Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-11-12 City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 of 76 November 12, 2013 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF LIVONIA MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 12, 2013 A Special Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Livonia was held in the Auditorium of the Livonia City Hall on Tuesday, November 12, 2013. MEMBERS PRESENT: Matthew Henzi, Chairman Craig Pastor, Vice President Sam Caramagno, Secretary Edward E. Duggan, Jr. Elizabeth McCue Kathleen McIntyre Robert E. Sills MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Fisher, Assistant City Attorney Scott Kearfott, City Inspector Bonnie J. Murphy, Court Reporter, CER2300/CSR2300 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. Seven (7) members were present this evening. 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 37 people present in the audience. (7:05) City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 of 76 November 12, 2013 APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-07-26: Masoud Shango, seeking to construct a fuel pump canopy and fueling stations, such use now creates the need for a variance because of the deficient building setbacks of a commercial building. Mrs. McCue: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I’m going to recuse myself from the vote here. Henzi: Okay. Mr. Kearfott, anything to add to this case? Kearfott: Not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for the Inspection Department? Caramagno: Mr. Chair, does this have to be removed from the table? Henzi: Yes. Caramagno: I’ll make that motion. Henzi: Is there support? Pastor: Yes. Henzi: All in favor, say aye. The Board (in unison): Aye. Henzi: This is removed, thank you. Anything for Scott Kearfott? Hearing none, will the Petitioner please come to the podium? Good evening. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 of 76 November 12, 2013 Petitioner: Good evening. Nick Shango, 13820 Merriman Road. Henzi: Mr. Shango, go ahead and tell us about the proposed gas station and canopy. Petitioner: Well, we’ve been trying to come up with a scheme for a couple years, I’ve been working at it for a long time. We came up with three gas pumps parallel to the building. We decide to shorten the entrance that we once grew, we made it 60 feet, we shrunk it back down to 30, there’s no conflict of traffic or cars coming into the site on Schoolcraft. So just you know from where the curb starts, I have my pumps, there should not be a conflict of cars coming in, I only have three pumps. I needed to do something to this site, it’s been slow for years and years now since the good days back in ’04, ’05. We would be putting a Dunkin’ Donuts on this site as well. We would be putting in brand new landscape, new light poles, repave the whole parking lot, concrete and building elements to the façade, canopies, awnings, a wood entrance, a new entrance on site for the Dunkin’. It has architectural features, it’s made out of wood, basically that’s where we’re at, it’s been a long time coming. Henzi: I’ve got a few questions. Petitioner: Sure. Henzi: Are you going to construct a Dunkin’ Donuts store whether you get the gas station pumps or not? Petitioner: No. Henzi: The two have to go together? Petitioner: It’s something that I do for a living. I have six stores, three of them are in C-stores, you know, somewhere in this layout. I have a better sales mix when It’s inside a gas station, I sell more coffee and it’s an extremely expensive build-out to do, just to do a Dunkin Donuts. So while I’m tearing of everything, I decide to throw that in there since I have to rework the counter, the floors have to come out, everything is going to get gutted except for the four walls. Henzi: What are you proposing to do with the old I think it was an insurance building? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 of 76 November 12, 2013 Petitioner: We’re going to tear that down. Part of this new plan is we’re creating more parking in the back, that’s going to get demolished and the parking lot will exist all the way to the back. We’re going to move the trash dumpster all the way to the back of the site, it should be on there, it’s the most current. Henzi: I would have one more question. Petitioner: Sure. Henzi: On your application there’s a question on the preprinted form that asks whether you sought rezoning and your answer was no but that zoning in C-2 only has a 60-foot setback, what do you mean by that? Petitioner: I’m zoned for fuel pumps, but I don’t meet the setback requirement so that’s why I’m asking for that. I’m short about 15 feet. Henzi: I don’t understand. Are you saying C-3 has a 75 foot setback but if this property was C-2, it’s only 60? Petitioner: I’m not sure, to be honest with you. I’ve been away from the case a few months. Henzi: You don’t dispute what’s on the Public Notice, do you? I mean as far as you’re concerned it’s correct at 75? Petitioner: I think I’m C-3, I’m not sure. I’d have to go back to my notes. Henzi: That’s what the application says but for me that’s important because if you were trying to raise a defense that hey, I’m not really 17 feet off, I’m more like 2 feet off, then we can go there. But if you’re conceding it’s 75, then we’ll just move on. Petitioner: I mean, I mean for me it’s more of I’m bringing to the table, I’m going to drastically improve the property. But it looks terrible right now. It’s outdated, the building needs to get painted, it needs to get updated, we need lights, we need something, you know, we just closed the Blimpie down this year, we were one of the last stores. We need to renovate the site and I think by doing this project, it brings a lot more to the table than being short 10 or 15 feet on which I’m okay to do everything there. The only thing that’s not meeting your standard is the 15 feet, whether it be 2 City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5 of 76 November 12, 2013 feet or 15 feet, I lowered the canopy to what they asked me, they asked me to go from four pumps three pumps, I did that. I’m trying to do everything I can, really, I really need your help, it’s tough. Henzi: Okay, thank you. Any questions? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Explain to me how this is not just a financial gain, you know, we can’t make a decision because you want a financial gain. So explain to me how this is not a financial gain because basically you told us you were hoping for financial gain, that’s what your hardship is. Petitioner: Of course I’m a business operator in this city, I’ve been here over twenty years, we’ve been on this site, we built it from scratch. I am zoned to put fuel pumps there. I’m not building anything out of the ordinary and by spending, I’m asking in return that you approve this, that I would make this site more beautiful, better for your city, new landscaping, a new monument sign, trash enclosure, stone and brick on the canopy, take the existing footprint, make it better, you know. Inside it’s gutted, brand new. Pastor: You can stop right there. Petitioner: Sure. Pastor: Did you listen to the chairman when he first read this? Petitioner: Yes, I did. Pastor: And he said we cannot approve you because you want a financial gain, you have to give us a reason. Financial gain cannot be taken into consideration. Petitioner: Okay. As I said, I’m trying to improve my site, it’s my property, improve my site. By having our strategy is we’d like to have a one stop shop, Dunkin Donuts, gas station, pump your gas, get coffee, get on the freeway. It’s due for renovation, the place is outdated and I don’t know what else, what other hardships do you really see at the City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6 of 76 November 12, 2013 city when people come for a zoning variance? What other hardships do they present to you? I don’t understand your question. Pastor: Well, this is a self-imposed hardship. Petitioner: This is not a self-imposed hardship. Pastor: Really? You don’t have to put pumps there. Petitioner: Yes, I do. Pastor: No, you don’t. Petitioner: I need it. Pastor: It’s existing without pumps what you have. Petitioner: Okay. Pastor: You don’t have to do it. Petitioner: Okay. Pastor: So this is a self-imposed hardship. So you’ve got to give us a good reason how we can approve that. Petitioner: Okay. Can I ask you a question in return? What’s a hardship to you putting gas pumps there? Pastor: You have two deficiencies there. Petitioner: But I’m saying what’s so bad about putting gas pumps there? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 7 of 76 November 12, 2013 Pastor: You’ve got two deficiencies there. Petitioner: I understand. Henzi: Anything else? Sills: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: On your application, how long have you had this property? Petitioner: Since about ’93. Sills: ’93? Petitioner: ’93, ’94. Sills: Well, on the application it says without the gas station, I will not have enough revenue, foot traffic, to make the project worthwhile financially. Well, hasn’t it been a financial success for you for twenty years? Petitioner: No. Sills: Then why have you kept it for twenty years? Petitioner: Because it’s one of our properties that we own. It’s not the only property that I own. Sills: But according to your application, it’s not worth keeping. Petitioner: No, that’s not what it says. I’m saying, I’m saying in general, it’s not the good old days like it was when all the factories and all the whole street down the road from me were working and people were coming and business was great. Business City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8 of 76 November 12, 2013 declined, you know, it’s been, you know, every ten years you should do a remodel. But when you invest back in your property, it has to make sense. I can’t invest halfway and I can’t, you know, we have something set in mind where we have this three-way system. We have a C-store, a gas station and a Dunkin Donuts. We do this on three other properties of mine and it’s our vision, you know, I’m not saying it’s right or wrong, I’m not saying you guys are wrong or right, this is what we’ looking for. So if I’m going to invest, that way and it won’t be completed right either. If I just put the Dunkin Donuts, I’m not going to get the foot traffic that I need unless I get a gas station in there because most of my business comes from pumping the gas, get your coffee and then you go on the freeway. So it was trouble by itself is what I’m saying. If I go to Dunkin Donuts, it was trouble. I don’t have a drive-thru and so you’re just counting on, you know, people stopping by and making that turn to come into you. Whereas if there’s a gas station there, they come, they stop, they pump gas, get a pack of cigarettes, get a cup of coffee, I’m going to hit the road. So this is proven for us because we do it on Van Dyke, we do it in Warren, we have a couple gas stations built like that and it works well for us like that. Sills: And it appears to me as though you’re doing this just for financial gain and no other reason. Duggan: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: So, your plan, are you going to have your liquor store in there and you’re going to have a Dunkin Donut on the corner there? Petitioner: Right. Duggan: And the Coney Island is going to stay? Petitioner: Yes. Duggan: And when your Dunkin Donuts customers pull up, where do you expect they’ll park; are they going to go past the Coney Island? Petitioner: I have no idea. I have three on this side facing Merriman and I created three to five more facing the corner of Schoolcraft and Merriman. And then the rest are in the City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 9 of 76 November 12, 2013 back. Duggan: Have you been talking to the Dunkin Donuts franchise on the parking situation? Petitioner: Yes, I’m the approved franchisee, I have six stores. Duggan: And they said that the parking situation is okay? Petitioner: Yes. It’s not a problem. It looks, I know it looks strange, but that’s how, again I’m sorry, I keep saying the same thing. I have two gas stations set up the same way. We have parking on the side, it’s more for while you’re pumping your gas, you grab your coffee, you go. If you get morning traffic, the party store, the hours where the Dunkin Donuts is staggered from the store and from the restaurant. The store gets busy at night, 9:00 – 10:00 p.m. throughout late at night. The Coney Island opens, you know, they have their side of the parking lot. But I have eight, nine spaces, that’s more than enough. A couple of mine, I have three, four spaces. Duggan: When is the Coney Island busiest? Petitioner: They are also busy in the morning, but they have the entire lot there. Duggan: Right. My question for you is if you get whatever busy time in the morning people stop at the gas station and they get their coffee, it’s a pretty congested area, right? Petitioner: Right. But they’re not going to park on my side because right now I have the party store there, they don’t park past the middle unit, they park, you know, where the restaurant is. Duggan: And where you want the Dunkin Donuts, do you have enough space for? Petitioner: Absolutely, I promise you. I wouldn’t do it if it wouldn’t make sense for me. You know, I would just have a traffic jam. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10 of 76 November 12, 2013 Pastor: If this was not approved, what are you going to do with this property? Petitioner: I’m sorry? Pastor: If this was not approved this evening, what are you going to do with this Property? Petitioner: I’m not sure. I’m not sure. Probably, what it is, I’ve been trying for two years, maybe more than that, I’ve come up with a lot of designs and I’m trying my best. I try to work the building down next to it, it got declined. I tried this design, you know, I’m doing the best I can. I’m trying to do something that makes sense for everybody. Pastor: How many seats are in the restaurant? Petitioner: Just a few, maybe three tables. We don’t put anything in there. We don’t want people to sit in there. Pastor: If you look at parking, I’m not sure they have enough parking.for this. Kearfott: I asked Randy about this, and he said all the parking conformed. Pastor: Okay. You have 34 seats in the Coney Island? Petitioner: Yes. Pastor: You said just a couple tables. Petitioner: In my Dunkin Donuts I have three, three tables. Pastor: I asked about the Coney Island. Petitioner: Oh, I’m sorry. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 11 of 76 November 12, 2013 Pastor: Okay, thank you. Petitioner: You’re welcome. Henzi: I had a couple more questions. Petitioner: Sure. Henzi: You went through Planning Commission and City Council and this has sort of been a drawn out process. Can you tell me about the discussions at the Planning Commission level about why they wanted the canopies to be 16 feet from the property line? I guess what I’m looking to know is where that comes from and did that come about as a result of conversations about not wanting the pumps and the canopies too close to the road? Petitioner: Well, it’s a mixture of both sides, me and them. It’s more to have cars get by on either side of it. You have a similar set up on Farmington somewhere, I’m not sure what street, there’s one that has parallel pumps, I looked at that one, I tried to work with that. But it’s more that you have room to get around the pumps. Henzi: Was there science behind it, was it just we think 16 feet, two car lengths, something like that? The reason I ask is 16 feet from the canopy to the property line is arbitrary, I mean it’s not in the ordinance, it was something that was negotiated during the process and I’m trying to figure out why. Petitioner: Well, again, it’s more of to give the site, you know, so you can safely maneuver around the site, I mean if you shift it up too high, you got cars coming in. So cars come in, cars come out, likewise facing the building, you want cars to come this way and cars to come that way. Henzi: Well, I understand that but the canopy is 18 feet up in the air. The pumps as proposed are much greater than 16 feet away. There is specifically something about we want the leading up of the canopy which is up in the air to be 16 feet away. I’m just asking --- Petitioner: To be honest with you I’m not sure. The only thing I can remember is they don’t the height, they want it 18 feet. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 12 of 76 November 12, 2013 Henzi: I sense from your application that one of your arguments is that it is an otherwise unusable lot because they’ve got gas stations on all three corners and I can’t have a gas station, that’s one of your arguments, right? Petitioner: Right, actually yes, and you know, if you don’t do that what else are you going to put there? I’m in the retail business, it’s what I do for a living. I’m very good at it, I make great designs, it’s not --- what else am I going to put there? I don’t sell toys, I’m not a mortgage guy, we’re in retail and we do convenient stores, we have four of them, we have four gas stations and we have six Dunkin Donuts and this is one of our properties, it’s the only one in Livonia, we’re on the east side, we’re in the Warren/Sterling Heights area, this is what we do, this is all we know. If I don’t do this, what else? It’s what I do for a living, I’m in the Dunkin Donuts business. What am I going to put there? Henzi: I understand but Schoolcraft and Merriman is a divided highway where there’s three traditional gas stations on three of the four corners. Your building existed for a long, long time, actually two buildings that existed for a long time and it’s never been a gas station. So I guess what I’m trying to find out is why is the property unbuildable if it’s existed, much to what Mr. Sills was asking you. You have a liquor store and a cell phone store and a coney island and you’ve had other tenants throughout the years, give me some support for why you have to have a gas station otherwise that corner won’t make it. Petitioner: I’ll tell you why. Our business is down 30 percent as of years ago, we’re not doing what we were doing before and do you want me to get into --- Henzi: Where, in all three? Petitioner: No, no. Those two businesses, we don’t own, we don’t own the coney island. We own the property, we own the building, we lease the coney island which has changed hands twice now and it might change again. Henzi: Well, when you say business, are you talking about the store? Petitioner: The actual restaurant is not owned by us. Henzi: When you say business is down, are you talking about the liquor store? Petitioner: Exactly, the party store. We had a Blimpie, Blimpie was doing well when we City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 13 of 76 November 12, 2013 opened, it was thriving but again over the years too, and we just closed it. Blimpie itself went out of business in Michigan, there might be one or two left, I’m not sure. And times are changing, you have to adjust. And my store that I own, the party store, is down 30 percent, it’s down, and you know we’re here to make money, right, we’re in business. We’re on the corner going onto the freeway, it’s a great, it’s ideal. It won’t affect the stations across from me, I’m making a right to go to the freeway. A guy is coming and making a right to hit the expressway, they’re stopping by me anyway. And if they wanted to get gas, they’re not making a left to go across the street from me this way or that way. They’re going this way to hit the expressway. It’s very few times where you stop in the middle of the street, wait for the cars to clear and make a left. The only other way it could be made is on the service drive, yes, there’s two of us on the service drive. The other two guys there’s no impact. So if we have a Dunkin Donuts, let me get my Dunkin Donuts, let me get my coffee, let me get on the expressway. It’s not necessarily a destination point, it’s a convenience. Oh, they’ve got this stuff all in here, okay, and then that way you increase a little more customer count and you get to where you want to be. Henzi: Okay, that answers my question. Mrs. McIntyre. McIntyre: I understand that the world is a chicken and egg but perhaps the reason that your business has gone down and I understand very well the economic downslide, but the fact that that property has not been updated, it is not an attractive looking property. I never know what’s there. I understand you don’t operate the coney island but there’s nothing compelling visually or commercially about that corner. So perhaps that’s part of the reason. Petitioner: No, that’s not it. Because always looked like that but again, it’s from 2006 there’s a decline plus for everybody, for everybody, even in my stores, even in my Dunkins, even anywhere. But from that time until now we’ve seen a decline, especially 2011, 2010, you’re going down. It’s ---- you know what can you do, right? If you invest, you need to get a return on your money. I’m not going to to and redevelop the whole building and do what? How do I pay back my mortgage? How do I pay back my investment. So there needs to be a trade-off, it has to be fair. I don’t mind investing extra money to develop the whole property in return if you’ll allow me to do this project. That way I will have revenue from these two extra things that I’m adding, the property looks beautiful, it looks better and you know I gain hopefully which I know I’ll increase at least 10, 15 percent to make me comfortable. It’s worth putting that money into there. No one is going to put money in to their properties, I don’t’ grow money on trees, I have to make money in my business to reinvest back into my business. Now, true, it should have been touched up but I did do the eaves a couple years ago, we just did the roof and like I said, you don’t pull money from somewhere else to put it there, you know. Whatever each business I had, I address that individually. So whatever each one can afford is what I invest back into it. McIntyre: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 of 76 November 12, 2013 Henzi: Any other questions? Duggan: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: You talked about that the coney island might be changing hands again, have you thought about putting in the Dunkin Donuts where the liquor store and the coney island is and not necessarily put a gas station there as planned and especially with your explanation of is that your hardship, part of it is financial return and that what you pretty much made clear here tonight. You know I’m not necessarily opposed to a gas station there but this plan, you know, what other alternatives have you thought about? Petitioner: I tried them all, I promise you, I tried them all, I flip flop them. I need the Dunkin to be connected to the C-store. Duggan: And you need the coney island there, too? Petitioner: The coney island has nothing to do with me, they’re just separate operators. But for me, a customer, my customers, Dunkin customers comes in --- Duggan: But you own that whole property, right? Petitioner: I do. Duggan: So if you were to get it so the coney island would leave, you could fill in anything there. Petitioner: What am I going to do with 4,000, 5,000 square feet, you know, it’s not --- it doesn’t make sense economically, for me it doesn’t make sense. For my formula to work, I need them to be in the same space. So it’s roughly 4,000 square feet split in half, there is no dividing wall, they are open to each other. I grab a bag of chips and a candy, get my coffee and go. If they’re divided by a wall it doesn’t work. I’m going to walk it, then leave, then walk down the path and go into there and come back out, it doesn’t work. I’m not trying to make this a financial burden but I mean I called it, what else do people come to the Zoning Board on a property such as mine and say what City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 of 76 November 12, 2013 they’re trying to do? I’m trying to develop the property but it has to make sense financially, of course, but I’m not saying it’s just one event. It’s a big investment. I have to be able to know I’m going to, you know, I see what my return is and that’s how you make decisions and hope for the best, you don’t know. So for us this formula has worked before, I’m just trying to duplicate it. And I’ve shown the previous --- is there Planning, I was in Planning, before you guys is Planning? Duggan: Yes. Petitioner: I’ve shown them what my idea was and how it worked and I have existing set-ups that work well, same way, there’s no parking in the front, I have a coney island, a Dunkin, a gas station on a higher traffic corner, this Merriman is probably not even half the traffic I get on my Van Dyke, I get 93,000 cars a day on Van Dyke and 696, every morning, northwest corner. I have a smaller property, it’s half the size and I have a drive-thru. But again, I have a Dunkin, I have a gas station, I have fuel pumps in the front, so you know we’ve seen the formula that works. I have stores that are stand alone, now you have a stand alone, you have a higher expense, higher operating expenses, it’s a lot more --- makes more sense when it’s within my building, I don’t have separate utilities and taxes and everything, when you’re in a strip center it’s chopped up kind of, your taxes are less because they’re split amongst the tenants, everybody shares it and so on and so forth so that’s why we do it like that. You have to be connected, you have to be in the same space. It doesn’t matter where the coney island goes, that’s just there for income purposes. If I was to do it again, I’d do the drive-thru but we built it so many years ago it’s already at the back of the property line, not much you can do with the building right now. It doesn’t make sense to demolish it, it’s not horrible, it doesn’t make sense. Duggan: Thank you. Henzi: I have one more question. Petitioner: Sure. Henzi: Do you have any pictures or any data regarding your other stores? Petitioner: I do, I have plenty of it, but I didn’t know to bring it. Henzi: I mean you just said that your Van Dyke property is half the size, I have no idea what you mean. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 of 76 November 12, 2013 Petitioner: Well, this is two properties together. The building with the State Farm is really another parcel. Henzi: How close are the pumps to the property line on those two parcels? Petitioner: We have 50 feet from the pump to the register, that’s what I mostly see. Henzi: No, the property line. Petitioner: The property line, I’m not sure. But to the pumps we have 50 feet as we have 50 feet here. Really that’s what the Liquor Control Commission asks, you need to have 50 feet from the pumps to the register. Henzi: I understand. I wish you would have brought that. There’s a room full of people who are vehemently against this. There are people who have written in and we were here once before and there’s a lot of folks that think that this is a bad idea. And when you say I’ve done this on two other occasions and it works really well, I can’t use that to your advantage, I can’t help you with that. Petitioner: Well, can we postpone it now and I’ll bring my props with me next time. Henzi: Well, I’m only one person, I don’t know what the other board members think. Petitioner: It works and they’re existing businesses and they’re in different cities, they’re just not in Livonia. Henzi: I’ll leave it like this, if this is tabled again, you’ve got to have that stuff, I’m sorry. Petitioner: Absolutely, absolutely. Henzi: I’m not saying this is going to get tabled, you might get approved, you might get denied, but if it gets tabled, I have to see that. Petitioner: Okay. I’m just trying to be honest with everybody. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 17 of 76 November 12, 2013 Henzi: I’m not saying you’re not. Petitioner: I have it. Henzi: To me that’s compelling. Petitioner: It’s proof, it’s living proof. I have it, I operate them right now. Henzi: Okay. Any other questions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Just a couple of things. Again, you’ll be selling the gas out of which store, the liquor store or the donut store, who will actually sell the fuel? Petitioner: Well, the C-store takes that on, so you go in the C-store and you pay. Caramagno: So the liquor store will actually sell the fuel? Petitioner: Yes. Caramagno: Okay. You talk about redeveloping the entire property, I see you’re trying to make an improvement here. You talk about redeveloping the whole property, and then we see all the coffee shops, the Dunkin Donuts, Aldi, they all want to put a drive-thru in, they all want one or two lanes; why would you want to do something against everything we’ve seen everywhere else? Petitioner: Because I have one store that’s a non drive-thru in a strip center center such as this one, and the cost for me it makes sense. I have a corporate lease, you know, I have a very, very good relationship with them, this would be my seventh store, seventh, so the cost of building this is a fraction of building a brand new building, you’re talking a fraction, maybe a fifth of the cost. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 18 of 76 November 12, 2013 Caramagno: Well, I hear that but I’m also thinking of the way things are being done today versus how they were doing it many, many years ago. People are doing things correctly and proper at one time rather than piecing something together just because of an odd property here. So you’re not interested in putting in a drive-thru or offer a drive-thru on a major highway that connects to downtown to everything out west. Petitioner: You’re absolutely right, you’re absolutely right but two things. I can’t make it a drive-thru because my building is on the back of the property so I have to use what I have. Caramagno: Okay. The property to the east where it was a vacant building, there’s a property that comes down. Petitioner: It’s a State Farm building. I own that property, I purchased it because it connects to my parking lot. Caramagno: That’s quite an investment, to buy a building and with the plan to knock it down to get more parking lot, that’s quite an investment here. Petitioner: Well, because I’m taking the parking out of the front so I have to. Now, the thing that --- I’m trying to answer your question, I would never build without a drive-thru unless it is in my C-store. The reason being most of my business comes from my C-store, that is why. They have seen this from me and they accept it, you know, so they accept this site as a non drive-thru. The rest of the risk I take upon myself again. I operate one store that is not a drive-thru. Ideally, I’d like to make a drive-thru, I can’t. The footprint is there to me, the investment makes sense. I will --- you know what I mean? I can’t break the building down and build a brand new build a brand new building just to have a drive-thru, it’s excessive. Caramagno: I don’t know what you can really do or not do. The other concern that I’ve got and it’s a substantial concern when you look at the layout of what you’re trying to do. I was there a couple times and one of the times you had a Coca-Cola truck in the parking lot delivering product over towards the door on the west side of the property and there was another truck trying to get in there and it was absolutely chaos, absolutely chaos. And that’s before there’s any fuel island or anybody trying to park and get to Dunkin Donuts, it was --- I had a hell of a time trying to get through myself. Petitioner: With all due respect to everybody, the issues you guys raise are existing In all the tiny gas stations you have across the street from me and all over the city. So These things that you’re introducing to me, exist in your city right now. Every single gas City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 19 of 76 November 12, 2013 station and mine is big enough to accommodate a gas station. The parcel I have Is bigger than 70 percent of the gas stations you have in the city. I’m saying the size I have is not out of the ordinary and I have plenty more room than my three neighbors right now. The guy across the street from me, I don’t know how you can fit cars in there, they’re busy all day. I don’t even have that many pumps. Caramagno: You’ve got a congested piece here, especially during deliveries. Is there any opportunity to deliver to the back of these stores? Where is the primary delivery for product? Petitioner: When we get this thing working and functioning we’ll have, you know, we’ll Have a place they can park in the back of the lot and all the way in the back where your dumpster will be now and they can walk over and drag their stuff in. They won’t park in the front like it is right now because remember I have an island splitting the two properties, that will go and it will just be straight pavement all the way down. And then when they leave, they can leave through the service drive and not come back through the front, that’s why we left the entrance there facing the State Farm. Caramagno: That was my concern and the couple questions I had. Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions for the Petitioner? Fisher: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Fisher. Fisher: The combination between the liquor store and gas station is a controversial One. Since your liquor store business was down I’m wondering would you trade the liquor license for the gas? Petitioner: Absolutely not. Because what’s the difference between a liquor license and a beer and wine license because all I’m doing is adding fuel pumps but all the other gas stations have beer and wine licenses, they don’t tell them to take beer and wine out of their gas station to operate fuel so it sounds terrible but it’s not. You still have alcohol, alcohol selling fuel, a lot of gas stations do that so you can’t look at it like that to me. You know, I’m a very cautious person, I think along the lines that you’re thinking but if you look at it from a black and white, I have alcohol, there is gas stations City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 20 of 76 November 12, 2013 that have alcohol. I sell chips and candy, they sell chips and candy. I’m just a little bit bigger. There’s a guy on – where is he, he’s on Middlebelt, he has a Tim Horton’s and a gas station, you know, he’s a big C-store. We’re just adding fuel pumps, nothing out of the ordinary. It exists all over the place, all over. Henzi: Can you name one other gas station in Livonia that --- Petitioner: Not in this city. Henzi: Anything else? Petitioner: But again, I was, like I was really grandfathered. Like if I was applying for one, if you had a question, that wasn’t already existing. So what I’m asking is I’m grandfathered and I want to add the C-store and the fuel pumps. I have a unique property. I think I’m one of two or three that’s zoned that allows me to do all three, that’s what the C-3 does, it allows you to have worse things actually which I’m not doing. I just want to put fuel pumps and a C-store and things I know how to do and I can do them very well and I’d appreciate it if you’d approve it. Henzi: Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against The project? If so, you can come on up to the podium. Matt Heron: Good evening. Henzi: Good evening. Matt Heron: My name is Matt Heron, I’m an attorney for the Exxon Mobil at that corner. With me to my right is Mo Medendra, the owner of the Exxon Mobil. The address of the one across the street at least is 13801 Merriman. We just have a couple points that I wanted to make and then I would actually give Mo the opportunity to address you specifically. But basically what we heard and what was in the application is somewhat evident. A variance is not needed to use the property. The property has been used for twenty years, it can be used. The ordinance, the Livonia Zoning Ordinance has not been and is not an excessive burden on the use of the property. What we really heard is that the desire to attain a higher financial return which has already been alluded to. The Zoning Ordinance and compliance with the Zoning Ordinance would not be an exceptional hardship on this particular property. And then what’s interesting about this case is the specifics of the variance that’s being requested and the nature of the use. The variance is requested with respect to the setback requirements, that’s 17 foot from Schoolcraft and then 23 feet from Merriman, if I heard right. But the setback exists in City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 21 of 76 November 12, 2013 order to address the possibility and risk of traffic congestion. It requires enough space and enables the property to have enough space which is the point of having a zoning ordinance in the first place. But in this particular instance, the variance itself would exacerbate the traffic congestion issues at this property. While the variance would assist in creating or making that problem bigger. This is especially true in this particular case because of the nature of Schoolcraft being a service drive for I-96, also being one way right at that particular location and with the lot being somewhat narrow as it is you would have an increase in traffic congestion, or it appears you would have an increase in traffic congestion both on the areas on the roads surrounding it but also on the property itself as alluded to with the trucks gaining access and being able to exit and being able to use the property. And it’s also compounded by, but really with the multiple uses of the property. It’s interesting that the multiple uses themselves also demonstrate that the property can be used without having to apply or obtain a variance. And lastly, that the variance itself is not insignificant. This is not a 1-foot or 2-foot variance request. It’s 23-feet out of the 75-foot setback requirement, almost entirely a third of the requirement that’s been imposed by the Zoning Ordinance. And I urge you to at least we believe that significant. So on behalf of the owner of the Exxon Mobil and Mo, we would request that the variance request be denied. Medendra: I would add one more point. Henzi: Can you say your name and address, please? Medendra: Mohar Medendra, 13801 Merriman Road, I’m the owner of the Mobil Station across the street from the property. I know the financial issue is not pressing, but I have to bring it back. Just when I mentioned five years ago we saw a potential of doing business in the City of Livonia and we purchased three stations. We invested over 4 million dollars. We came to the city and we are doing business in the city and we are very happy to be here. All that I’m asking you is work with us and please, don’t approve any variation or setback or anything we already have and exists. We change for something we don’t have. We don’t change for something we already have. Thank you very much. Henzi: Thank you. Amon: My name is Amon on Merriman Road, and I strongly disagree with this. There’s already a liquor store there, he has a liquor store. Mobil sells donuts, Speedway sells donuts, we don’t need more donuts and another gas station that would make everything jammed up in the morning when I have to go to work and I have to be on time because everybody is trying to get in there. I think he’s just out for Greed because nobody buys liquor in his liquor store because it’s too high, the liquor price so I think that’s what it is is greed, that’s all. And I strongly object, vehemently. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 22 of 76 November 12, 2013 Henzi: Thank you. Richard Mindick: I live at 38642 Grennada in Livonia. As a lifelong Livonia resident, I have major concerns. That is a high traffic area. With a coffee shop and additional gas station, it’s not going to work and please don’t allow liquor to be sold at a gas station in our city. Itidal Saba: My name is Itidal Saba, my address 36253 Whitcomb Street in Livonia. I Drive Jeffries Freeway every morning and every afternoon going to Dearborn to my work. I own a business in Dearborn that I work at. And I see the traffic going there and there are three gas stations already and there are so many gas stations in the city that one of them at Six Mile and Farmington, BP, has been out of business for at least two, three years. They tried to rezone it, make it a liquor store and they denied it. And there are so many gas stations existed already, I don’t see a need for, like when I drive my route on Jeffries going to Merriman exit, I go to the first gas station on the right. To go onto Merriman to make a left, that’s even harder. And for the people coming west on Jeffries, it’s much easier to go to Speedway and Mobil on the other side. So I am for to request the Zoning Board to deny the request. Al: I am Al at 31805 Glendale. I disagree with giving him the opportunity to open a gas station, we’ve got three and I’m with the lady that just came, we don’t need no gas station selling alcohol. I understand it’s his plight, he’s got a good business plan, it works over on Van Dyke, I think his business plan has worked for him for twenty years with his cashing checks and selling alcohol at that location. If it’s not working for him there he should open up another one on Van Dyke where it’s working good for him. Thank you. Edward: Edward Harake, a resident of the City of Livonia. I’m totally against this proposal for the gas station. Let me remind you of the failed gas stations that exist in the City of Livonia. Eight Mile and Farmington, Six Mile and Farmington, Seven Mile and Farmington, aside from the fact that it’s an environmental hazard, reject this proposal, please. Henzi: What’s your street address, sir? Edward: Pardon me? Henzi: It’s for our minutes. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 23 of 76 November 12, 2013 Edward: 33005 Brookside Court. Henzi: Thank you. Amen: Good evening. My name is Ronald Amen, 36786 Gardner, city of Livonia. I am the director of Community and Economic Development for the City of Dearborn Heights. Part of my job is to attract business to the City of Dearborn Heights but not at the expense of public safety. This setback almost looks one/third less of what he should have is ridiculous. The mere fact that that setback violates the ordinance that this city has established that these other three gas stations had to meet on the other three corners, I think is going to give him unfair advantage. To the proposal to avoid that setback ordinance and allow him to put in three gas pumps there, the city does not need another gas station. I think it’s a great idea about putting in a coffee shop there, that’s what I think you should work on. Henzi: Thank you. Harb: Hi. Ken Harb, 16788 Westbrook. First of all, I really feel for the Petitioner, I think Livonia needs more people like him taking a risk. But I listened for the last 40 minutes and I don’t see uniqueness here or practical difficulty. I feel that that corner is an ill conceived corner, it has deficiencies. It was – they wanted that building with the deficiencies and now they want to add a deficiency to a deficiency, it doesn’t make sense. A gas station doesn’t fit there for a lot of reasons that the Exxon attorney spoke about. And I also think that it’s bad precedence for the city. I believe personally that liquor and gas do not fit and the city if we start this precedent, this will be the first liquor store and gas station, I think it will be a very bad precedent. I think if you open up this can of worms, you’re going to start seeing more liquor stores wanting to have gas stations or gas stations wanting to have liquor and it’s just going to go on and on and on. I feel that the gas pumps, they don’t have enough room to maneuver and honestly, I think this is nothing more than a mere inconvenience and a way to earn a higher return. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. Nancy Salim: Nancy Salim, 30151 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan 48154. I agree with everybody, we shouldn’t have another gas station, three is enough, Exxon, Mobil and Speedway. Henzi: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 24 of 76 November 12, 2013 Shah: Good evening everybody. My name is Ketan Shah and I came from 31240 Schoolcraft, Livonia and I just want to say a few things. The site and zones, the rules are made for some reasons, we all agree. We should change that only for something which is essential, required or for safety reasons. If we are approving something which is totally against that. What you’re talking about here, what I heard, Schoolcraft Road, 75 feet is required, only 18 feet is missing, so that deficiency is almost 25 percent. And for Merriman Road, that deficiency is almost 33 percent. So we are not talking here about one or two things, almost 25 to 33 percent deficiency. And they’re building fuel pumps so that is totally against safety of people of Livonia and others safety. If something happens, we all will regret. So I believe everybody should not take the position that is not good for any people of Livonia. Thank you very much. Henzi: Thank you. H.M. El-Sabeh: Good evening. Mike El-Sabeh,, 16725 Levan Road, Livonia, Michigan, 48154. Thank you for taking the time of allowing me to speak here tonight. You know I’ve been a resident here for the last twenty-two years and one of the things that I cannot recognize through the years is we have the various gas stations located throughout the city. We start with Eight Mile and Farmington, there used to be four gas stations at that corner, now it’s down to two gas stations. We move to Farmington and Seven Mile, used to be a gas station there, it’s no longer there. Six Mile and Farmington, there’s three gas stations, one of them is closed, and if you go to that corner of 96 and Merriman, obviously there is plenty of gas stations in the city itself, so I would oppose that, I would object to that variance. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. Fiscelli: Hello. Henzi: Good evening. Fiskelli:. James Fiskelli, I’m here representing I.S. Real Estate, the property of 13801 Merriman Road. We purchased the property from the bank five years ago, they lost it to the bank, I’m not here to ask you to help me run my business, I’m just here asking you to make the right decision. Thank you. Nabil Hamade: Good evening everybody. I’m Nabil Hamade 17111 Farmington Road. I’m against the gas station over there. You know in the city of Livonia there are so many gas stations and so many gas stations is closed and we have enough gas stations so I ask you not to approve it. Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 25 of 76 November 12, 2013 Henzi: Thank you. Gazoan Yagoub: Good evening everybody. Gazoan Yagoub, 13801 Merriman Road, I’m just talking about opening that gas station. When he talks about people buying gas and coffee and leave, here it’s going to be people buying gas and liquor, it’s going to be worse right now, people have accidents and all the liquor, so it’s really not worth it for him to open a gas station to make it easier for people buying gas and liquor at the same time. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. Anybody else? Okay. We’ve got some letters to read, if you’ve spoken, we won’t read your letter but they’re incorporated into the record and we’ve seen your letters, we just won’t read them to save time. How many do you think we have? Caramagno: We’ve got tabled from the last time in July, 124 objections. And we’ve got a small packet here from Clark Hill. Henzi: You don’t need to read them because they spoke. Caramagno: We’ve got 24 letters of objection. Henzi: Mike, would it be all right just to read the twenty-four? We’ve been through the 85 or whatever it is from the last time and they’re almost identical. Fisher: Yes, I think that’s the way we customarily do it, we don’t go back and read the old ones. Caramagno: Go through the twenty-four today? Fisher: Yes. Caramagno: Okay. Kevin, 27970 Six Mile, writes an objection, (letter read). Enis Pepic, 19999 Purlingbrook writes an objection, (letter read). Tony Brandt, 30317 Kendall, an objection, (letter read). James Jackson, 31601 Industrial, (letter read), objection. James at 31362 Industrial, objection, (letter read). Tina at 29633 Bentley Street, objection, (letter read). Rodney at 18649 Glendale, objection, (letter read). Scott, 30917 Schoolcraft, objection, (letter read). Joel, 33900 Concord, Livonia, objection, City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 26 of 76 November 12, 2013 (letter read). Jim, 15778 Wolmer, writes an objection (letter read). Dawn, 11800 Merriman, objection, (letter read). Jeff Pierce, 14600 Bainbridge writes an objection (letter read). Kevin Sweet, 30280 Plymouth Road, objection, (letter read). Jon Lang, 12081 Newburgh, objection, (letter read). Matthew, 13602 Merriman, objection, (letter read). Wes at 31439 Scone, objection, (letter read). Sean Hill, 31770 Enterprise, objection, (letter read). Robert, 12743 Merriman, objection, (letter read). Meghan, 29631 Lyndon, objection, (letter read). Jill, 31626 Grennada, objection (letter read). Jean, 14451 Melrose, objection, (letter read). Eveyln, 14375 Arden, objection, (letter read). Charles Haas, 16257 Parklane, (letter read), objection. Henry Saba, 16489 Glengary, objection, (letter read). That’s it. Henzi: Mr. Shango, is there anything you’d like to say in closing? Petitioner: Yes, absolutely. A very important thing is I am allowed by my zoning to sell alcohol and have fuel pumps there, so all of these comments, that’s very nice, but I am allowed to sell gas and alcohol on the property, that’s why you don’t have that anywhere in this city because none of the properties are zoned that way. You only have one or two other properties that are zoned like mine. I am unique to my zoning. Second of all, we have this attorney and all these people saying there’s a setback to the zoning, no. If you want to talk setback, then 90 percent of your gas stations are lacking setback, let’s go and measure, all of us. I went, I checked all of them because they gave me such a hard time until I came here. I measured them all, especially the ones across the street from me, especially the one right next to me, he’s way smaller than me, you have no room in there, you don’t even have eight feet to the curb. You can squeeze one car and if one car is coming, you can’t even turn in. Third of all, if I rearrange this design, I can make it so I make the setback requirements on both sides but then the gas station won’t function properly and I can put it in anyway but it’s not going to work right, you’re going to have a traffic jam, you’re going to have a worse situation. I am allowed to put gas pumps on the property, but it has to make sense for both of us. If I just meet the zoning requirement, then it’s not going to flow right on the site. What can you do, you’re going to have pumps up against the building which is worse and I am allowed to do that, I am allowed to do that. But it is wrong to do that. Center them in the middle, have a nice flow of traffic. But I am, I am allowed to sell alcohol on this property, this should not even come up, this should not even be a question. So I’m not trying to hurt anybody’s business. I care about the guy next to me, he has a family, I have a family. My customer is turning right onto the freeway. The other two gas stations have nothing to do with me. Why? They’re going east, one’s going west, they have nothing to do with me. If you’re stopping at the Speedway, you’re not stopping at me. You’re going to get on the expressway and you’re going to head east or you’re going to --- I’m sorry, west. If you’re on my side, then you’re going to head east. And my customer comes up to the intersection, makes a right, that’s 90 percent of my business. And again, if you’re coming up to that intersection to make a right, you’re not making a left anyway, very rarely will you make a left and go through the headache, get in there and get back on the expressway. You’re going to make a right and you’re going to go. So, you know, I’m not trying to hurt anybody. This is not fair, you know, these arguments that I hear is not holding water. Now, is there any City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 27 of 76 November 12, 2013 other questions I can answer so I can help you see what I’m seeing, you know, I would appreciate it. Henzi: Yes, I have one. You said something a minute ago that didn’t help you, you said that you could reconfigure the plans. Petitioner: Yes, but it won’t work, it won’t, I promise you. From a planning standpoint it wont’ work. Henzi: What is the plan? Petitioner: Well, the plan is to center them on the property, that’s why we’re asking for a setback for a better flow of traffic. What are you going to do, stick them up against the building, it’s not going to flow right. How do you get out of your car, how about if another car wants to come in, that only gives me three pumps. The point I’m trying to make is I can do it, I can do it and not come for this variance, but it doesn’t make sense for me, it doesn’t make sense for you. The site won’t flow right and I’m only going to have three pumps. But if I want to do it, I can do it, you know, but this is the wrong way to go about it. So, we decided and we’ve been through this in Planning many times, I met with them 100 times, you know, and if we set them in the middle it works for all of us. They were happy with it. I took out a pump. I shrunk my entrance. I made sure that the flow of traffic works on that site so there is no problem. And you know I heard a couple funny jokes about my other properties, those have nothing to do with this, I’m just saying I’ve done it before, I know what I’m doing. I’m not going to develop a project that I don’t think will work. Because if I do it and it doesn’t work, I lose, not you, I lose. I lose the money. People can’t get in and out and traffic jams, there’s accidents, I lose if that happens, so I make sure that that doesn’t happen. So based on the volume of traffic that I get at that intersection, I did traffic studies, I’m a numbers guy, this is what I do, compared to my other sites, I say this makes sense here and then I came and brought it to the Board. Henzi: Do you have any pictures or data regarding the other gas stations, that 70 percent of the other gas stations in Livonia are smaller? Petitioner: I will go get them. Henzi: I’m sure some are. Petitioner: I will go get them because if you’re telling me that I’m deficient, then the City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 28 of 76 November 12, 2013 guy next to me and the two across he street should shut down right now because they’re way more deficient than I am. Just because I’m building a new one, if you’re saying this is a hazard, then theirs is an existing hazard. And if you say a Coke truck gets stuck on my property, then God help their property, it probably takes up half of their property and cars can’t get it. And I see it all day long. The Speedway across the street from me, the cars are in the street. Why don’t you guys go and tell them to close their store down or to rebuild or to buy the property next to them. So I just want to be fair. I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m not saying I’m right but these problems exist everywhere. And you know, I’m an architect, I’m a contractor, too, so I’m a planner, I do this. So, it’s not out of the ordinary, it’s not out of question to propose it on this site. It works. If it didn’t work, I wouldn’t do it, I wouldn’t invest the money, I wouldn’t waste your time and I’m not trying to hurt the guy next to me or the people across from me, it’s not going to hurt any of them. I’m on the southwest corner, I’m on the way to the freeway. Remember, you’re coming to me, you’re not going to the other two gas stations. Those two have nothing to do with me. The Speedway and Mobil, they’re going in the other direction. Are you going to make a left and come to me and make a u-turn, that has nothing to do with them, you know. So, the other thing is, I’m very high priced, he doesn’t have nothing to worry about. I charge a high price on my gas because I’m convenient and I make it a one stop shop. So he’s going to cater to a different customer, I cater to a different customer, you know, I’m not nonbranded, he is. I’m going to be a branded fuel, a Mobil or a Shell. So it’s not his competition, he gets his gas cheaper, he can still make a living, you know. So I’m not trying to hurt anybody, I’m just trying to improve my property enough to where I can do well and by doing that I’ll better the property for the city, it’s ugly, it’s terrible, it needs to get fixed. Henzi: You don’t have an agreement with an oil distributor yet? Petitioner: How am I going to get an agreement unless I get --- I have, I mean I have, you know I have four other gas stations, I have oil distributors, it’s not a problem. Henzi: So could you get Mobil? There’s one across the street. Petitioner: What I’m saying I have Mobils now, I have BP, there’s plenty. I can get any brand I want so that’s not a problem. I’m just saying as far as competition, I heard the argument, I’m not his competition. He’s a nonbranded fuel, he gets his gas cheaper and he sells it cheaper. I don’t sell my gas cheap. Plus, he has more fuel. I only have three pumps, one is going to be diesel, so two pumps. McIntyre: Excuse me, who is the nonbranded fuel? Petitioner: Next to me on Merriman, sorry I don’t know the address. On this side of City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 29 of 76 November 12, 2013 me, not across the freeway. The other side of the freeway has branded fuel. McIntyre: I thought that was a BP? Petitioner: Next to me, no, it’s not a BP, he’s a nonbranded. Heron: Exxon. It’s branded. Petitioner: It is? Is it Mobil? Heron: It’s branded. Petitioner: Either way, still I’m high priced, I won’t undercut. Because I don’t make my money on the gas, the gas is simply a convenience. And the argument is if you’re coming to stop at me, you’re not going to him anyways. The only way you’re going to him is if you need gas and you need it cheap, and you’re going to stop in the middle of Merriman, make a left, go into him and then you get on the freeway. Henzi: Okay. Petitioner: I’m just trying to give you all sides of the equation. Henzi: I have one last question for Mike. Can you shed a little light on the rules regarding selling alcohol at a gas station? So, for example, if there was a new petitioner who wanted to build a brand new gas station, would they be able to under the zoning ordinance, be able to sell gas and sell liquor? Fisher: Generally speaking, the answer to that would be no or at least they would require additional approval, waiver use approval, that would be as we discussed tonight unprecedented in Livonia. I don’t ---- I’m just checking to see whether, in his specific zoning district you certainly have gasoline stations as a permitted use, I do not see liquor licensees as a permitted use though. Petitioner: It is. Henzi: One of the reasons that I’m curious is we’ve looked at minutes from Planning City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 30 of 76 November 12, 2013 Commission meetings, City Council meetings, we’ve got a veto letter, I don’t see one single reference to the fact that opposers saying that is that this is bad because liquor is being sold at a gas station but that’s a very hot button issue for tonight. So my question along that line was was there discussion about the fact that he is able to sell liquor because he’s grandfathered? Fisher: I’m not aware of that discussion in connection with this particular property, I just know it’s longstanding obviously from the city’s approach. Petitioner: I’m sorry, may I say something? The prior meetings, when we went to the Planning Commission, we developed this layout, they were happy with it. I mean they were against it, it went back and forth, I reworked it, I made it perpendicular, I made it parallel, I took a pump out, this is the best flowing plan that we could come up with. Henzi: I don’t dispute that but in defense of this Board, and I’m not disparaging the Planning Commission, but not one single person asked where are you going to sell the gas from. Petitioner: I’m sorry? Henzi: Not one Planning Commissioner member asked the question where are you going to sell the gas from. Petitioner: Yes, they did, they asked me before. Henzi: Is it going to be at the party store, it was asked tonight as far as I can see for the very first time and it’s a very hot issue to at least a couple board members and many of the speakers. So I’m very surprised that this would go all the way through Planning Commission and City Council and that never came up. And I guess the point I’m trying to make is you’re being put through the ringer tonight because that’s more what this Board does than Planning Commission. Petitioner: No problem then, that’s okay. I was asked one time, it was early stages and I said yes, it’s going to be behind the C-store counter, where else would it be? The only difference you have, you have a liquor shelf behind me or there’s beer in the cooler which I know you’re not used to in this city but this is done. But again, I am grandfathered and my zoning permits me to sell alcohol on this property and have fuel pumps. I’m a C-3, I think you have two other ones. I’m in a very unique situation. So if that wasn’t allowed, I have no case, I can’t even come here. Because then I would City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 31 of 76 November 12, 2013 have to ask for you waive that to allow me to sell alcohol and get a setback. So, as I said, I’m in a tough spot because you want me to meet your setback requirements, I can rework the plan but it doesn’t help me, it doesn’t help you, it doesn’t work. I can make them meet, I can put them on there, but I will only maybe put two pumps and then I have to stick them up against the building which that cannot be denied. So we don’t win. I lose and then you’ve got an ugly, weird looking thing, you’ve got a big parking lot in front of you and two pumps up against the building. So this is the best, to have this function on the property, this is the way to lay out the pumps. They’re parallel to the building so when you come in off the service drive, you pull right in and you pull right out. If they’re perpendicular, which I have in my other places, there might be some difficulty turning around again. So, this is convenient. Where other gas stations are perpendicular, I think they have a heck of a time turning around in there because again, they have 10 feet less than me and that’s the three adjacent ones next to me, they’re all deficient, worse than me. But I don’t want to get into the blame game, that’s nor important, we’re only talking about mine right now. So I’ve looked at it left and right, I promise you, two years, it’s just coming out of my head now. I’ve tried every single way to please the boards, the please the city, what do you want me to do? Henzi: I understand, thank you. Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: Okay. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Sills. Sills: Well, the Petitioner hasn’t proven to me that he has a hardship. He’s had this property for twenty years, he says that he’s not making any money, why would anybody keep property for twenty years if you weren’t making any money? You obviously live in West Bloomfield, you have a nice home and everything, you must be making some money somewhere. Petitioner: Thank you for judging me, I appreciate it. Sills: And if nothing else, I don’t think we need another gas station so I cannot support this petition. Petitioner: I know, thank you. Henzi: Mrs. McIntyre. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 32 of 76 November 12, 2013 McIntyre: The points that you made that resonate with me were about our task tonight which is to look at in terms of the zoning variance. However there were public comments and the public is free to comment on whatever they want to. But looking at this and what I’m being asked to do as a member of this Board, is to determine whether you have uniqueness, whether there’s some overriding factor in why you need this variance. You’re asking for a significant variance, I think that point was made well tonight, you’re asking in one place almost 33 percent, that’s a significant variance, you’re not asking for a nominal variance, and based on that alone, taking all the other issues that you point out may not be the purview of this Board, but I think the Chairman made an interesting point about how no one had asked before on any other city board about the liquor and gasoline combination, but I can’t, as a member of this Zoning Board grant this variance, it’s a significant one, and there’s no compelling reason othmer than your desire for additional financial gain. So on the strict definition of what I’m being asked to evaluate, I can’t support. Henzi: Mr. Carmagno: Caramagno: In the time that I’ve been on this Board, I have not seen this much ppposition to a plan since I’ve been here. You’ve got a lot of interesting pieces ere, some of which is there a better plan for this property? You apparently have the zoning for the liquor and the fuel, but is there a better plan for this property including something better for Dunkin Donuts? I think yes, there would be but it has to be a complete remodeling and not just a brush up on what you have to get this to go from there. It’s a tight property and I hear what you say about the other properties and I’ll agree with that, but what I’ve seen and your expectation of diesel fuel here and E-85 and all the other fuels coming in and traffic backed up and back out onto these major roads, just doesn’t look good for me. The other reason I think that there’s something better here because in effect you said you can, you said you can do something different here. I tend to agree with you. Whether you want to or not invest in the property and do it right is maybe a different story, so at this point I’m not in support of what’s in front of me. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I can’t support this at all. I mean the Petitioner says I’m grandfathered, I’m grandfathered, and then he points to everyone else and says well, they’ve got problems, too, why aren’t they grandfathered? They are. You’re asking, everything I’ve heard from you, everything, was about financial gain. There was not one hardship. There was not --- this is all brought upon yourself. You brought it upon yourself when you built these stores, however you decided to build them for whatever reason you decided to build them and now you’re asking us to approve another variance and a variance back then as well for parking as I recall, I cannot consciously City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 33 of 76 November 12, 2013 approve this, this does not work whatsoever with me. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I, too, will be voting against this. I’m not opposed to a gas station going There, you can do it on your own, I think it’s not within the purview of this Board to discuss whether a gas station can go in there or not. You’ve asking for a setback and to get that setback you had to show difficulty beyond an inability to earn a higher financial return and you wrote straight on your petition in order to get enough revenue in order to make this project worthwhile financially. And the Chairman gave you that question just to start out and you looked at him and said, well, yes, why else would I do it? And that’s exactly what you weren’t supposed to say. We can’t, like I said we can’t grant a variance based on the inability to earn a higher financial return and that was your answer. So I will be voting against it. Petitioner: Can I say something before you close? Henzi: We are closed but make it quick. Petitioner: Well, there’s two things I’m going to say. If you’re not doing it for Financially, why do people develop properties? Henzi: We’ve already commented on that. Petitioner: The other thing is, I can put the gas pumps, I just won’t set them up that way, nobody wins here. Henzi: We’ve got that. We went over that. I’m much like Mr. Caramagno, I’m not so much opposed to a gas station here, I just don’t like the plan as it exists. I sympathize with you, I know where you’re coming from because you’ve been through several boards, just like you came before the board for a parking variance a long time ago, the board denied it and put your through the ringer for that, and this Board is putting you through the ringer this time. In my humble opinion, Planning Commission glossed over a lot of details because they much like me Want to see a new coffee shop go in. I think you’re a brave person for taking the Risk, this is a bad corner, it just is. You tell me that 70 percent of all the gas Stations in the city are smaller than yours but you have no proof. Petitioner: I have proof. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 34 of 76 November 12, 2013 Henzi: I think that this is a small corner. I’ve driven past, I don’t know how many gas stations because I’ve spent hours researching this case because I knew how important it was to a lot of folks, and there are a couple that are small, but a couple are about this size. Just from the naked eye test, this is a small parking lot that’s difficult to navigate, I’m sorry, it is, it’s not your fault. It’s on a bad corner, like one of the speakers said and it just doesn’t lend itself. You’re on a gas station intersection but you don’t have the same kind of configuration that those other properties do. I’d like to give you some pumps but in a different formation. And when you’re asked for the first time in front of a board representing the City of Livonia about a hot button issue that no one else has considered which is are you willing to trade a liquor license for the pumps and you say absolutely not because you don’t want to give up that thing of value, that turns me off. Because you just spent 40 minutes at the beginning of your presentation saying you want morning traffic and want coffee drinkers to come in and buy coffee and you want the convenience. But then you also want the liquor license because that’s going to make money. That just doesn’t make me want to jump up and down and say yeah, put the pumps in, I’m sorry. I would give you some pumps with a different plan. I won’t approve this one, I might approve a different one. That’s my vote. The floor is open for a motion. Upon Motion by McIntyre, supported by Pastor, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-07-26 (Tabled on July 23, 2013): An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Masoud Shango, 13820 Merriman, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to construct a fuel pump canopy and fueling stations; such use now creates the need for a variance due to the existing deficient building setbacks of the commercial building. Schoolcraft Right-of-Way Setback Merriman Right-Of-Way Setback Required: 75 ft. Required: 75 ft. Proposed: 57 ft. 9 inches Existing: 52 ft. Deficient: 17 ft. 3 inches Deficient: 23 ft. The property is located on the east side of Merriman, (13820) between Schoolcraft and Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 30.03(b), 2; 30.03(b), 2; 30.03(b),2 “Permitted Uses”, be denied because the Petitioner has not demonstrated to the Board that a practical difficulty exists, because the alleged practical difficulty does not entail more than mere inconvenience or the inability to earn a higherfinancial return. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 35 of 76 November 12, 2013 ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: McIntyre, Pastor, Sills, Duggan, Caramagno Nays: Henzi Absent: None Recused: McCue Henzi: The variance is denied. Petitioner: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 36 of 76 November 12, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-11-56: David Terski, 14315 Richfield, seeking to erect a six foot tall privacy fence within the side yard which is not allowed. Privacy fences cannot extend beyond the rear line of the home towards the street. Henzi: Mr. Kearfott, anything to add to this case? Kearfott: Not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Kearfott? Hearing none, good evening. Petitioner: Good evening, thank you. David Terski, 14315 Richfield. Henzi: Can you tell us about the fence you want to erect? Petitioner: Yes, sir. It basically boils down to safety. The way the front of our property comes down, we have an existing fence and we are very fortunate to have a large inground pool in the backyard. We are concerned for a lot of reasons. One, the fence has over the years shrunk a little bit, so it’s not four foot in every area so we’re trying to take care of it right now. We are working on looking at all different options. We also, we don’t have any issue with it, but we do have a group home a few houses down from us. With having a pool and a diving board and the nine foot deep end, I’m always concerned for safety. A few years back my wife was part of a search and unfortunately a rescue in Livonia where a young man, a little boy, had tragically passed inside of a pool. We have a six-year old, there are a lot of kids in the area, I am looking to secure the backyard as much as we possibly can. Our neighbor to the north side of us has an existing privacy fence, our home is set back a little bit, we’re not asking to pull all the way to the front of the property, just to match the existing fence line, where our side door is for one, but two, so we can make uniformity of the fence line. On the south side of the house what we’re looking to do is secure the pool heater which get exceptionally warm when we’re running it. I don’t want anybody to get burned. We just want to enclose that area. Our property is unique. We have kind of an angled lot, it has a lot of woods on it. We enjoy the woods. I know our neighbors enjoy the woods. We are not trying to put up a fortress by any stretch of the imagination. This is all about safety and making sure we can secure the property so that the people can enjoy it. We don’t get the kids running through. We have found broken glass in the back of our lot, we have found some debris that we cannot figure out how it got back there. Even currently with the safety cover we’ve put on the pool, it can only tolerate a certain weight. One of our dogs can run across and I can see it flex. I’m afraid if somebody tries to test it to see if they can be funny, that they could fall through and with the deep end of 9-foot, it could be challenging. What we’re looking to do is just secure the City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 37 of 76 November 12, 2013 property and makes sure that it looks nice and then make sure it fits within the City’s beautification. Henzi: There is a picture of wooden fence in the packet? Petitioner: Yes, sir. Henzi: Is that the one that you want to construct? Petitioner: Yes, sir. Henzi: And then will you stain it? Petitioner: Yes, sir. We’re going to stain it. We’re actually, for the front of the property, we’re going to have UpRight Fence come out and put it in, I want to make sure it’s done appropriately. From what I understand, that’s why I want a company come do it, I need self-closing gates, for the pool I want to make sure it’s done appropriately. We would put it up this winter to let it season, for lack of a better term, or let it sit for about six months, not even quite that far. In the spring we’re going to stain it a more natural color. When we spoke with our neighbors, everyone talked about the fact that they really like the trees, they like the wooded area. We’re not looking to put up a white vinyl fence, we want to put a wood fence in so we can stain it a more natural color so that everyone can enjoy the woods. Henzi: It’s kind of what your neighbor has next door? Petitioner: Yes, sir. And actually what I propose to do is stain hers the same color, we’ve already offered it up just so that we can keep the same color to make it look nice throughout the property. Henzi: Thank you. Any questions for the Petitioner? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 38 of 76 November 12, 2013 Pastor: Are you doing the whole property or just the front of the house and a couple feet back? Petitioner: No, we are just doing the sides of the property which we already have the permits to do because we have our neighbor that has signed off, we are not doing the back and there’s a section of about 120 feet on the right side that we aren’t touching, that was redeveloped a few years back, and there’s an existing 5-foot fence that I feel is more than adequate, it sits up pretty high, so we’re not touching that area as well. This is really just the front of the property and the side we already have a permit for, both Randy and John secured the permits for the side. Pastor: Okay. So that’s why we have the two different drawings? Petitioner: Yes, sir. Pastor: So from the new drawing you’re moving that twenty feet forward? Petitioner: Yes, sir, to match the existing fence line that’s there right now. Pastor: To your neighbor to the north? Petitioner: Yes, sir. Pastor: And then how far back are you putting this fence? Are you going back to the back corner? Petitioner: On the south side of the property we’re going to the back corner, on the right side or the north side, we are only going back about two/thirds of the way, there’s the existing 5-foot that we’re not going to replace. Pastor: Two/thirds of the way? Petitioner: On the, it would be the north side of the property. If you look at it, it goes out and then there’s about 120 feet, 125, we’re not touching that section. It’s referring to the side of the property. If you’re looking to the front of the property, then this would match the existing fence line. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 39 of 76 November 12, 2013 Pastor: So you’re going to go two/thirds of the way back to the back of your property with this fence, is that what you’re saying? I’m not following. Petitioner: No, sir, sorry, I apologize. What we have done so far within the --- well, we have the permit, right, on the north side we went about two/thirds. On the left side or south side, we did the existing fence line, where we’re asking for the variance is simply to pull the fence forward about 10 feet on the south side and about 12 feet on the north side. Just so that it doesn’t touch the back of the house, we wanted to have it so it protects the equipment, we can secure the property and we can make sure the safety of the neighborhood is intact. Henzi: On the north side you’re bringing it up to the back of the garage, right? Petitioner: Not even back that far --- well, yes, the back of the garage, yes, sir. Henzi: And then what’s on the south side? I mean you talked about the pool equipment, I know. Petitioner: It’s the existing fence line with my neighbor. Henzi: There are bedroom windows, is that the family room? Petitioner: There’s my son’s bedroom, there’s a bathroom window, and then there’s our bedroom that has a window on that side, so three windows to that property and then two windows going to the basement. Henzi: Okay. Any other questions? Hearing none, anyone in the audience want to speak for or against this project? If so, come on up. Seeing no one coming forward, are there letters? Caramagno: Yes. We’ve got Thomas Tomkiewicz, at 14461 Stonehouse, an approval, (letter read). Sharon at 14325 Richfield send an approval (letter read). Amanda and Nicholas at 14368 Stonehouse, objection, (letter read). Virginia at 14340 Stonehouse writes an objection as well (letter read). Carol Slater, 14400 Stonehouse, writes an objection (letter read). Anthony Marschall at 14330 Richfield writes an objection (letter read). City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 40 of 76 November 12, 2013 Henzi: Mr. Terski --- I’m sorry, go ahead. Carmen Malcolm: I actually live behind Mr. Terski at 14412 Stonehouse. My name is Carmen Malcolm. And my objection is not as much as with --- the concern is more with what he has already put up. He has already built fence behind the property that backs up to my house. And basically there are large chicken wire fences and they are not even on the property line, they’re within 3-feet of another fence. So I suppose my concern is with the things he’s already building, they don’t seem to meet any of the Codes, they’re eyesores and I really don’t understand what the need is to continue adding more and more fencing to what has already been put up. And I do have pictures of what he put up if you’d like to see them. Henzi: Sure. Scott, if two fences are three feet apart, is that double fence? You’re not sure? Kearfott: I’m going to ask Mr. Fisher that. Aaron Malcolm: We’re just concerned that the existing privacy fence put up is also right Next to a chain link fence, there’s no gap between them, so he’s already done stuff That’s not up to Code and I guess we’re just concerned with our neighborhood and Having stuff put up that’s not up to Code, we’d like to see it done correctly. Court Reporter: State your name. Aaron Malcolm: Aaron Malcolm, same property, 14412 Stonehouse. Henzi: Any questions for the speakers? Aaron Malcolm: The claim for the beer bottles and stuff in the backyard, we’ve lived there for four years, five years, our other neighbors have lived there for 30 years, 50 years, and there’s no shenanigans going on back there, there’s no kids playing back there. And that was the premise that was given to us when he first came and talked to us that he’s just concerned about keeping people out of his property and there’s nothing bad that’s going on back there. We just don’t want to see stuff that’s just ad hoc done and not up to Code, that’s it. Tara Overaitis Terski: Tara Overaitis Terski, 14315 Richfield. I think the misconception is a lot of the objections have been to the back of the house, but we’re not really talking about the back of the house, we’re talking about the front of the house, with the fencing in the front of the house. What my husband failed to say is that we have had debris thrown into our yard and one of our neighbors who is here who I’m not City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 41 of 76 November 12, 2013 going to point out because I don’t want to point fingers has told me specifically that they have thrown things in the back of our yard. So we could take that up with a police matter if we had to, but we want to be cordial with our neighbors and we’re trying to fit in with our neighbors. As far as like the trees in the backyard, those are our trees and so we have tried to be nice with our neighbors and let them have the beautification of the woods being in the backyard, that’s why we have not put up a privacy fence in the backyard. The fencing that they have brought up, those are trellises and we are growing stuff in the backyard as far as vines. When that particular parcel at one time, to the left of us would have been kennels, but our area was technically and also our neighbor pointed out to us was vineyards at one point. So that has the best soil in the back of the yard. So we’re not trying to do anything like out of the ordinary or off Code, we have permits for the side, we did everything up to Code, we talked to both of our neighbors on our south side of us and both of them have agreed, who it’s going to affect them the most besides us, but the front of the house, they’re in agreement with us putting up the privacy fence. We have had people jump in the backyard. We live there, we see in our backyard. They’re not in our backyard. They don’t see into our backyard. They can’t see with the woods the pool, so they can’t see if there’s people back there or not. They’re not out there 24/7. I’m a stay at home mom, I’m out there. I see what goes on in the backyard. We do have an inground pool which we have taken the safety precautions of putting in a pool alarm because we do worry about the neighborhood kids and we do --- we haven’t had any problems with the group home, but we do worry about that. As my husband mentioned, I was on the search, I helped with the search for the little boy that drowned a few years ago on Bell Creek and he was found in a neighborhood pool. We’re just trying to do everything to try to keep it safe for the neighborhood. That street is a dark street, a dirt road, and it’s a very dark street. My husband travels a lot and I’m there by myself with my six-year old. I want to feel safe in the neighborhood. You know and the way our house sits back, we have a side door. And I can’t see, if we don’t have a privacy fence, I can’t see if someone is going to try to get into that door. This way I feel they’re going to have to jump a 6-foot fence to come in the side door and you know grab my son or someone try to get in that way. It’s just an added security and that’s all we’re trying to do, just get an added security in the front of the house. As far as the right side, we have the pool equipment, that is hot. I mean the heater, anybody that has a pool, those heaters are very hot. We’re just trying to keep it so it is contained so people don’t go back there and touch it and burn their hand. All this is is a huge safety issue that we are very, very concerned about. Also, we are on Richfield, it’s a one street shot down to 96. So if my son is in the backyard or my niece or nephew are over that are 2, if someone goes back there and grabs them, they’re down 96 and I can’t get them. I mean you’re hearing it more and more. Maybe not in the city of Livonia, but you can’t say where it’s going to be and where It’s not going to be. My safety of my family and the neighborhood, and both of my neighbors are in agreement with putting the privacy fence in the front, it does nothing to affect the people who are behind us. As far as those objection letters, that had nothing to do with that. We’re talking about The front of the house, we weren’t even talking about the back of the house. And the side of the house we’ve already got permits for so that’s all I have to say but thank you very much. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 42 of 76 November 12, 2013 Henzi: Thank you. Mr. Terski, anything you want to say in closing? Petitioner: No, sir. I don’t think I could do any better than my wife just did. I should have brought her up first. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Mr. Terski, will you explain this what looks like a 6-foot tall fence in the backyard. How long has it been up? Because it doesn’t look like it’s very old. Petitioner: No, it’s not. It’s only been up maybe a week and a half. Pastor: Did you obtain a permit for that? Petitioner: No, sir, because we’re going to be growing on it. The way we are zoned, we’re going to be growing on those vines. Pastor: It is a fence and it needs a permit. Petitioner: (David) Well, at that point we can pull a permit for the back side, it’s mainly used to grow vines, it really is. It’s not there to --- we could have gone and set up for a privacy fence and asked for a variance for that, what we wanted to do instead of when we talked to our neighbors what we said are you opposed to it and they said well, we really like the woods. So I said okay, how can we find a way to grow what we want to grow in vegetables, how can we find a way to keep the neighbors and what it’s come down to is that the best solution was to try and put up --- I can go get trellises and put them in there instead of putting up wiring, if you will. If that’s what we need to do, then that’s what we’ll go and do. Petitioner: (Tara) It’s not a matter of that we were trying to go behind and do something sneaky, it’s a matter that we just wanted to – we didn’t put it right on the fence because you can’t have double fences, and we put it so many feet away, you can have it with the vines growing up. Petitioner: (David) And also because we have to have John or Randy come back out to inspect the privacy fence, if I was trying to hide it I wouldn’t have built it before they came out. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 43 of 76 November 12, 2013 Petitioner: (Tara) We’re pretty much an open book. Petitioner: (David) Thank you very much. Henzi: Thank you. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mrs. McIntyre. McIntyre: Just to clarify, how do we determine if something is a fence or a trellise, I mean it certainly looks like a fence to me so I guess I don’t know in our city what the definition of a fence is. Fisher: Are you ready? A fence is a hedge structure or partition erected to enclose or partition all or part of a block, including chain link fences, decorative or ornamental fences, privacy fences, privacy screens, split rail or ranch type fences and other means of partitioning an area. Petitioner: (David) If I may, the back fence is not the variance we’re here for, that’s maybe a separate area. This was simply a variance about the front of the property. McIntyre: I understand what the hearing is for. Petitioner: (David) Oh, I’m sorry, I apologize. I just wanted to make sure we were --- I apologize. Petitioner: (Tara) I know we have objection letters that’s why we wanted to make sure. McIntyre: No, I understand what we’re here for. Thank you. So, it sounds to me like it meets the definition of a fence and here’s the inconsistency. I understand what we’re here to talk about tonight but one of the things that we look at when people come before us for a variance is what other things are going on on the property. So you made the statement and maybe I misheard something, it seemed a little contradictory, but you had said that you were trying to prevent things from being thrown into your backyard, so it sounds to me like you put up the chicken wire to prevent things from being thrown into your backyard but you’re using them as trellises. So is it a fence or a trellise to prevent things coming in your backyard? Petitioner: (David) We could, if we wanted to, use it as a barrier for blocking and put City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 44 of 76 November 12, 2013 a fence a few feet back, there’s no way for me to stop a neighbor from dumping in our backyard. We built it off the fence line, there’s actually a gap between the existing fence which is there, that’s why it’s not going to stop dumping, where it’s at wouldn’t stop anybody from dumping anything back there. Petitioner: (Tara) They’ve been dumping for years back there. McIntyre: My other problem is I think your request for the privacy fence is really reasonable but I’m not comfortable voting to support that when there is a possibility that we have what’s considered that’s in violation of our Code and I mean Mr. Fisher read the definition which is very clear, but it’s still, I think it doesn’t specifically address unless I’m not seeing something. Fisher: Well, there’s another provision of the Fence Ordinance that distinguishes and may help you with this. Privacy screens are permitted in the rear yard only, shall not be located nearer than 10 feet to the rear property line, shall not extend beyond a side building line of the residence and there is some other criteria but the idea is that things that are permitted to do, are a minimum of 10 feet away from the back and also along the walls of your house parallel to the walls of your house. McIntyre: So, if this was ten feet in, I mean to me it sounds like a privacy screen. Fisher: It’s closer to a privacy screen. McIntyre: Okay. We have a problem where I think it meets and again, I’m not an attorney but it sounds to me like it meets the definition of a privacy screen and it’s a problem because it is a violation if it’s three or four feet from the back property line. So I would be comfortable voting for this variance with the condition that that privacy screen be moved to be in conformance. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Yes, I think the need for the privacy fence, you made your case there and I agree with that. I didn’t understand why you didn’t want to go totally around the property until you told me or us that there is an existing 5-foot fence and it would provide security for you. I don’t know if I ever would have heard about the chicken wire fence if the neighbors hadn’t brought pictures in here and that was conveniently left out and I don’t like it, I wouldn’t want to see it, it looks like you’re caging animals, so I think that needs to change in order to get this fence variance. I think when it changes a permit should be applied for City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 45 of 76 November 12, 2013 that as well. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Yes, I agree with Sam. I don’t think we’ve heard everything about this screen or fence, whatever you want to refer to it as. I thought this was a slam dunk, I thought we were done with this case ten minutes ago, but I can’t consciously approve the privacy with other violations on the property. Now I’m thinking there’s a couple other pictures there that perhaps there are other violations that we haven’t seen. I did get out of my truck and walk this property when I went by this afternoon, so that’s bad on me, so I’m a little hesitant to approve this without knowing what the other problems are. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I agree with the privacy fence on the side, I have no problem with that, I think It’s an entirely legitimate request, I do think you’ve got to do something, this is my opinion, take down that big fence in the back and figure out or come to some sort of agreement with your neighbors, so if we can come to an agreement with the Board on that, I’d be in favor of the privacy fence on the sides. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I agree and I’m kind of repeating what everybody else says. I totally understand the privacy on the side, that’s well justified, you know I can see how that fence went up back there but I will also that that I can understand why your neighbors don’t want to see it and there is the issue of the double fencing, so I think we have to get that rectified. So I will agree with what everybody else has said that privacy fence is fine, but I’m concerned about the fencing in the back. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: I concur with Mrs. McIntyre’s comment as far as the privacy fence that is brought before us here, but the fence in the rear has to be brought to satisfy Code. Petitioner: (David) Absolutely. Henzi: I think that there is a hardship, this is a unique shaped lot, and I think that there’s good reason to bring it closer to the road, Richfield, than the rear of the house because it’s going to align with existing fencing and also for safety reasons. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 46 of 76 November 12, 2013 Chief of which is the fact that the lots on the other sides are not the same size, you back up to a court, you touch a lot of different houses as neighbors and there’s good reason, however I’m going to have to go along with the other board members because by my count you might be coming back to us for two more variances because you’ve got fence on fence, you’ve got a rear yard fence that’s --- I can’t tell, it could be 8-feet tall, I can’t tell, and you might have different types of fence aligning, so to save you the trouble I think what I’d recommend is that we table it so you can come back and so that you can work with the Inspection Department and that somebody can go out there and tell you exactly what’s allowed or what’s not allowed so that when you come back you can tell us exactly here’s what we did, there’s no other deficiencies, all we need is to bring that small section of the side yard fence closer than the back of the house if that makes sense. So that’s my recommendation but the floor is open for a motion. Upon motion by Pastor, supported by Sills, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-11-56: David Terski, 14315 Richfield, seeking to erect a 6-foot tall privacy fence within the side yard which is not allowed. Privacy fences cannot extend beyond the rear line of the home towards the street. The property is located on the west side of Richfield, (14315), between Newburgh and Perth, Lot No. 076-01-0049-000, RUF Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Fence Ordinance, Section 15.44.090B “Residential District Regulations,” be tabled so the Petitioner can work with the Inspection Department and clear up any issues that may exist on the property. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: Pastor, Sills, McCue, McIntyre, Duggan, Caramagno, Henzi Nays: Absent: None. Henzi: This is tabled, but listen to these dates, this is important. Petitioner: (Tara) If we take down that and because the weather is getting bad, and we need to put cement in so with the frost coming on, there’s limited time the company has to do it. If we take down the back fence, that washes the issue. Henzi: I don’t know. Petitioner: (Tara) The other we have permits for and they were already permitted. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 47 of 76 November 12, 2013 Henzi: I don’t know what to say to that. You made an application. Between the time you made the application and today you made changes, the neighbors show up and say hey, we don’t like it, what else are we supposed to do? Petitioner: (Tara) We’re talking about the front of the property, we’re not talking about the back. Henzi: I understand that. Petitioner: (Tara) So my question to you is that if this was your family and you’re trying to have safety for your family, would you want it to be tabled for a few more months? Or with the weather being changed, it’s on your hands then because I worry about safety. Henzi: So do we but we answer to everybody in the City of Livonia including your neighbors, not just you. Petitioner: (Tara) I’m just saying that both of our neighbors on the side who it affects the most are in support with us. Henzi: If you want to get on for the December 10th, you have to ask to be rescheduled by November 15th, you don’t have to change your plan, you can change it drastically, that’s up to you, but that’s an important date, you need to call Bonnie and make sure you get the 10th, otherwise you’ll wait, it will be January. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 48 of 76 November 12, 2013 APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-11-57: McKesson Corp., 38220 Plymouth, seeking to erect an 8-foot tall iron picket fence within the front yard which is not allowed. No fence of any height is allowed within the front yard on industrial zoned property. Petitioner: Good evening. Henzi: Good evening. Petitioner: I’m Chris Van Norman, 38220 Plymouth Road in Livonia. I’m the Distribution Center Manager for the McKesson warehouse that’s located here in Livonia. I just wanted to give you a little bit about McKesson so everyone can understand what we do and what we do in Livonia. We employ about 500 people in Livonia. Henzi: Can I stop you for one second? Petitioner: Sure. Henzi: I’m sorry to interrupt. Petitioner: Okay, I guess I’ll start from the top. I’m Chris Van Norman, I‘m the Distribution Center Manager for McKesson. And I thank you for hearing this appeal here today because it’s very important for me and the workers we have at McKesson. I’ll explain a little bit about what McKesson does and what we do in Livonia. We’re primarily a pharmaceutical distributor, and we employ about 500 people in the city at three different locations. We have locations on Schoolcraft that strictly do IT work, things more office type jobs. But the Plymouth Road location is a pharmaceutical distributor that employs about 100 people. The 100 people that work there, we’re open just about 24/7 so we have people coming and going in terms of employees throughout the day, throughout the night. Our night shift gets off at 4:00 in the morning, so to get a perspective 100 people are coming at all hours of the day. What makes us unique and where we really like this fence, I wanted to --- I guess I first wanted to address that we are looking to put up an 8-foot tall ornamental fence and it’s around the employee parking lot, it’s not around the whole property of anything with the grass, it’s around the employee parking lot so the employees can swipe their card access and get within a security fence before they enter into the building. Why we are unique and why this is important is we sell Oxycontin and Vicodin and Viagra and a lot of things that people don’t rob banks anymore, they rob banks to try and get what we have. So there is somewhat of an epidemic and Detroit is an area that has an issue with this more than other areas. In the past three years we’ve had eleven delivery vehicles robbed at gunpoint. Drivers City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 49 of 76 November 12, 2013 have been hijacked, vans have been set on fire, shots have been fired, people have been kidnapped, I think I mentioned that already. But we’ve had eleven instances of drivers who had guns to their heads and taken and in some cases they take the van and in some cases they take the driver and the van and set the van on fire and take everything they have within the van. And that’s been eleven cases in three years. Just this calendar year alone, we’ve had four armed robbery cases within Dearborn, Dearborn Heights and a few in Detroit. We’ve been lucky enough, we’ve gone a few months without one but there’s still bad people out there. We’ve arrested a few but we know there are a lot of people involved in these that have not been arrested. So the delivery vehicle part, you know that’s out there and that has happened and we have had four this year, however through talking to some of the people that have been arrested for these crimes and so many people involved, we understand that they have at times, plenty of times are surveilling our distribution center and drove around our parking lot and watched our employees and hung out across the street and saw everybody coming and going. And the big fear that I have as the leader of that building and our company has, is that at some point they get bolder and bolder and they no longer will go after the delivery vehicles in Detroit, that they’ll come home to the mother ship and say hey, let’s try to get 500 cases of Oxycontin instead of the fifty pills we got last time. So that’s why I always sleep at night, knowing fifty people who are mothers and fathers and brothers and sisters who are going to their car at 3:00, 4:00 in the morning when their shift ends to essentially just go home and finish an honest day’s work. Really what we’re looking for is an ornamental fence. We’re a big company, we’re doing this the right way. We’re not putting up a chain link fence in the front or anything like that, it’s just going on the parking lot and it’s really to protect our employees as they come and go. We just don’t want something to happen, we want that extra layer of protection. There’s thirty distribution centers across the whole network at McKesson. This is the only one that doesn’t have a fence around it. And you can the argument it’s one of the most dangerous parts of the country. The reason it doesn’t have a fence is that the previous owner, there were stipulations within the lease that they essentially had some things in there that you couldn’t put up a fence, our new owner is here to represent us and support us, support of the fence and they are fully on board with us doing this from a safety standpoint, from a security standpoint, etc. I also have, if it would help to plead the case, Detective Peterson who is a Detroit area Law enforcement person that works closely with us to help us identify the people who do these crimes and help work with all law enforcement and organize the effort to arrest people and get people off the street who are doing this to our drivers, our product, our people. So I guess the only other thing I didn’t cover looking at my list here, I mentioned we’re spending a lot of money on the fence, we’re spending $200,000 on the fence and I heard the argument on the case earlier about financial hardship. We’re not putting this up to make money, there’s nothing for us, you know, if there was no problems in the world we wouldn’t have a fence, it’s a pain in the butt for us because we’re going City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 50 of 76 November 12, 2013 to have people swiping in and people telling me that I was two minutes late because the fence was there. It really has to do with safety and security and no other reason and you know it would help us all to sleep better at night knowing that we’re in a pretty safe place. So I don’t know if it would help to have Bill say a couple of words about what we’re doing. Henzi: Mrs. McIntyre. McIntyre: Before that, I have a few questions. What kind of on site security do you have in place currently? Petitioner: Right now we pay for security over the weekends because there’s nobody there and we do have a card swipe access to get in. We want the gate so we’d have another layer of the card swipe access and then a lot of security policies. We only employ a full-time security guard when things happen or there’s reasons. Like we had a gentleman about a year ago at 3:00 in the morning show up at the back door and say he wanted some money for gas. So he kind of came to the point where he was scoping out the place and things like that so we hired a security guard for the month after that. So we don’t have somebody permanently placed outside, we hope this layer and the fence help us but there are certain situations where we do hire full-time security guards to help out. McIntyre: Okay, thank you. Peterson: Good evening. I’m Bill Peterson, 38220 Plymouth, Livonia. I am a Consultant employed by McKesson for security and risk management purposes. As Mr. Van Norman said, McKesson has been the victim of eleven armed robberies in the past three years, two of which involved kidnappings and hijacking the vehicles. One did not involve a hijacking, I think simply the car was stolen. In two cases, the vehicles were torched after the product was taken and in one case there were shots fired, thank God nobody has been injured so far. If these continue of course I’m firmly convinced somebody will be injured. More to the point regarding this fence, there has been surveillance of the Distribution Center. I know this because I’ve interviewed Defendants in prison. McIntyre: You don’t mean security surveillance by that? Peterson: No, bad guy surveillance. I’ve interviewed them in prison and they’ve admitted to me that they did in fact do surveillance, there are people still out there who have been doing these robberies. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 51 of 76 November 12, 2013 Regarding the facility itself, this is the stuff that nightmares are made from. In the Past few years there have been a number of instances where warehouses or Distribution centers have been I tend to call it an assault on these centers. In New Jersey, an E.I. Lilley facility was assaulted where the criminals came through The roof and then used the equipment inside the facility to load up the trucks and Stold goods and made off with about 75 to 80 million dollars worth of product. There was another incident in Chesterfield, Virgina at the Laxo Smith Klein facility, Where they also came in through the roof and at that time they made off with about 6 million dollars worth of product. Mr. Van Norman mentioned the Oxycontin, Vicodin, Fentanyl, you may remember a few years ago where there were a number of drug Addicts who died rather suddenly of heroin mixed with Fentanyl and that’s pretty Quickly fatal. A considerable concern is the black market in pharmaceuticals. The Oxycontins, The Vicodins, that sort of thing gets moved quickly, street sales. The other products, The insulin, the anti-seizure medication, the heart medication, those are stolen as Well and they go back into the system as well through a black market and get Reintroduced into the distribution market improperly of course. Those products are Certainly potentially some definitely dangerous when they’re brought in that way. Some require to be stored in specific temperature controlled conditions. Others Have very limited shelf life. And some of those products, if your grandmother’s Heart medication is stored in the trunk of somebody’s Buick, you don’t want that. And we have great concerns that some of these products are being reintroduced into the system. This is not to scare you, simply to state the facts. This is a problem. This fence would finish enclosing the facility, would not make it pregnable. It’s not Going to be a Fort Knox but it would make it a harder target. We simply want to Harden the target here, make it more difficult for somebody to conduct worthwhile Surveillance on the building, on the comings and goings, limit access, make it a Little more difficult and not have those things occur here. One robbery did occur in Livonia, right down here on Schoolcraft and Stark Road, and that involved a Kidnapping and it was an ugly situation. We appreciate your consideration. Thank you for your time. We would like to make it as difficult as we reasonably can for the bad guys to do their business. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. Was there any questions? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I drove through your property this afternoon, you have a brand new 6-foot City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 52 of 76 November 12, 2013 chain link all the way around the back of the property? Petitioner: Correct. Pastor: So what are you putting on the front of the property? I think the back of the property is probably more vulnerable than the front of the property. Petitioner: Well, the reason we did the chain link and maybe the gentleman from the fence company can talk more about the six versus the eight, but the chain link, we do have a permit for the back and we’re just doing the --- the chain link is pretty much what you saw, not visible from the road and we get that. And so we went with the 6-feet behind, I’m not sure if the fence that we have comes in those different varieties, maybe Lee can speak on why they recommended the eight versus the six. Pastor: Or that fence. Petitioner: I know, why not 100? Pastor: Exactly. Petitioner: Lee, can you talk a little bit more about the 8 feet. Louette: Yes, it’s 7-foot high with barbed wire so it’s 8-foot high overall. My name is Lee Louette with Great Lakes Fence Company. Maximum height allowed by City Code Was 8-foot high and they opted for the barbed wire so we did 8-foot overall, 7-foot plus The three strand barb wire in the back. There is ornamental fence in the front between Two buildings from the McKesson Building over to Helm, it’s not encroaching on the Setback so that wasn’t included in the Zoning Board. Pastor: What was there before you put the new fence up? Louette: It was completely open all the way around. There was an existing chain link fence surrounding the Fex Ex property on a portion of the back. There’s sort of a green area behind the Helm Building mostly, that’s part of the property but not being fenced in. Pastor: That fence, I didn’t get out of my vehicle and measure it but it looked more Like 6-foot with the barb on top. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 53 of 76 November 12, 2013 Louette: The existing fence in the back was 6-foot high and there’s a foot of barbed wire. Pastor: So it’s 7-foot, not 8-foot. Louette: Right. And the new fence extending out from the Fed Ex fence is 7-foot high plus a foot of barbed wire. Pastor: So once again why are you only doing 7-foot in the backyard and 8-foot In the front yard, where your backyard is 7-foot and 8-foot in the front yard? Louette: Well, it’s 8-foot high overall on the back. The City Code allows for --- Pastor: You just said 6-foot. Louette: Well, the existing fence was 6-foot. Petitioner: I think we’re getting confused. The Fed Ex fence that’s in the rear of The property, that’s 6-foot and we added the 1-foot and Fed Ex approved us to put The barbed wire on there. So we didn’t want to tear the whole fence down and put It back up. The fence that you saw was maybe to run along the wooded grassy area, That’s the 7-foot plus the one. So it is higher on the new fence we built but 7-foot Where the existing fence was structured. Pastor: So why is it necessary to go 8-foot? I don’t think, and I may be wrong, I looked At Ford, they don’t have any 8-foot fences. Pastor: So why is it necessary to go 8-foot? I don’t think, and I may be wrong, I looked at Ford, they don’t have any 8-foot fencing in front of their property. I looked at a lot of commercial properties today and no one has --- I didn’t notice any that had 8-foot fencing even though it’s ornamental, it’s still 8-foot tall. Why you want 8-foot, why can’t you just go with a 6-foot ornamental fence, they’re still not going to jump it, I don’t know too many people who can jump six feet. Petitioner: It just comes down to a protection thing and you know if it’s between a 6-foot fence or no fence, obviously I’d prefer the 6-foot fence but the way we specked it out and the way we thought we’d be protected the most was with the maximum that’s allowed. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 54 of 76 November 12, 2013 Louette: If I can add something to that, the new fence that has been approved on The permit between the McKesson Building and Helm is 8-foot high overall, it has a curved top on it and just from a safety issue they don’t make anything lower than 7-foot so that somebody just walking by doesn’t happen into the curbed pieces that extend out. So with it being 8-foot high it’s safer for anybody that’s walking next to it but it makes it harder to climb with it being curved out at the top. And the fence that is before the Board now, the parking lot fence in the front of the building would match the same type of fence that’s going between the McKesson Building and the Helm Building. Pastor: Is there a fence there because I didn’t see any wrought iron fence there anywhere. Petitioner: It’s not up yet, we’re in the process of it. Pastor: Okay. Peterson: If I may add something, two of the individuals that are in prison actually now told me that they actually entered the employee lot, the one that is to be fenced, we’re hoping to be fenced, to surveil the building and the operations there. Pastor: Because I was in the back lot, I was in the back lot today surveilling your property. Petitioner: In another couple weeks when we get that truck fence up you won’t be able to do that anymore. So that --- we started with the truck fence and the variance right here is just for the front employee fence because it goes out to the front. Pastor: Thank you. Peterson: You’re welcome. Henzi: Any other questions? Sills: How well is your lot illuminated? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 55 of 76 November 12, 2013 Petitioner: Very well. We have lights on the actual buildings, on the building itself, and also lights around the parking lot. One of the safety checks we have every month is to go around and make sure all the lights are effective and we have the right luminescence there. Sills: Would increasing security help you at all? Petitioner: In terms of my hiring full-time security guard? Sills: Sure. Petitioner: Yes, it would, but a, it’s expensive, and b, in some cases it’s been proven to be ineffective. We wouldn’t have an armed security guard, you know, we don’t want a shoot out, so it’s really just a guy who sits in a car and is just going to call the police like anybody else. Sills: It appears to me that if the people that come into your building come through the roof, I don’t see where an 8-foot fence would stop them any more than a 6-foot fence would stop them. Petitioner: Well, I don’t really see how that would make a difference as well. If they’re going to --- the reason that we have the security guard on the weekends is because it’s during our closed periods and that’s where we are vulnerable with somebody who can get on to the roof and go down, so the security guard would see that during our closed periods. When we have sixty people working in our building, I think someone coming in through the roof would be a little noticeable but during the closed periods it’s effective to have that security guard out there. If people came through the roof, they’re not coming just for two cases, there has to be a forklift involved, there’s a truck involved, there’s other things that the fence helps with so they can’t drive their truck right up to a dock door and bulldoze through the dock door and then just take pallets out, they’d have to drive through an iron fence and then back up the truck and do things from there. So it helps with that extra layer, if somebody did kidnap the security guard and get through the roof then that fence adds more protection because you can’t just drive a truck through a dock door and back up. Sills: It seems to me like you’re going to spend an awful lot of money putting this fence up. Petitioner: We are. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 56 of 76 November 12, 2013 Sills: It seems sensible to me to put a little more security guards in position because aren’t afraid of going over a fence but they still hesitate if they see a human being there. So that is kind of my question, you’re going to spend an awful lot of money on a fence that may not do you any good. Petitoner: Well, we may end up doing both. You know, it’s not out of the question that if these robberies continue to happen in the near time that we wouldn’t have a full-time security guard. So, I agree with your point wholeheartedly that the more security, the better. Sills: And lighting is very important. Petitioner: Absolutely. Peterson: The additional security guards, unless they’re armed and ready to go to war, are not going to be particularly effective against the people who have been robbing the business. They have been well organized and armed and if they’re willing to stick up delivery drivers, kidnap them, and fire shots, they’re probably not going to be very much affected by an unarmed security guard. Sills: Is the fence going to prevent the hijacking of the trucks? Peterson: Not out in the city, it’s not. Sills: No. Peterson: No, it’s not. I simply brought those up to make a point that this is a real ongoing situation that I don’t expect to --- I don’t expect it to get better because people see the light and decide that that’s wrong, I shouldn’t do that, that’s not going to happen. Medical care costs are going up, pharmaceuticals are not cheap, and there’s a ready black market for them. I think we’re simply trying to make it a little more difficult for them to apply their trade at the distribution center. Now, we’ve done other things, many other things regarding the hijackings and continue to do more things regarding the hijackings. This is intended to address the potential at the distribution center itself and hopefully help with a little bit of the hijacking business as well. Sills: Have you looked into the possibility of guard dogs? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 57 of 76 November 12, 2013 Petitioner: No, we haven’t looked at that. Sills: You know people think twice when they see a big dog bearing its teeth, you know. Petitioner: No, I don’t know how many dogs we want roaming our parking lot. Peterson: It has to be fenced to have a reasonable expectation, and the dogs being effective. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: How many employees is there in this building you’re in on a daily basis? Petitioner: We have 100 that work there. Pastor: On a daily basis or is that all shifts put together? Petitioner: That’s all shifts put together. Pastor: On the first shift how many people do you have working? Petitioner: Well, during the daytime there’s 45, nighttime there’s 50 to 57. Pastor: So, I’m going to say there’s not 35 to 50 parking spots out there, where are people parking? Petitioner: We counted them, there’s fifty spots. And not everybody shows up you know each day, that’s what we’re staffed with, but over the course of time with running a 24/7 shift, I mentioned two shifts, but there’s different times when people are coming and going. It’s not like everyone is 7:00 to 3:00, it is spread out over 24 hours. So, we actually tested a little while back to say all right, everybody park in front today and make sure we all fit and we do with about ten spots to spare on most days. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 58 of 76 November 12, 2013 Pastor: You said you have people with overlapping shifts, where are the rest of them going to park? Petitioner: I’m sorry. Pastor: You say there are people with overlapping shifts, so you have more than the 50 people with overlapping shifts. Petitioner: No, fifty is the max at any time that anybody would be in the building. Pastor: Why can’t you just park in the back that’s already existing? Petitioner: We don’t have parking in back that’s already covered by fencing. Pastor: Right there, according to your plan. Is this fence back there? I know I saw a fence back in here. Petitioner: Right. This is the truck lot. And the entrances into the warehouse are only here and the one we use right now is right here on the side so people have to park in the back and walk all the way to the front to get in. These look like they’re parking spots but really there’s no parking spot lines drawn or anything like that. Pastor: You’re going to line your parking lot anyways, I mean just because there aren’t lines there today doesn’t mean there’s not going to be lines there tomorrow. Petitioner: The other thing --- Pastor: Are you parking out on the side of the building over here, too? Petitioner: Today we are, yes. Pastor: How are you going to protect people there? Petitioner: We wouldn’t allow them to park over there anymore. Everybody can park in the front lot and have to walk to the front entrance. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 59 of 76 November 12, 2013 Pastor: Thank you. Peterson: If I might add one thing, the area that’s between the buildings, between Helm and McKesson is all, you know, the trucking activity in both buildings, there’s a lot going on there, they have a lot of private small vehicles, you know amongst them, let alone foot traffic going back and forth. Henzi: Any other questions for the Petitioners? I’m sorry. Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Just a couple issues of clarification and quick answers, does the building have an alarm on it? Peterson: Of course, yes. Caramagno: There’s some talk about surveillance that McKesson was asked early on, I’m not talking about external surveillance of your building but what do you provide in the way of cameras of seeing what happens outside of your building? Petitioner: Yes. We have, well, recently because we added cameras, with the fence I think we have about fifteen different cameras on the outside of our building. We have about 130 cameras total, if you add all the cameras on the inside of our building. Caramagno: So you can see what’s happening outside? Petitioner: Yes. Caramagno: How long have you been in this building? Petitioner: About fifteen years. We moved from Highland Park back in ’98. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 60 of 76 November 12, 2013 Caramagno: Do you have a long term lease here? Petitioner: We just signed a lease and it’s good for three more years, yes, three more years. Caramagno: The reason I ask that is certainly when you want to put this ornamental fence up for protection, it’s primarily because the business that you have is a pharmaceutical business, so I’m concerned if you should leave this building in three years, I wouldn’t want to see the fence around it. Petitioner: I totally get where you’re coming from on that. Part of the reason why the landlord, Hackman Capital is here, is because they fully promote us doing this and one of the things that we’ve done is we, on the truck fence, they own our building and the building next door so they were good with us fencing in both the truck areas. Caramagno: When you say next door, are you talking about to the east? Petitioner: Yes, to the east. Caramagno: Is that the Helm Building? Petitioner: That’s correct. Caramagno: Okay. My other question would be, we don’t have any or do we any case for the Helm Building, although the fence is going to go up there, too? Petitioner: Well, the Helm Building’s employee parking lot won’t be fenced, it’s just the McKesson lot. The truck fence in between the two buildings. Caramagno: Will the ornamental fence go in between both your building and the Helm Building to the east? Petitioner: Yes. But we’ve already been approved for permits for that and it’s actually recessed back from the front of the building so it doesn’t hit the ordinance. Caramagno: That front yard doesn’t, Mike, does it make a difference? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 61 of 76 November 12, 2013 Fisher: Well, the front yard is the only area that’s prohibited. Caramagno: Okay. And the other thing is in the back where Craig drove around, I happened to drive around doing my surveillance, too, and gate is wide open, not locked, do you typically leave that gate open or is there any reason to lock it at this point because you’re not fenced in? Petitioner: Yes, it just got put up so they’re in the construction process. Like we haven’t even started the fence in front so that fence in the back, it just has two swing gates, we haven’t even locked it yet. It literally got up just late last week, so no point putting padlocks on that when they can just drive right into the front. But at the time that would happen, you know, we would have the pedestrian emergency exit gates there that were not there at the time, it will be fully fenced then. Caramagno: And you just brought something else up, emergency entrance, what happens if there’s an emergency, how do you get into this place? Petitioner: There’s a number of different options that we can explore. The other McKesson buildings, some places use lock boxes, some places have like a garage door opener that can open the gate that we can provide to law enforcement or the fire department. Caramagno: Do you plan to do that? Petitioner: Yes. We threw out a few different options and we’re still settling on what the best one is. Caramagno: I think that’s important, to be able to get in if there’s trouble. Petitioner: I agree. And we’re working with the Fire Marshal and everything, we’ve been working with them. Louette: Yes, I’m in touch with the Fire Marshal right now and whatever he wants for access, he’ll have. Caramagno: I don’t know who climbs the fence faster, the criminals or the law. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 62 of 76 November 12, 2013 Louette: Right. And there will be fire exit, like an emergency exit, pedestrian gate as well. Caramagno: Okay, thank you. Henzi: Mike, I have a question for you. Is there a prohibition for barbed wire on fences? Fisher: There is generally but in the case of industrial properties, industrial zoned properties that do not abut residential, barbed wire is permitted only if it’s straight strand and not coiled. Petitioner: And just to clarify, this front employee fence will not have any barbed wire, it’s ornamental just with the angle on top. The only barbed wire is in the back where you can’t see it. Henzi: Thank you. 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. Britigan: Yes, my name is Rob Britigan, and I’m with Hackman Capital and we own the building as well as mentioned earlier the building to the east, the 38150. My address is 5200 E. Cork Street in Kalamazoo, Michigan, that’s our office. And as mentioned earlier, I’m here to support this improvement for safety and security reasons and in doing so it will be an esthetically pleasing way to do it. It’s all about employee safety and we fully support it. We work with the McKesson folks, we just took ownership of the building in May so we obviously agree that it is a security problem in its current situation. We’re not going to let them get out of there, by the way, in three years, they’ll be around for a long time if we have anything to say about it. But again, we think this is a great solution and again it will be done in an esthetically pleasing way and I would just ask for your support tonight. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. Seeing no one else coming forward, can you read the letters. Caramagno: An objection, Amelia Marr, 250 Park Avenue, Suite 2030, VCS Properties, LLC, (letter read). Henzi: Mr. Van Norman, anything you’d like to say in closing? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 63 of 76 November 12, 2013 Petitioner: No. Just thank you for hearing our story and you know we want to do this the right way and we want to make it look nice, we have no vested interest in having a fence that doesn’t work or doesn’t look good so we’re going to do it right and it’s going to provide a lot of protection to our work force, especially those who come and go during the night hours where it’s a little scary going out to your car sometimes knowing everything that’s happened in the last three years and everything that probably will continue to happen knowing the problem that’s out there so thank you. Henzi: Thank you. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: I’m going to be in support, I think you make a good reason why you need the fence. Eight feet is a little high but I think that will deter people from trying to get over this fence. I do, as I said earlier, that it should only be allowed for this occupant of this building, if you should leave I think that should come down unless another tenant of the same capacity should move in there, but I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I’m having a hard time over the 8-foot height. I don’t know of any fence in Livonia that I can recall that we’ve ever approved at 8-foot, especially being in the front yard. I’d feel a lot better if it were six or even 7-foot, but I’m having a real hard time with this 8-foot height. We’ve had a lot of people ask for fences similar as this and we’ve always turned them down, so I’m not sure how I’m going to vote. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I will be in support. My one issue was going to be the barbed wire in the front but since you don’t have that, that was my objection, otherwise I think you have a need for it, you have a unique property and I will be in support. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I will also be in support. You have an obvious need for the fence and coming from banking, our goal in a lot of different issues is avoidance, not confrontation when we already have a problem. So I’m totally in agreement with what you say. And the fact that you’re willing to protect your employees, to me speaks volumes on what kind of company it is and you’re looking out for them so I will definitely support. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 64 of 76 November 12, 2013 Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: Well, I will approve it reluctantly. I don’t know if reluctantly is the proper term to use but we have turned down requests for 8-foot fences in the past. We’ve, to my recollection, we don’t ever go any higher than six feet. But because of the nature of your business, dealing with the narcotics and things like that, I can see a need for it so I will support it. Henzi: Mrs. McIntyre. McIntyre: Thank you for coming here tonight and being so well prepared and every questions we asked it was obvious there was nothing arbitrary about your request, you’ve been very attentive to all the city requirements, working with our Fire Marshal. You have a unique business, we really appreciate you choosing Livonia to have your business. I think given the configuration of your building, everything else, that this makes sense. The only condition that I would have is if you vacate it, and I hope you never do, I hope you stay in Livonia, but if it vacated to a business that didn’t have similar security issues, that the fence come down. But I don’t have any problems support this, you made a very, very compelling case. Henzi: I’ll support it as presented, too. I thought that you made a very compelling argument, you were very prepared. I would echo Mrs. McIntyre’s thank you for that. I remember approving a fence at a Fed Ex facility not too far away, I can’t remember who was in the front yard of the building but it was much the same argument, that there’s valuable property that thieves are interested at getting at. And so I am all for protecting your property and also your employees, I think that’s paramount. I think your plan is well thought out and you’ve already talked to the Fire Marshal through your fence contractor. I, too, have a concern if you left in two years and there’s somebody, a new tenant that comes in, yes, I wouldn’t necessarily be so compelled, but the fact that you’re going to spend $200,000 with only three years left on a lease, signals to me that you will be there for a while, at least I hope that you will. And even if you aren’t it signals then to me that this is incredibly important and I’ll support you in that request. Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: So the floor is open for a motion. Upon motion by McIntyre, supported by Caramagno, it was resolved: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-11-57: McKesson Corpo., 38220 Plymouth, seeking to erect an 8-foot tall iron picket fence within the front yard which is not allowed. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 65 of 76 November 12, 2013 No fence of any height is allowed within the front yard on industrial zoned property. The property is located on the north side of Plymouth (38220), between Eckles and Newburgh, Lot No. 119-99-0018-002, M-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Fence Ordinance, Section 15.44.100 “Industrial District Regulations,” be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because Petitioner has products at his premises that are highly susceptible to robbery and theft. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because it would deprive Petitioner of employee and facility safety. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because the property is in an industrial district and no one is harmed by this proposal. 4. The board received zero (0) letters of approval and one (1) objection letter from neighboring property owners. 5. The property is classified as “Industrial” 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 variance is good only for McKesson and/or other pharmaceutical companies requiring a high degree of security. Any other occupant must request a continuation of the variance in order to return this variance. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: McIntyre, Caramagno, McCue, Duggan, Pastor, Sills, Henzi Nays: None Absent: None Henzi: Congratulations. Your variance is granted with that one condition that we just talked about. Petitioner: Absolutely. Thank you so much, I really appreciate it, thank you. Henzi: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 66 of 76 November 12, 2013 APPEAL CASE NO: 2013-11-58: JCD Middlebelt, LLC (Jimmy John’s), 19639 Middlebelt, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to erect one identification ground sign, three ground directional signs, excess in area, and nine wall signs resulting in excess number of wall signs and wall sign area. Eight of the wall signs are front and rear on the existing drive-thru. Number of Identification Ground Signs Directional Ground Sign Area Allowed: One Allowed: 2 sq. ft. Proposed: Two (One existing) Proposed: 4 sq. ft per sign Excess: One Excess: 6 sq. ft. Number of Wall Signs Wall Sign Area Allowed: One Allowed: 50 sq. ft. Proposed: Nine Proposed: 114 sq. ft. Excess: Eight Excess: 64 sq. ft. Henzi: Mr. Kearfott, anything to add to this case? Kearfott: Not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for the Inspection Department? Hearing none, good evening. Petitioner: Good evening. Thank you for hearing our case. I’m Cheryl Doelker, a Jimmy John’s franchisee in Livonia, Michigan and we’re very thankful for this time on your agenda this evening. Again, I know it’s precious so I will be brief. Henzi: I’m sure you wish you had gotten your application in quicker so you could have been heard last time. Petitioner: And I want to thank Bonnie for advising me this morning that you folks had been forwarded the sign package that I had prepared. In addition, she helped us distribute this evening the additional photos that we showed to try and demonstrate the signage issues that we face here. And I hope we don’t sound like criminals for asking for these things. Part of our issue here is we have three Jimmy John’s in Livonia, this will be our first drive-thru and we’re very, very concerned as is the landlord, CVS Caremark, about motorist safety both as they enter the property, exit the property, and maneuver around about the property. As I’m sure you’re aware, this building that we’re interested in at one time was a bank building and the canopy extending over was the City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 67 of 76 November 12, 2013 housing for the bank pneumatic tube system and for the life of us we can’t figure out how to get sandwiches into those tubes. We need to completely reverse the drive-thru here, which we discussed the landlord has a major concern because even though the bank has been closed for several years, you know the normal flow of traffic through there is probably still in people’s memory and we need to be very careful about trying to rearrange that in an appropriate fashion. So, the basic elements of our packet, our sign package, which is a corporate requirement has been approved by the Planning Commission and City Council earlier this year and our goal certainly is to rehab this building into a Jimmy John’s with a drive-thru. Now, one of the unique circumstances here is that what I previously stated, is we do have to reverse this drive-thru and we want to be very careful and concerted in our efforts to do so appropriately. If I could just kind of walk you through this, the main plan which is our normal wall sign I think is within the requirements of the limits that are set on it, however as we set about the business of rerouting the drive-thru, we want to make sure that we’ve got on the property a drive-thru sign, that’s one of the ground signs we’re looking that points you right into hitting the front part of the building, we want to make sure people know where to stack and in what lane so we’re looking for that to be in the appropriate place in the front of what would be the southwest corner of the front of the building. Additionally as you go then proceeding around the building underneath the canopy then we get into these what we call airport directional signs. I think this is where we’re talking about the eight additional wall signs from our perspective but I was kind of taken aback by the wall signs because I think of them purposely as simply directional signs to promote more safety while you’re on the property. In addition, we have drive-thru services and we want to make sure our employees are going the right direction at all times, you know, we advertise freaky fast but we want them to be freaky careful, so that’s part of this piece of it and if that has to be considered as wall signage, I would look for suggestions on how to make that better and work within the criteria and still provide the same level of safety as people try to navigate through the property. We’re just trying to avoid confusion, especially since two of those lanes are going to be going from east to west for CVS and then the other two would be going from west to east for us so that’s where the wall signage comes in. Then proceeding around the building in a counter-clockwise direction, although I think the variance application referred to a wall sign on this north wall, we omitted that, there was no visibility of that sign and no point to put it there anyway. But we do think and feel very strongly that the exit only sign would be of necessity to keep people from wrongly entering in that north driveway to the property so that’s where that is. Does anybody have any questions so far on any of that? When we look at the hardship considerations, again it’s safety related. We want the traffic coming in off of Middlebelt and in off of Seven Mile to know exactly where to go, the folks that we’re working with at CVS feel very strongly about this as well and we’re very supportive of the ground City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 68 of 76 November 12, 2013 signage at each one of those curb cuts entering the property. In addition the setback of the building we’re interested in as it relates to figure 1 in my hardship considerations picture, the view for northbound traffic on Middlebelt because of the landscape elements that are on this property, there’s minimal visibility of the wall sign so we think the ground sign and monument sign will help them understand where they access the curb cut to get into the property. And then additionally from the northbound in figure 2, the view for southbound traffic on Middlebelt because of the setback of the building, there’s no visibility coming from north to south so that’s where the ground signage would be of critical importance to make sure people safely arrive at the right place. Considering figure 3, just to show that the landscape elements kind of obstruct the front of the building as it is right now and the sign elements in addition to promoting safety, anything really different than any of the other businesses already have in that area so I just would appreciate your support and consideration and any questions you may have, I’m happy to answer them. Henzi: Any questions for the Petitioner? I had one. I was just going to ask you about the eight wall signs I call traffic signs really. Petitioner: Okay. Henzi: Who came up with that concept, was it the sign company? Petitioner: The sign company in an effort to try to achieve something that would be workable and nonbranded for either of us, for CVS or for us, and purely like an airport directional he brought it above the canopy just to make sure that everyone would be able to clearly see them. Right now, in fact in some of the drawings that are on there, there are existing real tiny signs but being that the traffic was all coming from east to the west through there, I guess it was probably suitable to have the real tiny ones but the property owner felt very strongly that with the mixed flow of traffic there it would be critical to have something much more visible. Henzi: Okay. I was a little bit surprised that there wasn’t any branding on there but that was on purpose? Petitioner: It was very purposeful, yes. Henzi: Just to grab the driver’s attention, right? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 69 of 76 November 12, 2013 Petitioner: Exactly, right. And they did try to keep it in harmony with I think the CVS color scheme which is red and white and ours is red and white to the degree the colors were suitable for the property as it exists. Henzi: Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Is there clearance height on those signs or how tall is that drive-thru? Petitioner: I knew you’d ask me a question I don’t know the answer to. I don’t know the answer to that. Caramagno: It looks plenty high. Petitioner: I could probably figure it out because I have in my notes somewhere the little brick elements in the architecture there, I want to say they’re 36 inches between the brick lines, so I don’t know if that makes sense or not. Caramagno: Then they are plenty high. Pastor: They’re fifteen. Caramagno: Fifteen feet up. Petitioner: I think on the back of the building there might be some designation of the clearance on the east side of that canopy. Caramagno: It’s plenty high if it’s fifteen. Petitioner: I believe you’re right, I think it is 15 feet because I remember for another contractor, that the height of the wall itself is in the neighborhood of 22 feet to get over onto the inside of that canopy. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 70 of 76 November 12, 2013 Caramagno: Okay. And who’s the landlord of this property? Petitioner: CVS Caremark. Caramagno: CVS owns both buildings? Petitioner: Yes, from Rhode Island. Caramagno: The only other question I’ve got for you is with all the signs you’ve got here, I notice there’s a big opportunity at the corner of Seven and Middlebelt on their monument sign; no plan to have anything there? Petitioner: No. The only thing there and that as intentional as well because of the view from the north, it’s the southbound traffic, if you’re heading southbound on Middlebelt by the time you would see that sign at Seven and Middlebelt you’ve already gone past the curb cut to get in. Caramagno: What about northbound? Petitioner: Northbound, it would have been inconsequential and we felt that having the monument sign right in front of the building we’re going to occupy would be more beneficial for both directions. Caramagno: So just to clear things up, you’ll have no signage on the corner of Seven and Middlebelt? Petitioner: None whatsoever. Caramagno: Okay, thank you. Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Hearing none, is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against the project? If so, come on up. Seeing no one, are there letters? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 71 of 76 November 12, 2013 Caramagno: No. Henzi: Anything you’d like to say in closing? Petitioner: Just to thank you all for your time and consideration in this late evening hour that you’ve been seated for so long, thank you. Henzi: Thank you. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Normally when I see a sign package with all of this excess my first thought is heck no. But I find that a lot of the excess is signage I’ll call for safety reasons directing the people under the canopy which way to go so that makes perfect sense so I think I can support this. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I, too, will be in support. I was totally of not being on your side, I thought this was way too much but after going through it, you gave a very, very, very impressive presentation so thank you and I will support it because I think it sounds great. Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I, too, will support. It was a great presentation and I’m with everybody else when we start seeing that many signs and that many variances, but it makes total sense, makes sense with the way the two buildings are set up and it’s very well thought out so I will support. Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: I think all the signs are necessary and it’s well thought out, I will be in full support. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 72 of 76 November 12, 2013 Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: Mrs. McIntyre. McIntyre: Thank you for coming tonight with such a nice package. Thank you for bringing this business into the City. It was clear that your request was not frivolous, your presentation was first class in terms of the thought put into the drive-thru. I looked at this package and said oh my gosh, nine signs, until you realize it’s for safety and this isn’t just you want more signs than the next restaurant. Thank you for just coming in so well prepared and I will be in full support. Petitioner: Thank you. I appreciate your comments, thank you. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: I will be in support as well. I wasn’t sure but I understand your need for safety and I think the signs will serve you well. Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: I will be in support as well. I mean other than the excess wall signs, the deficiency is minimal. And I, too, will thank you for your packet, what the sign company did was nice but the photos you brought with the arrows made the decision very easy. Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: Just know if you’re doing this in other communities, keep doing it. Petitioner: I appreciate that, thank you. Henzi: So the floor is open for a motion. Petitioner: Thank you all. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 73 of 76 November 12, 2013 Upon motion by McCue, supported by Duggan, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-11-58: JCD Middlebelt, LLC (Jimmy John’s), 19639 Middlebelt, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to erect one identification ground sign, three ground directional signs, excess in area, and nine wall signs resulting in excess number of wall signs and wall sign area. Eight of the wall signs are front and rear on the existing drive-thru. Number of Wall Signs Wall Sign Area Allowed: One Allowed: 50 sq. ft. Proposed: Nine Proposed: 114 sq. ft. Excess: Eight Excess: 64 sq. ft. . Number of Identification Ground Signs Directional Ground Sign Area Allowed: One Allowed: 2 sq. ft. Proposed: Two (one existing) Proposed: 4 sq. ft. per sign Excess: One Excess: 6 sq. ft. The property is located on the east side of Middlebelt (19190) between Seven Mile and Vassar, Lot No. 003-01-0419-010, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance No. 543, Section 18.50D(i) “Permitted Signs” and 18.50H(a), 1,2 “sign Regulations in C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts, be granted as modified for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because of the location of the building and its alignment with the CVS store, which makes this an odd set up. 2. Denial of more signs than the Board is denying would have severe consquences for the Petitioner because it would not allow for visibility and safe entrance and exist of the drive-thru location. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because many neighboring businesses have like signage. 4. The Board received no (0) letters of approval and zero (0) letters of objection from neighboring property owners. 5. The granting of this variance will not adversely affect the purpose or objective the Master Plan because it is designated as “General Commercial” on the Master Plan and the granting of this variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That the variance is good for six months. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: McCue, Duggan, McIntyre, Pastor, Sills, Caramago, Henzi Nays: None Absent: None City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 74 of 76 November 12, 2013 Henzi: The variance is granted with that one condition, that it’s good for six months. That doesn’t mean it expires, that means you’ve got six months within which to complete the project. Petitioner: Okay, I’ll tell them. Thank you. Thank you all. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 75 of 76 November 12, 2013 Upon motion by Pastor, supported by Duggan, the minutes of August 13, 2013 were unanimously approved. Motion by Pastor, supported by McCue, to adjourn the meeting. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. _________________________ SAM CARAMAGNO, Secretary _________________________ MATTHEW HENZI, Chairman /bjm City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 76 of 76 November 12, 2013 Motion by Pastor, supported by McIntyre, to adjourn the meeting. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. _________________________ SAM CARAMAGNO, Secretary _________________________ MATTHEW HENZI, Chairman /