Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA MEETING 2015-03-10 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF LIVONIA MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING HELD MARCH 10, 2015 A Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Livonia was held in the Auditorium of the Livonia City Hall on Tuesday, March 10, 2015. MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Pastor, Acting Chairman Sam Caramagno, Secretary Robert Bowling Gregory Coppola MEMBERS ABSENT: Matthew Henzi Robert Sills Ben Schepis OTHERS PRESENT: Mike Fisher, City Attorney Steven Banko, City Inspector Patricia C. Burklow, CER-8225 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Acting Chairman Pastor then explained the Rules of Procedure to those interested parties. Each petitioner must give their name and address and declare hardship for appeal. Appeals of the Zoning Board's decisions are made to the Wayne County Circuit Court. The Chairman advised the audience that appeals can be filed within 21 days of the date tonight’s minutes are approved. The decision of the Zoning Board shall become final within five (5) calendar days following the hearing and the applicant shall be mailed a copy of the decision. There are four decisions the Board can make: to deny, to grant, to grant as modified by the Board, or to table for further information. Each petitioner may ask to be heard by a full seven (7) member Board. Four (4) members were present this evening. The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard by a full Board and Case No. 2015-03-08 requested to be rescheduled. The Secretary then read the Agenda and Legal Notice to each appeal, and each petitioner indicated their presence. Appeals came up for hearing after due legal notice was given to all interested parties within 300 feet, petitioners and City Departments. There were 8 people present in the audience. (7:05) City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 of 41 March 10, 2015 APPEAL CASE 2014-09-47: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Marck Properties, LLC, 35000 Schoolcraft, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to maintain the location of a dumpster and enclosure which is located in the front yard which is not allowed. The property is located on the north side of Schoolcraft (35000), between Ellen and Yale, Lot No. 083-03-0147-000, OS Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance No. 543, Section 2.06(17), “Definitions Pertaining to Lots and Areas; Yard, Front,” and Section 19.06(e), (i) “General Waiver Requirements and General Standards.” Pastor: Any information from Inspection Department? Banko: I have nothing to add at this time. Pastor: Thank you. The Petitioner can come forward please. Bostwich: Good evening. Pastor: Good evening. Bostwich: John Bostwich, 42400 Grand River. Pastor: Can you tell us something about your case? Bostwich: We were the builder for this property. It is a dental group. From my understanding when we submitted the permit the dumpster enclosure was noted on the site plan and from what we understood the site plan was approved. So we went ahead with the--where the dumpster location is currently at right now. Pastor: Was the dumpster location always in that particular spot? Bostwich: From my understanding we weren’t exactly sure. There were footings that were in that area so we just basically rebuilt the dumpster enclosure as is. Pastor: Okay. Any other questions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Yes, Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Okay, the--did you pull a permit for this? Bostwich: Well not for the enclosure, we thought that was included in our original building permit. So for the dumpster enclosure, no we did not. Caramagno: So--you thought--you thought this--Steve they need a permit for a dumpster enclosures is that right? Banko: Yes, they would. Caramagno: Is it uncommon for someone not to know this? Banko: We received a complaint back in 2013 regarding the dumpster enclosure being put in and that is where this whole thing started. The building inspector went out to the City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 of 41 March 10, 2015 location and this is why we are here at this time. There is the one comment from the Planning Commission--the Council resolution that does talk about a dumpster enclosure which is in your packet which is number 4, “That there shall be no outside storage of trash or if the dumpster is provided the three walls of the trash dumpster area shall be constructed out of the same brick used in the construction of the building or in the event a poured wall is substituted the wall design texture and color shall match that of the building and the enclosure gate shall be maintained and when not in use closed at all times.” And that is all that is stated there. It doesn’t state--if you look at the site plan it doesn’t show anything on the site plan of the dumpster enclosure on the site plan. Bostwich: We did have two different site plans submitted, there was an original one and there should have been a revised one from my understanding that had the actual dumpster location on the site plan. Now the dumpster enclosure is built out of the same material that’s the screen wall that abuts all the residences so it pretty much blends in with the entire property as is. So from my understanding when we walked the site with not only the owners but our architects--I shouldn’t say our architect it was an outsourced architect for the project, as well as our company, we figured that was pretty much the best location we could find on the property that was suitable not only for the doctors but for the residents as well, so. Pastor: Mr. Banko. Banko: Yes. Pastor: Isn’t that a poured brick wall in back of this dumpster? Banko: It is a poured brick wall. Pastor: So how do you--how do you tell me they are the same material because this is a block dumpster? Bostwich: Well the screen wall is a block--is a block screen wall. Pastor: Yeah, but that is not a poured brick wall. Bostwich: Well, I’m sorry I misspoke on that. The actual dumpster enclosure is actually the same material--it’s a block a cinder block wall. Split face is what the product was. Pastor: Mr. Banko, do you know what the code is--the ordinance is for the gates? Don’t we have to have metal or-- Banko: No, I don’t believe it has to be a metal gate. Pastor: Okay. Any other questions? Caramagno: I’m going to have some, let me look here for a second. Pastor: Sure. So you are telling me this block is the same block that is on the building? Bostwich: No, the building is actually brick, the screen wall that abuts the neighbors to the north and to the east is a split face cinder block material from what I remember. And we did our best to try and match up the block we used for the dumpster enclosure itself City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 of 41 March 10, 2015 to what’s--as well we painted the entire screen wall itself. So all the materials pretty much match as best as we possibly could. Pastor: This is a poured-- Bostwich: Obviously the screen wall-- Pastor: --brick wall on the back of this dumpster that the dumpster butts up against. It is not a block wall. Bostwich: If it’s not--well I know we did paint it so everything matches all as far as colors. Pastor: That’s not matching--the materials are not matching. Bostwich: Well-- Pastor: They are not asking you to match the paint, we’re asking you to match the materials. Bostwich: From what I remember I haven’t visited the site in probably six months. Pastor: Did you--you placed this dumpster in this position, this is a new dumpster pad. Bostwich: Correct, in the south east corner of the property. Pastor: Up in front of the building? Bostwich: Correct. Pastor: When you put that there did you have dumpster gates on here? Bostwich: There are dumpster gates on it yes. Pastor: Did you have--I have a picture right here that shows no dumpster gates, that is why I am asking. Bostwich: That picture was probably taken premature because I know the dumpster gates went on after the building was already occupied. But there are dumpster gates on that and there has been for several--almost probably a year and a half now. Pastor: Any other questions? Caramagno: What plan--sir what plan were you referring to that said it showed a dumpster location on this end of the property? I don’t--I am looking at these blue prints here and I don’t see-- Bostwich: We had several site plans that were submitted. So I know that the first site plan did not indicate that which came in with the actual permit and the building plan itself. This second one that was revised and submitted showing the--it should have been revised and submitted showing the actual dumpster enclosure on the property that should hopefully be in your packets because I know we have a record of it. Caramagno: On the little one? Bowling: The small one. Caramagno: The one that was turned in, do we know? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 of 41 March 10, 2015 Bowling: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Bowling. Bowling: Steve, did you know if you guys have a copy of this in your paperwork, the revised--the smaller-- Coppolla: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Coppolla. Coppolla: I did go by on Sunday, there are doors on it. Pastor: Yes, I know. Coppolla: Okay. Pastor: Any other questions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. I’ve got the--Steven where would be an appropriate location for the dumpster on this property? Banko: It should be in the rear yard. Caramagno: In the rear yard--the rear yard meaning? Banko: To the north. Caramagno: To the north. Banko: Obviously the best location for the dumpster would be the north toward the north east corner. Caramagno: Sure--sure, out of sight, out of the way. Banko: It would be screened from everything if it were in that location. Bostwich: There are still neighbors in the north east corner as well, more neighbors at that north east corner than there is to the south east corner. Not only that but obviously it impacts the parking for the patients that are in this dental office. It is an old surgeon’s office, there are plenty of patients in and out of the office that are under anesthesia so obviously you have a garbage dump truck coming in and out I don’t know how many times a day--or I should say a week. So obviously it makes it difficult for the patients--you know- -walking out of the office to have to deal with a garbage truck pulling in and out. Caramagno: That is all the questions I’ve got for right now. Pastor: So what--what do you have to say about not using the same type of material? You know brick and color instead of block? Bostwich: It is really what the plan had actually called out for so in that instance I probably should have done a better job matching the materials up. To be honest with you when we first laid that out we thought it would have been just fine with the cinderblock and just matching the colors up and having everything blend in together then using the same product. I’m not sure exactly how old that screen wall is but I guess we should have used a compatible product and just painted everything as is. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5 of 41 March 10, 2015 Pastor: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak on this matter? Come forward please. You can sit down. Simkow: Good evening. Thank you. Michael Simkow, 35148 Scone. Thirty two years, third house from this building as it’s been for 32 years. I hope to be like Paul Harvey so you know the rest of the story. This building was previously also a medical building. It was Botsford Clinic. They didn’t have any problem with a back rear dumpster where the zoning ordinance says it should be. There was never any footing in the front of this building, whether he saw it six months ago or whenever. I saw this a year ago and I called it to the attention as long--as well as a lot of other neighbors. And said how did this dumpster migrate to the front of this office building along Schoolcraft sidewalk in a location that is the only location in and out of our subdivision other than Five Mile. You can get into our subdivision on Five Mile, you can get into it from Schoolcraft. I pull out of my subdivision on Schoolcraft, I have to look to my left to see if traffic is clear to pull across the Wayne Road overpass. What do I see, I see a dumpster every single morning. I called it to the attention before there was an existing structure there. They had just poured the footing. There was never a footing before. Check with any of the other tenants, there was never a footing there. This property was re-modified, rehabilitated, to fit the oral surgery center that is there now starting early last year. It was fine for rear dumpster placement and there was a blue dumpster back there in years past. Like I say I’ve been there for 32 years. It has never been up in the front. And there is no hardship here, there is no problem with the patients going to and from that side of the parking lot there is plenty of room there. In fact, it would make more sense to put the dumpster in the back of the property because there are less patients that have to go to the back wall then there would be in the front. And there is no hardship to Waste Management or whatever kind of truck is going to come and lift up the dumpster and put it back in the refuse truck. It’s been there before, it should be there still, and you’ve got ask why we are here. How in the heck did a dumpster get there in the first place? In the front part where it is not even allowed according to the Zoning ordinance. I’m told because one neighbor complaint about it being in their backyard. I’ve got a dumpster two doors down from me from the building that is on the other side of Ellen Road and it’s a beautiful building but it is shielded from public view. This is the only--the only location in Livonia that has a dumpster in the front yard of any kind of business much less a business--an office business, much less a business that is smack dab in the middle of a residential neighborhood. We are all residents from Stark down to Levan. And I have driven from Haggerty down to Inkster Road and back. Nowhere even in the commercial district do you have a front yard dumpster. It doesn’t belong there, the ordinance doesn’t allow for it, it is not a harmonious blend between residents and the businesses that the City plan tries to expound, that the Zoning ordinance is supposed to have. It is not--this is not even an economic issue. Number one all the previous tenants for the past 32 years have never had a problem with rear dumpsters. The building materials that I am hearing talked about, I have color photos here of the property, the location, where it is best able to be put back in the lot where it is supposed to be. And the building materials are not the same as a screening wall. But that’s a secondary concern of the residents. We have eleven residents that have already signed objections whether it is on a letter form, whether it’s on the notice to appear here. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6 of 41 March 10, 2015 All of us don’t want to see this thing as we pull out of our subdivision. It’s never been there for thirty some years, I don’t want to look at it now and neither does anybody else. There are less intrusive ways of accommodating the interests of both people. You’ve got to have a dumpster, I guess, put it the back where the ordinance says it is supposed to be. Don’t put it please up in the front. The language says shielded from public view. Putting an enclosure around it doesn’t shield it. And there are photos to show. Building materials, the only common building material there is to that screening wall is it is hard. There not--it’s not the same material. In fact if you look at the photos the enclosure is two and a half cinder blocks higher than the screening wall. You are always going to have somebody--I complained about the dumpster being--where it was at my house. But for the greater good I had to bite the bullet and accept the dumpster. I don’t like it but it is there. I don’t have to look at it when I come out of my subdivision. The building materials is a secondary issue. I do see that the dumpster materials that are there, yeah it might be close it’s still cement and it is hard, put more complying materials back in the rear of the lot where it belongs. The trucks can go back there and it is not a problem with that. So the objections are--have nothing to economic. There is no hardship to the business. None of the other previous tenants had any problem with it, this doesn’t have any problem with it. They just put it up in the front for some reason. I know the site plan didn’t approve it. I went to go look at it. I know none of the other tenants had it and there was never any footing that was there. So, the only thing that this is coming to is do you want to put a dumpster along Schoolcraft Road, not just for the residents but for anybody else who is driving a main thoroughfare whether it is Plymouth Road, Schoolcraft, Five Mile who is going to look at the City of Livonia and say what is the heck is a dumpster doing in the front yard of this building and along Schoolcraft. One--another issues to consider is this sidewalk is the most direct route for children to go--and I don’t have school age children, I’ve been there, done that. But those who do, it is the more direct route for our subdivision to Frost Middle School and the YMCA. I’ve already seen people inside by that dumpster. Now I don’t know if they are relieving themselves or if they are going into the dumpster. But all I know is this is an oral surgery center and where I’ve been taught about bloodborne pathogens and what might find itself into a dumpster is body fluid. If it is wet and it is not yours you don’t touch it. I don’t know what gets into the dumpster and I don’t want any kids getting in there and I certainly don’t want the City of Livonia having any potential liability for agreeing to keep that dumpster in a place it shouldn’t be in the first place. There might not be any liability but I don’t want my taxpayers (sic) to somebody to defend it to say no we don’t have any responsibility even though the City passed judgment on allowing it to stay there, if God forbid you allow it to stay there. It’s a noxious eyesore to the community. It’s not intended to have a dumpster where people can see it. Statute- -or the ordinance specifically says it should be shielded from public view. It’s not shielded in any shape or form and I’ve got photos attached right to it. And I invite you all to take a look at it if you would. I know none of you would want that in your neighborhoods, I hope none of you want it anywhere in the City of Livonia because this is a matter of first impression. This is the only building that ever had a front yard dumpster. And certainly the first one on Schoolcraft border to border. It’s a--there is less intrusive ways available to solve this problem. Have it go back to the rear of the property line where it belongs. Where he didn’t even get a building permit to allow it to be placed there anyways, it just City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 7 of 41 March 10, 2015 grew feet and there it is. And it is two and a half cinderblocks higher than the screening wall that is surrounding the neighborhoods. There is always going to be one neighbor who is going to say they don’t like there, well for a greater good which is what the Master Plan is for which is what the Zoning ordinance is for, and to create a harmonious relationship between the homeowners and the businesses that are there. This does everything to the opposite. And I would just ask that you consider all the objections from the neighbors that were submitted. We were here three or four weeks ago for a first meeting, it was canceled. We had seven other homeowners, they have since given written objections to it. I would just ask would you please do the right thing, deny the appeal, and put the dumpster back in its proper resting place which is in the back of the building like every other building has to do in Livonia. And keep maintaining the high standards of Livonia that I am proud to be a part of. Thank you. Pastor: Thank you. Sir, do you remember where this dumpster was in the past? Simkow: Originally? Pastor: Yes. Simkow: Originally, it was not a medical facility and-- Pastor: I understand--well-- Simkow: And they had-- Pastor: --I’m saying, where has the dumpster been located until this point? Simkow: They had a blue dumpster before--before Oral Surgery came in there--Oakland Oral Surgery, there was a blue dumpster in the back against the north wall and closer to the building. So it’s on the north-- Pastor: What side of the building? Simkow: --east section. That’s where it was. And for previous tenants they would put their rubbish bags out because I would see it every single day--I mean every single Monday either on the curb line of Ellen just north of Schoolcraft or they would leave it at the back door if it was hazardous material and it would be picked up there. But never, ever was there before spring was there the materializing of a dumpster in the front yard. And so like I say in the last 32 years I’ve seen tenants come and go, real estate offices, Botsford outpatient clinic was there. And they didn’t have a dumpster, they had outside- -they’d bring their material out in the back and then they put it out by the curb line. They didn’t have a dumpster. But there was a dumpster that was there before and it was a blue one and it would be picked up just as easily as the one is across the street. But this is the first one being placed there and it is after a substantial re-modification to allow oral surgery tenants to move in. Because I watched all the construction and everything, they must have gutted the entire place to make inside suites for this facility. But nowhere should there ever be this dumpster and nowhere in any documents is that being provided for in whatever revisions of plans there are. Pastor: Any other questions? Caramagno: I think he has touched on all mine. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8 of 41 March 10, 2015 Pastor: Thank you. Simkow: Thanks for the time. Pastor: Is there any other--anybody else from the audience want to come forward? Seeing none, the petitioner can approach. Caramagno: Wait I have one-- Pastor: Oh, I’m sorry letters. Caramagno: Let me add to Mr. Simkow’s letter he does have objections signed here by Betty Simmons, Tim Graziotti, Pamela A., Malo, Gary Malo, and Jody Gordon all signed the back of the letter submitted by Mr. Simkow. I have a letter of approval from William Kondrath, 13984 Ellen, (letter read), letters of objection from Judy Marasco, 35112 Scone Street (letter read), Philip and Promise Ziegler, 14051 Edgewood Street (letter read), and Gary Jurek, 14021 Ellen Drive (letter read). Pastor: You can make a comment and try to address any of these concerns that you have heard please. Bostwich: I mean other than we have--outside of what we already discussed, I mean I don’t think there is anything I should say I guess. Again, we walked the property with our outside architect and the owners of the dental group, we say no issues with really where the placement was. We felt that it was--we weren’t making anything an eyesore by any means. I guess in regards to any type of medical equipment I think everybody here is well aware that most medical equipment is disposed of properly, it is not discarded in a dumpster that is accessible by children or anybody in the public whatsoever. So I would think that would not be a concern whatsoever. Again, we thought we took it on our best interest to try to make everything look appeasable to the neighborhood by using obviously the materials that we used. Granted we didn’t do the best job of probably matching them up. Not only that but for the accessibility of the patients coming in and out of the office as well as a dumpster truck that would be coming in to remove whatever waste that they do have. I think the reason that we also built that up an extra two blocks was to kind of conceal it a little bit more than really what it was obviously for the benefit of the neighbors so. Pastor: Thank you. I’ll close the public portion of this meeting and begin our comments with Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: This is interesting. I don’t know how long you’ve been in the building business but to not know to pull a permit or really look at your plans before you go and build something is a little bit troubling to me. I’m thinking as Mr. Simkow was talking about dumpsters in the front yard and I’m thinking all over this community and I really like he said can’t picture one in the front yard. It’s--he’s more true than not about that. You have a great deal of opposition here. A permit was not pulled for this. There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding here. And I think a great deal of misunderstanding here is on your part. No permit, not truly understanding where this thing has to be, the architect, you the builder, the property owner, maybe they didn’t care where it needed to be but that doesn’t really relieve the problem here. I think it is to some extent an eyesore where it is at and City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 9 of 41 March 10, 2015 it starts a bad precedent for dumpsters in the front yard. I don’t think I can be in support of this. Pastor: Mr. Bowling. Bowling: I agree. I don’t think there is any way that this makes a lot of sense. We don’t have anything else like this in Livonia that I am aware of. It is on my running route, I run by there almost every day and I don’t recall it being in the front in the last few years so this doesn’t make any sense that that would be something that I can support. Pastor: Mr. Coppolla. Coppolla: I would have to say that more of comment that if you had pulled a permit you probably would have saved yourself a lot of trouble because you would have ended up having to put it in the right place. Your oversight there has really created the issue and unfortunately you’ve created your own problem. I personally don’t find it completely unsightful (sic). And there are maybe ways you can remediate the view of it. I think the fact that there was no permit, the nonconforming material, the site plan wasn’t approved with it there, it leads me to say that it is not something I can support staying where it is at. Pastor: I will have to agree. I cannot support this--the location on this. It is an eyesore. There are other places to put it easily and the only thing--reason I can think of is they put it there is because they were trying to create more parking in the back. So I will not support this. Do we have a motion? Bowling: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Yes. Upon Motion by Bowling supported by Caramagno, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE 2014-09-47: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Marck Properties, LLC, 35000 Schoolcraft, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to maintain the location of a dumpster and enclosure which is located in the front yard which is not allowed. The property is located on the north side of Schoolcraft (35000), between Ellen and Yale, Lot No. 083-03-0147-000, OS Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance No. 543, Section 2.06(17), “Definitions Pertaining to Lots and Areas; Yard, Front,” and Section 19.06(e), (i) “General Waiver Requirements and General be denied for the following reasons and finding of fact: Standards,” 1. The petitioner has not demonstrated a practical difficulty. 2. The proposed variance is not consistent with the City’s Master Plan, Charter, and ordinances. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10 of 41 March 10, 2015 3. Denial of this variance is in the best interests of the City. 4. That the petitioner must apply for a permit to relocate the dumpster by June 1, 2015. 5. That the petitioner must remove the dumpster from the current location by June 30, 2015. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bowling, Caramagno, Coppolla, Pastor NAYS: None ABSENT: Sills, Schepis, Henzi Pastor: It’s been support--or denied, excuse me. You heard our terms. Bostwich: Okay, thank you. Pastor: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 11 of 41 March 10, 2015 APPEAL CASE 2015-01-02 (Tabled on January 6, 2015): An appeal has been made to , the Zoning Board of Appeals by Middlebelt Retail Development, LLC1260 Library St., Ste. 300, Detroit, MI 48226, on behalf of Lessee The Vitamin Shoppe, 12687 Middlebelt, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to erect an additional wall sign on the north elevation, resulting in excess number of wall signs and wall sign area. Number of Wall Signs: Wall Sign Area: Allowed: One Allowed: 37 sq. ft. Proposed: Two Proposed: 72 sq. ft. Excess: One (36 sq. ft. on each elevation) Excess: 35 sq. ft. The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt, (12687), between Industrial and CSX Railroad, Lot No. 101-99-0008-015, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance No. 543, Section 18.50H,(b),2, “Sign Regulations in C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts.” Pastor: Would the Petitioner please come to the podium? Or, Mr. Stanow (sic) do we have anything in addition? Caramagno: Banko. Pastor: I’m sorry, Banko, that’s been a long time. Fisher: Yes. Banko: Mr. Pastor, I have nothing to add at this time. Fisher: We have to remove this from the table. Pastor: Oh, this was previously tabled? Coppolla: It’s the Vitamin Shoppe, no I thought it was--no it’s the other one. It’s Starbucks that asked to be removed right? Pastor: No this was tabled. Caramagno: I’ll make the motion to take it off the table. Coppolla: Oh, I’m sorry. Pastor: Do I hear support? Bowling: Support. Pastor: All in favor? Board Members: Aye. Pastor: It is removed from the table. Redner: Can I start? Pastor: Yes. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 12 of 41 March 10, 2015 Redner: Craig Redner, my address is 101 North Walton in Pontiac, Michigan. I am representing the Vitamin Shoppe and we are requesting a second sign on the north elevation basically for better visibility on southbound Middlebelt. We do have a small tenant panel sign on a small monument sign that is set back pretty far off the road. It is not up there where the Menard’s big sign is which is up on Middlebelt. So we are requesting for a second sign on the north elevation. Pastor: You say you have a small sign up there? Redner: There’s a--there’s another monument sign, it’s a smaller monument sign, it’s set way back off the street and we do have a tenant panel on that yes. Pastor: Do you know how many square feet that panel is? Redner: I can tell you in a second when I look at it. I’m just saying that I know that sign is a lot smaller than the Menard’s one that up on the street. Pastor: You’re not suggesting that you should have as large a sign as Menards are you? Redner: No--no--no--no, not at all. That panel is 12 inches by 58 inches. Pastor: Any questions? Bowling: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Bowling. Bowling: I’m trying to remember why we tabled this in the first place. What did we have- - Pastor: I don’t remember to tell you the truth. Bowling: Do you recall why we tabled this in the first place? Redner: You know when I was up here they just--they said they wanted to table--retable it and I agreed okay. Bowling: Okay. Caramagno: I remember a little bit about this. Redner: I know there was a questions about the small sign that is on the rear door that is on the backside of the building. Which they are willing to give that up in order to get the other elevation. Bowling: All right. Fisher: If you look at the resolution which is in your packet, it says to be tabled to allow the petitioner an opportunity to meet with the developer, provide more specific plans, address whether there will be monument signage and or signage at the back of the building, consider the Board’s comments and explore other options at a future meeting. Pastor: Okay. Fisher: It looks like the proposal here is identical to what was proposed then. Caramagno: That’s what I thought, nothing had been changed. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 13 of 41 March 10, 2015 Pastor: So, are you having signage in the back of the building? Redner: No, there is one that is existing and they are willing to remove that if they can get the second sign on the north elevation. Pastor: So what would this second sign do for you that the monument sign doesn’t do for you? Because I can see-- Redner: It’s a larger sign. Pastor: --the monument sign from quite a distance. Redner: Right, the sign that they are proposing for that north elevation is a lot larger, would be seen sooner than the monument sign that is down for southbound traffic on Middlebelt. That little--well I call it a small monument sign compared to Menards is past the Vitamin Shoppe. So what they are trying to do is catch that traffic before they get past. If you look at the site plan-- Pastor: Yep. Redner: --Menards is right up there on Middlebelt and if you see that little square sign that is set about 77 feet back that’s where the tenant panel is on that existing sign. Pastor: I don’t know about the rest of the Board Members, but as I was driving by I had no problem identifying the Vitamin Shoppe from that what you are calling the smaller board. Any other questions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: When we talked--and I’m going off mostly memory here, when we talked about the--this being tabled and of course it was tabled. We talked about you coming back with a--the same plan or something different from your customer, what they want different in the way of signage here. So you came out early on that they are willing to take the sign off the back of the building. Doubling the square footage allowed with no consideration to doing something different almost seems--did you go back and talk to these people? Or did someone from your firm go back and talk to them? Redner: Someone from our firm did yes. Caramagno: What did they say? Redner: To be honest with you that would be Marvin and he ended up in another ZBA so I ended up going to this one because I attended the last one. Caramagno: And Marvin left you out to dry here. Redner: Thank you. Caramagno: I mean that’s not cool when you are here twice now and this time you are here with no more information than you were the last time. Render: Well they are willing to give up the sign. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 of 41 March 10, 2015 Caramagno: Whether it’s you or Marvin or the Vitamin Shoppe whoever at the--at the deal here, I hate to get to the point that we are telling you what we are going to give you on the building. Redner: Well I think their argument was that there are numerous signs that we have seen have a second elevation on it. So we were just requesting that because there are other grants that have been done and that’s why they are asking for theirs. Caramagno: Okay. And I think the other ones had a--I know, I don’t think, I know the other ones had come to us and had an alternate acceptable thing they would-- Redner: Okay. Caramagno: --see. I would hate to design your sign program here at this table. Redner: Understanding. Caramagno: We can, but I hate to do it. Pastor: You know I don’t feel like doing it. Any other questions? Coppolla: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Coppolla. Coppolla: Just a--well I am trying to better understand. You knew the building you were getting into. You knew the location. You knew the thoroughfare and all that, why come now after the building is up and everything for a second sign. Why wouldn’t you have asked for that up front? Redner: I believe they did and it was denied and then we asked to go in front of the Board. Coppolla: Okay. What other similar situated buildings in the area have side signs like this one? Redner: Jimmy Johns was one that I noticed, Honey Baked Ham, Applebee’s, Instant Lube. Coppolla: And where are they generally located on Middlebelt or-- Redner: Two of them I think are--or three of them are on Middlebelt and then some were on Five Mile. Coppolla: Okay. Redner: I know Jimmy Johns for sure, that was the first one I noticed and that’s maybe half of a mile up north on Middlebelt. Banko: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Banko. Banko: Can I make a comment? Pastor: Certainly. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 of 41 March 10, 2015 Banko: Aspen Dental has signage on their south elevation and again on their east elevation. Jimmy Johns on their north elevation and on their east elevation. The lube place is on a corner which they are permitted to have two signs. And also Applebee’s is sitting on a corner which is permitted--two thoroughfares which is permitted to have the two signs. You also though have Del Taco which also has an east elevation sign and a south elevation sign. Pastor: Is that Del Taco on another thoroughfare? Banko: No, it isn’t. Pastor: Yes, it is on the same road as Menards Road. Banko: Well it is connected--they are connected aren’t they? Pastor: Yes. Fisher: Well I guess I would add to that typically the second sign is half the size of the first as the ordinance--as the ordinance says when it allows you to have that second sign. Pastor: Any other questions? Bowling: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Bowling. Bowling: So that being said that’s typically what’s been allowed in the past, fifty percent of the size or somewhere in that range. Redner: Okay. Bowling: Do you have that ability to make those changes? Redner: I can certainly go back to them and tell them that is the most you are going to get is fifty percent. You are not going to get a hundred percent. Pastor: Is there anybody in the audience who would like to speak on this subject? Seeing none, letters? Caramagno: There are no letters. Pastor: Closing statement? Redner: Like I said, I can go back to them and tell them that if they want to come back with fifty percent--you know half the size of the sign, that there is a possibility it would be granted. Pastor: I’ll close this portion of the meeting and start my comments with Mr. Bowling. Bowling: Well, I think that probably makes good sense. I know we’ve done this before where we’ve taken a look at it. I think we’ve even made those decisions here at the table. So I think I would be in support of something that meets what we have done in the past. Pastor: Mr. Coppolla. Coppolla: I’d support giving them the opportunity to come back with a different design. I drove around and saw quite a few site signs so I understand there are a lot of reasons City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 of 41 March 10, 2015 you have it. This is an oddly situated building in the sense that it kind of sits back and there is a road in between but there is nothing--you can argue that it is difficult to see if you are not looking for it. Although I don’t see a Vitamin Shoppe being something that is an impulse buy. But in the sense of the sidewall with nothing on it, I actually found that somewhat unattractive so I really--if you could come up with a good alternative I would be supportive of that. I think the blank wall actually isn’t very nice so I support them coming back at some point. Pastor: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Well, you know, I know what we’ve done on the other properties. I know we’ve done it at Applebee’s and I know what we’ve done at the Jimmy Johns and the dental place. And I know what the coffee shop is asking for. There is a lot of signage in this area. It is almost becoming excessive. And like I said earlier I don’t like trying to design your program here, but what we have like Mr. Fisher said we have allowed fifty percent on the side wall. Redner: Okay. Caramagno: And I would support that but I would support that in conjunction with you don’t think that monument sign is effective and-- Redner: I’m--what I was stating sir, I’m not saying it’s not effective, I’m just saying it is far back off the road and a twelve inch panel is not going to draw the attention that a second sign would. Caramagno: Okay, so where I am going with that is, your second sign would draw attention, therefore I don’t know why you need the monument sign. So I would be in support of a fifty percent less than what is on the Middlebelt frontage for the sidewall and I don’t see why you need the monument sign. I would support that. Pastor: Well, I somewhat agree with everybody here. I’m not crazy about all the signage in this area. There is a lot of it. I think the monument sign works myself. I went by this place two or three times and I’ve had no problem seeing the monument sign. So I would support a tabling resolution once again so the petitioner can talk to his people and really come back to us with a plan because I don’t see a plan here. So I am not in favor of this but I would be in favor of possibly a tabling motion. Do I hear any motions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair, I guess the only way that they remotely win here is by a tabling motion because they can’t win a-- Pastor: They won’t win a-- Caramagno: They can’t win a-- Fisher: Yeah, they won’t get approval is what you are saying? Redner: May I ask a question regarding the monument sign. When you say you want to see that go away, are you referring to the tenant panel or the whole, because that is a multi-tenant monument sign. So are you saying the tenant panel you want to see go away? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 17 of 41 March 10, 2015 Caramagno: I don’t know why you would need a Vitamin Shoppe panel on that monument sign. Redner: Okay, that just what I wanted to clarify. Caramagno: I don’t know how effective that is. Redner: When you said you wanted the see the monument sign go away I thought you meant the whole sign itself. Caramagno: Oh, no I’m talking about your panel on that because--yeah, I see there’s three buildings there isn’t there? Redner: Yes. Caramagno: Three tenants, basically there’s you-- Redner: Yes, sir. Caramagno: What in there AT&T or something? Redner: Yes, sir. Caramagno: And what is on the endcap? Redner: I’m not sure. Caramagno: Coffee shop I think. Redner: I just know there is three units in that strip. Caramagno: So what goes in the middle then, guess what, guess who else gets another sign then too? That’s what--that’s the point I was making. Redner: Okay. Pastor: Do we have a resolution? Caramagno: Well, Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: I make a motion to table this case. Upon Motion by Caramagno supported by Coppolla, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE 2015-01-02 (Tabled on January 6, 2015): An appeal has , been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Middlebelt Retail Development, LLC1260 Library St., Ste. 300, Detroit, MI 48226, on behalf of Lessee The Vitamin Shoppe, 12687 Middlebelt, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to erect an additional wall sign on the north elevation,resulting in excess number of wall signs and wall sign area. Number of Wall Signs: Wall Sign Area: Allowed: One Allowed: 37 sq. ft. Proposed: Two Proposed: 72 sq. ft. Excess: One (36 sq. ft. on each elevation) City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 18 of 41 March 10, 2015 Excess: 35 sq. ft. The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt, (12687), between Industrial and CSX Railroad, Lot No. 101-99-0008-015, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance No. 543, Section 18.50H,(b),2, “Sign Regulations in be tabled to allow the petitioner an opportunity to C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts,” meet with the developer, provide more specific plans, consider the Board’s comments and explore other options at the next meeting. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Caramagno, Coppolla, Bowling, Pastor NAYS: None ABSENT: Henzi, Schepis, Sills Pastor: It’s been approved. Redner: All right, thank you. th Pastor: I believe the--can they make the next--the 14? Is that the next? th Fisher: Yes, April 14. Pastor: Yes. Redner: I’m going to be here anyway for Starbucks so it works for me. Thank you gentlemen. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 19 of 41 March 10, 2015 APPEAL CASE NO. 2015-02-05: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Preferred Real Estate, LLC, 38000 Ann Arbor Trail, Livonia, MI 48150, on behalf of Lessee Preferred Dental Group, 38000 Ann Arbor Trail, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to replace two existing ground signs and have one sign with electronic display of time and temperature. This type of display is not allowed in this zoning district. The existing signs are nonconforming to the current allowances provided in the sign ordinance and are under a previous variance granted by the Zoning Board (case# 8104-41). The property is located on the north side of Ann Arbor Trail (38000), between Ann Arbor Road and Hix, Lot No. 121-99-0017-001, OS Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance No. 543, Section 18.50H,(o) “Sign Regulations in C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts,” Pastor: Mr. Banko, any additional information? Banko: I have nothing to add at this time, Mr. Chair. Pastor: Thank you. Bowling: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Bowling. Bowling: Mr. Banko, on--it talks about that this is not allowed in this zoning district, where would we allow that sign? I guess in which zoning district? Banko: The digital sign? Bowling: Yes. Banko: The commercial districts. Bowling: Okay. I mean I see all the gas stations have a digital sign for their prices and those things on there. Are those parts of those districts as well? Banko: Those are commercial C-2 or C-3 districts. Bowling: Okay. All right, it would just be a small area if it is on a corner it’s considered that district? Banko: Yes, sir. Bowling: Okay, thanks. Pastor: Welcome, state your name please. Guzik: My name is Nicholas Guzik, I’m a project manager at Signs by Crannie and I am here representing Preferred Dental. Regula: Chet Regula, 38000 Ann Arbor Trail. Guzik: And what we would like to do is Dr. Regula contacted me in regards to the existing signs in that location. That location is an OS. The three corners all around it are commercial or zoned commercial. The existing--and what we would like to have for your support is replacing the existing signs that are at the location. We are looking at reducing City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 20 of 41 March 10, 2015 the square footage--we are not going to put any more square footage than what is currently there. We will use the same footprint, the same structure that is at the location. And I believe that you have photos and also renderings of the new sign. The existing signs are twenty years old. They look old, they look worn. We are looking at replacing them with just better signage. Pastor: You said you were going to reduce the signage or-- Guzik: Yes, the location sits on the corner of Ann Arbor Trail and Ann Arbor Road. One of the signs is at 27 square feet, we are taking it to 26 square feet. The other sign is 32 square feet, we’re taking it to 28 square feet. Pastor: Okay. Guzik: And again it’s a corner lot. There is difficulty in the visibility of the building because it’s a--it’s just a great corner, a lot of trees, a lot of landscaping which pretty much blocks the building. There are no type of wall signs on that location. Pastor: What’s the reasoning behind the temperature and time display? Guzik: To add to the visibility. I think often times in the sign business we will put a sign within 60--90 days it really does nothing. In our initial conversations we talked and discussed the electronic message center which is allowed I guess in the community. Talked about having the services provided by the dental office being able to advertise those services. However, the doctor said let’s just keep it clean and neat, let’s just put a small 10 inch time and temperature display. It will not flash, it will change, however, it’s unable to put any text or information on it. It’s just a small time and temp display, one color. Pastor: Any other questions? Coppolla: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Coppolla. Coppolla: I’m going to repeat your question. I guess when you look at time and temperature, I think every car has time and temperature and it doesn’t add a lot of value per se. Every phone has time and temperature, it’s really not providing any good information so again, I’ll ask the same question and I just want to see how you respond. What’s the value of having an electronic sign that has time and temperature? Guzik: We believe that--well not only we--evidence would point that a time and temperature is going to attract somebody driving. You could certainly dig for your cell phone well driving. You could certainly take a look at your dashboard, look and see what time it is. We believe that it is not distracting but it’s an attraction for the location. Coppolla: Okay, so let me just add to the question. Since dentistry isn’t an impulse location, you’re looking for it, you’re going there for a reason, why would you need that level of notice? Regula: Can I address that? Thirty percent of our patients--new patients come from the sign. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 21 of 41 March 10, 2015 Guzik: So it is, it’s an attraction without being loud, without being obnoxious. It’s neat, it’s professional. We spoke and had a conversation with Randy Abramson--is he here? Banko: No, he is not. Guzik: And we had a conversation about the existing signage. He certainly had no issues, protest or objections in the new signage. We talked about an electronic message center. He said, you know you are not going to be able to do an electronic message center, however with the time and temperature it is clean, it is neat, it’s not too large and it is not obnoxious, I suggest filing a variance and seeing. So, we had a conversation and he didn’t seem to object or have any protest including a time and temp in the sign, just only one sign on the corner. Regula: If I can chime in. We’ve been in the community for over thirty years. And I think serving the community well. The community has served us very well, as well. I think the sign is tastefully done, it’s an expensive proposition for us, the sign is. The existing sign is way past due getting upgraded. I think it will be tasteful for the City, certainly for us. The time and temperature, it will help us. Pastor: Are these signs lit? Back lit? Guzik: Yes, they are. They are internally illuminated. And they have push through letters so there is only a glow around the letters. So it’s not the whole back that will be lit up, it will only--it’s called pushed through letters. However, it is internally illuminated which is different right now. There’s a couple spots aiming up at the signage. And I do want to make it clear that this is not a flashing, a scrolling type of sign. It’s just tastefully done, just the time and temp. I know I rely upon time and temps, if I‘m on time great I’ve got five minutes or I’m running two minutes behind. It’s just nice to have and again it is very professional and I think it would enhance that location. Pastor: Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience that cares to address this issue? Seeing none, do we have letters? Caramagno: Mr. Chair, I’ve got a question. Pastor: Go ahead. Caramagno: And maybe I was paging through this and not listening. Where is the new sign going to go? Guzik: It is replacing the existing signage. There is one on the corner. Caramagno: So we’re going--you’re still staying with two signs? Guzik: Yes, it’s a corner lot so one is on the corner and then one is on Ann Arbor Trail by the drive--it’s set back off that driveway. Caramagno: It’s a--it’s replacing the two existing signs. Was there ever a consideration to put one sign that would suffice in place of the two? Guzik: Now we did not. Go ahead Chet. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 22 of 41 March 10, 2015 Regula: Again, after being there for thirty years, I don’t have it in front of me okay--but we have had a marketing company come in and do a survey and there is a need for both signs. That’s why we originally came back here twenty years ago. Caramagno: And I understand the need for two signs sitting under all the trees on the property. It’s a beautiful property okay. Regula: Thank you. Caramagno: Two signs sitting back there, that I can probably see that they blend in to some extent with the--with the property--with the wooded property. Being that you are going to put a lit--or asking to put a lit date, time, temperature on there, I would think like you are asking for, to get more attention and maybe that would get you more attention with one sign with the date and temperature on it. Regula: Well, if we are bargaining and negotiating, the two signs-- I mean if we are weighing one over the other as I said, you know God I love you to death don’t give me the thing I’m okay, I mean it’s a help. I think these are tastefully done. The lighting that we have right now is really a bit obtrusive to be honest with you. This is back lit, this has been in design now for nine months or so. We just think the time and temp would help us and we think it is tasteful. Guzik: And I might add that second sign by the driveway is almost more of a directional sign. I think without it people would be a little confused. Okay, I’m not exactly--because they are pretty far apart. So I’m not sure if they would get confused or it would become difficult to know where the building is. Regula: The conclusion from the marketing company is that the two served different purposes. Caramagno: Okay. Regula: It was not redundant. Bowling: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Yes. Bowling: Did you tell us already that the lighted sign that you are proposing, is that going to be on the Ann Arbor Road side or the Ann Arbor Trail side? Guzik: It will be on the corner of Ann Arbor Road and Ann Arbor Trail. Bowling: Okay. Guzik: It will be-- Bowling: It will be similar to the same location? Guzik: The one will be right on the corner there. Bowling: Okay. Is that a different location than where the current sign is? It seems like that’s-- Guzik: No. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 23 of 41 March 10, 2015 Bowling: --the other one is pushed back a little bit or it sits in that same spot? Guzik: Exact--we are using the exact locations where the existing signs are. Bowling: Okay. Regula: We cut the price by the keeping the same foot print. Bowling: That makes sense. Guzik: It’s an improvement. They are very nice looking signs. We’ve work on this design and just keeping it clean, neat and professional to reflect the offices and the location. Pastor: Thank you. Letters? Caramagno: Plenty. Letters of objections from Jean Spicer, 38172 Ann Arbor Trail (letter read), Gloria Krueger, 38234 Ann Arbor Trail (letter read), Barbara Dempsey, 38170 Ann Arbor Trail (letter read), Jocelyn Baker, 38238 Ann Arbor Trail (letter read), Patricia Agosta, 38294 Ann Arbor Trail (letter read), Heather Runyon, 37625 Ann Arbor Road, No. 108, (letter read) and Colleen Gurczynski, 38224 Ann Arbor Trail (letter read). Pastor: Thank you. Could you address any of those? Guzik: I think that maybe some of the people may think it is an electronic message center where it is going to flash, where it is going to scroll, where it is going to talk about teeth whitening. And that is not at all the case. The lumens--and also I wanted to mention there is a sensor on the sign during the day it is at fifty percent and at night it is at ten percent lumens. So it will dim down and lighten up based upon ambient lighting outside. So I believe that some of those objections might be something a little flashy, something a little scrolling which this is not going to be the case at all. And of course the other dentist is just not in a position or I think they are in a strip center and they could certainly make some investment and maybe buy a corner lot. Regula: I can also--you know the things I know I’m going to go to my grave not understanding. I don’t know how the Mackinaw Bridge stands, you know. Somewhere down the line we at Preferred just irritated--if you look at all those addresses they are from that condominium group in the back and somebody I don’t--I don’t know why but for years they don’t particularly care for what we do. So I don’t know what we are doing. If we take down trees, or do something we hear from them in a plethora so--the majority of those are from one source. Caramagno: Tough gang, we’ve heard from them before on other issues. Regula: You know I would love to know and settle it and be nice. But I am probably going to go to my grave and I just don’t know. Guzik: And this lighting will never get that far. There are trees bordering the property line so it will never ever be bright enough for anybody--is that a condominium complex? Regula: Yes. Guzik: To be able to see that light, it will be so far away. Pastor: Do you leave these signs on all night? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 24 of 41 March 10, 2015 Regula: I think so, yeah we light them at night. Guzik: Yeah, you do because of the exterior lighting. Pastor: Could you not put a timer or something on them to maybe quash some of the concerns about excess lighting? Regula: Mr. Pastor, I can tell you honestly there may be issues here okay, but the fact that this--we are actually taking the lighting down. I mean we have four obnoxious signs that are lighting from both sides that are just a pain in the neck and I mean they break. The lighting will be diminished here greatly. I mean if that is an issue I honestly don’t feel that is an issue that this lighting itself is going to be objectionable to anybody. Pastor: Okay, I will close the public portion of this meeting and start our comments with Mr. Coppolla. Coppolla: First of all, thank you for your commitment to the community. You have been here a long time and I really appreciate that. You’ve got a beautiful facility and a beautiful site here. Regula: Thank you. Coppolla: I think an upgrade--I like the upgrades to your signs in the sense of the design I think they are nice, they are attractive, they probably fit very well into the area. I do--I am struggling with the time and the temp. I just am not--I just have an issue with feeling that that is absolutely necessary. I am sure there are studies that prove that it increases traffic, I’m not sure that is true anymore. Most of the banks and all those that used to have a time and temp no longer have a time and temp. I’m a hundred percent supportive of you being able to retain your signs--the two signs and a hundred percent supportive of your proposal for the signs themselves. I am at this point not supportive of the time and temp. Regula: Even if we throw in a free root canal? Coppolla: If it was like the last one, no. Guzik: May I respond, or is this not the time? Caramagno: Not the time. I see you’ve got opposition from the condominium down the street and while it seems substantial I think this sign package is nice. I like the signs because the date--the temperature and time is on the Ann Arbor Road side of the building and that is where it is at right? Regula: Yes. Caramagno: I don’t find it offensive at all, I think it is kind of nice. I know what the cars say, and I heard what Greg said, I just kind of like it I miss them. So, I would be in support. Pastor: Mr. Bowling. Bowling: I think I echo Sam’s comments. The only real heartburn I have is the objection letters and it does seem to come from one place. But I think it is dynamite what you are doing here. It’s a--it looks like a really nice sign package. We’ve got the gas stations City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 25 of 41 March 10, 2015 right across the street that are advertising their prices all day long and that is kind of what made me think about that in the beginning there. So I think it is great and I think I would be in support of it. Pastor: I agree. I can support this sign package. I think it very tastefully done. I don’t have any heartburn over the time and date, it’s out on the main road. It’s not going to be obtrusive to anybody I don’t believe so I will be in support. Looking for a motion. Fisher: Well, Mr. Chair, right now you don’t have four votes for approval. Caramagno: Right, we don’t have Greg on this one. Pastor: He didn’t say yes or no is how I understood it. Coppolla: Mr. Chair, you are correct. I said I was supportive of the package I was not enthralled with the time and temp. If that is not what I said that is what I meant. And I apologize if I was misunderstood. Fisher: Okay. Pastor: So can we get a motion. Caramagno: What’s that? Pastor: A motion. Caramagno: Can it go? Pastor: We’ll see. Caramagno: Let’s push it. Upon Motion by Caramagno supported by Bowling, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2015-02-05: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Preferred Real Estate, LLC, 38000 Ann Arbor Trail, Livonia, MI 48150, on behalf of Lessee Preferred Dental Group, 38000 Ann Arbor Trail, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to replace two existing ground signs and have one sign with electronic display of time and temperature. This type of display is not allowed in this zoning district. The existing signs are nonconforming to the current allowances provided in the sign ordinance and are under a previous variance granted by the Zoning Board (case# 8104- 41). The property is located on the north side of Ann Arbor Trail (38000), between Ann Arbor Road and Hix, Lot No. 121-99-0017-001, OS Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance No. 543, Section 18.50H,(o) “Sign Regulations in be granted for the following reasons and findings of C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts,” fact: City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 26 of 41 March 10, 2015 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because the business currently has two signs and the property is located on two major thoroughfares on a wooded lot. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because the petitioner would not be allowed to upgrade his property and signs. 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 digital signs in the area and the proposed signs do not have a scrolling message. 4. The Board received one letter of approval and seven objection letters from neighboring property owners. 5. The property is classified as “office” 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 signs be constructed as presented to the Board verbally and in writing. 2. That the project be completed within six (6) months. 3. That the time and temperature are the only digital display message on the electronic sign. 4. That the illumination of the signs reduces as presented by petitioner, so the illumination, measured in lumens, is no greater at night than one-fifth of the respective sign’s illumination by day. 5. That there are no scrolling messages on the electronic sign. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Caramagno, Bowling, Coppolla, Pastor NAYS: None ABSENT: Sills, Henzi, Schepis Pastor: It has been-- Guzik: Thank you very much. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 27 of 41 March 10, 2015 Pastor: It’s been passed and you heard the conditions. Regula: Thank you very much. Guzik: Thank you we appreciate it. They are nice looking signs, you will be happy with them. Regula: And a closing comment if I may. My aunt said it’s not what you say, it’s not how you say it, it’s how you make somebody feel. You made me feel very well, thank you. I hope I can return the favor. Pastor: We will all be in for a root canal. Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 28 of 41 March 10, 2015 APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-06-28 (Tabled on June 3, 2014): Kordoba, LLC, 7573 Windgate Circle, West Bloomfield, MI 48323, on behalf of Lessee Masri Orthodontics, 15230 Levan, Livonia, MI 48154, seeking to erect a second wall sign upon a multi-tenant office building, resulting in excess number of wall signs and wall sign area. Number of Wall Signs:Wall Sign Area: Allowed: One Allowed: 20 sq. ft. Proposed: TwoProposed: 124 sq. ft. Excess: One (70 sq. ft. existing) Excess: 104 sq. ft. The property is located on the east side of Levan (15230), between Jamison and Five Mile, Lot. No. 077-99-0010-000, OS Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50F(b)2, “Sign Regulations for Office Services Districts.” Pastor: Mr. Banko, any-- Banko: I have nothing to add. Pastor: Thank you. Banko: Sure. Pastor: Will the petitioner please come up please? Good evening. Fitzgerald: Dan Fitzgerald from Classic Building on behalf of Masri Orthodontics. Waiting for me? Banko: Shall we remove it from the table? Bowling: Actually this was tabled. Caramagno: Mr. Chair, I make that motion to remove this from the table. Pastor: Do we have support? Bowling: Support. Pastor: All in favor? Board Members: Aye. Pastor: Can you tell us about your project, please? Fitzgerald: Yeah, this--there’s actually a problem with this particular location. I talked to Mark Toarmina--and he is having a real hard time with patients finding this place. Mark and I spoke and this is really not a corner building but should probably be treated as one due to the BP Gas Station. When you are traveling westbound down Five Mile it is impossible to see this place and identify it if you are a new patient. Also, travelling southbound on Levan would be complicated for that also. There is also certain parts of the day on this property where you are traveling westbound and objects can get in the way and it seems to be complicated for him dealing with repeated customers saying I City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 29 of 41 March 10, 2015 can’t find you. When you are traveling westbound down Five Mile in this particular place if you miss it, it is very complicated to turn around there because you have St. Mary’s on the left hand side and then you are going through the parking lots on the right hand side. Also travelling southbound on Levan you have the same scenario. You’d be pulling into residential properties on the left hand side trying to turn around and right side you’d also be back into the St. Mary’s. Not only into St. Mary’s you’ve wound up in the emergency section at this particular time you would turn. I also spoke with Randy Abramson regarding the square footage on this. Randy didn’t seem to have a problem with this. We’ve reduced it down another 16 square feet, it would bring it down to 54 square feet versus the 70. And it’s not that this is a gaudy looking sign or the reason he is basically here is because of the complaints from the customers. He spent like two million dollars on this project last year and for a sign to cause this much havoc, it just doesn’t make sense. So, he talked to me and I said you know he went the first time the second time I said well let me go see if we can explain it a little bit more clear what the problems are you are having here. Pastor: I seem to recall this case where we already gave him an extra access sign. So you are coming back for another bite at the apple basically? Fitzgerald: You gave him--I’m sorry? Pastor: We already gave him the second sign, now it is not big enough for him is that what I am hearing? Fitzgerald: No he only has one sign on this premises. Fisher: No, he has-- Pastor: Didn’t we-- Fisher: --the monument sign. Bowling: The monument sign out front. Pastor: Maybe that is what I am thinking. Fitzgerald: There is no monument sign there. Masri: The monument sign at this time is not used because we might have to take it down because of the sewage pipe. I mean we cannot use it. Fitzgerald: Yeah, the monument sign never wound up getting constructed because of the small sewer line that runs down Levan Road, he would have to get it taken out because the City of Livonia is still under observation with that particular-- Bowling: So you are not proposing to keep the monument sign and add this additional sign up top? Masri: We at this time are not able to use it, I mean I know there is a tenant checking this space out and we told them as of right now we cannot tell you there is a sign at this time. I mean it’s been existing. I mean the pipe will be constructed sometime this year or next year. Most of the contractors said that sign might be in the way. So we don’t know. This is why we are not investing in putting anything right now. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 30 of 41 March 10, 2015 Fisher: Well, just for clarity’s sake, if you get this sign are you going to get rid of the monument sign then? Masri: Not if--if they tear it down we are not going to build it again I guess. I mean if that is the answer. Fitzgerald: Well the--I remember you bringing me over for your sewer case and that sewer does run right down that line of that monument sign. So when they redo that sewer that monument sign is going to be gone. And that’s when I told him I’ll go to the Zoning Board with you and we will see what we can do. It’s just--it seems to me that the hardship here of this building without even thinking of a monument sign, when I was over there doing some research before I went to talk to Mark, it should be treated as a corner building. This place is just havoc over there trying to locate this guy. He--that’s just--we both agreed on that in our conversation. I don’t know the BP awning projects toward the Levan way which is basically blocking his whole store and I don’t know. I don’t see a monument sign really helping you in this case. Pastor: I would like to go back to Mr. Fisher’s question because I didn’t feel like it got answered properly. Are you saying that the monument will be taken down no matter what? If it comes down with the sanitary or not if you get this? Fitzgerald: Are you going to take the monument sign down if the sanitary line-- Masri: If the sanitary line--I mean the require-- Pastor: I don’t care if the sanitary line is there or not. Are you going to take it down yes or no? Masri: At this time we’re hoping not. It is artistically done nicely. We had some nice flowers, the Mayor complimented us about this design. I mean I think it’s a nice artistic structure of the whole area. It reduced the commercial look of the BP Gas Station and the next few months I mean there’s a bunch of flowers blooming I mean it is very attractively done sign compared to the very heavy populated industrial looking corner. And I think the BP Gas Station is creating a lot of industrial look and we are trying to tone down that look. Pastor: Any other questions? Fitzgerald: Having--I would like to say one more thing. Being this--being the hospital here though and the expansion that is going on I just--from a builder--being a builder also, I see that if a small sewer, this probably will get replaced. It just to me it makes logic--I see this monument sign being history if this under review with a sewer being small. Especially across the street from St. Mary Hospital with the expansion that these hospitals are doing Cancer Centers, what have you, I just--to me it seems like even though he likes the flowers and he likes the beauty of his BP (sic) sign I still see his monument sign one day being history. Just from my years in the business of both trades signs and building. Pastor: Any other questions? Coppolla: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Coppolla. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 31 of 41 March 10, 2015 Coppolla: Is this a single tenant facility or will it be a multi-tenant facility? Masri: Right now it is a single tenant. Coppolla: Do you intend to lease out space? Masri: Hopefully in the future. Coppolla: Is there a visible street address on the building? Masri: Yeah, I mean on the other side on Levan yeah. Fitzgerald: Is there a visible add-- Coppolla: And where is that located? Masri: On the door. I mean you only can see it probably if you are inside the building-- inside the parking lot. But from a distance you really cannot see it. Coppolla: Would there be any ability to put better street signage--street address signage on that building would it make it easier potentially for people to find that? Masri: Well I mean going with that direction I mean this property is still very blocked out. I mean we get--I mean multiple complaints every day about people going pass it on Five Mile, going into St. Mary’s and trying to take a u-turn. And this morning we had an accident in front of our parking lot. People are just confused about going right or left. Coppolla: Let me be a little bit more direct then. Would--would a better visible street address help to resolve the issue of people having difficulty seeing your building? Fitzgerald: Looking at this drawing here, an address on this architectural design would not look good. I mean you’re going to put a--on this particular side of the building with this architectural full blast with a radius at the top, it just seems to me with the beauty of this building to stick a vinyl letter address on this sign--I mean on this glass just seems to me to be just totally destroying the look of this building. I mean these--it’s like these signs- -and I know Livonia I’ve been working here for 35 years that’s why I said we’ll go with it. It just to me this sign here is not really a gaudy sign. It’s black in the day, it’s not even-- it’s not even a real attractive sign, it’s not flashing, it’s not anything. It’s strictly for identification. He--in all actuality he really needs a sign on the other side of the building but we are only going this way when you are heading northbound on Levan you go right by it too but that is beside the point. I think personally back to the--being treated as a corner building this particular building is being robbed as Mark Toarmino and I--with the parking structure of the BP Gas Station. I think this building probably if you can lean over that way treat this as a corner building because that’s technically kind of like this building is even though he’s not zoned in that particular category. It seems to me he’s getting robbed like day--if you see this Exhibit here, he’s got a tanker there that is just blocking everything. So the more he can get I think it would help him with his patient problem. I don’t think he’s really here for flashy signs. I think he is here for rectifying a situation with customers that are probably frustrated. Caramagno: Mr. Chair. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 32 of 41 March 10, 2015 Pastor: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: I’ve got a couple of questions for you. The--I think last time you were here or this case was before us, I don’t find your sign to be effective at all. Even in your picture right in front of my face, I can barely read the damn thing. It just doesn’t--it’s not effective to me and especially from the road. Is there anything else you can do to make this thing more effective? Fitzgerald: Which rendering are you looking at? Caramagno: I’m looking at your glossy pictures here. Fitzgerald: The original rendering that was submitted before the build before Livonia is the actual rendering he ended up going with. Not changing the sign once it was probably approved by the City of Livonia. So he duplicated that on the other side which is his logo. Caramagno: And that is why I said I don’t find it particularly-- Fitzgerald: Yeah. Caramagno: --eye catching or effective. So what you have up there now to me doesn’t do that trick. You want to duplicate that and I think all that does is double don’t do the trick. Fitzgerald: Yeah. Caramagno: I also look at your sign here, you’re showing the gas station with the tanker and for the life of me--where do you want to put the sign here that is going to be anywhere effective? This picture--where is this sign going to be that makes this any more effective? Fitzgerald: Well he is going to put it up higher and you could probably see that top of that building from a different angle. Caramagno: Not from this picture you cannot. Fitzgerald: Not from that picture? Caramagno: This picture does nothing for your case. It is still blocked. Pastor: It hurts his case. Masri: Well I mean the issue here-- Caramagno: Unless you are seeing something I am not. Pastor: No, I think it hurts his case actually these pictures. Caramagno: This adds no value. Have you given any consideration to putting a diagonal sign across the front someway on the--somehow like this? Has there been any consideration to that that would attract the traffic from two directions? Any other thing that duplicating what is up there now that I feel is terrible? Fitzgerald: Well I think the matter is that he has already paid for the one sign so he probably doesn’t want to take it down and do two signs over again. I mean I’m speaking not for him but I would-- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 33 of 41 March 10, 2015 Caramagno: I can hear that but-- Fitzgerald: I would see that’s where he would be thinking I’m just duplicating this at a smaller scale. But even with this picture with this tanker even at ten o’clock in the morning somebody going to this place traveling westbound on Five Mile he’s back to the same issue. They can’t find him and their turn around is just--I tried it, turning around there was just an absolute nightmare. Pastor: Why would they be looking at him on Five Mile and when they know he is not on Five Mile? Fitzgerald: Well, most of his clients he said comes from Five Mile. They don’t go Levan, coming up Farmington Road. Pastor: Yeah, but they know he is not on Five Mile. Masri: Well we do--I mean tell the patient we are at the corner of Five and Levan and we cannot get out it I mean--I mean we are on the corner to a degree I mean. We tell them we are next to the BP Gas Station and that is where the confusion start. They pass the gas station and they look and they don’t see us and then they go back and they miss the street and they have to take a u-turn St. Mary entrance, get the parking lot issues and then--it seems like more and more people are having issues--yes you told us Five Mile and Levan and missed it still. So I mean-- Fitzgerald: Technically he is on the corner of Five Mile and Levan that brings him back to that corner lot problem. Pastor: I’d like to know how you technically believe that he is on the corner because the gas station is on the corner. That is what it is. Fitzgerald: Yeah. That’s one of the reasons we are here for this building we feel should be treated as a corner building and therefore probably allowed the sign because it’s just- -he’s having problems with identification. It probably wouldn’t be a problem if the turnaround situations were easier but they are not. Not just one way but two ways. Pastor: Mr. Fisher. Fisher: Yes. Pastor: At this--if this was a corner lot, how much signage would he be allowed? Fisher: None, because this is an OS zoning district. Even if it were commercial he could- -again we would have the same thing we talked about before, your second sign on the corner can only be half the size of your first. So even if this were still commercially zoned and on the corner, the biggest that sign could be would 35 square feet. Pastor: Thank you. Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Can you tell me more about the monument sign? It’s--what is it on the-- what do you call that Craig? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 34 of 41 March 10, 2015 Pastor: Boulevard? Caramagno: Is it on the right-of-way, is that what it is? Bowling: Easement? Fitzgerald: I don’t even remember seeing a monument sign. Caramagno: It’s there believe us. Fitzgerald: Where is it? Bowling: It is right at the front of the building. Caramagno: What is the issue with that having to come down? If they put the sewer in it has to come down? Fitzgerald: Yeah, it is running right down that-- Caramagno: Well it is possible--possible. Masri: The sewer is about fourteen feet underground and the builders--not the building the contractor--the City has three bids. And three of them they said ninety percent by the time they put their equipment in there that sign has to go because of the depth of the pipe. And the pipe is coming out of the building so they are not going to be on the sidewalk and not try to destroy the sidewalk. So they would be sitting where the sign is. Caramagno: You got approved for the monument sign and they have to go because of a sewer rebuild and then the sign can get put back up, is that right? Masri: Probably not. If they took it down I mean I’m not going to pay for another one. It would be hard pressed unless somebody want to pay for it. Caramagno: To help you with this, I can’t see it. Banko: I haven’t even seen the monument sign but if a monument sign is according to the setback requirements, it has to be ten feet off the property line. And if in fact there was construction and then had to replace the sanitary sewer and it encroached upon the private property, I would think that the contractor would be liable to put back the monument sign if they destroyed the monument sign. If in fact that happened. But there are a lot of ifs here, there are a lot of assumptions being made. Caramagno: Absolutely right. Fitzgerald: But also they could also just say that is in the right-of-way and adios with your sign. Banko: If it is on private property sir through the Chair. If it meets its setback requirement and if there was a permit pulled for the monument sign, and again it was destroyed by the contractor who is working on the right-of-way I would think the contractor would be liable to replace the monument sign. And that is my assumption I guess. Fisher: Well actually just for the record. The Board did give a slight variance on the setback but still it is more than seven feet inside the private property. So yeah, their-- generally speaking sewers are installed in rights-of way and while I guess I don’t know City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 35 of 41 March 10, 2015 enough about sewer construction to be able to say absolutely the sign wouldn’t come down, I don’t know why it would as we sit here tonight. Fitzgerald: He just--there is no sign there he said, just the monument structure. Caramagno: Right. Fisher: You got-- Coppolla: There is no signage on it, but there is a structure there. Fisher: You actually got a variance from this Board to put a sign there, so we expect unless it never happens and we haven’t been told that it is not going to happen, that that sign is going to be there. Pastor: So with that being said, why wouldn’t that fulfill the requirements by putting a sign on that monument instead of coming here and doing this? Masri: That sign you cannot see it. I mean that sign from Five Mile you can’t see it. Fitzgerald: Now that’s not--the concern he had when he contacted me was the sewer was going in and he was told by three different contractors that that sign was in the way and would be taken out. This was his concern back when I talked to him probably in the summer time. So that’s probably why the sign is not there and he’s been going around trying to get this one. The last time it got tabled we reduced it down more and here we are and he still doesn’t have a monument sign out there. Pastor: But he has all the rights to put one out there is what we are saying. He already has permission to put a sign on that monument why isn’t that fulfilling his needs? Masri: Why would you put a sign if the sign is going to come down? Why would you spend ten thousand dollars on a sign if it is going to come down? Pastor: Well if it is placed in the proper place, then the contractor has to come on your private property and take that sign down, according to the City they are going to have to put it back up for you. Masri: But not for free. I mean there--this pipe is a requirement by the City, it is not my pipe. The City is doing this project. So if the City brings a builder or a contractor to take this pipe down and you want to get this pipe fixed and we need to--I’m not sure if anybody is aware of it, it is a necessity for our business. So we feel at one point this pipe is going to be changed because we have issues with the flooding of the sewage of the next door neighbor of the vet. So it is a necessity of a business owner in this area because we don’t have sewage line, we have a private lead. So that we are trying to get this pipe for four years now, finally the City honored this pipe and they are going to partially pay for it, but they are not going to pay to build a sign. I mean when you say a builder would come and put it back I mean nobody would put anything back for you. I mean they will tell you it’s going to come down and do you want to do it or not. I mean we need a sewer--I mean we need a sewer. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 36 of 41 March 10, 2015 Pastor: So what is the objection of taking it down and not using it if it doesn’t come down? Mr. Fisher asked you if you got this are you going to take down that monument and your answer was no. Masri: I said if this monument comes down because of the pipe-- Pastor: No--no--no, you are turning my words around. If we give you this sign are you going to take down the monument, if it comes down or not during the sewer construction? In other words, we are not going to let you have both signs. It is either one or the other. Masri: Well the issue is there is a tenant that is--second tenant I mean you are making it difficultly and hardship for people to lease that space and I think it’s not good for the City not to get tenant and pay taxes. Pastor: So now you are telling us that you are going to be back here for a tenant sign? Masri: No--no--no, the sign is there but nobody is using it I mean, I’m not sure-- Fisher: In other words, you want to advertise your tenant on the ground sign that you have permission for but have not erected? Masri: If the sign continues to be there sure. Coppolla: And if it is not? Masri: If somebody comes back here and asked for different signage--I mean nobody would lease the space with no signage. Fitzgerald: On the other hand, what if he does have the monument sign and doesn’t get this sign and it does get taken down and let’s say it is a year and a half project and what happens if he doesn’t get his sign put back up? Or they dig a fourteen foot hole and then pour a footing for a sign and a year and a half later the thing is sagging like this because the virgin ground is so deep? I mean there’s a lot of speculation that can go on with your particular case here. I know I’m a sign builder and a builder and I doubt if we are going to do anything free for him. Most contractors are going to charge you. On a hardship that that wasn’t their problem that it was in a right-of-way of a sewer line. Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: You are allowed twenty square feet on the wall. The name of the business or the building or whatever this is, is Masri Orthodontics. Masri you can hardly read from any type of distance at all let alone this paper in front of my face. If it just said Masri up there twice in letters that were readable it may be a lesser square footage would that suffice? Masri: I mean we are going back to architectural design for this building and it is a nice area for the City. I don’t know why we would destroy a nice looking building with something not-- Caramagno: What would we--what do you mean by destroying it? What do you mean by that? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 37 of 41 March 10, 2015 Masri: I mean it has two sides, they are identical. I mean it’s been designed by architects long time ago. The City approved it a long time ago with this look. I am here in front of the Board for the requirement. I mean it’s not the issue with will it work or not I mean it will not be appealing to the eye. I mean we are fighting the issue of yes there is measurement but there is also the artistic. We are trying to take care of the community here. We don’t want to be an eyesore. Caramagno: You’re not taking care--you are taking care of your building and your advertisement for your building. You are not taking care of the community, you are taking care of Masri Orthodontics. That is who you are taking care. Masri: If it’s an advertisement I would be putting a neon sign where it is flashing twenty four hours. Caramagno: No, you won’t be doing that either. Fitzgerald: Well, you might if you have a good enough case. Caramagno: So, I was more posing a suggestion than anything. I don’t have any more questions. That is it for me. Pastor: Does anybody else have any questions? Bowling: I do not. Pastor: I see no one in the audience, so do we have any letters? Caramagno: We have a letter of approval from Peter Tschudi, 14153 Sunset (letter read). Pastor: Do you have anything to say in closing? Masri: We appreciate--I mean we are here for the second time. And we’re trying to put something very tasteful done. I mean we’re not trying to go--to be flashy--I’m not trying to be flashy. I’m just trying to do something nice. And we hope you guys can honor it. That’s all we have. Pastor: Okay, I’ll close the public portion and start with Mr. Caramagno again. Caramagno: Well, I--as I was last time I don’t like it. I think it is excessive. I hear the hardship of the gas station and you should be a corner, I don’t think there is a whole lot of thought put into this other than I’ve bought a sign, here’s what I want. I can’t support it. Pastor: Mr. Bowling. Bowling: I actually don’t have a lot of problem with it. I think to some extent having the extra signage is going to make sense. I have some heartburn over the monument sign being left in place along with the additional signs we are looking at potentially three or four signs if we give you both sides of the monument. So I’m going to hold off and see what the other Board Members say. Pastor: Mr. Coppolla: Coppolla: I don’t think the sign will make a difference as to people being able to spot you. Someone coming west on Five Mile is not going to be looking for a building on Levan. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 38 of 41 March 10, 2015 And if they are looking for the sign up there over the BP, chances are they will be probably be up the rear end of another vehicle very shortly. I was at the building on Sunday looking around I found the street address very hard to see. And if there were a more prominent street address it would probably resolve the majority of your problems. Overall, again, if you wanted a sign there it would be--I just think it solves the problem. I don’t think it looks bad I think the symmetric--like you said symmetry kind of you know it is nice to have a little bit of symmetry there. I mean it’s nice. I find the black lettering and the shape of it and the size of it very hard to read. I think there will probably be more accidents with somebody trying to read the sign than they are trying to figure out where they are at. So kind of to be put it more concisely I don’t overly have an issue with the second sign. I don’t think it is a corner lot. I don’t think it will be helpful. I think you need to do something in regards to making it easier for people to see the street address. So my perspective I am--I would say not unsupportive. Pastor: Very politician like. Coppolla: Thank you. Pastor: I’ve got several concerns with this. One, you’re asking for five times what you are allowed. That’s--I--I don’t think we’ve ever approved that large of a request. Maybe we have, I might be wrong. Two, you have a monument sign that is not even figured into this package that you can use. Three, we’ve got space for lease and I can’t lease the property unless this guy has 64 square feet of signage so I am going to be back here asking for more signage. I don’t find--you have a beautiful building. You really did a nice job. The sign package I don’t think it is well thought out. I think it is piecemealed together. And it is piecemealed together because I want it not because it is effective. I would suggest to one of our members that they make a tabling resolution for you to be able to come back with a different plan. I cannot support this package as it is presented tonight. Do we have a motion? Bowling: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Bowling. Upon Motion by Bowling supported by Coppolla, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2014-06-28 (Tabled on June 3, 2014): Kordoba, LLC, 7573 Windgate Circle, West Bloomfield, MI 48323, on behalf of Lessee Masri Orthodontics, 15230 Levan, Livonia, MI 48154, seeking to erect a second wall sign upon a multi-tenant office building, resulting in excess number of wall signs and wall sign area. Number of Wall Signs: Wall Sign Area: Allowed: One Allowed: 20 sq. ft. Proposed: Two Proposed: 124 sq. ft. Excess: One (70 sq. ft. existing) Excess: 104 sq. ft. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 39 of 41 March 10, 2015 The property is located on the east side of Levan (15230), between Jamison and Five Mile, Lot. No. 077-99-0010-000, OS Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50F(b)2, “Sign Regulations for be tabled to allow the petitioner an opportunity to consider Office Services Districts,” the Board’s comments and explore other options more in keeping with the scale of what the ordinance allows. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bowling, Coppolla, Caramagno, Pastor NAYS: None ABSENT: Henzi, Sills, Schepis Pastor: It’s been tabled. Fitzgerald: Can I say one more thing? If I design this, this time can I design it with two sides one on each corner? I mean he scraps this whole-- Pastor: It’s up to you. You heard our comments and you know we are missing people. So they may be some other comments in the future. You may find some people a little softer than we are. I can’t tell. But I would suggest you take what we said into consideration. Fitzgerald: Okay, thank you, sir. Pastor: Thank you. Masri: Thank you very much. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 40 of 41 March 10, 2015 Pastor: We don’t have any minutes--or need to approve any minutes right? I didn’t see any. Caramagno: not that I know. th Bowling: I think we have March 9. th Pastor: March 9? th Bowling: Or December 9 I mean minutes to approve. Pastor: Do we have a motion to approve? Bowling: Motion to approve. Pastor: Do we have support? Caramagno: Are you saying we have minutes? Where did you see those minutes at? Bowling: They were in the package. Caramagno: Do you have them Craig? Pastor: No, I didn’t get them. Caramagno: Well if they are in there, I’ll support it. Pastor: All in favor? Board Members: Ayes. Pastor: Do we have a motion to adjourn? Bowling: Motion to adjourn. Pastor: All in favor? Board Members: Aye. Burklow: Who seconded the motion to adjourn? Pastor: Greg did. Coppolla: I did. Pastor: We are adjourned. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. _______________________________ Craig Pastor, Acting Chairman ______________________________ Sam Caramagno, Secretary /pcb City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 41 of 41 March 10, 2015