Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2003-12-1620909 MINUTES OF THE 8W PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, December 16, 2003, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 876`h Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. James McCann, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Members present: James C. McCann Dan Piercecchi H. G. Shane Robert Alanskas William LaPine John Walsh Carol Smiley Members absent: None Messrs. Mark Taormina, Planning Director; Al Nowak, Planner IV; Bill Poppenger, Planner I; and Ms. Marge Roney, Secretary, were also present. Chairman McCann informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in tum, will hold its own public hearing and make the final determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning Commission holds the only public hearing on a requeslfor preliminary plat and/or vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City Council for the final determination 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 len days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City Council. Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Commission become effective seven (7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning Commission and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their fling. The staff has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions, which the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the proceedings tonight. ITEM #1 PETITION 2003-10-01-19 ANN 8. CHARLES DEAMUD Mr. Pieroecchi, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2003- 10-01-19, submitted by Ann and Charles Deamud requesting to rezone properly at 34449 Pinetree, located on the south side of Pinetree Avenue between Stark Road and Laurel Avenue in the Northwest % of Section 33 from RUF To R-1. 20910 Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are two items of correspondence. The first letter is from the Engineering Division, dated October 3, 2003, which reads as follows: `Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposal at this time. No further right-of-way dedication is required. Since Supervisor's Livonia Plat #1 has been amended, the following legal description should be used." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The next letter is from Monica and Malt Harrison, 34450 Pinetree, Livonia, Michigan 48150, dated December 2, 2003, which reads as follows: `My husband and I live directly across from the Deamud family at 34450 Pinetree. We would like to express our support of their request to rezone the property. We have seen proposed drawings of their new home, and we believe it would greatly enhance the surrounding neighborhood. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on this issue." The letter is signed by Monica and Matt Harrison. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Charles Deamud, 34449 Pinetree, Livonia, Michigan 48150. Ann Deamud, 34449 Pinetree, Livonia, Michigan 48150. Chris Byron, Superintendent, Mike Petro Builders, 34484 Richmond Court, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. McCann: All right. Who would like to speak to this petition and tell us any additional information you think we should be aware of? Mr. Byron: Yes, I could do that. What do you want to know? Mr. McCann: Well, we're going to ask some questions in a minute. You've heard the presentation. If there's anything additional you think we should know, first we give you the opportunity to speak. If not, we'll just go right to the questions. Mr. Byron: Okay. That's fine. Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? 20911 Mr. Piercecchi: Please bear with us if we ask some of the questions that you may have been asked during your meeting with the Zoning Board of Appeals. It's important that our minutes include your remarks which can be accessed by the City Council, who will make the final decision, of course, on this petition. How long has the structure been located on this site? Ms. Deamud: Since about the early 40's. Mr. Piercecchi: So roughly 60 years then. How long have you owned the properly. Ms. Deamud: I've owned it only for a short few years but it has been in my family since it was constructed. Mr. Piercecchi: You say its been in the family though? Ms. Deamud: Since its been constructed. Mr. Piercecchi: Since the 40's. Ms.Deamud: Correct. Mr. Piercecchi: Why have you chosen to construct a modular package rather than renovate your current facility? Mr. Byron: Well, the renovation would be pretty much impossible. The house has deteriorated. The foundation has just about crumbled. The house is sinking. It's in really poor shape. Mr. Piercecchi: What you're saying is that it's really not repairable? Mr. Byron: Yes, its unrepairable. Mr. Piercecchi: It would cost more to repair it than to replace it? Mr. Byron: Yes. Itreallywould. Mr. Piercecchi: Are there any modular developments in this area that the Council or anybody could go look at? Mr. Byron: There's one on the comer of Stark Road and Orangelawn. I don't know who made that one, but the company I'm getting this one from is Redman. 20912 Mr. Piercecchi: How about the company that you represent? Do you have any in the area? Mr. Byron: No. Mr. Piercecchi: Anyplace? Mr. Byron: No. Mr. Piercecchi: Is this is the first modular home that you're putting together? Mr. Byron: For me, yes it is. Mr. Piercecchi: How about your company? Mr. Byron: Yes. Mr. Piercecchi: Are the properly owners, the Deamuds, agreeable to any changes that we think may make it more compatible? We notice that the structure originally is all vinyl. We cannot force you to do these things. And I notice in our notes here, which is pointed out by our Chairman here, which I was very well aware of, there was some plan that you had to modify the north elevation making it all brick, pulling in another window and pulling shutters on each of those windows. Ms. Deamud: Sure. Mr. Deamud: We're willing to do anything that you might suggest. Mr. Piercecchi: Well, we want to make it as compatible as we can if its acceptable to this group. Mr. Deamud: Right. Mr. Alanskas: What kind of a foundation do you put in a modular home? Mr. Byron: Just the regular footings and walls. Mr. Alanskas: Its concrete? Mr. Byron: Yes. Mr. LaPine: One of the problems I have with this proposal is, and I went out there today to take another look at it, is that the entrance of the house is on the west side. Every other entrance to the homes 20913 on Pinetree face Pinetree. Your entrance is on the side, which isn't compatible with what's in the area. See, I consider this the side of the house, not the front of the house. Is there anyway you can ... Mr. Deamud: Yes. We have been thinking about putting it on the front of the house so the front entrance would face Pinetree. We have been talking about that. Yes. Mr. LaPine: That makes a big difference to me. Originally, when I looked out, I didn't have a big problem, but after I went down Pinetree again today, I thought that's going to look kind of funny as the only house where the entrance is on the side. The entrance is on the west side where there's a driveway. Your mother-in-law owns the property to the west? Mr. Deamud: Next door. correct Mr. LaPine: There's a utility shed and then there's a garage. The garage belongs to your mother-in-law and you own the shed. Mr. Deamud: Correct. Mr. LaPine: Is that shed going to stay or is it going? Mr. Deamud: That is going to stay. Mr. LaPine: That's going to slay. It looks like you both use the same driveway there? Mr. Deamud: Basically, right now, yes. Mr. LaPine: So you won't have a garage for this home at all? Mr. Deamud: That is correct. Mr. LaPine: So there is the possibility that we can make this view look like that's the front of the house? Mr. Byron: Yes. Mr. McCann: We've got the plans up front. Mr. Taormina was marking the entrance in the front living room. Would that move the door over to the north side of the Irving room there? Mr. Deamud: We're getting our plans at the moment. 20914 Mrs. Deamud: Righlwhere that partial wall is in the center, there's an option for a door in the front entering into the kitchen. Correct. Right there. Mr. McCann: All right. Mrs. Deamud: We switched it to the side when we thought that's the way it needed to be, but we're willing to switch it back to the front so it will resemble the other homes. Mr. McCann: That would be great. Mr. Deamud: That would not be a problem. We have talked about that. We agreed with you when you said that it would look kind of strange. Ann and I have talked about that in the last couple months. As a matter of fact, Chris is the one that brought it up to us in the beginning. Mr. McCann: All right. I'm going to go to the audience if there are no further questions. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Mr. Deamud: And if I may, we also have pictures of the existing house with us if you want to see them. Mr. McCann: You're welcome to pass them by if you want. Sue Dyer, 34555 Richland Court. We're kind of kitty corner to the site, and we are in favor of the modular home. We feel that it will help benefit the area around us. As you can see, there are plenty of homes that need some work in the area, and if it's the most cost effective way for them to gel what they need to live in and to live nicely, we're in favor of that. There's also another modular home that's on Richland as well that I don't believe was mentioned. Thank you. Mr. McCann: Thank you. Anything else? Mr. LaPine: Is there going to be any cement work done on the west side where the driveway is? Are you putting in a driveway or anything like that? Mr. Deamud: Yes, we've talked about pulling a driveway in from the street back to the garage. 20915 Mr. La Pine: Thank you. Mr. McCann: If there are no other questions, I'm going to close the public hearing. A motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Walsh, seconded by Ms. Smiley, and unanimously approved, it was #12-160-2003 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on December 16, 2003, on Petition 2003-10-01-19, submitted by Ann and Charles Deamud requesting to rezone property at 34449 Pinetree, located on the south side of Pinetree Avenue between Stark Road and Laurel Avenue in the Northwest % of Section 33 from RUF To R-1, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2003-10-01-19 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses and zoning districts in the area; 2. That the proposed change of zoning would provide a zoning classification that would more reasonably relate to the size of the subject property; 3. That the proposed change of zoning would represent a minor extension of the zoning classification that encompasses the land area of the subdivision that adjoins the subject property to the east and to the south; and 4. That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Future Land Use Plan designation of Low Density Residential land use in this general area. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion? Mr. Alanskas: Did you put in a condition about changing the front door? Mr. Walsh: Yes, we can add that condition, to change the location of the front door. 20916 Mr. McCann: Is that okay with you, Ms. Smiley? Ms. Smiley: Absolutely. Mr. Piercecchi: Will this include the two windows also in the front? Mr. Deamud: Yes, thats not a problem with us. Mr. McCann: Fine. We'll amend the motion. Mr. Shane: The thing that concerns me is that it sounds like we're trying to condition this particular resolution. I don't think we can do that. Mr. McCann: If it's a zoning resolution, true. Mr. Shane: It will be in the minutes. Mr. McCann: That's right. We can't condition the zoning. Very good point. Mr. Walsh: So the motion will stand as I originally read it. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #2 PETITION 2003-11-01-20 LEO SOAVE Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2003-11-01-20, submitted by Leo Soave Building Company requesting to rezone properly at 14657 Cavell, located on the west side of Cavell Avenue between Five Mile Road and Western Gott Drive in the Northeast % of Section 24 from RUF to R-2. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There is one item of correspondence from the Engineering Division, dated November 18, 2003, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above-referencedpetftfon. We have no objections to the proposal at this time. There is no further right-of-way 20917 dedication required. The legal description is correct as submitted except for the fourth line." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Leo Soave, Leo Soave Building Company, Inc., 20592 Chestnut Circle, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Thank you very much and good evening. I'll answer your questions. Mr. McCann: Nothing further to add to that fine presentation? Mr. Soave: I'd just like to say that the western lot is going to be 9,100 square feet and the remainder of the property will be 26,000 square feet which supercedes RUF, which would be half an acre. Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one, I'm going to close the public hearing. A motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mr. Shane, and unanimously approved, it was #12-161-2003 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on December 16, 2003, on Petition 2003-11-01-20 submitted by Leo Soave Building Company requesting to rezone property at 14657 Cavell, located on the west side of Cavell Avenue between Five Mile Road and Western Golf Drive in the Northeast % of Section 24 from RUF to R-2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2003-11-01-20 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding zoning and land uses in the area; 2. That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the developing character of the area; 3. That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Future Land Use Plan designation of Low Density Residential land use in this general area; and 20916 4. That the proposed change of zoning represents an extension of an existing zoning district occurring on adjacent property to the south and west. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #3 PETITION 2003-11-02-20 TIM HORTONS Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2003-11-02-20 submitted by Dennis Miller, on behalf of Tim Hortons, requesting waiver use approval to increase the sealing capacity from 12 seals to 26 seals for the restaurant located on the north side of Schoolcraft Road between Inkster Road and Cardwell Avenue in the Southeast''/. of Section 24. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are four items of correspondence. The first dem is from the Engineering Division, dated November 20, 2003, which reads as follows: 'Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposal at this time. The following legal description should be used for the restaurant area." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated November 17, 2003, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to increase the seating from 12 to 26 seats of the restaurant located at the above -referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated November 19, 2003, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed the proposed plans in regards to the proposal to increase the seating at the Tim Horton restaurant located at 20919 westbound Schoolcraft and Inkster. We have no objections to the plans regarding the increased seating. There is only one barrier free parking space indicated. With 30 total parking spaces, two individually posted handicap parking spaces are required." The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The next item is a revised letter from the Inspection Department, dated December 4, 2003, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of November 14, 2003, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. This increase in seating, which will require an additional 13 parking spaces, must go before the Zoning Board of Appeals to seek a variance for the deficient parking spaces. The Tim Horton site will be deficient eight parking spaces and the adjacent retail site will be deficient two parking spaces. This Department has no further objection to this petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Mr. Dennis Miller, Director of Real Estate, Tim Horton, 19575 Victor Parkway, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Also in attendance is the landlord that owns the station and the retail building in the back, Mr. Salem, in case you have any questions for him. I would entertain any questions you might have at this point. Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. La Pine: I'm just curious. You've only been here about six months. You're not even open yet. In that period, what changed your mind from being a carry -out restaurantto full service restaurant? Mr. Miller: Originally this site plan, when it was approved with the gas station and the retail building, we weren't looking at this site at all. The landlord did the restaurant kind of on what tenant he might gel in the future. We came after the fact, after it was already approved for the 12 seals throughout the convenience store. So we weren't even involved from the beginning. We came in after the fact. Twelve seats is okay, but for the convenience of our customers, we need a little bit more seats than that and we have plenty of room in the size of this square footage. The demised premises are the same size of what they've always been, so there's a lot of room in the dining area for some more seats. And we feel more comfortable for our customers to have a few more seats. 20920 Mr. LaPine: Okay, that answers the question. The second part of that question, when you talk about full service, are you going to be like the other Tim Horlons that are around here? You're going to be serving soups, sandwiches and things of that nature? Mr. Miller: Yes, we'll have the soup and sandwiches. Its just a smaller version of the one that's on Plymouth Road. Mr. LaPine: For the landlord, I have a question for you. You've got a second floor to this building. What is that going to be used for? Mr. Salem: Storage. Mr. LaPine: How come you have so many wall plugs up there? How many did you count, Dan? Twelve? Mr. Piercecchi: Yes, I think so. Mr. Salem: Basically, there's a camera system going up there in the storage area. That's about it. Mr. LaPine: When we originally heard of this case, I never knew there was a second story to this building, actually an upstairs. I don't know if you would call it a second story. We were just curious when we were out there. All in all, I'm very happy with what you've done there. It looks good at this point. Mr. Alanskas: You're asking for 26 seals where you can gel up to 30. Why don't you gel the full 30 if you have the room? Mr. Miller: Twenty-six layout real nice in the room that's there. We probably could squeeze some more seats in there, but at this point we're comfortable with 26. Mr. Alanskas: So you will not be coming back for an additional four seats? Mr. Miller: I don't think we will be coming back. Mr. LaPine: Is this going to be a 24-hour operation? Mr. Miller: Yes, the same as the others. Mr. LaPine: And you still have the drive thru? Mr. Miller: Yes. 20921 Mr. McCann: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Dennis Cooper, 27541 Buckingham. Good evening. I've been against this right from the start. But to be honest with you, they haven't made it look too bad. The problem is that you've already got two other restaurants in that subdivision. This whole project has been full of misinformation from the start. They mentioned a gas station and a restaurant. Number one, I don't consider Tim Hortons a restaurant. Its a donut shop, a sandwich shop. Second of all, never did I hear anything about a Dollar General or cellular phone store going anywhere in there until they started building it. I attended the City Council meetings. I did not hear that. And that's where my main gripe is. Mr. McCann: I can tell you that we did have a public hearing on this item before and I believe it was at my suggestion that the old AAA building be reduced so that it could be sold out as commercial property because they were short on parking. Mr. Cooper: And that's fine and dandy. I think we have too many Dollar General stores in Livonia to start with. Do we need another cellular phone store? There's one at every corner as it is now. Mr. McCann: We don't have control over the type, only the zoning. Mr. Cooper: The zoning is the same for this as it was for the AAA business office? Mr. McCann: Yes, sir. Mr. Cooper: So C-2 is more than one type of zoning then, right? Mr. McCann: Right. Actually you can put office into commercial zoning and that's what had happened with AAA. Mr. Cooper: Well, I guess my complaint mainly is that this is not what we envisioned. Mr. McCann: Okay. I'm sorry. Mr. Cooper: Now whether or not it was approved, I can't make it to every meeting. You have meeting upon meeting upon meeting until nobody shows up. So consequently, it's just going to be a noisy area - middle of the night, 24-hour service. And I guess another question is, and I think you tried to answer it, It's hard for me to 20922 believe that somebody would build a building with more space than is needed. You built it for 12 people or 14 or whatever it was and now you want 26. It's hard for me to believe you can squeeze 14 more people into that same area. Mr. McCann: I think I can answer that because that came before us too. When Mr. Miller originally came to us, he told that he did not know what it was going to be. As a matter of fact, he thought it might be a donut shop. I don't know if Tim Horton was specifically suggested, but it was going to be a fast food that went along with the gas station. Mr. Miller: I probably did say that in some obscure meeting and nobody else was there. Mr. Cooper: They told us a restaurant. I'll be honest with you, the petitioner went door -lo -door in our neighborhood. Mr. McCann: And I'm not sure what was said there. We knew at the time that it could be a full service restaurant. There just wasn't enough room and not enough parking. Parking has always been an issue with this project. Mr. Alanskas: Originally, it was going to be a Dunkin' Donut shop, not a restaurant. Mr. Cooper: We couldn't even gel that out of the guy. He said it would be a restaurant but would not be specific. Mr. Alanskas: Il was going to be a Dunkin' Donut but that didn't go through. Mr. LaPine: I've been out here and looked at it just this Iasi week. There's plenty of room in the restaurant for 26 seats. There's no problem there. The convenience store is big, but this is a separate operation. So there's not a problem with 26 seals. I have to agree with Jim. As far as the noise, I think they're far enough away from you, because you've got a buffer there between the old AAA building plus the old Buckingham complex, which to me needs a lot of updating. I don't like 24 hour operations, but I don't think you're going to find that its going to be that big of a detriment to you as you might think. Mr. Cooper: That may be. I have to beg some forgiveness on your part, but you're not living there where the garbage trucks come in at 4:00 in the morning and pick the dumpsters up and bang them all over the place like we are. 20923 Mr. LaPine: Well, I live behind a big shopping center, and the same thing happens there. After a while, I'm used to it. I don't pay any attention to it. Mr. Cooper: Its a lot better than some uses they could put in that property. Mr. LaPine: You're absolutely right. Mr. McCann: Thank you, sir. Now, is there anything else? We do have another person coming up to speak. Kara Tmxell, 27504 Buckingham. I do understand his point about the noise since his properly backs up to the shopping plaza, but I was pleased to find out it was a Tim Horton because I first heard it was a MacDonald's and thought that was going to be a bad thing. I think Tim Horons will attract a better crowd of people to that corner and intersection. I'm for it. I don't see it as a negative, and I think Tim Horton fits in with Subway and Baskins & Robbins as far as the type of service and customers that it attracts. Mr. McCann: Thank you. Seeing no one else, I'm going to close the public hearing. A motion is in order. On a motion by Ms. Smiley, seconded by Mr. LaPine, and unanimously approved, it was #12-162-2003 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on December 16, 2003, on Pefilion 2003-11-02-20 submitted by Dennis Miller, on behalf of Tim Horton, requesting waiver use approval to increase the seating capacity from 12 seals to 26 seats for the restaurant located on the north side of Schoolcmft Road between Inkster Road and Cardwell Avenue in the Southeast % of Section 24, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2003-11-02-20 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the maximum number of customer seats shall not exceed 26; 2. That the Floor Plan marked sheet A 2 prepared by Shremshock Architects, Inc., dated July 10, 2003, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 20924 3. That this approval shall incorporate the following comment specified in the correspondence dated November 19, 2003 from the Traffic Bureau of the Division of Police; - Two individually posted handicap parking spaces shall be provided as required; 4. That the specific plan referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department for their review prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy allowing for 26 customer seats as the maximum seating capacity; 5. That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the deficient number of parking spaces and shall be subject to any conditions related thereto; and 6. That all conditions imposed under Council Resolution #614-02, which previously granted waiver use approval for the development of the subject properly, shall remain in effect to the extent that they are not in conflict with the conditions of this approval. Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed use complies with all of the general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; and 3. That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. 20925 ITEM #4 PETITION 2003-11-02-21 OLGA'S KITCHEN Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2003-11-02-21 submitted by Dennis Goldsworthy, on behalf of Olga's Kitchen, Inc., requesting waiver use approval to increase the sealing capacity of an existing restaurant at 37612 Six Mile Road, located in the Laurel Park Place Mall on the north side of Six Mile Road between Newburgh Road and Laurel Park Drive North in the Southeast''/. of Section 7. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the properly under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated November 19, 2003, which reads as follows: 'Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposal at this time. The following legal description should be used for the additional space. It excludes the 30 foot by 68 foot area previously used in Petition 89-04-02- 26." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated November 25, 2003, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to increase the seating capacity of the restaurant located at the above -referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal with the following stipulation: The occupancy as described and shown on plans by Michael Boggio Associates, Architects, sheet A-2 issued for September 20, 2003 requires two exits. Confirm that the submitted Floor plan satisfies this requirement" The letter is signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated November 19, 2003, which reads as follows: We have reviewed the proposed plans in regards to the proposal to increase seating at the Laurel Park Place mall. We have no objections to the plans as submitted." The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated November 18, 2003, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of November 14, 2003, the above -referenced Petition has been reviewed. This Department has no objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. 20926 Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Dennis Goldsworthy, Olga's Kitchen, 1940 Northwood Drive, Troy, Michigan 48084. Mark and Al did a marvelous job of covering all the details in this application. About the only thing I want to say is when we had 88 seals, our dining room was 957 square feet. We rented an additional 847 square feel from the landlord in the outer area and added only 45 seals. Basically, if my arithmetic is right, we had 10.88 square feel per seat under the old situation. And we now have 13.65 square feet per seat in the dining room. Its really much more comfortable than it was and the renovation is certainly an upgrade. Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. Alanskas: This has nothing to do with the petition, but I have a question. I used to frequent there a lot when I was working. What is your turnover ratio for a person going there for lunch? Do you have any idea? Mr. Goldsworthy: I'm sorry, I can't hear you. Mr. Alanskas: What is your turnover ratio when someone goes there for lunch? Are they there for half an hour, 45 minutes? Mr. Goldsworthy: In the restaurant? Mr. Alanskas: Yeah. Mr. Goldsworthy: I have no idea. Mr. Alanskas: You don't have an idea? Mr. Goldsworthy: I'm the Director of Construction, not operations. I would guess somewhere in the area of half an hour to 45 minutes. Mr. Alanskas: Thank you. I like your renovations. Mr. LaPine: How did we gel to this point? Apparently, the permits weren't taken out or you didn't come back to the Planning Commission to gel approval for this addition. Mr. Goldsworthy: I was hoping you wouldn't ask me that. Mr. McCann: Well, being in charge of construction, you've got the right guy. 20927 Mr. Goldsworthy: I screwed up. I got the building permit and I handed it to my contractor. I said, "Post it. Let's go." And I never saw the line in there that said you had to have Planning Department approval for the increase in seating. So when it came time to gel my Certificate of Occupancy, the final building inspector came out and said, "Where's your letter from the Planning Department?" And I stood there with my mouth open. So we went back to the building department, and fortunately they were willing to give me a temporary Certificate of Occupancy to open, stipulating that we had to agree that if its not approved by your committee, we'd have to roll back to the original 88 seats. Mr. McCann: You've been sweating a little bit. Mr. Goldsworthy: I don't know how we're going to pay the increase in rent if we have to do that, but that's another story. Mr. LaPine: I don't have any objection. I was over there and it looks very nice. You've done a nice job. Who is your architect? Mr. Goldsworthy: Mike Boggio. Mr. LaPine: Is he the original architect on the restaurant? Mr. Goldsworthy: Yes, he's been our architect for a long time. Mr. McCann: I have to agree that it was awfully tight in there before. I think it will help. Mr. McCann: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one, I'm going to close the public hearing. A motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Alanskas, and unanimously approved, it was #12-163-2003 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on December 16, 2003, on Petition 2003-11-02-21 submitted by Dennis Goldsworthy, on behalf of Olga's Kitchen, Inc., requesting waiver use approval to increase the sealing capacity of an existing restaurant at 37612 Six Mile Road, located in the Laurel Park Place Mall on the north side of Six Mile Road between Newburgh Road and Laurel Park Drive North in the Southeast % of Section 7, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City 20928 Council that Petition 2003-11-02-21 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the maximum number of customer seats shall not exceed 133; 2. Thatthis approval shall incorporate the following stipulation contained in the letter dated November 25, 2003 from the Fire and Rescue Division of the Department of Public Safely: The occupancy as described and shown on the Floor Plan marked Sheet A-2 prepared by Michael A. Boggio Associates, Architects, dated September 20, 2003 requires two exits; it shall be confirmed that the floor plan satisfies this requirement; 3. That the specific plan referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department for their review prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy allowing for 133 customer seats as the maximum seating capacity. Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed use complies with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Sections 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; 3. That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. 20929 Y 1:1 1i E4�9=k I It I [a] � VIIII4 95ErYb*�:1[H=I4Y1 Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2003-11-02-22 submitted by Remi -Keith Construction, on behalf of Big Boy Restaurant, requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition and increase the seating capacity of an existing full service restaurant at 33427 Plymouth Road, located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Farmington Road and Stark Road in the Northeast'''/ of Section 33. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Nowak: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated November 17, 2003, which reads as follows: 'Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposal at this time. Our records indicate that an additional 27 feet of right -0f --way for Plymouth Road should be dedicated at this time. The legal description for the addition is as follows. We trust that this will provide you with the information requested." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated November 24, 2003, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct an addition and increase the seating capacity of an existing full service restaurant located in a commercial building on property located at the above -referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by James E. Corcoran, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated November 19, 2003, which reads as follows: We have reviewed the proposed plans in regards to the proposal to construct an addition and increase the seating capacity for the Big Boy Restaurant on Plymouth Road near Farmington Road. We have no objections to the proposed addition. The proposed plan does not indicate any handicap parking spaces. Four handicap parking spaces are required, individually signed, and properly located near the entrance of the restaurant" The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated December 2, 2003, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of November 17, 2003, the above -referenced Petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) This Petitioner needs a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for deficient number of parking spaces. Furthermore, the employee count provided 20930 seems low. (2) The rooftop units may still be visible from the sides and rear. (3) The rearparking area, south of the carports, needs to be repaved or top coated. (4) All parking striping should be double striped and the barrier free parking issues will be reviewed by this Department at our plan review. This Department has no further objections to this Petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Randy Couture, Remi -Keith Construction, 7900 Anchor Bay Drive, Algonac, Michigan 48001. With me is Mr. Wail Bamieh, the operator owner, and James Morisi, one of the owners. Several things. Al the deadline, we did resubmit several plans, one being the elevation to the front, the checkerboard on the right side of the lower fascia. That has all been deleted. That is now just a simple fascia band without signage area. That should have been submitted. Wail Bamieh, 12035 Nalhaline, Redford, Michigan 42389. James Morisi, 21745 River Ridge Trail, Farmington Hills, Michigan 48335. Mr. Nowak: I dont believe we received it. Mr. Couture: It was hand -delivered at 3:00. I know I delivered them personally. And the parking count should be exact right now. When we removed the drive-in structures, we reconfigured parking including the ten fool parking spaces, and our parking should be correct as required by code. I personally brought them there. Mr. McCann: What day did you bring them there? Mr. Couture: Is it Mr. Lee or Scott? I don't remember the exact dale, but I had to have them in by that day by 5:00 and they were there by 3:00, just to revise them. That being said, the parking count will be as required by the code and the fascia just will not have those checkerboards. So it will be a little bit calmer. Mr. Alanskas: What color will the board be? Mr. Couture: Basically, a very light gray. Mr. Alanskas: All right. Thais a great improvement. Thank you. 20931 Mr. Couture: Yes. Mr. LaPine: Can you just give us a quick run-through. Where did you pick up the additional parking? Mr. Couture: Well, by removing the two structures in the rear of the grayed out areas ... Mr. LaPine: They were coming out originally anyways and the parking was calculated based on that coming out. So where has that changed? Mr. Couture: I can't see it very well right here, but the layout by the engineer, I was assured that we have the parking with the new ten foot striping to include the 98, 1 believe it is, parking spaces. So what you have there is actually an old plan, I think. Mr. McCann: What's the date on the plan? Mr. LaPine: This one here is 11-26. Mr. Couture: The area to the south, that greenbelt, that was in question a while ago. Mr. Bamieh has already cleaned all that out, taken out the dead ash trees. We didn't have time this fall to do any new plantings, but it has been cleaned out quite nicely and, of course, Mr. Bamieh, has been doing a lot of repairs to the building since he bought it. He's only owned this building for about three years. Mr. LaPine: As I understand you to say, you've taken out some ash trees. When did you lake them out? Mr. Bamieh: I contacted Mr. Bishop and I explained to him that he was supposed to come out and look at them because I told him I want do everything that you guys want us to do. We received a letter as to what repairs are necessary and cleaning up we need to do. We did everything accordingly including double striping the parking lot and painting. I think three or four months ago... . Mr. LaPine: We tabled you until next Spring. Did we not? Mr. Bamieh Yes, but we finished it anyway. We didn't have to wail, so we got it out of the way. 20932 Mr. Taormina: We're still going to revisit that issue when the landscape plan comes back. Mr. LaPine: I'm really confused here at the moment. Mark, how can we approve these plans when I don't know for sure where the parking is, if they really do have enough parking. Are you satisfied? Have you see any plans? Mr. Taormina: Well, no. The staff analysis showed that they were still 11 spaces short. We haven't done a review of any of the revised plans to verify that they now meet the parking calculation. I'm not sure how it rearranges the parking on this site to comply, but it could only be approved with the understanding that if there is any deficiency, that it would have to be considered by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. LaPine: I'm not doubling what you said because when I went out there and checked it, I came up with at least five more parking spots. I dont know where you got the 11, but I can understand it's very possible because then you lake out that brick runway that goes down the walk, you can bull the two things together which gives you a little more room. So I think it's possible to do, but to move on to one other thing: the free-standing Big Boy that stands out in front now. Is that going to still be there? It's just going to be moved to a different location? Mr. Couture: That's planned to be moved near the front entranceway, yes. Mr. LaPine: In the front of the building where there is grass, have you got any plans of upgrading that? Is there an underground sprinkler there? Mr. Couture: Yes, there is. Mr. LaPine: It doesn't look like it's used very often. The grass is in very bad shape. I think you could use a little more landscaping up at the front there. I think it would help the building. Will the new addition in the front, will that be the main entrance to the restaurant? Mr. Couture: No, the entrance is actually just to the right, south. It's the existing entrance now, but that entrance is actually going to be removed and the new double door system, Big Boy standards, are blue frames, red doors. Mr. LaPine: What's the new addition going to be used for? 20933 Mr. Couture: Simply sealing. Ms. Smiley: Is there any other entrance for customers beyond that one in the front? Can they come in through the back anywhere? Mr. Couture: No, ma'm. Ms. Smiley: You'll have all that parking in the back, but they'll have to go around the front to get in? Mr. Couture: Yes, ma'm. Ms. Smiley: You might want to re -think that in Michigan. Mr. Shane: It sounds like the petitioner is willing to meet the parking requirement one way or the other. Mr. Couture: Yes, sir. Mr. Shane: So either by revising the site plan so as to provide more spaces or by eliminating five or six seals. You can do it either way. Mr. Couture: The handicapped spaces have been shown, loo. Mr. Shane: Do you understand what I'm saying? Mr. McCann: Yes, I believe that we can approve it subject to complying with a revised plan before he gets to Council showing the seating capacity. Mr. McCann: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Joseph Bertrand, 31023 Grenada, Livonia, Michigan. I have known the owner of the Big Boy restaurant for over 15 years. I first mel him when he was the manager of the facility at Eight Mile and Haggerty Road, and he ran a beautiful shop there. I was just overjoyed when I found out he finally got his own store. What he has done to the restaurant that he is the owner of now has been just short of miraculous. I watched him completely revamp that thing inside. and I've told a lot of people that not all Big Boy's are alike. I knew that when he look over this one, he was going to really do it the right way. And he has. He has remodeled the inside, and I know when he gels done with the outside its going to look really nice. I think it will certainly enhance the Plymouth 20934 Road area down there. Also because I know the man personally and I know how hard he works, he's a real credit to our community. And I would very much support him in what he's asking tonight. Mr. McCann: Thank you. Mr. Alanskas: To the owner, do all Big Boy menus have to be the same or can you deviate and put in other dishes? Mr. Bamieh: They have to be the same. Mr. Shane: Are we satisfied that the plans have been revised so that the rooftop units do not show? Mr. Taormina: I'm not sure that any revisions included changes to that. So the answer to your question is no. It would appear as if certain equipment on top of the roof would still be visible. Mr. Shane: Well, we need to deal with that. Mr. Piercecchi: The motion deals with that. Mr. Shane: Are you prepared to do whatever you need to screen the rest of those roof -lop units? Mr. Couture: Obviously, you've seen that building. Its called a California style Big Boy. Its an old prototype. With that A -frame jutting roof, its extremely difficult to try to gel anything around that building. That's why the addition was able to cover the A -frame from the front. Right now, the only intention is to go beyond the front door. I cannot speak for the owner. I can't spend his money. Mr. Bamieh: You don't see that equipment from the front. The whole front when we change it, everything will be covered. You won't be able to see that from Plymouth Road. Mr. Shane: From Plymouth Road, you said? Mr. Bamieh: From Plymouth Road, no. Mr. Shane: Is it possible to paint that equipment to match the building. Mr. Bamieh: Thalwould be no problem. 20935 Mr. Couture: If we could do an inexpensive screen like ... I don't know if the City allows it ... some areas just use stockade style fencing up there that's painted. But to build the efface facade across that building the way its built, those are all guttered fascias. The roof drainage system would have to be revised completely. It would be a major undertaking. Mr. Shane: I understand. If you could paint it to match the rest of the roof, 0 would at lead cul down on the visibility. Mr. McCann: Anything else? If there is nothing further, I'm going to close the public hearing. A motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Piercecchi, and unanimously approved, it was #12-164-2003 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on December 16, 2003, Petition 2003-11-02-22 submitted by Remi -Keith Construction, on behalf of Big Boy Restaurant, requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition and increase the sealing capacity of an existing full service restaurant at 33427 Plymouth Road, located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Farmington Road and Stark Road in the Northeast''/. of Section 33, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2003-11-02-22 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Removal Plan marked Sheet 3 prepared by Washtenaw Engineering, dated November 4, 2003, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2. That the Site Plan marked Sheet 4 prepared by Washtenaw Engineering, dated November 26, 2003, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 3. That a fully detailed landscape plan, which shall provide for additional plant materials in the landscaped area in the front yard between the proposed addition and the Plymouth Road right-of-way, shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Commission and City Council within 60 days following approval of this petition by the City Council; 4. That the Floor Plan marked Sheet Al prepared by Lawrence R. Brink Associates Architects, dated November 25, 2003, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 20936 5. That the Exterior Elevations Plan marked Sheet A4 prepared by Lawrence R. Brink Associates Architects, dated October 29, 2003, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 6. That the maximum number of customer seats shall not exceed 175; 7. That the brick used in the construction of the building shall be full face 4 -inch brick, no exceptions; 8. That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals, if necessary, for the deficient number of parking spaces, and shall be subject to any conditions related thereto; 9. Thatthe following issues as outlined in the correspondence dated December 2, 2003 from the Inspection Department shall be rectified to that department's satisfaction: • That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be painted or concealed from public view on all sides by screening that shall be of a compatible character, material and color to other exterior materials on the building; • That the southerly end of the rear parking area shall be repaved or top coated; and • That all parking striping shall be double striped and four handicapped parking spaces shall be provided, individually signed, and properly located near the entrance to the restaurant. 10. That any new light fixtures provided shall be shielded and shall not exceed a maximum overall height of 20 feet above grade; 11. That no signs, either freestanding or wall mounted, are approved with this petition; all such signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council; 12. That no LED light -band or exposed neon shall be permitted on this site including, but not limited to, the wall signage, around the windows or along building features; and 20937 13. That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time the building permits are applied for. Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed use complies with all of the general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; and 3. That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion? Mr. Walsh: I'd just like to thank the petitioner for making an investment in the building. I agree with everything you said. It's been years since I've been in there. I slopped in probably about two months ago just for something to eat, and it looked really good inside. I drove back out to compare your plans against what the building is going to look like, and I think it's going to be a really good addition to Plymouth Road. I appreciate your patience through the two and half page approving resolution and coming forward tonight. I wish you the best of luck. Mr. LaPine: I'd just like to add one thing. I'm so happy to see you gel rid of that old drive-in that was back there. Its been there for so many years, and it's been falling down and not in good shape. Thank the Lord we're finally getting rid of it. Mr. Couture: I've got a lot of memories in those drive-ins. Mr. LaPine: I know. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. This concludes the Public Hearing section 20938 of our agenda. We will now proceed with the Pending Item section of our agenda. These items have been discussed at length in prior meetings; therefore, there will only be limited discussion tonight. Audience participation will require unanimous consent from the Commission. Will the Secretary please read the next item? ITEM #6 MOTION TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING TENT SALES Mr. Piercecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is a motion to hold a public hearing, pursuant to CR #564-03, to determine whether or not to amend Section 10.02 of Article X of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance No. 543, as amended, to provide for sidewalk and parking lot lent sales as permitted accessoryuses for retail establishments in C-1 Districts. On a motion by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Shane, and unanimously approved, it was #12-165-2003 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #564-03, and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to amend Section 10.02 of Article X of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance No. 543, as amended, to provide for sidewalk and parking lot lent sales as permitted accessory uses for retail establishments in C-1 Districts. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of such hearing shall be given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shall be a report and recommendation submitted to the City Council. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 20939 ITEM #7 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 873P° Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Mr. McCann, Chairman, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 873rd Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on September 30, 2003. On a motion by Mr. Shane, seconded by Mr. Walsh, and unanimously approved, it was #12-166-2003 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 873rd Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on September 30, 2003, are hereby approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Shane, Walsh, Alanskas, La Pine, Smiley, Piercecchi, McCann NAYS: None ABSENT: None Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ITEM #8 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 874th Regular Meeting Mr. McCann, Chairman, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 8741 Regular Meeting held on October 14, 2003. On a motion by Ms. Smiley, seconded by Mr. Walsh, and unanimously approved, it was #12-167-2003 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 8741 Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on October 14, 2003, are hereby approved. A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Smiley, Walsh, LaPine, Shane, Piercecchi, McCann NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Alanskas Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 20940 ITEM #9 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 875th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Mr. McCann, Chairman, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 875th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on October 28, 2003. On a motion by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Alanskas, and unanimously approved, it was #12-168-2003 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 875" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on October 28, 2003, are hereby approved. A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: LaPine, Alanskas, Smiley, Shane, Walsh, Piercecchi, McCann NAYS: None ABSENT: None Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the mo0on is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 876th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on December 16, 2003, was adjourned at 8:53 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Dan Pieroecchi, Secretary ATTEST: James C. McCann, Chairman