HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2001-05-0818522
MINUTES OF THE 824th PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING
FIELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMFSSION
OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
On Tuesday, May 8, 2001, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 824me
Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Cent Drive,
Lwoma, Michigan.
Mr. James McCann. Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm
Members present James C. MCC= Dan Piemecchi H G. Shane
William LaPme RobertAlanskas *Blaine Koons
Members absent: Now
$Arnived A 8:05 pm
Messrs. Mak Taormina, Planning Director, Scolt Miller, Planer 11, Bill Poppenger, Planer I
and Robby Willians, Program Supervisor, were also present
Chaimuan McCann informed the audience that if a petition on tonighYs agenda involves a
rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in hum,
will hold its own public hearing make the find determination as to whether a petition is
approved or denied The Planning Connmssion holds the only public hexing on a request for
preliminary plat and/or vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to
the City Council for the foal detemtination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected If a
petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan approval 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 Planing Commission become effective seven (7) days atter the date of adoption
The Planning Commission and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions
upon then filing The staff has famished the Comussion 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 2001-04-01-04 Hurley Homes, Inc.
Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 2001-04-01-04
by Hurley Homes, Inc. requesting to rezone property located on the south
side of Six Mile Road between Middlebelt Road and Oporto Street in the
N.E. 1/4 of Section 14 from OS to RUFA.
Mr. Poppenger presented a map showmg the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the surrounding mea.
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
18523
Mr. Tamnina: We have me later and it is from the Engineering Division dated April 17,
2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering
Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no
objections to the legaldescriphon contaveled thereon. It should be noted
that the Engineering Division currently requires a minenum rightof-way
width ofsaty (60) feet for standard residential roads. This allows the
developer to provide a space between the edge ofrood and public sidewalk
for theplacement ofutdrues outside of the pavement lines. However, given
the site constraints, jno public sidewalk ism be required and a utility
easement ofat least l0 feet in width was m be created m mediately adjacent
to the rightofway, the Engineering Division would have an objections to
the proposal. We trust that this will provide you with the mformation
requested." The letter is signed by David Lear, PE., Civil Engineer. That
is the ea4nt of the correspondence.
Mr. McCain: Is the petitioner here this evening
Raymond Hurley, President of Hurley Homes, Inc., 32511 Norfo➢r, Livonia My petition is
In rezone property Gam OS, office services, to the highest residential
zoning classification which is RUFA, half acre building sites, as defined by
The Livonia Zoning Ordinance. The effect of this proposed zoning change
would remove surplus and mused office zoning that intrudes into the
adjoining residential neigbborhmd Also, the approval of this petition
would be compatible and in hannorry with the adjoining RUFA
neighborhood. It would prevent the development of the adjoining RUFA
vacant property for a small housing developrrent made up of five find] half -
acre single-family home sites. Thank yon for your consideratim and I l
answer any questions you have.
Mr. McCann: Are fere any questions Goon the Commissimers?
Mr. Alawkas: In regards to sidewalks, wereym pla a ^g unpinning sidewalks in Gmtof
fesehomes?
Mr. Hurley:
At This point, it is up in The aa.
Mr. Alanskas:
Because as you heard in The leter, you are asking for a 50 foot sheet and if
you go with 50 feet and have no sidewalks, it would be an problem. I was
wondering what your answer would be in regard to sidewalks.
Mr. Healey:
My original plan was to not have sidewalks.
Mr. Alawkas:
Are you going to have a'1" runaround?
Mr. Hurley:
Yes sir.
Mr. Alawkas:
All right Thankym
18524
Mr. McCann: Are there any more questions? Hearing none, I will go to the audience. Is
there anybody in the audience who wishes to speak for or against this
petition?
Gayle Caswell, 29930 Munger. I brought a picture I would like to hand out to everyone of
our backyard showing the big concern we have, and have always had of
any development going in back there and the water drainage problem. We
are always flooded out We are the lowest area. Our property is the lowest
of the entire area so any water drainage comes through our yard It gets
flooded a lot Than is a concern Ideally nothing would ever be built back
there. As you can see the trees, we do love the trees and all the wild
creatures but they dont seem to be important to a lot of decisions made in
Livonia. Our biggest concern would be the drainage. We have been here
many times about this property and at one proof it was stated, I cant
remember if it was the Planning Commission or the City Crowd, that this
property is something that should never be built up. I felt real good about
leaving that meeting but obviously that didnt stand. The land behind un is
even with ours because I know the few times that I have looked over that
wall, there is always standing water. The mosquito problem is
unbelievable. Thank you.
Mr. Alanskas:
Have you even called the FEgmaenng Division and have them come out
and look A your home for drainage problems because it looks like your
property is very low! Have you evertned building up your property with
dirt?
Mrs. Caswell:
Slowly but surely, yes.
Mr. Alaaskas:
Because famayom picture it kooks likeit is concave.
Mrs. Caswell:
That might be the quality of the picture. I taped two pictures together.
You can see where the water drains from the west to the east Iam right at
the back comer of the property in question
Mr. Alacskas:
All right Thank you
Mr. Piemecchi:
Did you say you abutted the property?
Mrs. Caswell:
Yes. That wall would be right back there. That is the corner that would be
the southeast comer of the property where the wall ends on the right side of
the picture. It then goes north and that is the farthest east side of the
property and the farthest south.
Mr. Piemecchi:
'Hark you
Nancy Henderson, 29900 Munger. I am the property that is directly east of what is now
zoned as Office Services - lot27 onyom map. I have a couple of
questions and concerns. One of my concerns is also what Mrs. Caswell
brought up, which is the water problem because I am low also and I have a
18525
water problem There is a retaining Lyall that ams from north to south
which would be on the west side of my property and that wall was put up, I
believe in 1980 or 1981, because of the water problem. I do have the
Hautes and I brought them to previous meetings when this issue came up
at a meeting in 1980 form the Zoning Board of Appeals with the water
problem I would hope that if this petition does pass, I anal want it to pass
but if it does, that the wall remain Bhere and not be taken down. Another
question I had was, has all of this property been sold already and by that I
mean not just what is currently zoned Office Services but the adjacent
property to the west, the RUF, with these new sites?
Mr. McCann: We are going to back up here because this isn't an information gathering as
towhatisgoingoninalloftheareas. Whatwe have before us tonight is
Ste issue as to whether the section behind the two buildings directly behind
the yards and the brick wall is currently zoned OS, Office Services, should
be rezoned to RUF. The proposed zoning RUF, Rural Urban Farm, is the
largest residentialzo ing we have in Bre City. Theissuethatsbouldbe
addressed before us tonight is whether or not the zone is better zoned as
office services or residential This is cur concern. As far as Hooding, that
is a concern but we do have built into our ordinances that they have to take
care of the water that is existing on the property and provide for drainage
of R They cannot drain A onto you yards. By doing Brat it will, in fact,
help Poe drainage situation an your yards because it appears from the
pictures that the wideris corning onto yo ryards finm flus area Ihat flus
is wbere it is stored Mr. Taormina, does this come in with the new Wayne
County provision or is this under the old provisions, depending on the
drainage system?
Mr. Taormina: I don't know exactly what regulations they will have to comply with
Whether it will be Livnma'ss[omh water guidelines or the County's. But
can tell you that Bre Engineering Division is aware of some of these
concerns and in fact. I had a conversation with John Full the aftemoon
where we discussed this issue and he will be looking carefully at the
engineering plans when they do come his way far this development
Obviously, the wall that borders these properties is probably the biggest
constraint that they have to deal with There is no question, as you
motioned earlier, that he will have to handle the drainage from the
development The question is how can they pick up the additional offsite
damage that right be beneficial with the wall in place where it is. He is
aware of it and there will be a requirement for detention for the new
development.
Mrs. Henderson: Do all of these lot sizes confirm to the RUE?
Mr. McCann: At this point we only have a preliminary drawing. They will have to come
back for that at another time. This is justzo ing so we dont have any final
drawings. When the subdivision cores in then they will have to come
back andmeetthoseregnnemerls. Right now they arejust proposing to
scale that this is what could be donee RUF type Hmuly zoning.
18526
Mrs. Henderson:
O.K. Thank you I have nothing else.
Harty Caswell, 29930 Monger. With the road being only 50 fen wide coming in there, it
looks like it is taking part of those lots. The nrnarowud, is that going to be
big enough for fire tracks and emergencies vehicles to come in and make a
turn around down there?
Mr. McCain:
That is what the Fre Department will pass on when they come back for
preluninary plat approval. The Fre Deparhneot will reviewthe plans and
make them comply so that they can access it
Mr. Caswell:
O.K. Thamcyou.
Mr. McCann:
I a ngoivg to go to the petitioner. Is there anything that you would like to
0 us, sit!
Mr. Hurley: Those are legitimate concerns on the drainage but those will be addressed.
You are correct The ordinance does state that we have to contain all the
drainage on our lot and in fact the Wayne County ordinances are even a
little bit morestringent They are real particular about that and I am sure d
will alleviate some of the drainage Haat the neighbors will have. Iluere is
going to be a retention area onthis site so hopefully Htatwill address their
drainage problems.
Mr. McCann: I am going to close the public bearing A motion is in order.
On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Shane and unannnously approved it was
#5-742001 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the
City Planning Commission on May 8, 2001, on Petition 2001-04-01-04 by
Hurley Homes, Inc. requesting to rezone property located on the south side
of Six Mile Road between Middlebelt Road and Oporto Street in the NE.
1/4 of Section 14 from OS to RUFA, the Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council Haat Petition 2001-04-01-04 be
approved for the following reasons:
1. That the proposed change ofzomng is consistent with the prevailing
RUF zoning in the area;
2. That the change ofzoning will provide for lot sizes which are
consistent with the majority of existing lots in this general area;
3. That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony
with the general chmacter of the area; and
4. That the proposed change ofzoning will remove unneeded OS zoning
in the area.
18527
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above heanngwas given m
accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance
#543, as amended.
Mr. McCain: Is there arty discussion? Hearing none, I do have a couple of commeuts
because I don'tthink the comment that Livonia doesn't care about woods
and open space is faun. Livonia is one of the leading rmmwtities will
regard to park]ands, nature preserves and everything else. But anybody
who owns property in this City, has a right to develop it in a reasonable
way. They pay taxes on the property. They, nnpowe then property. Under
the lawym have a rigbt w development A in m appropriate way ifit is not
detrimental to your neighbors. In this instance, the zoning is for OS. It
would be proper for him to put an office building to there. Has petition is
for RUFA, the largest class of zoning for single fine ly residential we have
within the City. I am grog to vote for this because I can'tthink of
anything better to go back in there and to preserve the quiet nature of the
neighborhood than other homes wish larger lots. Will the secretary please
call the roll?
A roll call vote was taken with the following result
AYES: A]anskas, Shane, LaPine, Pieucecchi, Mc Ca®
NAYS: Now
ABSENT: Koons
Mr. McCann, Cbairmao, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted
It will go on to City Caawd with an approving resolution
ITEM #2 PETITION 2001-03-02-05 Haggerty Road Investments
Mr. Piemecehi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-02-05
by Haggerty Road Investments requesting waiver use approval to remodel
and expand an existing building in connection with a proposal to operate a
M service restaurant on property located on the east side of Haggerty
Road between Seven Mile Road and Eight Mile Road in the S.W. 1/4 of
Section 6.
Mr. Poppenger presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the surrounding area.
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina: We have four departmental items of correspondence and a letter from
Arthur O. Carmichael, the petitioner. The fust itent is a letter from the
Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated April 6, 2001, which reads as
Inflows: "Thu office has reviewed the siwplan submitted to connection
with a request to consirwt an addldon ofopproxanately 810 square feet
and remodel the exuhng buddmgfor a restaurant on property located at
18528
the above referenced address. We have no objections to thisproposal"
The letter is sipped by James E. Corcmen, Fire Marshal. The second lett
is from the Engineering Division, dated April 10, 2001, winch reads as
follows: "Pursuant toyour request, the Engineering Division has review ed
the above referencedpetition The Engineering Drvlslon has no objections
in the proposal or the legal deserquien contained therein. However, it los
our understanding that the County a allowing storm sewer discharge into
its storm sewer main located along Haggerty Road We trust that this will
provideyou with the information requested" The leiter is signed by David
Lear, PE, Civil Engineer. The third leis is fr® the Division of Police,
dated April 17, 2001, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed the site
plans for remodeling the existing bufldingfor a restaurant. There is no
indication on the plans submitted for a dece/erahon lane for northbound
traffic turning into the driveway. Due to the traffic volume and congestion
experienced in this area, a deceleration lane u strongly recommended We
have mother objections to the plan as submitted." The letter is signed by
Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau The fourth letter is firm the
Inspection Deparhnevt, dated April 23, 2001, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request ofApril 2, 2001, the above referenced petition
has been reviewed. The following ds noted: (I) This petition, as put
forth, will notpass inspection plan review. This buildings proposed to
undergo a change of usegroup and therefore, most be constructed as
though new in regards an the barrier free and accessibility codes, both
interior and exterior ofthe building. In addition, this plan will not work
as it is lacking the required separate employee restroom (2) This
petition will need the following variances from the Zoning Board of
Appeals (fthe property is G2). (a) Deficient front yard setback 60 feet
required, 25 f feet proposed, deficient 35 f feet (b) Deficient one (l)
ingreWegress driveway. ABndmum two (2) required (40 feet apart), only
one (I) prrvided (3) Eightpoles are in question at 25 feet tall, not 20
feet. (4) The existing parking lot needs to be redone and double striped
The fencing needs an be removed. (S) As stated, this petition meets the
min mum parking requirements. However, we believe the employee
figure to be artficia4 low by a minimum offrve (S) and the serving
counter looks like a bar area Mat will have seats. Therefore, at a
minimum, this petition would need a Zoning variance from the Zoning
Board ofAppeals for deficient parking (a minvnum offrve (S) spaces). If
the counter willhave customers more Man five (S) parking spaces will be
required (6) The dumpster enclosure has no height specified and
should be charified to the Commission and Council's satisfaction. (7) A
note (#Ib) on GI speaks to seeding some areas. This should he changed
m sod Clarification should be obtained on the exaetpercent of
landscaping provided, as itis not dear from the plane. (8) No signage
has been reviewed Thu Department has unfit ther objections to this
petition other than as noted " The letter is signed by Alex Bishop,
Assistant Director of Inspection. We see in receipt of a letter from Arthur
O. Carmichael addressed to the Inspection Deparhnent, dated May 8, 2001,
which reads as follows: "We are in receipt ofyour review letter dated
April 23, 2001, and offer the following comments. (I) The required
18529
separate employee toilet room will be shown on the tenant drawings as
part ofthe tenant food service drawings. (2) Per your advice, we will
seek ZBA approval for both items. (3) Light poles will be 25 feet tall
(4) A civil engineering drawing note calls for double striping ofparking
stabs. Ifyou think this is imujrcien4 the stalls will be redrawn. The
fence will be removed by the end of construction, but might be used to
secure bales ofhay required for erosion control during construction. (5)
The "serving counter" is shown in order to show its position relative to
the tables and booths. It t better noted as "display case" as in most
delicatessens. Amore definitive drawing ofthe display case willbe apart
ofthe tenant food servicedrawings (6) The dumpuer enclosure height
wiBhe afsujrcientheight to hide the dumpsbs. (7) sodwibbe
provided Theperceniage oflandscapings on the civilenghwering
drawings and meets City requirement. (g) Actualsignage t unknown at
this time and willbe presenbd to the City for approvalonce known. We
trust lht response adequately answers your review. Ifnot please so
inform us." The letter is signed by Arthur O. Ca nichael. That is the
exert of the correspondence.
Mr. McCain:
Is the petitioner here this evening
Art Carmichael, general partner for Haggerty Road Investments, 7830 Bambury, West
Bloomfield Ianherehranswermyquestionsymmighthaveorsome
that were brought up, one was the deceleration lane. I wanted one. I
showed one. I submitted it to Wayne County Road Commission and they
told me not to do it. I asked them to re -review R I am willing to spend
more money for a safer situation and they rejected it I went back and
appealed it, informally, and they rejected it They don't warn a
deceleration lane there. I don't know why. I think it is better but they told
mean. I don't kmowwhat to do about that
Mr. McCann:
I think there was a mistake in your letter. You meant that you would go
with a 20 foot light pole instead of 25 feet Is that correct?
Mr. Carmichael:
I an responding to the Building Department
Mr. McCam;
The ordinance requires 20 fret.
Mr. Ca nichael:
They said 25 feet and so I am responding to it I an willing to do nkat
they want us to do. They said they wanted 25 feet
Mr. McCain:
Have you addressed the puking situation?
Mr. Ca nichael:
The puking should be fine. It was my emu and I called that off as a
counter. It was never intended to be a counter. I drew up the tables.
Mr. McCain:
Even without the counter the Inspection Department indicated that you are
still five spaces deficierd.
18530
Mr. Carmichael: No. They said with the canter there would be seals at the canter and
would be five deficient because of that
Mr. McCann:
Is that coned Mr. Taormina? Is he foe deficient with" seats at the
counter or five deficient with the canter?
Mr. Taunton:
I think the Inspection Department has indicated that if, in fact, seats were
going to be placed around the counter, that an additional deficiency would
result In addition to this, they believe that the parking requveumtis
artificially low as a result of the number of employees that were indicated
on the plans and that they believe that to be low by a m ustarm of five.
The deficiency is based on the m ober of employees. The deficiency could
actually increase if, in fact, you include additional seats around the canes.
Mr. McCaw:
What they are saying is that ym are already five short and if ym have
seats around the conte; it is going to create even more shortage.
Mr. Carmichael:
There never was intended to be seats around the counter.
Mr. McCann:
All right Then ym are still five short
Mr. Carmichael:
Then we either have to go to ZBA and ask for a variance or wajust
eliminate the number of seats appropriate to adjust for that We will do
me or the other.
Mr. McCann:
Sir, the addition, how necessary is that? Ym have the upstairs seating
area.
Mr. Carmichael:
That seemed to be the target There are two different people that were
interested to the property. One wanted to buy and me wanted to lease.
Both were looking for about 100 seats. Ibat was what our target was. Itis
a verylimited site. It is a difficult site. I think we did pretty well with
what we have there. If we have to take seats not then we have to do it
That is the bottom line. I suspect we would go to ZBA and at least appeal
it and if it were rejected, we would take out the seats. It is that simple.
Mr. Alaoskas:
Sr,, are you pla®ng on havmg only suc employees?
Mr. Carmichael:
They are not my employees.
Mr. Alanskas:
For the restaurant, it says that there will be six employees, then of course,
you will be mane deficient for parking.
Mr. Carmichael:
Understood. I dml know the exit number the delicatessen would have.
The other people that were involved, there are two people. One is the
Stage Delicatessen and they would like to lease it The other is the Bone
Yard people and they would like to purchase it. So, I would have to query
them and ask them how many employees they have.
18531
Mr. Alanskas: What I sm thinking is, for example, if you have the Bone Yard which is sit
down seating for both places, I can'tvisualize for 100 seats only sift people
taking rare of the whole facility.
Mr. Carmichael:
It depends on how they operate.
Mr. Alanskas:
Ifym go into any average restaurant and it is 100 seats, there is certainly
care than six employees.
Mr. Camtichael:
True. I think that is true of the Bone Yard
Mr. Alanskas: If it is a busy restaurant, you may have six just in the kitchen alone
cocking
-
Mr. Carmichael: It depends on how they operate. I can't answer the question.
Mr. Alanskas: Parking is always a concern no matter where it is and if we are going in
here with five A the very least, six employees, if that figure grows to more,
you could be as far as between 20 and 30 spaces deficient
Mr. Carmichael : Then we would have to sacrifice the seats.
Mr. A]anskas: You know, it is very hard to prove something when you my, "We will do
this on an if come basis." I, as one Commissiorm, like to knmv exactly
what I am voting on and it sounds like tight now that we are saying 'It
could be Ibis" or "It could be that" I don't hike voting on something that is
not cast in cem®t Thank you
Mr. Carmichael:
That is fair.
Mr. Shane:
Do either one of your teuaNs have a problem with cmrmutting to this
absent the approval? If you gave them a contingency deal where if it gets
approved, they can either buy it or lease it are you having a problem
pinning down one ofthem?
Mr. Carmichael:
I don'treally think so.
Mr. Shane:
Wouldn't itbe in your bestinterestto try topin one down sothen ifyou
had to go to the Zoning Board, you would have all of your information as
In how marry seals they want, employees and so Fath
Mr. Carmichael:
I think we will do that One of my difficulties is that I have been out of the
country fora monthand Ijust got back I really didn't have all the time
necessary to prepare for this, nor notify them As you can see my letter
addressed to the Inspection Department is today. You areright and
perhaps the best way to handle this is we have to go to the ZBA for other
ihmgs. When we go to ZBA we will have the exactnumbers.
18532
Mr. Sbane:
I am a little bit reluctant, also, to act on Pols without knowing who A is,
who your tenant is or who your buyer is.
Mr. Carmichael:
At the moment it would be Stage Delicatessen They are the ones who
sent me the letter that they want me to proceed but we dont have a signed
agreemantyet
Mr. Sbane:
Thank you
Mr. LaPme:
One of the problems I have with the location is the way it sits up so high.
You are the highest building along Haggerty Road When you are driving
down Haggerty Road, you really can'tsee the other restaurants because of
Mr. LaPine:
your building. I was reading here a condition m the consentjudgment
states that: "Such proposed waiver use shall be reviewed according to the
following criteria: (1) Compatibility of the proposed use with the goal of
fostafi^g a high quality 'enterlmarroa d district' in the area; and (2)
Mr. Carmichael:
Aesthetic compatibility with umprovemems already conn cted m the
entertainment district" In my opinion, the aesthetic compatibility or
improvements in the district, this is not compatible with the other buildings
in that they are down and you sit up so high. Has there been arty thinking
about tearing the budding down and starting from scratch?
Mr. Carmichael: I asked fin Gl zoning years ago before the lawsuit My intention at that
time was w put in a conanercial building, not a restaumant It was the City
who wanted the restnurmq not me. So I am complying with the City. I am
doing the best I can with that property. I amtrying to satisfy the City in
my mind and evidentially I am not When I was Poere it was a dirt road.
The reason we put the second story on was the mad was so high out in
front of us. We were halfway through construction and Wayne County
came and lowered the mad and now we are high above the road. Had we
known they were going to cut that road down, we probably wouldn't have
built the second story on that building. That was 23 years ago.
Mr. LaPine:
Icanumderstand. Ibis isjust one Planning Commission member. Wheal
drive down there, the first thing I see is the budding. If the building was
Iowa, I don't even know if that is possible because wasp'tthat a water
tower at one time?
Mr. Carmichael:
ILe City owned it The City ofLivoma sold thatto me. It was a water tank
and it supplied the water to the City of Livonia and if anything, we have
been sitting there for 23 years and if things are inconsistent around us, they
dug a hole around us. It is a matter of viewpoint Who is incompatible
with whom?
Mr. LaPine:
Thank you
Mr. Shane:
When you say the City wanted a restamart, could you explain it a little bit
further?
18533
Mr. Carmichael: Drum; the consentjudgment it was the City who, wbm we were
consistently asking for what was acceptable, it was the City who came up
with the restaurant, not us. So we are trying to comply with it I sm trying
the best can and I am having difficulty doing that
Mr. McCann:
I think one of the things of your consaujudgnent was that you would
comply with all the City ordinances with your reslaumvt and you keep
telling us, '711 have a variance here' or'TH need another variance there."
We are seeing that it is not really complying with all of the ordinances like
the Consent Judgnent said it would
Mr. Camucbael:
I really didn'tthink I would have a problem with those two ids that came
U
Mr. McCann:
We're not saying that you are going to. We arejust saying that these are
concerns that we have and we have to look at the whole picture. What
would like to do now is go to the audience firs[ because this is a public
bearing. We wart the audience input We warn your input and I'll give
you the last cormnent afterwards. Bull amjust saying there are legitimate
concerns that we have to look at Nobody is trying to beat up on you or do
anyfhingelse. Wejustwartto see the bestprojecttherepossible.
Mr. Carmichael:
O.K.
Mr. McCain:
Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this
petition? Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing. Nowyon can give
nue any last cormnent that you have, sir.
Mr. Carmichael :
As far as the two items that were brought up for ZBA, I thought it was a
non -issue. I am m engineer. I am in construction but I dont get m on this
end of it The architect annually does and I am blind sided by this part of
the action as part as far as construction. When we purchased the site from
the City it didn't comply with the setbacks at that time and in fact, the
concrete cylinder was there and at that time we went to ZBA and we were
approved for the setback that we have. The addition we are putting on is
behind the setback requirement that is mentioned here. I didn't realize the
whole building had to go behind but the addition, in fact, is. We were
cognizant of that and tried to do that The other issue was there is the fact
thatwehaveadmmgroomupinthe dining room now, barrier free. When
we designed the budding originally, again we put the second story an there
because of the road being so high which vanished on us and disappeared
but we had a drafting room downstairs and a drafting room upstairs so
anybody in a wheelchair could work downstairs in that dashing room So
when we were designing this we said well, "We have a diming room
downstairs and a dining room upstairs", the same kind of scenario. We
didn't think it was an issue. We didn'trealize the use change made you go
back to pount one and start all over agun. So I sm responding to that We
will go back to point one and start all over again. If we are rejected, we are
rejected. We are trying.
18534
Mr. McCain: I know you are. We arejust trying to go through A wilh you Don't get
frustrated
Mr. Carmichael:
Well, A is mish-Aing.
Mr. McCain:
Ifdiere are no further questions, a motion is in order.
Mr. Alanskas:
Mr. Chairman, because of all the questions that we have arising I think this
should be tabled to an indefinite date until we have more particulars in
regards to who is going to have the restaurant
Mr. McCain:
Is Poere a data when you world know when you would be able to 5nalis
negotiations. What we would like to have is a person who is going to be
coating in there. If it is Stage Deli, they will be able to address the number
of employees. They will address the hours and they will give us some
feeling of the type of irnpact that is going to have there.
Mr. Cmmichaeb
So four weeks would be suffuctent time?
Mr. McCain:
Certainly.
On a motion by
Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Shane and approved it was
#5-75-2001
RESOLVED that, pursuant b a Public Hearing having been held by the
City Planning Commission on May 8, 2001, on Petition 2001-03-02-05 by
Haggerty Road Investments requesting waiver use approval to remodel and
expand an existing building in connection with a proposal in operate a fiull
service restaurant on property located on the east side of Haggerty Road
between Seven Mile Road and Eight Mile Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section
6, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that petition 200 1-
lau ingCommissiondcesherebyrecmmnendthatpetition2001-
03-02- 05
03-02-05 be tabled to June 12, 2001.
A roll call was taken with the following result:
AYES: A]ayskas, Sbane, LaPine, Piemecchi, Mc Ca®
NAYS: Now
ABSENT: Now
ABSTAIN: Koons
Mr. McCann, Chairman,
declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted
ITEM #3
PETITION 2001-03-02-06 U -Haul Corporation
Mr. Piemeccbi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-02-06
by U -Haul Corporation iquesting waiver use approval to rent ticks on
property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Stark and
Farmington Roads in the NH 1/4 of Serf cm 33.
18535
Mr. Poppenger presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the surrounding area.
Mr. McCann:
Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina:
There are four ids of correspondence. The fast itent is a letter form Poe
Livania Fre & Rescue Division, dated April 6, 2001, which reads as
follows: "Thu office has reviewed the siteplan submitted in connection
with a request to rent jour trucks on property located at the above
referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal" Thelettaris
signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal- The second item is from the
Engineering Division, dated April 10, 2001, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division hos reviewed the
above referencedpetition. The Engineering Division has no objections to
the proposal at this tune. The jollowmg legal description should be used in
connection with the above referenced pe66on: Em209, except the South
629.00 feet also except the North 27.00 feet of Supervisor's Plat #2, T.
IS, R. 9E, Livonia Township (now Qty of Livonia), Wayne County,
Michigan as recorded in Liber 66, Page 1, Wayne County Record&' We
trust that this will provide you with the information requested" The lister
B signed by David Lear, PE., Civil Engineer. The third liner is from the
Division of Police, Tri fic Bureau, dated April 10, 2001, which reads as
follows: "We have reviewed the proposed site plan far truck rentals. One
handicap parking space a requ redfor this property. (1) The handicap
space must conform to City Ordinance and be individually signed (2)
The property should he adequately lighledfor crime deterrence. We have
no other objections to this proposed site plan." The letter is signed by
Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau The fourth letter is from the
Inspection Department, dated April 23, 2001, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request of April 2, 2001, the above referenced petition
has been reviewed The following is noted: (1) A site visit April 20, 2001
revealed the following conditions: (a) Du rpster enclosure gates all being
left open. (b) Two (2) trees of the previously required landscaping are
rmssing at the rear south property line. (c) The landscaping is ant being
nominated alongside of the east wall of the budding. (d) the parking
spaces arenot being properly utilized (2) The number ofresdal tracks
allowed at any one time should be specified This Deparhnent has no
further objections to this petition other than as noted" 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 evening
has Geiger, representing U -Haul on behalf of Ed Weiss, owner of the property.
Ed Weiss:
Just to correct the record, I am not the owner of the property.I am the
owner of the business on the property.
18536
Mr. McCann: Thank you Are there any additional comments over our presentation, sit!
Mr. Geiger: No. I have no objections to any of the things I heard other than the
handicapped I wasn't aware of that and of the lighting.
Ed Weiss, owner of All Night Auto, 37729 Plymouth Road Justwaddresspartofthe
concern, I believe it was the Inspection Department or Engineering
Deparhnent that said the tushes were missing in the back There is
construction going on back there on property that we don't own. I moved
into that location and took over an empty building on August 18, 2000. In
September they started excavating back there and if any of you have been
back there, I am right next to Woodland Bowling. On the other side of me
is a florist Directly behind me they are budding a building and they
excavated. This is not on the property that I am on. They have unloaded
brick and it has been sitting back there since last September. Notting has
been done. They knocked over those bushes and those bushes died. I can't
do anything until they move everything out of there. Also, the problem
with the dumpsle; I have been having discussions, if you will, as the people
who are doing construction, or whatever, move in and out of there
occasionally. They use my dumpster. We come in in the morning and the
gates to the dumpsfer are open and we close them We do our best There
is no hwb lying around. You didn't hear that It is just the gates and A is a
small dumpster.
Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Cor missiooas?
Mr. Alanskas: Whatpercemageofbsiness areyoulockivg togetfsma this U-Hanlwith
the business thatyou have now!
Mr. Weiss:
Very small. As you heard we are only looking to have four trucks there.
We are not looking to have a huge U -Haul center there. The reason is that
we have had numerous requests. Nmetv-sixpercemofourctiemeleare
Livonia residents. We have had numerous requests from clientele, from not
only residents but business owners. We have commercial accounts who
need to replace trucks that are being serviced for a day, that type of thing.
We have numerous requests firm residents rowing kids in and out of
college, parents in and am of homes, people rowing info the area and that
type of thing. We are only looking to have four trucks there at arty given
time.
Mr. Alanskas:
You say four trucks, sav that you open A 8:00 in the morning and by 10:00
am you have rented all four trucks and you get more calls for more U -
Hauls. What would you do, get another four!
Mr. Geiger
No. It would be whataver is available no the lot that would be available for
himmuse.
Mr. Alanskas:
But could he get another 4, or 5 or 10 from somewhere else?
18537
Mr. Geiger: Not under normal circumstances for local, no. He could have trucks
delivered there for another customer if it was a one-way trip out of town.
Mr. A]anskas:
When people return these trailers, is it feasible that even through he only
has four spots, that he could get as high as 15 or 20 U -Hauls returned?
Mr. Geiger:
Not normally.
Mr. A]anskas:
Butcouldthathappen?
Mr. Geiger:
Itwould be highly unlikely and the reason is, I would take me ofour
eters, which are high volume centers, and we normally get 10 to 13 into a
center, as an independent dealership I would be tickled to death to see that
many come in from any dealer but I dont think that is ever going to happen.
Mr. Alaoskas:
What hours can the people return the U -Hauls, up to what time?
Mr. Geiger:
That can be either way. We've got what is considered a drop box so they
could do it anytime during the evening if they wanted to, if he goes with the
drop box or they could be restricted to the opening hours.
Mr. Alaoskas:
With the drop box, how would these people know where to park the trucks?
Could they put them anywhere in the lot or an someone else's property if it
was easier to do instead of backing up where this spot would be?
Mr. Geiger:
In reality, they probably will drop them m a place that is very easy and
accessible w get out of and they probably will not try and put them into a
parking space.
Mr. Alanskas:
But they could drop them off anywhere at all?
Mr. Geiger:
Yes sir.
Mr. Alauskas:
Thankyou.
Mr. Piercecchi:
How did this request for storage originate, the request from U -Haul?
Mr. Weiss
'IherequestwasnIfrom U -Haul. Iherequestwasfrommeandthisstarted
with me because of the requests I was getting from my clientele. I never
in my wildest imagination thought about renting any mucks but webejust
gotten numerous requests for track rental from or clientele and again, as I
said, it really came from people this past Septerber, moving kids in and
out of college. Over the wintertime, in Livonia's older established area,
there are a lot of people that go to Florida for the winter. We have requests
to rent small trucks to go down to Florida, not trailers but trucks. We've
bud that type of thing. Again, as Mr. Geiger said, and I dont mean to
impress you that I have 10 to 15 requests per week I don't That is not
true.
18538
Mr. Piemeceld If hear von correctly, sir, you are going to in effect have another rental
facility only on a small scale.
Mr. Weiss:
No s¢ You mean another bolding?
Mr. Piemecchi:
Itis a rental facility. ILese four trucks, who is going m oau these trucks,
You?
Mr. Weiss:
LT -Hand. I would be an independent dealer for U -Haul
Mr. Piemecchi:
Does itregiwe special licensing for that?
Mr. Weiss:
No,just an agreement between IJ -Had and myself.
Mr. Piereecchi
You mean the state or the City doesn'trequre arty special licensing?
Mr. Weiss:
No sir. This is the only special permit that I need
Mr. Piemecchi:
One of the concerns that I have is that down the street we have a U -Haid
facility down there that is really very crowded all the time and I don'tthink
any numbers were ever specified when that area was granted as a storage
facility.
Mr. Geiger:
I think you are refcvring to Ryder.
Mr. Piemecchi:
That is correct. That is what I am referring to at Shark and Plymouth It is a
very crowded facility. Itis almost impossible to drive through it.
Mr. Geiger:
Ijust speak for them.
Mr. Weiss:
That is Budget, not U -Haul.
Mr. Geiger:
They are a competitor of ours and I guess they recognize the need because
they have a lot of trucks there.
Mr. Piemecchi:
Do you think this would have arty negative effects an Plymouth Road,
which a lot of time and money are being invested in that road?
Mr. Weiss:
No I dont Iwouldn't be here if thought that was the case. I am
business owner and this is very minor to wbatmy business is. Thos is an
accommodation to my clientele and to have four trucks as a max, at any
given time.
Mr. Piemecchi:
How are you going to guarantee that?
Mr. Weiss:
That is what my application is for. I would assume that is what I will be
approved for. I don't have a background of not abiding by the laws. I
assume there is an Inspection Department and I would assume there is a
barna rthatwill comedown mine if don't abide bythe laws. Iamnot
18539
looking to have a problem over a LF -Had. Do you know what I mean? I
donrphm cn having arty more than fom tmcks. Itis is not my main
business. There is not enough involvement to get into unable with this.
Mr. Piemerchi:
The reason why I ask that is because you door really have a ton of parking
w itis. Ifyou tried to get 10 tracks in you woddnr be able w handle your
ovn business, W.
Mr. Weiss:
I duitneed a lot of parking. I have 20 spots and if you see those parking
spot, they are generous. They are not all crammed in. They are 20' plus X
8'. If arty of you have ever passed by the facility, you wi➢ notice that since
we have been open at any given time in the lot masa ma we've had 10
tacks.
Mr. Piemecchi:
At ora study meeting I brought up the subject of screening. Do you think
those trucks should be screened Behind you there is a wall and there are
residences, correct, east?
Mr. Weiss:
East? There is no wall. East. I can look all the way down to Buddy's
parking lot
Mr. Piemecchi:
There is an wall behind that!
Mr. Weiss:
No sm. I start right up to whoevers property line A is which is a florist and
they atart right up to Buddy's. There are all kinds of commercial traffic. On
the other side of me is Woodland Lanes and they've got more beer and wine
trucks coming in and out of there all day long
Mr. Pie cecchi:
This is a waiver but it will probably have to go to the ZBA, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. McCann:
Forwfiat? Wearegivinghimthewaiver.
Mr. Weiss:
It is my understanding that we are coned correctly. Wejustneed a special
use perm t
Mrs. Koros:
Mr. Geiger, is there a typical number for bucks, 4 trucks, 5 trucks or 1
truck Is there a typical member?
Mr. Geiger:
The typical member depends on the age of the dealer. They tend to get more
secure and have more clientele as the years go by. Normally starting art
you arelooking at abort two trucks. ILere are two different factors
involved m U -Haul. Ibere is the local Easiness and there is the one way
business. Ibe local is done, obviously, with a truck on site. Then the one-
way business is done with trucks being sent to the location for the customer.
Mrs. Koros:
Then do you monitor that centrally or does the business owner!
Mr. Geiger:
Yes through the business with a computer on site.
18540
Mr. Weiss:
Not yet
Mr. Geiger:
But there would be a computer there that would hook into our cenhal.I
would not be concerned with the four hocks going to seven or eight First
of all, if it does ever do that, all you have to do is call us and they will be
gone.
Mrs. Koos:
And how far away would they ger?
Mr.Geiger:
Inkster would be closes[ to the center. We also have owe in Redford.
Mrs. Koos:
Mr. Weiss, is the handicapped space a problem?
Mr. Weiss:
It is there already. I am glad you mentioned that The lot is striped. The
handicapped space is painted and marked It was already done when I
moved in.
Mrs. Koons:
Mark, does that mean we are looking at an additional handicapped space?
Mr. Taornvna:
Itjust says that the handicap space must conform to the City ordinance and
must be individually signed Whether or not it was based an the Traffic
Bureau's inspection of the site is not indicated It couldjust be stated as a
reminder.
Mrs. Koons:
O.K. Thanks. I have a request to the staff that we look into the abutting
property problems with bricks lying around so this gentleman can replace
the trees that need to be replaced.
Mr. Weiss:
There are two bushes m the back and it is where they are excavating, not
where they have all the bricks, 95 feet behind there.
Mrs. Koos:
But you cant do anything until they are fmshed?
Mr. Weiss:
Ob, I could. I could do it mmomrw if that is what you want but I know they
would disappear.
Mrs. Koos:
O.K 'hawk you
Mr. LaPine:
Right now you operate a repay shop.
Mr. Weiss:
Yes sir.
Mr. LaPine:
You have customers come m from time to lure, commercial especially, and
they need a truck to replace a truck that is in your facility to be repaired.
Mr. Weiss:
It is not especially. It is split 50/50 that the requests are made.
18541
Mr. LaPine: You are not out there advertsing you are renting bucks. These are strictly
for your customers. Is there going to be a sign out there saying,'rU-Hauls
forrenthere."
Mr. Weiss:
There will be a decal, not a sign. I coal put up any additional signs. I am at
my signage limit now.
Mr. LaPine:
I can be assured that if we approve only four vehicles and today you have
six people that are in your esFeblishment and all six of them need a buck,
four of them get a track and the other two you coal help out Is that
correct?
Mr. Geiger:
Four would be the max that we would be able to help.
Mr. LaPine:
These are strictly local, nobody can rent a track from here and take it from
here to another state and leave it',
Mr. Geiger:
There are two different ways to handle R
Mr. LaPine:
I understand you told me there are ttvo differeatways. But this location
would be strictly local?
Mr. Geiger:
Yes sir.
Mr. LaPine:
If a track was not ranted at this location and somebody wants to return it,
can they retvn it In this ]oration?
Mr. Geiger:
Yes. In the U -Haul system they can return A to any location in the United
States.
Mr. LaPine:
My question gels back to, if you have only four tracks there, but two people
come there and want to return tacks that did not rent them fromthere, than
Pve got six tracks.
Mr. Geiger:
If the four are still an sem? Yes sir. Yoube got a legdon de question If
there are four tracks there and two people reI n trucks you have a total of
six In that situatim we can either call Redford and they cm be here m five
minutes.
Mr. LaPine:
That is the questionI wanted answered ]hereis a possibility that there
could be more than four at anv one time and he has to call someone and
they have to come and pick them up.
Mr. Geiger:
Yes.
Mr. LaPine:
Will they be picked up within a reasonable amount of time, twelve hours,
twanty-fora hams?
18542
Mr. Geiger: Trucks are very valuable to U -Haul so yes, they will be picked up almost
i®adiaRly.
Mr.LaPme:
WegotirRothisproblemwith Budget We really got snookered and before
we koew it, we had twice w many trucks w r thmghtwe were going to
have there and this is what worries me wben we talk about only four trucks
that he is going to have. That he is going to lease but there is always the
possibility that people can return a truck there and we dual know how many
of those people it is going to be. It could be one. It could be two. It could
be never ending but Ijust want to make sure I understand it
Mr. Geiger:
As anile, dealers do not get a lot of trucks returned. Most of the time the
trucks are sent in to cents. It is just the nature of the business and if a
contract is being set up in California they are probably going to look up and
say, "There is one in Redford. Fine, that is pretty close and that is where it
goy,
Mr. LaPive:
O.K. Thank you
Mr. Alaaskas:
Of the four trucks, what class would these tacks be?
Mr. Geiger:
We go by footage. A ten foot tack which is a small tack a fourteen foot
truck a seventeen foot truck a 24 foot truck and a 26 foot truck.
Mr. Alaaskes:
I am going by weight Class I is 6,000 pounds, Class II is 6,000 to 10,000
pounds. Class IB is 10,000 to 14,000 pounds.
Mr.Geiger:
The randnuanwoukl be the JH, which is a 26 feet and Poatis going to run
18,000 pounds. That is 10% ofU-Haul's business.
Mr. ellansskas:
18,000 pounds, that would be a Class VI.
Mr. Geiger:
Chances of those being there are slim
Mr. Alaaskas:
Whatdoyouthingwillbethere? Whatsis?
Mr. Geiger:
The fnuteen and the seventeen.
Mr. Alaaskas:
That would be the Class III, 10,000 to 14,000?
Mr. Geiger:
That would be right aramd 10,000.
Mr. Alaaskas:
All right Thank you
Robert Okerstmm, 13520 Merriman, Livonia I am an up and naming U-Hml dealer in the
City of Livonia right now, for the lasttwelve months. I put a call into Joe.
Because of my contract and payment, it says I am the only one in the City
of Livonia. Obviously, that is not right My point is, do you wart a truck
rental on every major thoroughfare in Livonia?
18543
Mr. McCann: Two issues you brought forlh, me, whether or not the location is
appropriate. We coal interfere with people's rights to do business with the
City and we have no right to say, "We can only have two truck renals but
we can have 10 McDonalds and 34 pharmacies." We are in a situation of
looking at whether or not this area is appropriate zu ing for the type of use
he has. Now, comments addressed to that issue we can deal with whether
or not you have a contract with U -Had as to being the sole location within
the City, I think that is something between you and U -Had.
Mr.Okershom: Hereistbecontrzct
Mr. McCann: I was just saying that is not something we need to deal with here at the
Planning Commissim
Mr. Okershom:
I never got an answer so I thoughtI would get one today.
Mr. Geiger:
I think that is a moot point because he is petitioner comber far and I think
he is applying for space for storage.
Mr. McCann:
You know what gentlemen, Please address the Planning Commission and
please keep to the issue at hand and that is whether or not this location is
appropriate for the U -Haul waiver use.
Mr. Okershom:
Tbat is a11I have.
Mr. McCain:
Is there anybody else in the audience who wishes to speak for or against this
petition' Seeing nobody, I will give the last comment to the petitioners. Is
there anything additional that we haven't heard that we need to hear?
Mr. Geiger:
No Sr.
Mr. Weiss:
No. Sr.
Mr. McCann:
I will close the pubkc hearing A motion is in order.
On a motion by Mr. Pietcecchi, seconded by Mrs. Koros and approved it was
#5-762001RESOLVED
that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the
City Planning Coamussion on May 8,200 1, on Petition 2001-03-02-06 by
U -Haul Corporation requesting waiver use approval to rent trucks on
property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Stark and
Partington Roads in the NH 1/4 of Section 33, the Planning Cominssion
does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2001-03-02-06 be
approved subject to the following conditions:
1. That Poe maximum nnmber of rental tanks to be parked on Poe site at
any one time shall be limited to far (4);
18544
2.
That the parking of rental trucks shall ocau only wilbin Poe designated
Mr. McCain:
parking spaces located in the rear parking lot adjacent to the east
Mr. Alawkas:
property line as shown on the site plan submitted with this request
3.
That the prohibition ofoveraight outdoor parking or storage of vehicles
on the site, imposed by Council Resolution #873-98 in connection with
Petition 98-8-2-15 which pemtitted the vehicle repair business
currently existing on the subject site, is amended to the extent that A
Mr. LaPine:
conflicts with conditions (1) and (2) above;
4.
Thin the dumpsiar enclosure gates shall be properly maimained and,
wbm not in use, closed at all tomes;
5.
That any lighting equipment provided on the subject site shall be
shielded from adjacent properties, and all light standards shall not
exceed 20 feet in height; and
6.
That the largest rental vehicle to be parked on the subject property
would be a tock with a hotel overall length of 27 feet
For the following reasons:
1. That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the special and
general waiver use standards and requirement as set forth in Section
11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance 4543;
2. Thin the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed
use: and
3. That the proposed use is compatible to and inbarmovy with the
adjacent 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. Geiger:
The 27 foot is the bad size. The truck is just about 32 feel
Mr. McCain:
Is there any discussion?
Mr. Alawkas:
I fir one am going to vole an on this because I know we are starting with
only fru trucks and by listening to the petitioner and the gentleman firm
U -Haul that this could be a growing business and it could go from 4 to 6,
from 6 to 8, 8 hr10 and Ijust don't think we need a U -Haul or any other
additional tock rental on Plymouth Road.
Mr. LaPine:
Iam also goingtovote against onthe fnctfl t, number one,Ijustthink
we are spending so much money on Plymouth Road We've got a truck
rental business right down the street from here and I dual think we need
18545
another one. Thirdly, the fact that when the repair facility was approved
there, there was a condition in the original approval that there shall be no
overnight or outdoor storage of vehicles on the site and I think this
contradicts what was approved when the repair facility went m there.
Therefore, I an going to be voting against this.
Mr. McCann: I am going to be voting in favor partly because I do have a lot of the same
concems, as Mr. Alanskas and Mr. Supine. We all feel like we got a little
boned by the rental service down the street from you They told us they
were going to limit the number of trucks to be under 10 at arty one time. It
wasn't in writing and in this instance it is going to be n wrung and you are
going to be hunted to four. If it grows and you need more or if you have a
problem with having more trucks on there, we would have to relook at the
issue. As long as A is ]etited to fan and that you immediately return the
out of state vehicles to either Inkster or Redford, which makes sense to me,
they cant re-matthem if they dont have them Youwauldthmkthey
would want to get them out of there right away. I dont believe fan would
be a problem and I think it would benefit the neighbors m that area and for
your customers. Will the secretary please call the roll?
A roll call vote was taken with the following result
YES: Piemecchi, Koros, Shane, McCann
NAYS: Alanskas, LaPine
ABSENT: Now
Mr. McCam, Chairmam, declared the nation is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution
ITEM #4 PETITION 2001-04-02-07 Robert Okerstrom
Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-04-02-07
by Robert Okerstrom requesting waiver use approval to utilize a porion of
property at 13520 Menimm for an RV, boat and travel hailer outdoor
storage facility to be located an property an the east side ofMerrim m
Road between SchoolcraR and Plymouth Roads in the N.W. 1/4 of Section
26.
Mr. Poppenger presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zming
of the surrounding area.
Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Tanmina: There are four ids ofcomespondence. The fust one is a letter from the
Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated April 12, 2001, which reads as
Inflows: r7hu office has reviewed the siteplan submitted m connectun
with a request to store RV, boat (aver 20 feet) and traler on property
/ocatedat the above referenced address. We have no objectuns to this
18546
proposal with thefollowing stipulations: (1) Provide adequate number of
fire hydrants with spacing consistent with commercialproperty (300'
within arty point ofsite). (2) Provide access in the form off re hent&
Arty cul-de-sac or turnaround should accommodate emergency vehicles
with a wall to wall turning radius ofat least 45 feet." the letter is signed
by James E. Caveman, Fre Marshal. The second letter is from the
Division of Police, dated April 16, 2001, which reads as follows: "We
have reviewed the site plim in connection with a proposalfor a RV, boat,
and trader outdoor storagefacility. We have one concern regarding the
security of the factlity at the gate on the east side of the property where the
wooded two acre lot is. We wouldrecommend that there be an gate on the
east side since this wouht possibly be the fust point for an unlawful entry
onto the property. Ifremoval ofthe gate is not possible, we would then
recommend that a monsoon often feet ofground be kept clear along the
east side of the fence line in order to discourage break-in attempts by using
the wooded mea for concealment We have mother objections to this
proposal " The letter is sipped by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic
Bureau. The ihmd letter is from the Enginrig Division, dated April 17,
2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering
Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. The following
approximate legal description should be used in connection with the above
referenced propos al: 'That part of the N. W. 114 of Section 26, T. IS., 11.
9t,, City ofLiawma, Wayne County, Michigan, more particularly
described as beginning at a point distant due south, 1,001.80 feet from
the Northwest comer ofSection 26 and proceeding thence due South,
100 feet,; thence due Eas;1,788.91 feet,' thence North 0029'56" Ea%4
200.01 feet,; thence due Wes41,290.65 feet,'theme due South 100.00
feet; thence due West 500. 00feet to the point ofbegimeing except the
West 1,45500 feet also except theEast 217.80 feet thereof.' We have no
objections to the proposal, but it is our understandng local ordinances
require parking areas to be paved and to provide for storm drainage for
the paved areas. Ifstorm water drainage a to be required the developer
will need in either obtain apermit from Wayne County to conevel the
parking lot drainage to they storm sewer system or obtain an easement
from neighboring properties to connect the storm drainage to the City of
Livoma's storm system located approximately 200 feet South of the subject
property. We trust that this will provide you with the information
requested" The letter is signed by David Lear, P.E, Civil Engineer. The
fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated April 23, 2001,
which reads as Hallows: "Pursuant in your request of April 6, 2001, the
above referenced petition has been reviewed The following a noted (1)
A site visit (April 20, 2001) revealedpet4ioner is already conducting this
business. There arepiles ofserap, old vehicles junk vehicles and stared
vehicles now on the property. The barbed wire is currently in plan. (2)
This petition will need a variance porn theZoning Board ofAppeals as
the primary building is nonconforming due to a deficient front yard
.setback: required 100 fee; existing 44 feet, deficient 56feet (3) This
petition will also require the hatowing variances from the Zoning Board
ofAppeals: (a) Defident the hard surfbce afthe entire lot or parcel (not
18547
just gravelor stone as indicated). (b) Deficient Landscaping. The eni re
pont yard must be Landscaped and no other plan has been presented for
review. (c) Barbed wire fence is not allowed The plan also has
inconsistencies as to height ofthe fence. (4) The site plan is very
rudimemary. Where are the drains going? Where is the access to the
proposed storage? This plan should be clar#led and detailed property
and then resubmitted with aft required information provided -including
all buildings now on this property -for a further review. this
Department has no farther objections to this petition." The letter is signed
by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director ofImpection. That is the extent of the
correspondence.
Mr. McCann:
Is the petitioner here this evening?
Robert Okerstrom, 13520 Merriman Road.
Mr. McCann:
Sir, would you like to address some of the issues.
Mr. 01e- tr m:
The lad me from Mr. Bishop, I deal understand We deal have myjunk
vehicles, as he says. We don't have arty scrap at all. So I'm not sure what
thatmeans. Every vehicle on au property, that doesn't belong to the
company is licensed and insured. Dat is a must and all of our vebicles
are licensed and have been insured So, I don't know where that statement
comes been. I don't know where the piles of scrap are. We do recycle
aluminum Unless he was there when we were recycling. Idon't know.
That is part of the business also. As far as the drainage, the drainage
hasn't been in there for 10 years, I think So it is not a problem Ihave a
sketch here if you would like to look at it As far as the landscaping, the
existing office building that we occupy has not been landscaped for years.
So don't exactly know what that means either. That parking area is 700
feet off of Marmon Road It is in the middle of my properties. So,I
don't know exactly what he is saying there. As far as the gate to the
wooded lot, that is a man gate that put in so I can inspect my property
back there because it has been violated by commercial dumping for the
last seven years and wejust caught them last December. Thstgateisused
by me to inspect the property. It is chained and locked so there is nobody
getting in there but me. The wooded area is two acres that goes to
Industrial Road As far as the parking area, it is lighted Itwas done by
Edison. The drainage is proper. It is all pitched It has two inches of clay
topping with 12 inches base. It has four inches of 1 x 3 gravel with two
inches of quarter by three quarter limestone on top of R So it is very
solid. We use it for the company until we down sized and we don'twe it
any longer. The purpose of this parking area started out with the company
employees. Then I saw that some tax burden could be relieved there so I
kind of opened it to the public a bit It seems to be working quite well.
Mrs. Koons:
Mr. Okersurm, the gate, you are calling it a man gate. Does did mean A
is a door size?
18548
yh Okerstmrn: It is a three-foot gate. Yes
Mrs. Koons:
I am hearing, in a lot of the reports that it needs to be a hard surface. Are
you considering limestone a hard surface? Should I consider limestone a
hard surface?
Mr. Okerstrom:
Yes. If you are building a mad, that is the basis of your road before you
put black top over it To black top four acres is quite an expense. As far
as the surface now, it is as hard as concrete. The drainage is perfect
There is no water standing at all. We built A ourselves. We are general
contractors so we know what we are doing It is sufficient
Mrs. Koros:
Thankyou.
Mr. Shane:
The parcel that we are tailing about, this is not a separate tax parcel is it?
Mr. Oknrstrom
No.
Mr. Sbane:
Ib you know how many RVs you can park in this site?
Mr. Okerstrom:
200. It is 650' X 2001.
Mr. Shane:
Thaukyou.
Mr. Alanskas:
IIowmany doyouhave there now! fhwmanyareyoutakingforrental
therenow!
Mr. Okerstrom:
There are probably 20 private owners.
Mr. Alanskas:
Unfortunately, I did not get a chance to get there before tonighPs meeting
Will you also be taking popcorn machines, hike the storage place on
Eckles Road?
Mr. Okerstrom:
No.
Mr. Alanskas:
It will be strictly RVs and boats?
Mr. Okerstrom:
It will be anything over 20 feet I dont want rowboats and little trailers
and snow machines and things like that Somebody that has a 20 foot
hailer generally takes care of it and generally looks after it and that is
what I warn
Mr. Alanskas:
Are the people that read there allowed to go during the winter in case they
want to go and see thein vehicle or RV and work an it, or whatever!
Mr. Okerstrom:
We have two roads, actually it is a cul-de-sac road to the south. It is 45
feet and to the north it is 45 feet so the entire road is about 90 feet wide.
It goes up to the back east fence and is a cul-de-sac.
18549
Mr. Alanskas:
But ifit is locked, how would they get in there?
Mr. Okerstrom:
The main gate is locked. Ihat is the east fence going into the woods.
Mr. Alanskas:
So you are saying there is an area that is open where anybody can walk in
there?
Mr. Okerstrom:
Off ofMemman, you can drive in there. We keep the roads clear.
Mr. Alanskas:
Are there my theft problems with rentals?
Mr. Okmstrom:
We had one theft last year and it was one of our lessee's employees that
broke into his vehicle and that was about the size of it
Mr. Alanskas:
Has the Police Depaztnent ever had to go there for any problems?
Mr. Okers orm:
Just for that one break-in. We didn'twantto get involved in that
Mr. Alanskas:
Was there a Police report taken on that?
Mr. Okmstrom:
I think there was.
Mr. Alanskas:
Ibmkyou.
Mr. Stone
What are the lighting facilities for Pois particular location? Do you have
lighting facilities?
Mr. 01 e-�m:
Yes we do. On that little sketch I gave you there are three poles running
down through the center with dual lights on each side. They cover 150
fret each side. It actually scans 150 feet circumference. It looks like
Brick Stadium at night
Mr. Shane:
Do you have barbed wire on the fence?
Mr. 01e- tr m:
We have barbed wire all the way except to the south which the person that
owns that property now didnI agree with putting barbed wire up so we
didn't do it
Mr. Shane:
Do you have a problem with talong that down?
Mr. Okerstrom:
Taking the barbed wire down? Do I have a problem with it?
Mr. Shane:
Yes.
Mr. Okerstrorc
Why? Is necessary?
Mr. Shane:
It could be. We generally have a problem with the barbed wire because of
the safely of the kids and that kind of Poing.
18550
Mr. Okersuma
It is an industrial area What would kids be doing there?
Mr. McCann:
The problem is that kids get in to there at night and get caught in it Kits
will do bad thing,..
Mr. Okerstrom:
Yeah. I am aware of that
Mr. McCann:
The City ordinance now, I believe, prohibits barbed wire.
Mr. Okerstron:
The guy that put the fence up was supposed to have been pemdtad. Is it
illegal for industrial properties to have it?
Mr. McCann:
No. Industrial is one area where you can have it
Mr. Okerstrom:
That is what I thought We did it because of what I explained to you
earlier. WerraimainedthatpropertyurNlwedownsized. Itisjust
vacant So I decided to do this.
Mr. LaPine:
Do you still opemb your roofing company out of there?
Mr. Okerstrom:
Inver did. That is my brother's. Are you tallying about my father's
business?
Mr. LaPine:
Yes. HowloW have you been using this as a stmege for renw?
Mr. Okerstrom:
For employees, aboutime months, for the general public, maybe six
months.
Mr. LaPine:
Do they lease these on a seasonal basis or is Ajust monthly?
Mr. Okerstro n:
Yearly.
Mr. McCann:
If there are no firrlher questions from the Commissioners, I am going to
go b the audience. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for
or against this petition? Seeing nobody, I will close the public hearing A
motion is in order.
Mr. Alanskas:
I would like to table this petition pending receipt of a properly developed
site plan. I dont call this a site plan
Mr. Okerstrom:
That is a rough sketch I put together.
Mr. Alanskas:
I am sure you are in no hurry because you are already doing this. It will
be up to us to get a date where you could get a site plan and through the
Chart, I would like to see exactly what percent of landscaping he has in
the front of the office now In see if he complies with the 15%. I want b
make sure he is in compliance. Is you landscapingirrigated?
Mr. Okerstrom:
Yes. We are under a sprinkler system
18551
Mr. McCann: Mr. Taormina, as long as we under the process, he can continue to operate
as he is, correct?
Mr. Taormina:
I am not aware of any enforcemeu t action involving this property but itis
ldcely the conditions could be maintained as is. He should not lease any
more space out there without having the proper approval.
Mr. Shane:
The landscaping requirement, are they referring to this specific property
or the entire property together?
Mr. Twmnna:
The m lication is that the deficiency exists in the front yard of this
property which I believe would be the area between Memmw Road and
the building of the office.
Mr. Sbane:
So we are tallong about the office?
Mr. Taomana:
Ibelieve so.
Mr. Shane:
That is why I asked whether this was a separate tax parcel.
Mr. Okerstrom:
Wejustwent through with a 40' X 50' addition on our building and they
said it was O%., landscaping and all.
Mr. McCann:
How sow would it take you to get a plan drawn up that is going to be
little bit more to scale? What other conditions were we talking about?
Mr. Alanskes:
Instead of gravel, something else for the lot
Mr. McCann:
I think we need a recommendation from Engineering whether that would
constitute a hard surface.
Mr. Taw arric
The ordinance is quite specific as to the type of surface material and that
is that it either be concrete or a plant mixed bituminous material.
Mr. McCann:
So it is either concrete or asphalt?
Mr. Tacmmma
Yes. I think that was the indication by the Inspection Department and
they would have to seek a variance for the washed limestone that they are
showing on the plan
Mr. McCann:
The ZBA could grantthe crushed limestone',
Mr. Tacmmma
Yes. I think that was the indication
Mr. McCann:
That is something thatwe will have to look at ourselves. My conrsn was
also that there was some question with regard as to the adequacy of the
light pales. Are they wooden fight pales at this point?
18552
Mr. Okerstrem: No. They were put up by Edison.
Mr. McCann: O.K.
Mr. Okerstsmm: I have a light scheme ifyou need it
On a motive by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Piemecchi and unanimously approved it was
#5-77-2001 RESOLVED that, pmvaR to a Public Hearing having been held by the
City Planning Commission on May 8,200 1, on Petition 2001-04-02-07 by
Robert Okentrom requesting waiver use approval to utilize a portion of
property at 13520 Merriman for an RV, boat and travel hailer outdoor
storage facility to be located on property on the east side ofMerriman
Road behveen Schoolmfr and Plymouth Roads in the N.W. 1/4 of Section
26, the Pla i ^g Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 2001-04-02-07 be tabled July 10, 2001.
Mr. McCam, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopt-&
ITEM #5 PETITION 2001-02-03-01 Thomas & Sherry Louisigna
Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-02-03-01
by Thomas and Sherry Louisigna requesting to vacate a 12' wide easement
running east and west on the south border on their property located A
11446 Loveland (Lot 1638 of the Rosedale Gardens No. 9) in the N.W. 1/4
of Section 34.
Mr. Poppenger presented a map showing the property under petition plus the exishug noting
of the surrounding area.
Mr. McCain: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina: Them is a letter from the Engineering Divisiou dated Marl 7, 2001,
which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering
Division has reviewed the above referencedpe6doa Please be advised
that the 6' backyard easement has an exuarg (in use) sanitary main and
cannot be vacated Astor the 12' wide rode yard easement, the City has no
utilities in this area however, a fw1d inspection revealed the existence of
Detroit Edison overhead liner within the easement Please contact Detroit
Edison for their opinion as to the vacating of the 12'side yard easement.
For the 12'side yard easement, the following legal description should be
used. 'The South12 feet ofthe following described parcel Lot1638,
Rosedate Garden No. 9, part of the NW. 114 ofSedion 34, T. IS., R. 9E.,
City of Livonia Wayne County, Michigan, as recorded in Liber 73, Page
41 of Way" County Record&' We Gust that this will provide you with the
information requested." The letter is signed by Jahn P. Hill, Assistant City
Engineer.
18553
Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? I dont see the petitioner. Are there
arty comments or questions from the Conwissioners? If there are no
questions, I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience
wishing to speak for or against this petition? Seeing nobody, I will close
the public hearing.
Mr. Lupine: I have no objection and I wdl make an approving resolution only that it is
approved based on the fact that they get approval of the mtility
On a motive by Mr. LaPorte, seconded by Mr. Shane, and unanimously approved it was
#5-7g-2001 RESOLVED that, pmsiam to a Public Hearing having been hell by the
City Planning Conwission on May 8,200 1, on Petition 2001-02-03-01 by
Thomas and Sherry Louisiana requesting to vacate a 12' wide easement
running east and west on the south border on their property located A
11446 Loveland (Lot 1638 of the Rosedale Gardens No. 9) in the N.W. 1/4
of Section 34, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 2001-02-03-01 be approved, assuming there are
no objections from any public utility company, for the following reasons:
1. That there are no City maintained utilities within the subject easement
2. Ted the land area covered by the subject easemeratcan be more
advantageously uNized by the property owner if un -encumbered by the
easement and
3. That the City Engineer has no objections to the proposed vacating.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above bearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code
or Ordinances.
Mr. McCaw, Chaumont, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopt-&
ITEM#6 PETITION 2001-03-06-02 City Planning Commission
(Home Businesses)
Mr. Piemeccbi, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-06-02
by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution 945-01,
and Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance 4543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City
of Livonia, as amended, to amend Section 4.02 of Article IV of the Zoning
Ordinance to establish various reshictions in connection with home
businesses.
Mr. Taonniw: Council Resolution 4877-00, adopted on December 11, 2000, requested the
Law Department to prepare a proposed amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance in connection with home businesses. This proposed language
amendment is designed to establish new restrictions that would make home
18554
occupations more compatible and harmonious with single -Family districts.
It would also clean-up the existing language of Sections 2.08(4), which
provides for a definition of home occupation and Section 4.02(8) which
eslablisbes and governs all permitted accessory buildings and uses in the
single family districts, including home occupations. The ordinance is
based on the premise that home occupations are best controlled through a
strict set of performance standards rather than establishing a list of
permitted home occupations or professions. Thus, instead of listing the
various types of home businesses, the proposed ordinance attempts to
impose reasonable conditions and restrictions and prohibits those general
activities that are likely to be incompatible to a neighborhood setting.
Mr. McCain: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak for or against this
petition? Seeing nobody, I will close the public hearing. Amotion ism
order.
On a motion by Mrs. Koons, seconded by Mr. Alanskas and unanimously approved it was
#5-79-2001 RESOLVED that, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that
Petition 2001-03-06-02 by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to
Council Resolution #45-01, and Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance #543, the
Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, to amend Section
4.02 of Article IV of the Zoning Ordinance to establish various restrictions
in connection with home businesses, the Planning Commission does
hereby recovmrend to the City Council that Petition 2001-03-06-02 be
approved subject to the following conditions:
1. That the proposed language amendment will address the issue ofhome
businesses by regulating those areas which present the potential for
conflicts with the residential nature of the zoning district;
2. That Poe proposed language amaidment will control or prohibit those
general activities likely to prove obnoxious to residential neighbors and
will coram mtrictions that will immunize disruptions to the
neighborhood; and
3. That the proposed language amendment is consistent with the indent
and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance, which among other things, is to
protect the health, safety and welfare of its cities.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above bearing was given
in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning
Ordinance 4543, as amended.
Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion. Hearing none, Ijust have one comment I
flunk it is a needed improvement I like the language and it does not
affect the family day care ordinance or the group day care home
ordinance, which we did so much work on last year. Will the secretary
please call the roll?
18555
Aroll mllvate was taken with the following result
AYES:
Koons, Alanskas, LaPine, Piercerchi, Shane, McCann
NAYS:
Now
ABSENT:
None
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopt-&
It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution
ITEM#7 PETITION2001-03-06-03 City Planning Commission
(Drug Stores & Pharmacies as Waiver Uses)
Mr. Pie Cecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-06-03
by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #66-01,
and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance 4543, the Zoning Ordinance
of the City of Livonia, as amended, to amend Sections 10.02, 10.03, 11.02
and 11.03 of Articles X and XI of the Zoning Ordinance to designate drug
stores and pharmacies as waiver uses.
Mr. Taormina: This proposed language amendment to the Zoning Ordinance was initiated
by the City Law Department and the City Council, pm atran to Council
Resolution 466-01 adopted on Febmazp7, 2001, whereby the City Planting
Commission was directed to conduct a public hearing on the question of
whether amendments should be made to Article X, Sections 10.02 and
10.03 and Article M, Sections 11.02 and 11.03 of Zoning Ordinance 4543,
as amended, to designate drug stores and pharmacies as waiver uses instead
of pertained uses in comonercially zoned districts, and to thereafter submit
its report and recommendation to the City Conrail. In a report dated March
28, 2001 to the City Council, the Law Department identified at least two (2)
other nearby cornnnnities, Westland and Lathrop Village that treat drug
stores and/or pharrnacies as waiver uses in their commercial zoning
districts. Waiver uses are permitted only where there is a finding by the
City Planning Commission and approved by the City Cancel that the use
complies with the special requirerneurts and regulations for the waiver use
bring sought and the general standards of Section 19.06 of the ordinance. In
reviewing possible alternatives, it was discovered that a third community,
Troy, allows drug stores and pbannzcies as permitted uses, bort restricts the
use ofdrive-up window facilities which are a common feature ofmost
freestanding drug stores as well as other commercial businesses. In Troy's
local business district which is sinWar to om C-1 district, drive -up
windows are prohibited, while its general business district allows them as a
conditional use.
Mr. McCann: Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this
petition? Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing. A motion is in
order.
18556
Mr. Sbane: I want to make a denying resolution but I want to make sae that the
minutes reflect the fact that, while I don't see the merit fox treating drug
stores as waiver uses, there may be same merit in consideration of the
drive -up window concept regardless of what type of business we aretall®g
about as a waiver use.
On a motive by Mr. Shane, seconded by Mr. Piercecchi and unsummously approved it was
#5-80-2001 RESOLVED that, the Planning Commussam does hereby recommend that
Petition 2001-03-06-03 by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to
Council Resolution #66-01, and Section 23.0 Ila) of Ordinance 4543, the
Zommg Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, to amend Sections of
10.02, 10.03, 11.02 and 11.03 of Articles X and XI of the Zoning Ordinance
to designaia drug stores and pharmacies as waiver uses, the Planning
Coo rissiw does hereby nommumd to the City Council that Petition
2001-03-06-03 be denied for the following reasons:
1. That the curum language contained in the Zoning Ordinance provides
adequate control over the location and nature of the subject use,
2. That the proposed language amendment will impose unneeded
additional regulations with respect to the subject use, and
3. That the proposed language amendment will add an unnecessary burden
on private enterprise attempting to establish the subject use.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543,
as ammded.
Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion? Hearing none, Ijust have a comment inaddition w
what Mr. Shane said and that is that the audience at home and that the
Council understands that the Planning Commission does have a lot of
concern with regard to the number of pharmacies that have popped up
around the City. However, after spending considerable time discussing the
issue, we felt that the drive-tluu was something that should be treated as a
wavier use and that the pharmacy, itself, is not unusual or unique m arty
way that would requve the health, safety and welfare of the community to
become a waiver use. Therefore, I am going to vote along with the denying
resolution. Will the secretary please call the roll?
A roll call vote was taken with the fo0owing result:
AYES: Shane, Pierceccbi, Alonskas, LaPine, Koons, McCaua
NAYS: Now
ABSENT: Now
Mr. McCain, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted
18557
ITEM #8 PETITION 2001-03-06-04 City Planning Commission
(Sealing limitations for restaurants in a C-1 district)
Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, amrnmced the nextitem on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-06-04
by the City Planning Coun fission, pmsuantto Council Resolution #78-01
and parsuam to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance
of the City of Livonia, as amended, to amend Section 10.03 of Article X of
the Zoning Ordinance, seating humorous for restaurmG in a C-1 district.
Mr. Taormina: Council Resolution #78-01, adopted by the City Coma on February 7,
2001, requested the Planning Commission to consider an amendment to
Article X, Section 10.03 of the Zoning Ordinance to amend the restaurant
seating In diations in C-1 districts. The proposed language as prepared by
the Law Deparenent would add "full service" restaurants as a waiver use
under the C-1 dishictregulations. If approved, both boated service and bill
service reslaurards would be provided for as waiver uses in a C-1 district
(the different being that limited service restomms have a limit of 30 seats
whereas full service restaumrils would have more than 30 seats). This issue
arose in connection with a request by the Dumesi Restaurant located in the
Four Oaks shopping center on the northwest comer of Joy and Newburgh
Roads, to expand the seating of its restaurant Since the C- l inning at Itis
location provides for a maximum of only 30 seats under the "limited
service" type ofrestaumrd as defined by the ordinance, the petitioner
unsuccessfully sought the rezoning of the tenard space to C-2 to allow for
"lu0-service" type restaurants. The restraint operator ultimately resorted
to obtaining avariance from the ZBA hrhave more than 30 seats. Puerto
1968, restaurants, except for drive-ins and nationals, weretreated as a
permitted use m C-1 districts. 13etween 1968-1991, restaurants were
prohibited in C-1 zones. The most recunt amendment occurred in 1991,
establishing hunted service restaurmU as a waiver use in C-1 districts.
Mr. McCain: Again, this is something that the Planning Coumussion did spend
considerable time with
On a motion by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mrs. Know and unanimously approved it was
#5-81-2001 RESOLVED that, Petition2001-03-06-04 by the City Planning
Commission, pmsuara to Council Resolution 478-01 and pursuant to
Section 23.0 Ila) of Ordinance 4543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of
Livonia, as amended, to amend Section 10.03 of Article X of the Zoning
Ordinance, seating limitations for reslauranU in a C-1 district, the Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
2001-03-06-04 be denied due to the fact that the proposed language
amaidment to add full service reslauranU as a waiver use in the C-1 district
would allow for reslaormts with more than 30 seats and should be denied
fir the following reasons:
18558
1. That the proposed language amendment is not needed to accommodate
full service resmunama in the City;
2. That the Zoning Ordinance currently commas sufficient language to
adequately provide for full service restramos in proper locations other
than C-1 districts; and
3. That the proposed language amendment will promote larger resmurmU
in a district which, in general, is intended to drew customers from a
small service area
FURTHER RESOLVED that, nobee of such hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance
4543, as amended.
Mr. McCann: Is thereany discussion?
Mr. LaPine: I believe that if we allow this, we are going to get more restaurants and I
think we should by and control them as much as we can in the C-2
districts.
Mr. Sbane: There may be some merit to this but I hope the City Council deliberates
this for a while and gets some empirical data that wouldjustify opening up
the C-1 district for additional seats. I am going w mpporttbe denying
resolution because we spent a lot of time determining that the C-1 district
would be a proper place fora smaller restaurerR and I dont see ibat
anything would change that at this point.
Mr. McCann: My only comment would be that we are trying to change the ordinance on
me particular event and I think we need to find a broader problem before
we change the ordinance. Will the secretary please call the roll?
Aroll call vote was taken withthe following result
AYES: Piercecchi, Koons, Alauskas, LaPine, Shane, McCann
NAYS: Kone
ABSENT: None
Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted
This concludes the public hearing portion of the agenda We will now
proceed with the Miscellaneous Site Plan portion of our agenda
ITEM #9 PETITION 2001-04-05-16 Ameritech
Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is Petition 2001-04-08-16
by Ameritech requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of
the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to construct a second
18559
floor addition to the building located at 15550 Newburgh Road in the S.W.
1/4 of Section 17.
Mr. Miller: This site is located an the east side of Newburgh Road between Five Mile
and Ladywood The petitioner is requesting approval to construct a second
floor addition to the existing Ameritech building located an the subject site.
This site is located just north of the Newburgh Shopping Center. The
existing budding is one-story in height and 10,400 sq. It. in size. The
addition would add a second floor In the top of the building and double the
size of building. To allow access to the second floor, a small stair tower
addition would be constructed to the rear of the building Once the
proposed addition is completed, the building would be expanded to
approximately 21,030 sq. It In a letter that accompanied the plans, it is
explained that `the proposed addition would not change the existing use of
the building, which is far housing telephone communication equipment
only" The letter also goes an to staff that `the occupancy would remain at
frve full time day shift employees'. This facility does not cater to or receive
any type of outside customer traffic. Parking required is one (1) some per
employee=5 spaces. Parking providedis 15 spaces. The Building
Elevation Plan shows and notes that the new addition would be constructed
not of "newface brick__ to match the existing construction'. Theexisting
building is conshuxkd out of a dark brownish -rod brick. The plan shows
that all roof ope mechanical equipment would be screened by a metal siding
enclosure. The only type of openings proposed for the second floor
addition would be louvered covered windows an the north and south (sides)
elevations. The submitted plans only make reference to the addition. No
other changes to the site, including landscaping are proposed. At the May
1, 2001 Study Meeting, the Planning Commission expressed some concerns
about the aesthetics of the solid, two-story bigb, brick walls of the structure.
They understood security reasons this building had to be somewhat fortified
but thought something architecturally needed to be done to help it blend in
with the surrounding neighborhood It was suggested that some type of
fake windows and possibly a different brick pattern be incorporated into the
design of the building to help break up the vastness of the walls. On May 7,
2001, the petitioner submitted a revised elevation plan. The new plan shows
that the building would have a mw of windows along the north and soutin
elevations. These windows would be positioned approximately in the
middle of the first and second floors and would be defined by two bands of
soldier cause brick
Mr. McCain: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina: There are four ids of correspondence. The first letter is from the
Engineering Division, dated May 1, 2001, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to our request, the Engineermg Division has reviewed the above
referenced petition. We have an objection to the proposal or legal
description contained thereto. It should be noted that the existing sidewalk
located along Newburgh Road u to remain and that any damaged or
misalignedsections should be replaced during construction. Wetnastthat
18560
this will provide you rrith the information requested.." The lelRris signed
by David Lear, PP., Civil Engineer. The second letter is from the
Inspection Deparhnmt, dated May 3, 2001, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to yam request ofAprd 25, 2001, the above referenced petition
has been reviewed The follownig is noted: (1) Due to the increase in
site, this structure as proposed, will be required to be in full compliance
with all Michigan Barrier Free Codes. The only en6typermitted bylaw to
greaten accessibility waiver is the State Barrier Free Design Board (2)
This petition proposed no increase in parking while doubling the site of
the building. Therefore, a variance for deficientparking from the Zoning
Board of Appeals will be required Originally a standard ofone spaceper
500 usable square feet was utilised Using the some standard, another 17
spaces would be required This standard would apply only to this usage
and others permitted in 18.38(19). Therefore, this site would be deficient
16spaces. (3) Theparking lot will require some repaving,repair,
restoration and double striping. (4) There is a dumpster placed on site
without an enclosure. (5) The protective wall cap needs repair and/or
replacement in severalareas and the west Di feet ofthe north wall needs
to be restored and repaired to three (3) feet in height (6) The site's
landscaping needs maintenance and there are broken curbs at the north
parking island This Department has no further objections to this petition
other than as noted" The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant
Dimcferoflnspection. Thedh¢dletterisfro die Livonia Fire&Resme
Division, dated May 7, 2001, which reads as follows: "This ojfree has
reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct a
secondfloor addition to the building on property located at the above
referencedaddress. We have m objections to this proposaC" The lett is
signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal. The fourth letter is from the
Divisim ofPohee, dated May 8, 2001, NvMch reads m follows: "We have
reviewed the plane in connection with a proposal to construct a second floes
addition. We have no objections to the plans as submitted." The Inver is
signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau That is the extent of
thecorrespondence.
Mr. McCann:
Is the petitioner here this evenmgl
Marian Jasla la, Ameritech, 1365 Cass Avenue, Brom 1218, Detroit, MI 48226.
Mr. McCann:
Is there amfifi.ng additional yon would like to hll us that hasnY been brought
forward by our staff!
Ms. Jaskula:
Only that the need to increase the size of the building is the need for
Ameritech to add additional equipment to service the comrnmity. The space
is scheduled to exhaust probably in the second quarter of next year. In order
to keep up with all the technology changes we need to add to the budding
and we are limited on the facility on the site so that brought forth the need to
go to a second floor.
Mr. McCann:
Are there any questions from the Commissioners?
18561
Mrs. Koons: Ms. Jaskula, I have read our Inspection Departments concern about the
barrier free design and your response to that. Your response to that is that
the mainframes are 76" to 12' in height
Ms. Jaskula:
Yes.
Mrs. Koons:
It appears to me though thatyna still need pemvssim or a waiver from the
State Barrer Free Design Board.
Ms. Jaskula:
If we do need that, then we will by and acquire it
Elton Anderson
Associates, I work for the archnecnaal firm Carter & Burgess, 30800
Telegraph Road, Suite 4900, Bingham Fames, Michigan 48025. We had
submitted to the City a copy of the BOCA National Code 1996 version, and
it is Chapter 11 and it is Section 11.03.0 Accessibility. Ihere is a statement
in there that says, "All buildings and artiOares, including their associated
sites and facilities, shall be accessible to persons with physical disabilities
including, but not limited to, occupants, employees, students, spectators,
participants and visitors." Under the exceptions category, item 42, "areas
wbere work cannot reasonably be performed by persons having a severe
turpzrtment mobility, sight or hearing are not required to have the speck
features providing accessibility to such persons."
Mr. McCann:
Are the only people that work in there, maintenance people?
Mr. Anderson:
They are telephone equipment fume people, sir.
Mr. McCann:
There are no operators, no person thatjust monitors the equipment?
Mr. Anderson:
The people that work in there have computers that monitor the equipment
Mr. McCann:
Are they the repair people themselves?
Mr. Anderson:
No sir.
Mr. McCann:
So, are you saying a handicapped person could not monitor the equipment
and work the computers?
Mr. Anderson:
Yes sir, because they in tum are wiring wbat we would call telephone
equipment They are not repot people. They are people who wre the
fumes up and connect telephone lines.
Mr. McCann:
You anal need arty staff in there thatjust operates the computers during the
day?
Mr. Anderson:
No sir. They are dual function people.
18562
Mrs. Koons
Referring back to what you just read about mobility, vision and hearing, will
you read that section again?
Mr. Anderson:
Areas of work cannot reasonably be performed by persons having a severe
imlsarmanC mobility, sight or hearing, are not required W have the specific
feahues providing accessibility to such persons. This is the BOCA code,
which the City goes by.
Mrs. Koons:
I needed to now if it was the end"and/or." Thank you
Mr. LaPine:
How many employees do you have there?
Ms. Jaskula:
There are five.
Mr. LaPine:
All you basically need is five parking spaces and maybe on occasion smm
seven?
Ms. Jwkula:
There are outside technicians that stop at the building but are not stationed
there.
Mr. LaPine:
How many parking spaces does the ordinance say they need
Mr. Taormina:
The ordinance is generally silent with respect to this type of use. I believe A
is one space for 500 sq. ft of gross floor area.
Mr. LaPine:
So that is where they have to go to Zoning Board of Appeals to get a
variance for the number of deficient parking they have?
Mr. Tasmania:
That has been suggested by the Inspection Department and that will probably
be subject to fiather discussion before malong the decision as to thein need to
be before the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. LaPine:
Are we putting in mare switching here m equipment for more phone lines?
Whaz exactly is going in the bildingl
Ms. Jaskula:
It is switching equipment It is fiames and switches.
Mr. LaPne:
Thank you
Mr. Alanskes:
Does this have anything to do with cell phones?
Ms. Jaskula:
No.
Mr. Piercecchi:
SN, did you say you are the architect for this building?
Mr. Anderson:
I am one of the architects. I have another architect here who is a consultant.
18563
Mr. Piercecchi: I hate fe be critical but adjacent to you nn the south is a me-storybudding
and that budding doesn't really have much imagmation at all- It looks more
like a warehouse that is brick, if I can be so blunt
Mr. Anderson:
I coal believe the pictures that you are looking at (inaudible)
Mr. Piercecchi:
Itis a limrible looking building. Donlym agree? What about the frout?
Mr. McCann:
Is there a reason there are no windows on the west elevation?
Ms. Jaskala:
Our telephone equipmantbuildmgs smuply donlhave windows for secu ity
reasons. We added those at the request of the City.
Haresh Dhana, Elton Anderson Association, 407 E Port Sheet Suite 303, Detroit Michigan
48226. After I got the call from Scott Miller, we added the windows on the
north side and the south side. There are no windows in the front because on
the one comer there is just an area for fresh air and supply air so we do not
put windows nextkr there. Ifyou look at the floor plan, nextkr that thereis
a staircase going from the main floor In the second floor and next to that is a
verysmall area Ifyou insist, we can add a window. Thatwouldnl be a big
problem but normally equipment buildings dont have the windows for safety
and secuity.
Mr. Piercecchi:
I was interested in breaking up that brick
Mr. Dharia:
If you look at the west elevation, the area which is oper, that is the area for
the fresh air next In the stair fewer and only the wall left over here, is where
you can put a window or two if you need. I would have no objection to
putting in a couple ofwindows ifyou would like to do that But those would
be more like a standard glass window, you cant see from inside to outside.
It will just be awindov look
Mr. Piercecchi:
Is lhis the planned view here?
Mr. Dharia:
Yes.
Mr. Piercecchi:
If you break up all of that brick, you ve got two rows going across there and I
Poink you can even make it better now. In that drawing there you show a
lighter color going on the vertical Is that going fe be final? Is itnotgoing
In be all one color!
Mr. Dharia:
The brick is going In match on top and bottom It could be broken up with a
different band and use a different color brick. Again, as you desire, we can
break up this elevation.
Mr. Piercecchi:
I amjust really flindang of your people. It is your building and the prettier
you make it the better manage Ameritech will have too, right? And there are
an signs on this budding are there?
18564
Mr. Dharia: Ihere is a small sign that says, "Ameritech"
Mr. Piem utchi: Ijust think itis too much brick and not enough of splitting itup and getting
somemorebalanceinitmthertbmjustonebigblurofbrick ThatisjuAa
comment. It is your budding. I guess you can do what you want with it I
was just suggesting that you might consider something like that
Mr. McCann:
I assume all ofyuur lines nm underground mc, this location?
Ms. Jaskula:
Yes.
Mr. McCann:
One of my concerns is that technology changes quickly and is there a
possibility of 10 or 20 years down the line that this building is just going to
be outgrown and you are going to abandon it?
Mr. Anderson:
My honest answer probably would be, 'No, sir." But I really can't see 20
years in advance. Normally, what would happen, is equipment changes and
they will come into the budding and do an internal tmvsfarjob from one
switch to another. Take the old equipment out and put in a newer generation
of equipmerR
Mr. McCann:
My concern is that satellite may take over and the bard line location like this
may not be necessary then we've got a building that should have 40 to 50
parking spots and has 17 and the next owner comes in and says, "Welt, we've
grandfathered in and there is no parking and doesn't meet any ofthe City
requirements." I think that b ilding bas been there since I was a yomhg kid
It's been there a long time and I don't see it changing because all of the hand
wires nm into itbut that is a concern and you don'tbeheve you see that as a
problem?
Mr. Anderson:
I really can say because I can't look into a crystal ball and say what is going
to happen.
Mr. Dharia:
I haven't seen Ameritech, formally Michigm Bell, selling arty oftheir
holdings. They always had the equipment changes in the building. Some
building are vacrot at this time with minmial equipment bII they still own
the whole bolding
Mr. LaPme:
The windows that are going in, are they regular windows?
Mr. Dharia:
The windows that are going m are regular windows. They are fixed
windows. They are 6' x 5' windows with insulated glass.
Mr. McCann:
If there are no further questions, a motion is in order.
On a motim by
Mrs. Koons, seconded by Mr. Shane and unanimously approved it was
#5-82-2001
RESOLVED that, the City Pla ung Commissmn does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 2001-04-08-16 by Ameritech requesting
18565
approval of all plans required by Section 15.58 of the Zoning Ordinance in
connection with a proposal to construct a second floor addition to the
budding located az 15550 Newburgh Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 17 be
approved subject to the following conditions:
1. That the Site Plan marked Sheet C-1 dated 4/24/01, as revised, prepared
by Elton Anderson Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered
to;
2. That the ExRrim Building Elevation Plan marked Sheet A-6 dated
5/04/01, as revised, prepared by Elton Anderson Associates, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to;
3. That the brick used in the construction shall match that of the existing
budding and shall be full face 4 inch brick no exceptions;
4. Thar the petitioner shall correct to the Inspection Department's
satisfaction the following as outlined in the correspondence dated May
3,2001:
thaz this structure shall be in bill compliance with all
Michigan Barrer Free Codes;
that the entire parking lot shall be repaired, resealed
and double striped
that the protective wall shall be repaired and the
west 10 tt of the north wall shall be restored to 3 tt
in height
thaz the site's landscaping shall be revitalized and
thereafter permanently maintained in ahealthy
condition;
thaz the broken curbs of the north parking island
shall be reported
5. That the dumpster area shall be enclosed and the three walls of the area
shall be contracted out of the same brick used in the construction of
the building or in the event a poured wall is substituted, the wall's
design, texture and color shall march that of the building and the
enclosure gates shall be maintained and when not in use closed at all
times;
6. That no signs, either freestanding or wall mounted, are approved with
us petition;
7. Thst the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be
submitted to the Inspection Departrnent az the time the building permits
are applied for.
S. Thatwindows will be placed on the west elevation with the approval of
the Inspection and Planning Deparfta n
18566
Mr. McCann:
Is Poere any discussion?
Mr. Alanskas:
Wi0 those windows be tined?
Mr. Dharia:
Yes.
Mr. Alanskas:
Like a green cold!
Mr. Dharia:
More like a bronze, dark brovn or block
Mr. Alanskas:
Thank you
Mr. McCaw, Chairmw,
declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted
It will go on to City Council with an approvng resolution. This concludes
the Miscellaneous Site Plan portion of our agenda We will now proceed
with the Pending Item section of our agenda
ITEM#10 APPROVAL OFMINUTES 822°a Public Hearing&Regular Meeting
Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is Approval of the Minu es
of the 822°a Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on April 3, 2001.
On a motion by Mr. Shane, seconded by Mrs. Koons and unanimously approved, it was
#5-83-2001 RESOLVED that, the Minutes of the 822°a Public Hearings and Regular
Meeting held by the City Planning Commission an April 3, 2001, are
hereby approved.
A roll call vote was taken with the following result
AYES: LaPine, Koons, Shane, McCann, Pierceccbi
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Alamkas
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted the 824ue Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting held on May 8, 2001, was adjourned at 9:36 pm
CM PLANNING COMMISSION
James C. McCaw, Chairman
/rw
Dan Piercerchi, Secretary
15567