Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA MEETING 2014-06-17 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF LIVONIA MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING HELD JUNE 17, 2014 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, June 17, 2014. MEMBERS PRESENT: Matthew Henzi, Chairman Sam Caramagno, Secretary Elizabeth H. McCue Jason Rhines Robert Sills MEMBERS ABSENT: Craig Pastor Michael E. Duggan, Jr. OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Fisher, Assistant City Attorney Scott Kearfott, City Inspector Bonnie J. Murphy, CSR-2300/CER-8225 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Henzi then explained the Rules of Procedure to those interested parties. Each petitioner must give their name and address and declare hardship for appeal. Appeals of the Zoning Board's decisions are made to the Wayne County Circuit Court. The Chairman advised the audience that appeals can be filed within 21 days of the date tonight’s minutes are approved. The decision of the Zoning Board shall become final within five (5) calendar days following the hearing and the applicant shall be mailed a copy of the decision. There are four decisions the Board can make: to deny, to grant, to grant as modified by the Board, or to table for further information. Each petitioner may ask to be heard by a full seven (7) member Board. Five (5) members were present this evening. The Chairman asked if anyone wished . The Secretary then read the Agenda to be heard by a full Board and no one wished to do so 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 27 people present in the audience. (7:05) City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 of 47 June 17, 2014 APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-04-18: Vinyl Sash of Flint, on behalf of John Perreca, 36310 St. Andrews, seeking to construct an open deck resulting in deficient rear yard setback. Rear Yard Setback : Required: 35 ft. Proposed: 25.8 ft. Deficient: 9.2 ft. The property is located on the north side of St. Andrews (36310), between Fairway and Club, Lot. No. 017-02-0118-000, R-4 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 4.05 “Schedule of Minimum Front and Rear Yard Requirements in R-1 through R-5 Districts.” Henzi: Mr. Kearfott, anything to add to this case? Kearfott: Not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for the Inspection Department? Hearing none, will the petitioner please come to the podium? Good evening. Robert Bloss: Robert Bloss, Vinyl Sash. Henzi: How do you spell your last name? Bloss: B-l-o-s-s. Henzi: Mr. Bloss, go ahead and tell us why a variance is required in your opinion. Bloss: These people have a patio door coming out the back of their condo without any way of getting out without building a deck or a set of steps. And this fifteen by twelve set of steps--or deck will have a four foot set of steps that come off the side of it. Henzi: Is there an existing slab? Bloss: No, sir. Henzi: In the packet there is a letter from the Homeowner’s Association, is your client willing to abide by all those requirements? Bloss: Yes. Henzi: Okay. Any questions for the petitioner? Sills: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Sills. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 of 47 June 17, 2014 Sills: Has the petitioner checked with the Engineering Department of Livonia as far as the grade is concerned? Is there going to be any problems with the run off? Bloss: We have applied for a permit for it, which they have but there is no problems whatsoever as far as runoff. They have an application for it. Sills: Did the Engineering Department approve it? Bloss: At this point I am not sure if they have or not. I don’t think that-- Sills: Because there is some questions as to whether the addition on the house would affect the drainage or-- Bloss: If you were at this position the twelve feet projection that we are projecting this deck at comes at a higher level than where the ditch is to the outside. We’re not going out to that area where they have it runoff right now. Sills: So it shouldn’t have any problems with the flow from the Engineering Department? Bloss: No. Sills: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: When you say open deck this is just a deck with no roof on it? Bloss: Correct. Caramagno: What is the picture here--there is a drawing here it looks like there is a roof. Seasonal studio patio room. Is this what we are talking about or are we talking about a deck? Bloss: We are only talking about a deck. Murphy: That was a prior submission he changed to a deck. Caramagno: Okay, so this-- Bloss: The Association would not allow that one. Caramagno: I see. Bloss: That’s why we went to an open deck. Carmagno: I see a picture of the deck but then I seen this as well. I just want to make sure we are clear on that. Bloss: Oh, okay. Caramagno: Okay, thank you. Henzi: I think your packet says it’s going to be the Trex decking? Bloss: Yes. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 of 47 June 17, 2014 Henzi: What color? Bloss: It’s a beige color. Henzi: Was that approved as well as part of that submission to the Homeowner’s Association? Bloss: Yes. Henzi: Any other questions? Hearing none, is there anyone in the audience that wants to speak for or against this project? If so, come on up to the podium. Seeing no one coming forward, are there letters? Caramagno: Yes, we have an approval letter from Katherine Rippe, 36316 St. Andrews (letter read), an approval letter from Debra Merlino, 36329 St. Andrews (letter read), an approval letter from Dana and Mark Lutzo, 36313 St. Andrews (letter read), an approval letter from Charles A. Calomeni, 36320 St. Andrews (letter read) and an objection letter from Cynthia L. Gresens, 36330 St. Andrews. Henzi: I have one more question, Mr. Bloss. There is nothing in the packet that states what the hardship is, it just states why it would look nice. Is there something about the lot or something else that makes it a hardship? Bloss: Because of the fact that they have--I mean if you look at the building codes they should have something coming off that door anyways. They can’t get out or use it at all the way it is it’s eighteen inches off the ground. And also of course they get some place to sit outside and have a little bit of outside as far as the deck provides. Henzi: Okay, anything you want to say in closing? Bloss: I--unless you have some more questions. Henzi: I think your client might want to come up and say something. Good evening. John Perreca: Hi, I’m John Perreca, 36310 St. Andrews. Just to give you a little clearer idea. There are two streets and every home on my side of the street faces like this. My home should have been facing like this and then there wouldn’t have been a problem because there was plenty of room over here. But because for whatever reasons, instead of facing like this, they tilted it this way. Now, I guess I have to take part of the blame because I signed the contract and I saw what he was doing but he should have been telling me that I could only put a seven foot deck off the back or a seven foot whatever. And seven feet you can’t even get a table on there let alone a bar for some adult cocktails and things like. Look all I want to do is enhance the value of my home, number one. And number two have a place to go out and enjoy the weather in the summer. I’m only going out twelve feet. I mean it’s not--I’m planning a distance away from the road behind us. Henzi: Okay. Perreca: That’s my story. Henzi: Thank you. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Sills. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 of 47 June 17, 2014 Sills: I--I could support this petition to a point. I would support it contingent upon the Engineering Department giving their blessings on it as far as the drainage is concerned and there wouldn’t be any problems with the--with the posts being installed to support the deck. Henzi: Mr. Rhines. Rhines: I’ll be in support of this--this appeal. I drove through the neighborhood and just about every other house in the neighborhood has a deck on it. It seems that that is the intent with the neighborhood. And the Homeowner’s Association which is typically more strict in their requirements than even the City is on things like this, they’ve given their blessing on it. So I’ll be in support of this. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: I’m going to support as well. The Homeowner’s Association has given you their approval. You’ve got a peculiar lot there with the backing up to the side street and you are really on a corner lot. I don’t think what you are asking for is too far out of line and I’ll be in support. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I agree for the same reasons as the others. And you know--the Board--or your- -the board in the Neighborhood Association supports it and has given their blessing. Most of your neighbors have a deck as well and most of your neighbors are in support of what it is you want to do so I’ll be support as well. Henzi: I too will support the petition I think there is a hardship. If the house has been configured you wouldn’t even need the variance. They shouldn’t be penalized for the way the house was built. I suggest conditions that it not be enclosed and that it comply with the Homeowner’s Association requirements. So the floor is open for a motion. Rhines: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Rhines. Upon Motion by Rhines, supported by Sills, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-04-18: Vinyl Sash of Flint, on behalf of John Perreca, 36310 St. Andrews, seeking to construct an open deck resulting in deficient rear yard setback. Rear Yard Setback : Required: 35 ft. Proposed: 25.8 ft. Deficient: 9.2 ft. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5 of 47 June 17, 2014 The property is located on the north side of St. Andrews (36310), between Fairway and Club, Lot. No. 017-02-0118-000, R-4 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 4.05 “Schedule of Minimum Front and be granted for the following Rear Yard Requirements in R-1 through R-5 Districts.”, reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because of the peculiar shape of the Petitioner’s lot, how the house was built on the lot, and the way the two roads come together. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because they would not be able to exit their home into their backyard and enjoy the warm weather like the rest of their neighbors. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because there are many houses in their neighborhood with similar decks and they have the approval of the Condominium Association. 4. The Board received four (4) letters of approval and one (1) objection letter from neighboring property owners. 5. The property is classified as “Low Density Residential” in the Master Plan and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That the Petitioner abide by the regulations of his Homeowners’ Association. 2. That the Petitioner receive approval from the Engineering Department concerning run-off. 3. That the deck not be enclosed. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6 of 47 June 17, 2014 ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Rhines, Sills, McCue, Caramagno, Henzi NAYS: None ABSENT: Duggan, Pastor Henzi: The variance is granted, I will read the conditions one more time. You’ve got to comply with the Homeowner’s Association requirements, you’ve got to have the Engineering Department approve for runoff concerns and it cannot be enclosed. Good luck to you. Perrecca: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 7 of 47 June 17, 2014 APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-06-31: Joseph Rose, on behalf of Bernita Bullock, lessee, 30295 Plymouth, seeking to operate a day care/child care development business upon property resulting in deficient number of parking spaces and deficient fenced in play area. Number of Parking Spaces Outdoor Play Area Required: 29 Required: 5,000 sq. ft. Proposed: 19 Proposed: 4,692 sq. ft. Deficient: 10Deficient: 308 sq. ft. The property is located on the south side of Plymouth (30295), between Middlebelt and Milburn, Lot. No. 137-99-0001-000, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.38 (22) “Off-Street Parking; Schedule,” and 11.02 “Permitted Uses,” Henzi: Mr. Kearfott anything to add to this case? Kearfott: Not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for the Inspection Department? I have one. Scott, do you know how the parking spots--required spots are calculated. Is it based on employees plus projected patrons? Kearfott: I do not know how they based that. Mike, would you know? Fisher: No, but I can look it up and maybe answer this. Henzi: Okay. Sills: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: May I ask how close the nearest day care center is to this one being proposed? Kearfott: I do not know. Bullock: I could answer the question. Henzi: We’ll give you a chance. Sills: That’s all I have. Henzi: Anything else for Inspection? Fisher: In answer to your question, the parking area shall be at least equal to that area needed to provide one parking space for each 200 square feet of floor area. Henzi: Thank you. Okay, would the petitioner please come forward? Good evening. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8 of 47 June 17, 2014 Bullock: Good evening. Hi, good evening. My name is Bernita Bullock I am for 30295 Plymouth Road, Livonia, Michigan. I’m here today to ask you for whether a variance for a reduction in my parking lot, or a reduction in the child play area. If I--I don’t need--I do not need 5000 square feet of outdoor play area and I do not need 29 spaces for parking. My employees--I would have one to five employees that would be there eight hours at a time and my parents will only be there to pick up and drop off the children. And the children will be picked up and dropped off according to the parents work scheduled not according to the center being open. Henzi: You said that you knew where the nearest day care center was? Where is that? Bullock: Yes, it’s two miles down. It’s on Merriman and Farmington Road, which is Learning Tree. Murphy: It’s Plymouth-- Henzi: Oh, Plymouth between Merriman and Farmington? Bullock: Yes, I’m sorry. Henzi: Can you tell us a little bit about how many kids are there? We’re trying to get a flavor for-- Bullock: Well, they have-- Henzi: --you know, when you say I don’t need this--these many spots tell us how many people will be there at one time, that sort of thing. Bullock: Well, I have a--currently I have a school in Detroit which I’m licensed for a hundred children. And it’s been incorporated for 43 years and I have been there for fifteen. And we only use--we have outdoor parking--we have street parking and it’s only three parents at a time that drop off the kids. It’s never no more than three parents. And I could tell you that from experience from being there for fifteen years that when a child’s dropped off--when a parent drops off a child at eight o’clock there’s no more than three parents at one time that have to be at work at the same time. If you have to be at work today at seven o’clock, the chances of somebody else having to be at work at seven o’clock too is very rare. So I don’t need--that’s why I’m saying I don’t need--I could--I’m asking for either or, a reduction in the parking or a reduction of the play area. Either one I can work with because the State says I only need twelve hundred square feet of outdoor play area. The City of Livonia is asking for four times the recommended what the State says. And that’s a--it’s an attainable number but because the building was never set up for a child care center or a church, that’s why it is lacking the space. Henzi: How big of an outdoor play area do you have at your center now? Bullock: I have 7000 square feet but it was a church that was there first. And the church blocked off the whole back of the church because they was going to put a parking lot there and they changed their mind and fenced it off for the school. Henzi: How many kids would you have at the Livonia center? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 9 of 47 June 17, 2014 Bullock: Well I would be a startup. I won’t be like I am with my Detroit center so I wanted to be licensed for 150 but I’m not going to get a 150 the first year because that’s just impossible for a startup to grow that quick. Henzi: And then what are the proposed hours? Bullock: The proposed hours is 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Henzi: And then when you say 150 is it the type of daycare center where kids come and go or do they all attend a set schedule? Bullock: No, its--if--they come and go according to their parent’s work schedule. Henzi: Okay. Bullock: We will have a set schedule for the children all day but they won’t be there all day. Most parents only work eight hours and an hour to get there and an hour to get back so most children will be there maybe ten hours a day. And the center down the street has 200. Henzi: If you only had to have the 1200 square feet outdoor play area do you know how many parking spots you could get in the back? Bullock: The back yard--the building takes up 15 spots, the 5000 square feet take up 15 parking spots, so I will only--1200 will only use up five so I would have my 29 spots. Henzi: Okay. The last question I have for you is we were given a piece of paper today with the site plan-- Bullock: I have--I have--I made you two site plans, one for if you reduce the parking lot and the other is for if you reduce the play area. Henzi: So this one says the outdoor play area if you reduced to 60 by 22? Bullock: Yes. Henzi: Then you would have the parents turn around and more parking? Bullock: Yes. Henzi: At the rear of the property? Bullock: Yes. Henzi: Thank you, that’s all the questions I have. Any other questions? Rhines: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Rhines. Rhines: This site plan, I assume it’s an old one, it says new addition? Bullock: No--no, it’s not a old one that’s the way it is now. The people before me they built a new addition onto the building. Rhines: Okay. That’s not something you’re proposing to do-- Bullock: No--no--no, that was already there. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10 of 47 June 17, 2014 Rhines: Okay. Do you think the parents will have to use the parking lot next door-- Bullock: No. Rhines: --in the back of the other building? Bullock: No. Rhines: So you--there’s a shared driveway between the properties-- Bullock: Yes. Rhines: --but actually I am very familiar with this whole area so-- Bullock: If--I’m sorry--if Mr. George blocks off this area he has his own driveway on the other side of his building. And my parents and customers will be able to use this side and he will be able to use this side. Rhines: And that’s a guaranteed shared driveway? Bullock: That’s a guarantee--yes. And I talked to Mr. Rose--Mr. Joseph Rose, he said he was there for twenty years before Mr. George was there and he always let Mr. George use his parking lot for his customers. He said he doesn’t understand why it’s an issue with me using--me using his--I mean it’s been going like this for twenty years, that’s what he told me. Rhines: Mr. George, he’s the one that owns the building next door? Bullock: Yes. Rhines: And he doesn’t--and you’re saying he does not want you using his parking spots? Bullock: Yes. Rhines: And that’s what I wanted to make sure that that was a shared driveway because it didn’t look like with those electrical poles that there was room to drive between your building and the electrical poles if-- Bullock: Yes. Rhines: --you have to use that shared driveway? Bullock: Yes, but--but if he blocks off his he still has his own drive on the other side. Rhines: If he blocks off the parking in the back you mean so that you can’t get to it? Bullock: Yes. Rhines: Do you how big of a gap that would be between the last pole? I feel like I’m going to have--it would be nice if I could go take a look again with this new information-- do you know how much room there would be if he blocked off his parking lot between the last pole and the-- Bullock: I--I--what I did was for--for the outdoor play area was a total of the 74 feet that’s across. If you see--if you see that that’s the 74 feet. Rhines: Okay. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 11 of 47 June 17, 2014 Bullock: So, it was an electrical pole right there on the corner where you see it looks like it says 97.62 that’s an electrical pole right there, I know that for a fact. Do you see that? Where the outdoor play area in the back you see looks like it says 92.62 that’s an electrical pole right there. Oh I see it says 24 feet. Rhines: I’m sorry, I am not seeing that. Bullock: Yeah, it’s 24 feet. Did you say how far is it from the building from the pole? It says right here 24.55. Rhines: We are either talking about two different things or my drawing--or my sketch might be different. McCue: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: He is stating that it is 22.5. Bullock: 22? Kearfott: 22.85 inches-- McCue: Between the building and the pole. Kearfott: --between the utility pole and the building. Bullock: Okay. Henzi: Any other questions? Rhines: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Rhines. Rhines: So--so do you know, I mean perhaps you do or don’t know--do you know where your neighbor would be allowed to block off his parking lot? Did you talk to somebody about that yet? Bullock: Well, if he blocked off his parking lot, his parking lot will--his parking lot will end at the point of his property. That’s his door, you see the word commercial building and you 93.00 that’s his door--that’s his front door right there. And then the whole blank area in the back is all his parking. Rhines: So he would--but the driveway is a shared driveway-- Bullock: Yes. Rhines: --how far back does that driveway go? Bullock: The driveway goes all the way back to the back of the building. Rhines: Back to-- Bullock: All the way back to the outdoor play area. It goes all the way back. Rhines: Are you--are you renting the building or buying it? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 12 of 47 June 17, 2014 Bullock: I’m doing a six month lease and then after the first year I will be purchasing it for $600,000.00. Rhines: And what do you have to do for the playground? Do you have to build a fence back there? Bullock: Yes, I have to put the--the City of Livonia says it has to be a vinyl fence and the Inspection Department told me they are not going to come out until my vinyl fence is up and I’m here today not because I have my business license already because they’ll not give me my business license until I come here for you to tell me it’s okay or not for me to even have the fence or the parking. Which I had a business before, I have one right now and I’ve never heard of this but this is the way Livonia is. But I want to be in Livonia because the demand is high. And you all have very large commercial buildings next to Detroit--but you know you have very large commercial buildings--and a lot of them are vacant and property owners are willing to sell them for pretty cheap. And that’s what I’m trying to do is purchase this and make a living--a career for me and my family. Rhines: Well, my kids are beyond the age of daycare but if you are right and there is a demand then we’d love to have you here. We’d love to meet that demand so that people can find daycare and get to work but we also want to make sure that the building works within what you are trying to do and that you’ve got enough parking spots and that there is enough play area. One more--I think one more question. When you fence--the area that you fence does that remain black top or do you have to have tear out some black top and-- Bullock: No, I don’t have to according to the State of Michigan play yard inspector that if it’s asphalt I could put bikes out there and they could play out there with bikes. If--grass is not required by the State of Michigan. Rhines: Thank you. No more questions. Henzi: Any other questions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: I’m looking at the picture here and I was out to your location yesterday. Looking at the picture here now that I understand it a little more clearly. So off the corner of your building you go to the property line with your fence to accomplish your whole outdoor play area-- Bullock: Yes. Caramagno: You’ve got the utility poles that run what look like down an easement between the two properties? Bullock: Yes. Caramagno: Other than you saying that is a joint driveway there is clearly--in the picture there is clearly a separation of the two properties. The party store looks like it is concrete and your property or the property that you are looking at is asphalt. Bullock: Mm-hmm. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 13 of 47 June 17, 2014 Caramagno: What do you have that says that’s a joint driveway? Bullock: That’s from Mr. Rose and Mr. Richard George that has been that way. He--Mr. Rose was there first and then Mr. George came after. Caramagno: Mr. Rose owns the building that you are looking at? Bullock: Yes. Caramagno: And Mr. George bought or put the building with the party store afterward? Bullock: Yes. Caramagno: It’s looking like to me that Mr. George invested his money in a cement driveway, it must be his property. Bullock: They must have made arrangements because that’s what he told me that they made an arrangement twenty years ago. Caramagno: Do you have anything in writing that acknowledges that arrangement? Bullock: No, because Mr. George won’t sign anything. Caramagno: Well that’s difficult then. If he won’t allow you to use that driveway-- Bullock: It’s not his driveway. If you look at it how else--if they block--if he blocks off that part that driveway it’s a half of driveway, nobody can even use that driveway. Caramagno: If he blocks off that driveway the place you’re intending to park cars becomes your driveway. Bullock: No, it’s not because it’s a cement block right there in front of it. You can’t--you cannot use that as a driveway. Caramagno: Okay, so in my mind that’s--that’s a problem at least right now in my mind. You’re parking on the side of the building so you will have your cars in towards the building--your building that’s 22 feet I think I heard between the building and the poles there. How many spots are there between the back of your building and-- Bullock: Nineteen. Caramagno: There is nineteen what? Bullock: Nineteen parking spots? Caramagno: How wide? Bullock: Seven feet each. Caramagno: Only seven foot wide spots? Bullock: Yes. Caramagno: Double striped or single striped? Bullock: Single. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 of 47 June 17, 2014 Caramagno: Okay, and you’re tight so backing out is tight with the building behind you-- the party store. As you are backing out of your parking spot you will almost hit that building before you can get out of your parking spot. Bullock: That’s one--it’s impossible that Mr. Joseph Rose and Mr. Richie didn’t go half on that parking lot--I mean didn’t go half on the driveway. Caramagno: Nothing is impossible if it is not written down, nothing is impossible. So I think-- Bullock: Well how else would Mr. Rose use that parking lot for the last twenty years? All these other businesses have been using it for twenty years before me. Caramagno: I don’t know that, I mean--I don’t know that, I am sure they have. But you mention it yourself and I’m sure you mentioned it, if he closes the parking lot. Bullock: Well I mentioned it because Mr. George has called half the Board and has called everybody in here complaining. So--so--so-- Caramagno: I don’t know who Mr. George is, I have no idea. Bullock: I brought it up because it’s no secret that Mr. Richard George has called everybody in the City of Livonia. Caramagno: He has not called me, I don’t know who the man is. Bullock: Well he called everybody else. I’m surprised he don’t have you on speed dial. Caramagno: Where is your--where is your entrance to this building is it on the front or on the back? Bullock: The entrance is on the front. Caramagno: Okay, so-- Bullock: Entrance on the front and entrance on the back. Caramagno: So if you are parking alongside there how do you walk around to the front? Do you walk between the car and the building or do you walk around behind the cars? How do you get around with a child--how do you get around up to the front of the building? Where do you walk, down the center of the driveway? Bullock: No. Caramagno: Or are you going to put parking blocks along here between the-- Bullock: I will--I will block off whatever I need to block off for the safety of the children. I’ve never had issue with parking ever before, my parents at my other center park on the street. They park in the street, they let the children out on the passenger side, bring the children in, sign them in, and they leave and go to work. Caramagno: Now you can’t do that on Plymouth Road, you can’t let them out on the street. Bullock: No, they are not going to be let out on Plymouth Road because I have a parking lot. Why would I let them out on Plymouth Road? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 of 47 June 17, 2014 Caramagno: Let me ask Scott. Scott, what is the length of a parking spot? Typical length of a parking spot? Do you have that? Bullock: That’s the-- Kearfott: I’ll look real quick. Caramagno: What is the width of a parking spot? Kearfott: Nine to ten feet. Sills: I think it’s ten by twenty. Henzi: Ten by twenty. Caramagno: So we are talking about seven here and we’ve only got 22 feet of total length. I don’t know how--that’s the couple questions I’ve got. Bullock: How do you see 22 feet? I’m measuring from the front of the building to the back of the outdoor play area all that is parking. Caramagno: I’m talking about between you--the side--the west side of your building and the separation of asphalt versus concrete which is--it looks like is the dividing line. Bullock: Okay, what’s the difference with a parent pulling up at Target and pulling their children out in the parking lot and going inside? There’s no barriers. Caramagno: We’re talking about parking and the parking variance. That’s what you are here for isn’t it? Bullock: Right, I’m here for--I’m here for-- Caramagno: So we are looking at the parking spots and the size of them. Bullock: I’m here for either or. I’m here for either a reduction in the parking or a reduction in the outdoor play area. Caramagno: Well right now I’m looking at the parking and I like the larger play area myself. Especially for a 150 kids, that’s a lot of kids. Bullock: Well all the kids don’t go out there at one time. You take them out in increments. That’s how elementary schools do it. If they took out a thousand kids at one time they wouldn’t have enough outdoor play area. Caramagno: Sure. Bullock: So children have certain times. You go to lunch at 10:30, you go outside for 45 minutes. The next group goes to lunch at 11:30 they go out for 45 minutes. Caramagno: Okay. Bullock: This is how the elementary schools and middle schools been doing it for years. And this is the way the State tells me I have to do it also. So I will accommodate to the State law and also with Livonia law. Rhines: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Rhines. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 of 47 June 17, 2014 Rhines: We are very pro-business in Livonia if we need another daycare that is great, but I just don’t--from what I can tell so far I don’t see it fitting so well on this property in particular. If--unless--especially the driveway is not--you know--is not in writing that you can use that shared driveway there because if he ever sold that building, if they tore it down, if they got rid of that driveway, if you’re planning on parking next to the building, that would have to be from your driveway to that building if the other driveway becomes unusable. So, among the other difficulties you’ve still got--you still have a deficiency in parking spots and or play area but even before we consider that we’ve got to know that that is a guaranteed thing that you will be able use that driveway. Bullock: If the parking--if the--if I have to tell the parents to park to the farther back which they can. They don’t have to park--they can pull up to the driveway--they can pull up to the driveway and then they can park past the building--past the end of the building. Rhines: Yeah, in order to have room to turn around if you took Mister--and I’m calling him Mr. George, I don’t know his name, I’ve never talked to him, but you’ve called him Mr. George so I’m calling him Mr. George. If Mr. George--Mr. George’s parking lot and driveway went completely away, I’m just guessing because I am not there right now with a tape measure but there would only be five or six or seven parking spots if you had to turn your--the area next to your building into a driveway and get rid of that cement block and use that as a driveway. And then they had to come around the corner of the building and they had to turn into parking spots so if we granted the smaller playing area-- Bullock: They would have room to turn around. Rhines: Yeah, but there would only be room for six or seven if you parked there. And then they would back out into this very small space not hitting Mr. George’s property and there would really be--if--if we are not guaranteed to be able to use his driveway, you might be looking for a variance to have only a smaller play area and only six or seven parking spots. Bullock: Well I’m looking at it now and it says 24 feet, Mr. (inaudible) said it was 22.05 if the parking--if the width and the length of a parking lot is seven by ten feet, they have ten feet to back up, go back that way, turn around in the back of the building and come back forward. They will have that. Rhines: Yeah, I’m not denying that, there might be room to back up there, but then--but if you weren’t able to park next to your building then there would only be--and I’m just guessing I had to measure it--there might only be six or seven or eight parking spots. Bullock: But if I am allowed to park right there, then we would have the room. Rhines: You would still have less than the required but you would have as you said nineteen seven foot--again we are going by what you said because I haven’t measured it. But first and foremost we’ve got to see something in writing that the building next to you cannot be sold and that parking--and that driveway cannot be taken away from you. I mean otherwise you don’t have nineteen spots you’ve got about six or seven. Bullock: In the back of the building on the side--on the side of this building is nothing but grass. If I tear out the back where they could go around and go through the other side City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 17 of 47 June 17, 2014 would that be okay? Where there would be one way in, they could come in, park, pull out and then go around to the back? Rhines: That wouldn’t be a question this Board can answer, I would think that is more of a Planning Commission-- Bullock: Well that would be a site plan that I will--that I could show you today that we will cut out and the parents will be able to pull out that way. It would be one way in and I won’t have to use the next door neighbors at all. Rhines: If that were-- Bullock: And the thing is this is my cost. No one is paying for this but me. You know, I want to be here. I would like to invest in Livonia. I’m trying to put in almost a million dollars in this city, I’m doing the best I can. And it seems like I’m getting like--you know- -stopped. Everywhere I go--you know--because like I said I’m not able to apply for a business license until I get this done first. And that is unheard of. I’ve never heard of that before. So you know I’m getting stopped in Livonia. But Livonia has a high demand for what I do and I have two degrees, one in accounting and one in early childhood development. I am a professional if I am nothing else. And I see a demand in this City and I would like to offer quality child care. I’m not offering that stuff you see on TV where the peoples getting killed or child abuse--no. My center is the best, Peter Rabbit is the best in Detroit. It is one of the best in the inner suburbs. Okay, nobody can compete with my center--no one. And I will offer the same quality center here in Livonia. Rhines: Well, then it will probably be successful but this Board we are just looking at the parking and the playground set back-- Bullock: Okay. Rhines: --and right now I don’t have enough information to feel confident that there is enough parking spots or enough play area. But I don’t have any more questions about the parking and the play area right now. McCue: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I’m with everybody else on the Board as far as we are totally pro-business in Livonia. And trust me when I say we are all very familiar with that location and we would love to have your business in that location. I can guarantee it. I think what they are truly trying to say here is it is really in your best interest to figure out that situation--that driveway before you put that million dollars into that situation. None of us want to see you going into that location and finding out after the fact you are going to have a problem. So, again, we don’t want it to appear that we are stalling or holding--we are really looking out for your best interest and I think because we’ve done this for a long time we have seen how some things can work out. And I agree I think maybe--are we looking at more of a tabling type of situation where we can get some more information. Truly we are here to help you. We want to make it work for you. But I do think it is in your best interest in that particular location, and I know it well to get a game plan as to how that driveway is going to work before you go any further. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 18 of 47 June 17, 2014 Henzi: I have a question more questions, Miss Bullock. Is Mr. Rose here tonight? Bullock: No, he is not here. Henzi: Did he ever tell you that there is a written document called a shared parking agreement? Bullock: Yeah, but Mr. George won’t sign it. Henzi: Well that’s--okay-- Bullock: He--he-- Henzi: --is there a signed shared parking agreement? Bullock: It was an arrangement between Mr. Rose and Mr. George for twenty years. And then when I said I want to buy the building next door then he said oh, I’m not agreeing to it. Henzi: So the two business owners had an informal agreement? Mr. Rose wants to sell the building? Bullock: Yes. Henzi: He then formalizes it because in order to sell the building to you he wants you to buy it he has to get the shared parking agreement, so there is not a signed agreement? Bullock: No. Henzi: Okay. Did you measure the spots in the back-- Bullock: Yes, it’s fifteen spots. Henzi: And they are all seven feet wide? Bullock: Yes. Henzi: What about any other spots on the property? Bullock: There was nineteen on the side of the building made a total of thirty-four. Henzi: What’s the dimensions of those spots? Bullock: All of them measured seven feet. Henzi: What was this building used for if you know? Bullock: It was a carpet place for many years--carpet wholesale for many years. Henzi: Wholesale or retail? Bullock: Carpet where they brought in big trucks in of carpet. It used to be New York Carpet World for years and then it was an independent contractor for years after that. Henzi: Do you know whether it was a retail establishment, meaning the people off the street are coming in to shop? Bullock: In the--I--I don’t know--oh, it used to be a fireworks place at one time. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 19 of 47 June 17, 2014 Henzi: Do you understand what I’m--the reason I am getting at--you mentioned Target. There is a big difference between Target which has customers that go in and out for twenty to forty minutes each and there is constant turnover of the cars. And you wouldn’t know this but this Board generally has a policy that we like to see ten foot wide double striped spots in those type of retail places because you are constantly going to have people opening up their car, getting the car seat out, whatever. Understand? It is different than like an office building where somebody is going to go and park there from 9:00 to 5:00 and they are the only one that is ever going to use the spot. So in--as we try and configure some kind of compromise over should we decrease the amount of outdoor play area and give you more spots, those are the things that we are thinking about because we generally don’t like seven foot wide spots. Especially when you are saying you are going to have constant turnover. So that is where we are coming from in terms of the size of the spots. And that is why I am asking what was the nature of the business before so I can compare it to what you are going to use it for. Rhines: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Rhines. Rhines: One last question. Have you looked around Livonia to see if there are any other buildings? Is there a particular reason why you would prefer this building? Bullock: I would prefer that building because Wal-Mart, LA Fitness, and Target is right behind me. Rhines: Okay. Bullock: That’s my market. Rhines: That makes sense. There are no other buildings in the area that would-- Bullock: No, I want that building. Rhines: Okay. Henzi: I had another line of questioning. Can you explain--a few minutes ago you came up with maybe option C, which was-- Bullock: Tear off the back. Henzi: Yes, so it’s going to be like a u-shaped, that’s the way that I understood it, is that what you are talking about? Bullock: No, just cut it out where they could just go next door it’s nothing but an empty lot next door. Henzi: Right. Bullock: And cut it out where they can just go one way and go out one way. There is nothing but grass and--there is nothing but grass and a big empty driveway on the side. I could just cut into the grass and then the parents can just go right out. Henzi: And then--I mean are you building a new driveway to exit onto Plymouth or are you saying go out the back the existing-- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 20 of 47 June 17, 2014 Bullock: Well in the back of the--this--on the whole side of the building if you still have the picture of it--the whole side of the building is a driveway to LA Fitness, the driveway to Target, the driveway to Wal-Mart, that’s a shared driveway between all of the businesses. So if I was to cut the grass part out and concrete it, the parents would be able to go one way and then go out to the existing concrete that is out there now. Henzi: That might be the best bet. Bullock: And I will--I mean I could it draw it right now and they could do that right now and I could start doing the work-- Henzi: Well let me ask you this. Do you like that traffic flow or are you saying I’ll do that only if I have to? Bullock: I’m doing--I’ll do it to get approved with the Board. I would like to have this business at this establishment. Henzi: I understand, but would that be a preferable traffic flow? Bullock: It would be an expensive traffic flow because I have to tear that stuff out-- Henzi: Okay. Bullock: --to--to accommodate it. Yes, it would be expensive but I mean I would do it if that says I could have the building. Kearfott: Are you talking on the east side of the building? Bullock: This side. Kearfott: Where all the landscaping is? Bullock: No--yeah, the west side. Kearfott: The west side is where the party store is. Bullock: Okay, well the east side. Kearfott: The east side? Bullock: Yeah. Kearfott: And that landscaping that you want to tear up-- Bullock: I won’t--I won’t cut that out no, I will cut out just a spot for the people to drive out it won’t be the landscaping. Not--I’m not talking about on the side of the building where the fence is up, they have beautiful flowers and shrubs out there, I’m not talking about that, in the very back there is nothing back there but grass. And I’ll cut that part out where the parents could just go one way in and go out. Kearfott: So you are saying you would cut open a spot through the landscaping on the back side of the white vinyl fence-- Bullock: In the grass part. Kearfott: --and go into the LA Fitness parking lot and use that to go out to Plymouth Road. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 21 of 47 June 17, 2014 Bullock: Actually I wasn’t thinking about that but yeah I could do that too. But I wasn’t talking about that, I was talking about to the side. But I wasn’t going to mess with the landscaping there or the fencing. It’s a spot back there that is completely blank with nothing but grass. Kearfott: Because I think that landscaping is LA Fitness’s, you know, I don’t think she can just blanket get rid of it unless she had some sort of agreement with them. Henzi: Okay. Bullock: What about the side? It’s the side too, that is not LA Fitness. Kearfott: What’s that? Bullock: It’s the side--the side of the building the whole side, it’s a corner--it’s a corner lot I don’t have to go into LA Fitness I could right to the side where they pull up and make an L shape and go to the other side, and that’s not LA Fitness. Kearfott: Without seeing something how do you--we don’t have any plans or anything like that. Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: I think there are some ideas here but we are certainly not going to figure out tonight. I think if we entertain a tabling motion we could look at this. You can look at the feet you have here, the parking spaces with the ten by twenty spots, or something like. Your traffic flow through and cut through, find out if you do own that or if LA Fitness owns that landscape. I don’t know who owns that, I don’t see a clear plot plan here but you have some options. And I think if we table this tonight you can go back and relook at this and see maybe there is a--maybe there is an agreement on this driveway that can be had. Not parking agreement but a mutual use driveway. Maybe you can get that; that makes a big--big difference here. So I don’t think it is something we are going to figure out tonight in my opinion. Rhines: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Rhines. Rhines: Yeah, there’s a--I know what you are talking about on the other side. There is like a pavement there between this building and Huntington Bank I think is the next building going to the east and there is just an open parking lot. But for all we know the developer has plans some day of putting something there or LA Fitness might own it. But that’s another thing that needs to be figured out before we would say, oh, yes everything is great to just bust through there and drive onto somebody else’s parking lot that we don’t know what they plan on doing with it. So just some research I agree with my colleagues we’ve got to do--or you’ve got to do some more research and maybe talk to some of the other neighbors and see if there is another option for you. Henzi: Any other questions for the petitioner? Hearing none, is there anyone in the audience that wants to speak for or against the project? If so, come on up to the podium. You can have a seat Miss Bulllock, I will call you back when everyone has spoken. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 22 of 47 June 17, 2014 Bullock: I would like to add--if you don’t mind. Henzi: Go ahead. Bullock: I really need an answer today of yea or nay. This process is really a headache. I’ve never experienced this ever before in my life. I really feel this is racism but I would really like to know a yea or nay tonight. I--I--I would love to invest in Livonia but this is just--it is unbearable for me. So, if you would be most gracious and please give me yea or nay tonight, I don’t--I can’t come back tonight and go through this again with you guys. Christopher Martin: Christopher Martin, 12275 Inkster Road, Livonia, 48150. Somewhat familiar with this City. I’ve gone to a lot of meetings over the years. I just want to mention a daycare center that was talked about earlier in the discussion. It’s the one on the south side of Plymouth Road, it’s the old Bill Knapps. I watched that go through the process and on that particular parcel they were severely deficient in fenced in area for the children to play even though they put in an addition on the building. Their reasoning and how they got approval is they said well, we’ll just walk the kids right across the street because the City owned property there that the--one of the branch libraries is at, we’ll just use that. I have yet to see the kids over there to be honest with you. That was done a number of years ago. So to have deficient play area fenced in, they certainly have it. I can understand this woman’s frustration, I just spent with good behavior I just spent 26 days in jail, building code violations. I’ve been in front of this Board--some of you have been here--numerous times for having fencing approved at my business on Inkster Road there to keep the thieves out. I know how frustrating it is but I hear constantly how business friendly Livonia is. And it just depends on who you are. And if you indeed want to play the game and there is a game--it’s a money game. So I’m sorry for this woman, she appears to have her heart set on this thing. And I know you are going to table it and you are going to want her to come back with some additional information or whatever. All I can tell you is is that Bill Knapps, okay, they added an addition on that building which further shrinked (sic) the enclosed play area for those kids outside and that was still approved. I sat and watched it. So that’s just my view on it. I’ll speak on the item on the agenda the next one that is coming up because that is another one that has been discussed numerous times. But it is just unfortunate. I feel you will probably break her heart over it but I know a lot of other business owners that have been put in the same position. So, that’s my thought on it after being almost a 62 year resident within this City. Any questions for me? Henzi: Sure, Mr. Martin did you review the Bill Knapps--the Learning Tree South on project files in the last week or so? Martin: Did I review it last week? Henzi: Within the last couple of weeks? I mean did you go down to the ZBA office and pull the files? Martin: No, I sat through the meetings Matt. Henzi: Okay. Martin: Okay. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 23 of 47 June 17, 2014 Henzi: Do you remember if parking was an issue on that case? Because I remember that one but I don’t remember if parking was an issue. Martin: I know that the enclosed area for the children to play I remember that specifically because they viewed as it would be no problem walking the kids across the street to use the City owned property. But once again, that is not enclosed--it’s not an enclosed area. Henzi: No, my question was was deficient parking an issue in that case? Did they get a variance for that issue? Martin: I don’t remember that Matt I was just--I go to a lot of meetings Matt. One thing I do remember is they were severely deficient in the enclosed play area. Henzi: Yeah, I got it, I remember. Martin: And that is one of her issues-- Henzi: Yeah. Martin: --along with parking. And them Sam wanted to throw in who owns the ingress and egress okay. If it’s been established and it’s been that way for a number of years I think it is difficult to undo it. It’s almost a formal trespass in a way--an ongoing trespass. And if no one-- Caramagno: Thanks for the opinion. I think it was a valid question. Martin: Well I thought you were acting like it was the O.J. Simpson case here or something and you were--that’s the way I looked at it. Caramagno: No, valid question. Martin: Okay. Henzi: Does anyone else want to speak for or against the project? If so, come on up. Are there letters on this case? Caramagno: No letters. Henzi: Miss Bullock is there anything you would like to say in closing? Bullock: No. Henzi: Okay. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Rhines. Rhines: Well you’ve asked for an approval or denial today which I understand where-- your reasons, you’re frustrated. I’m not going to be able to vote for an approval today. There’s two deficiencies of the play area and the parking and there is too many unknowns of whether you would even be able to use that building for this purpose. If the building next door sells, or if he decides to block it off and the comments of the last resident should be--you know--should be legal because it’s been that way for twenty years, I mean I don’t know how--I mean if he chose to block it off I don’t know how long it would take to get through the Court and whether you win that or you don’t you might be six months to a year without being able to use your business. So to think that--you know speaking for myself, to think that I am doing anything different than trying to look out for your best City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 24 of 47 June 17, 2014 interest and the best interest for the use of this building is crazy. I would love to see you open a daycare in Livonia, I would love to see you open a daycare here if you can find out a way to make it work. But I’m not seeing it so I can’t vote something that I just don’t see how we know this is going to work. I’d like to table it because there might be answers. That’s not a stall tactic, that’s not you know to try to give you more headaches. I’d like to table it because there might be ways to make it work. But I can’t vote for something right now when those ways of making it work haven’t been--haven’t been presented to me. So I would not be able to support it. I would not be able to support approval but I would be able to support a tabling resolution to allow you or us to get more information. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: I would also support a tabling resolution although that’s not something that you seem to be interested in. I haven’t on this Board seen a parking case issue where I’ve gotten a drawing that didn’t illustrate the parking spots. Let alone a driveway that is shared that is not--not a signed intent--no approval there. So it’s either a tabling motion for me or no. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I agree. As I stated earlier that we just need more information and again it is as much to your benefit as it is to the City. And that is what our job is to decide what the best interest is for all parties. And for me right now we need more information. And I would support a tabling resolution if that is what you choose to do. If not, it will have to be a no for me. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: I agree with my colleagues and I couldn’t have said it any better than Mr. Rhines had said it. There are too many unknowns here, there are too many options that the petitioner could take and to stand there and say she has to have an answer tonight one way or the other, I couldn’t vote for that because there are just too many unknowns here. Henzi: I echo the comments of the other Board members. I do remember the old Bill Knapps restaurant that was turned into the Learning Tree South. I believe that that petitioner came back at least to a second meeting and maybe even more. I remember there was a great deal of detail. There was a lot a talk about how the fence was going to be modified and things like that. So in my mind I’d like to see this project go forward. I think that there is room for compromise. I would give a break on the outdoor play area. But I have to echo Mr. Caramagno’s comments, when we get a case with parking we need to see where the spots are going to go because then we figure out okay if you are short ten, how about if you are short twelve but we make them bigger spots. Because now is the chance to make that kind of fix for the way that this project looks going forward. I’m concerned that the adjoining landowner is going to block off the shared driveway and this is going to be a mess. And I think that there is a way to fix this I just--I can’t support the way that this exists, the way that it was presented. I think that I need more information. If the petitioner doesn’t want to come back that is fine, if the petitioner does come back you know I will visit the site again. I would like to see proposals for parking. I would like to know the ownership structure. This is not--this isn’t like the other case on Plymouth Road. This is an out building in a large commercial area. It’s a super center City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 25 of 47 June 17, 2014 parking lot. It doesn’t border Sheldon Park. And so I am loathe to just go ahead and give something away without having some input on how the parking and the traffic flow is going to look. So having said that, the floor is open for a motion. And let me add one more thing about a tabling resolution. A tabling resolution and I say this to everybody when we are about to table, is for your benefit because if we denied it, you would have to pay to come back if you changed your plan. If we table it you don’t have to pay to come back, we just reschedule. So for having said that, the floor is open for a motion. Upon Motion by Sills, supported by McCue, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-06-31: Joseph Rose, on behalf of Bernita Bullock, lessee, 30295 Plymouth, seeking to operate a day care/child care development business upon property resulting in deficient number of parking spaces and deficient fenced in play area. Number of Parking Spaces Outdoor Play Area Required: 29 Required: 5,000 sq. ft. Proposed: 19 Proposed: 4,692 sq. ft. Deficient: 10Deficient: 308 sq. ft. The property is located on the south side of Plymouth (30295), between Middlebelt and Milburn, Lot. No. 137-99-0001-000, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.38 (22) “Off-Street Parking; Schedule,” and 11.02 “Permitted be tabled so the Petitioner can accrue more information and come back before the Uses,” Board with additional options. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Sills, McCue, Rhines, Caramagno, Henzi NAYS: None ABSENT: Duggan, Pastor th Henzi: This is tabled. The next available meeting is July 15 but you would have to get your materials into the ZBA office by Friday. You don’t have to make any changes you can simply ask to get back on the docket. You can make many changes, it’s up to you. If you--if that date th doesn’t work then the next meeting after that would be July 29. Good luck. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 26 of 47 June 17, 2014 APPEAL CASE NO. NO. 2014-06-32: McLaren Engines, 32233 Eight Mile, Livonia, seeking to construct a building addition and detached parking structure resulting in deficient west side yard setback (abutting Hubbard) and excess building height. Side Yard Setback Building Height Required: 30 ft. Allowed: 35 ft. Proposed: 28.9 ft. Proposed: 51 ft. Deficient: 1.1 ft.Excess: 16 ft. The property is located on the south side of Eight Mile (32233), between Parker and Hubbard, Lot. No. 009-99-0087-000, M-L Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 15.04 “Building Height” and 15.05 (b) “Yard and Setback Requirements.” Henzi: Mr. Kearfott anything to add to this case? Kearfott: Not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Kearfott? Hearing none, will the petitioners please come to the podium? Good evening. Scott Maxwell: Scott Maxwell, 32233 Eight Mile. Mike Gillis: I’m Mike Gillis representing Tacoma Engineers, 176 Speedvale, West Guelph, Ontario. Henzi: Okay, go ahead tell us about the planned construction. Maxwell: The planned constructed is an addition to the campus that we have right now if you have the site plans in front of you or looked at them, there are three existing buildings. The general plan that was approved by the City Council is to remove what we call building three the westerly building and replace it with an additional building that stretches across the parking lot to the central building. Its components in order to fit the employees that we wish to have there, which we have about a hundred now and we’d move when completed about a hundred from the office building in Southfield to make 200 people. And to also allow for additional future expansion requires a building that is three stories high to accommodate all the people that would need to be there and the equipment to do that. As part of that we looked at other ways to put the building in there and this was the City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 27 of 47 June 17, 2014 most effective plan in terms of keeping that high building closer to Eight Mile and as far into the industrial area as possible. And to allow the number of people that we need to do that required three stories instead of two which would have fit the existing variance or the height requirements. And also going into the area where Hubbard is that is worth about 4000 square feet by doing that 1.1 feet. So those are the main reasons we did it. If we do not do that we will not be able to have enough occupied--ocupiable (sic) office space to be able to bring all of the people from Southfield and we would just stay where we are at. Henzi: Mr. Maxwell-- Maxwell: Yes. Henzi: --why this location, why couldn’t you move into the industrial corridor? Maxwell: We spent on and off I don’t know since I’ve been involved with McLaren since 2003 at least, three attempts to find one space or building or set of building within Livonia that could handle what we want to do. Because we have a mix of industrial space where we do testing, development, and assembly as well as having enough office space to be able to accommodate the people we have in the Detroit area. We also have a lot of existing infrastructure in the Eight Mile campus for testing and previously in ’08--‘09 we spent eight million in adding to what we call the East building or Building 2 to put electrical test cells in there. There is a lot of infrastructure that is in the floor and is difficult--you can’t just pick up the equipment and move and put it somewhere else. You have to dig all that out put it back and redo all that flooring again. We also have engine test cells that have Department of Environmental Quality permits to emit exhaust from running engines. If we move all the permits have to be redone. Anything we have in terms of our ability to burn fuel is null and void. There are some grandfathered cells in there that allow us to do some things that we would probably not be allowed in other buildings in other areas. And then there are all kinds of things with noise, air quality, it’s a very complicated and difficult process to move all of that. We also are established there. We have a lot of people that are already working there. We like the City, we like where we are at. All of our technical people need to be there and can’t be because of the existing building size. And so for us not finding a--an existing property in Livonia or anywhere in that area over the last eleven years brought us to the point where we want to build and improve on where we are at right now. Henzi: Let’s talk about the side yard setback, that’s kind of the easy one in my opinion any way. Why is it that the building has to be deficient in the side yard setback? Maxwell: I’ll give a general, Mike can give more detail. Basically without the-- the plan involves the center building being untouched in terms of its footprint and foundation that City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 28 of 47 June 17, 2014 the new building would come up against that. So we were limited going east against that building. There are setbacks to Eight Mile which both of those buildings at so there is no opportunity to move forward and anything moving back moves it further back into the neighborhood. The other buildings have the un--really difficult to move infrastructure, couldn’t really do it there. So that’s square space area is--was the best place to put it. In order to meet our goals for floor space, to not only be able to house all the existing people we have currently but be able to expand, so we don’t have to keep coming back over and over to add things, we had a square foot calculation. Mike laid that all out with the design and everything and that was about 4000 square feet worth to that. The site plan calls for additional landscaping to be put in there to help not hide it but help it blend in. The moved the walls--sorry, the windows are not openable (sic), it’s air conditioned so we felt that that was the best place to put it, the best way to mitigate it, and not have additional noise in the neighborhood that way. Henzi: Okay. Last question deals with the height. The application, I think Mr. Gillis prepared talks about the building height being 46 feet plus a five foot parapet? Maxwell: Correct. Henzi: Can you describe it--that’s the office tower, is that the entire fascia? Gillis: Well the, as I understand the ordinance the building height is measured to the top of the roof surface. So the roof surface is actually somewhere just over 45 feet. So there is a main floor which is about 17 feet and then two 14 foot floors. So you’re just over 45 feet. Across the front of the building which would be the north and then on the east side we have the parapet that rises above that roof surface to 51 feet. As I understand the ordinance there is a five foot parapet allowed above the building roof surface. That parapet provides screening for any new roof top equipment on the office portion of the building. Henzi: Okay, that’s going to be my next question because you’ve got existing roof top mechanical. So I was wondering is it going to be 51 plus another ten or are you saying 51 is it. Gilles: Fifty-one is the top of the parapet-- Henzi: Fifty-one will enclose--that encloses all that roof top mechanical--or not encloses it but-- Gilles: It doesn’t enclose it-- Henzi: --covers it. Gilles: The actual roof surface is 46 feet. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 29 of 47 June 17, 2014 Henzi: Got it. But we are not going to have roof top mechanical 60 feet? Gilles: Correct. Henzi: Got it, thank you. Any questions for the petitioner’s representatives? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: The property--the house on either side the one on Hubbard the one on the street that is to east, the one house was removed it looks like? Maxwell: Yes. Caramagno: And then the other on Hubbard, I see a sign, is that house coming down? Maxwell: It will yes. Caramagno: That is coming down as part of your improvement plan here? Maxwell: Yes. Caramagno: And that’s going to be--what is going to be there? Maxwell: Green space. Caramagno: That’s all green space, landscaped? Maxwell: Yes. Caramagno: Okay. The stacks on your existing building, your exhaust stacks-- Maxwell: Correct. Caramagno: --is there anything to shield them at all or is that--any plan to do anything there? Maxwell: No, the new part of the building being three stories will actually hide if you are at that height and looking from west to east they would not be blocked, but otherwise you can somewhat see them. So from that point of view no. From Eight Mile you will still see them, from the back of the building you will still see them. Gilles: We are increasing the height of the building façade though of the existing building where those existing stacks are by three feet. Caramagno: You’re coming up another three feet? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 30 of 47 June 17, 2014 Gilles: We’re-- Caramagno: On the Eight Mile side? Gilles: Yeah, right now there’s a--there’s a metal guard there and it will be approximately that height of solid wall--of new façade. Caramagno: Okay. Gilles: So it will screen to a certain extent. Maxwell: And the height of the stacks existing are all part of the DEQ permitting requirements to have certain heights. They look at air movement, carry and so on. So they are what they are. Caramagno: Okay. What kind of testing do you do in the building? What is it you test? Maxwell: In the center building we have dynamometers that do either engine testing or the other main business--we’re part of Linamar’s driveline group. And what that means is all-wheel drive gear boxes. When you have a Ford Fusion and you get an all-wheel drive version there is a gear box in the front similar like an axle would be that transmit power to the back of the car and then additionally there would be an axle put in the back of the car to drive the rear wheels. Otherwise, it’s strictly in the front. So our job there is to develop the hardware meaning the gear boxes and all the components in it before a production vehicle gets out. That’s usually about a three year effort. There is testing for those as well. What you will find in that middle building is lighter duty component testing, testing for oil movement, any electronics that would connect or disconnect to make sure that is functioning correctly. And they are very small cells in general. The east building has two large what are called t-cells, there are three motors that will drive an input and two outputs. And basically you are simulating what’s happening in a vehicle with those cells and they will be run for efficiency, for durability, noise in the vehicle they have to be quiet if your gear whines everyone thinks something is wrong so we have all kinds of customer requirements that we have to meet. We have two of those cells that do that right now and that’s pretty much all we do. We have some minor business where we actually test dual clutch transmissions for a customer in one of those cells because it actually--the configuration will work for that. Caramagno: 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 to the podium. Good evening. Jack Roush: Hi, my name is Jack Roush, Jr. I live in the neighborhood adjacent with the current facility that McLaren is talking about. I’m--my family has a long history in Livonia, I’m obviously very pro-business and pro-Livonia. And our company has several buildings throughout the area. I find it hard to believe that just from our own experience that there’s a hardship presented by needing to expand a building in this way. I can’t--our building City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 31 of 47 June 17, 2014 numbers go up above 80, not all of them are currently active buildings but I’ve never been familiar with a project quite like the one that is being discussed. Henzi: Mr. Roush, can I stop you one second? Roush: Yes. Henzi: Can you tell us your address? Roush: Sure, it’s 20009 Mayfield Street. Henzi: Thank you, sorry to cut you off. Roush: I think it’s especially sensitive because it is right on the border with a neighborhood. And it’s already with some previous discussion petitions that have been submitted, it’s changing the nature of the neighborhood somewhat. And I guess I think it’s especially sensitive because of the purpose of zoning and ordinance I would argue is to protect the residential--the sanctity of the residential areas. I saw in the letter--the petition that was submitted that it--the project is likely to improve the value in the area and I think just the opposite is true. I think it actually would be yet another part of this whole collection of petitions that is potentially creating a hardship for the residents of the neighborhood. And I guess that is my main argument. If you guys-- Henzi: What letter were you referencing? Unidentified Speaker: Variance application. Henzi: Oh, okay. Anything else? Roush: I would just urge you guys to very carefully consider that and consider the impact to the neighborhood. Henzi: Thank you. Roush: Thank you. Laura Roush: My name is Laura Roush, Jack’s wife of 20009 Mayfield Street. Obviously we are not butting up next to this building, however we are affected by what is going on. As he has stated there is going to be an increase in staff at this facility because they are expanding. From what I understand the variance they need to show this difficulty they are having is beyond financial gain. Obviously expanding your business is financial gain. I am failing to see where they are showing a hardship that says they have to do this. They are going to be moving people to this facility and increasing traffic in our neighborhood because the parking facility that previous neighbors graciously came to an agreement with them that they could have some parking back there, they want to expand this to something that was not originally--something that neighbors even had an idea would happen. They didn’t think--they said to them that they wouldn’t expand--I mean when you say we’re going to--you know we want to have a parking lot okay, you are not thinking three story parking garage you know in my back yard. That’s definitely disturbing I think all of you would be pretty upset if someone else said you know that little parking lot next door it’s going to go up three stories. I think that that is really disturbing that--I feel like they were misled. So I’m up here really defending them on that but for me personally and my family we have a lot of traffic through that neighborhood. People use it to cut through City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 32 of 47 June 17, 2014 already, we’ve had increased traffic from the school that there’s a lot of extra busses there because it is now a multi-district school. And we have that lovely soccer field at the end of the street which cause a lot of traffic as well. So to think that we are going to have a double in staff parking at the facility that has an exit into our neighborhood where I’m sure at lunch time, they are going to want to go to Taco Bell, they are not going to want to make that left hand turn. You know there is going to be a lot of cutting through our neighborhood creating even more traffic. We’ve had stop signs removed, now counting yesterday I’ve had three incidents where people have been speeding through the neighborhood that have almost hit my car with my children in it going way beyond the speed limit--double. So you know we have some traffic concerns there. We have some peace concerns in the fact that nobody wants a parking garage in their backyard. This residential area that is being impacted it’s not something that is next to a lot--you know-- we’re more rural and people like it that way. We like it darker, we don’t want street lights. We don’t want the sidewalks necessarily but it is getting to the point where we can’t walk on the street and it is a concern. I really feel that it’s too close a peaceful neighborhood to allow this--to allow such a big facility. As my husband said the business in our family, it’s the same stuff. The same stuff they do, the same stuff we do. It’s almost identical. And there’s been times when--you know--a building didn’t meet our needs, maybe the rent went up, whatever the occasion and we picked up and moved--you know--moved your equipment. And I understand that maybe that is difficult and it does cost money but we do it. It’s never been an issue for us. We continually use the existing buildings that are there so that we’re not trying to building these monstrosities. Now, I would say to McLaren, this is good business to do it this way, to not build this brand new facility and instead try to use what is available because in the end--I mean that’s why we are successful. So I would recommend to them that they really look around, really consider what they are doing and how it is impacting all these people. Because they are all here, and they are upset. And I’ll tell you what there is a lot more that just can’t come. They just can’t do it all the time because they have families and they have jobs. So I just want you to think very carefully that if you allow these variances to--there may be other people in Livonia that are going to try and do the same thing. And this is a community about families and I really want you to think about that. Business is important I agree, but not at the detriment of the integrity of our neighborhoods. So thank you very much. Henzi: Thank you. Mike Horton: Good evening. Henzi: Good evening. Mike Horton: My name is Mike Horton, I live at 20414 Hubbard. I guess to begin I would like to say that I oppose this variance. You had stated that in kind of your opening remarks that the petitioner needs to kind of show where they have some hardship and this is--or prove or state what that hardship is to kind of justify this variance. And I also read the application for variance and I really--I don’t really see anything in there that would kind of address that issue. I believe in the spirit of those kind of rules that you folks use for petitioners to get these variance changes, it also states that they have to show it won’t cause and undue hardship on the surrounding neighbors. And I would argue that this in fact would cause huge hardships on many of the surrounding neighbors. I am now a City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 33 of 47 June 17, 2014 border with McLaren since they bought my neighbor’s house--the one that they are going to tear down. So I’m very close to this and it states in their application that--you know-- the nearest residential property is going to be a 160 feet away from the--you know--three story office tower on Eight Mile. I don’t know if that’s--that is probably accurate but that whole building is going to come considerably further back into the neighborhood it does now. It’s not even that that concerns me as much as the three story parking garage that is going to be required to accommodate this three story building and expansion that they are talking about. That is only going to be 45 feet from my back yard. So if you will indulge me a minute that’s about row three from where you are sitting there’s going to be a three story parking garage. I’m going to be 35 feet further when I will be looking out my back door. I won’t even be at the end of my backyard I’ll be in my house. So, with that being said I kind of looked around the City a little bit too and there is no precedent for this. There is nothing even remotely close to the way this is going to impact this residential neighborhood. I think the closest three story parking garage is over on Six Mile near the Comerica Bank. And the closest house to that or residential neighborhood is about 3000 feet away. So as to the Eight Mile stretch, there really is nothing that would resemble this giant expansion that they are talking about. Also, I think amongst the many things ordinances do and ordinances boards do, one of those things is kind of--you know--keep a continuity for an intended use for any given property or space. And clearly this expansion is completely out of sync with the intended use of that space along Eight Mile. And I know that there is some desire by the City to keep businesses here and viable and- -I’m pro-business too, I have a job, I want to work, I want revenue in the City so I don’t have to pay higher taxes. But at some point you simply outgrow a space. And I think it is a little disingenuous for McLaren to sort of hold the City hostage with if we can’t find anything we’re going to move if you don’t give us this. Because really where does this end? They are a business, businesses are constantly trying to grow. So they need this because of this growth. What are we going to do in five years, what are we going to do in ten years? Worse, what if in five years they outgrow and you put your foot down and say no more, you can’t get any bigger in that space and they leave it? Now look what we are left with. And what are the odds of finding a business that similar to fit that space. Cats, homeless people and dirt will be the only thing that occupies that three story parking garage 45 feet off of my backyard. So, as to the hardships to the surrounding neighbors, I would just like to mention a few that--traffic which is already pretty bad is going to increase up to 275 cars a day. Property values there is just no arguing that, they will go down. Their value may go up, but ours will go down and no one wants to address that. Everybody just looks at us and nobody says anything about that. And our quality of life. We will not be looking at a much larger footprint than any of us would ever expected to be in our neighborhood. Henzi: Your address one more time? Horton: 20414 Hubbard. Henzi: Okay, thank you. Horton: Thanks. Henzi: If there’s others that want to speak, I recommend just line up, don’t wait. Good evening. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 34 of 47 June 17, 2014 Nabil Newman: Good evening, my name is Nabil Newman, 20341 Parker Street. I just want to start with a little bit of a background on McLaren how truthful they’ve been throughout this whole process. When they initially applied or they tried to get that parking lot they pitched us on the parking lot before I moved in--they pitched the neighborhood on the parking lot in 2010. Henzi: Can I stop you one-- Newman: Sure. Henzi: Did you say Parker or Park Lane? Newman: Parker. Henzi: Thank you, sorry to cut you off. Newman: No problem. So the parking lot was never developed it sat there for four years and now they decided to come up with this three story level structure. When I read here I see that they describe their variance as a minor. I’m not excellent in math but from 35 feet to 51 that’s 50 percent. I don’t know how that qualifies for minor in McLaren’s mind. They keep talking about they can’t find a spot in the City of Livonia. If Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Menards, they all found plenty of space. I’m pretty sure they can, they just don’t want to because it is cheaper for them. Every time the discussion goes into if we don’t get this approved we consider moving to Canada and then all of a sudden moving to Canada is feasible and that equipment is not all that heavy anymore. They just use that as a scare tactic in order to get whatever they want through from the City. Somehow, someway, some--they were able to get the three story level approved by the City Council. This is our last chance to fight this because this is not just about the variance, it’s about everything. My property is right south of that project--McLaren’s property. So, I’m going to be looking at a three level story garage and beyond that I’m going to be looking that their mechanical equipment of the roof of that 51 feet. Even in their proposal they are not doing anything on the south side unless I misheard something. They are talking about the north and the east side. So we are going to be looking at that every day. They have not been truthful and we are just hoping this is going to stop someway. The only hardship is to us not them. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. Robert Austin: Good evening, my name is Robert Austin. I live at 20306 Hubbard. I’m the seventh house south of Eight Mile on the east side of Hubbard. I’ve lived there for 29 years. I am a small independent business owner. I’ve been in Livonia 29 years with my small business. We’ve had enough of McLaren. There is a lot of history with that company for the 29 years that I’ve lived there. A lot of these neighbors have been here longer than that. A 51 foot building which will now be six houses from me, I just can’t take it. It is just crazy. The--this application for variance there are a lot of questions on here that as far as I am concerned McLaren hasn’t answered truthfully. They don’t show a hardship, they certainly--their last statement on the letter they attached to this application I’m sure you all have it--in general it is our opinion that the proposed building expansion will add value to the area and the impact of the variance will be positive overall. It has been nothing but negative to all the neighbors that live in that area. They keep referring City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 35 of 47 June 17, 2014 to our neighborhood as residential zoned residential, the last I looked I was zoned rural urban farming. And I think most of the neighbors are zoned rural urban farming. That is no place for a three story parking garage and a 51 story office building. My wife works in Detroit, that’s a great place for parking garages and big tall structures, not in Livonia. It’s just not something that is conducive to the neighborhood or the City. So I’m coming here just to go on record. I encourage you all at least table this, but consider voting no and turning this variance application down. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. Melissa Wegener: Good evening, I’m Melissa Wegener. I live at 20445 Hubbard across the street from the house that they recently purchased that is going to be coming down. I oppose a lot of this basically due to the traffic. I have talked to the police department about this traffic coming out onto Hubbard. They cannot enforce it. They say they are going to put a sign up that says you can’t make a left turn. The police department has notified me that they can’t enforce that because that sign is on public property--or on private property, excuse me. There is a school at the end of the street. To the left of this going west across Hubbard there is an office building there and storage sheds. Those storage sheds run businesses out of there. There are three semis that come in there weekly. There is a snow removal landscape business in there which legally they shouldn’t be running those businesses out of there. That is a lot of increased traffic plus the people that work there you have that problem. This parking structure has no business being where it is at. They say they have looked and can’t find any other options. The gentleman who lives to the east of them across the street on the other side of Parker has a building that is two stories I think or something like that, it’s a karate school. I asked him have you been approached by these guys? I mean that would be perfect to put a parking structure there because it is right in the industrial zone. He says no one has asked us anything I would sell this property in a minute. Put a parking deck over there. They can walk across the street and go to work. You know keep it all there on Eight Mile. I have to listen to noise around the clock. They test around the clock. I have asked them before--I’ve asked the City, when you are testing at night I can hear that. There is a noise ordinance, they are supposed to stop at eleven. They told us the last time they didn’t care because they have a test to do they have to do it and it doesn’t matter. Those stacks up on those building. I talked to DEQ the lady I talked to was actually the one that was out to inspect them the last time. She said they don’t use half those stacks up there. She said they don’t even use that much of that equipment anymore. So the cost of moving that shouldn’t be as much if they are not using all that right now. There is plenty of property in this City and--you know--what is going to happen when they want to grow, they have nowhere else to grow now. They are stuck. This is as much property as they are going to be able to use. Why would a business this size want to stifle themselves and not be able to keep growing. It doesn’t make any sense. But all this extra traffic flow, all this extra noise, not to mention the lighting. I’ve been asking them for five or six years to take care of the lights that are in my window every night. The last meeting we had with Jerry before he left there, he said I’m going to go over there right now and take care of it. You know what it still lights up my house every night. I can’t get anything done over there. I already had the lighting from the storage shed over here. I have the lighting across the street from City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 36 of 47 June 17, 2014 them. We don’t need anymore. It is way too much. And I hope you think long and hard about this. Thank you. Craig Rickle: Hi, my name is Craig Rickle. I live at 20325 Parker. This expansion is like they said there is going to be future expansion and you got the pictures of what they want the building to look like and you can drive down Eight Mile and there ain’t nothing close to anything of this size. And they talk about noise and that. I have two days off Saturday and Sunday. I like sitting out on my back deck and drink coffee, 7:02 every morning I hear those engines revving up and get a lot of noise out of them. They can put what they want and she says they don’t use the test facilities, they use them. I do service work at a test facility way out, no one is around, they have two giant buildings, they started out at six cells, they’ve got sixteen cells now and they are still putting four more in. They will expand. They are on one city block. There is no room. You can’t keep expanding a test facility. This is something that is going to expand and expand. Industrial Park off of Levan, anywhere there is plenty of room. They say it costs too much to move, if you get a building a lot cheaper that you don’t have to do all the building, you use that money for the moving of the equipment. I’ve dealt with other businesses that do this stuff and you just don’t go in a residential neighborhood and put this in. I mean, I just want to have a little peace and quiet in the morning and I don’t get it. I mean I just hear engines revving, walk down Parker, doors are open on the side of building three and you just hear them all running. They are all gone at five o’clock. We walk the dogs around the block all the time. Doors are open, we hear them, they have no idea. I could walk right into their building. They have no idea what is going on. I mean they don’t secure it. They were supposed to--they got a berm that they never completed. They’ve got nothing but solid mosquitos, you can’t even go out in the evening. There is no water flow, no nothing in that retention pond and it’s a total mess. They were supposed to plant landscaping on the berms, never did anything. They should at least put some sort of pump in there to get the water flowing around it is just all stagnant water. And we’ve got to live with all this every day and they don’t care. They--now they are going to have to move the berm bigger, closer to our property to do this parking structure which is just making everything worse. And nobody is caring about--I thought this City was families come first and we are all being stepped on just for a little bit of money. I mean we pay our taxes just like everybody else we should have the right to enjoy our life too and not have it taken away. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. Christopher Martin: Christopher Martin, 12275 Inkster Road, Livonia, 48150. I’ll be brief. I don’t live in the neighborhood but a friend of my mine used to live on the east side of Parker until he let the--due to economic problems he let the house go back to the bank. So I am familiar with that area okay. But the biggest thing is when I go to these meetings is, is this a real hardship. It is not it is an inconvenience. And one of the things that is mentioned a lot is, is there financial gain. It is all about financial gain, that is what this whole thing is about this evening. So I am not in favor of this because as others have stated there are other industrial buildings and I know that Roush owns a number of them within City here and so they are out there. They are available. Once again this is just an inconvenience it is not a hardship. There is no way. Is the fix going to be in on this later City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 37 of 47 June 17, 2014 on, who knows, but these people have been to numerous meetings fighting this thing over the years and it seem to keep cropping up again. So, no I am not in favor of this. I think it is going into a--it’s affecting a residential neighborhood to a great degree and it shouldn’t take place. So that is it. Henzi: Thank you. Ralph Martin: My name is Ralph Martin, 20366 Hubbard. I’ve lived there for 51 years and before McLaren even came into the neighborhood. They leased the property in 1969 until ’85 when they bought the property. They tried to do some rezoning at that time, they were turned down. They went from ’85 to 2009 and have been turned down two or three times if I recall for different things. Most of the people have said already what is on my paper here. And rather than beat a dead horse, I won’t go over it. But McLaren has actually used up all the space they have. They are trying to put ten pounds of sand in a five pound bag and they are not going to be satisfied with that. On their proposal they are asking for a variance. They want to make this a viable business. Viable means to expand it and grow it. Well if they are already sixteen feet higher than they are supposed to be, how much further can they grow? And nobody has addressed the property values in the neighborhood. I just had my house appraised two weeks ago. I asked the guy when they put this parking lot in will the price go down and he said definitely. He said if you can get someone to buy it. We know that. McLaren hasn’t done a traffic study to see what--to see how that is going to affect the neighborhood. The officials in the Livonia haven’t addressed our concerns at all. I know that McLaren pays a lot of taxes but we give them a tax abatement. Citizens pay part of that, the State gives them a tax credit of $110,000.00 a year. And if they can move those hundred employees over from Southfield, they will save $600,000.00 that they are paying in rent in Southfield. I can’t believe as sharp a company as they are, and as big as they are, that they have to have everybody on one block. With today’s electronics, computers, I think a sales person and even Scott says they may even work out of their homes three or four days a week. Why do they need a 150 parking spaces for somebody that is going to be in their house for four days a week? If they want to have 150 guys or 200 guys at a meeting that’s one thing but they don’t all need to be in that same building to run that business. I know they put a lot of money into building two--yeah building two and it is beautiful the way they take care of it, but the way they are going we won’t have a chance in that neighborhood. And I respectfully ask that you--if you can’t deny them at least postpone it--table it, whatever you call it until they can come up with something that is other than this is what we are going to do for Livonia, I want to know what they are going to do for the residents. And also to maintain our property values and not have all this traffic. If you haven’t been to Tim Horton’s on Eight Mile in the morning or Leo’s Coney Island, you don’t know what traffic is. Mr. Pastor says this is going to be good because the guys that go in there will be going in there for lunch. Good luck, they won’t even get in there. They’ve got no parking there. The driveways are too narrow for that facility and you’ve got that many more people to the neighborhood it is just going to get worse. So, I think there should be a further study on how it is going to affect us whether than how much are we going to get out of taxes. And I appreciate your time. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. Anybody else? Are there any letters? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 38 of 47 June 17, 2014 Caramagno: No letters. Henzi: Mr. Maxwell anything you want to say in closing. Maxwell: I’ll say a couple of things. You know we’ve been a part of the neighborhood for 45 years. Our existence and our purpose hasn’t been a secret any of those years. With what we are trying to do here, I don’t want to talk about tax abatements, and what not, those are all conditional on bringing the jobs and the investment. Millions of dollars in investment and equipment that equipment besides the property also gets taxed. As we invest and bring people in, we are bringing business--secondary business opportunities in Livonia. And they have to go places for lunch, they--it’s convenient for me to go to businesses in the area and look for things to do for repairs. I’ve bought furnace parts down the street on Eight Mile. And then we have--these are all technical jobs, they are good high paying jobs we bring to the City. So overall, even though the abatement is in place if we do our job as we have been asked to do in doing the investment, the people will bring more money in taxes over all. In general, you know why here, why not somewhere else, every company has a different philosophy and different strategy about how they go about doing their business. Linamar is about collaboration and working together. The virtual office, people working from home for us and the way we go about our business it’s overrated, it doesn’t work. Yes, the sales people are out on the road that is their job. But everyone else, the engineers, our technicians, are in separate places, there is travel back and forth. We need them for answers and support they are not there, we have to call over and bring them to Southfield for a 20 minute--or from Southfield, 20 minute drive, back and forth. They are wasting their time driving back and forth. So there are a lot of reasons why we have to have everyone in one place. That was the whole purpose of this project and doing what we are doing and asking what we are asking for. The--you know--as far as--there are some people who are saying that we haven’t been truthful about some of the previous rezoning. I wish we would have been smart enough in 2010 to go through the process and try and hope that four years later that rezoned property would carry us and allow us to have our garage there. The whole reason we did that in the first place in 2010 was to bring a small number of people from Southfield not everybody. We abandoned that because as we added a few projects we had to bring more people than the building would hold and that rezoned parking would hold, so we abandoned the project. That is why we never completed--we didn’t even put the surface lot in. The mechanicals in the back are already visible to the neighbors in the existing buildings, it’s not really going to change that. And I think the other--the traffic--you know- -for the most part everybody that is in there moves in and out on Eight Mile. I am sure there are people that go down Hubbard, there is some things we can do with gating and other things to stop that and limit it. Nobody uses Mayfield, we are not part of that issue with our people going down there now or if we have 275 people. We don’t have access to Mayfield, we don’t have access to Parker. All we have is Eight Mile and Hubbard. So I don’t see where that’s going to change anything. And as far as our business and the noise we make. Yes, we run dyno’s and yes we make noise and from year to year we have variations in our business and we are not running a lot right now. In the past we’ve run quite a bit, in the future I would hope that we would be running again because that is income and jobs and that is part of what we do as a business. So from our point of view, not being able to have everyone in one place, having to go somewhere else, moving all City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 39 of 47 June 17, 2014 the infrastructure--and by the way, all the stuff in the existing buildings all has to be recreated if we do another campus elsewhere. All we are paying for is the additional space not everything so it would be much more costly to pack up and move everything to some other location whether it was Livonia or elsewhere. So our desire and our need as a business is to be in one location, this is the best spot for us that is why we chose it. Yes we need three stories, and yes we need it a little bit closer to Parker to make it work. And that is why we are here and that is why we feel that we have a good case to ask for this. Henzi: Thank you. Scott, I had a question for you. Do you know the height of the parking structure--the proposed structure? Kearfott: The one now? Henzi: The proposed? Maxwell: I do. Henzi: What is it, Mr. Maxwell? Maxwell: There is a surface lot at the existing ground level and there is two elevated decks, each nine feet tall, so the second elevated deck is 18 feet from the ground. There will be additional--not a parapet, but guarding and cover for headlights and other such and there--also approved in the site plan were 12 foot high directional LED on the south end of the property that shine north so they don’t shine in the neighbors. Henzi: Okay. Maybe this is for Mike. I just wanted to be clear, the way that I read the application, the parking deck has nothing to do with this variance. There is no variance required. They could put one up tomorrow, am I right? Fisher: The parking deck is not part of the problem here. I guess it could be subject as a condition in this case, but it is not the subject of the case. Henzi: Okay. Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: I have a question. When you mentioned earlier collaboration of working together with your people at McLaren-- Maxwell: Yes. Caramagno: --there seems to be some problems obviously with the audience. They are dramatically against this-- Maxwell: Correct. Caramagno: I heard the lady mention the light shining in her bedroom and she had trouble with the storage facility next door, aren’t these types of problems easily fixed by McLaren? Not having a light shine in her home, isn’t there directional things you could do to alleviate some of these issues with your neighbors? Maxwell: Yeah, where Melissa is, her--what we call building three has lights on the side for security. They are basically sodium lights that are a big bulb and they project outwards. The new building everything will be down both on the side of Hubbard and the backside of--Mike knows the details exactly what that is. All those areas that are an issue will be LED directional--we currently have lights that we do have are especially in the back City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 40 of 47 June 17, 2014 are on motion sensors and are only supposed to come on when motion--so if someone walks by--they are not perfect--if a cat walks by they may come on. But with the building configured the way it is that is about the best solution we can have. It should be better or no worse than that in the new building. Caramagno: Well, yeah I hear that and you know you are not the most popular guy here tonight but the--does that woman know that? Have you--has someone from your facility talked to her-- Maxwell: Yes. Caramagno: --or did you even know about the issue of the light? Did someone talk to her about that and say listen we are working on fixing this thing that troubles you neighbor- - Maxwell: One of the-- Caramagno: --did you do any of those things? Maxwell: --the original meeting before City Council we actually went over there, the lights were off at that point, tripped--they weren’t tripped by the motion but once Gary was there they were on and they stay on for a certain amount of time and then they go off. Unidentified Person: They stay on all night. Maxwell: The ones on the side do yes. Caramagno: And--and-- Maxwell: But the ones in the back where the neighbor nearest Jim Pristhorn (sic) they definitely shine on the side of his house, that’s why those were put on a motion sensors to try and dull that. From a security point of view, the west side of that building they do stay on. That will be eliminated in the new building and if you want Mike can elaborate a little bit on what generally-- Caramagno: That is what I was sort of getting at. She-- Maxwell: We’ve tried. Caramagno: --is at the back and hollers up no it is on all night. That little bit of communication might go a long, long way. As a company I am sure you guys understand that. But that was my question, but I guess it is probably time for me to talk right? Do you have more questions? Henzi: I have one more. Caramagno: I’m sorry. Henzi: For Mike. Obviously this went through Planning Commission and City Council, I didn’t--in my packet I didn’t have the write up. Can you give me a general feel, were those hearings contentious with a lot of neighborhood opposition? Fisher: I didn’t sit on those but I’m told that there were many participants probably some of the same that were here tonight have spoken about this probably as it has progressed through the process. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 41 of 47 June 17, 2014 Henzi: On--if--you know sometimes we get the Planning Commission transcript or the City Council transcript, did either one of those have neighbor comments or is it just the petitioner I can’t remember. Fisher: If neighbors go to the Planning Commission they can be on that transcript. I guess-- Bonnie Martin: I have those transcripts with all the neighbor comments on it. Fisher: Okay. I guess the same would be true of the Council. Henzi: Okay, that was it. I am going to close the public portion of the case and I’m--I’m sorry Mr. Horton, it’s ten after-- Mike Horton: I’ll be brief. Henzi: Please. Horton: I simply want to say that in 2010 McLaren came with a much smaller plan. They asked us if they stuck to that plan would we allow this not come to City Hall and try to fight against it. They showed us a very specific plan, they turned it into you guys. We said okay if you promise to stick to this we will just not fight this. They went to City Council, we said we are not going to fight it, there is paperwork supporting all of this. City Council said thank you very much, McLaren you have your approval. Somewhere between 2010 and now they changed their minds. That is the only reason they have that parking zoning back there to begin with. This wouldn’t even be a conversation today if we hadn’t said okay. And now they changed their minds drastically, but we are not allowed to change our minds. We gave that up that day based on something they told us and this is nothing like what they told us. Henzi: I don’t follow, I’m not being-- Horton: In 2010-- Henzi: No, I understand, let me back up-- Horton: I’m sorry. Henzi: Let me be more specific. Horton: I mean-- Henzi: You’re saying that somehow you conceded the parking deck? Horton: No we conceded a parking lot with 48 spaces. Fisher: It is--Mr. Chair, if I may. What he is talking about is the neighbors had a protest petition at the time this property was being rezoned to P back in 2010, is that right? Horton: Correct. Fisher: And they--because McLaren said we are only going to pursue these limited objectives they said okay we won’t continue the protest. So-- Henzi: Which--okay. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 42 of 47 June 17, 2014 Fisher: --he’s--what he’s--the reasoning is that McLaren might never have gotten that zoning had they not made the promise to have a more low key project. Henzi: Got it. Horton: Now we are kind of stuck. Henzi: Got it. Horton: So we are sort of relying on our--the only thing we have which is these commissions to help us out. Henzi: Okay, thank you. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: This is an interesting meeting tonight. The only two things we are asked to consider here tonight are the side yard setback what is next to nothing--a foot and of course the height. And as we--I think when Mr. Henzi started out he said the side yard setbacks seem like the minor issue and I do agree with that it doesn’t seem to be too bad of an issue compared to where you sit today. So I am okay with the side yard setback. The other is the actual height of the building. In all the comments we heard tonight there were three people who referenced the height of the building. I heard a lot of comments about traffic on the road, making a left turn out of McLaren, well I think those are legitimate gripes and complaints and concerns. I would hope that McLaren takes care of that. The parking, the parking deck, I had no say in that. I have no say in that, what has been done is done there. I feel bad for those of you that don’t care for that. There’s talk about an occupied building versus an unoccupied building. I think when McLaren puts out there on Eight Mile Road in the way of taking care of their property is as good as anybody in the City and I would much rather see an occupied building than an unoccupied building. I heard about the storage business activity next door on Eight Mile Road running businesses out of there and snow plows companies and what not. Again that has no bearing on this at all for me. Is the 50 feet too tall and encroaching on your homes, it’s tall, it is mostly on Eight Mile Road. I think with the landscape that is going to be put in here, I think although it is going to be tall I don’t think it is going to be the worst thing in the world. So I am going to approve it. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I agree with Mr. Caramagno in the fact that there were a variety of issues brought up tonight and I think this goes back a long ways. I would also agree with the side yard setback there wasn’t really a lot of discussion on that. I think that was--I will be in support of that. There are concerns about a lot of activity going on on Eight Mile whether it is McLaren or any place else. I’m not convinced that the denial of the two variances that they are asking for tonight is going to change any of that. Unidentified Person: How can you say that? Henzi: I’m going to ask for order. I think we have been patient. We are just giving our comments. So I will ask for order. Go ahead. McCue: So with that being said, I will--I will be supporting the variance. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 43 of 47 June 17, 2014 Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: I will be in support of the two variances they are asking for. The side yard setback deficiency doesn’t mean too much. And as far as the building height is concerned, the location of McLaren Industries on Eight Mile Road is at the limit of the City so I don’t think it is going to affect too much. If it was in the center of the City I would probably not accept it. But the location that they are in I will accept it and I will accept this petition. Henzi: Mr. Rhines. Rhines: I have the same sentiments of my colleagues. McLaren could reduce the height of the building and squeeze in to a little bit smaller building and reduce the side yard setback by one foot, and there would nothing that this Board could do to stop them. Everything else has already been approved. So the only reason they came in front of the Board today was because of a one foot side yard setback and the building height. I would also support a tabling resolution for some research as to how many other buildings are too high here in the neighborhoods. I don’t--you know--I don’t have all that research. I’m looking at the plans that have been put out here and I would stipulate that these plans be followed exactly. There’s--it looks like they are planning on planting a bunch of trees to improve the view for the neighbors. They are going to do the lighting in such a way that it reduces the glare into the neighbor’s houses. I live on the south side of Livonia, there was a lot of protests when Wal-Mart wanted to go in on the south side of Livonia and I have noise if I am standing out in my backyard at night and have a little campfire going. I listen to some music, I’ve had noise from the industries in my neighborhood. I don’t like it but you know we don’t live in Pinckney, we live in Livonia. We have some industry here. I would support a tabling resolution to do a little bit more research on the height of the building but obviously the side yard setback we give allowances with some hardships all the time. And I would be in support of either an approval or a tabling resolution to do a little research on the height. Henzi: This is a very difficult case. It is tough to balance the two competing interests. I- -I mean it is Eight Mile. It’s--these residences don’t border a green belt so there--I think that they do have some expectation that there is going to be noise. But by the same token they’ve made compromises before and they’re legitimately concerned that the nature of this area has been significantly changed and I get that. One of the most difficult things for me on the--with respect to this entire process is that this has been approved. The petitioner so to speak is on the one yard line. They’ve done the heavy lifting and they’ve come to us in a--you know an hour long meeting and are asking us to approve it. I struggle with whether a tabling resolution would be appropriate. The side yard setback I don’t think there is any problem. I think that any--strike that--I think that we routinely give de minimis variances to homeowners and business alike for something like that. The building height, I don’t know if there is more information to get. The petitioner simply says we need a third story. It has nothing to do with the calculation of we need more storage, why do you need 51, couldn’t you live with 41, it is much simpler. The petitioner says we have to have a third story and I think they have demonstrated a hardship which we can’t fit our people in the building without the third floor. To me, that’s a hardship. So, if there is consensus for tabling for a decision before a full Board I will fully go along with it. There may be consensus for an approval. The floor is open for a motion. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 44 of 47 June 17, 2014 Upon Motion by Caramagno supported by Sills, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. NO. 2014-06-32: McLaren Engines, 32233 Eight Mile, Livonia, seeking to construct a building addition and detached parking structure resulting in deficient west side yard setback (abutting Hubbard) and excess building height. Side Yard Setback Building Height Required: 30 ft. Allowed: 35 ft. Proposed: 28.9 ft. Proposed: 51 ft. Deficient: 1.1 ft.Excess: 16 ft. The property is located on the south side of Eight Mile (32233), between Parker and Hubbard, Lot. No. 009-99-0087-000, M-L Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 15.04 “Building Height” and 15.05 (b) be granted for the following reasons and findings “Yard and Setback Requirements,” of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because the Petitioner has been in this location since 1969 and they must expand to meet their business needs. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because it would not allow the Petitioner to house all of its employees in one building and it would cause Petitioner to have to move to another location and would require all new permits and they would lose their grandfathered status for same. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because there are other industrial buildings along Eight Mile. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 45 of 47 June 17, 2014 4. The Board received no letters of approval and no objection letters 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 it be constructed as presented and comply with the requirements of the Planning Commission and Council. 2. That the Petitioner use its best efforts to minimize stray lighting. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Caramagno, Sills, McCue, Rhines, Henzi NAYS: None ABSENT: Duggan, Pastor Henzi: Gentleman, the variance is granted with those two conditions. Good luck. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 46 of 47 June 17, 2014 nd Henzi: I think there are minutes to be approved from June 2. th Bonnie Murphy: May 13. th Henzi: I’m sorry, May 13. Motion by Caramagno, seconded by McCue to approved minutes of May 13, 2014. Henzi: Is there a motion to adjourn? McCue: I make a motion to adjourn. Rhines: I’ll support that. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. __________________________ SAM CARAMAGNO, Secretary ___________________________ MATTHEW HENZI, Chairman /pcb City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 47 of 47 June 17, 2014