Del Taco is the end cap and the two retail spaces. The first sign here is the front sign. You know it's a Del Taco logo which is not being discussed tonight because it complies or conforms I should say. There is this additional sign here that is --it just says made to order fresh. It sits on top of the front door canopy, it's not internally illuminated. It's more of a slogan, it's not more --we don't really see it as an advertisement sign to draw you in from the road. There's also a similar sign here on the drive thru side on the awning that says drive thru open 24 hours. Same thing it's not internally illuminated. You can't see it from the road you really have to be in our site to even see what that says. And then the other wall sign would be on the corner --the main entry corner which would face southbound, which faces Menard's. Which as I explained before we feel that most customers will use the Menard's access to access the Del Taco because it's on that City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 26 of 41 January 28, 2014 side of the site. So we feel a sign very important for northbound traffic and for Menard's customers to see that sign as well. So those are the four building signs that are on the agenda. And also the menu boards. Obviously there's a menu board, it's at the drive thru so there's a menu board where you order just like any other fast food restaurant. The second board must be --they're considering the pre -sell board. It sits --the car that's ordering and then there would be a car behind that, it's for that car to get an idea of the menu before they get to the speaker to order so it's quicker for everybody. And that sits directly behind the building there's no way anyone would see that board from the road, really you'd have to be in the drive thru lane to even see that. And it's a --it's a very small sign. It's maybe twice the size of this and it sits real low to the ground. It's not illuminated, there's no lighting or anything, there's no electrical. It's almost more of a -- it's almost more of a --you know --banner with some posts that stick in the ground. It's very --very simple sign. So that would be the two menu boards. For the ground sign, it's modeled exactly after the Applebee's sign. The same height of fourteen foot, It would have three panels, two retail, the Del Taco and also the digital --I'm sorry --the electronic reader board. It's the same electronic reader board that you see --you saw for the Applebee's, same square footage. And these are each 16.66 square foot, same height, same stone, brick base as the Applebee's and actually the cultured stone on both buildings match --they're identical so it's a good look for the development. This ground sign for the Del Taco --here's the Del Taco, here's the Applebee's, the Applebee's is here, this sign is the opposite corner. Like I stated where we believe most traffic will come off of Menard's drive. Some of the hardships are similar to the Applebee's. The one big one being the Menard's sign that's massive sits right here on the adjacent corner. It really blocks visibility to the building and to our ground sign because you have that dip in the road under the railroad tracks. So by the time you get --we actually did some time tests, here's you coming northbound on Middlebelt you can see the large Menard's sign here. We actually went out there and did some sign tests and this was a six foot tall --you actually have no visibility of our sign at all. So we feel fourteen foot will achieve what we need. We asked for twenty originally but the City Council and Planning beat us down to fourteen and we feel we can live with that. So that again the high volume of traffic, and the safety concerns as you are coming up the hill, you really need to see that sign and --you know --make a quick safe reaction into our site. And especially with fast food, once you --once a customer passes a fast food restaurant there's almost you know maybe ten percent chance that that customer's going to turn around and come back to your restaurant. So we feel that sign is very important that they see that ground sign, make a decision and can safely enter the site. So those are the hardships that we feel we have. Henzi: Do you have presale boards at other Del Taco -- Jones: Yeah. Henzi: --stores, like the one on Telegraph? Jones: Yes, they all-- Henzi: So it's a typical thing? Jones: Yes, it's very typical. It's only about maybe four foot hall (sic) --sorry four foot tall, it's maybe this wide, it's a banner --it's a soft banner. You stake it into the ground City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 27 of 41 January 28, 2014 with PVC pieces. No electrical no lighting, it's strictly to help speed of service they call it for customer --especially with the Del Taco brand. You know not many people know the menu so it really helps to have that car --that second car have an idea of what they might order if they pull up to order. It helps with the speed. Henzi: This is a lot more than tacos right? I mean the menu is -- Jones: Yeah, it's-- Henzi: --varied. Jones: --they got cheeseburgers, hamburgers; they serve French fries, handmade shakes, handmade salsa. Their burgers are actually grilled on a grill right in the restaurant. It's --its' very authentic, it's very fresh; they actually grate their own cheese on site. They make their own --I think I might have said this --they make their own salsa on site. But yeah it's --nothing comes in bags, and it's much different than Taco Bell but that's what people compare it to, because its Mexican food. Henzi: Any other questions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Who controls the digital sign on this -- Jones: Del Taco. Caramagno: Del Taco controls the digital sign as well? Jones: Yes. Caramagno: Now we've heard about the --the Applebee's, we heard about they can change their menu four times a year -- Jones: Yeah. Caramagno: --they've got Military Mondays, do we --do both have Military Mondays? Jones: No, Del-- Caramagno: Del Taco seems to be more of a fast food? Jones: Del Taco --yes, Del Taco is definitely more of a fast food than Applebee's. Del Taco does participate in a lot of charities they would advertise those. They sell shamrocks for Multiple Sclerosis, they do a lot of charities and our organization always has done charities so we put those on the board. For fast food we would put more out their promotions on the board like there --if you compare it to like a McDonald's where they have the Dollar menu, maybe the Del Taco has something similar that they would promote. Some --you know --different promotions. They also change the promotions probably ten times a year. So you might have a ninety nine cent taco one --you know -- one month than the next month is a dollar chalupa or something. So that's what they would use it for. Caramagno: So the sign is strictly for Del Taco? Jones: Yes. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 28 of 41 January 28, 2014 Caramagno: And the other is strictly for Applebee's? Jones: At this point yes, unless--we haven't even discussed it, but unless a possible retail user came in and wanted to pay for some time on the board. Maybe we would discuss that with them but at this time it hasn't been discussed. Caramagno: Mike how does the ordinance read as far as selling advertising space? Fisher: No, we can't do that. Jones: No? Caramagno: Can't do that? Jones: Then we wouldn't do that. Caramagno: So that covers that piece. Okay. Thank you that answers my question. Henzi: Well Mike, what if one of the--what if retail A becomes a Verizon Store can Verizon have its logo flashed a couple times and hour or something like that? Fisher: Well they're not supposed to flash either but-- Henzi: Well, they exist-- Fisher: Yes, I don't--I guess if Verizon is on site that's fine. Jones: I truly don't think we're even going down that path with this development, it's always just been for Del Taco. But I'm just saying there's always a chance. Caramagno: It seems the sky is the limit with some of stuff right now, you probably can't even envision what it's going to be somewhere down the road but it just creates questions. Henzi: Any other questions? Anybody in the audience want to speak for or against the project? I see no one coming forward, are there letters? Caramagno: No. Henzi: Mr. Jones anything you like to say in closing on this case? Jones: The big thing like I said is we tried to model this after the Applebee's so it's consistent. We worked with City Council on a nice landscape buffer along the whole front of our site. So were going to have nice stone walls throughout and that was one thing we worked with City Council on and they're going to adopt that for all the new users in the area. Everyone will have the same stone landscape feature across their site. So that will look great out there. They thought it would go really well with our cultured stone on our sign and I just ask that you guys approve as we present tonight. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. I'll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board's comments with Mrs. McCue. McCue: I will be totally in support of this. I mean you were very prepared, very candid with any questions. I think we all have a very good picture as to exactly what it is you're going to do, and I will--I will fully support the project. Henzi: Mr. Duggan City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 29 of 41 January 28, 2014 Duggan: I to will support the project. You said earlier, you're right off of Middlebelt Road. You know you have the awkward entrances, you have Applebee's and Menards right there, I can see why you need the space --the signs. I thought your three cases tonight was one of the best presentations we've had since I've been on the --I've been on a couple years now. So thank you for being so prepared. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: You said something a few minutes ago about being consistent and certainly you're developing a piece that's new --new to an area of Livonia that's been dragging us down if --if that's proper, but this is consistent. It's consistent with what you asked for what the Applebee's, this is on the corner of the property, as I said earlier you did a fine job of presenting this to us and showing it, displaying it. It's been through the Council and Planning, and it's fitting for the area. It's --it's not like this is a residential area it is a --it's a --it's a retail commercial area and it looks good. I'm in support. Henzi: I totally support it, you gave good reason why an excess ground sign is required in both height and area. And then like the Applebee's wall signs, I think there are things that are signs, but not necessarily the same as other businesses in the area which used their signs strictly for advertising and luring the driver in. A lot of these are just architectural elements that also happen to be signs. So I will be in full support as presented. The floors open for a motion. Duggan: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Upon Motion by Duggan supported by McCue, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-01-08: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by TSFR Apple Venture, LLC, (Del Taco), 17800 Laurel Park, #200C, Livonia, MI, seeking to erect a ground sign with electronic message board, two menu board ground signs and wall signs resulting in excess ground sigh height, area and excess number of wall signs, wall sign area and excess number of menu boards. The electronic message board is not allowed due to the nonconforming signage proposed. Ground Sign Height Allowed: 8 feet Proposed: 14 feet Excess: 6 feet Ground Sign Area Allowed: 40 sq. ft. Proposed: 72 sq. ft. Excess: 32 sq. ft. Number of Wall Signs Allowed: One Proposed: Four Excess: Three Number of Menu Boards Allowed: One Proposed: Two Excess: One Wall Sign Area Allowed: 31 sq. ft. Proposed: 122 sq. ft. Excess: 91 sq. ft. The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt (13201), between Industrial and CSX Railroad, Lot No. 101-99-0008-011, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50H(b), 1, 2, (o), "Sign City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 30 of 41 January 28, 2014 Regulations in C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts" was granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 16. The uniqueness requirement is met because of the location of the property with the natural drop on Middlebelt Road as well as the unique entrances and the signage next door. 17. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because the signs are consistent with the Applebee's next door. 18. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because the signs are consistent with the other signs in the area. 19. The Board received no letters of approval and no objection letters from neighboring property owners. 20. The property is classified as "general commercial" in the Master Plan and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions - 1 . onditions: 1. The sign be built as presented. 2. The sign comply with any requirements of City Council and Planning Commission. 3. That the project be completed within one year. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Duggan, McCue, Caramagno, Henzi NAYS: None. ABSENT: McIntyre, Sills, Pastor Henzi: Very standard three conditions of the signs have to be erected as presented. They have to comply with Planning Commission and City Council requirements. And that it's good for one year. Jones: Thank you. McCue: Good luck. Henzi: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 31 of 41 January 28, 2014 APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-01-10: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Rogvoy Architects, 32500 Telegraph, #250, Bingham Farms, MI, on behalf of Tobeck Realty, seeking to erect two ground signs upon a future multi -tenant commercial retail site resulting in excess number of ground signs and one of the signs being excess in height, width and area. Number of Ground Signs Ground Sign Height Ground Sign Width Ground Sign Area Allowed: Two Allowed: 8 feet Allowed: 10 feet Allowed: 40 sq. ft. Proposed: Three Proposed: 14 feet Proposed: 12'8" Proposed: 75 sq. ft. Excess: One. Excess: 6 feet Excess: 2'8" Excess: 35 sq. ft. The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt (13505-13507), between Schoolcraft and Industrial, Lot No. 101-99-0004-002, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50H(b), 1, "Sign Regulations in C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts." Henzi: Mr. Banko anything to add in this case? BanKo: No, sir. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? Good evening. Drain: Good evening, my name is Mark Drain and I'm with Rogvoy Architects, my address is 32500 Telegraph Road, Suite 250, Bingham Farms, Michigan. Henzi: Mr. Drain go ahead and tell us about the ground sign variance. Drain: Let me --let me start off with a little background here. Obviously this building's been sitting here vacant for quite some time. It was built back in the 60's, it was a GEM store then it ended up becoming a Handy Andy store, a F & M, and then there was also a Wal-Mart here. Since this building been here, the area has grown up around it. Costco has been added to the mix, Home Depot has been added, the Millennium Shopping Center, now the Menard's and now Applebee's and Del Taco. When we started our project we had two full access curb cuts on this site. Then due to the enormous amount of traffic that is now present in this area we had to design our curb cuts to be limited access curb cuts. And what I'm trying to say is that when you are on Middlebelt Road you will always be able to turn left into the site always prior to our development. 1 --we had to restrict the curb turning access here to be right in, right out. And our only opportunity to have a left turn into our site is at this location where we have a right in and a right out and a left turn in here. Most of the opportunities for our southbound-- or northbound traffic is people who turn left into the site at the Industrial Road traffic signal. We've also as we've redesigned the site modified everything. We've taken a site --a curb cut that was over here and we've realigned it with the crossover over the expressway so we have direct access in here. And also what we are doing is because of the low grade here as you come up the service drive we repositioned the light to give you a better opportunity by moving it further east to be able to get into the site. For all these reasons we feel there are some physical limitations and high amount of traffic and high volume of traffic and the high speed of the traffic. What we thought we would do is place a modest monument sign at this location here to help promote northbound traffic to make a left hand turn into our site. Our site does wrap around this City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 32 of 41 January 28, 2014 bank and I don't know if at one point and time this must have been the parent parcel for this because we do have a piece of property that a little arm if you will that comes down in front of the bank. So the idea behind this sign is to be able to promote safe left hand turns in at the light. The idea here is because there is no opportunity for northbound traffic to turn into this curb cut. We wanted to make sure that we had a tasteful modest but very effective monument sign to designate this entrance here. And that's this sign here. And we also have this same sign over here for reasons of high volume and high speed and low --low grade here to be able to promote a safe effective turn into the site at this location. And if you --if you will I mean we are the architects for Livonia Marketplace and you know there are two pylon signs out there. That's where we started our offer because that's what we thought we --was appropriate and through the process with the Planning Commission and the City Council we thought it best that we ask for a fourteen foot high sign because it seems to be a popular height going around the City right now. Especially for this area here that has all this traffic and the --there are access issues. This is a very similar sign as the one we did out at Livonia Marketplace except it doesn't have the lights, it's has a decorative masonry base and I do feel like we have an unique site, unique circumstances, and we're trying to handle it as safely and modestly and tastefully as we can. Henzi: I have --first to comment the curb on the Schoolcraft, that's a genius move because to me it was always very cumbersome getting into that property. 1 --that's very smart and I want to congratulate you on that. The second one is just a question. What is the total square --proposed square footage for the retail, is it about a hundred thousand maybe a little less? Drain: This main building here is like a 135,000. Henzi: Okay. Drain: We actually --and we'll talk about this in the next presentation --we actually reduced the overall building footprint on this site and all the impervious surface. We really reduced all this by adding certain landscape features and retention facilities and less --less building. Henzi: Yeah, I mean you're 35 square feet over on a building with a 135,000 square feet of retail. You know, how many feet away from Middlebelt Road --I mean you didn't even mention the fact that you don't sit on Middlebelt. Your set back of --I don't know what it is --but it's significant, right? Drain: And the other thing too is that I have 900 --almost 970 feet from here to here with limited access curb cuts and another 718 from here to here with limited access space also. So this site is huge and again I would want it to be modest, but I want it to be effective. Henzi: Okay. Any other questions for the petitioner? Hearing none, and there's nobody in the audience, are there letters on this case? Caramagno: No. Henzi: Mr. Drain anything you want to say in closing about the ground signs? Drain: No, I think we've --I think I've said all I can say. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 33 of 41 January 28, 2014 Henzi: Okay, thank you. I'll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board's comments with Mr. Duggan. Duggan: Yeah, I will be in support. I think it's a great idea I mean you're centrally --you know --letting them know where they can enter the property especially with the unique location where your --where the buildings will be located off of Middlebelt and Schoolcraft so I think you absolutely need it. I think the property is unique enough that I can be in support. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Yeah, this is an exceptional piece of property here, large --you're probably some 500 feet off of Middlebelt Road. These signs have got to be effective to be found here. Your curb cutting as you mentioned just doesn't allow for easy access on the property as some places do. So I think what you're asking for is exceptionally reasonable. Drain: Thank you. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I would agree. The location of the property, the logistics of the entrance and exits on this property just bowed with a few exceptions so I will support. Henzi: I totally support it. I think it's a perfect. I think it's perfect for this area, it matches the Millennium Center. I remember going to meetings one week when we thought another major home improvement store was going to take over this property and we were salivating and I'm glad they didn't because I think your plan is much better and will be more effective. Drain: Oh, thank you. Henzi: So I'm in full support. The floor's open for a motion. McCue: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. Upon Motion by McCue supported by Duggan, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-01-10: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Rogvoy Architects, 32500 Telegraph, #250, Bingham Farms, MI, on behalf of Tobeck Realty, seeking to erect two ground signs upon a future multi -tenant commercial retail site resulting in excess number of ground signs and one of the signs being excess in height, width and area. Number of Ground Signs Ground Sign Height Ground Sign Width Ground Sign Area Allowed: Two Allowed: 8 feet Allowed: 10 feet Allowed: 40 sq. ft. Proposed: Three Proposed: 14 feet Proposed: 12'8" Proposed: 75 sq. ft. Excess: One. Excess: 6 feet Excess: 2'8" Excess: 35 sq. ft. The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt (13505-13507), between Schoolcraft and Industrial, Lot No. 101-99-0004-002, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 34 of 41 January 28, 2014 the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50H(b), 1, "Sign Regulations in C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts" was granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 21. The uniqueness requirement is met because of the size and location of the property and the traffic flow that is going to be needed to access the property. 22. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because the access for customers would become impossible if the proposed entrances and set up are not as proposed. 23. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because we have not had any objections to the proposal and similar exceptions have been granted for surrounding properties. 24. The Board received no letters of approval and no objection letters from neighboring property owners. 25. The property is classified as "general commercial" in the Master Plan and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions - 1 . onditions: 1. That the signs are constructed as presented to the Board. 2. That the project comply with all conditions set by City Council and Planning Commission. 3. That the project be completed within one year. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: McCue, Duggan, Caramagno, Henzi NAYS: None ABSENT: McIntyre, Sills, Pastor Henzi: Your variance is granted with those three conditions. You got to construct the sign as presented. Comply with City Council and Planning Commission requirements. It's good for twelve months which means that you've got twelve months in which to complete construction. Drain: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 35 of 41 January 28, 2014 APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-01-11: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Rogvoy Architects, 32500 Telegraph, #250, Bingham Farms, MI on behalf of Tobeck Realty, seeking to construct a commercial retail center resulting in deficient number of parking spaces. Number of Parking Spaces Required: 762 Proposed: 700 Deficient: 62 The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt (13505-13507), between Schoolcraft and Industrial, Lot No. 101-99-0004-002, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.38,(31) "Off -Street Parking." Henzi: Mr. Banko, do you have anything to add on this? Banko: Nothing to add, except when you start construction save the gold fish in the back wheel well. Drain: Yes, I know where that is. Caramagno: Wow. McCue: Seriously? Banko: Seriously. Drain: There is a gold fish. McCue: Really? Banko: It's about that big. McCue: So we're going to save him? Banko: That's a --we can make that a condition. McCue: Could we? I bet we haven't had a condition like that before. Caramagno: It looks like it's frozen solid. Banko: It is but he's down there. McCue: You checked it out? Banko: He's down there. Drain: I was going to send my son over there with his ice fishing equipment to get it. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? Okay, go ahead Mr. Drain. Drain: Hi, again Mark Drain. As you know this is a huge redevelopment project and what's there is going to be completely remodeled head to toe. Parking surface, additional landscaping, additional storm water retention system, new building facade, new landscaping --landscaping scheme similar to what's been developed down the stretch. And to this day I don't know how it happened but this site does not conform City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 36 of 41 January 28, 2014 parking wise as it sits today. And our reconstruction of this property makes us less non- conforming, and we're asking for a variance of sixty two parking spaces and I think it's a modest amount of parking spaces. Even though --you know --parking ordinances are intended to make sure that neighborhoods don't get infiltrated with overflow parking or parking doesn't flow over into the thoroughfares, it's been our experience with many shopping centers and one in particular the Livonia Market Place that is parked at this exact same parking ratio at four cars --at four and a half cars per thousand and we find it perfectly adequate. Especially at Livonia Market Place where we have a grocer, and those customers tend to stay longer. We feel that this type of product --this type of retail mix at 4.5 cars per thousand is appropriate. Other projects we've done just recently was the Gateway Shopping Center at Eight Mile and Woodard which was the first Meijer grocery store in Detroit. That's parked at four cars per thousand and it functions fabulously. And we just don't want to pave more of Livonia than we have to and we want to be practical and modest and we think that the benefits of additional green space and reconstruction far outweigh a modest deficiency of parking. Henzi: Mr. Drain do you know if there's a variance existing on the property right now? Drain: I can find no variance that exists on the property. It's probably something that just evolved over the last --since 1964 when it was first built it just kind of went on its way but-- Henzi: I was just curious, I thought we granted one when it was a Wal-Mart. Drain: If that's the case the Planning Commission or planning staff never revealed it to me Henzi: Okay, I could be wrong. What's the size of the spots? Are these double striped? Drain: These are ten --ten foot wide double striped spots. Henzi: Got it. Drain: And Joe Taylor suggested strongly we don't come back and asked them to be reduced in size if there is a parking problem, so --but we're confident that this parking ratio is adequate. Henzi: Got it. Any questions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: How much landscaping are you adding to this property? Drain: I think the answer is that we comply with the open space requirement as required by ordinance. I'm sorry, I can't --can't remember if it's fifteen percent or twenty five percent. But to give you an idea all of this will be added, all of this is being added here. Or any by the way we've also land banked some parking spaces just to get more green space in here because they are kind of out of the way parking spaces they're there for count but not necessarily practical, so we've added additional green space. We've also added additional green space along the whole building facade and along the sides and many --many parking lot islands. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 37 of 41 January 28, 2014 Caramagno: The--the--that's what I was getting at. The ovals that I see here at the end of each parking aisle, is that --is that grass in the -- Drain: Yes. Caramagno: Is that what that is? Drain: Yes, trees and grass. Caramagno: Okay. And --and you've taken a lot of space out of here for the detention pond --parking space out that going to it --that doesn't currently exist now right? Drain: Right, this is all asphalt paving right here. Caramagno: It's all snow drifts. Drain: Well yeah, it's something. Caramagno: Yeah -- Drain: Its asphalt and piles of snow. Caramagno: Yeah. Drain: Nobody's shoveling --plowing this lot right now. Caramagno: Not much. Drain: Yeah, what we're doing to disrupt the soil here and here is the amount of area and this future restaurant that's going to go here. This is the areas that would be required for surface storm water retention and treatment to support this new development. And that's why it's there. They contemplated putting it under ground and keeping the parking spaces but the expense of that did not outweigh the benefit of the additional parking spaces. Caramagno: Thank you. Banko: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Banko. Banko: Where they're detaching and retaching (sic) where the pond is going that used to be a real trouble area for us, for actually ordinance with all the semi parking and storage of commercials vehicles in that area. So it looks good to see the pond going in over there. Drain: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? There's nobody in the audience. There's no letters on this case are there? Caramagno: There is not. Henzi: Mr. Drain anything you want to say in closing about the parking variance? Drain: No if you approve us we're --we're ready to go. We'll be happy to be here, it's been a long process. It's been a long time needed development of this property. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 38 of 41 January 28, 2014 Henzi: Thank you. I'll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board's comments with Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Yeah, ready to go sounds good on this piece of property. Sixty two spots is --sounds very minor to me, they're ten foot --as you said that's a good thing. The retention pond here is taking up some of your space and I agree with Mr. Banko that's a --this is a truck parking location without this retention pond here so. This looks like a nice plan and I can't wait to see it. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I'll totally support it. I agree a lot of thought, a lot of effort, a lot of time have gone into that. And again a I go back to the fact that I don't think any retail location is going to want to short themselves in any way, shape or form on parking spots. Sizes are good, and for the amount that you're looking at, it's a minor number. So I will support. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I too will support. I think the plans look great, you obviously know even with the sixty some less spaces you know you can handle it otherwise you wouldn't be proposing it as it is. So I will absolutely be in support and good luck. It's going to be great. Drain: Thank you. Henzi: I too think it's a great development. I think that 62 spots is a minimal deficiency. I don't think parking's going to be a problem. I'd rather see the double striped ten foot wide spots with 62 short rather than you go to nine foot single stripe and you know you got way more than you need to require a variance, I'd rather do it this way. I am also very excited for this development to take root. Thank you very much -- Drain: Thank you. Henzi: --for what you've done for the promotion. McCue: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. Upon Motion by McCue supported by Caramagno, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-01-11: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Rogvoy Architects, 32500 Telegraph, #250, Bingham Farms, MI on behalf of Tobeck Realty, seeking to construct a commercial retail center resulting in deficient number of parking spaces. Number of Parking Spaces Required: 762 Proposed: 700 Deficient: 62 City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 39 of 41 January 28, 2014 The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt (13505-13507), between Schoolcraft and Industrial, Lot No. 101-99-0004-002, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.38,(31) "Off -Street Parking" was granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because the position, location and layout of the property and that the number of overall parking spaces is sufficient. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because it would increase the amount of construction time and cost of the project delaying the potential benefits for the location. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because there have been no objections from neighbors and the deficiency of parking spaces is minimal compared with amount of parking spaces proposed. 4. The Board received no letters of approval and no objection letters from neighboring property owners. 5. The property is classified as "general commercial" in the Master Plan and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That the project be completed as presented to the Board. 2. That it conforms with all requirements of the Planning Commission and the City Council. 3. That the project be completed within twelve months. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: McCue, Caramagno, Duggan, Henzi NAYS: None. ABSENT: McIntyre, Sills, Pastor Henzi: The variance is granted with those two conditions. Drain: Thank you very much. And I didn't mean to be presumptuous by preparing plans ahead of time for construction, but my client was willing to take the risk to expedite the process and it paid off. So thank you. Caramagno: The sooner the better. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 40 of 41 January 28, 2014 McCue: Yeah, none of us are going to complain about that. Drain: Thank you. McCue: Nice job. Henzi: Any minutes? Caramagno: Nope. Henzi: Than I'll make a motion to adjourn. McCue: Support. Henzi: All those in favor say aye. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. SAM CARAMAGNO, Secretary MATTHEW HENZI, Chairman City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 41 of 41 January 28, 2014