Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-08-11City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 of 43 March 8, 2011 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF LIVONIA MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING HELD MARCH 8, 2011 A Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Livonia was held in the Auditorium of the Livonia City Hall on Tuesday, March 8, 2011. MEMBERS PRESENT: Matt Henzi, Chairman Terry Moran, Vice Chairman Sam Caramagno, Secretary Toni Aloe Ken Harb Craig Pastor Robert Sills MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Fisher, Assistant City Attorney Steve Banko, City Inspector Helen Mininni, Court Reporter 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. Five (5) Members were present this evening. The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard by a full Board and no one wished to do so. The Secretary then read the Agenda and Legal Notice to each appeal, and each Petitioner indicated their presence. Appeals came up for hearing after due legal notice was given to all interested parties within 300 feet, Petitioners and City Departments. There were 7 persons present in the audience. ______________________________________________________________________ ( 7:01 pm #1/16) APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-02-04 (Rescheduled from meeting of February 1, 2011): Tony Aubrey, Jaubrey, LLC, 27675 Grand River, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 of 43 March 8, 2011 erect two wall signs resulting in excess number of wall signs and wall sign area, and excess permanent window signage is also being requested. Number of Wall Signs Wall Sign Area Allowed: One Allowed: 60 sq. ft. Proposed: Two Proposed: 106 sq. ft. Excess: One Excess: 46 sq. ft. Window Signage Area Allowed: 10 sq. ft. Proposed: 63 sq. ft. Excess: 53 sq. ft. The property is located on the south side of Grand River (27675) between Inkster and Angling. Henzi: Mr. Banko, anything to add to this case? Banko: Not at this time, Sir. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Mr. Banko, what is allowed in the window of the property here? Banko: In a single business you are allowed 10 square feet of permanent signage and you are also allowed 20 percent of temporary signage, but that is also in combination with that 10 square feet of permanent signage. Caramagno: And what is permanent signage, something affixed to the window or something hanging in front of the window? Banko: Yes, usually with temporary signage the rule of thumb is that a temporary signage is changed at least every 30 days. Permanent signage could be an open sign, could be Visa, welcome, things of that nature. Caramagno: Okay. Thank you. Moran: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Moran. Moran: Mr. Banko, I didn’t quite understand that. You said 10 – 20 percent of something? I’m sorry. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 of 43 March 8, 2011 Banko: You are allowed to use temporary signage in your windows also but you can cover no more than 20 percent of the total window area. Moran: Got ya. Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Mr. Harb. Harb: Mr. Banko, in a commercial district if this was a corner like a 7/11, what would they be allowed? Banko: On a corner of a major thorough fare, you would be permitted two wall signs one of which would be the frontage sign and your second wall sign or other facing would be permitted, but it would be permitted with only half the square footage of the original sign. Harb: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Moran: One more. Henzi: Mr. Moran. Moran: Steve, again, on this window signage it says they are allowed 10 square feet. Does that imply that they have 50 square feet of window signage because they are allowed 20 percent? Fifty square feet of window and they are allowed 10 square feet which would be 20 percent? Banko: It wouldn’t matter if they had 50 square feet of window or 100 square feet of window, you’re only permitted 10 square feet of permanent signage in those windows. Moran: And 20 percent of the total -- Banko: Of the temporary signage. Moran: Thank you. I’m sorry. I wasn’t getting it. Henzi: Thank you. Any other questions? Hearing none, will the Petitioner please come to the podium? Petitioner: Hi, my name is Bryan Duquet. I represent Motor City Pawn. I’m with Sign- a-Rama, 36886 Harper, Clinton Township, Michigan 48035. We’re here tonight to ask for actually a couple of variances. Obviously, you’ve already read a couple. One was with the two signs and one was with the size of the window graphics. With the two signs the building currently was purchased – it has two signs on it already. We kind of assumed that when this project started that this would be a reface and we would be refacing existing signs and later discovered that the ordinance only calls for one sign and that it is not grandfathered in. So, what we did was – I’m sure most of you have City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 of 43 March 8, 2011 been to the property. It’s an older construction building. It sits right on Grand River, very close to the street. Obviously, if you were to sign the building only in the front of the building, you’d be able to see it I believe on westbound Grand River, but you’d have no visibility of it on eastbound until you’d already passed it and obviously that would cause traffic issues with people making panic stops trying to pull in the building. I took some pictures of other buildings around and I noticed the buildings next door to the Chase Bank quite a few of the other locations have two signs. I imagine for the same circumstances because they are built real close to the road. Obviously visibility is an issue. We asked for a little bit of a larger sign on the front of the building. The name is Motor City Pawn Brokers. He’s got a lot of characters in the sign. Obviously, making the sign smaller makes those characters harder to read. So, we increased the size of the sign to be able to get more visibility. It means you would be looking from the opposite side of Grand River across to be able to see the building. In regards to the window graphics, he’s got a lot of different services. He does change them but not necessarily every 30 days. He recently called me and said he is considering another option which I don’t know if it requires a variance or not, but he’s considering doing something with a nice illuminated framed type window sign where he can change them out and make them more attractive. So, that’s an option to doing vinyl. Any questions? Henzi: You said you have pictures? Petitioner: Yes, I took a picture of the old building and I have a picture of the – you can kind of see in this one – I thought I brought with me the Chase building, but the Chase Bank right next door has two signs on it. Henzi: Just give them to the reporter when you are ready and we will all take a look. Petitioner: This is a picture of the old Radio Shack. Currently existing there are two box signs on the building. What he wants to do is he wants to take down – leave the one box on the side and reface it with a Motor City logo and on the front he wants to put an updated channel letter sign to match his other locations. That would be new LED channel letter sign. I brought a sample with me tonight so you guys can get an idea. I’m sure you’ve never got to see a channel letter sign up close and personal, but going with LED lighting in them, they are very, very light and I brought this so you can get an idea how they are constructed and the actual weight of them. Henzi: Thanks, any questions for the Petitioner’s representative? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: How large are these letters? I mean, your overall sign height is 46 inches. What is the height of the letters? Petitioner: It should be on the drawings that were submitted, but I’m guessing based on these dimensions they are probably around 20 inches. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5 of 43 March 8, 2011 Pastor: Those are large letters. I mean, that letter that you are passing around has got to be eight to 10 inches. Petitioner: No, they’re not even quite that big. They’re probably about 18, 16 to 18 inches. Pastor: As I was just going to point out, that letter that you are passing around has got to be eight to 10 inches. Why can’t you make your letters that size and reduce the size of the sign a little bit? Petitioner: Well, you can, but obviously the smaller the letter the shorter the visibility. Pastor: Not when it’s lit. I mean, you’ll be able to see that across the street just as easily as pretty much anything else. Petitioner: Depending on character size, they have viewing distances. Obviously, lit letters is more visible. They can be made smaller, but obviously more readable. Pastor: So why don’t you make them 10 feet tall then so you can see them from Hamtramck? Petitioner: We have signs that we have done that with. Pastor: You understand my point though? Petitioner: Absolutely. Pastor: So my point is, why so big because these are very large – if you’re telling me they are 18 inches tall, that’s a pretty tall letter. That’s more than twice of what this one is. Petitioner: A typical channel letter is 16 to 18 inches. That’s most of what we put out. Pastor: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Harb: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Harb. Harb: Bryan, I didn’t catch your last name. Petitioner: Duquet. Harb: Duquet. All right, Mr. Duquet, you said that this is basically a reface, but this sign is 70 square feet in the front and 36 square feet on the side? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6 of 43 March 8, 2011 Petitioner: The side of the building is 36 square feet. The front sign is considerably larger. We did drawings with 36 square feet. The owner said that’s just really small. Harb: Well, I’m guessing that originally it was probably 60 square feet? Petitioner: On the front of the building? Harb: Yes. Petitioner: No, originally it was – the front sign currently matches the side sign. They are both 36 square feet. Harb: Okay. I guess then the question would be would this work if it was 60 square feet in the front and 36 on the side? Petitioner: I think if it was 60 square feet in the front and 36 on the side, I think he’d be very happy with that. I think that would be a fair request. Harb: Okay. Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Harb: Well, let me ask one more question. Henzi: Mr. Harb. Harb: Mr. Duquet, the refacing of the side of the building. Petitioner: Yes. Harb: You’re saying that is 36 square feet and not 30 square feet? Petitioner: It’s currently three foot by 12 foot. Harb: Okay. Thank you. Petitioner: That’s existing sign. Henzi: Any other questions? Harb: Are you going to talk about the signage on the windows or is that next or how are we going to do this? Petitioner: Whatever you like. Henzi: Go ahead. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 7 of 43 March 8, 2011 Petitioner: With his business, I know at quite a few of his other locations there is a lot of window signage. His type of business offers all kinds of different services and he notices a huge difference in his business by being able to put those things out and let people know what products and services he offers. He feels that the window signage is detrimental to the success of the business because you know he’s made quite an investment in the property. He’s redoing the property and bringing it up to code. And he thinks that the window graphics or window signage is going to be a necessary part of the success of the business. Henzi: Why don’t you give us examples? What is it that he needs to let people know that his business does? Petitioner: Well, for example, he’s got on here – right now what he’s put on here is that he’s got three month loans, right now gold is a high dollar asset so he is offering top dollar paid for gold. He’s got cash loans, jewelry and diamonds. I didn’t realize it, but he sells firearms and electronics. He generally about once a year, once every two years he changes out these graphics and puts different items that people wouldn’t typically expect him to carry or offer and he puts those in the windows. Now, the latest venture is over at the Gratiot location we have easily three times this on that location, but he’s looking at putting in a picture frame type lit sign, illuminated sign. They are a narrow thin box. They actually look like a picture frame and then putting nice graphics in those and maybe pictures of a watch, or pictures of jewelry or gold, something much more attractive than doing the vinyl graphics and it would be illuminated in the windows. So, they would have a real nice clean presence as you went by. Henzi: Are you offering to swap the request for the vinyl lettering for the picture frame sign or are you just telling us that’s something you might do in the future? Petitioner: No, we are willing to swap it, that’s the direction he wants to go with it. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: How many square feet would this picture frame sign be? Petitioner: Really, we’ve kind of limited that to what’s the decision here of the Board. He’s asking for the square footage he has based on what’s determined tonight we’ll do our best to accommodate it based on the size frame – size of the available signs. Pastor: I’m sorry, you said the square footage he has? Petitioner: Well, the request on here is for 60 square feet for window graphics. Window signage, right now it’s proposed at 63 square feet. Pastor: So now you’re telling us that you want to put 53 square feet of changeable window signage that could -- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8 of 43 March 8, 2011 Petitioner: Totals, imagines, that type of thing. Pastor: I understand that could be changed to anything he wants anytime he wants. Would this be something that will be constantly changing? Petitioner: No, we’re not looking at – he did consider doing or requesting for electronic message center. That’s not what he’s looking to do. These are fixed imagines that are digitally printed and put into a picture frame. It’s a lit picture frame. Pastor: I guess I’m a little confused now. Is this an electronic sign that I can work on a computer and change it -- Petitioner: No. Pastor: -- or is it something that you take a picture of, put it in a picture frame and it lights the product? Petitioner: Exactly, second. Pastor: Thank you. Moran: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Moran. Moran: The application asks you to explain how this is unique to your property-a condition that doesn’t exist anywhere else in the City. It also asks you to explain what this difficulty is that involves more than a mere inconvenience or an inability to earn a higher rate of return. Their application only addresses the, as I read it, the signs for the walls. How would you answer the question as to why a variance should be granted and how it meets both of those conditions that’s unique to the property and that it’s anything but a mere inconvenience or inability to earn a higher rate of return? Petitioner: I guess that’s a tough one to answer because I guess when you’re looking at the success of the business – I know in these variances it says if it doesn’t make a higher rate of return unfortunately small businesses are not government subsidized. They have to make their payroll and their rent. I’d like to think that people are getting rich right now, but they’re not; they’re just trying to pay their bills and survive. I don’t think this is a matter of him trying to get rich off the location as much as trying to make sure it’s successful, a part of this community and a paying part of this community for many years to come. So, there is monetary concern with it as anybody making an investment. Moran: But you’re asking for quite an accommodation and you’re asking for virtually carte blanche right to change this whenever as long as it’s less than 63 square feet. No controls upon this. The gentleman is free to put whatever he chooses as long as it’s less than 63 square feet; is that your request? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 9 of 43 March 8, 2011 Petitioner: No, the request is to put some signage in the window that’s classy signage that’s within the guidelines of the Board and if the Board decides that you can do window signage and you tell me to limit it to images and not text or whatever stipulations you put on it tonight, those are the guidelines that we are willing to work with. We’re just looking -- Pastor: You’re making the application. I don’t run one of these businesses and you’re exactly right, sir, we want to have successful businesses in our community. We’d be foolish to try to hamper businesses, but we are faced with our laws or ordinances that we must deal with. So, I have to ask you to tell me what conditions you would put on that. I don’t know what reasonable conditions are nor do I run a business. I wouldn’t even know how to build a fence around it. Petitioner: Let me introduce you to Ivan. This is Ivan; he’s with Motor City Pawn. Jarbov: Hello. Henzi: Good evening. Can you tell us your name and business address? Jarbov: Ivan Jarbov and I work at Motor City in Warren, Michigan on Van Dyke. Petitioner: Any examples of what you’d want to put up on windows. Jarbov: Like gold, like pictures of piled gold, some guns, watches, some game systems, TV, name brands like Sony, RCA, stuff like that. Petitioner: For example, holiday seasons obviously you would want to put holiday-type images, gift, gift wrapping, and packages. When gold is at a high, you are going to want to put gold, jewelry, diamonds, and pictures of those types of things. Jarbov: What we buy, what we sell -- Petitioner: We just passed Valentines, during Valentines Day’s you would want to put some kind of Valentine image in it with the products that you have available. The business is not the type of business where we go out and buy so many cars. We don’t know what products the customer will bring in, but when products become available as they relate to various holidays or events, those are the items that they would want to put in those windows and tactfully, tastefully. Pastor: Let me try to understand something here. Steve, we started this evening talking about he’s entitled to 10 square feet of signage and 20 percent temporary. Do we know what 20 percent comes out to on this particular site? Banko: I would have to research that. You would have to take the total window area – from what I am looking at here it looks like he almost has 20 percent of the window filled up with permanent signage which would allow no temporary signage. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10 of 43 March 8, 2011 Pastor: So you’re suggesting if we granted this, his request tonight is for 63 feet of permanent signage then we can make it anything we want, but Inspection would currently enforce it that he’d be allowed no temporary signage. Banko: It looks – and this is only an assumption on my part – but by looking at what I’m looking at here on the drawing, it almost appears that he’s taken 20 percent of the window and put signage in it. So, basically he wouldn’t be able to add temporary signage on a regular basis – the only thing that would be allowed if you granted would be the permanent signage that you’re going to grant. Pastor: Well what I’m exploring is if a – what’s the purpose of having limits on our signs? I suspect that its– so it doesn’t appear cluttered. Banko: Clutter and a lot of times people will put up temporary signage and it’s of the paper variety and it sits in that window for 30 days, 60 days or longer and of course it gets weathered, the sun changes the color of the sign against, you know, it deteriorates and of course, we don’t want the gaudiness throughout, across the front of the window. We want the windows open so people can see into the business. Pastor: Just doing a little rough arithmetic here. Does it look like there’s 50 feet across this building instead 60 feet? Banko: I think they measured the building to be 60 feet across. Pastor: So if it’s 60 feet across, you know, what do we think these windows are 10 feet high, 12 feet high? Banko: It appears that they’re almost 10 feet high. Pastor: A seven foot door another three, four, five on top of that. So, I’m kind of looking at 50 times maybe 12 feet high. That’s 750 square feet at 20 percent. It would be about 150 square feet of temporary signage; would it not? Banko: If your figures are correct, yes, sir. Pastor: So just roughing it out, correct me if I’m wrong, or I will ask the question of Ivan and the other gentleman. Could you run your business with 10 permanent and changing around to 150 square feet of other signage? Petitioner: Yeah, I’m almost thinking that if you’re doing it that would – the temporary signage as long as it’s changing every 30 days, you’re saying we don’t need a request or variance for that if I’m understanding correctly. Banko: The understanding is – I’ll quote the ordinance: “You’re permitted 10 square feet of permanent signage and you’re permitted 20 percent of temporary signage but that also includes that 10 square feet of permanent signage.” If you get what I’m saying here. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 11 of 43 March 8, 2011 Petitioner: Yeah, yeah, no, actually that would work. I think that would work for what he wants to do. Pastor: So, you’re going to withdraw the request for a window signage variance tonight? Petitioner: Okay. Yes. Henzi: Any other questions? Harb: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Harb. Harb: I have a couple questions. First of all, how did we come up with the signs on the window equal 63 square feet? Was it just like four by four? Banko: Mr. Harb, I didn’t write this up so when it was written up I was not there. Harb: Mr. Duquet, did you -- Petitioner: I’ll help you with that. We actually boxed off the areas when we laid it out and we actually boxed it off and totaled it all up to find out what the square footage was. Harb: Do you have any pictures of the temporary signage that you would like to put in the window? Petitioner: No, that actually came about two weeks ago and we’re still working on the concept of it and finding the frames. Currently we have looked at LED, we’ve look at fluorescent, and we’ve looked at some that has nice glass double edged frame to it. So, we’re looking at the different options. It’s something that is going to be classy to be put in those windows. Harb: Do you have anything – well first of all, you know the putting telephone numbers on windows in my eyes is a no, no if you will. Okay? I don’t think that we’ve ever approved telephone numbers on any kind of signage on windows or awnings or anything else like that because that really is, you know, financial return rather than, you know, location which is basically what a sign package is supposed to be. You said that you boxed off everything, what would be the 10 square feet that you’re talking about because everything appears to be at least 16 square feet. Petitioner: The 10 square feet we’ll probably just design put a logo or something on the front door with hours just limit it to something small. If we are going to use the temporary signage, he probably won’t do the permanent window signage there’s no need to. Harb: All right, Mr. Chair, I for one cannot – I don’t feel comfortable about approving something that I can’t see but maybe Mike, do we even need to see it if he’s -- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 12 of 43 March 8, 2011 Fisher: He withdrew the request. There’s nothing before the Board about window signage anymore. Harb: Okay. All right. Moran: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Moran. Moran: I’d like to offer something else. Petitioner: Sure. Moran: As I helped you calculate this evening. Petitioner: Sure. Moran: I’m all for businesses doing whatever they’re entitled to do under our ordinance. I’m also trying to create a nice community for everyone. One of my concerns is temporary signage doesn’t stay temporary and I think as Mr. Banko indicated, it often by definition doesn’t last. Would some sort of negotiations here, if you will, permanent signage of a smaller amount be of interest? And we don’t have to resolve this all this evening, but as Mr. Fisher said, you’ve offered to remove the request for that variance. I’m suggesting would you get a nicer looking sign package if you were able to go back and study this and have 63 square feet, have 75 square feet of nice looking signage that we can see a package, approve, and let’s get this business going. I’m just suggesting that’s another possibility that I would consider. Petitioner: He’s saying if you want to put together a nicer package to present and get that variance for which means we would come back another evening. You’re saying possibly if we wanted to go the additional square footage possibly bring back a different package and table that portion of it; is that what you’re recommending? Moran: I’m only one Board member. I said I would entertain that. I’d have to see it, but I’m just suggesting that – I’m picturing two extremes. I’m picturing using my calculations 150 square feet of banners and other things that aren’t very attractive and really don’t get changed every 30 days. Petitioner: No, I would definitely – Tony Aubrey is in Florida, so he’s obviously representing him at this moment. So, yeah, I definitely entertain that. Moran: I suggest we ask the other Board members their feelings on it. I don’t want to waste anyone’s time, but I personally would like to look at something like that. Henzi: Any other comments on that topic? Pastor: Mr. Chair. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 13 of 43 March 8, 2011 Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Yes, I agree with Mr. Moran. I would not be in favoring of approving any of the sign package without seeing a full package and even if he has a right to change the temporary signs, if that’s the case, he doesn’t want to bring a package in front of me, I would not be approving the large signs. Harb: I’m with Mr. Fisher; the Petitioner withdrew the window sign package. I’m for going ahead and allowing the Petitioner to go ahead and put up his wall signs based on certain, you know, criteria, and if he wants to come back with something more than 10 square feet, then he could come back. We could table that portion of it, but I think the Petitioner has a right for at least the wall signs to go forward. Henzi: Any other comments? Aloe: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: He doesn’t have to come back at all once we grant the wall signs. He doesn’t have to come back here at all. He can do whatever he wants with this 150 temporary. Henzi: Right. Moran: I know you had this snow storm that delayed this hearing. When do you hope to be open? Petitioner: They’re planning on being open in the beginning of April. So, I was just adding in my mind, the permanent signage is kind of necessary to get moving with – the temporary signage I have no problem coming back with another proposed package or withdrawing it because he does have available temporary signage and what he does what to do is I know is a nice classy look Henzi: All right, then my question to you, Mr. Fisher, is there’s a suggestion to split this into two variances, but the Petitioner has withdrawn the request for that one variance so what are our options? Fisher: Well, I think your options are you can approve or deny the wall sign variance -- you can table it if there’s something else you think you can get or need, but they took the window sign issue off the table. Henzi: So it’s really up to them. If they decide that changing sign type every 30 days is too cumbersome and they would like to have, let’s say 90 square feet permanent sign instead of 10 square feet permanent and 140 square feet temporary, they would just come back for another hearing. Fisher: Yes that would be – now they’ve made that into a separate variance request. Are we really sure this is a hundred – 150 square feet is the 20 percent? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 of 43 March 8, 2011 Banko: Mr. Chair. I was going to make that point. You guys are throwing around that figure of 150 square feet of window signage, we’re not really sure of the total window area so it would be hard to make a recommendation as to how much signage would be permitted there without knowing the total window area. We’re just making assumptions. Moran: Somehow or another I did the math wrong. I made the assumption it was 50 feet wide by the seven foot door, appears to be about five higher so I did 50 times 12. Somehow or another it came up to 750 and it should have come up to 600. 20 percent of that would be 120. Petitioner: We realize it would be 20 percent of the windows so that’s not an issue for us. Moran: Well, I’m just suggesting for the group it’s a pretty substantial number. I’ll offer one other – Mr. Fisher possibly, if they choose, we could vote on their wall signage for a relatively short period of time six months, allow them to open their business that way, conduct their business with the temporary signage if they want – well continue that way, but then they would have to come back in six months to extend that. It would get them back here. Pastor: Mr. Moran, but what would be the point of that if they put up this wall sign and we tell no, too big, six months later. Moran: Yeah. Pastor: He just spent 70 thousand – 40 thousand dollars for signs and they’d have to tear that back down. Moran: I want to ensure that we get a chance to review the window signage, but like you said, one option is for the Petitioner to just say I’ll do temporary stuff and I’ll see you guys. Aloe: That’s exactly right. Henzi: Say that again. Moran: One option is for him to say I’ll do temporary signage and I’m going to run my business that way. Fisher: That is what he said. Moran: Well, it’s one option; there are other options as well. Henzi: Any other comments? Anything else to these points? Petitioner: No, I was just going to mention you guys asked just for your own information on the paper signs. He doesn’t have paper signs in any of his locations. The one’s that you see fade are those cheap painted grocery store type signs. Anything that we do we City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 of 43 March 8, 2011 print with equal-solvent inks. They’re laminated. They’re nine, 10 years direct sunlight before they fade. It’s the same materials we use to do vehicle wraps, vehicle graphics, stereo graphics, that kind of stuff. So, you’re not going to find paper signs in his windows that are going to be tearing, ripping, and falling apart. He’s the type of business person that if he’s got a tear in one of his graphics, he’s calling me to come back and fix it. So, that’s not the kind of organization he runs. Henzi: Okay. And let me just confirm one more time that the front area 60 square feet is okay with you? Petitioner: Yeah, we’d be comfortable with that. Henzi: And then 36 is the side sign, that’s what exists already, right? Petitioner: Yeah, we’d be comfortable with that. Henzi: Okay. Is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against this project; if so, come on up. I see no one coming forward. Are there letters? Caramagno: One objection from Barbara Roddy [20405 Antago] (letter read). Henzi: Gentlemen, you have the opportunity for a closing statement; is there anything you would like to say? Petitioner: I think we beat her to the punch. Henzi: Okay. Thanks. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Well, I think this building could use two signs, but these two signs or at least the front sign is larger than I’m willing to approve so I cannot approve this as presented. Henzi: Mr. Harb. Harb: I believe there is a uniqueness. I believe that this looks and feels like a corner lot. I feel that 60 feet in front and refacing the current sign on the side is perfectly reasonable and I’d be in support of that. Henzi: Mr. Moran. Moran: Given the orientation of this building to Grand River, given its close proximity to the sidewalk, I do believe it’s – as Mr. Harb characterized it, it has the feel of a corner lot. So, I can see the need for two signs. Given the name of this organization which I always think is interesting when you look at a sign package – it’s a fairly long name. It’s just the name they chose. If it was ABC, they’d be able to put up a lot of very big letters. I think this is right. I will go along with the 60 square feet in the front and 36 on the side as presented. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 of 43 March 8, 2011 Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Yeah, the 60 square feet in the front and 36 as well on the side, that negotiated number I can agree with. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: I’d also be in approval for the same reasons as stated by Mr. Moran. I think location and the zero set back warrants two signs. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: I, too, will go along with my colleagues on their decisions. At the outset of this particular petition I looked at it and I said, wow, look at this excess, excess, excess. I still think it’s a lot of signage, but I just didn’t want to open up a can of worms. If you allow all this excess signage for one particular building owner along comes 10 more people and they want to have the same thing as you have and the first thing we’ve got is we’ve got a big flea market and this is the reason that we do have stringent sign ordinances and I would off the top of my head I would first of all say no, I wouldn’t go along with this, but being that most of the Board is in agreement that the 60 foot frontage is fine and the 36 on the side is okay, I’ll go along with that, too. Henzi: I agree with the other Board members for all the reasons stated. I might make one suggestion for consideration of a condition that the phone number can’t be displayed in the window and I’ll explain why. Some businesses are appointment only, like you’re going to go to the dentist, you need to know a phone number because if you just show up out of the blue, they’re not going to see you. I don’t think that this is an appointment only or hasn’t been explained as such. I think it’s more in line with regular retail or you can get waited on if you bring something in to be pawned and for that reason I don’t see why the phone number needs to be so prominently displayed, plus it doesn’t appear significantly throughout the City. So, the floor is open for a motion. Harb: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Harb. Upon Motion by Harb, supported by Aloe, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-02-04: Tony Aubrey, Jaubrey, LLC, 27675 Grand River, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to erect two wall signs resulting in excess number of wall signs and wall sign area and excess permanent window signage is also be requested. Number of Wall Signs Wall Sign Area Allowed: One Allowed: 60 sq. ft. Proposed: Two Proposed: 106 sq. ft. Excess: One Excess: 46 sq. ft. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 17 of 43 March 8, 2011 Window Signage Area Allowed: 10 sq. ft. Proposed: 63 sq. ft. Excess: 53 sq. ft. Petition as amended at the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting on March 8, 2011: Number of Wall Signs Wall Sign Area Allowed: One Allowed: 60 sq. ft. Proposed: Two Proposed: 106 sq. ft. Excess: One Excess: 46 sq. ft. The property is located on the south side of Grand River (27675) between Inkster and Angling, be granted for the following reasons: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because of the odd shape lot on Grand River which looks like a corner lot. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because of the inability for clients to locate Petitioner’s business would increase without the second sign on the side. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on the neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because the building and sign package is consistent with other corner lot locations throughout the City and also on Grand River. 4. Board received no letters of approval and one (1) letter of objection. 5. The granting of this variance will not adversely affect the purpose or objective of the Master Plan because this property is classified as “General Commercial” under 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 Petitioner is granted six (6) months to complete construction. 2. That the Petitioner is prohibited from displaying phones numbers visible from the street on the front window. 3. That a photo cell timer can be used. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Aloe, Caramagno, Harb, Moran, Sills, Henzi NAYS: Pastor City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 18 of 43 March 8, 2011 Henzi: Motion to approve with conditions by Mr. Harb, support by Mrs. Aloe, any discussion? Aloe: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: I’m sorry, Ken, did you give the size of the two signs? Harb: I will repeat that the signs, front sign be no greater than 60 square feet and the side sign be no greater than 36 square feet. Petitioner: Just a quick question. You mentioned on the phone number – typically if we do like an entry door window, we’ll put the store hours and a small phone number with a name on the front door; is that an issue? We’re talking like one-inch character. Henzi: Mr. Banko, can businesses do that without even seeking a variance? Banko: Yes, Mr. Chair. You see the phone numbers on the front door throughout businesses within the City -- Harb: I’m not going to argue with that. I’m – Petitioner: Yes, I just want to make sure we understood. We’re not looking to put something gaudy. I understand that, but typically we’ll come up with a nice logo emblem, hours, and a phone number – Harb: That’s fine. I’m talking about what you have presented -- Petitioner: Understood. Harb: -- on this package. Petitioner: Okay. I just wanted to clarify. Henzi: Any other discussion? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Any thought to illumination, hours, have any signs illuminated? Is it going to be 24 hour open during business, what’s the thought there? I know it wasn’t discussed, but we probably need something. Harb: Mr. Banko, are signs on Grand River typically end at 12 or -- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 19 of 43 March 8, 2011 Banko: You only have that two block area there along Grand River that runs in Livonia. Harb: How about like on Eight Mile and other parts of the City? Banko: Most of 8 Mile is industrial or ML properties. There’s not a lot of retail on 8 Mile Road. Harb: Anywhere? Banko: What’s the question again? Harb: Before I -- I would request that Mr. Duquet talk on that. You don’t need 24 hours? Petitioner: No, typically with lighted signs, most people were putting timers on. Now, what we do probably 90 percent of the signs we put up we put them on photo cells. So, if we have inclement weather and it is dark outside, the sign is lit. If it’s sunny outside and it is good weather, the sign is off. We just photo cell them – it’s just a nice attractive clean way to do it. Harb: So, are you saying it could be on all night? Petitioner: Well, yeah, typically they are on all night. I’ve been in business now eight years and my signs are on all night. When you turn around and look at a building that there’s no signs lit on, it looks like a desolate building. We typically run our signs all night. They’re not the kind of thing that lights up the road, but they are just to let you know hey, there are businesses here. I don’t think I’ve ever with the exception of message centers I don’t think I’ve ever had a sign have specific to be turned off at a certain time. Harb: I haven’t given it much thought. Does anyone have any thoughts on that? Henzi: I’m trying to think of Chase’s illuminated signs and I can’t remember if they’re all illuminated, but I probably noticed the lighting at the ATM. Harb: What are your store hours? Jarbov: Ten till six. Harb: Ten till six. Jarbov: Yes, Saturday’s 10 to five, Sunday’s we’re closed. Moran: Would there be other lights on for security reasons of any kind? Jarbov: No. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 20 of 43 March 8, 2011 Banko: The front is all commercial. There’s no residential in the area. I mean, you have residential behind. Moran: I may be in the minority, but I don’t care what a building has on at three in the morning. Harb: I’m okay with what the Petitioner suggested as well, the photo cell. Petitioner: The only time I’ve ever seen a limitation put on lighting, just for your own purposes is, we do a lot of church signs and churches are typically in residential areas and because of the electronic message centers they can illuminate quite a bit of light, we tend to turn those off at midnight in some of the communities or significantly dim them down, but in terms of traditional fluorescent lit or LED lit signs, you know, like a package like this, they don’t put out the type of light where it’s going to be obtrusive to somebody. They just lit themselves. Henzi: We almost always limit the hours of illumination if there’s any residential exposure. Petitioner: And I can understand that, this one definitely doesn’t have that. Henzi: Okay. Fisher: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Fisher. Fisher: One more thing we might have language to clarify the phone number thing a little bit. We’ll just say, no phone numbers visible from the street. Henzi: Is that okay? Harb: That’s fine, no phone number is visible from the street. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe, is that okay with you? Aloe: Agreed. Henzi: Any other discussion? ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Aloe, Caramagno, Harb, Moran, Sills, Henzi NAYS: Pastor City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 21 of 43 March 8, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ (7:50 pm #1/1480) APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-02-05 (Tabled on February 15, 2011): Kenneth and Wendy Trepanier, 11300 Melrose, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to erect a 6-ft. tall privacy fence along the east property line without the approval of the adjoining property owners, which is not allowed. The property is located on the east side of Melrose (11300) between Elmira and Plymouth. Henzi: Is there a motion to remove from the table? Harb: So moved. Caramagno: Support. Henzi: All in favor say “aye.” Board: Aye. Henzi: Opposed. This is removed from the table. Mr. Banko, anything to add to this case? Banko: No at this time, sir. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? Moran: I just have one question. Henzi: Sure. Moran: Do we know of anything new on this or are we just going to hear it now? The application had nothing new. Is there anything new the Board should be aware of? Banko: Not to my knowledge. Henzi: I guess we will find out. Moran: Thank you. Henzi: There is a new letter from the Demings, I did notice that. We will ask the Petitioners please come on up to the podium. Good evening. Petitioner: Good evening. Ken Trepanier, 11300 Melrose, and Wendy Trepanier. Henzi: Mr. and Mrs. Trepanier, we are quite familiar with this and we sort of gave you very specific instructions and why don’t you tell us what has happened since you were City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 22 of 43 March 8, 2011 here last with respect to approaching your neighbors the Demings about the sort of the last piece of the puzzle in the backyard. Petitioner: Yes, I talked to Mr. Deming a couple weeks ago maybe I think it was and we discussed, I kind of pointed out my feeling on the thing – a great deal of the fence is hidden from his house by the garages which are there anyway so he wouldn’t even see it. The rest of it is kind of partially hidden from him by their children’s play station scape they have out there and I talked to him about, you know, the quality of the fence that I was putting up and he could see the three pieces I’ve already done. I discussed with him his fence which is a wooden fence and talked about how it’s kind of, you know, wooden fences kind of deteriorate and his in fact is kind of already doing that. They fade and they warp and they don’t look too good. Talked about maintenance like that. So, we talked for a little while and he kind of saw my points and I talked – one other thing I mentioned to him is that, you know, it’s a pretty expensive fence, I don’t know if he was aware of how much money the fence was going to cost. I talked to him about that and pointed out that I wasn’t asking him to share in the cost of that. And again like we said the first time, you know, he has three sides of his yard is a privacy fence, three sides of my yard are a privacy fence. He doesn’t disagree with the privacy fence. Their issue was that he didn’t particularly care for the vinyl fence. I didn’t care for his wood fence. He said he would talk to his wife some more. He didn’t seem real settled one way or the other. He said he would talk to his wife some more and would get back with me and he hasn’t gotten back with me. Henzi: Okay. So you don’t have approval from him? Petitioner: Not that I know of, no. Henzi: Okay. And what about his neighbor, next door neighbor, 11309. Petitioner: Yeah, well, we didn’t hear anything from that gentleman in the first place so I – and I don’t know him so I haven’t talked with him. Henzi: Any questions for the Petitioners? I’ll cut to the chase, mention a few things that he points out in his letter. He’s got a different letter than what was submitted last time. Mr. and Mrs. Deming appear to sign it. They indicate that you spoke with them on or about – it can’t be March 21, must have been February 21. You stopped them briefly as they were on their way out and you had a conversation and that you suggested bolting the side of their fence – I suppose what he means is you had suggested vinyl on one side with wooden bolted – did you have that conversation? Petitioner: Yeah, I didn’t stop him. I was out there shoveling snow he came over to see me. I told him that the City doesn’t allow two fences along the property line. Henzi: And that’s sort of why we are at this impasse, right? Petitioner: Right. Henzi: Okay. Any other questions? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 23 of 43 March 8, 2011 Moran: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Moran. Moran: Just so I am clear, has your neighbor suggested any solution to this other than putting up the shadow box? Petitioner: No. Moran: Has he ever offered to pay for the shadow box or is his solution the shadow box is the only thing acceptable or replacing the chain link that was removed. Mrs. Trepanier: Right. Moran: And you’re to bear the expense of all of this. Mrs. Trepanier: He never mentioned paying. Petitioner: He didn’t specify that either way. I just told him that, you know, I didn’t expect him to pay for any of the fence that I wanted to put and that was the extent of that discussion. He didn’t say he would or would not put up a shadow box fence and would or wouldn’t pay for it. Moran: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Hearing none is there anyone in the audience that wants to speak for or against the project, if so come on up. I see no one coming forward – by the way, Mr. and Mrs. Trepanier, are the Deming’s here tonight? Mrs. Trepanier: No. Petitioner: I don’t think so. Mrs. Trepanier: I haven’t seen them. Henzi: All right. Can you read the letters? Caramagno: Elsa Johnston [11033 Arden] sends in an approval (letter was read.) We have an approval from Christopher Kurish [11300 Auburndale] (letter was read). An approval from Michael Klassa [11301 Melrose] (letter was read). An approval from Tracey Trepanier [11037 Melrose] (letter was read). An objection from Mike and Renee Deming [11301 Arden Street](letter was read). Henzi: You have the opportunity to make a closing statement; is there anything you would like to say? Petitioner: Well, a couple of little misleading comments there. I explained to him that the City doesn’t allow two fences and that’s where he came up with the thing about the City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 24 of 43 March 8, 2011 wooden fence. All their comments about what they liked about their fence and how this wouldn’t match, the same things apply to my side of the yard, you know, if their wooden fence wouldn’t match mine, I wouldn’t have minded it but, you know, they didn’t put one up, they didn’t offer to put one up as we talked about the first time when we were here, you know, we both have large dogs and we want to try and keep it separate. Again, they don’t object to a privacy, they just don’t care for the style of mine. And as we said last time, too, their comment about other fences in the neighborhood, there’s a variety, there are wood fences, there are vinyl fences, there are some pretty tacky-looking wood fences, and there are some pretty tacking-looking vinyl fences. There’s one just like mine a block and a half away which is where we kind of saw the thing in the first place the idea. It’s pretty expensive, it’s a quality fence, it has a real nice look to it and it matches the siding on our house and most of it is hidden from their view anyway – so I’m not sure – we didn’t really expect there to be a problem. Henzi: Okay. Thank you very much. Moran: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Moran. Moran: Mr. Banko, last time Mr. Kearfott representing the Inspection Department had an issue with the trailer being stored on the side of the house. When I drove by – the camper I guess – when I drove by there today, it was still out there. Does the City have an issue with that or no? Banko: When I took a look at this case, I took a ride by there and I asked Mr. Kearfott what transpired regarding that camper and I guess it was just an assumption that the camper would be moved, but if the camper remains where it’s at which I believe it does not belong to you, does it not? Petitioner: No, it’s my son’s and it’s not going to stay there. We only moved it so the guy could put the fence up and, you know, it’s been kind of snowy since then. It will be gone as soon as the fence issue is done. Banko: It should be gone now but if it isn’t taken care of, you’re going to end up getting a notice regarding it. Petitioner: Right, it’s not going to stay here. It’s in my driveway, you know, I mean, we haven’t moved into the house yet so he moved it so the guy could put the fence up and it’s not going to stay there. It’s absolutely not going to stay in the driveway. Banko: We would ask that you expedite your removal of it as soon as possible. Petitioner: Yeah. Mrs. Trepanier: That’s not a problem. Henzi: Anything else? Okay. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 25 of 43 March 8, 2011 Aloe: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: Can I ask the Petitioner a question? You recently purchased that home; right? Petitioner: Well, we’ve had it for a few years. I’ve been doing some extensive remodeling to it which has taken a little bit longer than we thought it would. Aloe: Okay. Well my question is, if your neighbor behind you had already put up a shadow box fence because they said it matches the rest, would you still have put this fence up along your other sides or would you have matched it? Petitioner: No, we didn’t want a wooden fence because I don’t think they look very good, they deteriorate. His is already kind of discoloring and warped and they require a lot of maintenance and I didn’t want to do that. Aloe: Oh, I agree with you. I would much rather see a vinyl fence, too, and just for the reasons that you stated. What about the comment on here about replacing the cyclone fence that you damaged. Petitioner: Yeah, the contractor went in there and he started taking that fence apart which he wasn’t supposed to do because he hadn’t even pulled a permit yet which I didn’t know. When I found out he did that I told him he had to stop all his work. He had to go pull a permit which he did finally for the other three sides. I told him he had to put that chain-link fence back together. Aloe: So, the fence has been put back the way it was? Petitioner: It was – yeah, he kind of put it up temporarily, I mean, if that chain-link fence was just going to stay there, he would have to put it back exactly the way it was. Aloe: Thank you. Henzi: Anything else? Okay. I will close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Harb. Harb: I think, yeah, this feels like a neighbor dispute and I do not like neighbor disputes. When I heard the case before though, I thought what the Petitioner was asking was not unreasonable and I thought that the neighbor’s at 11301 and 11309 Arden should have come up with some alternatives and I still haven’t heard an alternative. It seems to me that the neighbor at 11301 had an opportunity for years to put up a privacy fence in the back and chose not to for whatever reason. So, I’m going to approve this. Henzi: Mr. Moran. Moran: Kind of like Mr. Harb. When I heard this the last time, I was sympathic to the Petitioner because is someone – I don’t like privacy fences, but if two parties wanted it, City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 26 of 43 March 8, 2011 then my preference is a low-maintenance, no maintenance vinyl. I also like the look of a lattice on the top. I think that’s a little less imposing. The Petitioner caused this and had the other party come and done the things properly we’d be talking about a shadow box there, but I think we need to move this along. I don’t think putting a chain link back there is a solution. What troubles me is not that the objecting people didn’t take the time to show up at either meeting. That’s their right. They’ve made their feelings known, but what troubles me is they haven’t offered a solution to this. It appears that both parties are okay with the privacy fence, but their solution is put up the kind I have and you pay for it all and I just don’t think that that’s reasonable. So, given that it appears to me that the two parties are okay with the privacy fence, given that I like vinyl, given that the other individuals have not suggested at all a reasonable solution, I’m going to support this petition as presented tonight. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Well, I supported it last time and I haven’t changed my mind at all. I think it’s an interesting scenario. You have a split backyard with another resident. You have one that doesn’t care for your vinyl, but doesn’t mind privacy. And the other neighbor really hasn’t spoken up and said anything. So, I’m going to stay in support. I liked it in the first place and I still do. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: I will also be in support. I’m an advocate of vinyl fences. Your neighbor has no problem with the privacy fence and you’re willing to pay for it so I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: I will also be in support. I detest wooden fences because I’ve never seen one that has stood up more than three or four years that didn’t look bad and they get weather beaten and they look very shabby to say the best. They look very shabby after three or four years so I’m going to go along with the Petition. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I will also go along with this petition. I think you’ve done a wonderful job on the house. The fence looks great. It’s unfortunate your neighbor choose wood and is stuck on wood. And as the other Commissioners have said has not come up with a reasonable solution. So, I will be in support of this although I’m sure the resolution will say something about removing that camper. Henzi: Yes, I too will support the request. I think it’s reasonable. I don’t like forcing privacy fences on adjacent neighbors because both parties have to live with it for years on out. I might feel differently if the adjoining neighbors’ objection was that they liked open spaces, they didn’t want a privacy fence, but their objection is much different and I think it’s completely unreasonable to object to mismatched fences when it’s mismatched now and it’s been mismatched and they left it mismatched after installing a brand-new fence a few years ago. Obviously, this fence is not that important to them. So, for City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 27 of 43 March 8, 2011 those reasons I like the vinyl fence. I mean, it and the house look great. So, the floor is open for a motion. Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Upon Motion by Caramagno, supported by Pastor, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-02-05: Kenneth and Wendy Trepanier, 11300 Melrose, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to erect a 6-ft. tall privacy fence along the east property line without the approval of the adjoining property owner, which is not allowed. The property is located on the east side of Melrose (11300) between Elmira and Plymouth, be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because the property already has privacy fencing on three sides and Petitioner is seeking yard security from neighboring dogs and for their dogs, as well as completing an unfinished project. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because of the dog situation in addition to a broken-down chain-link fence in the back yard. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on the neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because both properties already have a privacy fence on three sides and this fence would complete the project. 4. The Board received four (4) letters of approval and one (1) letter of objection from neighboring property owners. 5. The granting of this variance will not adversely affect the purpose or objective of the Master Plan because the property is classified “Low- density Residential” under 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 chain-link fence must be removed. 2. That the vinyl fence is to be put up according to the plan that was presented to the Board. 3. That the camper/trailer must be removed as soon as possible, weather permitting. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 28 of 43 March 8, 2011 ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Caramagno, Pastor, Aloe, Harb, Moran, Sills, Henzi NAYS: None Henzi: The variance is granted you just have to move the camper when the snow is gone. Thank you. Petitioner: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 29 of 43 March 8, 2011 (8:11 #1/2153) APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-03-07: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Bill and Sharon Lee, 17505 McNamara Drive, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to construct an addition onto the rear of an existing dwelling resulting in deficient rear yard setback. Rear Yard Setback Required: 30 ft. 0 in. Proposed: 28 ft. 8 in. Deficient: 1 ft. 4 in. The property is located on the west side of McNamara Drive (17505) between Vacri and Bobrich. Henzi: Mr. Banko, anything to add to this case? Banko: I have nothing to add, sir. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? Moran: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Moran. Moran: This is a fairly small deficiency. At what point does the Inspection Department say two inches, three inches. Banko: Well, after you read -- Moran: Is there more to the story – Paul Harvey, what’s the rest of the story? Banko: I can’t give you the rest of the story until you read one of the communications from one of the neighbors that wants to draw a line in the sand. It is so inconsequential. I believe there is nothing I can add to that. Moran: Thank you. Henzi: Well, let me just ask, I mean, on occasion has the Inspection Department used its discretion and signed off on permits pulled for, you know, for a one or two percent deficiency? Banko: I can only tell you that I’m not the one that’s – I’m not a plan examiner and I’m not sitting there with permits or files. They only request my presence when somebody isn’t doing what they’re supposed to. Henzi: Fair enough. Thanks. Any other questions for Mr. Banko? Hearing none, will City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 30 of 43 March 8, 2011 the Petitioners please come to the podium? Good evening. Petitioner: Hi. Henzi: Can you tell us your names and address, please. Petitioner: Sharon Lee, 17505 McNamara Drive, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Mr. Lee: Bill Lee, same address. Henzi: Why don’t you just tell us what it is you want to construct and tell us a little bit about the building materials et cetera. Petitioner: We’re putting on – we wanted to put a Florida room, but then we found out Livonia doesn’t let you put on a Florida room any more you have to have heat and air conditioning and all this kind of stuff. So, we went with the addition instead and then I’m an only child. I’m a nurse, my family - my mom’s getting older and she will probably be coming to live with us. So, she lives in a fairly large house in Livonia right now and we were trying to make it – once we did the bottom we could extend the back so that she would have more of a suite type thing upstairs so she wouldn’t be so confined. She’s claustrophobic and that’s all we’re doing. Henzi: Okay. Petitioner: Oh, I’m sorry. We’re using brick, the same kind of brick that we had. If you want, should I show this? Henzi: Sure. Petitioner: It’s reclaimed brick so the outside will be reclaimed brick also on the bottom half and then the top half is already vinyl siding and it will be the same and it will match and the roof will match, too, it’s a blue scallops 40 year guarantee on it. And that’s what is going to be used again on the extension part. Henzi: Is there an existing slab? Petitioner: Yes, sir. And actually the extension of what we want to do is only like a foot past what the patio is now. We have a little tiny sweet pea tree and it comes to this side of the sweet pea tree if you happen to go by and see it. Henzi: Okay. I was going to ask if you’re even increasing the size of your patio. Petitioner: Barely. Henzi: What feedback have you gotten from neighbors if any? Petitioner: Well, we talked to our neighbors on our side. Nobody has had any complaints that we know of. We only got the neighbor that is directly behind us called City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 31 of 43 March 8, 2011 my husband. Mr. Lee: To inquire on what the addition was. Petitioner: Right, he wanted to know why because the neighbor that lives two streets over got a letter and they didn’t know why. And I don’t know, I would have thought that that was more than 300 feet, but I don’t know and that’s all he said. And they just had an addition put on, the ones directly behind us like a – I don’t know – maybe two summers ago. Henzi: Okay. Petitioner: But nobody said anything negative, but obviously somebody did. Henzi: Yes, there’s one letter you’ll hear, but I don’t know if it’s personal or just a matter or principle. I don’t know. When you hear the name maybe you’ll -- Petitioner: Know it. Henzi: -- make your own conclusion. Petitioner: Okay. Henzi: Any questions for the Petitioners? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: How long have you been in this home? Petitioner: Fifteen, 15-ish. Mr. Lee: Since 1989 was it? Pastor: So quite a while, quite a while. Petitioner: Yes. Pastor: Okay. It looks like you’re doing a very nice job. Thank you. Petitioner: Thank you. Moran: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Moran. Moran: Actually I have two lines of questioning. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 32 of 43 March 8, 2011 Petitioner: Sure. Moran: I’m a little mixed up. Petitioner: Okay. Moran: You were going to put your mother in a Florida room originally? I mean your request this for, you talked about putting in a Florida room and then you moved wanting an addition because the hardship is my mother. How does the Florida room come into this? Petitioner: Because you have to have – it just made sense to me because to put the upstairs you have got to have a downstairs because we are kicking out the back. Moran: So you were going to have a Florida room with an upstairs addition that was fully heated originally? I guess it doesn’t matter. Your request is that you want this for your mother. I was trying to understand the hardship. What I couldn’t reconcile was why your hardship was housing your mother and you were going to put a Florida room on. Petitioner: Housing my mother is never a hardship. She’s awesome but -- Moran: Well, for purposes of this request this evening the need to have another party and expand your house. Petitioner: Yes. Moran: Now, Mr. Banko, I’d kind of like to get to the bottom of this. This neighbor didn’t get this notice and then call them it was already a case. So, perhaps the neighbor had made his reasons known before that or is that not important this evening? Banko: I guess it would be important. I didn’t read these until this evening so I was totally – these aren’t given to me until the day of the meeting. Moran: But my point is, somebody decided not to approve this and make it a variance prior – anyway, I have no other questions. I surrender. Henzi: Any other questions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno and then Mr. Sills. Sills: I want to take off a little bit on Terry’s original comment about the slight deficiency here and I’d probably like to address the Petitioners. Is there some reason why you couldn’t of come in that extra foot and four inches and not be before us at all – being it is so minor? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 33 of 43 March 8, 2011 Petitioner: Well, because it was so minor we didn’t think that it would be a problem. I didn’t know it was a problem until we went in to the City to do the first paperwork and they told me it was a problem. I didn’t know it was a problem. I wouldn’t have had any – Sills: You have one neighbor that thinks it is a real problem so that was the reason I am questioning it. But for one foot four inches I think that maybe if you took another look at this you could pull it in and be well within the confines of the ordinance. What’s your opinion? Petitioner: Well, we did the spacing because of the way the patio already was, you know, we’re on the back side of the house the slab is already there. So, we did it pretty much for that, but we did it so that when we did the bathroom that we would have enough room to access from that bedroom to the bathroom and that it would give us a larger shower area. Sills: Okay. This is just my personal questioning. Petitioner: That’s okay. Sills: I have no objection to such a small deficiency myself, but you do have a questioning neighbor and he’d probably question even if you brought it in a foot. Petitioner: Maybe, I don’t know, but maybe. Sills: Okay. That’s all I wanted to say. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: My question is, the upper deck, how big is that patio on top? What is that? Petitioner: It’s like six feet, I think. Mr. Lee: Six by eight. Caramagno: Where do you see that at? Pastor: On the side, page 407. Caramagno: And what is the purpose of that? Petitioner: Pleasure. Caramagno: What kind of pleasure? Petitioner: Coffee in the morning, sitting outside and actually we wanted it partially and this is the honest to God truth. We really like the fireworks and we figured if we were up City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 34 of 43 March 8, 2011 higher we would be able to see them from our property. Caramagno: I see you have a railing. What kind of railing are you planning on putting up there? Petitioner: They’re slats, they’re slats, and I don’t know what else to call them, railings. Caramagno: Is it a metal, is it vinyl? Petitioner: No, they’re – I don’t know the name of the product but it’s a lot newer product that supposed to be so that you don’t have to paint it, you don’t have to, you know, it is maintenance free. Caramagno: Plastic wood type? Petitioner: Well, it’s a resin-type polymer. Caramagno: Trex? Petitioner: Yes. Caramagno: So, there’s a door there. Where does that lead to? Petitioner: The door? It goes into the bathroom. Caramagno: This is the bathroom and these brick pillars that support it? Petitioner: Yes. Caramagno: All the way? Petitioner: Yes. Because that way we figured our neighbors on this side, theirs juts out like that, too, and they have brick and we thought it would just make it look like it was with the house all along. Caramagno: That doesn’t get included in the backyard setback, these pillars, these concrete pillars or brick pillars, that doesn’t get included in the setback? Banko: Sir, you’re asking a layman a technical question. Caramagno: Is that right? Banko: I can’t answer you. If I was the plan examiner or the building inspection, I’d be able to answer that. Pastor: Sam, that’s on the side yard. Those pillars are on the side yard. Banko: Yeah, that would be the side yard. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 35 of 43 March 8, 2011 Petitioner: Right, it’s on the side. It’s not in the back. I mean it’s in the back but -- Caramagno: Oh, I was visioning this in the – okay. I didn’t see what elevation it is down there that’s why I couldn’t see that. All right. Okay. Fisher: That’s the little dotted lines. Caramagno: That’s all I have. Thanks. Henzi: I’ve got just one or two questions following up from what Mr. Sills was asking about. I do understand it correctly that you consulted with a builder and came up with some measurements and had him draw up some plans and it was at that point that you found out you needed to go get a variance. Petitioner: Yes. Henzi: Because you are one foot four inches deficient with the setback and you decided then to ask for a variance instead of bringing it back in. Petitioner: Yes. Henzi: Okay. The reason I bring that up is because you’re asking or you’re making the argument that one foot four inches is minimal and playing devil’s advocate somebody else would say, well, if it’s minor then why don’t you just bring it back. So, I wanted to make it clear for the record that the one foot four inches wasn’t something that you considered when you drew up your plans you had an idea for what it would look like and you sort of used the existing patio as a benchmark and you went from that. Petitioner: Right, that’s why I didn’t think that there would be a problem. Henzi: Right. Okay. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Just for the Board’s information usually when you build, you build in two foot increments. So, if you go back, you go back two foot not one foot four because building materials aren’t designed that way. Everything usually goes in a two foot increment. So the 20 foot makes perfect sense or it would be 18 feet. Henzi: Okay. Any other questions? Harb: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Harb. Moran: I just have one other - is there going to be anything else or are they entitled to put a deck back there within this 30 foot or now 28 foot eight inch space? Banko: I can’t answer your question. I believe if there was flat work back it would not -- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 36 of 43 March 8, 2011 Moran: What I am concerned about is what safe guards do we have so that the neighbor who is most concerned doesn’t have a patio 10 feet off the back of his property line or something like that. Fisher: I think the answer to that is no. If you remember Sarah Estates we had a number of cases like that. So, no, that would not be – an above ground comparable to the one that they’re having on the side, an above ground patio like that would not be permitted in that rear setback area. Moran: Okay. So, behind your house – which I guess it would be to the west it will remain grass. You won’t have a patio slab there, you won’t have a wooden deck of any kind? Petitioner: No, if we did that it would have been off to the side. It wouldn’t have been back farther. But we have California Red Wood Trees back there and it’s like, you know, but our neighbor does have one. It had the addition put on. They have a patio deck all the way across the back of their yard. Moran: Well, my concern is you’re asking for an accommodation this evening and the neighbor who is objecting most strenuously is immediately behind you. So, I can understand if I’m a neighbor I want some separation. I don’t want you to build out so that you’re virtually sitting on your property line. Petitioner: We’re not. We’re not even going half way back. If you went out and looked -- Moran: I understand. Petitioner: Okay. Moran: I’m talking about putting on other things such as patios and decks. Petitioner: We have no intention. Henzi: Mr. Harb. Harb: Mr. and Mrs. Lee, isn’t the balcony facing north? Petitioner: Yes. Harb: So, are you talking about looking at the Farmington Fireworks or the Livonia Fireworks? Petitioner: The Schoolcraft Fireworks. Harb: The Schoolcraft Fireworks. I’m not familiar with the Schoolcraft Fireworks. That’s all I have. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 37 of 43 March 8, 2011 Henzi: Anything else? Aloe: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: The relocated door wall – this is for Mr. Banko – that’s at the rear of the home; right? Petitioner: No. Aloe: That’s the side? Okay. Thank you. Henzi: Anything else? Caramagno: One more question. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: This balcony for recreation or whatever you called it. Is there ever going to be any plans to put stairs for this to come down to the main level from the outside? Petitioner: No. Caramagno: No plans to walk down from this balcony down to the ground level. Okay. The reason I ask is because you called this a suite almost like a separate portion of the house for your mother to live in. So I didn’t know if this was eventually going to wind up being another additional entrance to this home. Petitioner: No. Caramagno: No. No plan. Okay. Thank you. Petitioner: There’s no room. Harb: Mr. Chair, one more question. I just wanted to address where the door wall is. You know, what Mr. Moran was talking about is that, you know, a patio slab greater than like eight inches above ground is to be frowned on. It seems like the door wall is going to be higher than a foot and a half or so and you’re going to have to have a step up. So, what Mr. Moran and others want to make sure that you’re not going to have like a raised patio other than, you know, the typical six, eight inches above ground. Petitioner: No, sir. Harb: Okay. Henzi: Anything else? I don’t think there is anyone left in the audience to speak. Can you read the letters, please? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 38 of 43 March 8, 2011 Caramagno: [17507 McNamara Drive] Manouk and Sonia Derovakimian (letter was read). We have no comments. Colleen & Ken Schou [17476 McNamara] approval. James Lodge [17560 Myron](letter read) objection. Henzi: Mr. and Mrs. Lee, do you have anything to say in response? Petitioner: No, we don’t even know who that is. Sorry, I don’t know why Myron because I thought – no. Henzi: Anything else in closing then? Petitioner: No, thank you for your time. Henzi: Okay. Moran: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Moran. Moran: Just so we get this hardship correct in our resolution. Is it your parents or your mother? Petitioner: Well, it’s both of them right now but my mother it’s my mother that I was talking about. Moran: Your application says your parents thus my confusion. Petitioner: I’m sorry. I’m a little nervous. It is parents. I have a mother and a step- father. Moran: Thank you. Henzi: Okay. I will close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Moran. Moran: Well, due to the de minimis nature of this I’m fine with it. I can’t tell the difference between 28 feet eight inches and 30 feet. I think it’s going to be a nice addition. The only thing is again I would just offer that I’d like to ensure that it remain open space in the back so that there is no sitting area or something like that and Mr. Fisher told me that that wouldn’t be permitted so I’m sure that will be fine. I’m in support. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno: Caramagno: Yes, it is a minimal request. I will be in support as well. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 39 of 43 March 8, 2011 Aloe: I agree with the other members and I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: I will also be in support. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I will also be in support and I really appreciate you putting the brick on the first floor like the rest of the home and doing a very nice job with this addition. I think you’ve done an excellent job so I will be in full support. Henzi: Mr. Harb. Harb: I agree with Mr. Pastor. I think this is a great proposal. I would not like to see an above ground deck as part of the proposal. Henzi: I will support the variance and echo Mr. Pastor. I think it’s commendable anytime somebody wants to make an addition look like it has existed when the home was built. And I think it is going to look very nice. I don’t know that I’m willing to preclude the Petitioner’s from putting in a small deck on the back or I don’t know if I want to take away their right to ask for a variance for it later but the floor is open for a motion. Harb: They won’t need a variance. Pastor: Well, if you excluded they won’t. Harb: Right. They won’t need it if it’s not included. Henzi: I thought Mr. Fisher, you said if it was a raised structure. Fisher: Well, I guess we’re talking – I guess what Ken is alluding to is the location of the raised structure. If the raised structure is in their rear setback area, then they would need a variance to do that. It’s not obvious why they would do that though because their door wall is actually on the side. So, it seems like if they were going to have a raised structure, it would be on the side instead of on the back. Henzi: Is that what you were saying it was the location you have a problem with? Harb: Well, no, what I’m saying is that we’re basically allowing for a rear yard setback of 28 feet eight inches specifically for the building and below. Fisher: Right. Harb: So, they could have raised structures up to the 28 feet eight inches on either side and it would still fit this variance and what I would like to do is make sure that they don’t have raised patios, you know, which I don’t think they will because of where the location City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 40 of 43 March 8, 2011 of the door wall is. But if they have three foot wide all of a sudden the whole backyard goes out to 28 feet eight inches is rear yard setback. That’s what I would not like to see. Fisher: Well, I assume you guys will require them to do this as presented so that wouldn’t – since they haven’t presented it wouldn’t be approved tonight anyhow and if they wanted to encroach on the 30 foot setback area, they’d have to come back for a variance, or you could preclude by your resolution this evening. Henzi: That’s what you’re trying to do, right? Harb: Well, yeah, I just wanted to point that out because once we give the variance up to 28 feet eight inches, they can do anything they want on either side as long as they don’t go past that; right? Henzi: Right. Fisher: All you have to do to stop that is condition this as presented since they didn’t present that that would otherwise require a variance that would not be permitted under this variance. Henzi: Okay. I think we got it. Moran: In my line of inquiry was I wanted to be certain that it would require a variance to put on any kind of slab back there just to sit on. Harb: No, a slab doesn’t have to because that’s allowable under the ordinance. Moran: I’d like it to remain open space is my point. Pastor: Are you talking the 28 – the rear yard? Moran: Yes. Pastor: You’re not talking about the side yards. Moran: I’m not talking about the side yard. Pastor: Okay. Fisher: Everything beyond the back building line would be green is that what you are saying? Moran: That’s what I’m suggesting. Fisher: Okay. You want that to be a condition. Moran: I’m recommending that. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 41 of 43 March 8, 2011 Fisher: Okay. Moran: And as I understand it, that there’s trees and other foliage back there that’s not a hardship to the Petitioners. Fisher: All right. Henzi: Okay. Is there a motion then? Moran: I’ll do it. Henzi: Mr. Moran. Moran: If everybody’s all right with that. Upon Motion by Moran, supported by Harb, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-03-07: Bill and Sharon Lee, 17505 McNamara Drive, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to construct an addition onto the rear of an existing dwelling resulting in deficient rear yard setback. Rear Yard Setback Allowed: 30 ft. 0 in. Proposed: 28 ft. 8 in. Excess: 1 ft. 4 in. The property is located on the west side of McNamara Drive (17505) between Vacri and Bobrich be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because the Petitioner is interested in adding an addition to an existing dwelling that will adequately house her elderly parents. The uniqueness requirement is further met because the request is de minimis. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because they would not be able to add the necessary space to house her parents. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on the neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because there are no material effects on neighboring properties. 4. The Board received two (2) letters of approval and one (1) letter of objection. 5. The granting of this variance will not adversely affect the purpose or objective of the Master Plan because this property is classified as “Low-density Residential” under the Master Plan, and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 42 of 43 March 8, 2011 FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That the addition be built as presented to the Board. 2. That the construction be commenced within one (1) year and enclosed within 90 days after construction commences. 3. That space behind that the back building line of the addition is to remain open. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Aloe, Caramagno, Harb, Moran, Pastor, Sills, Henzi NAYS: None Petitioner: My new door wall comes out to the side here. We have a cherry tree there right now. Did any of you see it? No. Okay. There’s a weeping cherry tree there. So, that will have to go. So, am I allowed to use that side of the yard, I mean, where we have gravel and stuff like that right now. I mean, am I allowed to have chairs there and stuff? Henzi: Yeah. Moran: On the side. Petitioner: Yes, on the side. Henzi: Yes, that’s the side yard as opposed to in the rear. Rear meaning behind the -- Petitioner: Behind the new addition. Henzi: -- the new addition. Petitioner: We never intended. Henzi: That’s what we thought. Okay. Thank you. Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 43 of 43 March 8, 2011 There being no further business to come before the Board the meeting adjourned at 8:41 p.m. ______________________________ SAM CARAMAGNO, Secretary ______________________________ MATTHEW HENZI, Chairman /hd