HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2001-01-3018231
MINUTES OF THE Sle PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING
FIELD BY THE CFTY PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CFTY OF LFVONIA
On Tuesday, January 30, 2001, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held it
818n Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Cent
Drive, Livomm Michigan
Mr. James McCann, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm-
Members
mMembers present James C. MCCann Dan Piercecchi H. G. Shane
Robert Alanskas William LaPine
Members absent: Elaine Koons
Messrs. Mark Taomrim, Planning Director, Al Nowak, Planner IV, Scott Miller, Plainer IL
Bill Poppenger, Planner I and Robby Williams ware also present
Cinnamon McCann informed the audience that if a petition on noughts agenda to, a
rezoning reque this Commis sion makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in turn,
will hold its own public hearing, make the final determination as to whether a petition is
approved or denied The Planning Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for
prelmninaryplatand/orvacatingpetition The Commission's recommendation is forwarded
the City Council for the final determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected If a
petition requesting a waiver of we or site plan approNzl is denied tonight, the petitioner has
ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City Council. Resolutions adopted
by the City Planning Con mission become effective seven (7) days after the date of adoption
The Planning Commission and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions
upon their filing. The staff has furnished the Corm cession with both approving and denying
resolutions, which the Commtission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the
proceedings tonight
ITEM#1 PETITION 2000-10-01-19 City planning Commission
(Loveland between Cards and Clarita)
Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, armom ed the next item on the agenda is Petition 2000-10-10-19
by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Canard Resolution 4774-00
and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance 4543, the Zoning Ordinance of
the City of Livonia, as amended, proposing to rezone certain property located
an Loveland between Curtis and Clarita in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 10 from
R-3 to R-4.
Mr. Taorrwna presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the sumouvding area
18232
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence',
Mr. Nowak: There is am itent of correspondence and A is a "revised" lett from the
Engineering Division, dated December 7, 2000, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to }our request, the Engmeeang Division has reviewed the above
referenced pea mn. The Engineering Division has no objections to the
proposal of this time. Thefollowmg legal descrTmor should be used an
connectmn therewit/c 'Lots 768 thru 787, Supervisor's Livonia Plat No. 13,
T. IS., R 9E., Livonia Township (now Cityof Livonia), Wayne County,
Michigan as recorded in Liber 68, Page 17, Wayne County Records and the
West 1/2 ofthe adjacent vacated street right f --way.' We trust that thu will
provide you with the informamor requested." The letter is signed by David
Lear, RE, Civil Engmear. That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. McCain: We are basically the proponents of this petition. I think Mr. Taormina
explaineditquitewet. The reasoning behind going to R-4 as opposed to RS
is ihatthe majority ofihe sites fitwithinthat classification. I am going togo
to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience that wisbes to speak for or
against this petition?
Ryan Delong 18285 Loveland I am one of the people affected by this. From wbat I
hmderstood of the application process is, this is to stop a lot of future
development in the neighborhood Tokeeptheneigbborhoodthewayitis
mw with the wide-open spaces. From what I looked at in my plot plans and
looking at the neigbborhood and during a little research, I found out that under
the R-3 status there are no conforming splits available in the neigbborhood If
someone were to apply for a lot split, it would have to go through Canard and
a meeting just like this and apply for a variance. If that is the reasoning for
going up to a RA which increases your lot size, it would make it harder to get
a variance in these types ofneigbborhoods which are ahead protected by it
This has resurfaced Ibis originally started, I believe, two years ago. I am
not positive. It has resurfaced since I was at the October 19 City Council
meeting and I removed my application for a lot split Since thea they have
reapplied for it I don't agree. I would like to have the choice to do with my
property how I see fit, as long as it is legal and I go through the proper legal
channels. I deal really support it and since everything is nonconflah ngin
the neighborhood for a lot split, I truly believe that it bas to go through the
proper legal circles and be subject to the neighborhood's concers before
anything would be approved Ijustwould like m say I have no intention of
really doing anything with my property other than living on it and maybe
doing an addition. AIM split isnl in my game plan butI would like w have
the lived= to apply for that type of variance.
Mr. Piemecchi: How large is your lot thatym were thinking about splitting it?
Mr. Deiong: It is 144' x 475'. It would require a seven foot variance on both-
Mr.
othMr. Piemec hi: It is 144' x 475' and you waot to split that?
18233
Mr. Deiong: I thought about it
Mr. Piercecchi: The only Powg you could split it to is R2.
Mr. Deiong: I had applied for a variance at me time. I didnY know if would be approved
or not
Mr. Piemecchi: That property is basically zoned R-37
Mr. Deiong: Yes it is.
Mr. McCann: Is there anybody else who wishes to speak? If not, I will close the Public
Hearing. A motion is in order.
On a motion by Mr. Piemecchi, seconded by Mr. Shane and unanimously approved, it was
#01-09-2001 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City
Planning Couunissinn on January 30, 2001, nn Petition 2000-10-01-19 by the
City Planning Commission proposing to rezone certain property located on
Loveland between Curds and Clarita in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 10 from R-3
to R-4, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 2000-10-01-19 be approved for the following reasons:
1) That the proposed change ofzonmg is compatible to and in barmony, with
the surrounding zo s; districts in the area;
2) That the proposed R-4 zoning district closely corresponds to the
prevailing lot sizes in the arra
3) That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the established
character of the area:
4) Thatthe proposed change of zoning was requested by affected property
owners in the subject area; and
5) That 80% of the lots in the subject area conform to the lot size and set
back requirem®ts of the proposed R-4 zoning district
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance witb the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543,
as amended
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted
It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution for a R-4 zoning
ITEM #2 PETITION 2000-12-01-22 Masoud Shango
18234
Mr. Piereecchi, Secretary, announced the nextitem on the agenda is Petitim 2000-12-01-22
by Masoud Shango requesting to rezone property located on the south side of
SchoolcraR Road east of Merriman in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 26 from P and
M-1 to C-3.
Mr. Taomina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the surrounding area
Mr. McCam: Is there my correspondence?
Mr. Nowak There is me itan oformospxndence. It is a lett from the Engineering
Division, dated December 28, 2000, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to
your reques4 the Engrus ring Drvdsion has reviewed the above referenced
petition The Engrus ring Dansion has an objections to the proposal at this
lone. The following legal description should be used in connection lherervA
'That part oftheN.W.114 of Section 26, T. IS, R 9E., Chy of Livonia,
Wayne County, Michigan moreparricularly described as beginning at a
point distant South 8927000"East, 265. 50feet and South 0029'56" West,
2 78. 00 feet from the Northwestcorner ofSecdon 26 and proceeding thence
South 8921000" Ew4103. 00 feet,'theme South 0029'56" West 94.62
feet; thence due West 103. 00feet,' thence North 0029'56"East, 95.79 feet
to the PomtofBeginnmg.' Wetrostthat this will provideym with the
information requested" The letter is signed by David Lear, PE., Civil
Engineer. That is the exert of the correspondence.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? It looks as though the petitioner is not
here. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this
petition? Seeing no one, I will close the Public Hearing. A motim is in
order.
Mr. LaPine: Normally I wouldn'tmake a amen without hearing from the petitioner buten
this case, I think A is very obvious that this is a bad situation and we don't
want to make it worse. Therefore I will make a denying resolution.
On a motion by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Alauskas and unannnously approved, it was
#01-10-2001 RESOLVED that, Panamint to a Public Hearing having been held by the City
Planning Coumtission an January 30, 2001, on Petition 2000.12-01-22 by
Masoud Shango requesting to rezone property located on the south side of
Schoderaft Road east ofMeniman in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 26 fromP and
M-1 to C-3, the Planning Commission does hereby recorcm®d to the City
Council that Petition 2000- 12-01- 22 be denied for the following reasons:
1) That the proposed change of zoning represents an increase in a less
restrictive zo ing district in the area;
2) That the proposed change ofzonmg is not needed to utilize the property,
18235
3) That the proposed change ofzonmg will provide for moremensive
commercial use of the subject property in an otherwise industrial area;
and
4) That there is no demonstrated need for additional coarmercialzorting in
this section of the City.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543,
as amended
Mr. McCarm, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adoprtd
It will go on to City Council with a denying resolution.
ITEM #3 PETITION 2000-12-01-23 Leo Soave
Mr. Piememi i, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is Petition 2000-12-01-23
by Leo Soave requesting to rezone property located m the east side of Cross
Winds Road north of Six Mile Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 11 from
RUFC to R-3.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the surround areas.
Mr. McCarm: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak There is one itmaofcarespondence and itis a letter from the Engineering
Division, dated December 29, 2000, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to
your request, the Engursermg Division has reviewed the above referenced
petition. We have no objection to the proposal err legal description at this
tare. However, it should be noted that although the lots are currently
serviced by sanitarysewer andwater maul no storm wirer is available The
developer will be responsible for extending a stome sewer to service the lots
orfindinganakematemethodofdrarnage. We trust that this willierovide
you with the information requested" The letter is signed by David Lear, PE.,
Civil Engineer. That is the emnt of the correspondence.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evemni.
Lon Smee,34822Pembroke. This naming will allowus to F,vildtwohomes. Onewoddbe
a ranch, 3 bedrooms, 2-12 baths, hill basement attached garage and the other
would be a two story, 4 bedrume, 2-1/2 baths, attached garage. The price
would be about $280,000 or so. I will answer your questions.
Mr. LaPine: You beard the letter we got from the Engineering Department How are you
going to handle the storm water! Are you going to put in a sewer in to hook
into it?
18236
Mr. Shave There is a manhole on the south side of Lot 21. That is going to be bored
right into the min hole. That is how we are going In access the storm sewer.
Mr. LaPme:
The water will be taken off by the stam sewer that is there?
Mr. Soave:
Yes sir.
Mr. LaPma
O.K Thank you
Mr. McCam:
What is the percentage of brick on these hares?
Mr. Soave:
Ontheranchitisgoivgtobeallbrick. Onthe colmialitwillbe about 65%
brick
Mr. McCaw:
Are there any other questions firm the Commissioners? Hearing none, I will
go to the audience? Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak her or
against this petition?
Angus McKersie, 30406 Su Mile Road That property is behind my house. Ilivethere. I
plan on Irving there. These are lot that are behind my house that are right in
the subdivision and it is an oppana ity fa me to sell them My taxes have
gone up. I went down to see why and they said because dere are speculators
in the area and that land t going up so they raised my faxes. If sell that
property, maybe my taxes will come back down.
Mr. McCann:
If there is nobody else wishing to speak, I will close the Public Hearing. A
motion is in order.
On a motion by Mr. Lopata, seconded by Mr. Shane and continuously approved, it was
#01-11-2001
RESOLVED that, puramit to a Public Hearing having been held by the City
Planning Commission on January 30, 2001, on Petition 2000-12-01-23 by
Lm Soave requesting to rezone property located on the east side of Cross
Winds Road north of Su Mile Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 11 from
RUFC to R-3, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that Petition 2000-12-01-23 be approved for the following reasons:
1) That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony wi8r
the surrounding zoning districts and uses in the area;
2) That the proposed change of zoning is consist wiPo the developing
character of the area;
3) That the proposed zoning district will provide fa residential lot sizes
which will compliment the existing residential development in Poe area;
and
18237
4) That the proposed change of zoning represents an exte rim of an existing
zoning district occurring immediately to the north and west of the subject
property.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Sectim 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543,
as amended
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing residuum adopted
It wT] go an to City Council with an approving resolution-
ITEM
esolution
ITEM #4 PETITION 2000-12-02-36 Filippo Mainella (Luigi's Pizza & Subs)
Mr. Piemeerbi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2000-12-02-36
by Filippo Mainella requesting waiver use approval to increase the seating
capacity in an existing restaurant located m Poe north side ofPlywourth Road
between Merriman and Hubbard Roads in the S.E. 1/4 of Section 27.
Mr. Twentru s presented a map showing the property under pethon plus the emshrg nursing
of the surrounding area
Mr. McCain: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak Thee are four ileus ofmmspovdence. Thefirstitanisalelterfrwi Poe
DivisionofPolice, dated December 15, 2000, which reads as follows: "We
have reviewed the proposed site plan for the listed business. Two properly
signed handicap spaces are required The extra seven spaces at the north end
of the property should be consbwhaliso that parking meets the requirements
of Livonia City Ordinance. We have mother objections regarding this plan"
The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau The second
lAhr is from the Engineering Division, dand December 20, 2000, which
reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has
reviewed the above re/crencedpentmn The Engineering Division has no
objections to the proposal at this time. The following legal description should
be used in cormection therewith: 'That pwt ofthe 3E. 1/4 ofSation 27, T.
IS., It 9E., City ofLivou ia. Wayne County, Michigan more particularly
described as beginning at a point distant North 8922'20" West, 418.00 feet
and North 00'07'50" West, 60.00 feet from the Southeast corner ofSection
27 and proceeding thence North 00007'50" Wes; 259.45 feet,'theme South
8922020"East,178.00 feet,; North 0000750" West, 50.00 feet; thence
North 8922'20" West, 183.00 feet,' thence Ninth 00007'50" West, 6.00 feet;
thence North 8922'20" West, 116.00 feet; thenceSouth 00007050"East,
315.45 feet,; thence South 89011'20"Eas;121.00 feet ko the point of
Beginning.' We trust that this will provide you with the information
requested." The legis signedby David Lear,P.H, Civil Engineer. The
third letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated December 27,
2000, which reads as follows: "This offiee has reviewed the site plan
submitted in connection with a request to increase the seating capacity in an
18238
exalbrg restaurant on properly located al the above referenced address. We
have no objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by James I-
Corcoran, Fire Marshal- The fourth lett is from the Inspection Deparhneot,
datod January 12, 2001, wfiich reads w follows: "Pursuant to your request of
December ll, 2000, the above referencedpentron has been reviewed. The
foltowup a noted: (1) a. The Petition proposes two(2) spaces for two (2)
employees which seems to be unreasonably low. We hare used a figure of
eight (8) employees which is Men a total of47 required spaces. b. The aisle
for the angle parking by 11. 67feet which by less than the mandated
minimum 16.0 foot width. c. Therefore, this petition wiU need variances
from the Zoning Board ofAppeals for: LQ deficient number ofspaces. 47
required, 34 provided, L2) deficient driveway aisle width 16.0 feet
required, 11.67 feet provided, which ifnot approved will eliminate 2 spaces.
(2) No apparentprovision for lighting has been made. (3) The dumpster
access aisle will not work asproposed on a "curved" access The lane
should be perpendicular to the enclosure. (4) Double sniping is not
indicatedon theplans and shouldbe clarified Bur7dingaccessibilbywiIIbe
addressed atplan review. Thu Department has no further objections to this
Petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of
Inspection That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. McCann:
Is the petitioner here this everdngl
Phil Marcella, 31530 Plyw Ih Road, Livonia. I amrequesting extra seating formy new
restaurant It was Pizza Man and it is changed to Luigi's Pizza and Sub.
Mr. McCain:
We've gotten your new plans, which are corrected. You've added an
additional 34 feet of parking to the rear, which complies and reduced the
number of angle parking spots so that they comply. Is there anything
additional you would like to tell us besides that?
Mr. Mainella:
No, not really. Ibe newplm shows all the iu rovemmts that were
requested. I think it is all here.
Mr. McCam:
Arethem any questions from tie Commissioners?
Mr. Alaoskas:
It says in our nobs that you are only going to have two employees in the
budding.
Mr. Mainella:
No sir. ILere are going to be fins employees all the time.
Mr. Alanskas:
So you are going to have me cook and three waitresses?
Mr. Mawella:
No. It is not a full service resburzrrt. It is basically like a buffet style. It will
be me, a cook and two guys helping people in the front It is ant afiill service
restaumrR
Mr. Alanskas:
People come in and you take their order and they talm the food themselves to
the table?
18239
Mr. Mainella: Yes sr. Either they sit down and eat or they carry out
Mr. Alanskas: Soyonwillhavenogrlswaitingontablesatall?
Mr. Mainelhi No sir.
Mr. LaPme: Mark, I am concerned about the west side. Ib you see where he has the two
forty-five degree parking spots?
Mr. Taormina:
Yes.
Mr. LaPine:
Can we eliminate those? I dant like that 16 foot width there. If we eliminate
those then we have the 37.67. Is there a reason why they can't be eliminated?
Mr. Taormina:
As you recall fiom the earlier design, there were fern parking spaces located
there. Two have been eliminated, that we thought would conflict as far as the
width of the drive isle was concerned The other two arejust north of where
the cars would back up and would not require the find! width of the drive at
that point.
Mr. LaPine:
I guess my concern is that, seeing that he has moved the drmrpster from the
east side to the west, my feeling is when the guy takes the dumpster he is
going to go down that isle and when he hits that 16.67 drive, I don't think he
is going to be able to get through there. Ib you follow what I am saying?
Mr. Taormina:
As we indicated earlier, this plan does comply with the parking rectu ements
for the site. Any reduction in parking would have to be made up somewhere
else an the site or he would have to petition the Zoning Board for a variance.
There maybe an opportunity to add another parking space somewhere else on
the site, which would bejust south of space 41 or at some other location. I
am not sure. We would have to take a closer look at it
Mr. LaPine:
My only wony is about the trucks coming through. I don't like that 16.67
wide. But in your opinion, as a planner, you dont think there is a problem?
Mr. Taormina:
Because this is limited to one-way circulation, we believe that that it would be
adequate.
Mr. LaPine:
Are they going to come in one-way and go out the other way?
Mr. Taormina:
That is the way the lot is laid out. That is correct
Mr. LaPine:
The second question I have for you sir, on the east side of your property, you
have an existing landscaping and lawn area there. You have a few little
shrubs therefrom what I could seefrom the snow. I amjust wondering ifwe
could go the same depth on the east side and plant some shrubs there because
you have all grass there. Is that possible, so we could even it out an both
sides?
18240
Mr. Mainella:
All along the side of the building?
Mr. LaPine:
Just on the one side, whatever the depth on the landscaping and lawn to the
west, put the same amount of shrubs and whatever so they are balanced oII.
Mr. Mainella:
OX. You are talking about in the front of the budding?
Mr. LaPine:
Right lbe nstaurerR that was there before, they were there a long time. I
dont knowhow they made it
Mr. Mainella:
He had been there 13 years.
Mr. LaPine:
Do you think this operation, instead of being a full service restaurant with
waitresses, can be a viable operation?
Mr. Mainella :
I have been in business before. I ran Joe's Bakery and Deli for 15 years. I
know he had problems. I think I have a good reputation I think the setup
that want is basically a pizza and sub shop.
Mr. LaPine:
O.K Thank you
Mr. Shave:
Do you think you need arty additional parking loth~ Ihol yon lookinto
that?
Mr. Mainella:
Actually, ill am not mistaken, I have four spotlights. I have one oneach side
of the building, east side and west side. One that shots ua the north side and
ova is right an top of the back door.
Mr. Shave:
O.K.
Mr. Mainella:
Butif you need more, to be honestwithyou, Ithinkthat is enough lighting.
Mr. Sbane:
OK It is for you benefit not mine. If you think you have enough, that is
fine
Mr. LaPive:
What are your hours of operation?
Mr. Mainella:
9:00 am. 0 9:00 p.m, Monday through Friday, 10:00 am to 9:00 pm on
Saturday, closed on Sunday.
Mr. LaPine:
You dual have breakfast there, do you?
Mr. Mainella:
No.
Mr. LaPine:
O.K. Thank you-
ouMr.
Mr.McCain:
Is there anybody an the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition?
Seeing no oma, I will close the Public Hearing. A motion is in order.
18241
On a motion by Mr. Shane, and seconded by Mr. LaPme and continuously approved, it was
#01-12-2001 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City
Planning Commission on January 30, 2001, on Petition 2000-12-02-36 by
Filippo Mmuella (Luigi's Pi=a & Subs) requesting waiver use approval to
increase the seating capacity in an existing restaurant located an the north side
of Plymouth Road between Merriman and Hubbard Roads in the S.P. 1/4 of
Section 27, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that Petition 2000-12-02- 3 6 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1) That the site plan, submitted by Luigi's Pure & Subs, with a revision date
of January 26, 2001, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
2) That the maximum number of customer seats to be provided is 78 seats;
3) That the three walls of the dumpster enclosure shall be constrwted of
poured concrete with simulated brick pattern and the enclosure gens shall
be maintained and when not in use, closed at all times;
4) That any new pole -mounted site lighting fisc mes shall be shielded and
shall not exceed 20 feet in height;
5) That the site plan referenced in this approving resolution shall be
submitted to the Inspection Department at the time the building permits
are applied for.
For the following reasons:
1) That the proposed use complies with all of the special and general waiver
use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of
the Zoning Ordinance #543;
2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use;
and
3) That the proposed use is compatible to and in barmorry with the
surrounding uses in the ams-
FURTHER
reaFURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543,
as amended
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted
It will go on to Council with an approving resolution.
ITEM #5 PETITION 2000-12-0237 Sam Baki
18242
Mr. Pienceccbi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2000-12-02-37
by Sam Bali requesting waiver use approval to construct a Planned
Residential Development consisting of cluster housing on property located on
the south side of Seven Mile Road between Parklane Drive and Fairway
Drive in the NE. 1/4 of Section 8.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing owing
of the surrounding area
Mr. McCann Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak Thenearefamilemsofconespondence. Thefastitemisalelterfiom Poe
Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated December 27, 2000, which reads as
follows: 'Thu office has reviewed the site plan submitted in cormection with
a request to construct a cluster housmgproject on property located at the
above referenced address. We have an objections to this proposal. However,
our approval u contingent on adequate hydrants being provided one near
entrance m street andone near cul-de-sac. Most remote hydrant shallflow
1500 GPMwith a resldrm[pressure of20 PSI." The letter is signed by James
E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal- The second letter is firm the Engineering
Division, dated December 28, 2000, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to
your request, the Engineermg Division has reviewed the above referenced
petition The Engineering Division has an objections to the proposal at this
time although it should be noted that the developer will be required to
include storm water retention basins to accommodate 100 year storm
activities, as well as private storm sewer systems for the proposed
development Sanitary sewers andwater mains will be public. The following
legal description should be used in connection therewith 'That part ofthe
Northeast 114 ofSeedon 8, T. IS., R. 9E, City ofLivmda, Wayne County,
Michigan morepardcularly described as beginning at a paint dismin North
89-44 010 Of East, 920. 50feet and South 00009044"Eas; 60. 00feet from the
North 114 corner ofSecdon 8 and proceeding thence North 89044 010 OF Eard,
288. 00feet, thence South 00009030"East, 520. 80feeg South 89044 010 or
West, 150. 00feet, thence North 00'09'30" Wes; 260.00 feet; thence South
89044 010 " Wes4 137.98feet thence North 00009 44" West, 260.80 feet to the
Point ofitegirming.' We trust that this will provide you with the information
requested." Thelelteris signed by David Lear, FOR, Civil Fugueser. The
third letter is from the Division of Police, dated January 10, 2001, which
reads as follows: "We have reviewed the proposed site plan for the luted
petition. We have an objections to the plan as submitted A stop sign will be
required at Seven Mile Road" The letter is signed by Wesley McKee,
Segeant, Track Bureau. The fourth letter is how the Inspection DepaMnent
(revised), dated January 18, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to yon
request of December 15, 2000, the above referencedPetitian has been
reviewed The following is noted (1) This project may be permitted under
Article XX, Section 20.01, through 20.06 subject to Planning Commission
and City Council approvals (2) According to 20.02A(e) this Petition
quabyles for waiver consideration. (3) Under 20.02A, (2)q the minimum
18243
requirements in the R-4 District for distance between houses is 20 feet
Units 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 do not meet the requirement. The side yard must be
adjusted to obtain the minimum spacing or the Petitioner must seek and
obtain a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for deficient distance
between buOdmgs. (4) Tinder 20.02A, (2)b, a setbackf ion Seven Atte of
75 feet to building anular parking areas for units I and 8 is required As
proposed this Petition will need variances fMm the Zoning Board of
Appeals for both units for deficient setback Thu Department has no further
objection to this Petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant
Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. MCCann: Is the petitioner herethis evening?
Sam Bald, 36800 Seven Mile Road, Livonia We have two parels that have an overall width
of288toot That caused us to have a deficiency in width that we cannot
moommodate having a 50F to 60' mad to meet the requirements as a regular
subdivision These twopieces of property, pareel(a) is zoned R-3 andparcel
(b) is R-4. Ile surrounding area on the east, west and south of this property
are all under the R-3 zoning. We are coming in with this petition as a cluster
housing. Ile minimal lot sizes still meets the neighboring property and they
are all larger in the dimension of the lots. This property has two houses
existing on it. One of them is the Sbay property, which is a historic house
that will be staying as is with some remodeling to R This was already
discussed with the Historic Commission regarding that estate. The garage
behind this property is going to be removed. The second residence on parcel
(a) will be completely remodeled from the outside. Ail of the siding will be
pulled off and re -bricked with an addition of a two car attached garage. Some
of the requests about the storm, we are going to be accommodating the storm
without having a detention, lice I did on my other sites. We put storm tanks
underground They are buried and you can't see them We will
accommodate the empieering and meet the City requnemem to store all water
on site and discharge it at a percentage rate, lice Wayne County. All of these
sins will have water and sewer. The landscaping we revised after meeting
with some of the neighbors. We adjusted some of the street layouts to
accommodate some of the neighbors to allow for more trees where the street
was too close to the comer. The new layoutjust came in. under the cluster
housing. We are allowed to have under the R-4 zo m for the 2.79 acres, that
allows us to go up to ten units, under the square footage of the overall and
under the R-3 it is 12 units. Right now we are only at 8 units total. That is
what allows us to have larger size lots. The homes we will be building are a
minirmm of 1900 sq. ft. ranches, 2450 sq. ft colonials and story and a half,
with 70% minimum brick on the story and a half and the colonials and 90%
brick on the machos. Parcel 2, wbere the existing house is, will be 100%
brick
Mr. McCann: Are there arty questions from the Commdssionvs?
Mr. Piercecchi: You stated that you are going to have your ova sewer system here. You are
going to confine the storm water to the site?
18244
Mr. Bald: The storm water, yes.
Mr. Pi�hi: How many gallons do you design foil
Mr. Bali: The engineer will require that I usually dont figure that out Like at Fox
Creek Estates, we put in 1600 feet of 42" pipes that nobody sees. That is our
storage tanks.
Mr. Piereccchi: Those 1600 feet of what size?
Mr. Bali: It is 1600 fret of 42" pipe that we store storm wakx in it But you dont see it
It is sitting in the backyard of all the property.
Mr. Piercecchi: Is that area designed for the 100 year rainfall?
Mr. Bali: Yes. Wehavetomeetthatrequvement
Mr. Piercerchi: This will be proportionately equal to that?
Mr. Bald: Yes. That site was 7-12 acres. That is what we had to allow to meat the
requirem®t
Mr. McCann: If there are no firther questions from the Commissioners, I will go to the
audience. Is there anybody in the audience who wisbes to speak for or
against this petition?
Tad Gohnulka, 36240 CAarita, I am behind this property on the opposite side from Seven
Mile. One of our chief concerns about this development is that condominium
housing or cluster housing or whatever A is, is not in keeping with the
character of the surrounding neighborhood. This is an older subdivision of
single family homes. We have a few concerns specific to the idea of
condoaundumc
Mr. McCann: Lets back up fnjust one minute. The type ofcondomindums as used now, is
not what we pictured years ago. Because there was a change in the law, or an
interpretation of the law regarding how site plans had to be processed, they
changed the law to meet the condominium They have started filingthese
under the Condominium Act The only difference under the condouuntum is
when the condominium comes in and a subdivision like this, it will meet
every requiremeut of the R4 and more. We found that we can control the
percentage of brick. You have acmally more control with a condominium but
there will be separate ownership of the property. There will be separate
maintenance of the property. It will be single-family homes meeting all the
requirements in the R-4 distrdctjust as the homes around it do. To get caught
up in the wordTondominlum"really isn't going to affect your neighbors. Mr.
Taormina, is the subdivision to the north, Fox Creek, is that condomindum as
well? I befieve it is.
18245
Mr. Taomtina: Yes, if you are refecting to Fox Creek Estates. I believe those are site
condominiums. This is proposed to be developed as a cluster housing project.
The homes immediately surrounding it, those within the Beatrice Gardens
Subdivision and Parkview Estates, are all conventional style subdivisions.
Mr. McCann:
Let me explain the difference. You can have a normal subdivision that is
condominium subdivision that you can'ttell the adherence. Ilse cluster
housing comes into place where we have an odd shaped lot That is not
squared off You can't have exactly 80' x 130' lots to meet R 3. But they are
shaped a little bit different but they meet the square foot They have the same
area and that is what is coating in here. They cant meet the exact
requirements as far as the shape but the size all meets the requirement which,
in this case, is R-3. Is that correct, Mr. Taormina?
Mr. Taormina:
The proposed parcels,the way they are described would meet the minimum
area requirements for the R-3 and R-4 districts. What is unique about this type
of development, the land area within the private road is included within the
computation for the density for the site. Than is something that the cluster
ordinance allows that the conventional subdivision would not otherwise
provide far.
Mr. McCann:
All right Just so we are all on the same square as to wlsere we are coming
from on this. Please go ahead.
Mr. Golrmrlka:
We understand the distinction between a complex, or whatever, and single
family site condos. Our concern is that although it is like the suaaunding
subdivision in that regard, the single-family homes, we have what appears to
be, as submitted, an aspbalt road coming down, and it is a private road.
Mr. McCann:
Yes.
Mr. Gohmilke:
One of the concerns we have is howtmsh might be removed from this private
road. If the City trash removal would come down that road or if there would
be a dumpster at the end of the road somewhere or in someone's backyard
We are also concerned with asphalt pavement or if that doesn't have to be
concrete or if that could be part of the approval. We don't want to see
blacktop pothole City in ten or fifteen years coming up that private road
Those are two of the concerns we want to have addressed
Mr. McCann:
I'll let the staff respond to the asphalt although I know I five an Mayfield and
the street has been there for over 20 years and A is asphalt I think a lot of the
new subs that come through are asphalt There are very few that are concrete.
Mr. Taomtina:
I am not sure what, if arty, differences there are between the paving
requirements for private roads and public roads.
Mr. Bald:
The private road in this subdivision, the hcousmners on this site only will
have an association fee monthly. Any time a maintenance has to occur, they
are paying for it, not the City. The City has nothing to do with that road.
18246
That is the only difference. The other issue of the trash removal, every
homeowner is going to be paying taxes and the trucks will go the street to
pick it up on the same day which is Friday morr ^g, or ifthem is a holiday,
Saturday mooting. That is typical for anywhere else but a private road aspect
will be paid for by the association itself which will be formed as soon as the
development is done.
Mr. Gohhmllm: More of a major concern and we wouldjust like some clarification, it is not so
much the size of the lots, we understand Hhat those are in keeping with the
zoning in terms of square footage of the lots. Whin we would like to know is
if there could somehow be a restriction of the size of the homes on the lots.
We know there is a building envelope given in the site plan, but does the City
typically or ever give any kind ofreshiction on the height of homes? Say that
they be equal to, or less than, the height of the surrounding homes or square
footage mass *mmms or anything hike Brat What we are particularly concerned
about is some of these big foot homes cropping up and Livonia starting to
look like an upscale Hamtramck where there and homes in the back yard of
other homes who are on the alley way and so forth. We would like to knowif
there could be a restriction put in the approval that the homes be limited to the
height of the highest home on the adjacent property or something like that I
am not sure how that works but that is a major concern for the people in the
neighborhood
Mr. McCann: IT leave that question to Mr. Tammina I believe those are options.
Mr. Taom ua: There is a degree of flexibility or discretionary authority given to the Planning
Commission when they review these special waiver uses, including the size of
the homes and the relationship with the surrwnding developed areas. I think
as long as it is reasonable and in keeping with the surrounding arra I deal
see where that would be a problem Under the current proposal there are
minimum house sizes establisbed in the proposed master deed of 2400 sq. ft
and 1900 sq. ft That would be at least a starting point As far as the height
ofthehomealdoniknow. Wejustreceived some new information this
evening regarding the homes themselves. Maybe that is sonaedaing Mr. Bald
could clarify.
Mr. Bald: The height of the homes under the R3 and R4 zoning, I believe under the
orddnace, itis 35 feet maxdmmn, mt to exceed. We have b follow the same
City Ordinance for the height of the homes between colonials, machos and
cape cods. They are not going to exceed 35 feet which is required anywhere
inthe City. The largest home size I can put it in if it is required bythe
Planning Cornmdssion or the Council, we usually deal do that We deal see
homes exceeding 35 feet in height om this site. These lot have big envelopes.
With the colonials, I deal see mvbodv building anything bigger than 3500 sq.
ft on his site, anyway. I can add That'w my bylaws requirement but I as I
said, it is optional.
Mr. Gohhmllm: I would say that35 feet is less than or equal to the height ofthe homes in the
adjacent lots. We would appreciate that If it is higher, we really haw
18247
problem On my northern exposure, I already have not enough light coming
into my family room and now if have a huge house taller than my own back
there, it is going to get even darker. That is a concern We would like to urge
the Commission w put in some kind ofrequirement that the homes, in terms
of height, match that of the surrounding neighborhood.
Mr. Shane: If these budding elevation drawings that the petitioner submitted, are correct
in scale, it appears as if the two story house would be a maximum of 23 feet
Mr. Tammima: I question whether or not that scale is accurate.
Mr. Bald: Thad scale is not aco sima. I dml see anything over 32 factor 33 feet in
colmials or cape cods. Like I said, we will not exceed the 35 feet that is
required anywhere in the area. That is a City requremerR
Mr. Gohmilha: I mount talking about a certain height in feet, I amjust saying the
surrounding neighborhood. We would really appreciate that they are not
exceedingthesrromdinghomesinheight Anothermajorcmcma is Poe
mads proximity to certain peoples' backyards where again, this reminds me of
Hamtramch where ym have alleyways and so forth. There are neighbors who
feel that this road coming right close to their backyard is a concern with the
noise of the cars and things like that Also, we would like to ensue that there
are no street lights or if there are streetlights, that they be kept away from
people's backyards but we really prefer that the bylaws show that there be no
streetlights in the development Again, it's people's backyards and what is
back there when they are trying to enjoy it is what they are concerned with
Mr. LaPine: I dual understand what you are talking about the road. There is only one
place where I think A is close and it is where the cul-de-sac is 45 feet
otherwise from the road to the property line to the rear it is 110 feet on the
west side and 138 feet on the other side.
Mr. McCann: I think they have also revised the plan whether ym are able to see it or not
but new revised plans came in today which moved the road away and put in
some trees between the road and the back of the fmuly home to aleviate that
problem That was me of the concerns that were brought to his attention.
We did receive new plans that show quite a bit of greenbelt and shrubbery piII
in between the road and the backyards and then they moved the road away.
Mr. Gohmulka: The last we I saw it I saw the shrubbery in there and it looked to me as
though the evergreen trees would either have to encroach mum the road or unto
the neighbor's backyard in order to be an effective barrier, or else at some
point have their branches trimmed to keep therm out of the road. Again, the
concern is the general proximity of that road to the neigbbofs backyard,
noise, streetlights, what have ym, itjud seems rather close. No offense to
Hamtramck Itjud kind of reminds me ofHamUarack
Mr. LaPine: About the streetlights, we in Livonia believe the streetlights are a necessity
because of safety. We coal have to have the big streetlights. Hee we can
18248
have the ornamental type of streetlights like the Btcerneurnal sub and some
of the other subs. The other thing is we have no control over if someone
wards to stick a light in the back of his property that tights up his whole
backyard That is his right to do that for his own protection. We have a lot of
them an the area where I live. People have them an then backyards and people
just feel more comfortable with their backyards lit at night But as far as the
streetlights, I really believe that that is a condition of the City of Livonia and
you have to have streetlights but they can be the ornamental type so they are
not the big pole type.
Mr. Gohnulka: If there is anyway the Comrassion can pert something in the bylaws of the
association that it would be preferable to have ona mental lights, I think the
neigbbms would appreciate that I also wanted to know what the setbacks are
on the backside ofthe homes from the fence of the adjacenthomes. Is it 30
feet or 40 feet?
Mr. McCann: It is 35 fed.
Mr. Gohmlka: Is there any place in the City's zoning of Inspection laws that prevents a deck
from being erected that comes art? Can you only get so close to the Peace
with a deck?
Mr.McCann: There is an easement that you have to wary about but I believe that would be
it
Mr. Gohmlka: If am not mistaken, the easement is on my side of the fence or is it always
on both sides of the fence?
Mr. McCann: It depends on when it goes through the Engineering. He might have to
provide an easement depending on where the utilities go back in there. Mr.
Taonnim do you understand his question and do you have any continent on
it?
Mr. Taormina: There is a certain allowance for decks to emend into a portion of the 35 foot
rear yard setback, but the ordinance does not pemtit them to go all the way to
the property line. I believe that allowance may only be 10 feet or so. So you
are still looking at about a 25 foot distance between the actual property line
and the edge of any decks that would be constructed on the rear of the homes.
Mr. Gohnulka: I urge you to take into consideration our concerns and there maybe other
neighbors that may have concerns of then own Thank you
Mr. Piercecchi: Mr. Bald, von have listed that you are going to do a ranch and a two story,
but is the 2450 sq. tr described here incaredly? It is described as a story and
a half. Is that really a two stay?
Mr. Bald: Itis either atwo story or a stay and ahalf, aminimum of 2450 sq. ft So
we can go over that
18249
Mr.Piercerchl: Tomedtlookslikeatwos[oryhouse.
Mr. Bald: Technically, they look like a two story because we put cathedrals and
everything else in them to make them look like flat Inside, they are only a
story and a half with a master suite on the fast floor. It is a lot more
cmmnon these days.
Mr. Piemecchi: Will there be any legitimate two stories Poen?
Mr. Bali: Yes. We have me layout Page #6 has the colonial on it
Mr. Piercecchi: What is the height on A since that is the concern of the people?
Mr. Bald: Lice I said, the mannan is about 32 feet That is on the highest cable.
Erick Giovawini, 36297 Seven Mile. I a unjust west of the proposed development here in the
Beatrice Sub. My concern is proposed lot No. 1. I feel it is too close to the
sidewalk and service drive and my concent is bedng where it is posramed
From my front porch, I would be looking into the backyard of another
home. Mosthomes in fhe Livonda neighborhood, the front faces the front
You don't have to look into someone's backyard from your front porch. If
that is not dealt with, if you would allow them to build there at least would
like to have that softened by putting a berm up, as close as you can all the
way down to the service drive, list a six foot berm with six foot pine trees, if
you would consider that At least that would help soften the look from what
I see from my front porch I dual have any problem with the homes
coating in. I think itwould add to the value ofmy home butmy wife and I
sit out oa the front porch quite a bit and I dual think I should have to look
into someone's backyard and according to the diagram I have here, it looks
like it is going to be at least 20 or 30 feet in front ofmy home.
Mr. McCann: Milch lot are you referring to?
Mr.Giova nail: I amtallong about fhe proposedlot#1. Iamjustwastofthatin Beatrice
Sub No.1. I am the very fust house off of Seven Mile there.
Mr. McCann: You are an lot #1?
Mr. Guamanian Yes.
Mr. MCCann: Youface Parklane Ihive?
Mr. Giovannini: I face Seven Mile. The way it appears, this house is going to be facing east
but the backyard will basically be in my frond yard My concern is to soften
that look with a berm and pine trees. Am I making that clear? Right there
along the lot Imes.
Mr. Bali: We can accommodate a berm and Continue the berm all the way around to
accommodate that area.
18250
Mr. Mccam: Do you have any room on the east side to bring that drive over a little bit?
Or are you pretty bght with the existing house?
Mr. Bald:
Not really. We could but what we did we are using the same curb cNsm
Seven Mile they already have for both homes. Wejust didn't want to crew
a commotion with Wayne County because the whole road was just rebuilt
and we dual wara to touch it so we left it in the center, in between the two
lots which are the same curb crffi that were already existing. We ceoNedit
in between the lots and the houses. As you see, there is a big envelope in
front of the Shay house and we knew that nothing was going to be built in
frond of it but one of them, to keep it that way, and another one to save the
well in front of that residence. The well will sit right infnutofthe right -
of way, which we left it that way and to keep the road away from A plus
there is a large tree in frond of that house. I doniknow ilA 100 years old. I
dont know if it is one of the oldest trees in the City. We are saving that tree
Wo.
Mr. Govanmm:
If you could make par[ of the requirement If it is going to go through with
the proposed plan, at least expand the berm around. At least along my
property line there. Like I said, from my froatporeh I will be looking into
the backyard of lot 41.
Mr. McCam:
I understand. Maybe he could extend that and put some more shrubbery in.
Mr. Govar®m:
Pine trees preferably.
Mr. Piercerchi:
Lots 1, 2, and 3 should have that Any problem with that Mr. Bald?
Mr. Bald:
Trees prmmde clean art, lees do it
Mr. McCain:
So we need to revise the landscape plan around the back of parcels 1, 2 and
3.
Mark Mollon, 36270 Dardanella My lot is the me that is sort of an the inside comer where
Pve got the proposed development to my north and to my east I owm the lot
when the road comes closest to the comer of my backyard The original
proposal had the road within five feet of our corner lot line. I appreciate
Mr. Bali's willingness to adjust the road a little bit It still is fairly close
and the situation has made it a little bit worse by the Fact that my home is
sitting right at the back of the lot It is right np to the setback so it is very
close to that back. This is really right in our backyard. Irecognize the
value of streetlights as far as safety but I think also that people also have a
right not to have intrusive lighting coming duan thein property with our
backyard there and to enjoy our patio or without light coming and our back
bedroom windows. I would hope that there would be something that could
be done to make sure that any street lighting that is put np either has frill
cutoff fist res so that we dont have glare coming across the property line or
some kind of limitations as to where these street fights could be placed with
the fact Ghat it is right in aur backyard there. Agan, I do appreciate Mr.
18251
Bali's willingness w work with us somewhat but I need w make sue that
there are some assurances that this kind of buffer is going w be in place
with the traffic there. There will be a lot of head fights, noise and I am not
sue if this plan is approved like this whether or not that guarantees where
the road and these trees will be placed exactly. I am kind of fuzzy on the
credibility if this is going to tum out Poe way 9 has been laid out
Mr. McCann:
We have a few more questions for Mr. Bald. What direction does the front
of your house face?
Mr. Mollon:
The front of my house is facing directly m the west
Mr. McCann:
I am not sure how Parklane comes do here.
Mr. Mollon:
I am on Dmdanella Dardanella is east and west and it goes arm a dead end.
It shaped almost hike a'T'.
Mr. McCann:
You ve got a 15 foot separation on the south side of lot 43. Can you put
some shrubbery along there too Mr. Bali?
Mr. Bald:
Sure. As you guys are aware of my two sins I did in the last two years, I
put a lot of trees in them so it is not a problem.
Mr. McCain:
The ones you got from K -Mart, did they all sur nw?
Mr. Bali:
They all surnved except one tree from the City died. Ihad nothing do
with it
Mr. McCann:
You see what we are saying is, it is not only in the back. They increased
other landscaping You can see where we are coming from He has the
greenbelt He has 15 feet, 10 feet isnt enough He can give you some since
you are nght here, he can give you some greenbelt do here for separation.
Mr. Mollon:
We do have a privacy fence along that line.
Mr. McCain:
That may not assdst you anyway. Well save that greenbelt We are goring
mbe using it We have to concern ourselves wth where the lights are
going m go. Do you have a problem with ornamental lights?
Mr. Bald:
Wehavenoproblemdoingit The Cityrequnesit Wedonlusuallymst
putuplights. The Cityrequirementis thztweput up fights and most of the
timesmthec doswedmlhzvewputuphghtspmod Weonlyputup
lights at the front of the entrance. What ever the City requires, we follow.
Mr. Mollon:
Your questionjustnow, is that relating w the home lighting or the sheet
hghhogt
Mr. McCann:
Sheet balding.
18252
Mr. Mollon So there are streetlights that are required?
Mr. Alanskas: There are a lot of new subs that dont have streetlights.
Mr. Bald: Streetlights are required under the ordinance.
Mr. McCann: Not in condominiums, they may not be though.
Mr. Taormina: I am not aware of airy requrement
Mr. McCann: But we are trying for safety purposes. We like to put them in. There are
some subs that are goring to an ornamental light and location can be looked
at Considering where you home is to avoid it being at that location, right
behind you That is something we can bring back as well or staffcan
approve.
Mark Johnston, 19043 Fairway. My concem is the flooding My yard is lower than the
existing property now. If he bolds his hose up me foot higher than the
curb, his house will then be two feet higher than my backyard Therefore,
all the water is going to end up in or rear yards.
Mr. McCann: As part of the engineering plan, he bas to provide for all the offsite water.
Mr. Johnston: It didnI work in Whispering Pines. The lots east of Wayne Road it flooded
all of those houses out there. The City hued me to go in there and fix it sol
know. I'mjust letting you know. My yard is already low now and if they
raise that property up more, it is going to put my lot lower and I have no
catch basin so there is nowhere for the water to go.
Mr. McCann: You are talking basically an issue that needs to be dealt with.
Mr. Johnston: Ibis is what this is fm.
Mr. McCann: But it is an issue that we have no Control over. The Engineering
Department has to approve these plans. They are the ones that tell us that
yes his plans are going to provide for the water, 100 year storm, and all the
other requrements or they are not We are not educated in the engmeermg
aspects of this to be able to make recommendations. Mr. Taormina, do you
have a reccmmmdation to him as to how best to go about his Concerns?
Mr. Taormina: Where do yonlive?
Mr. Johnston: Lot 4, off ofFairaay.
Mr. McCann: At the turn aroond
Mr. Johnston: The lights will be going into my window.
18253
Mr. Taomtina: There are two issues; one is the capacity ofthe system for storage purposes
and the other is the direction of water flow and how the site will be graded
The developer has already been informed that, as far as the storage
requirements are concerned he has to detain for 100 year storm which he
has indicated will be in the form ofundergound pipes. As far as where the
catch basins will sited on this property, not only to account for drainage that
occurs from his street but also accommodating off site areas, that would be
dealt with during the final engineering review of the site when he shows
precisely how the property will be graded. I really can't answer in any
great dEtail or any specificity as to where those catch basins will be located-
ocatedYou
Youare adjacent to the cul-de-sac there and that is an area that is identified
as having ample area where those structures could be installed for the
purposes of picking up drainage. That is about all I can offer at this point.
They are not shown on the plan presently.
Mr. Johnston:
Right birt if, like you say, they raise all of those lots, it is not the water
going off the front, it is the water coming from the rem and enaoachi g
into our rear yards.
Mr. Taormina:
That is normally where the rem yard catch basins will be installed
Typically, will be storm sewers provided along the rear of the properties at
intervals necessary to pick up that drainage and carry it to the larger storm
sewers. Although those are not shown m the plan, thatwould be something
that would have to be followed through with the Engineering review of this
site, to make sure that that is exactly what takes place, especially if you are
experiencing any drainage problems.
Mr. Johnson:
Every time it rmns now, Ihave two inches of water in my back yard-
ardMr.
Mr.McCann:
Mr. Bald, do you have an answer?
Mr. Bald:
Yes I do. After meeting with some of the neighbors and their concern was
brought to my attention, most of the time we do this at the engineering stage
after final approval from City Canal. I already metwith City Engineer
John Hill last week and we discussed that issue. Between each two units we
have to have a catch basin to dump our sump pump leads into it As I am
looking at itnght nowbetween one and two we are going w have one. In
theback. oflotthreem the cornerwe aregoingtohaveone. Between
sevenandeightwearegoingtohaveone. Rightbehindhishouseattheend
of the cul-de-sac we are going to have one. Between four and five we are
going to have one. These are the catch basins that will take care of any
water because we have to have one for each to service each two homes and
to drain the water into R That will accormiodate what he is discussing.
Mr. Johnston:
So you are going to lower that land down to one and a half feet to my land?
Mr. Bald:
We have had to do it on every site that we have done. We've done Fox
Creek.
18254
Mr. Johnston: On Fox Creek youve got a creek nest to it It is easy to drain off.
Mr. Bald: We did not discharge into the creek. We still had to have storm lines
Mr. McCann: We are trying to accommodate you with answers as bestwe can but again,
these are engineering questions that have to be dealt with, I agree, but they
are not before us tonight
Mr. Johnston: Tbankyou.
John Brick, 18999 Fairway. Concerning the proposed development of the Shay property, my
family and I are in opposition to the plan My hourly residence is
inmredianll , bordering theirs, plot 46 on Fairway, Street, Parkview Estates.
Our house would be directly behind the proposed residence. I recognize the
Shay's ownership of the property, a matter in which I have no say. I have
been good friends with the Shays for a long time. I do not wish to offend
them in anyway. The Shay home is a historical tanker. If homes are built,
the residences of the developed property of the City of Livonia may not ford
it appropriate for a historical marker to be in that neighborhood What
might result from such a feeling is that the Shay house aoght be removed
perhaps to Gneermread effectively packing off the house because of the
residential developmerR It would be an injustice to remove the house from
the land because of an unforeseen problem of the developed property. The
house alone may be a historical marker but the house and land are both, if
you will, co -historic. It is impossible to deny that people enjoy and become
attached to things, which are not theirs. In the same way, it is impossible to
say that my family and I have no business in the tubae of the land One
cherishes the land for what it is, not what it could become or what it is
worth If we treasure the land for what it is then we have to recognize what
it gives. It is a home of wildlife of the rare bird the killdeer, the
groradhogs, the raccoons, opossums, rabbits and even bats live in its
shelter. Because of this I would like to suggest an alternative plan or
possibility. The City of Livonia could perhaps buy the land or create it as a
small common land or at least part of it The neighboring residences could
then set up a homeowners association to pool their resources and pay for the
upkeep and maintenance of the property. It would be a commons, an open
land for the pleasure of the residences of Parkview Estates and Beatrice
Gardens. This would not separate this historical marker possibly from the
historical land and keep the land safe from further development Our house
is lot 46 on the Fainvay Drive and it world be right behind proposed house
45. It world only give 12 feet of space between the house and our property,
which is not what we would like.
Mr. McCann: Any questions for Mr. Brick As far as getting the City to buy it, you are
going to have to take that up with the Council. We dont have any money,
they do.
Richard Burrows, 19065 Fairway, lot 43 that backs up to proposed site 6 & 7. I share some of
the same serNmerrts as Mark He is my neighbor immediately to the south.
18255
The runoff is a high concern of ours. Like John brought up, I was curious
as to whether the requnemeots on a rear yard spacing from existing
property lines for proposed lot 44 & 45 are basically side by side with the
back of the other people's yards and whether there is any requirement based
on backing up to someone's else yard as opposed to the side of a proposed
property going up to the back of someone's yard I believe I read in some of
the latest information supplied by Mr. Bali was that I lbought it said 2400
sq. ft maximum home available on this lot
Mr. McCann
Mr. Burrows:
There is a mtinimmm of 2450 sq. tk?
Mr. McCain:
For a colonial and I believe 1900 sq. ft for a single story.
Mr. Burrows:
In that same package I believe there was a 2900 sq. ft rendering.
Mr.McCann:
That was one of the possible proposals.
Mr. Burrows:
Is that accepted by the Commission or is there a possibility of 2900 sq. ft
going in there?
Mr. McCann:
Yes. That is a proposal that he is bringing before us. We have not made
any ruling yet and we are the recommending body did sends it on to the
City Council.
Mr. Bumows:
Is there arty existing, or recently finished site much like this that has been
put into Livonia recently, something that we could go look at to see what
the impact is on the surrounding neighborhood? Somewhere this type of
cluster housing bas been put in, so we could have good visual
representation? One of the things I would hate to do is that, it is all well
and good once we get it on paper but once it gets into the ground, you dont
want itw be a white elepbant out there behind us. We would have to set a
precedence. I know we are not the first but I would like to know where
there are any others existing similar to this development already m Livonia
Mr. McCann:
There are certain developments that have used this type of system before.
Mr. Tammina, can you think of an example that would match this me?
Mr. Taormina:
The only ones that come to mind are the ones that have attached dwelling
units. So it really wmldnt be a close comparison to what is being proposed
here. We have had some that have been proposed recently but they me not
yetdeveloped Wecmn rtmnlygetbackwthegentem mdldhim
know.
Mr. McCann:
Ifym want to have your name, we will get back with you.
Mr. Shone:
This is not unlike some site condominium projects in the City. These are
individual houses on individual lots. There are some site condominium
18256
projects, which are not cluster housing but they look an awful lot like this.
You probably couldn't tell one from the other.
Mr. Burrows:
As long as there is something that represents the 28 foot road, something of
a similar nature.
Mr. Shore:
The only difference alight be a full depth City street as opposed to a
coumaon road but that would be the only difference. If am not atistakem,
Mr. Bald, won't you be required to construct this street under City standards
for a City street?
Mr. Bald:
Yes.
Mr. Shave:
So you are not going to see any difference in construction ofitjust the
winlh
Mr. Burrows:
RjgbL Just the prox®dty of the hours in relationship to each other, again
with the narrower street, the different setbacks
Mr. McCann:
The setbacks should meet the requirements.
Mr. Tacmrina:
I think this is the question you had earlier about the selbacks, but I think it
was related to the rem of the homes. The houses that will be constructed on
this street that will backup to your property will have a 35 fact rear yard
setback, the same that is required for your house regardless of whether it is
a cluster development or a conventional subdivision, which you five in.
The difference in this development and yours will primarily be the setback
from the street These homes will appear, and will be much closer to the
proposed street because it does not include the 60 foot wide right-of-way
that is annually provided for a public thoroughfare. This being a private
street the design is much more efficient in that respect because they can
place the utilities much closer or even under the pavement as opposed to
having certain setback requirements from the back of the curb under a
public road Yes, it would appear very much like a conventional style
subdivision as far as the distance between the homes from side to side and
the distance from the back of the homes to the rear property line. Again, the
main difference would be how the house appears from the curb bat from the
street.
Mr. Burrows:
Compounding that you have a shorter distance for a front yard, house to the
street then you have a narrower street compounding that fact of front of
house to frorat of house is going to be a torch narrower corridor essentially.
Mr. Taormina:
That quite honestly, is the essence of what clustering can do as far as
providing an option on sites that are a little bit more difficult to develop.
Mr. Burrows:
Again, I realize that there is a 35 that or 40 foot setback directly behind my
property. I am concerned about the proxdmity of say lots 5 & 6 off of
Fairway backing up to the side of proposed lot 45. That was ore that was
18257
really of a concern because you've got 12 feet there and if the individual is
going to have a driveway that, depending on the house is set, very possibly
the back of that house could be up to that 12 foot, since that is the longer
access of the lot, the house could be turned and face straight to the west
Now you have a backyard that is 12 feet up against the ne# property line.
Mr. Taormina:
I don'tknow that that is likely given the orientation of that lot Thatwould
be a question for Mr. Bald.
Mr. McCann:
If you did that, he would have to have 35 feet to the rem of the lot wouldn't
he? You couldn't orient The house to the side yard
Mr. Taormina:
Well, yes and no. How the house appears on the lot is one thing How we
deNmine the setbacks is based on the dimensions and orientation of the lot
How the actual house looks is really an option or deterntination of the
builder or developer.
Mr. Burrows:
When it calls out rear yard, does it mean it is the back of the house?
Mr. McCann:
That is the intent Mr. Bald?
Mr. Bald:
The back of the house, like between 4 & 5, if you look at it, most of the
homes we are bolding, the garages stick out more than the house which sits
a little bit behind it So if you see that (roan area you are talking about, that
is the area where the garage area is which is 22 feet and will be sticking out
and the house will be sitting back a little biL As you notice, this lot is 150
feet on one side and 135 feet on the other side. This envelope is even larger
than one ofthe houses is probably going to be sitting on With the way itis
setup, we are not going to change the fnM. The front is going to face the
cul-de-sac.
Mr. Burrows:
If the house sits on an angle on that Ink it is possible that the comer of The
house could still be 12 feet from the property line on either lot 5 or 6.
Mr. Taormina:
That is cmmct.
Mr. Burrows:
I know it is not my property that is going to backing up against itb tl
would sure ham for it In be backing up into my property line. I guess that is
all
Camille Bride, 18999
Fairway. My house is 46 on Fairwav and I see 4 it is adjoining the
proposed house 45. If am looking at tkos map correctly, I see that the back
of my house is going to be only 12 feet from the back or side of their house,
of The proposed house.
Mr. McCain:
That will be the back of your yard.
Mrs. Brick:
That is only 12 feet That looks like that is a shat distance from my
property. Idon't like that Iwould [hat there would no house there at all. I
18258
am listening to everybody talking and it seems like it is a done deal It
seems like this is how this is going to be. I thought that perhaps we could
talk about alternatives to developing this area at all. This is a very small
area, very small. My son was the one who spoke here before you and
think his idea is a very good one. He is interested in pursuing A and I would
like to get information as to how he could pursue it to make this area open
for us rather than have it be developed I feel that I dual warn any of this
but if it has to be, I would like the space behind my house open For
whatever that is worth, for whoever the powers are here that can do that for
me, do that for me please.
Mr. McCann: This is a public hearing. We are trying to get everybody's comments before
we make a decision
Mrs. Brick: O.K. Thank you
Patrick Coulter, 18668 Fairway. Being a realist. I don'tthink there is any doubt that this
property will be developed But I think my concern along with some of my
neighbors is about the size of the houses that will go in there. Ibere was
talk about 1900 sq. tt for the rmanium for a ranch and 2450 sq. ft for a
colonial. You all know what the houses in Fox Creek look like. My
concern would be, would something as large as that go am that small area
I would hate to see something that looks like a castle among the village. I
don't know what kind of hunts there are or if there are any hunts in size that
he could put in there. I know about the nunimum butwhat about the
rraxrtnum`!
Mr. McCann: We were discussing that earlier that that was a passibility to part some
m rsirnums, as well.
Mr. Could: Will that be done before anything is decided?
Mr. McCann: Again, we would only make a recommendation to the City Council and the
City Council would then male a final determination as to what is
appropriate.
Mr. Could: I think from my point ofview and my neigbbors we wouldjust like to urge
City Council and you, the Planning Comrmssion, that is not something that
looks out of character with our neighborhood on the south side of Seven
Mile. Thank you.
Mile Aurelia, 19021 Fairway. I am on lot #5 oa Fainvsy. My problem is withthe cul-de-
sac. I have a street in boom of my house, of course, and I don't want in the
back of my house. There is no protection from a car coming off that road
into my backyard, wbich isn't fenced, on purpose. There is no protection. I
doral warrt headlights in my backyard Whateverwe can do to elirninate
that fro either berry brick wall or large trees, or whateveryou think, I think
we need something there. I know that you have a revised plan
Unfindunstely I haven't seen the original of that Apparently you got it late.
18259
Basically, what can you do for me, lot 45 and my neighbor on lot 94 has the
same issues.
Mr. Alanskas:
On the newplan, for the back of your yard they are showing three big frees
Mr. McCann
and they are showing four around the curb of the cul-de-sm to give you
Mr. Amelia:
protection so that would not happen.
Mr. McCann:
Thee to the north of that is seven
Mr. Aurelia:
You are talking deciduxars bees?
Mr. Alanskas:
No, three deciduous bees and four evergreen trees. I am sure Mr. Baku
could beef that up ifyua world like.
Mr. Aurelia:
What I want is something in writing.
Mr. Alanskas:
Itis not in writing. Itis right on the site plans.
Mr. Aurelia:
Well, apparently the site plans changed and I Invent seen it
Mr. McCann
We can make an opportunity after the meeting for you to review it
Mr. Amelia:
I think it is unfortunate that that wasnl available before this meeting so we
could have looked at it
Mr. McCann:
I think was bas happened is that the concerns were brought to the developer
and he in fact moved the road to provide for separation on the west side and
put in vegetation along has 4 & 5 around the cul-de-sac. Whathe was
trying to do was answer the questions that were raised
Mr. Aurelia:
I understand but A kind of cvaumvents that we didnl get to see the changes
so I coal speak to the changes.
Mr. Alanskas:
We are only a recommending body and we look at a site plan and make
recommendations and then it goes to City Council and they start all over
again. They may say,'4 dual even like this entire plan We warrt to change
itcompletely. Wewrottodowbattheresideniswant Wewanttomake
less changes." So this is only a recommendation thatwe are looking at
This is notthe final say. This is only the beginning of the process.
Mr. Aurelia:
I understand that but I want to nip this in the bud
Mr. Alanskas: You coal nip it in the bud because if we say that we are going to this for
you and the Council says, "No, we are not going to do that" They have the
final say.
Mr. Aurelia: What are the chances ofrequiring that area, where you said about the pine
trees and those three deciduous are to be a commons area like right across
from the court?
18260
Mr. McCam: You are talking about the aura on the east side of the drive. There is a 45
foot area between the homes.
Mr. Aurelia:
Right, that east side of the cul-de-sm on the west side there is a craniums
area with many trees.
Mr. McCann:
He beefed it up but there is already room for more in that area depending on
the width of the light.
Mr. Slime:
There is always an opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to increase the number of
evergreens and fainly considerably there.
Mr. McCann:
It looks to me like we could almost put a small berh in there too which
adds something by putting a berm in there with ground cover you get rid of
the effects of the car lights.
Mr. Aurelia:
The problem I have is with the way that it is that it is not a cormnons area so
that means the owner of lot 5 or 6 could eventually cut down those trees.
Correct?
Mr. McCann:
Not on the site condominium because that is part of the development We
have gme through this where you have a landscape plan that is associated
wilh the development of the condominium association That is part of like
your occupancy perut Those have to be maintained as part of the
agreement with the City.
Mr. Aurelia:
Those are my concerns, the safety issue, that cul -de -sun.
Michael Whell,
36252 Claritz. On the plans here, my property is Poe me immediately to the
south of the development, lot #4. One ofthe decisions that the Council has
to make and the citizens, as well, is whether or not it meets with the faun
function and is compatible with the surrounding houses. I heard the
developer, Mr. Bald, say that some of these houses could go as high as 3500
sq. ft, in terms of stmchme size. That is almost double my current square
footage for my house. As I link at this particular plan, which are different
than some of the plans you are holding up, there are about 40 feet of
distance between the property line and the back of the structure that is
plamed for lot 4. Had is probably about where you are sitting, Mr.
McCam, to about the thmd row of seats here. That is not a great distance at
all from the back of the front line to what would possibly be the back of
possibly a 3500 sq. If house. That is a concern for my wife and I and I sm
sure my neighbors as well. As we look at that, we are thinkingabout
propertyvalues. We are wondering about the salability of outhouses in the
future when we show the house and people come and they see am property
and then a very gmgmlum hese rising to the north of my property and
probably to the property inmediately to the east of that So we would ask
that the board take a good hard look at that and again we are very concerned
with whether or not this particular development is, in fact, harmonious with
18261
the surrounding structures both Beatrice Gardens and Parkview. Ibank
YOU
Laurie Johnston, 19043 Fair v y. You have heard many ofthe concerns of our neighbms and
they are also concerns of mine. I Pomk the main thing is that none of us
have been approached to possibly purchase that land and use it for our own
aesthetic beauty with our own money to upkeep it That way is wouldn't be
rnfnngmg on om privacy and the area around us. That isjust a concern
We have all talked about it amongst us but nobody brought Post up tonight
ILankyou.
Mr. McCain: I will close the Public Hearing. Are there any last comments or questions?
Mr. Pimceccbi: Mr. Bald, what are the square footages of the two homes that are going to
remain in that parcel?
Mr. Bald: I don't have the exact square footage of nkat we are going to build.
Whatever we sell, we build We port a minimum requirement m we can put
maximum requirement It could be a 2000 sq.& much.
Mr. Piercecchi: I mean the two that are there?
Mr. Bald: The existing house on unit 42 has 2700 sq. ft
Mr. Piercerchi: The existing house is 2700 sq. ft?
Mr. Bald: Yes, the one with the old brick and the new facelift
Mr. Piercerchi: And they are goring to put a two car garage an top of that also?
Mr. Bald: Yes.
Mr. Piercerchi: How about the existing house that faces Seven Mile Road?
Mr. Bald: I think it is about 1700 sq. &
Mr.Piemecchi: Thatoneissmaller.
Mr. Bald: But if you notice an unit N2, it is not laking that much out of that envelope.
Mr. Piececchi: I can see some reason, Mr. Bald, to be a concerned about houses that would
over power the adjacent houses. I looked at the property prior to getting this
me here and one thing I didn'tdo was guess the size ofthose homes. Maybe
that is something we should look at
Mr. LaPine: Are you developing the property and then goring to build the homes or are
you selling off the lots and mybody can get their own builder!
Mr. Bald: No. We are not selling lots.
18262
Mr. LaPdne: So you are going to develop the whole project?
Mr. Bald: The same thing A Fox Creek. We will have a budder flat works with me
sturdy.
Mr. LaPine:
How long have you owned this pars]?
Mr. Bald:
We havent even closed on df. We just bought it a month ago.
Mr. LaPine:
So the property was our there to buy if anybody wanted to buy it, it was a
possibility that they could have bought it?
Mr. Bald:
Yes. Ibe resident on parcel (a) has been trying to buy it for almost a year.
Mr. LaPine:
O.K Thank you
Mr. Bald:
Ihaveoeresponse. Thecul-de-swc smwedtothewestifyoumticem
yournewly revised plans. It originally was 38 froLm w it is 45 feet We did
move that cul-de-sw from the back of these homes.
Mr. McCann:
A motionis in order.
Mr. Alanskas:
Because we have had so many requests for additional landscaping in the back
and on one side and the other side and the question about the height of the
homes, I would ]dke to see this tabled I would ]dke, m the meantime, for Mr.
Bali get with the neighbors and get their requests and see what they want to
do in regards to landscaping and come back with us wiPo another plan that
shows exactly what they are going to do on landscaping on the entire property
do regards to showing the naxlmmm amount of the height of the building and
the maxdrnum square footage of the budding, before we go arty l ether.
On a motion by Mr. Almskas, seconded by Mr. Piemecchi and unanimously approved, it was
#01-13-2001
RESOLVED that, purstontto a Public Hearing having been held by the City
Phoning Commission on January 30, 2001, on Petition 2000-12-02-37 by
Sam Bald requesting waiver use approval to construct a Planned Residential
Development consisting of cluster hosing on property located on the south
side of Seven Mile Road between Parklane Drive and Fairway Drive in the
NP. 1/4 of Section 8, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that
Petition 2000-12-02-37 be tabled to February 13, 2001.
Mr. McCaw,
Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted
Mr. Bali, if you could come up with a recounendatio with regard to the
greenbelt regard to minimum and maxrzmvm size ofthe fust level, split level
andcolonial. Andthenmakesurethatymgdthenewrevisedplansatter
you port in the landscaping to the neighbors have plenty oft®e to reviewit
befnethehearing. Thankyo.
18263
ITEM#6 PETITION 2000-12-02-35 Cmig Corbell(Hunter Homes)
Mr. Piereecebi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2000-12-02-38
by Craig Corbell (Harter Homes) requesting waiver use approval to construct
a Planned Residential Development consisting of sousing for the elderly an
property located an the east side of Newburgh Road between Five Mile and
Ladywood Roads in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 17.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the mshng zoning
of the surrounding area
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak Therearefouritersofconespondence. Thefntisalenerfi'omthe
Engineering Division, dated December 29, 2000, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above
referencedpention The Engineering Division wouldlow to point out the
following deficienines with the proposal: (1) The Southernenbance will
needto he alignedwph Kingsbury Avenue so that left turn conflicts do not
occur. (2) The sheet whi need to have one name for the entire length from
enhance to enhance, no South or North designations w01 be allowed for
the ends of the roadway. (3) The development willneed w include storm
water detention to accommodate a 100 year storm event, and construction
approval will be needed from the Wayne County Division of Watershed
Management. The following legal description should be used in connectent
therewith: 'Thatpartofthe SoWhwestll4ofSechonl7, T. IS,R. 9F., City
ofLivoniq Wayne County, Michigan more particularly described as
beginning at a point distant due North, 757.69 feet and due East, 60. 00feet
from the Southwest corner ofSection 17 and proceeding thence due North,
890.00 feet,' thence due East, 240.00 feet,; thence due South, 890.00 feet;
thence due West, 240.00 feet to the Point ofBegimung.' We bust that this
will provide you with the information requested." The letRris signed by
David Lear, PE., Civil Engineer. The secmd lelAi is tiomihe Divisum of
Police, Samr y 5, 2001, wbicb reads w follows: F'We have reviewed the site
plans as submitted by Craig Corbell of Hunter Homes andsuggest the
following recommendations. We recommend that a deceleration lane be
added to both entrances into the complex for the following reasom: (1)
Heavy traffic volumes already exist along Newburgh Road, especially
during the morning and evening rush hours (2) Trends mdwim that
vehicle miles traveled and vehicle registrations continue m increase,
resulting in ever increasing traffic volumes. (3) The addition ofthe
deceleration lane will assist in reducing the frequency ofrear end collisions
and assist in maintaining a normal flow ofnorthbound traffic along
Newburgh Road and away from the congested intersection ofFive Mile
Road Due to traffic volumes during the morning andevening rush hours on
southbound Newburgh Road and the backup oftraffic that already exists, we
also recommend that the traffic commission consider prohibiting left turns
from the southern more driveway. Stop signs will be requared at each calf of
18264
the complex. We also recommend that a stop bar (which would be
maintained by the development and applied to the road surface) be required
along with the stop signs to better indicate that exiting vehicles most stop
be ore crossing the sidewalk" The letter is signed by Wesley McKee,
Sergeant Traffic Bnresu. The third letter is from the Livonia Fire &Resnais
Division, darod January 12, 2001, which reads as follows: "This ojfce has
reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct a
Planned ResidentudDevelopment on property located on the east side of
Newburgh Road between Five Mile and Ladywood Roads in the S.W. 114 of
Section l7. We have an objections to this proposal with the following
stipulations. (1) If any ofsubject buildings are to be provided with
automatic sprinkler systems, hydrants shall be located between 50 fed and
100 feet from the Fire Department Connections. (2) Fire hydrants shall be
provided throughout complex with maximum distance to any portion of
complex to hydrant 300 feet (3) The most remade hydrant shall flow 1500
GPM with a 20 PSIresidualpressure. (4) Access around buildings shall
be provided for emergency vehicles with turning radius up to fbriy-five fed
wall to wall and a minimum verticalclearance of l3-12feet" Thelelteris
signed by James E. Cameron, Fire Marshal. The fourth Inver is from the
Inspection Deparhnent dated January 15, 2001, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request of December 28, 2000, the above referenced
petition has been reviewed. The following it noted "(1) This projectis in
art R-9, Housing for the Elderly, gaming. Although proposedas a Planned
Resider ialDevebpment, there is no mention ofthe required 55 year age
minimum for all occupants (2) R-9 gontng requires 50 -foot front yard, 50 -
foot rear yard and side yard minimum of25 feet with 60 foot total oftwo.
Maximum lot coverage aIIowed is 25% (a) The front and rear yard are 35
fed verses 30 fed respectively and are deficient ofgoning district
requirements by 15 fed and 20 fed. A modification such as this may be
granted under Article XX, Section 20.06(6) by the Planning Commission
and 0tv Council ifh is determined to be a more efficient use and not
injurious to the surrounding land and the public as a whole. (b) As
proposed this Petition exceeds the maximum 25% lot coverage by 36%,
covering approximately 34% ofthe lot As this over -coverage may not be
waived under Article XX, to proceed as proposed will require a variance
from the Zoning Board ofAppeats (3) The proposed 5 foot high brick waft
along Newburgh will require a variance from the Zoning Board ofAppeals.
Further, tfthe variance is granted, the wall will have to be reduced to 3 feet
in height at both sides ofboth drives for at least a 10 foot length for a clear
vision area (4) The plan submitted does not show any ofthe exterior
finish details. This districtrequires essentially maintenance free exterior
constructton and allplans most bear the sealofthe registered Architect or
Engineer. These items should be clarified (5) Landscaping detail is
insufficient to review as to type and type ofirrigation. These items should
be clarified This Department has no further objections to this Petition." The
letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of hispection. There is a
letter from JoAnne C. Tappan, 15631 Sussex, Livonia, received in the
Pia®ng Deparhneot on January 17, 2001, which reads as follows: "Dear
Planning Commission, I am unable to attend the Plarming Commission
18265
meeting on January 30, 2001, but wish to make my opinion known I do not
want houswgfor the elderly located on Newburgh Road This type of
enterprise will bring addihona4 amended traffic into the area and increased
emergency vehicles at all hours. This type ofbusmess does not belong in this
area I thought this issue had beenput to bed a couple ofyears ago,
however, here it a again, much like casino's in Detroit just keep putting the
idea out there and eventually, it will get passed When I moved to Livonia 35
years ago, Newburgh was residential I reale with mereased population
and traffic, Newburgh a o longer a desirable residential street. If this
property has to be zoned commercial, it should have enterprises that generate
traffic only during the day -light hours, such as offices. Iwould appreciate
your reading my opinion into the record of the Plannwg Commission" That
is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. McCain:
Is the petitioner herePois eveving?.
Craig Corbell,
Hunter Homes, 3941 Telegraph, Suite 207, Bloomfield, MI 48302. As you
have seen from some of the earlier petitions, obviously the neighborly ivpnrt is
critical. We have spent a lot of time with the neighbors as well as the various
deparhnents within the City to go over some of the concerns.
Mr. McCain:
Lefs start right there. The laundry Ed from Mr. Bishop ryas pretty extinnu .
Everything is a waiver use, it doesn't meet any of the requu'anents. net is
the major problem with this project When a petitioner comes in there are one
or two things that are a problem but here the laundry list was very extensive
with regard to not rushing arty of the City requirements.
Mr. Corbell:
Actually, if you wire to look at the City requirements A does meet a number
of Poem The biggest issue would be the setbacks.
Mr. McCain:
The setbacks, the area that it sits on, the wall, the size and Poe density.
Mr. Corbell:
The density is well under.
Mr. McCann:
Not when you go over the fntprint size. You are allowed 25% of the
developed area.
Mr. Corbell
There are a number of different ways that the area is calculated based on
whether it is a R C or a R-9 or anything in between. I know with the R 9 Poey
have an accessory building that comes into play. Some of Poem include the
garages, some don't That may be what you are referring ko.
Mr. Alauskas:
Sir, do you own this property?
Mr. Corbell
No. Not at this time. We have a purchase agreement on the property.
Mr. Alauskas:
Is it on a contingent}?
Mr. Corbell:
We have not closed yet
18266
Mr. Alonskas: Usually when you have a R-9 area for senim housing, you don'thave homes
lice this. We bad two different petitions to have a one story building and we
approved both of them Of course, they didn't go through
Mr. Corbell:
I understood they were two story.
Mr. Alarmskas:
One was two story and one was one story. Even though you sayyou are not
over in density, it looks litre you are pulling five pounds of coffee in a one
pound can. Itjum looks like it is massive. In regards to when you have
senior housing, it says 55 years and older. How could that be policed? If you
sold a person the property and they were 55 and they had children 17 or 18 or
even smaller, it doesn't fit the criteria.
Mr. Corbell:
First of all, in regards to the 55 years of age and older, we have spoken to our
attorneys about this and they have stated that there is no way for the City to
evenenforcethat ILepoint of having a 55 and olderordinanceto begiawith
doem't make sense.
Mr. McCann:
Soyoudon't even wart seniorhousing, youjustwanttoput up condos?
Mr. Corbell:
We are proposing an actual condominium here and whether we go mki the R-
C or under the R-9 classification, we are still going to need a number of
C
variances most of which is due to the size of the site and the width of the site.
There is a site frdher south on Newburgh Road, Kmgsmn Village, the site is
actually nartower than this one as well. It has the same setback issues that we
have here. We have designed this in conformance with other condominiums.
Mr. Alonskas:
You would then sell to anybody then it would not be an R-9 district
Mr. Corbell:
We did not say we would sell to anyone. In fad our experience has been that
with this type of housing that 95% of the people who purchase them are over
55. We have done our own internal survey of close to 100 units.
Mr. Alanskas:
Thank you.
Mr. Corbell:
Again, we met with the neighbors and the various City people with the
different departments and it appears there me two major issues that are of a
concern to either the City and/or the neighbors. One of them happens to be
drainage, which we have discussed extensively with the Engineering
Department as well and we will absolutely address that with the engineered
plans including extending catch basins on to the easement of the properties to
the east that have the old style construction where I believe there is a catch
basin every seventh lot and current standards me every two or three. We
would be happy to extend catch basins from our system across to pick up my
rear yard drainage problems that they are currently expentenc mg As far as
the traffic issues go, there are two reports now from the Traffic Bureau as
well as the Engineering Deportment It appears that we may need to pursue a
further traffic study to determine which way to make left turns, which way to
18267
provide any deceleration. What size radiuses and so on and I think as you
mentioned earlier petitions that those were technical engineering issues that
can be worked out by the Engineering Department When we put together
this design, it is typical of condominium development within Livonia as
well as the neighboring communities of Carlon, Plymouth, Novi and
Farmington Hills. We actually look measurements of all of those
developments for the from yard, the road width, the driveway lengths and the
rear yards and we are more or less in the middle of at least a dozen
developments of this mane which Pone of them are here in Livonia As far as
all of our distances go, because this property has so much frontage along
Newburgh, the 75 foot setback becomes a major problem The way we feel
that is it a problem is twofold. First of all, we provide landscaping as well as
some type of a wall there that would be heavily landscaped and it would be a
decorative wall and a sound preventive as well, which would not only help
the people who lives in these residences but also the people who live to the
east in the Country Home Subdivision. As far as keeping in harmony with
the area as well, none of the residential developments along Newburgh Road
south of Six Mile meet the 75 foot setback requirement anyway. Most of
them are anywhere fiom 25 to 35 feet from the setback line. So the homes
themselves would actually be in line with Bre rest of the residences south of
Six Mile along Newburgh Road To the north, up by Seven and Eight Mile,
where there are large vacant parcels available over the last 10 or 15 years,
those may have had more room to accommodate a setback We feel that it is
in keeping with the area. Getting back to your initial comem, and I
understand, a lot of people have a difficult time understanding how different
things fit into Poe zoning classifications hike you explained earlier with a site
condoariniumversus a subdivision. Because we need some variances in
particular because of the setbacks, we felt that those variances would be the
same issues whether it was rezoned to R -C or arty other form of condominium
rather thanjust leaving it at R-9. Ihat was wby we never bothered with
actually making a change in zoning classification because in the end we
would still have the same type of housing that we are proposing. We would
still have the same types of needs for some type of variance or the allowable
ids under the PRD and that is why we asked for the PRD. A number of the
other developments of this type even within the City of Livonia have gone
under the PRD. In summary I could address the actual concerns of this
particular site regardless of mm type of developmem. We have assured the
neighbors and agreed with the Engineering Department to provide for
adequate drainage as well as obviously the stoma requirements of the City
ordinance to address any of those problems that are pre-existing as well as
there may be in the future per the Engineering standards. The same goes for
the traffic issues as well. We have talked to some of the neighbors adjoining
the parcel as far as the landscaping goes. Not only would we like to utilize
the landscaping that is on the plan but we would agree to supplement it after
meeting with each neighbor who backs rip to the site to help with the
screening and take care of different issues regarding where headlights might
come in between two units, one place is to the north and one place is to the
south as well as some other screening issues. A lot of the neighbors have
come this evening. These are alit of the neighbors we have met with in the
18268
past as well as discuss these items with them on the phone. My
unde;mudmg is that the neighbors would much rather have a residential
homeowner occupied there rather than a commercial or senior housing or an
office or some of the other developments that have been proposed there as
well. I would be happy to answer arty questions. I'll give you names of other
developmemis in the area as well. Kingston Villagejust south of there is an
clmsicexarmpleofashrWarcir�cewithanamowparce1. Thavkyou.
Mr. McCann: If there are no questions form the Commissioners, I will go to the audience.
Is there anybody in the audience who wishes to speak for or against this
petition'
Sandra Ralston, 15631 Liverpool. The neighbors backing up to this parcel have been opposed
In building anything other than residences. Hunter Homes has proposed
putting 18 condos in the same price range as the existing homes. Because
these are private residences, we have no objection to them or to a variance
allowing the homes to be built 35 feet from the property lines. Marry of the
homes on Newburgh between Five Mile and Su Mile are no more than 35
feet from the sidewalk Our main concern is the drainage problem that we
have been experiencing. The Engineering Department is aware of om
problem and the need to address it According to today's code, there must be
a catch basin drain behind every couple of houses but we have one every
seventh house. Mr. Corbell has offered to have his engineers add catch basins
and connect them to the condos storm drainpipe. He also agreed that his
company world remove the railroad ties that form the retaining wall dividing
the property and will grade the property to bring A down to our level. We
request that this plan be incorporated arm any approval given by the Planning
Commission, the City Council or the Engineering Departmemt Thank you
Mr.McCann: Whom are you speaking on behalf of?
Ms. Ralston: The neighbors that back that property, all of the houses. Webemetwithall
of the neighbors that back against this parcel. Everybody is in agreeme d.
Some of them could not be here. They are in Florida. Some of them didn't
come because they have no objection
Mr.McCaun: Allnght "ILaukyma
Ilko Stuew 37265 Ladywood. My house is on the north side of the proposed property. I
heardsomethmgabontthewallbemgbuiltonNewburgh Idon'tthink itwill
look very good there so I am sure the developers will try to do something
better than a wall. That is the only section on Newburgh in Livonia that is not
lined by trees and I sure hope they will do that for them property. Other than
that I would much rather have condos there than any kind of business like it
was said in the letter earlier.
Vicki Hicks, 37578 S. Sherwood Court. I have reviewed the plans earlier today. I am very
much opposed to it It is too many houses and too few spots. All of the ideas
by you Inspection Department, I agree with The footprint is taking up way
18269
too much room on there. I realize that in order to make this a profitable
venture for this builder he needs to pert a lot of houses on there. But I do
think there are an awful lot of houses in an awful small space. Secondly, they
are talking about one story ranch houses although when I looked at the
pictures, they do appear to have something like a very large cathedral ceiling
which then the outside of it looks like a two story house as opposed to a much
because of that facade going an their. The landscaping looked reasonable, at
least the pieces that l could understand boom the plan today. The wall along
Five Mile, I am sure, is to prevent the noise and the lights in the back of those
peoples properties but with so many school age children walling down
Newburgh, walling down there, itis kind of a danger for someone pulling out
of there especially if they are in whatever age range of people who five in
here, coming out of here with a five foot wall, you are not going to see a
small child. They move very quickly and you are going go have accidents
withkids. There is a middle schooljustup the street boom there and I think
that is a potential problem with kids walling back and forth to school,
especially in the morning as opposed to the altemoon because people coming
home boom work wouldnl encamter that Ibethingthatmostconcansme
tonight is that this was set up as R-9 as senior housing and what I hear now is,
"Well we'fi leave it as R-9 and I can pretty much do what I want to with this
property as far as who lives here." Not only does that bother me boom the
standpoint that it doesal seem to facilitate the R-9 but the blatant attitude that,
"Itismypropertymdwe'lldowhateverwewantwvvith R" Itkmdsoftlies
in the face of that situation. The builder spoke to the people who live directly
behind this property. I live across Newburgh Road and I had no contact with
this builder during this process so I have a lot of problems with the way the
houses are built, too many and too much of a small space.
Denise Diabiase, 15619 Liverpool. My backyard would be then backyard Ihave been very
outspoken with the City Council about the two previous ventures. I feel real
mookered by it, the companies that came in. Ibe got a real good feeling in
Mr. Corbett. Maybe he didnY do A right when he didnY change the zo t^g.
But the neighbors are pretty fight on Liverpool and we want that property
developed. It is an eyesore. There are abandoned buildings on it In regards
to the previous woman's concern about school age children, I would hike to
see a lot of houses there so the kids would stop walking through my backyard
They use it as a cutaway. They are very disrespectful to our property. I see it
as a bother. I do get a lot of noise boom Newburgh I would those hares to
absorb that sound and the fitter that blows into my backyard. We would like
In see them come in. Maybe they could squeeze A a fittle differently but A is
the first time our neighborhood, and we are a very fight neighborhood, we are
in agreement on something so I support his recommendation to come in.
Mike Farrell, 15595 Liverpool. My home backs up to the proposed project there. The
property has hem tried to be developed for the past 20 years. Different
proposals have been made and this seems to be about the best that has come
along I agree it is a lot of homes to put in there but for them to have
financial beneficial project. I guess you have to put that navy bvldngs in
there. Whatwehavenghtnowiswehavetwoemptyhomesda havebem
18270
empty for about three years. I am concerned that there are kids that are
breaking auto Poem and I think the police have been called a number of times
fornuisame because kids might get hurt It is very attractive for kids to play
in. The homes that are there should be torn down or leveled before some kids
do get hurt The only way that is going to happen is if the property is
developed At this point m note, with the differerR proposals that have come
through, this seems to be about the best bet For that reason I am in favor of
it Mr. Corbell has metwith us and listened to us and the drainage was a
major concern. The elevation of the property behind us, at some points there
are railroad ties that are about two to two and a half feet high to keep the
ground farm shitting over into the back far additional drainage problems but
also in some points, the ground can be as high as four feet or higher as you go
further into the lot If he can take care of those problems, I would be in favor
of some development there and this seems to be the best Thank you-
Nancy
ou
Nancy Piersw, 15699 Liverpool. I have lived at that address for the last four yeas. During
The past four years, Beacon Rose and those other assisted Irving facilities were
the plans. I was very much opposed to them and I still as I do not want
seniors living m my neighborhood I ducal feel that there is a need for it
There is plenty of A on Haggerty Road I went to all of those meetings and I
disputed that tirelessly. Now we have, what I consider the second best thing
to single unit residential. We have condominiums. That is residential. That is
not going to hurt my property value. That's not going to interfere with my
life. There will be regular families Irving as opposed to people who require
medical care and health assistance along a business because that is what the
assisted living is. It is a business. I do not wart a business in my backyard. I
want these condominiums. I met with Mr. Corbell on a few occasions and
actually spoke whim today at his office. I amvery pleased with how he has
dealt with the neighbors. As I said, since I have lived there for the past far
yeas them have been many proposals for assisted living, many of which I
was never notified of, didnl receive letters about different meetings. I havenl
hal my problem with Mr. Corbett. I have known fiom the very beguming
what he is proposing and he has kept me informed and he has listened to what
I have to say along with all of the other neighbors. I understand there are
some problems with the City Inspector but think they could be easily
resolved I an very much for this. There is nothing that I would want besides
this. The only other Poing would be the single units but I know that that is not
going to happen because of the price of that land and land is very scarce in
Livonia and this is the only residential that we will be able to geL If we dont
get approved, then we will be fighting Lace these people have been fighting all
of these yeas that they have Wed there. I have neighbors who have lived
there fiom day one and they have been fighting and fighting, fire stations, car
washes all kind of horrific things that you dont want in yarbackyad They
are unnecessary. We have enough vacant buildings and strip malls that are
not fully leased and that is a terrible eyesore and I certainly wouldnl want to
bring m anymore businesses that are notneeded I certainly feel that senior
assisted Irving is not needed There are plenty of them in Livonia I think
Livonia does need more condominiums. That is the wave of the future. We
are living in an older society. Livonia is an older society. This will be
18271
beneficial to people who wardw slay in Livonia but who cant maintain their
houses. There are plenty of older neighbors who would like to live in these.
They don't warn to leave the City. I am doing everything I can to support and
talk on behalf of the many neighbors who couldn't make it They are sick of
fighting City Hall all the time about this property. This is finally something
we want I am sure that he will accommodate the problems that the inspector
has with the zoning and why can'tthey just rezone il?
Dov Sedestrom, 37637 Sherwood Court Livonia, right across the street from the proposed
Hunter Homes development I want to speak m relation to the decel lane that
is recommended by Sergeant McKee. I think that is a very good idea. I have
been up here before talking and when the Hearthstone and when the Beacon
Rose projects came up because we are concerned m Sherwood Court with
traffic coming across and I am sure you have heard this before, coming
across from the north road m the northern most part of that property that is
slightlyoffsetto Sherwood Courtnorlh. Wehavel5childrenthatfivem
Sherwood Court. They are in the street and all over the place. Our concern
is that you might say, "Well, who would come across Cam lanes of traffic
just to make a south limn?" You would be surprised We see all kinds of
goofy stuff there to that court even though at either end of the court there are
two yellow signs that say'No outlet". We still have people coring through.
They are thinking that there is a way aft They come whizmg around there
at a high rate of speed ordinarily. I am curmus as to how this would be
addressed with this road that is proposed slightly offset from Sherwood north
In preclude people fiom coming directly across instead of tuning to the right
or turning to the left and coming south in the passing lave?
Mr.McCann: That would be something that we would have to go to the Planning
Department for suggestions on.
Mr. Taormina: I don't believe the road was offset for the purpose of precluding the kind of
l uming mwemeNs that you arespeaking of. I think thatthe road is shown
m the plan where it is because it is comenient in terms of how the site plan
lays out
Mr. Sedest o n: I have seen the site plan. I know what you are talking abaft
Mr. Taormina: You indicated a concent that this could be a situation that could lend itself to
having cars Linn right onto Newburg4 immediately gem the lefthand limn
lane, turn left onto Sherwood Court North and loop around in order to hum
right onto Newburgh Road Is that correct?
Mr. Sedestrom: That is correct
Mr. Taormina: I have another concern, one that I have already expressed, to Mr. Corbell
about the offset of the roads and the potential conflict as far as can; Luning
left Normally, when two roads that are across the street fi al one another are
so close together, it makes sense to line them up as opposed to have them
offset Because, as one car is traveling south on Newburgh Road to get in to
18272
the left hand tum lane to tum left into his development, and the same Poing is
occurring for cars that are northbound on Newburgh Road to get into the left
hand tum lane to tum left into Sberwood Court, A presents a potential
conflict That is an issue that needs to be addressed in addition to yors.I
canl0 you the likelihood ofthe timing movements that you are referring
to. I dual know.
Mr. Sedestrom:
Wehavenoidenwhattheall Poepeoplewill bedowgdatwillbe livivgin
that area No one does. With the increased traffic volume on Newburgh
Road, particularly when I-275 has an accident, we are reallyjammed up and
A takes a long time In get through. That is just another side issue. When
previous developers have come before the planning Corrmussim, we worked
ant a situation whereby there would be no direct road that would come
across and either intersect Sherwood Cart north or south. In this instance, I
noted that the southern most road off the property goes directly toward
Kingsbury.
Mr. Taormina:
Correct.
Mr. Sedestrom:
And the other one is slightly offset m the north. I see that I would be very
interested to see how that would be handled Because,as Isaid,weare
concerned about traffic on that court and that is something, I don't know who
sees about the traffic study. Is that something that the City sees about or
what?
Mr. Taormina:
There was a change to the plan as it relates to the alignment of the southerly
entrance drive to this site and Kingsbury Avenue. Originally, that drive was
shown having a very sinWar offset to what you see at the north end of
Sherwood Cont. But the Engineering Department advised the petitioner that
A would be necessary, and I think it was reflected in the letter that was read
into the record this evening, that the roads would have to align in order to
avoid the left hand turn conflicts. I believe the potential for the conflicts still
exists at Sherwood Court North and the drive that he proposes to the north
That was the situation that gave rise to the change of the plan that required
those two mads to line up, specifically to avoid the p rmidial for left hand
hum conflict.
Mr. Sedestrom:
Another question I have is, who takes care of the maintenance of the
property. Who takes care of it? It this the responsibility of the homeowner
or is there an association, ofwbat?
Mr. McCann:
There would be a condominium association
Mr. Sedestrom:
Thank you
Mr. McCann:
If there is nobody who wishes to speak, I will close the Public Hearing. Are
there any last comments from the petitioner?
18273
Mr. Corbell: Yes. I wouldjus[ like to address a couple of other issues that have come up
this evening. The first of which is concerning the zoning. Because of the
way the petition was identified in all aspects, it is a bit confusing. We would
like to do that type of development regardless of what the zoning
classification is. If we request a rezoning, fine. If we could have it approved
with the variances or the PRD which allows you to do it here. We would love
In go that route so that we could get started this summer. As far as the one
lady's corm unds and the height of the units, the reason why we have the lot
coverage the way we do is because we proposed all ranch units. We dont
have any stacked units. We deal have any colonials. People dont want to
deal with the stars in a condominium They are looking for complete
convenience. We do offer the one style unit that has a loft option that aught
raise the rear up to properly somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 feet in
height Otherwise all of the eves are about 9 feet off the grand, so that the
height is not an issue. The cathedral ceilings that are typically in the newer
style homes, these are designed to be in the interim so that the height is in the
ridge of the height of the roof In begin with and buried in the attic rather than
raising the rem walls find making the units taller. As far as the wall, thathas
been discussed and is clear what needs to be done for that because it was
explained to me very clearly the exact instance this lady was expressing
concerting if a kid is tiding his bicycle along the sidewalk and someone pulls
oat they have to have enough visibility to see them so that they deal have an
accident That is something that is waked out in Engineering. As fm as
speaking to the neighbors across Newburgh, I did speak with Mr. Sedes[rom
about a couple of the issues, and again these sound like traffic depar exam or
engineering issues. The south enhance was adjusted per Mr. Hill's report and
we do have those m alignment The north enhance, itwas explained to me,
could be addressed in a number of different ways. A couple of different
simple ways was simply with signage,'!uo left turn",'light inrn only" and
things like that to avoid conflicts and lastly, I did speak with Mr. Hill m the
Bngineering Department specifically about the grade differential between this
site and the properties and the homes and the lots to the east and the southern
half along Liverpool that are anywhere from afoot and a half In three feet
lower. Mr. Hill and I went through the grades and we do have a
topographical survey fm this site already. By adjusting the brick ledges on
the homes to the south end of the new homes, we can lower the grade to
match the grade for the homes to the east and therefore alleviate runoff issues,
height differentials and of course, take care of the rem yard drainage with
swalesandcatchbasins. Tbankyoa
Mr. Alanskes: This is a thingthathas been goingonfrfouror fiveyears and looking atthe
rendering, it is not a bad looking site bAyast going in the R-9 classification
really dishvbs me. Mr. Taormina, ifw wx R C howmmny tmits could they
put on there?
Mr. Thermos: I believe when we went through this plan, it complied in all respects wits the
density allmvmces in the R -C district There were some issues regarding the
setbacks, obviously, and that would depend on whether or not he submits his
petition as a planned residential development or under the conventional style
18274
ofR-C development But if may offer a suggestion, we have heard from the
petmonerhere this evening that achraftedly the City doesn't have any
enforcement authority over this housing as it relates to what the intent of the
R-9, housing for the elderly district and I think what we are doing is we are
lookmg at a site plan when in fact we should be lookmg at the issue of zoning
for this property. If it pleases the Commission this evening, because of the
imestrum that has been made at this point with submitting the plans and if
the decision is to consider the issue of the zoning, then he could submit a
rezoning petition and this plan could be placed on hold or tabled until such
time that the Planning Commission and City Council address the issue of
zoning for the property. That is one alternative or you can take no action or
see if he wants to withdrawn.
Mr.Alanskas: Shouldwe table this becausewe donlhlw theR9 orjustdeny the R9
petition?
Mr. Tacrourn You have those different options available to you A denial would obviously
make him start all over again. A tabling wouldn'treally do anything other
than wait for the zoning w catch up w the site plan. Or, maybe he would be
willingtowithdmwhispetition. ButIcaunotseewewouldbefailingIthink
as far as the issue of the future land use for this property to consider this
request for the R 9 zo mg knowing what he has already indicated and that is
that it would not be limited to housing for the elderly.
Mr. McCain: We have a lot of deficiencies here. We have a lot of problems with it
Obviously, the neighbors are in favor of it Obviously, it is appropriate
zoning in the area This site plan needs some work so my recommendation
was going to be either way. We rmght look for a tabling motion to see if we
could make this site plan more conforming and in the mean time he could also
begin the rezoning petition. Mr. Taormina, would it be better able to comply
under the R -C district than he is the R-9 besides the addition of not having to
meet the 55 age requirement and not meeting the spirit of the R 9 being a
swim development with resources for the development of community areas,
supervision and the different things that we normally associate with the swim
developments?
Mr. Taormina: I agree with that especially if application is made under the PRD requirements
of the Ordinance which gives the Planning Commission and City Council
more flexibility in team of the setbacks. The other difference is that the lot
coverage limitation that applies in the R-9 district does not apply in the R C
district The restriction is on the amount ofusable floor area that is devoted
to the Irving space fn all the units. In fact, this plan would comply under
those guidelines. That would be one less deficiency that would result
depending ov what zoning classification is elected.
Mr. McCann: There would have to be an agreema¢ from the owner of the property to
rezone the property, since it is under a purchase agreement
Mr. Piercerchi: Mark, in the R C district, isn't it 10 units per acre?
18275
Mr. Taormina:
That is correct. For two bedroom units the maxi®um density allowance
would be 10 units per acre. We are ]oolong A 4.9 ares so clearly this would
fall well within the density guidelines.
Mr. McCann:
A motion is in order.
Mr. Alanskas:
I will malre amotiontotableto givethepetitionertimew ask foross ing
and go with the same site plan.
Mr. McCann:
I think the site plan still has a lot of modifications and the density.
Mr. Shane:
I would like to hear a tabling resolution without arty reference to rezm ng or
not zoning I would like to see it tabled and then we could discuss the whole
item without obligating ourselves.
Mr. McCann:
Are you supporting a general tabling by Mr. Alanskas?
Mr. Shane:
Yes
On a motion by Mr. Almskas, seconded by Mr. Shane and unanimously droved, it was
#01-142001
RESOLVED that, parsuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the Cly
Planning Commission on January 30, 2001, on Petition 2000-12-02-38 by
Craig Corbell (Hurter Homes) requesting waiver use approval to construct a
Planned Residential Development consisting ofhousing for the elderly on
property located on the east side of Newburgh Road between Five Mile and
Ladywood Roads in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 17, the Planning Commission
does hereby recommend that Petition 2000-12-02-38 be tabled to April 3,
2001.
Mr. McCamn, Cbaimvw,
declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted
ITEM #7 PETITION 2000-12-0239 R C. Riley & Associates
(A T & T Wireless)
Mr. Piencecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2000-12-02-39
by R C Riley & Associates on behalf of AT&T Wheless Services, Inc.,
requesting waiver use approval to construct wireless communication facility
consisting of a 121 foot monopole tower and its accompanying electronic
equtipment cabinets on property located on the east side of Newburgh Road
between Six Mile Road and Munger Street in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 17.
Mr. Tarmma presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zo ang
of the surrounding area
Mr. McCann: Is there my correspondence?
18276
Mr. Nowak ThetearefturiRmsofconespondence. ILefirstisaleII fiviuthe
Engineering Division, dated December 29, 2000, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above
referencedpention. We have no objection to the proposal or legal
description at this time. We trust that this will provide you with the
information requested." The letter is signed by David Lear, P.E., Civil
Engineer. The second letter is from the Division of Police, dated January 10,
2001, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed the proposed site plan for
the luted petition requesting 0 construct a wireless communication facility.
We have no objections to the proposed site plan as submitted" Tbeletteris
signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant Traffic Bureau. The thrid letter is from
the Livonia Fre & Rescue Division, dated January 11, 2001, which reads as
follows: 'Thu office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with
a request to construct a wtreless communication facildv on properly located
at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal."
The letter is signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal. The fourth letter is
from the Inspection Department, dated January 16, 2001, which reads as
follows: "Pursuant to your request ofDecember 29, 2000, the above
referencedPention has been reviewed. Thefollowmg is noted.. (1) As
proposed this Petition wiII need several variances from the Zoning Board of
Appeals. (a) Defuient rear yard setback OSDistrict l5 feet required, less
than 6feetpeovided (b) Defuientfaazone setbackfrorn the Rd Districtta
the south. 148 feet (123 and25) required, 136 (prox) provided (2)
District immediately at east boundary isPL, an elementary school (3) The
hrndscaping plan shows trees removed, but not replaced and no mention of
hrndscape irrigation These should be clarified. (4) There is a dumpster
screening area, currently with the gates removed in that area No mention
is made of relocations This should be clarified. (5) The parking lot,
parking island curbs, exasting accessory building and parking lot striping
allneed maintenance and/or repair. (6) Itis not clear ifparking spaces
will be lost to the construction and/or access route to the site. These items
should be clarified The Department has no frvlher objections to this
Petition." Theletteris signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of
Inspection That is the exert of the correspondence.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitionerherelhis evening?
Kristen Palko, Richard Connor Riley & Associates on behalf of AT&T Wireless Services,
30150 Telegraph, Suite 420, Bingham Farms. I would first like to start off
going through the process and how we came to this site. Iluis was abouta
three year process that we have been actually looking for a site in the area
Our radio frequency engineers issued a search ring and that search ring was at
Six Mile and Levan, approximately bisected by Levan. If you have the
application packet in Gond of you, we provided some propagation maps
demonstrating the need for a site in this area. If yen flip to tab "J", we
provided some maps. What the first shows is our surrounding sites and they
are each labeled with a number and that is how AT&T identifies thein site. I
would like to pain out that our existing sites right now, as they are shown an
the map, are currently all co -locations or rooftop sites in the area What you
18277
see in the center of this conglomeration, is red surrounding the numbers in the
center portion of those sites means that is the best coverage there, that would
be the center of the site of where our anter nas as actually located. As you go
out, the green portion, you start losing some coverage and the white would be
zero coverage. As you notice in the center of this map, we have a large space
of white here where we need a site. We have red surrounding that cycle and
right in the middle is where we are deficient AT&T's goal is to provide
seamless coverage to our customers. Here we do not have coverage for our
customers and that is our goal. That is why I can here before you tonight If
you flip the page on the back side here, what we have, and our code for this
site is 184, and when we place site into the gap here, we fill the coverage in
the center of the circle here and therefore our goal is accomplished Our
customers are happy and we have optimum coverage for those customers. I
have a hand out, I know we have submitted a lot of materials so far, but I do
have a couple of handouts that I would like to go through with you to
demonstrate how we came to this sato and why we absolutely need a site here.
Mr. Alanskas: While you are passing that out, where the white areas are, are there co -
locators there where you could attach to somebody else?
Ms. Polka: No. That is what I am going to go through next for you It is how we cameto
this place and the need for a mw land site as opposed to a rooftop or a
colocation. The purpose of this handout is to demonstrate why I am here
before for a mw land site instead of a colocation on an existing structure
rooftop site. It is AT&Ts policy to collocate on existing structures wberever
feasible in the area We have been looking for a site in this particular area for
approximately three years now. I know A is a sensitive area If you notice on
the page you will see a circle. That is our search right that our radio
frequency engineers issued this search ring and this is where we need to have
a site. Here our target height was 120 fret to provide the best coverage for
our customers. We need to look within that search ring What we do is we
analyze the zorung of the connnntity. We look for existing structures and
where the community would like to see us. We look for industrial properties,
rooftops and also existing monopoles and such structures; that we can
collocate on. We also like to look for municipal property. We like to give the
coloration rent and the rent from the canners to the community wherever
possible. What we did is we went through and onthe next page is a little
chart matching the candidate letters with what type of site it is, the available
mminting height for our antennas. Our optimal height we need here is 120
feet and the issues presented to us with these sites. The first site we looked at
was St Timothy, which is just south of our proposed site currently as it exists
now. St Timothy was not interested in a site on then property. The next sato,
we looked to the school property. Schools often times work well. They often
lures have light standards that we can replace on soccer fields or football
fields and such. Currently we have a site at Stevenson High School that you
are familiar with that we replaced a light standard and that is a minimal
impact on the corrnmmity, which is our goal.
18278
Mr. McCann: Time is rumung short We have hem here for quill a period of time. What
we are interested in is the reasons why this particular site will work for you
and its impact on the area and neighbors.
Ms. Palko: This has been a long site in the working and this is very important to us. This
site did work and I think it is a great site in the end. The m^ ^g and the
reason I am before you is that it is a waiver use, the way the parcel is shaped,
it is narrow and so we are not able to meet setbacks on the parcel. However,
what we look to do is set it off of Newburgh Road. It is approximately 300
feet from Newburgh Road setback behind the medical offices. We are going
to use an existing drive through the parking lotto the back portion of our site.
Where the greenbelt is and the dmnpster on the site plan, we are going to fit
the monopole and our electronic equipment within that existing green space
which is in the comer of the parking lot so we are not taking out any
additional parking spots. We are proposing at this point to leave the dmnpster
where it is. The parcel will be surrounded by, we are going to match the
mason wall to the eastern portion of the property line which extends to the
greenbelt there which is public land so that our equipmmt and the base of the
monopole will be screened Gom the houses which are approximately 650 feet
to the east. On the Gout we added a wrought iron fence, which we feel is
more aesthetically pleasing than barbed wire or anything of that nature to
open up for our construction people and maintenance personnel to access the
site. It was m®tioned in some of the reports that there will be three trees that
are removed. There are three trees in that little square which is 32' x 34' wide
which is our lease area Those are necessary in order to place the monopole
within that parcel and place our electronic equipment Normally AT&T tikes
to put a 12' x 28' shelter. In this case we are dismantling an electronic cabinet
and lining them along the large wall that blocks the alley Gom the retail
property along the backside. We feel that we are trying to work with the
community here and trying to have the least impact on the site and then also
to propose a 121 foot monopole which is sunilar to a light standard and that
will serve our needs. I will be happy to answer any questions that you may
have at this time.
Mr. LaPine: What area will this service? Just the Livonia area or does A service
Westland? How far do you go east, west, south or north?
Ms. Palko: If you look on the propagation map and exhmit"T', which is the original map
that we looked at, the one on the back side shows what happens when we fill
in with this site, and that is site 184. That will serve approxinatelyjust our
search ring. These sites usually cover a one to two mile radius.
Unfortunately, that is the law physics that we are dealt with and the
technology that we are dealing with right now. The sites do not cover a very
broad area What we will do is we will fill in the gap right here in the center
ofthe surnnmding site. Basically, we are trying to cover Six Mile and Levan
and that area right there.
Mr. LaPine: Does that mean in the firtme that you are going to have to have more of these
in this particular area?
18279
Ms. Palko: It is hard b say at this point As you know, I-275 is a highly traveled area In
this case, and why it has taken us so long b find a perfect site here, is that it is
mainly residential. The use is here. We are looking for coverage along Su
Mile and also Levan and actually this is the direct cents of meeting ono
coverage needs. It is not so much I-275 and Su Mile. We do have sites that
adequately cover 275 and some of the busier thoroughfares. I dont want b
speculate that you wool see me back here because that is always shooting
myself in the foot when I appear here a couple of years from now. Ibis is
actually a coverage site so we doral have coverage in this particular area that
we are looking for. If you have high volumes of traffic, lots of calls, esch
lower or auction can only carry about 117 calls. So along 275, we get a lot of
traffic along there. We might have b go back and find a capacity site.
Instead of providing coverage that would be providing more capacity b carry
more calls because there are so many.
Mr. LaPme: Do you allow other companies b come onto your pole?
Ms. Palko: We do. We provided acolocation affidavit which states that AT&T will
allow firtme carriers b collocate on this pale. In this case we provided a three
carver pale so two other carriers may collocate on this pole with AT&T.
Mr. McCain: One of the concerns is that looking at the provisions and plan, the staff was
concerned that you left room for them on the pale but no room for them b part
their equipment in.
Ms. Palko: Normally, and you can decide this, we tried to mimois the impact on the
existing site, as it exists right now. We are not able to predict which other
carriers will need this site. So instead of clearing art the whole area and
maybe no ane will come b that site, what we did was we left A and tried to fit
our equipment into the existing area the bestway passible. The dumpster
may be removed and moved b a different site on the property. What we also
lriednottodowasnotbmfiingeonanyofthepuldngmitexis. Weare
not removing any parking spaces and I know that was a question by the
engineer. Fulnre carriers, I doral know if there were parking calculations
done because we werevl removing any parking as it exists. If they need b
remove some spaces, then maybe they could come back and get a parking
variance and extend the site into some of those parking spaces. Once you
remove the dumpster, I think it is 6 feet by 10 feet Sprints equipaent is 11
feet by 13 feet So some of Bre other carriers can fit into that existing space.
Wejust tried b have the least impact on the site as it exists knowing what a
sensitive area it is.
Mr. Piemeerlic Would you repent the diameter of coverage from this tower?
Ms. Palko: Each site can cover approximately a one b two mile radius. That depends
on height That is kind of a generalization and A is also based on
topography. If there are large buildings blocking the signals, you can cover
far less, if there are large trees and certain instances like that Thatis kind of
18280
a genealimlion that we go with but Pols will fill our gaps and our needs at
Pols time.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Iwas under the impression from other people that they had more coverage
from then towers. You mentioned the 1275 corridor. You realize that there
is a tower going in there at Five Mile and I275. Have you tried to get on
with that one?
Ms. Palko:
Whathappens is itis moving father south out of our search ring and
encroaching on another me of or other sites. We do have a site at Five Mile
and Haggerty which is in Northville Township and Post is a coloration on an
existing American tower. So what happens is that site is ton close to our
existing site and then we have a gap to the northeast. So I would have go
come back and get a site there so it wouldn'tserve our needs properly.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Because of the Northville site, it wouldjust be redundant then woldv't it?
Ms. Palko:
Right
Mr. Almskas:
I have a hypothetical question for you. In you estimation, you know the
communications is growing and you wart a pole here now, can ou City said
other cities be filled with poles all over or City as the need becomes for
more and more?
Ms. Palko:
Technology is always evolving rapidly changing It is hard to mak
geveraheat ras dealing wiPo something hike Ibis.
Mr. Alanskas:
I said it was hypothetical but it seems hike every four or five months
somebody is coring in saying, "We need a pole here or we need one there."
And all of a sudden our city is full of these big poles all over the city.
Ms. Palko:
I understand you concerns. What happens we are all trying to provide
coverage and the reality is Poat those sites can only carry so many calls.
What happens you have to go back in and provide capacity sites in the future.
Everyone has a cell phone these days, we know that Everyone wants to use
it and not drop calls. What can happen is if cities have good zoning
ordinances and they can provide for sites in specific areas we may come in
and need a capacity site and we can find a rooftop site to fit those reeds or an
existing monopole that we can collocate on to fill those gaps.
Mr.Alanskas:
Yonhaveansweredmyquestion. Thankyou
Mr. McCann:
Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition?
Ron Caponi, 37528 Ladywood but I am a member of St Timothy's Church and they have
been trying for several years to get it We went back and said that we weren't
interested It was basically just the aesthetica of a 120 mot pole, which is 12
stories protruding up in the a¢ We have several members of or
congregation that live on Monger which is basically am their back door.
18281
Some of the conversation we did have was more or less along the lines of
aesthetics, wbat type of things could AT&T do relative to the tower. Going
along with your point on the fact that more and more of them are popping up
all over. I think that they sbould address that kind of consideration for the
sums nding communities because eventually they are going to have to
infringe on residential neighborhoods. That is kind of why we fumed A down
and I amjust here on standpoir t still saying that and speaking on behalf of the
community. I look at it and I understand Newburgh to Farmington is a mile
and a half. To me there are commercial sites like the mall there a rooftop
location, you can get up there. Something like that kind of a structure on top
of a five story building already doesn't look quite as intrusive as a pole that is
120 feet in the air. There are other places in the area that they have tried to
work with to do that I think as a City Planning Commission you should
maybe think towards those lines each time this kind of question comes up and
what can be done aesthetically. They did a good job on what they would do
on the ground but nobody sees the buildings on the ground What they see is
what is stuck up in the air. That is all I have to say.
Mr. McCann: If there is nobody else who wishes to speak, I will close the Public Hearing.
Do you have my last comments?
Ms. Palko: Regarding the member of St Timothy's, that was what I was going to go
thmugh and some of the sites that we looked at because I pushed, I said what
about the Marriott Hotel by Laurel Park Place, what about St Mary's
Hospital. We also looked into the Best Western sign along the expressway.
It is kind of a monopole type structure as it exists and changing "the sign
and doing something there. They were all too short. The Marriott rooftop we
could get 90 feet, I think it was. We need 120 feet and it is moving out of our
search ring. What happens is every time we move a little bit, I know it
doesn't sound like a lot, but I am back in here looking for a new site on the
opposite site that we move away from our search ring. That map I handed out
as a supplement, that was to show that we looked at commercial property.
We have looked at rooftop sites. We evaluated some of the public lands and
we feel that this is the best site and we know it does not meet setback sites
based on the residential to the south and also along the east because we are
crouched into that back comer and we realize that we will need a variance but
we thought that it was the best site and it works for our system.
Mr. McCain: A motion is in order.
On a motion by Mr. IaPine, seconded by Mr. Shane and approved, it was
#01-15-2001 RESOLVED that, pummatto aPublic Hearing having been held by the City
Planning Commission on January 30, 2001, on Petition 2000-12-02-39 by R.
C. Riley & Associates on behalf of AT&T Wireless Services, Inc., requesting
waiver use approval to construct a wireless communication facility consisting
of a 121 foot monopole tower and its accompanying electronic equipment
cabinets on property located on the east side of Newburgh Road between Six
Mile Road and Munger Street in the N.W.1/4 of Section 17, the Planning
18282
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that petition 2000-
12-02-39 be approved subject to the granting of variances by the Zoning
Board of Appeals for deficient setback from a residential district and for
deficient rem yard setback on an OS district and subject to the following
additional conditions:
1) That the site plan, marked drawing No. 318417-02, prepared by
Christopher Wzacny and Associates, Inc., with a revision date of
December 19, 2000, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
2) That the enlarged site plan, marked drawing No. 318417-03, prepared by
Christopher Wzacny and Associates, Inc., with a revision date of
December 18, 2000, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to;
3) That the elevations plan, marked drawing No. 3184F-04, prepared by
Christopher Wzacny and Associates, Inc., with a revision date of
December 19, 2000, is hereby approved and shall be adhered kr;
4) That the landscaping proposed for the landscape area just south of the
lease area as shown on the enlarged site plan sball be installed to the
satisfaction of the Inspection Departrnent and thereaRer permanerrtly
maintained m a healthy condition; and
5) That the plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted
to the Inspection Deparhnent at the time the budding pemrits are applied
for.
For the following reasons:
1) That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the general waiver use
standards and requirements as set forth in Section 19.06 of the Zoning
Ordinance;
2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use;
and
3) That the proposed use is compatible to and in barmorry with the
surrounding uses in the area
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543,
as amended
Mr. McCann: Is them any discussion?
Mr. Alawkes: This kind ofreminds me of years ago when we had satellite dishes for TV's,
they used to be 10 feet Througb modem technology we now have them
down to 18 inches. I think it is time that our City says that AT&T and other
companies to come up with more different ways to do this and receive these
18283
signals without having these big large towers. I think it may be done bat that
it will be done Gather down the road. Tbat is why I am not voting for this.
ILankyou.
Mr. LaPme: I agree with Mr. Alanskas but the fact still remains, we have to have the
technology today to take care of the people who have cell phones and who
drive around and want to use cell phones. If you are in an emergency and if
you are in an area where you lose round because you don't have the signal,
you are going to be a little upset I agree, I don't like all of these towers. I
wish there was another way we could do it I think there is a way that they
could develop them in such a way that they take care up some type of a shape
of artor something But at this point, until that happens, I believe that the
people who own these phones and buy them with the undersTmdmg that they
are going to be able to get the service and that they will be able to use them in
the areas they want to use them, this is what we have to do and this is just part
of the new technology.
Mr. Piemecchi: Bill, I see your point but I Bob's even more. As long as we keep punting up
these towers, what's make you think we are going to get any additional
spending of additional money for high tech? The reason they need these
towers all over the place, and I cant believe that they can only go two miles.
That should be able to be resolved unless it is the number of calls that come
into each site thatrestria it brt I agree with Bob. I think itis abouttime that
we put an end to this staff
Mr. McCain: If there are no Gather comments, IT throw in my own two cats. I agree I am
not real pleased with the tower but think everybody in my family has a cell
phone except I wont give one to my 13 year old son yet As a matter of fact,
I suggested to my daughters that they get rid of their regular phones. With the
cell phone they get all their long distance and they can go with that Marry,
people that I meet today, that is their only fomu of phone. It works. I agree
that would like to see new technology come atu place but I dont think the
technology is there or they wouldn't be going through the great expense to
going through all of these studies to go through to all of these plammg
commissions, to go through the councils and then go to the cost of budding
these towers and renting the space for them They pretty dearly for I am sure.
Blacking this one I don'tthink is going to help the cause although I believe in
it So I am going to vote for it
Mr. Shane: I agree with Bob. I agree Bill and I agree with Jim and I agree with Dau I
dont ISce them but I flunk this particular location is probably as mobtmsive
as maybe you can get in that particular area. Until other technology comes
around, I guess I9 vote for it
Mr. McCann: can the roll.
A roll call vols was taken with the fdlowing result
AYES: LaPine, Shane, McCain
18284
NAYS: Alanskas, Piercecchi
ABSENT: Koons
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted
It will go an to City Camel with an approving resolution.
ITEM #S Preliminary Plat of Kenwood Meadows Subdivision #2
Mr. Piececchi, Secretary, arnanced the next item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat approval
of Kenwood Meadows Subdivision 42 proposed to be located south of Five
Mile Road between Cavell and Santa Anita Avenues in the N.E. 1/4 of
Section24.
Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zormg
of the surrounding area
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nowak There are three ids of correspondence. The fust itern is a letter from the
Engineering Division, dated December 20, 2000, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant w your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above
referencedprelimuu"platfor Kemvood Meadaws Subdlvuwn#2. This
department will need w have a larger area ofright-ec way given at the South
end of the road Taylor Boulevard to accommodate a cut desac or "tee "turn
around As theplat a cunendy designedfre protection andgarbage
collection would be nearly impossible. Ifthe developer feels that propertyto
the South will be added onto the proposed plat he shouldfirst obtain the
property and then submit an updatedplat layout We bust that this will
provideyou with the information requested" The lAhr is signed by David
Lear, P.E., Civil Engineer. The second ldhr is lion the Department of Parks
& Recreation, dated December 21, 2000, which reads as follows: "The
Department of Parks and Recreation has reviewed the prelim nary plat of the
Kenwood Meadows Subdivision #2. At this time, Ifind w discrepancies or
problems that would be caused by the development of this subdivision." The
le issignedby Ronald R.Rewls Supeinhndent. Thethudlethris from
the Livonia Fre & Rescue Division, dated January 11, 2001, which reads as
follows: "This office has reviewedthepreliminaryplat submittedin
connection with a request to develop a subdrvuion. We have no objections w
ties proposal with thefollowing stipulations. (1) Developer shallprovide
means for emergency vehicle to turn around (2) Hydrant spacing shall be
consistent with residential use groups, most remote hydrant 1000 gp.m." The
letter is signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal. That is the exert ofthe
correspondence.
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner herelhis evemngl
18285
Leo Soave, 34822 Pembroke. Ibis is a platted subdivision The house will be me and two
stay. This will be a concrete road with a "T" turnaround. The price of these
homes will be $220,000 or so. I'll answer your questions.
Mr. McCain:
One of the major concerns, waT start right mto it, is where are we on the
development to the south ofthis?
Mr. Soave:
We are nowhere. This is all we have.
Mr. McCain:
This is all you have. You are not an negotiations right now with any of the
other property owners to the south?
Mr. Soave:
No sir.
Mr. McCain:
Are you plammg on it?
Mr. Soave:
If we do it right, yes sir. We are in that kind of business. If that works out,
yes. Sane of the people down called us about selling thein property. But we
have to get to that paint yet
Mr. McCam:
And the person to the immediate south is not interested?
Mr. Soave:
No sir.
Mr. Piemerchi:
I am sure you are not surprised that I was surprised when I received this
revised plan. Myself, and others actually were under the impression that you
were pawing a cul-de-sac after those two lots were rezoned Actually,itwas
part of the deal but I realize tines and conditions change. You are seeking
new territory. Jim touched on it and I want to much on it in the same vein. I
would like to ask, what level of assurance and success can you give on this
arrangement which opens up a new opportunity to a sense self! You partially
were asked if you had obtained any agreem®ts firm the current property
owners to sell thein property. You said right now you have no other
agreements.
Mr. Soave:
No sir.
Mr. Piemecchi:
But you attend to get them obviously or you wouldnl be leaving a stub road,
right? Do you think you are going to have mad blocks in this project?
Mr. Suave
This is a very speculative business. There may be road blocks. We haw
gentlemen here that when we developed the first phase, he said, "Under no
circumshances am I going to sell." Well, this gentleman is right here and he
warts to sell.
Mr. Piemerchi:
I recognize that I said time changes. When and if you do go further south,
how are you going m provide access m this new temtor}? That is a questim
that is pretty big my mind. We coal expect to go down to where the other
residentials are and part in a cm -de -sac down there because the Fire
18286
Department wool allow that and that is putting a very long street to a dead
end. Correct?
Mr. Soave: I respect your opinion, sir. Wbatever you say is taken seriously but I have
one comment to make. About five years ago, I developed Orangelawn N1 and
Orange]awn #2. This is Plymouth Road and Stark Itis werrt from Stark
Road almost w Famnngton Road Right now the cul-de-sac is about 500 feet
west ofFamungton Road. There are some areas like that almost all through
the City.
Mr. Piemecchi: If you go all the way down to the end to Western Golf, that the nest
residential properties are would be perpendicular to the street that you would
put m? Are you saying thatyou can go all thewaydovm there without
having an access?
Mr. Soave: No sir. I am not saying that at all. Once we add on to this, we will have to
come to Cavell somewhere along the line.
Mr. Piercerchi: I.asfiy, I know you are only asking for a plat, but I really would like to be
assured, Mr. Soave, that when you do come back to us, I am only speaking
for myself, that an fire future that you will present us with a comprehensive
plan, not two loll at a time for rezoning.
Mr. Soave: O.K. In my defense, whm we first met hereto the rezoning process, we were
throwing around the idea of a cul-de-sac, I have no problem with that but
some of the people on Cavell said no. They wanted to have the opportunity to
be able to be able to do that
Mr. Piemecchi: That is water under the bridge.
Mr. Soave: Thank you very much. Idon't like to be called or go back on my word
because that is what live by, is my word.
Mr. Pienceccbi: O.K. Thankyou.
Mr. McCain: Is there anybody in the audience who wishes to speak for or against this
Petition?
Betty Ward, 14959 Cavell. I am the road block. The problem that I have is that I don't like
the way the road is among into my property. I would like to see a privacy
fence go up to keep vandals or keep trespassers or things like that out of my
property. I have also been told that if they waited long enough, that I would
be too old to mow my yard I think I am going to be around a few more years
tomownryyard Iain not really going tojust give up my property hike they
feel that I will.
Mr. McCain: I think that is wonderful. I don'tthink anybody is intending that you should
Ms. Ward: I was told that
18287
Mr. McCann:
No. I think thatyou must have misunderstood. What we try to do is that we
looked A the sub ending at one spot and they said no, 'It is going to end up
here" Now the neighbors to the north are saying,'No, we would like the
possibility someday ifyou hit the lonery and move to Hawaii, wonderful for
you but the successor may decide to do it. We arejust trying to figure out
what is going on What all the neigbbors want and what makes sense brown a
plawmgpointofview.
Ms. Ward:
I do know from talking to some of my neighbors they are not for this. My
neighbor next door is. The neighbor next door to them is. As you get further
down, they are not for it
Mr. McCann:
So you are next to this.
Ms. Ward:
I am right there where the road ends.
Mr. McCann:
But the one to the soulh of you would like to see this developed?
Ms. Wand
Right Andthe neighbornextdaorto them and up"he grouphome and
then after that, no.
Mr. McCann:
So you have threetothe south of you Port would like it but beyond on that no.
That is where we come into this. This is a preliminary plat How deep are
those lots, Mr. Taormiva?
Mr. Tamanama:
The lot that she hues on?
Mr. McCann:
How far is the set back for your home?
Ms. Ward:
I think it goes back about 650 fret
Mr. McCann:
Your property does but how far does your home sit off of Cavell?
Ms. Ward:
I dont really know.
Mr. McCann:
Your home sits pretty much adjac to your neighbors.
Ms. Ward:
Yes.
Mr. Taormina:
Ib you know if your house lines up, more or less, with the house to the north
of you?
Ms. Ward:
I think we might be set backjust a little bit but we are pretty close.
Mr.Taormina:
That is probably 50 to 60 fret brown the right-of-way which would probably be
over 200 fee[ from the subdrvrsun line as it is shown.
Mr.McCann:
The reason you would want a wood fence is why?
18288
Ms. Ward: I would prefer to not have trespassers going on The road just stops there
People are going to drive off and see the woods and dump trash and things
Elm Poat My backyard is for my kids to play in and I would prefer not to
have neighborhood kids in my backyard
Mr. Alanskas:
Ib you have a fence back there now?
Ms. Ward:
I don't have it totally fenced I have it fenced part way back.
Mr. Alanskas:
With what kind of fence?
Ms. Ward:
With a chain link
Mr. McCann:
I think if people are going to be spending $220,000 for a home, they are not to
want people corning back there and dumping nest to them but I guess ifyou
wanted a fence, that would be something that would have to on your property
line. Idon't know that we can force the issue on then property line. Anything
else?
Ms. Ward:
No.
Paul Macri, 38705 Seven Mile, Livonia I have been waling in Livonia selling residential
real estate for the past ten years and I have worked m Phase I m this
subdivision to sell homes with Mr. Soave. Ijust want to speak to a couple of
points. The lady previous to me mentioned what she felt was the position of
the people along this condor. Just to set the stage a little bit Cavell which is
the street east of the subdivision, has about 14 or 15 parcels that go back to
Western Golf Estates, which Mr. Piercecchi was referring to, all of those
parcels are about the same depth, around 600 feet deep. I have spoken with
each and everyone of those people along there and I can tell you gentlemen
that we presented a petition at the last meeting and it had the names of five or
six people, two senior citizen ladies, one in her 70's and one in her 80's that
are at the very back of at that end, within fou or five parcels from the very
end, both are interested in selling. In my experience it has been that people
change then nunds. The gentleman that is going to speak after me was
adamantly opposed to this project We had meetings in the churches and the
neighborhood and he spoke out against it very passionately, very fervently. I
have been involved in putting pieces together fm subdivisions m Livonia for
the past ten years. I was noolved m acqumng land m this subdivision.
Mr. McCann:
At this point she is not interested
Mr. Macen
The point I wanted to make is that there are people who do want the option
and they are well back in that subdivision. We are not going to have anybody
to sell, obviously, but people do change their minds. People already have on
this site and the future, I don't think any of us can predict the tubae. The
zo ng we are requestmg and the approval we are requesting is m
18289
conformance and the type of home we are going to build there is going to be a
home that will increase the value of all the other homes in the area too.
Mr. LaPine: Do you have your own real estate firm or do you work for someone?
Mr. Macen I work with Real Estate One.
Mr. LaPine: ILankyou.
Paul Pinkstaff, 15035 Cavell. I own the property to the north and I am the living example of
the person that changed their mind. I guess about all I can say is I think with
the pressure and all the development going on. I coal miagme that eventually
that other part woulda t someday be developed so I'd keep my options open
rather than closing them off. Thank you
Mr. Piemerchi: The young lady that was up here and had a problem potentially with people
driving thnwgb the back there, is there a way that you could block that off?
Mr. Soave: The City Engineer is going to ask us to pert a barricade at the end of that
sheet.
Mr. Piemercbi: Can do?
Mr. Soave: Yes sir. It will be done.
Donald Leese, 15000 Santa Anita. I am concerned about the drains in that area Every year I
get ducks in my backyard. I was wondering if they were going to put in a
drainage through that area to take off all the water!
Mr. McCann: They are going to have to dispose of the water on their property. Thereis
now ay around that
Mr. Leese: Right but they are going to be raising their property, which is going to leave
my property low.
Mr. McCain: If they pert their property higher than yours, they have to have drains at the
edge of their property to collect all the water.
Mr. Leese: Will they do that?
Mr. McCain: They have because they cant drain onto your property.
Mr. Leese: It is real swampy in that area.
Mr. McCann: Dan is one of the concems he will have to deal with the Engineering
Department Again, it is a big corrzm of everybody's and the City will look
at it very closely at the Engineering level to make sure that itis taken care of.
Mr. Leese: ILankyou.
18290
Mr. McCann: The public hearing is closed Annotation is in order.
On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Shane and approved it was
#01-16-2001 RESOLVED that, punuard to a Public Hearing having been held by the City
Planning Commission on January 30, 2001, on Preliminary Plat approval of
Kenwood Meadows Subdivision 42 proposed to be located south of Five Mile
Road between Cavell and Santa Anita Avenues in the N.F- 1/4 of Section 24,
the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
the Prelimmary Plat for Kenwood Meadows Subdivision 42 be approved for
the revised plat with a revision date of January 24, 2001, subject to the
waiving of the open space requirement of the Subdivision Rdes &
Regulations and to the mflowmg additional conditions:
1) That the plat be further revised to comply with City standards to the
satisfaction of the Engineering Division with respect to a properly
designed "T' turnaround at the southern terminus of the proposed street;
and:
2) That a barricade shall be placed at the southerly end of the proposed street
to prevent traffic from moving through the orphaned land to the south;
For the following reasons:
1) That the preliminary plat is drawn in compliance with all applicable
standards and requirements as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance #543; and
2) Had the preliminary plat represents a reasonable land use soludion to
development of the subject land
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was sent to the
abutting property owners, proprietor, City Departments as fisted in the Proof
of Service, and copies of the plat together with the notices have been sent to
the Building Department Superintendent of Schools, Fire Deparhnem, Police
Department and the Parks and Recreation Department.
Mr. McCann; Is there arty discussion?
Mr. Pemecchi: How about barricading the end of that street?
Mr. McCann: Mr. Ta0rmins?
Mr. Taormina: I think you only talking about a bamer across the street itself. I don't knowif
that totally addresses the concern of the lady to the south That pmeIIs
traffic from moving through and dumping. As I understand rt, that is a
requreatentofPoe Fmgmemng Department IdonYPomkithurtsnecessanly
to put it in She resolution.
18291
Mr. Piercecchi:
I thought the lady was concerned about the faffic coming through there and
that was why Mr. Soave was willing to put a barricade up.
Mr. McCann:
The City requires it he says.
Mr. Piercecchi:
Why cool we put that in the resolution?
Mr. Alanskas:
Weare.
Mr. McCann:
Call the roll.
A roll call vote was td® with the following result:
AYES: A]anskas, Shane, Piercecchi, McCann
NAYS: Iapma
ABSENT: Koons
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted
It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution
Mr. McCann: This concludes the Public Hearing portion of me agenda We will now
proceed with the Miscellaneous Site Plan portion of our agenda
ITEM #9 PETITION 2001-01-05-03 Brent & Sue Goings
Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the need item on the agenda is Petition 2001-01-08-03
by Brent and Sue Goings on behalf of filters Frozen Custard, requesting
approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the Zoning Ordinance in
connection with a proposal to construct an ice cram parlor on property
located at 31195 Eight Mile Road in the N.W. 1/4 of Section 2.
Mr. Miller: This site is located on the south side ofEight Mile between Merriman and
Milburn The petitioner is requesting approval to construct a Rittefs Frozen
Custard Stand on the vacant piece of property that is located nest to the Rite
Aid Store that sites on the southeast corner of Eight Mile Road and Memman
Read At one time, this piece of property was the home of a Chinch's Lumber
Store. On January 21, 1997, this site, along with the dug store's comer lot,
received Site Plan Approval for the construction of a commercial center. The
commercial center was to consist of two separate buildings, a Rite Aid Store
and a multttenant retail budding. The drug store was the only part of the
development that was constructed. The proposed frozen custard stand would
be round in shape and measure approximately 806 sq. ft in size. The
establishment would have no inside seating The Site Plan shows ten (10)
tables, with four (4) seats eacb, within the patio area out in boot of the
building. Customers would serve themselves by placing an order at one of
the three walk-up windows. According to the petitioner, Ritts only serves
custard type products, which includes ice cream cones, sundaes and frozen
dairies. No grill foods such as hamburgers or hot dogs would be offered. The
18292
Site Plan shows the site's enclosed trash dumpster area located in the
southeast comer of the rear parking lot The budding and large patio area
would sit in the middle of the site with parking situated on all fad sides.
Parking required is 28 spaces. Parking provided is 78 spaces. Basically, the
petitioner is proposing to keep most of the existing landscaping on the site as
it is today. Some additional trees and shrubbery within the new parking lot
islands would be the only plant materials added. There seems to be an
opportunity for additional green space or maybe a playscape area within the
large concrete pad that the building and tables sit on. Ihelandscaping
required is not less than 15% of the total area. Landscaping provided is 20
of the site. The petitioner is requesting approval for a confomung ground
sign. At this time no wall signage is proposed Signage permitted for this
site under Section 18.5011 is ore (1) wall sign not to exceed 36 sq. tt in sign
area and one ground sign not to exceed 30 sq. It in sign area, 6 It in height or
10 It in length The sign shall be setback 10 feet from any right-of-way live.
Proposed signage is one wall sign 18 sq. It in sign area and one grand sign
30 sq. It in sign area, 6 It in height, 10 It in length and set back 10 feet from
the Eight Mile ngbt-of-way line.
Mr. McCann: Is there any morespondence7
Mr.TaomtnaThe frstleter is from the Livonia
Fire & Rescue Division, dated January 11, 2001, which reads as follows:
'Thu office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request
to construct a Ritter's Frozen Custer Shop on property located at the above
referencedaddress. We have no objections io this proposal." lhelethiis
signed by James E. Conecrut. Fire Marshal- The second itana is a letter from
the Engineering Division, dated January 11, 2001, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above
referencedpentlon. We have no objection to the proposal or legal
description contained therein. It should be noted that the developer will be
requved io dedicate a new water maw easement to match the proposed
changes io the crating water maw. We trust that this will provide you with
the wformation requested" The letter is signed by David Lear, P.E., Civil
Engineer. The dffdldhr is from the Inspection Department, dated January
15, 2001, which reads as follows: 'Pursuant to your request ofJanuary5,
2001, the above referenced Petition has been reviewed The followwg is
noted.. (1) Existing walls ofdumpsur enclosure are shown on the plan
withoutanygates. (2)Nolandwispeplanwasprovided Detailslacking
on type ofmaterial, irrigation, lightpoles and double striping ofthe parking
lot These items should be clarifred (3) Under 11.03c,(2)(e) it does not
appear that adequate sanitaryfacilities for the public have been provided
The single bathroom appears to be for employees only. (4) The monument
sign as designated, with a her (10) foot setback would be permitted No wall
signage was reviewed (5) The incorrect ancessibitdy issues (barrier free)
will be addressed atpLm review; i.e.: height ofserving windows and
counters. This Department has no further objections to this Petition other
than as noted I trust this provides the requested wformanon." The letter is
signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director oflnspection. The fourth letter is
18293
from the Division of Police, dated Sennary 16, 2001, which reads as follows:
'7n response to the mpttoned pe6tton5 the Police Department has reviewed
the listedsite plan as submitted We have reviewed the proposed site
requestmg to construct a Ritter's Frozm CuslardShop. Slap signs w$l be
requ red at both exits at Eight Ade Road The hamHcap spaces must be
individually postedper City Ordinance." The lett is signed by Wesley
McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. That is the exert of the comspondmim
Mr. McCam:
Is the petitioner herelhis evening?
Brent Goings, 5962 Meridian, Brighton, Michigm.
Mr. McCann:
We've had a fainly detailed explanation Do you want to go into it a little
further!
Mr. Goings:
I think Scott did a greatjob.
Mr. McCaw:
You bad some colorrenderings. Fortheaudiencewatchingtelevisimon
tonight, this is your existing me in Brighton, Michigan, correct?
Mr. Goings:
Yes, it is.
Mr. McCann:
You've been in business how long?
Mr. Goings:
Wehavebeminbusinessformeyearin Brightm Weopenedin Mayof
last year.
Mr. McCam:
And you expect to do pretty much the exact same business as you did
Brighten?
Mr. Goings:
Exactly. We have several Livonia customers that come out there currently.
Mr. McCam:
What are your hours of operation?
Mr. Goings:
We open approximately at 11:00 am seven days a week and we are open
until 10:00 pm. Sunday through Thursday, Friday and Saturday mul 1100
ti
Mr. McCam;
Rightfli sigh Christmas?
Mr. Goings:
No. We close mid-November and we open the Cyst part of March.
Mr. McCaw:
What about the tables and furniture out front Is that all removed in the
wmhilane?
Mr. Goings:
No it is not They are concrete tables and they approximamly 1100 pounds
each and they are going to stay there.
18294
Mr. LaPine: Do you have my problems wiPo teenagers handing around here that causes
any problems? How often to do go up there and make sure that things are
cleaned up so there isn't any garbage blowing around on Eight Mile or
Merriman Road and things of that nature? Nowadays teenagers have these
skateboards and things like that, do you allow those kind of things on your
property and how do you police things like that?
Mr. Goings:
In Brighton we have had a couple issues with skateboarders. We have asked
them to please not do it on the concrete. We have had no problems other than
a couple of instances where we have asked them to leave. It is a family place
with a lot of small kids walling around and we don't want anyone to get hurl
As far as teenagers, webe not had any issues at all, in Brighton for the entire
year. As far as the trash during the busy hoes, someone is outside attending
to the tables and picking up trash every hour.
Mr. LaPine:
On the tables when a family comes and something gets spilled, ara they
cleaned up periodically?
Mr. Goings:
Every hour.
Mr. LaPwe:
What is the busiest time of the da}? Is it from 5:00 p.m or 6:00 pm?
Mr. Goings:
It ranges from about 6:30 pm to 9:30 p.m
Mr. LaPwe:
So by that tine most of the traffic coming up Eight Mile from Detroit or out
in the northern suburbs is all over and they are on thein way home.
Mr. Goings:
Right
Mr. Alanskes:
I was looking over that letter that shows how many you have to sell. It says
that your average sale is $4.70?
Mr. Goings:
That is per transaction. A transaction could be a family of gain. It could be
family of five.
Mr. McCann:
I am going to go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience who
wishes to speak for or against this petition? See no one, a motion is m order.
On a motion by Mr. Piavecchi, seconded by Mr. Alanskas and unanimously approved, it was
#01-17-2001
RESOLVED that, the City planning Commission does hereby recommend to
the City Council that petition 2001-01-08-03 by Brent and Sue Goings on
behalf ofRitb2es Frozen Custard, requesting approval of all plans required by
Section 18.58 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to
construct an ice cream parlor on property located at 31195 Eight Mile Road in
the N.W. 1/4 of Section 2 be approved subject to the following conditions:
18295
1) That the Site and Landscape Plan marked Sheet 1 dated 1/25/01, as
revised, prepared by Basney & Smith, Inc., is hereby approved and shall
be adhered to:
2) That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu ofbydroseeding
3) That underground sprinlders are to be provided for all landscaped and
sodded areas and all planted materials shall be installed to the satisfaction
of the Inspection Department and thereafter permanently unadorned in a
healthy condition;
4) That the Exterior Building Elevation Plans marked A-2 and A-3 both
dated December 27, 2000 prepared by Architectural Concepts, Inc., is
hereby approved and sball be adhered to;
5) That all new parking lot fight standards shall be shielded from the
adjacent properties and shall match the existing standards on the site in
type and height;
6) That the petitioner shall correct to the Inspection Departments satisfaction
the following site deficiencies as outlined in the correspondence dated
January 15, 2001:
that the enclosed durmpster area sball have entrance gates and these
gates shall be unadorned and when not in use, closed at all tines;
that proper and adequate sanitary and water facilities for the public
sball be provided;
that the entire parking lot shall be double striped
that all handicap spaces sball be identified and comply with the
Michigan Barrier Free Code
7) That the conforming Sign Package sdmmitted by Ritfefs Frozen Custard,
as received by the Planning Commmmission on January 3, 2001, is hereby
approved and sball be adhered to;
8) That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be
submitted to the Inspection Deparhn®t a the tune the budding permits
are applied for; and
9) That the lights will be turned off one-halfhau after closing
Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion?
Mr. Piercecchi: I would like to extend my cuuplimends to you and your partner for
mcrrantathepercentoflandscapung Youaccomplishedthazbywidemng
the landscape parking area, extending the plant area in front of the building
and adding two additional landscape plots. You nowhave provided the sale
with 20% landscaping and my comptimedo on that
18296
Mr. Goings: Thank you
Mr. Alanskas: When do you hope to open after it goes through Council?
Mr. Goings: Assuming it gets approval from Council, we would Elm to be open May 1.
Mr. McCann, Chan=, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted
Thus concludes the Miscellaneous Sit Plan portion of our agenda. We will
now proceed with the Pending I1can section of our agenda-
ITEM
genda
ITEM #10 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is the Approval of Minutes
of the 8161 Public Hearing and Regular Meeting held on December 12, 2000.
On a motion by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Shane, and unanimously approved, it was
#12-218-2000 RESOLVED that the Minutes of the 816n Public Hearings & Regular
Meeting held by the City Plaumng Commission on December 12, 2000, are
hereby approved.
A roll call vow was taken with the following result
AYES: A]anskas, Shane, Piercecchi, LaPine, McCann,
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Koons
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adoptd
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted the 818P Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting held on January 30,200 1, was adjorned at 11:14 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Dan Piemecchi, Secretary
ATTEST:
James C. McCann, Chairman
/rw