Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2006-11-1423649 MINUTES OF THE 935° PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, November 14, 2006, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 935" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. John Walsh, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Members present: William LaPine Deborah McDermott R. Lee Morrow Carol A. Smiley Ian Wilshaw John Walsh Members absent: H. G. Shane Messrs. Mark Taormina, Planning Director; At Nowak, Planner IV; Ms. Debra Walter, Clerk -Typist II; and Ms. Marge Watson, Program Supervisor; were also present. Chairman Walsh informed the audience that if a petition on tonighfs 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 request for 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 oflhe proceedings tonight. ITEM#1 PETlTION2006-09-01-08 TACO BELL Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2006-09- 01-08 submitted by Peter Lyders, on behalf of Old West Properties, LLC (a franchisee of Taco Bell Corp.), requesting to rezone a portion of the properly at 19036 Filmore, located on the east side of Filmore Avenue between Seven Mile Road and Clanta Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9 from R-3 to C-2 office building on properly located at 34010 Plymouth Road in the Southeast % of Section 28. 23650 Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning ofthe surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There is one item of correspondence from the Engineering Division, dated October 12, 2006, 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 proprietor has configures the proposed driveway to Filmore Avenue to discourage traffic from going through the residential neighborhood. The legal description for the rezoning should be changed as follows." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions for the staff before we go to the petitioner? Seeing none, would the petitioner please step forward? Eric D. Rauch, Desine Inc., 2183 Pless Drive, Brighton, Michigan 48114. Also with me tonight is Rick Eccles, Property Manager for Sundance, Incorporated. As previously menfioned, this was a rezoning request that the Planning Commission saw a year ago, so I'm going to briefly refresh everybody about the request and its intricacies. Mark, could you put up the proposed zoning presentation? The subject parcel is located at 19055 Farmington Road. It's currently .48 acres in size and was constructed in 1982. It no longer meets the current specifications published by the Taco Bell Corporation. The Corporation, as you may recall, issued an ultimatum to all their franchisee holders nationwide, and that was that they must demolish and reconstruct all their buildings that were built in the 80's. They call them their mission -style buildings. Prior to franchise agreements being renewed for particular sites when that agreement comes up for renewal. The renewal for this site came up on September 20, 2006, two months ago almost. The Corporation was kind enough to issue the petitioner a one-year extension based on the fact that they recognized he is seeking approval processes here at the City of Livonia. The subject parcel is zoned C-2, which does permit the full service restaurant and the existing restaurant has dine -in and carryout service. It would be required to add a drive-thru service to meet Corporate standards. However, when you look at the existing property here, it's got an odd Oklahoma shape to it, and it doesn't accommodate the addition of a drive-thru lane and the 23651 efficient counterclockwise traffic movements that are associated with it. Could we go to the artist's rendering, Mark? So to make improvements that can meet both Corporate and city standards, the petitioner put a contingent purchase offer on the property at 19036 Filmore Avenue. The proposed construction would demolish the existing house and use less than one-half of that properly for features associated with the Taco Bell. The remaining 60 percent, as previously mentioned, would be used as an open space area and contribute toward buffering characteristics to the adjacent residential uses. To help limit the effects on the adjacent uses, the property's site design would consist of a five-foot tall screening wall on tie western end here, the southern end, then back down west. This wall would be five foot tall, have a red brick appearance with a limestone cap, and would be indicafive of a lot of the imaging that you see here at the City of Livonia. And it would effectively prevent site lightng and vehicle headlight glare from traversing onto adjacent properties. So this wall, five-foot tall wall, provides a barrier from all the site lighting activities within the Taco Bell facility. A mixture of coniferous and deciduous trees would be planted within that 50 fool buffer, and the addition of a 10 fool buffer along the west side would again have coniferous and deciduous trees to help dampen particularly noise pollution which the screening wall wouldn't do. The 50 -fool space along the south side would be irrigated, maintained and mowed on the same weekly basis as the rest of the Taco Bell so there wouldn't have to be any worry about it overgrowing and looking obtrusive. Additionally, the 10 -fool strip on this west side here apparently doesn't exist right now. The Taco Bell abuts directly up against Filmore Avenue. So the residences across Filmore Avenue now have a 10 -foot buffer, the addition of landscaping, and the additon of the screening wall, which currently aren't there. So these are all elements which currently don't exist on this site. It's important to remember that the site currently is adjacent to residential uses. It would continue to be adjacent to residential uses but we proposed a 10 -foot buffer, a 50 -fool buffer, screening walls and significant landscaping - all three buffering elements which currently are not on site. The closest any resident would be to the Tam Bell screening wall is approximately 75 feet. Currently, the closest residence to the Taco Bell screening wall is 23 feet. So there is an isolafion increase of 52 feet between the two uses. Additonally, the existing Taco Bell restaurant, the building itself, the closest residence to it now is 85 feet away, and the proposed restaurant to the closest residence, it would be 123 feel. So again you're seeing an isolafion distance increase by 38 feel. Could you go 23652 to the sound level presentation? As we went through the rezoning process last year, a lot of the residents, and rightfully so, haw concerns about noise. So we took a look at our known highest noise level, and that would be the speaker post at the drive-thru mini -board. The speaker post, first off, has what they refer to as an OCB, an order confirmation board. It prevents a lot of the back and forth communications by actually having the order on a TV screen in front of them. And the speaker post comes from the manufacturer preset at 70 decibels. The petitioner has the ability to lower that down to 60 decibels. And we know that sound diminishes at a rale of 6 decibels every time the distance from the sound source is doubled. So by the time you gel to the nearest adjacent residence, the sound has diminished down to 30 decibels. That doesn't even take into account all the buffering characteristics between those two points if they were just traveling through thin air. So when you start taking into account the screening wall, the significant landscaping, the existing stockade fences, it would easily diminish near 10 decibels which brings everything down to about 20 decibels until you gel to the nearest residential use. As a comparison, off to the right there, 20 decibels is compared to the noise that TV sound stages would like to be at. Basically, it's the point with which the human ear actually begins to hear sound. Its literally a pin drop. There has been developments over the Iasi 5 or 10 five years here in the City of Livonia which have set precedence for similar improvements such as the Taco Bell would like to make. In 2000, the Hunt's Ace Hardware, which is just two blocks to the west, received approval to rezone residential property so that they could expand their parking lot. If you look at our improvements, our improvements are for parking and traffic circulation features within our site. So our 6,000 square foot with which we're requesting the rezoning only has the parking and traffic circulation functions, similar to the Hunt's Ace Hardware. Additionally, we're providing the isolation distances, the buffering characteristics, both the screening wall and the natural charectensfics, which Hunt's Ace Hardware didn't. Likewise, in 1996, the Winlergarden Bar received approval to rezone residential property so they would expand their parking lot. That particular site is klty comer on the north side of Seven Mile just east of Farmington, and again, doesn't offering the buffering characteristics which are being proposed here tonight at the Taco Bell site. It's also important to remember that the Wintergarden Bar oftentimes on the weekend does have very late hours of operation. So that's certainly consistent with what you see in the area. Sundance Incorporated, they're very experienced developers who 2assa understand the importance of being a responsible neighbor. In fact, since the petitioner owned the property, they received an average of 1.87 disturbing the peace calls per year and that's per the city's police records obtained in 2005. I've had the pleasure and my company has had the pleasure of working with them for seven years, and over the Iasi four years, we've done about 25 Taco Bells in 25 different municipalifies. In 2005, the petitioner was granted Commercial Development of the Year awards in Canton Township and in the City of Brighton, and just last week the City of Dearborn awarded them the Standards in Excellence award. This is an award that indicates businesses that promote an outstanding year round exterior beautification and maintenance program. I think the interesting thing about this particular site in the City of Dearborn, which they just received an award on, it happens to be directly adjacent to a significant amount of residential. I'd like to pass this over. Mr. Walsh: Hand it down here to the end and we'll pass it along. Mr. Rauch: Thal site has never had a complaint. In fact, the residences, the only buffering they have to the Taco Bell is a five-foot tall screen wall. They dont have the 50 fool isolation. They dont have the mixture of coniferous and deciduous trees. There's never been an issue at the site, which is just about 15 miles south from here. Just last week they won an award for the site. So I think you guys can feel comfortable that these are developers who not only talk a good game but also produce one. As previously mentioned, the Corporation is forcing Taco Bell to make these improvements or the site will be closed. What would be left is an odd -shaped piece of property with that Okalahoma shape with the building on it that's obviously an old Taco Bell. They're seeking to make a substantial investment into a business that has been operating at that location for over 25 years now, and if this investment isn't allowed to be made, on September 20, 2007, they will be forced to shut their doors. Thank you, and at this time I will open it to the Board for any questions. Mr. Walsh: Thank you. Are there any questions? Mr. La Pine: Sir, it is my understanding that the proposal you're making tonight is exactly, to the last detail, the same one you made to us a year ago. Is this correct? Mr. Rauch: Yeah. 23654 Mr. La Pine: Now, tell me so I can understand why I should change my vote, what has changed so that I would have a reason to change my vote? I can see nothing has changed. Everything is the same. The only thing that has changed is when you go to City Council, the votes may change a little there and you would gel it passed. As far as I'm concerned, I read all the minutes from the last meeting. Nothing as far as I can see has changed to make me change my vole. Something would have to be substantially different for me to change my vole. So if you don't have anything different that's changed, then I have no reason to change my vote. Mr. Rauch: We just hope that, you know, the economic condition of our state has certainly changed in the Iasi year. This is a business that's been in operation for 25 years, and they would like to continue to operate there. That's why we're here tonight. We don't want to give up. We'd like to operate at this particular site. If not, they're forced to close the business with which they've operated and it's loo bad. Mr. LaPine: Well, the only thing I can say to that, I don't want you to go out of business anyway. My biggest objection to this whole operation from the beginning has been the drive Jhm. Now, you mentioned Ace Hardware. I was on the Board. I voted for that. The Wintergarden Bar where they lore down a house. I voted for that, but they don't have any drive-thm. They dont have any problem with the traffic. That corner at Seven Mile and Farmington Road is a very busy comer. We're talking two different things here - a drive-lhm and not a drive-thm. As far as I'm concerned, if nothing has changed, I have no reason to change my vote. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, Mr. Rauch, if you don't gel the approval to have this rezoning completed, either by this Board or the City Council, has Taco Bell or this particular franchisee taken a serious look at other commercial properties in the area, and what is their Plan B? Mr. Rauch: Certainly, the petitioner I know has looked for several years. This ultimatum by the Corporation isn't something that just came about last year or anything. It's been around for about four or five years and prior to these rezoning requests. There's been a very aggressive look for properties in this area. Another limiting factor is the Corporation sets these limits. I believe we have to be within half a mile of this particular intersection. We looked at one property very aggressively and another one kind of shaked 23655 out real fast that it wasn't going to work and there's certain properties in the area where owners won't sell to us for competition reasons. Mr. Walsh: Is there anything else, Mr. Wilshaw? Mr. Wilshaw: No, thank you. Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that cashes to speak for or against this petition? Ladies and gentlemen, if you do wish to speak please come forward to a microphone on either side and give us your name and address. Roger M. Cote, 19018 Filmore. I live right next door to the properly that's supposed to be rezoned. I'd like to take a minute to thank the Planning Commission and the Council and everybody that helped us through the ordeal we had. We tried real hard to, you know, keep our neighborhood a peaceful and safe neighborhood, and I do believe that if a drive thru is put into our location, a lot of bad things could happen. I know they have said the parcel, like if they can't build at that location, they'll have to abandon the location. I submitted seven or eight different pictures of different Taco Bell locations that became other businesses. They weren't just left vacant. Other businesses became other businesses after Taco Bell left. I've seen all kinds of different places around town that they could possibly build on. One really good location would be there right on Middlebelt and SchoolcraR. There's a Chi Chi's restaurant that's been vacant there for a long time, and it seems like that would be a perfect location, wouldn't have to tear a house down. All they would have to do is tear that business down and build their business and maybe a lot of times they have two franchises in one. I guess the new franchises that they have now. But it seems they could do a lot better trying to plan on finding a better location than to just tear up a neighborhood. Everybody deserves to have peace and quiet and safely in their neighborhoods. We're all taxpayers. We like to live good just like everybody else. This is just going to be a lot of pressure on us. This place here is open unfit 1:00 in the morning, maybe 1:30 in morning, because I hear music coming from that place all the time. Just putting up a five fool wall, you know, you have the party store and if you have a wall, just the noise going through there is going to echo through the whole neighborhood. I could hear the expressway at 275 in the summertime. Cars driving on a -way and that's like a couple miles down the road. You could imagine being right next door, you know, like your 23656 privacy and everything else. Its a bad idea for the neighborhood. We just hope that the right thing gets done, and thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Thank you, Mr. Cole. Good evening. Karen Greenwald, 19007 Filmore. I live kitty corner. Well, its directly across from Mr. Cole and would be kitty comer from the home. I'd like to ask the petitioner a couple questions if I may. Mr. Walsh: If you could direct them to us, then they'll have the opportunity at the end to answer them. Ms. Greenwald: Oh, okay. I'm sorry. My question is this: This home that they want to demolish is actually an improvement as to what was there before. The home prior had been almost abandoned, and basically a builder look it and he re -beautified it and made it what it is and it contributed to the neighborhood. My question is, within the Iasi five years, if Taco Bell has known that they needed to do these modifications, why didn't they purchase the properly at that time when the house was ... literally the ceiling had caved in and the windows were broken. It seems to me now we have something that contributes to our neighborhood and we want to tear it down. Well, that to me makes absolutely no sense. Mr. Walsh: Ms. Greenwald, we'll make note of that comment, and if they care to answer the question, they'll have the opportunity at the end of the public hearing to do so. Ms. Greenwald: Okay. The other thing is, I heard a couple things also about sound, and I'd like to bring this up. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the neighborhood at rest is 45 decibels. Okay? So this idea that you can adjust up or down the squawk box and its only going to be what 6 decibels or 10 decibels or whatever, really, I mean, there's no scientific documentation that will support that and I do have that information from the EPA. Also, boom cars come through the neighborhood. Boom cars are cars that have been specially designed so that they have speakers that are built right into the vehicle. And you've probably been next to a vehicle that when you had the windows rolled up and you can feel the boom of the car next to you? Okay, well, while that may not be problematic if you only have one or two, but if you have a drive-thru, we will . . a boom car can be heard up to half a mile away, and actually it's a physiological issue, and again, I have documentation of all 23657 this from the EPA. What happens is, it can actually gel into your home. If there's a reverberation, there's a low current and people have to put up with that, and I certainly didn't move into this neighborhood to put up with that kind of noise. The issue also about the Winlergarden Bar, as I understand it, that was not really expanded into the residential neighborhood. It was expanded along Farmington Road. It does abut against a residential area, but there again, like you were saying, there's traffic coming and going, but you don't have a squawk box; you don't have the people driving through and ordering food. The only other residential locafion that I know of that really has any kind of commercial zoning is the Dunkin' Donuts near Seven Mile and Middlebelt Road. As far as extending the beautification of the neighborhood, I have absolutely no problem with Taco Bell coming into our neighborhood, but I do have a problem with the noise and with our residential area, which I purchased into a residence. If I wanted to purchase into commercial land, I would have done so. And so I think its great that they have the beautification awards, but no buffer is going to be substantial enough to keep that sound out of my ears and out of my neighbors' ears. Hunt's Ace Hardware, as far as I understand, they took the owner's home and actually look that lot land out and then they expanded in the back so they were not ... in effect, it really wasn t that much land either, but it was the way that the land was developed. So I believe that while it would be nice to have a taco in every car and a Taco Bell in every garage, I just don't think its good for us at this site. Thank you. Gloria Kildani, 19031 Filmore. Good evening. I first want to say that again I'm here for the proposal of the rezoning of Taco Bell, which was denied last year. As Mr. LaPine had mentioned, no changes have been made. My observation is that last time it needed to be denied it was a minority vole, 2 to 5. Now I hear that a majority vote is needed because it's no longer a formal petition. I first want to say shame on Taco Bell for making the community of Filmore Street go through this again in less than a year's time. Both committees have stated that the rezoning did not fit into the surrounding area and the proposal was defeated. I have not seen any major changes to the rezoning area that should or would allow this to succeed. We, as residents of this area, have been through major turmoil just with the construction that took place this summer on the street of Seven Mile and Farmington. I personally have two children who play in the neighborhood. This summer, my husband and I were fearful of them playing outside in front due to the excessive traffic on the 23658 street. The construction continued during the beginning of the school year. My children walked to and from the bus stop. Early in the morning and in the afternoon, the traffic was constant due to people cutting through the street so that they didn't have to wait those extra few minutes on Seven Mile and Farmington. With Taco Bell, Filmore would be another exit out instead of having to wait to turn back onto Farmington through the drlve-lhru. In the beginning of this construction mess, we had several days where police officers were situated in the area slopping cars speeding through the street. I personally had witnessed several cars being slopped by the police for speeding and that was in a very short period of time. Mr. Walsh: Ma'am, I'm going to ask you to keep your comments to the Taco Bell issue. Ms. Kildani: Okay. With this proposal that does not ft into an area, the traffic we have now and we will have will be a constant lifestyle change for us on Filmore Street. This is not the quiet street I had purchased my house on five years ago. Right after the first proposal of Taco Bell was defeated, a new driveway was .. . that has nothing to do with Taco Bell. Mr. Walsh: If you could just keep it to that. I appreciate what you've gone through, but we need to keep our comments on Taco Bell tonight. Ms. Kildani: Okay. I understand. I also have a concern that if Taco Bell does succeed in passing this proposal, what guarantee do we have that the portion being rezoned will not be brought up again to be voted on later to be changed into commercial? Surely not the word of Taco Bell. According to them, if the first proposal was not to pass, they would be closing their doors because the contract of Taco Bell headquarters said that if it was not changed by a certain dale, they had to close. In concern with this upkeep of the rezoning of residenfial property, who are we to believe that this will be taken care of? Taco Bell says they will. We dont know if they're going to or not. Please take into consideration the value and cencems of the surrounding neighborhood, not the community who will not have to deal with drastic life changes, but with the residents of Filmore Street and the colleagues who voted this proposal down less than a year ago, if not less than five months. Again, I would like to state that the safety of our children and the sanity of our life here on Filmore Street is in question with the rezoning of the property and the expansion of Taco Bell. Again, thank you. 23659 Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody else in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? I see no one coming forward at this time. I'm going to close the public hearing. The petitioner has the opportunity to speak before we proceed to a motion. It's your choice, unless the commissioners have any questions. Mr. Morrow: I do have a question, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Rauch: Yes, I would like to lake this opportunity to speak about a couple things that were brought up. It is my understanding that the improvements to the existing house at 19036 Filmore Avenue were completed seven years ago, that of course a couple years prior to this ultimatum by the Taco Bell Corporation. In regards to the function of the drive thru, and noise, and boom boxes, I have passed around an air photo of one of the existing sites in Dearborn. I have a few others here that abut residential loo; one in the City of Ann Arbor, Redford, the City of Adrian, all abut residential. If you want to look at them or rot, none of them have problems. I think the problem is more perceived that it actually is perceived during the site plan review process and things of that nature. What the petitioner actually finds is that they dont gel that many complaints. One of the unique things about a drive-thru restaurant with the speaker posts is a person keeping their volume up on their car stereos won't be able to order. They have to tum down their volume just to listen. These are things, the boom boxes, which are bothersome, I certainly recognize that. I also recognize that they are a condition of our society and not so much a condition of our site, and we would certainly love to do everything within our power, and they do everything within their power, to try and keep those elements diminished as much as possible. Also, functions on Filmore Avenue about the increase in traffic, you guys have it within your documentation a traffic impact study which was completed by a third party. It conducted that there would not be an increase of traffic on Filmore Avenue within the residential area. In fact, you can expect a significant decrease. The biggest reason for that is because currently the function of the ingress and egress has four traffic movements, two way in and two way mt. Three of those four traffic movements would be eliminated in our proposed plan by making it egress to the right only, forcing all traffic out of the Taco Bell property north toward Seven Mile Road. So certainly we've listened to concerns through the residents, through communications most of last year, and implemented that element early on and recognized that as being problematic and did everything within our power 23660 by making that right tum only, the geometry and also signage so that issue could be lessened. Mr. Walsh: Thank you. We do have one question for you from one of the commissioners. Mr. Morrow: Yes, I dont think we covered it so far. I think it came out at the last public hearing. What is the percentage increase of business the drive-thru will produce? Mr. Rauch: About 30 percent. Mr. Morrow: That's what I had in my mind. The concern I have obviously is not with your speaker system for ordering; it's the lineup that you will have waiting to gel to the speaker. There will be a lot more cars trying to gel through the drive-lhru. I think Taco Bell is very successful, which means its going to have a lot of traffic there. The neighbors are apparently have trouble coping with what exists now, so we're going to increase that by probably more than one-third, because now they have to gel out of their cars and go in and then come back out. Now a lot of them will be outside. If this zoning were granted, you would have to come back for a waiver of use to put through a drive-lhru, would you not? Mr. Rauch: That's correct. Mr. Morrow: So tonight the zoning, if you were just doing it without the drive- thru, it would be a wonderful plan. But because the drive-thru is an integral part of what we're doing here tonight, my feeling is we might as wet nip it in the bud based on what we decided at the last public hearing. You put together a wonderful plan. The only problem is that it's too close to the neighborhood. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Are there any additional questions? At this point then, a motion would be in order. On a motion by La Pine, seconded by Morrow, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-116-2006 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 2006, on Petition 2006-09-01-08, submitted by Peter Lyders, on behalf of Old West Properties, L.L.C. (a franchisee of Taco Bell Corp.), requesting to rezone a portion of the property at 19036 Filmore, located on the east side of Filmore Avenue between Seven Mile 23661 Road and Clanta Avenue in the Northeast 114 of Section 9 from R3 to G2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2006-09-01-08 be denied for the following reasons: 1. That this general area in the vicinity of the Farmington Road and Seven Mile Road intersection contains sufficient C-2 zoned lands to serve the needs of the area; 2. That the petitioner has failed to adequately demonstrate a need in this area for additional commercial uses such as are permitted by the C-2 district; 3. That the proposed change of zoning will extend non- residential zoning too far into a residential area; 4. That the proposed change of zoning is incompatible to the residential uses in the area to the south and west; 5. That the development of the subject property for commercial use in conjunction with adjacent properties will result in an increase in traffic and the location of the properties relative to access from public streets, particularly with respect to vehicular turning movements in relation to routes of traffic flow and access to off-street parking, will be hazardous and inconvenient and will be detrimental to the surrounding area; and 6. That the proposed change of zoning is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Plan designation of Low Density Residential land use for the subject 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. Walsh: Is there any discussion? Mr. Wilshaw: I appreciate the petitioner coming in and giving us an overview of his request again. I think the petitioner has made a nice effort to mention the fad that the Taco Bell is looking to improve the site overall. He's got beautification awards. He's talking about a brick wall that looks nice. But what's before us today is not a site plan. It's a rezoning request. And when I look at it purely on the merits of a rezoning request, what I see is an encroachment of commercial zoning into a residential area 2ass2 that's not right on the surface of Seven Mile Road. The Wine Castle is north of this property. There's reference to Hunt's Ace Hardware encroaching slightly into the residential area for parking expansion. But Hunt's Ace Hardware is right on Seven Mile Road. This property is not. This property is one commercial properly south of Seven Mile Road and what they're looking to do is further increase that southbound movement of the commercial property. And that's what disturbs me. I think that they certainly have good intertions. I think that the Taco Bell can hopefully find a location in the city where they can develop their site and do it in this attractive manner, but I don't think this is the place to do it. Ms. McDermott: I just want to say that I was not here the last time around for this but when look at this issue, I have to look at it as if it were next to my home. And I think if the truth be told, there are not very many residents that would like to see commercial property move next to their home with a fast food restaurant with a drive-lhru window. I feel that I'm here to look at the best interests of both the city and residents, and I also agree this is not the place to do it. Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go onto City Council with a denying resolution. ITEM#2 PETITION 200640-01-09 STARBUCKS COFFEE Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2006- 10-01-09 submitted by Cambridge West Limited Partnership, on behalf of Starbucks Coffee, requesting to rezone properly at 39209 Six Mile Road, located on the southeast corner of Six Mile Road and Haggerty Road in the Northwest''/. of Section 18 from OS to C-2. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There is one item of correspondence from the Engineering Division, dated October 18, 2006, which reads as follows: `Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objection to the proposal at this time. No additional right-of-way is required. The legal description for the Starbucks parcel to be 2360 rezoned follows." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions for the staff before we go to the petitioner? Seeing none, is the petitioner here this evening? Good evening. Brady Blain, Cambridge West limited Partnership, 39209 W. Six Mile Road, Suite 111, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Good evening. Mr. Walsh: Is there anything you'd like to add to the presentation? Mr. Blain: Well, to give you a general overview of why I'm here today, Starbucks approached us several months ago to locale one of their coffee shops at our corner. As everyone is aware, it's a popular corner and they fell their coffee shop would do very well there. As mentioned, Security Bank and Trust and subsequently First of America and National City did have a three lane drive- lhru in the exact area that Starbucks and Cambridge West is proposing to do a 1,700-1,800 square fool drive-thm structure. The site handled the bank drive-thm adequately, and we feel that the traffic for this Starbucks location wouldn't be much more than that of the bank branch that was there for 9 or 10 years plus. No curb cuts are going to be required for this property. There are actually three drives that service the building. One additional one on Haggerty that is not shown there. There it is. Therefore, turning in and out of the property should not be a problem. You're able to tum right onto Six Mile Road either by taking the Haggerty exit then a right on Six Mile or cutting through the lot and taking aright directly onto Six Mile, turning left onto Haggerty, just by turning left on either one of the two drives. You can tum left on Six Mile by turning out of the Haggerty Road exit and taking a left at the left hand tum signal at Six Mile. The only question there is tatting a left onto Haggerty, which can be difficult at times because of the backup at the light. But again, the second driveway to Haggerty should allow an easy left hand turn onto Haggerty. Therefore, we feel it would be a good use to Starbucks and that's why I'm here this evening. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mrs. Smiley: Starbucks doesn't have any drive-thru. People have a tendency to go in there and silfor a few minutes. Mr. Blain: I'm sorry.? 23664 Ms. Smiley: You dont have drive-thm service, do you, from Starbucks? Mr. Blain: Yes, there is a drive-thru service. Ms. Smiley: There is? Mr. Blain: Its proposed to be a drive-lhru. I've been told it's a new development on their part. And to be honest with you, we really tried to gel them to take the old bank location right at the comer of the building there. They did have a drive-lhru there, and they are adamant about having a stand-alone structure in the parking lot. But no, there is a drive-thm there, and I've planned for about 20 to 30 seats in the building itself. Ms. Smiley: What percentage do you think is drive-lhru in a Starbucks? Mr. Blain: I couldn't answer that question. Mr. La Pine: When was the last banking business done there? Mr. Blain: National City moved out. They built their own branch down on Haggerty between Seven and Eight Mile. They moved out just over a year ago. I think it was September, 2005. Mr. La Pine: 2005? Mr. Blain: Yes. Mr. La Pine: Mr. Blain is not here this evening, is he? Mr. Blain: No, he is not. Mr. La Pine: When we started the project for College Park, Mr. Blain was dead against it because he said there's so much traffic in that area. Since then, as you probably know, there is tremendously more traffic there today than there was when the bank was there. Mr. Blain: Right. Mr. La Pine: And it's probably going to get worse as time goes by, especially when you take into consideration just south of you up Haggerty, there's Bosch Automotive going in; there's a new shopping center on the corner of Five Mile. A lot of that traffic has to come south to Six Mile to get back on the expressway. So 23665 anything that happens on Haggerty Road worries me because of the traffic problem. Mrs. Smiley asked one of the questions I'd like to know. I'd like to know from Starbucks how much traffic do they expect to have there? How much drive-thm traffic, basically people driving in, getting their drink and trying to gel back out onto either Haggerty or Six Mile Road in the morning and in the afternoon? That's important to me. Apparently, we don't have that information this evening. Secondly, do you know if they're going to close the Starbucks that's in the Barnes & Noble Bookstore across the street? Is that going to close and everything is going to operate over here? Mr. Blain: As far as I know, and a Starbucks representative wasn't able to make it tonight, they do plan on making future meetings, but I am unaware of them closing the Starbucks in the Barnes & Noble to answer that question. And in regard to your question about your traffic concerns, yes, there is heavy traffic at that intersection. I can't speak of future traffic but today there is heavy traffic there. We're of the opinion, and Starbucks is of the opinion, that by adding that location, it's not going to create more traffic than what's already there. Starbucks doesn't consider itself a destination slop. People who slop at certain Starbud<s locations slop there because it's either to and from work or wherever it is that they may be going. We're of the opinion it won't necessarily create more traffic that doesn't already exist at that intersection. Mr. LaPine: I intend to disagree with you, but that's my personal opinion. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: In one of our earlier meetings, your dad had talked about this building as being something that if Starbucks was to move out or be unsuccessful for whatever reason, I can't imagine a Starbucks not being successful, but his intention was basically to demolish it. He really didn't want this to become anything else. It that still the case, and if so, would you be willing, since this is a rezoning request, to consider a voluntary conditional rezoning staling that if this is no longer Starbucks that the zoning ofthis property would go back to office use? Mr. Blain: I think we would consider that, yes. He did say that, and I don't think I would be standing here tonight before you if wasn't Starbucks approaching us for a coffee location. If it was Java Joe's or some other group, I dont think I would be standing here before you today. But that is, yes, what he said. This is a 10 year lease. Starbucks is a world dass corporation that's going 23666 to run a first class operation. I don't foresee them going anywhere anytime soon. But we could take that into consideration. Sure. Absolutely. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Mr. Walsh: Anything else? Mr. La Pine: Can I ask just one more question? How fast do you need this? Can we table this until we gel a representative from Starbucks so I can get a handle on how much traffic I can expect during different peak hours of the day, or is this something that has to be on a fast track? Mr. Blain: They're the one's pushing this more so than we are. Their timeframe as of today is that they would like this structure built before the end of their fiscal year. I believe which is like September -October next year. So we're just trying to meet that timefmme as of today. That's really where we're at with negotiations. Again, we wanted to see where we would be with this approval process and to gel a feel from you before really anything has progressed too far. Mr. Morrow: Mr. Blain, following up Mr. W lshaw's comments, at least as one Planning Commissioner, I wouldn't be willing to grant C-2 at that location. Mr. Blain: I'm sorry. Mr. Morrow: I wouldn't be willing to grant C-2 forever and ever on that particular property, but like you, you were impressed with the factthat it would be a Caribou, not Caribou but a ... Mr. Blain: Starbucks. Mr. Walsh: You just mined all the money they spent on advertising. Mr. Morrow: I thought of that earlier because they'll probably siphon some business off of Caribou Coffee. But no, you were impressed with the petitioner or the group that wants to come in there. And so would you be willing to commit that your company would have to do it, that the zoning would revert to the office classification should - what's his business again? I'm not one of these coffee people. Mr. Blain: Starbucks. 23667 Mr. Morrow: Starbucks. Would you be willing to commit to that? Mr. Blain: I believe we would. Mr. Morrow: The keyword there is believe. Mr. Blain: You need a definitive answer tonight? Mr. Morrow: Pardon? Mr. Blain: You need a definitive answer? Mr. Morrow: Well, it's more important that the definitive answer is done at the Council level. I'd like to ask the Chairman if it would be possible. Mr. Walsh: It's a Council decision but I think the point, Mr. Blain, if I may speak for Mr. Morrow, we have to vole tonight or table R. Mr. Blain: Yes, I understand. Mr. Walsh: We have at least two members thus far that have indicated some desire for that commitment. If you want an up or down vote tonight, then we need the commitment so we know what we're voting on. Mr. Blain: I understand. Mr. Walsh: Is that a safe way to put it? Mr. Morrow: And I'm not so sure that's something that Mr. Blain would want, to revert it back. Mr. Blain: I think we would be willing to revert it back to OS. Yes. Mr. Morrow: The site is not that large and it would be hard to get anything else in there, but like I said earlier, just to grant a C-2 on that parking lot is not something I consider good planning unless we know exactly what the use is going to be. Mr. Blain: I understand. Mr. Morrow: Thank you. 23668 Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion would be in order. Mr. LaPine: Mr. Chairman, seeing that Mr. Blain, Sr. is not here to tell us if he would agree to what Mr. Morrow is alluding to, and I'd like to have a representative from Starbucks here to just give me a feel for how much additional traffic may be along that corridor. I would make a tabling motion. On a motion by LaPine, d was RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby table Petition 2006-10-01-09 submitted by Cambridge West Limited Partnership, on behalf of Starbucks Coffee, requesting to rezone property at 39209 Six Mile Road, located on the southeast corner of Six Mile Road and Haggerty Road in the Northwest % of Section 18 from OS to C-2. Mr. Walsh: We have a tabling motion. Is there support? Mr. Morrow: Mr. Chairman, did not Mr. Blain make that commitment tonight that they would revert the zoning back? Mr. Walsh: I'm still hearing he thinks and believes. That's what I have thus far. Mr. Morrow: I thought I heard that he was going to make that commitment tonight for his corporation. Mr. Walsh: We do have the commitment. We still have a motion on the floor to table. Is there support? Hearing none, the motion fails for lack of support. Is there an alternative motion? On a motion by Morrow, seconded by Wiilshaw, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-117-2006 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 2006, on Petition 2006-10-01-09 submitted by Cambridge West Limited Partnership, on behalf of Starbucks Coffee, requesting to rezone property at 39209 Six Mile Road, located on the southeast corner of Six Mile Road and Haggerty Road in the Northwest % of Section 18 from OS to C-2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2006-10-01-09 be approved for the following reasons: 23669 1. That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the existing zoning on the property located at the northeast corner of the Six Mile Road and Haggerty Road intersection; 2. That the proposed change of zoning will not be detrimental to the surrounding land uses in the area; 3. That the proposed change of zoning will allow for the orderly and efficient development and use of the subject property in a manner that will be complementary to the existing developments on the adjacent properties; 4. That the proposed change of zoning will provide opportunities for a greater variety of uses to serve the area as well as the City as a whole; and 5. That the petitioner has voluntarily offered to enter into a conditional rezoning agreement with the city and include in the statement of cordifions a condifion whereby he would agree to remove the building and allow the zoning to revert back to the OS classification in the event Starbucks vacates the premises. 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. Walsh: Is there any discussion? Mr. Morrow: I would like to have the wording worked in there if we could relating to reverting back. Mr. Walsh: Mr. Taormina. Mr. Taormina: Actually, Stale law prohibits us from imposing that as a condition on the rezoning. I think we're relying upon the statement this evening by Mr. Blain that they will voluntarily offer that as a condition of the rezoning and that will be in a form of a Conditional Rezoning Agreement presented to the Council in connection with the final action on this rezoning this evening. We will discuss that with our Legal Department, but I just want it clear this evening that it's not something that this body is imposing upon tie petitioner as a condition for the rezoning. It is something that is being voluntarily offered. 23670 Mr. Morrow: And that can be shown in the minutes, right, that he has agreed to that? Mr. Taormina: Yes. Mr. Morrow: But not a part of our resolution. Mr. Walsh: That's correct. Mr. Morrow: Thank you. Mr. LaPine: A motion and second? Mr. Walsh: Not yet. Do we have a second for the motion? Mr. Wilshaw: I'll second it. Mr. Walsh: Mr. Wilshaw has seconded the motion. Is there further discussion? Mr. LaPine: I have another question, Mr. Blain. Do you know, Mr. Blain, what the hours of operation would be at this location? Do you have any idea? Mr. Blain: I dont know exactly the hours of operation at that location. Just being familiar with Starbucks, I believe it's 6:00 a.m. until about 10:00 P.M. Mr. LaPine: Okay. Mr. Walsh: Is there any further discussion? Mr. Wilshaw: Like my companion, Mr. LaPine, I do have a number of questions that I've reserved from not asking tonight because there isn't a representative from Starbucks here. It would be nice to have some of those answered at this point. I do think we can go ahead and start the rezoning process because just knowing how Starbucks does business, I think I can answer several of them in my head. It just would be nice to have a confirmation of some of them, but I certainly do encourage both the voluntary zoning contract zoning to be done and I certainly do encourage the petitioner to do whatever he can to make sure the Starbucks representatives are here at the upcoming meeting so we can get these questions answered. I think there are some legitimate questions when it comes to traffic, traffic flow, hours of operation and those types of things. 23671 Mr. Blain: Absolutely. Mr. Wilshaw: So I do encourage that. Mr. Blain: I'll make sure they're here next time. Mr.Wilshaw: Thank you. Mr. Walsh, 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 2006-09-0222 MIDAMERICASHOWS Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2006- 09-02-22, submitted by Mid America Shows, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to conduct a carnival sponsored by the Livonia Mall Merchants Association consisting of amusement rides, games and food concessions from Thursday, May 3, 2007 through Sunday, May 13, 2007, inclusive, on properly located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebell Road and Purlingbrook Road in the Southeast''/. of Section 2. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated September 19, 2006, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above-refemnced petition. We have no objection to the proposal at this time." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated September 19, 2006, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to conduct a carnival sponsored by the Livonia Mall Merchant's Association consisting of amusement rides, games and food concessions from May 3, 2007, through May 13, 2007, on property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt Road and Puringbrook Street in the Southeast X of Section 2. We have no objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Andrew C. Walker, Sr. Fire Inspector. The third letter is from 23672 the Division of Police, dated October 18, 2006, which reads as follows: We have reviewed the plans in connection with a proposal by Mid America Shows, Inc., for the carnival at Livonia Mall carnival located at Seven Mile and Middlebett. We have no objections or recommendations to the plans as submitted." The letter is signed by Dariusz Nisenbaum, Lieutenant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated September 20, 2006, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of September 18, 2006, 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. Mr. Walsh: Is the petitioner here this evening? Good evening. How are you? James Wegerly, Vice President of Mid America Shows, Inc., 3041 Serenity, Oakland, Michigan 48363. I'm very well. How are you? I am appearing before you this evening, as you've already staled, to once again request permission to conduct our annual carnival sponsored by the Livonia Mall Merchants Association at Livonia Mall. As Mr. Taormina already mentioned, the only exception to past approvals that you've been so gracious to grant is that we are going to be fully contained within the Livonia Mall property itself and we won't encroach upon Sears. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. LaPine: I was out there and tried to figure out what is Livonia Mall's property and where you are going to be. How do you keep cars from parking on Sears' properly and using the carnival? Mr. Wegerly: Well, I'm not really certain that we can do that, and I dont think that's really an issue with Sears. I think as you're well aware, you folks probably better than anybody, there's some discussion I think with Livonia Mall, L.L.C. and Sears regarding some redevelopment, and they just fell more comfortable, Livonia Mall did, having it just on their own properly. I don't think the parking is really an issue, and I don't think you could, in all due respect, I'm not sure you could do that with any of the businesses if you know what I'm saying. Mr. LaPine: Okay. I thought there was some conflict between the two of you. Mr. Wegerly: No, not in the least. No. 23673 Mr. LaPine: Okay. Fine. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Any other questions? Mr. Wilshaw: Hello, Mr. Wegery. Mr. Wegerly: Hi. Mr. Wilshaw: Just a couple obligatory type questions that I'm sure you're used to us asking. Security will be provided on site by the Police Department? Mr. Wegerly: City of Livonia police, yes. Mr. Wilshaw: And there won't be any storage of or any on-site residential or living quarters for your staff? Mr. Wegerly: We do leave just a smattering there for security purposes and they're not visible, as we have in the past. We have to have someone there. Mr. Wilshaw: Its all concealed? Mr. Wegerly: Yes, and they're actually inspected on-site by the Wayne County Health Department and License Division. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. As a result of the change in your layout this year, there wont be any impeding of traffic that would be proceeding up the roadway and around the mall? Its still going to be fully accessible? Mr. Wegerly: Yes. Absolutely. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Very good. Thank you. Mr. Wegerly: Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Are there any additional questions? Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion is in order. On a motion by Wilshaw, seconded by LaPine, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-110-2006 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 2006, 23s7a on Petition 2006-09-02-22, submitted by Mid America Shows, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to conduct a carnival sponsored by the Livonia Mall Merchants Association consisfing of amusement rides, games and food concessions from Thursday, May 3, 2007 through Sunday, May 13, 2007, inclusive, on property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebell Road and Puringbrook Road in the Southeast ''/ of Section 2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2006-09-02- 22 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the carnival shall be limited to the dales as specified by Mid America Shows, Inc., which are May 3, 2007 through May 13, 2007, inclusive; 2. That the proposed carnival operation shall be confined to the area as illustrated on the site plan submitted with this request; 3. That all rides, food concessions, booths and all other equipment and apparatus relating to the operation of the carnival shall be located at least 60 feel distant from the Seven Mile Road right-of-way line; 4. That all trucks and other transportation equipment shall be parked or stored within the northwesterly portion of the Livonia Mall parking lot, but no closer than 100 feet from the west properly line abutting the Ziegler Place site or 250 feet from the south property line abutting Hunters Brook Condominiums; 5. That there shall be no motors running on the stored trucks during late hours, especially between 11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., including motors on any refrigeration trucks; 6. That there shall be no Irving quarters at the location of the stored trucks; 7. That adequate access to nearest local hydrants be provided for firefighting and that adequate access be provided for medical units and personnel; 8. That adequate security shall be provided to insure a safe and orderly event; 23675 9. That temporary fences/barricades shall be placed along north, east and west perimeters to prevent pedestrians/children from walking or running into traffic areas; and 10. That the hours of operation of the carnival shall be as stated in a letter dated September 12, 2006 from James K. Wegedy, Vice President of Mid America Shows, Inc., which have been approved by the Police Department. 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 site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; 3. That the use of the subject properly for carnival purposes will not interrupt the normal traffic flow and circulation in the area and will notimpede access to the Livonia Mall; and 4. That no reporting City department objects to the proposed 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 amended. Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM#4 PETITION 200640-0223 ALOHA MARKET Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2006- 10-02-23, submitted by Valia, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD liquor license at 36274 Five Mile Road (Aloha Markel), located on the north side of Five Mile Road between Levan Road and Golfview Drive in the Southeast %of Section 17. 23676 Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under pefifion plus the exisfing zoning ofthe surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated October 13, 2006, 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 additional right -0f -way is required and the legal description as provided by the Planning Department is correct." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated October 13, 2006, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to operate a SDD license on property located at the above -referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Andrew C. Walker, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Inspection Department, dated October 18, 2006, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of October 11, 2006, the above - referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) The dumpster enclosure has no gates. 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. Walsh: Are there any questions for the staff? Mr. La Pine: Just one question. Mark, do you have any idea how old this building is or when it was built? Mr. Taormina: I can't answer that. I don't know. Mr. LaPine: Its really outdated. I just wondered about updating it somewhat. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Is the petitioner here this evening? Randal Toma, Randal Toma & Associates, PC, 29777 Telegraph Road, Suite 2500, Southfield, Michigan 48034. I also have Mr. Abdul standing here behind me, who is the owner of Valia, Inc., which is the owner and operator ofAloha Markel. Mr. Walsh: Okay. Thank you. Is there anything you'd like to add? 23677 Mr. Toma: Just a few quick statements. Basically, the convenience store has been in that location for over 30 years and the current owner and petitioner has been in business there for 6 years operating an SDM license without any incident. Since he has been there, he has done some improvements to the exterior and interior of the business to try and help them improve his business there. Currently, the owner has executed a purchase agreement to purchase an SDD license that's in the City of Livonia that's been in escrow that has not been in use. He has been through the Michigan Liquor Control Commission investigation and is now seeking the waiver use approval to utilize the SDD license to improve his business that has been suffering because of the economy and to also satisfy a lot of customer requests for liquor and spirits and things of that sort. Upon approval, the owner does plan to install brand new shelving behind the counter space, which would house the liquor inventory and would be out of access from the general public. Nothing further. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. LaPine: When I checked out this location, I went into the store. It's a pretty cluttered store, and my question is, the area shown where you're going to have the liquor, it doesn't look very big. How large of an inventory of liquor are you going to have? I mean some of the liquor stores in Livonia gel hundreds and hundreds of different brands of liquor, and I just dont see that much room in here behind that counter to do that. Mr. Toma: We tried to make it as accurate as possible. There is some space right directly behind the counter that's there right now, and it's going to go a little bit further. Its going to be 32 feel wide. There is some more space that is utilized for some ... I don't know what's over there. Just some counter, some instant ticket display, lottery displays, things that he's going to just rearrange and make more room for the liquor. Mr. LaPine: Okay. Mr. Toma: Probably 32 feel though. Mr. Wilshaw: Are you going to look to change any signage on your building as a result of the fact that you would be selling liquor? Mr. Abdul: We're just going to change the sign. It used to be beer and wine and grocery and lotto. I will lake that one down and just 23678 put Aloha Liquor. That's all it is. Or maybe change it if we get approval for a sign, maybe chain lettering to make it nicer. But Aloha Liquor. That's all it is. Actually the box is old anyway and we'll request to change it and make it look better and brigher you know. Maybe go with a color like red. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, I think in line with what Mr. LaPine was saying, this site does look a little fired. The site plan I have is dated 1963 so I'm guessing it was probably built somewhere in that neighborhood. Mr. Toma: He has been kind of holding off on doing some remodeling because it kind of depends on what he's going to do there, but he does plan on kind of revamping the floor plan and upgrading the shelves. It would be a new counter where the register sits as well. Things like that. He kind of has to know which way to go depending on the outcome of this petition. Mr. Wilshaw: A question through the Chair to Mr. Taormina. If this sign was to change as a result of what the owner is referring to, does he have to come in front of us for those changes, or if its in the same footprint as the old sign, is that okay or how does that work? Mr. Taormina: That can all be handled administratively. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. As long as he doesn't increase the size of the sign. Mr. Taormina: Correct. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. That's it for me. Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, I will close the public hearing. A motion would be in order. On a motion by Morrow, seconded by McDermott, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-119-2006 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 2006, on Petition 2006-10-02-23 submitted by Valia, Inc. requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD liquor license at 36274 Five Mile Road (Aloha Market), located on the north side of Five Mile Road between Levan Road and Golfview Drive in the Southeast % of Section 17, the Planning Commission does 23s79 hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2006-10-02- 23 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That all liquor products allowed to be sold in connection with the use of an SDD license at this location shall be displayed behind a counter with no direct public access in accordance with the Floor Plan submitted by Valia, Inc., as received by the Planning Commission on October 10, 2006; 2. That metal gales shall be installed on the existing dumpster enclosure located in the northwesterly portion of the subject property; 3. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council; 4. That the use of LED lighthands or exposed neon, such as to outline windows or building features, shall not be permitted on the site; and 5. That the specific plan referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time of application for the building permits and/or zoning compliance permits. Subjecttothe 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. 23680 Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM#5 PETITION 200640-0224 MT. HOPE CEMETERY Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2006- 10-02-24 submitted by Mikocem L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval to construct a mausoleum at 17840 Middlebelt Road (Mt. Hope Cemetery) located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Six Mile Road and Pickford Avenue in the Southwest'''/ of Section 12. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated October 16, 2006, which reads as follows: 'Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objection to the proposal at this time. No additional right-of-way is required, and the legal description is correct" The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated October 17, 2006, which reads as follows: `This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct a new mausoleum on property located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Six Mile Road and Pickford Avenue in the Southwest X of Section 12. We have no objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Andrew C. Walker, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Inspection Department, dated October 18, 2006, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of October 13, 2006, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) The Chapel must be posted with a codeoomplian 'maximum occupancy of 50' sign due to the single exit. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection. The next letter is from Bleznak Real Estate Group, dated November 7, 2006, which reads as follows: "1 represent the property immediately north of the cemetery, commonly known as Woodridge Apartments. On behalf of the ownership, 1 have two concerns regarding the proposed mausoleum. First, a height limitation not exceeding 2asmt 30 feet, and second, a minimum setback from our property line of 300 feet. 1 would appreciate you presenting my concerns at the public hearing. 1 can be reached at (248) 489-1111 if you would like to discuss further." The letter is signed by Mitchell Bleznak, President. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions for the staff? Mr. Wilshaw: As I understand it, the building is 16 feel in height. Is it more than 300 feel from the property line of this apartment complex? Mr. Taormina: It is substantially more. In fad, Mr. Nowak measured its distance to be 1,240 feel from the adjacent property line to the north. Mr. Wilshaw: Very good. Thank you. Mr. LaPine: I just want to ask Mr. Taormina one question. Mark, do we have anyjurisdiction overlhe roads inside the cemetery? Mr. Taormina: Not that I'm aware of. Mr. Walsh: Is the petitioner here this evening? If you could please come forward. Good evening. Steve Garske, Mikocem, L.L.C., 31300 Southfield Road, Bevedy Hills, Michigan 48025. Good evening. I work for Mikocem, L.L.C., the owner of the cemetery. I don't have much to say. The building, as it was said, is very similar to the one approved by the Planning Commission a few years ago. Its slightly smaller, and most of the crypts will be used to fulfill preconstrudion obligations that were purchased by the families in the surrounding community that were sold by a previous company that actually came before. Other than that, that's all I have. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Thank you, sir, for coming in tonight. Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? If you could please step forward to one of the microphones. Good evening. Mohamed Farag, 17553 Middlebell. Good evening. My name is Dr. Mohamed Farrag. I'm a psychologist. I reside just in front of the cemetery. I have serious concerns here because I think the project, in addition to some other things, can affect the property around the 23682 area in a very negative and serious way. First of all, it's not I think a pleasant scene to see everyday funerals, digging graves and mourners every morning and all the time. So, I'm a psychologist and I see how much it affects the homes. We have homes just in front of the place, and I think it's not good. Especially the owner did not build a green fence, tall trees, to provide privacy to the cemetery and also to protect the property around it and protect the fields of the residents around the area. So I have serious concerns here, and I think this project will just increase traffic around the area and will lead to more negative impact. Thankyou. Mr. LaPine: I'm kind of confused. Where do you live in relation to this? Say you're on Middlebelt Road. Do you live across Middlebell Road? Dr. Farmg: Yes, across Middlebell Road, across from the cemetery. Mr. LaPine: Okay. Across from the cemetery. How long have you been there? Dr. Farmg: More than eight years now. Mr. LaPine: The problem you have, the cemetery was there before you moved in. Its been there forever. Dr. Farmg: But there is a continuous increase in the area. Always there's expansion. So we see now maybe four or five times what we used to see before. Mr. LaPine: We're getting older. Dr. Farmg: What? Mr. LaPine: We're getting older. Dr. Farmg: Unfortunately. Mr. Walsh: Thank you, sir. Good evening. Anthony Jones, 17551 Middlebell. Good evening. I live right next door to the doctor there, and I can understand where he's coming from. I can live with the idea that's a cemetery, but when you're watching a structure go up, it's not loo pleasant to look at. Right now, its beautiful. I love looking across there, the landscaping. They keep the landscape beautiful and everything. But 23683 watching the structure go up, I think it's going to hurl our neighborhood, the location where it is. Mr. La Pine: But there's two structures there right now that are mausoleums on that properly. Have you ever noticed those? Mr. Jones: Yes, I noticed them but they're so small you really can look over them. Mr. Walsh: Thank you, sir. Is there anybody else in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, I'm going to close the public hearing. A motion is in order. Mr. Wilshaw: I will go ahead and make an approving resolution. Unfortunately, as we already discussed, that particular line of business is one that is increasing, and I can understand their need for additional space within their properly. On a motion by Wilshaw, seconded by LaPine, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-120-2006 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 2006, on Petition 2006-10-02-24 submitted by Mikocem, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval to construct a mausoleum at 17840 Middlebell Road (Ml. Hope Cemetery) located on the east side of Middlebell Road between Six Mile Road and Pickford Avenue in the Southwest % of Section 12, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2006-10-02-24 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the location of the mausoleum shall be in accordance with the Land Title Survey Plan prepared by Mannik & Smith, Inc., as received by the Planning Commission on October 12, 2006; 2. That the Landscape Plan submitted by Mikocem L.L.C. dated October 9, 2006, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 3. That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu of hydroseeding; 4. That the landscaping shown on the above -referenced Landscape Plan shall be installed to the satisfaction of the 23684 Inspection Department and thereafter shall be properly and permanently maintained; 5. That the Building Elevations Plan submitted by Mikocem L.L.C. dated October 9, 2006, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 6. That all rooftop mounted mechanical equipment shall be 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; 7. That the chapel shall be posted with a "code compliance maximum occupancy of 50" sign due to the single exit, as stipulated in the correspondence dated October 18, 2006 from the Inspection Department; and 8. 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. Walsh: Is there any discussion? Mr. Taormina: Something that was not brought out during the discussion on this item and for the benefit of the residents with concerns, this structure will be set back roughly 430 feet from Middlebell Road. Now there are some other structures on the property as was indicated, the pole barn and the offices; those are about 100 feet away from the right-of-way of Middlebelt Road. So if they 23685 could visualize this structure being almost three times further away, the equivalent of almost one and half football fields, there is a substantial setbackfrom Middlebelt Road forthis structure. Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM#6 PETITION 2006-10-02-25 MASON -STARK Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2006- 10-02-25, submitted by Mason -Stark Properties, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval for the outdoor storage of recreational vehicles and commercial vehicles at 12752 Stark Road, located on the east side of Stark Road between the CSX Railroad right -0f -way and SchoolcraR Road in the Northeast'/. of Section 28. Mr. Taormina presented a nep showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated October 13, 2006, which as follows: 'Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objection to the proposal at this time. No additional right-of-way is required, and the legal description as provided by the Planning Department is comect" The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated October 17, 2006, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request for waiver use approval for RV storage on property located on the east side of Stark Road between railroad right-of-way and Schoolcraft Road in the Northeast X of Section 28. The idea of a RV storage area is acceptable to the Fire Department with the following stipulations: (1) The developer shall provide a layout plan for the location of fences and lease spaces for review. (2) Access shall be maintained year round. (3) Hydrant spacing shall be consistent with City of Livonia Ordinances. (4) Fire lanes shall be not less than 20 feet of unobstructed width, able to withstand live loads of fire apparatus, and have a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance. (5) An approved turnaround for fire 23686 apparatus shall be provided where access is dead -ended and is in excess of 150 feet in length. The turnaround shall have a minimum turning radius of 53 feet wall-to-wall and an inside turning radius of 29 feet 6 inches. The authority having jurisdiction shall approve the grade, surface, and location of the fire lane. (6) T or Y turnaround arrangements shall be permitted. (7) Fire lanes shall be marked with freestanding signs that have the words 'Fire Lane — No Parking' painted in contrasting colors (on both sides) at a size and spacing approved by the authority having jurisdiction." The letter is signed by Andrew C. Walker, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Inspection Department, dated October 24, 2006, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of October 13, 2006, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) There appears to be no approval for currently existing RV storage at east end of property. (2) There is an unenclosed dumpster stationed in the drive area. (3) Maximum fence height in this district is limited to 8 feet. (4) Customer and employee parking and driveways are not marked property. (5) This site improperly drains roof water into the adjacent south property. This issue was previously brought to their attention and remains unresolved. (6) We request that all principals in this site be property fully identified including copies of identification acceptable to this Department" The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions for the staff? Seeing none, gentlemen, if you could step forward. Gary Lockwood, Mason -Stark Properties, L.L.C., 12752 Stark Road, Livonia, MI 48150. I'm the owner of the building that v 're speaking of. I've had discussions with Mr. Nowak as well as the other gentlemen, Alex. We'll comply to any changes that are required by the city. We will work in compliance with the City's desire to make these changes. It's an easy on and off ramp to the accessibility of our property. It is paved. It meets predominantly all the requirements at present for this type of variance, and we will work and comply with the City for any changes that need to be made at this time. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. LaPine: Unfortunately, Mr. Morrow and I were out there last Saturday and we couldn't gel into your property because of the 23687 construction on Stark Road. Big trucks were dumping slag and so forth. Mr. Lockwood: That isn't due to my situation. Mr. LaPine: I never had an opportunity to go behind the property to look at it. I assume from what I read hear 0 looks all right. I notice there was a sign on the property that its for sale or lease. Mr. Lockwood: We are right now, and I've put under contract a brokerage firm. We're not utilizing all the building. We have 18,000 square feel right now. Al one time, I employed 60 employees. I now work offshore with contractual arrangements offshore to manufacture my product. So I've cul my staff from 60 dental technicians to approximately about 22. It's dedining from that number. We manufacture dental prosthetics at that location but have licensed and contracted work offshore with China as well as the European contine nl to manufacture our product at this time. So there is no need for that type of parking in the back of the building, which is over the requirement on the paving. When I acquired the building approximately 14 or 15 years ago, we paved all the way back to the property, which we did not need that amount of parking. And I've allowed employees and some of my friends to utilize the back area without a permit to park their RVs, their boats al this time. Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Lockwood, there's some issue regarding drainage of water from your building onto the adjacent property. Is that going to be resolved? Mr. Lockwood: It will be resolved. I have no problem on a contingency basis to approve this. I have talked to the people regarding this at the city level. Ithink if you could speak to them, I can make those changes without difficulty whatsoever. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion is in order. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by McDermott, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-121-2006 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 2006, 23688 on Petition 2006-10-02-25 submitted by Mason -Stark Properties, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval for the outdoor storage of recreational vehicles and commercial vehicles at 12752 Stark Road, located on the east side of Stark Road between the CSX Railroad right-of-way and Schoolcraft Road in the Northeast % of Section 28, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2006-10-02-25 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Site Plan submitted by Mason -Stark Properties L.L.C., as received by the Planning Commission on October 19, 2006, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2. That the outdoor storage of recreational vehicles and commercial vehicles shall be limited to the rear yard storage area as identified and designated on the above - referenced Site Plan and shall be maintained in an orderly manner; 3. That there shall be no outdoor storage of dismantled, damaged or inoperable vehicles, and no outdoor storage of vehicle parts, scrap material and debris in connection with this use; 4. That adequate and properly directed lighting facilities, not exceeding 20 feet in height, shall be provided for the illumination of the storage area; 5. Thal the following issues as outlined in the correspondence dated October 24, 2006, from the Inspection Department shall be resolved to that department's satisfaction: That a dumpster enclosure shall be provided in the "dumpsler area" as shown on the Site Plan which shall be constructed of brick, block or reinforced poured concrete walls and with metal enclosure gales which shall be properly maintained and, when not in use, closed at all times; That the entire area utilized for recreational and commercial vehicle storage shall be enclosed by a fence of a type approved by the Inspection Department, not exceeding 8 feel in height unless a variance is granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals for excessive 23689 fence height, with only such openings as may be necessary for ingress and egress; That customer and employee parking and driveways shall be propedy marked and all parking spaces shall be double striped, including the provision of barrier free parking with proper signage, marking and configuration, and all regular spaces shall be 10' x 20' in size as required; That there shall be rectification of the existing problem that the site improperly drains roof water into the adjacent south property; That all principals in this site be properly fully identified including copies of identification acceptable to the Inspection Department. 6. That the issues as outlined in the correspondence dated October 17, 2006, from the Livonia Fire and Rescue Division relating to the layout plan for the location of fences and lease spaces, maintaining year round access, hydrant spacing, provision and signing of fire lanes, and an approved turnaround for fire apparatus, shall be resolved tothe satisfaction ofthe Fire Marshal; and 7. That the plan referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time the building permits and/or zoning compliance permits are applied for. Subjectto the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 16.11 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2. That the subject property 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. 23690 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. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #7 PETITION 200640-02-26 STUCCHI'S ICE CREAM Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2006- 10-02-26, submitted by Eicherl, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval to operate a limited service restaurant (Slucchi's Ice Cream) at 33316 Plymouth Road in the Fountain Park Development, on property located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Farmington Road and Mayfield Avenue in the Southwest % of Section 27. Mr. Walsh: I'm going to turn the floor over to Mr. Taormina and ask the Vice Chair to cover me for a minute. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. LaPine: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated October 16, 2006, which reads as follows: 'Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above-refemnced petition. We have no objections to the proposal at this time. No additional right-of- way is required. The legal description as shown is for the overall 1.60acre site and contains some typographic emors. The legal description to be used for the waiver use follows." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated October 17, 2006, which reads as follows: 'This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to operate an ice cream parlor on property located on the north side of Plymouth Road (Fountain Park) between Farmington Road and Mayfield Avenue in the Southwest X of Section 27. We have no objections to this omposal." The letter is signed by Andrew C. Walker, Fire Marshal. The last letter is from the Inspection Department, dated October 19, 2006, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of October 13, 2assi 2006, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) This site may have only one restroom with a total occupant load of 15 or fewer, including customers (seated and standing) and employees. This site may exceed that maximum. (2) The service areas must be barrier free from the customer side. (3) Should the project move forward, at this Departments plan review other items may be addressed, as needed, conceming ventilation, noise and odor abatement, plumbing, etc. 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. LaPine: Are there any questions for the staff? Is the petitioner here this evening? Kristen Eichert, Eichert, L.L.C., 15175 Gary Lane, Livonia, Michigan 48154. I'm here with my husband, Brian Eichert, who is the Vice President of Eichert, L.L.C. We are hoping to be approved to open a Stucchi's Ice Cream Shop at 33316 Plymouth Road in the Fountain Park Development, and we're here to answer any questions you might have for us. Mr. LaPine: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. Wilshaw: Ms. Eichert, I was looking at your site plan and you have mention of a coffee machine and microwave and a soup wanner, that type of thing. What are you going to be serving in this restaurant? Ms. Eichert: Our main item, of course, would be ice cream and everything that goes along with it, shakes, malts, things like that. It will be open 12 months out of the year, so to help us survive during the winter, go also with soups. And then we're also going to do a Chicago -style hot dog, which I think will do really well. Mr. Wilshaw: Are you going to have any sandwiches or anything along those lines? Ms. Eichert: No. There's a Jimmy John's already in the plaza, so we're unable to do anything like that. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Very good. Thank you. Ms. Smiley: Have you been in this business before? 23692 Ms. Eichert: I've actually worked in an ice cream shop for the past five years, run it, a shop in Northville. So I've been working there for five years. I dont own that shop but I have been working there and doing everything for that shop besides all the money part of it. I have five years experience. Ms. Smiley: Thank you very much, and I apologize for wrecking the name of the ice cream store. Ms. Eichert: That's okay. Mr. LaPine: What are your hours of operation? Ms. Eichert: Right now, we're planning to go from 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. or 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Hopefully in the summer go from 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Maybe in the winter cut back a little bit just because of trying to get people in there. Mr. LaPine: Let me pass the gavel back to the Chairman so I can ask some more questions. Something came up from the Inspection Department and maybe Mark and you can answer it about the restrooms. How do we determine if its going to be a single restroom or a double restroom? Mr. Taormina: That will be determined at the time of plan review by the Inspection Department. Mr. LaPine: During the summertime, there's going to be people lined up waiting for ice cream, and I just don't know if they're going to have bathroom facilities or not. There was one other thing I wanted to ask. Are you going to run the operation? Ms. Eichert: Yes. Mr. LaPine: How many employees do you think yoUll have? Ms. Eichert: We believe around 7 to 9, but hopefully we'll need more than that. From what we've heard from the corporation that we're working with, they usually have no more than 2 or 3 people working atone time. Mr. LaPine: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Walsh: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion is in order. 23693 On a motion by McDermott, seconded by LaPine, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-122-2006 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 2006, on Petition 2006-10-02-26 submitted by Eicherl, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval to operate a limited service restaurant (Slucchi's Ice Cream) at 33316 Plymouth Road in the Fountain Park Development, on properly located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Farmington Road and Mayfield Avenue in the Southwest % of Section 27, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2006-10-02-26 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the customer seating provided in connection with the subject use shall be in accordance with the Floor Plan marked Sheet Al prepared by the Foresta Group, P.C., Architects, dated October 9, 2006; 2. That the maximum number of customer seats shall not exceed 12, including 10 seats inside the building and 2 ouldoorseats; 3. That a trash receptacle shall be provided for the outdoor dining area and shall be emptied regularly as needed; 4. Thatthe following issues as outlined in the correspondence dated October 19, 2006, from the Inspection Department shall be rectified to that department's satisfaction: - That this site shall not exceed the maximum total occupant load of 15, including customers and employees, fora facility with only one restroom; - That the service areas shall be barrier free from the customer side; - That the petitioner shall comply with all requirements as determined in connection with the Inspection Department's plan review of other items such as ventilation, noise and odor abatement, plumbing, etc.; 5. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be submitted for review 2W94 and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council; 6. That wall signage shall not be illuminated beyond one (1) hour after this business closes; 7. That no LED lightband or exposed neon shall be permitted on the site including, but not limited to, the building or around the windows; and 8. That the specific plan referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time the building permits are applied for. Subjectto 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 rapacity 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. Walsh: Is there any discussion? Mr. Taormina: If I may just encourage the petitioners to contact the Building Inspection Department as soon as possible to determine whether or not they'll need additional restroom facilities based on that occupant load. I think it's something they probably should not wail to do. Mr. Walsh: The petitioners are nodding in the audience. Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. 23695 ITEM#8 PETITION 200640-0227 HAROLD ZEIGLER Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2006- 10-02-27 submitted by Harold Zeigler Auto Group, on behalf of J. D. Bynder, Inc., requesting waiver use approval to operate an auto dealership at 35841 Plymouth Road, on properly located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Levan Road and Yale Avenue in the Northeast % of Section 32. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning oflhe surrounding area. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated October 18, 2006, 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 except as noted below. No additional right of -way is required. The legal description as shown is correct. There are no existing city storm sewers in this area. Use of the storm sewers in Plymouth Road will require permitting from the Michigan Department of Transportation and Wayne County in accordance with their storm water management ordinance. The closure of the one driveway will also require a Department of Transportation permit." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated October 18, 2006, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to operate an auto dealership on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Levan Road and Yale Avenue in the Northeast/. of Section 32. We have no objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Andrew C. Walker, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Inspection Department, dated October 24, 2006, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of October 16, 2006, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted: (1) This drawing needs to be reconfigured. No parking of any type is allowed within 20 feet of the front lot line. (2) There are three wall signs proposed for this site. Only one of 100 square feet is allowed without obtaining a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The monument sign has not been reviewed due to lack of detail. (3) Although we will address it at this Department's plan review, should this project move forward, we would like to give advance 23696 notice that a non -allowed dead end corridor has been created near mom 107. If the building has a fire suppression system, it would be allowable. (4) It appears that a section of the protective screening wall is missing by Lot 1 of Kentwood Park subdivision. Either the wall must be completed or a permanent greenbe# approved by separate resolution or a properly executed, approved property separation agreement be filed. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection. The next letter is from the Plymouth Road Development Authority, dated October 25, 2006, which reads as follows: At the 183'" Regular Meeting of the Plymouth Road Development Authority of the City of Livonia held on October 19, 2006, the following resolution was unanimously adopted. #2006-22 Resolved, that the Plymouth Road Development Authority does hereby support in concept the proposed plans as submitted by Harold Zeigler Auto Group, on behalf of J. D. Byrider, Inc., requesting waiver use approval to operate an auto dealership at 35841 Plymouth Road, on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Levan Road and Yale Avenue in the Southwest X of Section 17 (Petition 2006-10-02-27), subject to compliance with all City codes and ordinances, as such may be modified by the action of the Planning Commission and/or City Council, including exterior building materials and vinyl fencing." The letter is signed by John J. Nagy, Executive Director. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Taormina: Mr. Chairman? dilAv'F-lB�[F Mr. Taormina: If I can just point out relative to the last sentence in the PRDA's recommending letter what they're referring to regarding the vinyl fencing. The site plan does show the enclosure of the storage area to the rear of the building. The plan as submitted shows a six -fool high wood privacy fence, and what the PRDA is suggesting is that the wood fence be replaced with a vinyl fence. There's a gate that would be available here on the east end of the building, another opening here on the west end of the building, but this gate essentially wraps in this area around the west and east sides of the rear portion of the site. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? 23697 Ms. Smiley: Mr. Chairman, the 61 vehicle display spaces are 9' x 20'. Is that because they're for vehicle display that they're not the typical 10'x 20'? Mr. Taormina: That is cored, and we typically allow the smaller sizes because they're not customer spaces. Ms. Smiley: Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Are there any other questions for the staff? Is the petitioner here this evening? Good evening. Daniel J. Scheid, Harold Zeigler Auto Group, 4201 Stadium Drive, Kalamazoo, Michigan 49008. Good evening. Thanks to the Planning Commission for allowing us to present our plan here. I'm the Chief Financial Officer, and with me is our President, Aaron Zeigler. I just want to take just a moment to tell you who the Zeigler Auto Group is. It's probably not as known on the east side of stale. We own and operate nine dealerships located on the west side of stale. Of those nine dealerships, seven of them are new car operations - Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, BMW, Mitsubishi and Suzuki. Two of those operations are J.D. Byrider's. One is located in Lansing, Michigan, and one is located in Kalamazoo, Michigan. J.D. Byrider is actually a national used card franchise. It is also a financial operation. There's about 120 J.D. Byrider franchises located around the country. It was founded about 20 - 25 years ago by Jim Duvos. That's the J.D. in J.D. Byrider. Jim had an idea 25 years ago, coming from the new car franchise operation, where he observed that a lot of his clients coming through the door couldn't get financed. Typically in the new car operation, people come into the operation and want to buy a new car, but the dealership doesn't provide the financing. They go to banks, and believe it or not, about 50% of the people that come into a typical new car dealership are turned down because banks will not finance them based on credit and other things like that. So Jim observed this and said there's a huge opportunity to serve these types of people that can't get the financing. There actually is a market out there that does this. A lot of small what they call B lots that are traditionally seen as low capitalization, dingy buildings, don't treat the customer right. Jim said there s a huge opportunity to create a business model so that people coming into his operation are treated right, they're sold and delivered a fine quality vehicle that's going to run, and it's going to be backed by the operation. And so he began this business 25 years ago and built it up to 120 23698 franchises around the country and has had a lot of success with that. J.D. Byrider owns and operates 12 franchises themselves, and then they have franchisees, such as ourself, that own and operate the J.D. Byriders. The requirement for being a J.D. Bynder operator is (a) you have to have the capital so that you can build the business and do it right But (b), you have to have the philosophies that are very consistent with our philosophies. You have to build beautiful buildings. You have to maintain your properties. You have to treat your employees right and you have to treat your customers right. And those philosophies really sync up with our philosophies. I wanted to give you that background so you understand what the J.D. Bynder business is. It is as much a financing operation as it is a car sales operation. Important in that distinction is, typically on a new car lot, the goal of the new car lot is to sell as many cars as they can, gel as many customers in and sell as many as they can. As I go up and down Plymouth Road, you haw some big dealerships where their goal is to sell 500, 600, 700, 800 cars or more a month. Our goal is not nearly to do that. Our goal is to bring in customers, sit down, really be their financial planner first, work through a budget and ultimately fina nce them, selling approximately 100 cars a month. We're going to develop a relationship with these customers over three years, so it's important to us that our customer are successful. And because of that, we need to put good quality, fine vehicles on the road. Part of that model is just like you saw some of the pictures there of the building. With that in mind, we've had the opportunity now to spend a couple of meetings with some of the members from the Planning Commission, the City Council, and then obviously the first step in the process was meeting with the Plymouth Road Development Authority. And a number of questions came up in those meetings, a number of observations. In building our buildings, there is actually a prototype that J.D. Bynder requires, and that prototype, which is the prototype we built in Lansing and also Kalamazoo, it's typically a block building in the front. It's split face block and then a metal building in the back. This is primarily done so the economics of the building can support the business. One thing that came to light for us is that Plymouth Road has got clear objectives on what they're trying to do along the corridor there. Part of it is the front look, but then part is obviously how you're affecting the neighbors in the rear. And so we have made a change in our business, you know, the development of the building, gone away from the prototype and gone with what was described as the Quik Brik, which is a structural brick. It can be a structural brick that supports the building, and we went away from the metal building in the back 2WN and went with a full block. Another reason we did that is, and something we've learned to do in projects around the west side of the state is, it's about being a good neighbor as well. We do understand and recognize that there are some neighbors that reside immediately to the south of the operation, and noise became a question. We didn't believe it would be an issue based on our current operations, but having understood that's an issue, we've gone to the full block building in order to eliminate that concern over noise. Another concern was lighting, and as Mark noted in the early comments there, the lighting in the rear of the building is primarily over our vehicles that are being prepared to come out of the lot for sale. We do need to have lighting back there obviously so that in the evening when our employees leave they've got safety. However, recognizing that we have neighbors directly to the south of us, we have said we can lower the light on that to 16 foot and we will also lower the lighting levels to 400 watts up until the time we close. After we dose, we can lower that wattage below that. On the front of the lot, that's where it's important and that we have higher lighting, and we will handle that accordingly putting the lighting on the front of the lot so that it shows our inventory in the evening. Some other things that are important to understand about our business is, a lot of people associate car lots with speakers and loud noises and those types of things. Not only we will commit but we've changed our plan to say we will not install any speakers. There's no noise going outside the building. Another distinction there is when a customer comes onto our lot, they're not first coming on to buy a car. They're first coming on, in our eyes, to sit down with us and work through a financial plan. Because of that, unlike a traditional car lot where you have the speakers and the noise and the customers running around the lot, our goal is to have them come on into our building and come into our office space and sit down and start that process. So no speakers outside the building. Another important thing on this particular lot is that buffer on the south side. What we committed to leaving is a tree line buffer between our back lot and the fence that Mark described on the south side of the building. Once again, it is a buffer between our property and the neighbors. Another point that was brought up in the inspection report was the protective screening wall and the fact that there's a piece of that wall missing between directly to the south of us and the lot that would be to the east of us. What we've committed is to not develop that little corner piece there, so that any trees and shrubs and anything that's back in that comer will remain from our development standpoint. Some other key points I want to 23]00 bring up. We'll not install any exposed neon on the building. A lot of times you see on car dealerships and things like that theyve got these big bright lights, big exposed neon. That's another thing that's just not needed on our facility, and it's something that we've gone away from the typical prototype. The key here, this business, while you think of it as a car dealership, is something much different than your traditional car dealership, and its a business that we believe is serving a need not only in Livonia but also on the east side of the stale. That's why when we looked at this property that I believe has been somewhat dilapidated there on Plymouth Road. It's got the old property that we saw a key opportunity for us to come in and develop it. I just want to close also with another point that was brought up in a previous meeting and that is, as you go up and down the corridor and you see a number of dealerships, some of which have closed or some of which have been put up for sale, because our building is not a traditional dealership, we don't have a showroom. The front office, as Mark described, about 3,500 square feel, is strictly offices. When you come into the building, it's not a showroom where you show cars. It's an office space where you come and sit with clients and you begin to work through that. And that's just an important distinction on how this business is operated. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. LaPine: Along the Plymouth Road corridor, we have a number of dealerships and they all have used car lots. What's different from buying a used car from you? Now, I understand that you finance. Most car dealerships finance through Ford Motor Credit or General Motors. Are the interest rates you're going to charge your clients going to be in the same ratio as they would gel from a bank or a credit union or from a factory -financed company, or do you have a higher rate because you have people that possibly aren't making their payments each month? Mr. Scheid: That's a very good question. I heard really two questions, one being what distinguishes us between the other dealerships, specifically, the other used car dealerships on the corridor, and then talk about our business model, our interest rales. First, lel me answer the first part of that question. You are correct. There are a number of dealerships up and down the corridor. None of which, to my knowledge, do the financing themselves. An important part of our business is, because we're financing this vehide, and the average loan is about a three-year loan, what's important to us is obviously we put a quality vehicle on 23]01 the road because I'm bearing all the risks. And because of that, and this was part of Jim Devos' business model, we're going to put a full warranty on that vehicle. So when a customer drives off the lot, we're taking the risk. So if that car breaks down, it's in our best interests to repair the car rather than have the car go bad, in which case, typically, a customer is going to stop paying for it. So that really sets us apart from the typical model where a dealership is selling a used car, the bank is financing, and so the dealership has now given up all their risk in the transaction. They can pretty much wash their hands of the deal. In our case, it's important to us that our customers are successful, because if our customers aren't successful, we're not going to be successful. And to answer your question about the interest rate, if you come to a typical dealership, you're going to have a whole army of what I'll call credit worthiness. You're going to have some customers that have very high credit scores, have a very sound financial picture and they're going to gel low interest rales at a typical dealership. You're also going to get some customers that come to those dealerships and have less than perfect credit. They have questionable credit, I'll call 1. And some of those dealerships will find banks. In our new car stores, we do find banks that finance those customers. Those banks finance them at the same interest rates that we finance at. Certainly they're higher interest rates because you're laking on a higher level of risk, but the interest rates that they're charging is no different than our interest rates. The differentiation is we're holding the paper. We're financing the deal. And so because of that, we need to provide a warranty and we also got to provide a good quality vehicle that's going to continue to run. Mr. La Pine: But you haven't told me what your interest rates are going to be. Are they going to at 6%,8%,10%,15%? Mr. Scheid: No, the interest rales ... well, they vary over time. But typically you're talking interest rales for these types of customers are going to be close to 20%, those types of rales. Very consistent with any rale you'll find at anybody who walks into a dealership and goes to ... and lel me give you some examples. Wells Fargo Bank, W.F. Financial - these are all banks that finance very similar means that we do. They just don't also have the cars and they charge interest rates very similar to this. But one thing that's important to remember, when you dive off the lot, your interest rate covers a lot more than the cost of the car. It covers all the repairs, it covers all the maintenance, oil changes. We all know how important an oil change is to the life of a 23702 vehicle. Well, we know that our customers need to have oil changes so we cover them. We just encourage them to come back to our building and we cover the oil changes. I mean its all built into the cost of the program. There's no additional cost. So if you look at say a traditional interest rate of 8% or 9% for somebody who has good credit, remember, that person is going to have to pay for the maintenance on their vehicle. That person is going to have to pay for the oil changes. When you take an interest rale such as 8%, 9%, 10% and you add in those costs, you're effectively going to get to a higher interest rale. Mr. La Pine: Lel me ask you this question. What are the model years you're going to have? Are you going to have just three-year old cars, no older than three, or are you going to have cars that are five years old? Number two, do you get these cars from the factories that are lease cars and then tum them back and then you buy them from the factories? Is that the way it operates? And number three, you say typically they'll be financed for three years. Well, if you have a car that's selling for $17,000, you're financing is going to be prettystiff. Mr. Scheid: Yes. The average car is actually less than $10,000 so you're exactly right. You're backing into what's a possible payment to afford for a customer, and obviously the business model wouldn't work if we had high dollar cars. Having heard a lot of questions in your question there, let me attempt to answer them. J.D. Byrider actually, because they have 120 franchises around the country, they have access to an enormous amount of information. And they share that information with all their franchisees. One of the key points of information that they have is what are the types of cars that are going to be the highest quality. And selling thousands and thousands and thousands of cars a year around the country, they share this information to show, okay, what's the average breakdown of a Ford Taurus and how long does a Pontiac Grand Am last? And they publish a list that's accessible at any given point in time on what are the best cars to buy. What we find is the average car is going to be three years old, three to four years old, some cars no more than 60,000 miles. Some cars you can run up to 90,000 miles and they're still going to be a good quality vehicle. You also asked where these cars are coming from. A little bit of everywhere. Some of them are off lease depending on what residuals are doing on leases. Some of them are cars that were traded in on new car lots, and the new car dealers are not interested in selling a three or four year old car that has 60,000 miles. They come from a lot of different places. And we have buyers. They 23703 don't work on staff. We have people out there, networks out there where they go out and find these cars and then we purchase them from them. Mr. LaPine: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: I was going to start by aslang you some questions about your business model just so that everybody could understand kind of what J.D. Synder is, which Mr. LaPine already started asking several questions. I'll just add to that the question that . . certainly this area is unique, southeast Michigan, in the fad that we're the Big Three here. I believe somewhere in the neighborhood of 70% of all vehicles sold at new car dealerships are on lease as opposed to sales, which is pretty unique. How does this affect your business and the viability of your business because you have a lot of people that just keep re -upping their leases? Mr. Scheid: A good question. What pu typically find is the customers that we ... once again, the customer base that's attractive to us for our business and the customers that typically come to us for help, those are customers that have been turned down by a new car dealership, whether its for a new or used car. And what you find with a lease typically, a lease car is going to be approved typically because of lease rales by somebody who has a credit score and somebody has a credit worthiness that can afford that vehicle. So to be frank with you, Mr. Wilshaw, we almost never run into that type of an issue. Now, the flip side of that is, the cars coming off lease actually help our business because when you have a lot of cars coming off lease, it drives the values down of cars and obviously it provides us with inventory. Mr. Wilshaw: Right. Now, the other question along on that line, the typical age of your vehicle is three or four years, perhaps off lease. Do you also have a variety of vehicles as far as a consumer coming in, can they gel vans and trucks and small cars, large cars? What sort of variety do you have? Mr. Scheid: That's a good question. It lends to be a blend. Now, an important thing to understand when you're asking about the business model, when a customer comes on our lot, we're going to have a limited range of vehicles. I'm taking a guess here, a little bit here, but it's probably like 60% sedans, those types of things. I'm thinking like Pontiac Grand Ams and Ford Taurus. We'll have a more limited number of trucks and SUVs just because of the price of those vehicles, even coming off lease, 23]04 They lend to be a little bit ... or coming in a secondary market, they lend to be a little bit more expensive, but I have seen Chevy Blazers and those types of things on our lot. But when a customer comes onto our lot, what we encourage them to do, and really the way our business works, they first come in and we're first their financial advisor. We first work with them to put together a budget and a plan that works for them and frankly works for us. When you gel done with that plan, what you find of our 50 cars silting on our lot, or 40 - 50 cars silting on the lot, they may only qualify for 10 of them because if we put them in a car they can't afford, not only do they fail, but we fail as well. And so you really have to limit it down to okay, what car can they afford. And clearly if they're interested in a van, we'll see if we can work in a van, and if they're interested in a sedan, we'll see if we can work that in. But for our customers to be successful in the business model, they need to work with us as much as we need to work with them. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Now, you have two other J.D. Byrider franchises, one in Kalamazoo and one in Lansing. How long have those been in operation? Mr. Scheid: Good question. We opened up our Kalamazoo operation in 2000, so we're closing out our sixth year there, sixth, seventh year, actually, the end of 2000. And our J.D. Byrlder in Lansing, R's just over three years old. We opened that operation in the middle of 2003. I'm glad you asked about those. The important note there too is the Lansing operation, out of 120 J.D. Byriders, ranks number three in customer service. So the way that we treat our customers, and Kalamazoo ranks number seven out of 120 J.D. Byriders. These are customer surveys that come back in. And I was just informed, I did not realize this, but we actually just won ... J.D. Byrider does an award for their facilities, their built prototypes and they're obviously interested in their franchisees making their facilties. They come to our facilities multiple times a year to make sure that we're living by the franchise standards. We actually won the award for our facilities in both Lansing and Kalamazoo as of this most recent year l guess. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Good. Because that's gang to be important as we go forward and as the City Council looks at this, as well as to understand how the business operates and how its going to ft into our area. Now to talk a little bit about the building itself, part of the reason we're looking at your proposal, I do have a few questions about the building. You started out with a building 23705 that was pretty much prototypical. You've made several improvements to the quality of the materials on the building. Are you going to provide a color rendering or material samples, those types of things, to show us where you are right now with the brick, the colors, all that type of thing? Mr. Scheid: Yeah, one thing we need to sort out is the final color of the brick, but I did bring two samples which I'm more than happy to pass around to the Board, of what this Quik Brik is. When you look at it from a distance, its brick. It looks everything like brick. One of the advantages, it is structural. And so, typically, the J.D. Synder's used a lighter color building. That's just their colors, but coming onto the corridor here, the corridor colors for the columns that you have up and down the corridor, they're a darker red brick. So what we've looked at, and actually the rendering we have there is something we're going to attempt to try and match. Now you gel into bricks and, as you know, different brick manufacturers and Quik Brik versus a standard brick, we'll do the best we can to match it up, but while not a perfect color match I can give you here, what I can tell you is its going to be something similar. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. And the business hours of your business. What days are you going to operate? Mr. Scheid: 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., and an important distinction there is we don't open on Sunday. So I guess as you start to gel into concerns about what's going to go onto the property, whether it's a restaurant or whatever else that would typically be open on the weekends, Tale hours, we're not open on Sunday, and then on Saturday, we have limited hours. We're open until 5:00 in Lansing and 4:00 in Kalamazoo. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. And you expect to have Saturday hours? Mr. Scheid: Yes. Limited. We close down at mid-aftemoon, you know, 500. Mr. Wilshaw: Now, because your dealership doesn't gel new vehicles, you go out and purchase used one. Tell me a little bit about the vehicle delivery process for vehicles coming into your facility. How many are going to come in, how often? These are questions that our residents are surely going to be concerned with. Mr. Sheid: Sure. That's a natural concern. Typically in a new car lot, and I'll contrast that for you first. On a new car lot, you have car 237M carriers that bring your cars that can be anywhere from a sixcar carrier short bed to a multiple bed that can actually carry up to 14 cars. In our case, it's much different because we're going out looking for these cars in onesies twosies. You know, 40 to 50 percent of the time we actually have drivers that go gel the cars. They drive them on the lot. So there's nothing different than a patron coming onto our lot. That's for cars that are sourced from a radius of say 100 miles or so. We do buy some cars out of stale because you have to go find the cars wherever you can find the cars. Those typically come in on say like a four - car bed. Its a truck that just comes in, they drive right out front there and within 10 minutes they have your cars off the lot and they're done. I dont want to say its inconspicuous but its not a big car carrier. That's just not the model because you dont find cars in those types of masses, so you get them when you can. Mr. Wilshaw: We've had concerns from other dealerships on Plymouth that have had to unload their vehicles on Plymouth Road itself, which obstructs traffic. So you're facility isn't going to have that problem, right? Mr. Sheid: No. Absolutely not. In fad, if you look at our Lansing facility, the lot is a little bit lighter than where we're at here, and there's no chance on earth that on Cedar Street in Lansing we could unload cars in the middle of Cedar Street. They make it on there, they make it out of there, and nobody knows the difference. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. One last question. Also, in regard to noise at your facility. You have repair bays in the back where you said that you're going to be doing some oil changes, and you're going to touch up the vehicles that come in to make sure that they're in good working order. What sort of noise is going to be generated? Are you going to have any outdoor operation? Any storage of parts that come off these vehicles, that type of thing? Mr. Sheid: Good question. To answer you're first question there, no, we will not have any outdoor operations. There will be no repairs done outside. And an important thing loo, we're not going to have a body shop. So I heard you say touchup and those type of things. We're not going to be doing paint. We're not going to be doing body shop. The reality is if we have to gel into that, the car doesn't work for our business model. We're not going to be storing things outside. The only thing outside is cars. We're not going to be storing things. And the other thing is, our cars are not junk, for lack of a better way to put R. I mean they just 23]07 don't work for our business model. So if someone brings in a piece of junk, we've got to get it out of there pretty quick. We don't have the room to store those types of things. We're not going to do any work outside. You asked about the noise. I don't want to say it's typical dealership noise because we're doing limited repairs. In fad, the noisiest thing in our dealership is the air compressor, but lel me put this in perspective. Our air compressor in Lansing sits on a wall adjacent to our offices. So the place where the air compressor sits is right in the middle of the building and adjacent to our offices. In Lansing, we have metal in the back and we do not have a block wall separating the shop and the offices. We've never had a complaint from customers, employees for the noise coming from the compressor, and that's the noisiest thing you gel in a dealership. We've got doors on both sides. And we've gone to the block. I mean the block is probably the biggest thing that is going to shield any noise coming out of the dealership. And like I mentioned, even our metal building in Lansing, and Kalamazoo for that matter, we haven't had noise issues coming through the metal. Mr. Wilshaw: Well, you get the sound of air guns laking lug nuts off, that type of thing. Mr. Sheid: Sure. Mr. Wilshaw: Yourdoors are going to be closed during operation? Mr. Shied: Yes, other than to gel in and out of there, close the doors, yep. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Very good. Thank you. Mr. La Pine: You're basically not doing any actual repairs there except oil changes, lune -ups and things of that nature? Mr. Shied: Yeah. You know it's hard to distinguish types ... we're not doing major engine overhauls and body work. I mean we're doing repairs. When a car comes in, you have to change an alternator, you have to put a new set of tires on, you know. If we have to start dealing with major engine work, that's not our car. That just doesn't ft our model. Mr. LaPine: I understood you when you made your presentation. You still own the car until the person pays for it. Now, I assume you would either gel them insurance to cover collision and so forth for the car. If they have an accident and the car needs repair, 23]08 Sandra Nowak Rosenberger, 35810 Elmira. Hi, Allen. I don't know if he's a relative or not. I went ahead and look the liberty of writing up a number of questions that my neighbors and I have compiled that we would like answered, and I would like to pass these down to everybody so it will make it a little easier. First of all, regarding another auto dealership in the area, there's nine already within a two mile radius. That's kind of redundant to have another one. Plus we also have at least five collision/bump shops in the area. We find that's pretty unacceptable to have another one right behind our backyards. Now Iunderstand that there are at least 19 double lights going into this area on the property. I think do they bring them back to you and you take care of them? How is that handled? Mr. Sheid: One point of clarification, technically, they own the car. When we sell them the car, they technically own it. They have to take title to the car. We own the financing on the cars. We have a lien on the vehicle. If a car gets in a accident, depending on the nature of the accident, it's probably no longer any good and so, yeah, we, just like any other bank, require insurance on the vehicles and, you know, if there's an insurance settlement, that's where we work with our customers to pay off the vehicle and hopefully put them in another vehicle. Mr. La Pine: Does each individual customer contact and get his own insurance or does he get it through your company? Mr. Sheid: Yes. Although we can help him find insurance, but we're not an insurance company. But the state requires insurance. You want to register a car and each year when you update your registration, you have to have insurance and prove it to the state, which obviously protects our interest. But while we can help our customers find insurance, we're not an insurance company. Mr. LaPine: I'll be honest with you. I'm not really enthused about having another dealership, a used car lot, on Plymouth Road. The only thing in your favor is what's there now is pretty bad and whatever you're going to build there has to be an improvement, unless I hear something else from the neighors. Mr. Walsh: Are there any other questions or comments for the petitioner? Hearing none, thank you for your explanation. We appreciate the depth of it. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Sandra Nowak Rosenberger, 35810 Elmira. Hi, Allen. I don't know if he's a relative or not. I went ahead and look the liberty of writing up a number of questions that my neighbors and I have compiled that we would like answered, and I would like to pass these down to everybody so it will make it a little easier. First of all, regarding another auto dealership in the area, there's nine already within a two mile radius. That's kind of redundant to have another one. Plus we also have at least five collision/bump shops in the area. We find that's pretty unacceptable to have another one right behind our backyards. Now Iunderstand that there are at least 19 double lights going into this area on the property. I think 23709 that's correct, 19 double lights. That would be 38 lights. Now, Mr. Zieglers representative has said that the lights would be dimmed down in the evening after it closes at 8:00 or whenever. Four hundred watts per light is still an awful lot of light, and if you multiply that by 38 lights, I've got daylight in my backyard. I will not have night at all. I will not have any darkness. I already have lights from the Hitch House and Ford across the street. My bedroom window faces the back of my property, and my bedroom is very, very bright at night already from these lights. Can you imagine 38 more sodium or mercury vapor lights, even on dim, at 400 watts per light? I will not have night. Neither will my neighbors. That's a great concern of mine. Now supposedly it opens at 7:00 in the morning until 8:00 at night, and its going to be closed on Sundays. Seven o'clock is real early to have a business open, especially in a residential area. We're concerned about that. We're concerned possibly that there would be piped canned music coming out from the building, but I understand that won't be happening so that's a positive. The 20 fool greenbelt that is supposed to be left behind the back of the properly that would abut my brick wall and the neighbors brick walls that separate our property from Cockmm's Markel is basically scrub and trash wood or what you would call softwood. It's not thick. Its verythin. We're not going to have any privacy. We're going to see this building no matter what. I understand there's supposed to be storage behind the building, and then the greenbelt. So whatever they choose to store back there, we're going to have full view of. It's not going to be pretty. We're concerned about our properly values going down because of this. Right now, yes, I know it kind of looks like hillbilly central back there with Cockrum's farm, but it's not going to be any better once this goes in, if it does. Also, I have informed the Mayor's Office, the Engineer office, Mr. Taormina and Mr. Schron that since Cockmm's Market properly is lower than my backyard which abuts it, I get flooding six to len limes per year in my backyard three feet deep. If this business gets approval, I need to know what assurances I and my neighbors have that flooding will no longer be an issue. And I did speak to Mr. Taormina yesterday, and I gave him some inaccurate information. I said that the water comes out of the culvert into my backyard. And my husband corrected me last night when I spoke to him. He said, no, its because the property behind our wall on Cockmm's Markel is loo low and the water comes into our backyard and that's why we're having flooding. So I certainly hope that if this building does get built, that somehow, someway the flooding problem will be eradicated. Thank you. 23710 Robert Oppenlander, 35824 Elmira. I look the liberty of laking a picture of the scrub that is behind the commercial wall. I will pass it on. As you can see, you can see right through it. You can see the building of the nursery. And I look a measurement of that area and its from 55 to 65 feel wide depending on where you make your measurement. It's noljusl straight across. If this 35 to 55, 25 to 35 feet is taken away, there's not going to be much left for privacy, which is what I would like. This privacy is going to be gone. We have, at least when the trees are green, we have a buffer area that absorbs the noise. Now, with the building, there going to ratcheting, and when doors open up, that ratcheting is going to be heard. So there's going to be a noise concern with 7:00 a.m. especially in the summertime when my grandchildren, who are living with me, are able to sleep to 9:00 - 10:00 in the morning, which they frequently do on the weekends when school is in session. With the number of lights, with 38 lights, there's approximately, from what I saw on the plans, in the neighborhood of 12 lights, I would say. Three, 6 and then the front lights, 10 lights, that are facing towards our homes. With nothing to blind that light way, the lights are going to be right on our homes. Its going to be like grand central station. I'm concerned about what they're going to store since the cars they are going to gel are in such good shape or supposedly are in good shape that there's. I don't know, not loo much to be stored. If they're going to have cars that are worthwhile, their cars to be sold are going to be up in the front. So what is there really to be stored? And when you are working on engines, you have solvents that are going to be involved. Now with the trash container, what is that going to contain? So we have first of all, we have a problem with lights; we have a problem with noise; we have a problem with seeing the building and the goings on there. It's going to be right in our backyard. Now I have a beautiful home. My properly value is going to be depreciated. Who in the world would want to live behind something like that? It's coming after I'm there. Now, I went into the computer, if you will bear with me, and I found some information that's rather interesting about J.D. Byrlder and CNAC Finance Company. May I read it please? Shady collection practices, rude employees, resold my car but now charging me for it. Kalamazoo, Michigan. I used to work for CNAC. Surprised that CNAC/J.D. Byrlder has not been seriously looked at by the Federal Trade Commission. Mr. Walsh: Sir, I appreciate your research, but we dont know your sources. 23711 Mr. Oppenlander: My resource is Google on the computer Mr. Walsh: Okay. I'm just going to try to keep comments to the site plan and we appreciate it. I allowed a couple there but I dont want to go further with that. Mr. Oppenlander: Okay. But I do have concerns. Also, there's more than just 9 car businesses; there's 10, because Bill Brown is not on the list, and it has three different spots for new cars, used cars and then some. And then we have a vacant building, the U.S. Tire, which already has a building up, already has bays. Why not use it? And then with 9 bays, with two cars in each bay, how much, if these cars are in such good shape, how much is there to be done that it lakes 18 vehicles in a building to be taken care of? I do have concerns. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Thank you, sir. Kathleen Cox, 35851 Elmira. Good evening. This is my husband, David. Bob has staled some of our concerns also. One of the things all of you sifting here couldn't wail, I bel, to move into Livonia. We did six years ago. It was our dream. And now our dream is being destroyed because we have a car dealership supposedly moving into our neighborhood. And the things is, if you go around Livonia, Garden City or Westland, and you take a look at the dealerships that are on Ford Road, Plymouth Road, that have service centers, they do not back up to any type of residential area. There is usually a big Iol or a Iolwilh cars on it. Ours is going to be backed up to five of our dear neighbors houses, who have children, who again came to Livonia for a dream. And it's going to be destroyed because we have a car dealership. We have nine service bays, two cars each, that equals 18 cars at a time. And not only that, its going to be to the back so we will have the noise and everything else. And if you look at the noise level at a Taco Bell, can't you imagine would it would be EPA -wise at a car dealership? As Bob stated and you brought to his altenfion, we're here to make the facts. I am pleading with you as a Livonia resident to go out to the internet and bring up J.D. Byrider and Zeigler. I was amazed at what I found, and I fell with them bringing up the topic that their customers, they treat them right as soon as they come in the door, I think if you go out to any one of the numerous, numerous sections, pages on pages, 20, 30, 40, you'll be very surprised. And I dont know if it's appropriate, but I don't feel the City of Livonia has to spend our lax money on lawsuits as the one that was just settled in 2006 in Kentucky for $7.1 million, 14,400 23712 complaints in a four-year period. And I'm not here to badmouth. I would have been happy to have anything, really. As you say, it's not a good sight there. I told my husband tonight, I'd rather have a Hooters come in. Al lead we know their food is good. Okay? But there's a lot of information out there of unhappy customers. You make up your own decision. The only thing I ask is thalyou go out and take a look at it. David Cox: We request you do the due diligent on that. Ms. Cox: Please. Thank you for your time. Mary Jo Busharl, 35850 Elmira. My property backs up against the wall that would be the back of their building. I'm concerned about quite a few things in addition to all the things that my neighbors have mentioned. I'm concerned about introducing crime to the area. When you're dealing with used cars, you're not usually dealing with people that are of the highest quality. I think that was mentioned when he said that they're not credit worthy. I think when you picture a used car dealership, you picture bright gaudy flags and everything around the area, and again the type of people that it attracts. With trash dumpslers being in the back, I'm concerned about rodents and things like that. I have two small children. I'm concerned about toxins and chemicals that will be used, and they might say they're not harmful at this point, but in 20 years, who knows what they could be. Both of my children suffer from severe allergies and asthma. Why introduce something else that going to potentially be harmful to their health? The improvements were mentioned about Plymouth Road and keeping up with what the City expects and wants for Plymouth Road. Except for the mention of green wall, there really isn't anything that's mentioned to keep it looking good for us and for our families. Both of my children's bedrooms are upstairs in the rear of the home, which faces their building. I feel that this building is much loo large for the property that's available. I'm certain that our home values will decrease. We're already in a poor economic stale and we really can't afford to have our home values drop any more. They say they're financial planners first. I dont know who theyre kidding because I am a financial planner and the first rule of sales is to make the sale. The tree line buffer that we currently have, for three out of four seasons, we don't have any leaves. So the small amount of trees that they're willing to leave there really isn't going to do much for three out of four seasons. They say that the average price of a car is $10,000. 1 lease two brand new vehicles. I understand that $10,000 is not going to buy you 23]13 much. They also state that the average age of their vehicles are three to four years. I don't remember the last time Ford made a Taurus or Chevy made a Blazer, so their vehicles have to be more than four years old, especially if they're going to be $10,000. 1 view this in the same way that people view refineries - not in my backyard. When I purchased my home, I understood that was a commercial property there and at the time, Cockrum's Markel was still functioning. I did not have a problem with that. I have a lot of problems with this building and this corporation putting uplhal type of facility. Richard Bushart, 35850 Elmira. I'm Mary Jo's husband. Again, behind the proposed dealership. When I think of Livonia, I think of families first. We all see it on the signs. Can I pass this around because this is Livonia. Mr. Walsh: Sure. If you just want to hand it to Ms. Watson, she'll pass it along. Mr. Bushart: I think it's simple. Back in 2002, we were adding a son to our family. So that made four so we had to move. We had two choices: Canton and Livonia. Well, we chose Livonia simply because families first. Here's what's going to happen if this goes through. Not only will our home values depredate, which they will. I cant have my two children playing in the backyard. So what's going to happen is I'm going to have to move out of the City I enjoy being in. I'm obviously going to take a huge loss on my house, and I really have no idea where I'd move to. I wouldn't be able to afford much. But I guess my biggest thing is personal. I just want what's best for myfamily, and I know that's what Livonia is about. Donald Paul, 35839 Elmira. I also have all the concerns that my other neighbors do and then some. I do have one neighbor that is out of town that did type up a small letter of their objection. I wonder if I could submit that? Mr. Walsh: Please. Mr. Paul: Thank you. One of the main problems I have also, they can say all they want to about what they'll do about lighting, our bedroom is upstairs and it faces Plymouth Road. We have the car wash that's four or five houses down from me that you can go in the first house and you can actually read a paper at 10:00 at night in their backyard without turning a light on. That compounds the whole issue of the lighting. I dont care if they 23714 put them 15 feel, 20 bet, face them whatever way they want. They're going to be faced from Plymouth Road towards us and that's definitely going to hit me in my bedroom window. And yes, I could put a room darkener on there and pull the shades, but what are you going to do in the summertime? You want your windows open. Also, I just don't think this is the type of business that we need in our area. I believe that our neighborhood, our surrounding area, are all employed, probably a big majority work for Ford Motor Company. It's right across the street. I don't think that we have a lot of high-risk people in our neighborhood that have bad credit. We all own houses. Driving around my neighborhood, I don't see any particularly junk cars parked around the neighborhood. So I don't really believe that we need this car lot there. And the gentleman stated that there won't be any noise. I would just like to ask them one question. Is their service garage aircondilioned? Because if it isn't, they can't tell me the bay doors aren't going to be open in the summertime while they're working on cars. And through personal experience with some of the dealerships I've been in, I don't believe they aircondition their service garages. I don't think they lake that good of care of their employees. That's all I have to say. Steven Druc, 35625 Elmira. I've been a resident of Livonia for 28 years on Elmira Street. Both my parents and my in-laws moved to Livonia in 1950. 1 went to school in Livonia, grew up as a kid in Livonia, got married, moved out, moved back to the City of Livonia for several reasons: family, community, one of the safest communities to live in the U.S., the school system and the city services. I've got mixed feelings about the petition. It is great to see business waning to come into the City of Livonia. We desperately need it. We need the lax base. We need to maintain our current city services that we all enjoy as residents. However, on the Plymouth Road corridor we have no less, starting at approximately one halt mile east of Middlebelt Road going west along Plymouth Road, down to Wayne Road, no less than 8 or 9 new and used car dealerships. I ask each one of you, do we, does the City of Livonia, really need another car business on Plymouth Road? I think not. Six months out of the year, I'm pretty much blocked from the lights from Kicker's restaurant, from the Hitch House, from the car wash. Six months there's no leaves on the trees. I live in a colonial on Elmira Street, the older part of Elmira. The five houses backing up the property in question, their property values will be significantly impacted by this petition, by this building, by this dealership going into this area. Residents on the east and west 23]15 side of those homes on Elmira Court and Elmira Street will also be impacted on their property values. I plan on retiring and staying in the City of Livonia. I cannot afford at this time to have the value of my house dedine more than it already has due to the economic conditions in the State of Michigan. Unfortunately, some of our neighbors were not able to attend tonight due to illnesses, so on and so forth. I represent some of them. I am respectfully requesting at this time that the members of the commission once again think about the question I asked, Do we really need another dealership on Plymouth Road? I would much rather see that properly slay vacant as it is, even though it is somewhat of an eyesore, or the property would better be suited, I think, to maybe an office; medical building, one story, normal hours - say from 8:00 to 5:00, 8:00 to 6:00, something like that with less impact on the neighborhood, less noise pollution, less light pollution. I respectfully request at this time that the petition for the parcel of properly in question for a used car dealership be denied. Thank you for your time. Mr. Walsh: Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak for or against this item? I will close the public hearing. The petitioner has the last word. Aaron Zeigler, President, J.D. Byrider and the Harold Zeigler Auto Group. I completely understand where the residents are coming from that border this piece of property. They did certainly make some accusations against us, which were untrue, and I don't want to get into that right now. The other two J.D. Byriders that we have, both of them in Kalamazoo and in Lansing, back up to residential areas where there's houses. In both of those cases before we built the facility, and we want to do this here as well, we sat down and we mel with the neighbors. And hearing everybody out there, I think what I'm hearing is that they just don't want this piece of properly to be developed because its going to affect ... Unifdenlifed audience member: Inaudible statement. Mr. Zeigler: That's my opinion from listening to them, is that they don't want this piece of property to be developed because there's going to be lights there, there's going to be a building there. Well, anybody that comes in there, there's going to be lights and a building or there's going to be a building built there. Unfortunately, the gentleman that owned the piece of properly along with his wife that had it for a long time has passed away. It is his wife's main asset that she has left in her life. She needs 23716 to sell that from an estate planning standpoint before she passes away. The piece of property has been for sale for quite a long time. Our best guess is well over a year. And she hasn't been able to sell that yet until we came along. Everybody said there's either 9 or 10 dealerships I'm hearing along Plymouth Road depending upon how you count. We're not in competition with any one of those dealerships. As a matter of fad, that's where we get about 80 percent of our customers are referrals from other new car dealerships. Something else that everybody mentioned here was, we had offered to leave at least a 20 fool greenspace, and we want to have a buffer between our business and the houses. If the residents don't feel that the greenspace there is adequate, we would be more than willing to go out there and plant trees to present a buffer between us and them. We want to be a good neighbor. We certainly don't want to hurt property values. We don't want to be disruptive to the neighbors. We want to come in and provide a service that's currently being underserved in the market. We want to be a good neighbor. I'm more than willing to sit down with each and every one of the neighbors and willing to put a plan in writing that we'll come up with a buffer zone and that we'll do everything we can to minimize any disturbance from their standpoint. Al both of our other dealerships, we have not had one noise complaint or any complaint of any kind from anyone of the neighbors that back up to either our Kalamazoo piece of property or our Lansing piece of property. One last thing, loo, approximately 50 percent of the people in the United States are our customer base. So I know a couple people mentioned they didn't feel that our used car customers were worthy. I guess they don't understand it. Theyre good quality people. I've got a lot of my family members who have bought used cars. Our customers are good people. Just because they've had issues with credit or they don't have any credit, we find that's a lot of kids that are coming out of college or coming out of school that don't have credit. It doesn't mean that they're bad people. They're not bad people. They're good people. Our organization is a family-owned business just like theyve all got families. I have a family. I have two young children. So does our chief financial officer. And that's why we don't want to deter the quality of life of the neighbors around us. We want to work with them, and we're willing to work with them to minimize any disturbances that they might have. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Mr. Zeigler, if I could asked one question just because one neighbors asked. Is your service bay going to be air conditioned? 23]1] Mr. Zeigler: Actually, we have 10 dealerships and none of them are air- conditioned, and the doors are down at all limes. We're more than happy to write that into an ordinance other than when a car is going in or going out. Our doors are automatic so when you drive up to them, they go up. When you drive in, they go back down. There's no way b keep the doors up or anything like that. Mr. Walsh: All right. Thank you. Mr. LaPine? Mr. LaPine: Mr. Zeigler, have you purchased the property or is it contingent on getting the waivers? Mr. Zeigler: It would be contingent upon getting approval for our business there. We do have a non-refundable deposit on the properly at this point. Mr. Walsh: Thank you. Al this point, a motion would be in order. Mr. LaPine: Do you think it would be good for us to maybe table this and let the petitioner and neighbors gel together and discuss it and see if there's any way that they can come to some agreement? Mr. Walsh: Well, Mr.LaPine, you understand that once a tabling motion is on the table, its not to be discussed. Mr. LaPine: I understand, but I'm saying if I made the motion, I was wondering how all the other members feel before I make the motion so we can discuss it. Mr. Walsh: No. We're governed by Robert's Rules. Robert's Rules require that when a tabling motion is made ... Mr. LaPine: But I haven't made a tabling motion. If I do ... Mr. Walsh: Mr. LaPine, you can't circumvent the rules in that manner. Mr. LaPine: Well, I disagree with you. Mr. Walsh: If you wish to offer a tabling resolution, you may do so. Mr. Morrow: Well, at the risk of upsetting the Chairman, the petitioners did say they were willing to work with the neighbors to resolve some of the concerns that they had, and I don't know how we can do that unless we table it. 23718 Mr. Walsh: Mr. Morrow, understand, it's not persona Ily upsetting to me. Its a question of precedent and the rules by which we operate. So all I'm suggesting is that if you wish to offer a tabling resolution, for consistency's sake, virtually every other activity that we've taken, someone should offer it and we should see if it passes or fails. A resolution is in order. Mr. Wilshaw: I do think that this is a fairly significant proposal that's being made. I think that the petitioner has addressed several issues already, but they have discussed and mentioned that there's a willingness for them to work with the neighbors to enhance the greenbelt and the screen that's in the rear of the property. I do think that's probably not a bad thing to do, and for the sake of abiding with Robert's Rules, I will make a tabling resolution at this time to see how it goes. On a motion by Wilshaw, seconded by LaPine, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-123-2006 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby table Petition 2006-10-02-27 submitted by Harold Zeigler Auto Group, on behalf of J. D. Byrider, Inc., requesting waiver use approval to operate an auto dealership at 35841 Plymouth Road, on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Levan Road and Yale Avenue in the Northeast % of Section 32. Mr. Walsh: The motion passes. Ladies and gentlemen, what this means is we will table this to a dale uncertain. We'll provide the opportunity for the petitioner to decide which way they wish to proceed. They may or may not contact you. That's up to them. This will be rescheduled. You'll receive notice again of when we have a hearing. I'll answer the question only for purposes of procedure. Yes ma'am. Unidentified audience member: Inaudible. Mr. Walsh: That would be something that if he chooses to contact neighbors, you'll need to address. I can assure you we will take into account whether or not they do meet with you next time we meet. All right, this will be adjourned until a dale uncertain. Thank you. 23719 k1=lAi Uk=9=k IY Ile] 7 lKiDI S 0:1 Ti f_CN'1 Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Pefifion 2006- 10-02-28 submitted by The Velmeir Companies requesting waiver use approval to construct a commercial building (CVS Pharmacy) with a drive lhru pharmacy at 37300 Five Mile Road, located on the northeast corner of Five Mile Road and Newburgh Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17. Mr. Taormina presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning ofthe surrounding area. Mr. LaPine: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Nowak: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated October 17, 2006, 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 additional right-of- way is required. The legal description as shown is for the overall and is correct. There are capacity issues with the existing storm sewers in this area and the detention facilities are appropriate. The designer should verify with Wayne County whether or not a County permit will be required for this facility." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated October 18, 2006, which reads as follows: `This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct a CVS Pharmacy with a drive thru window on property located on the northeast comer of Five Mile Road and Newburgh Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17. We have no objections to this proposal with the following stipulation: If subject building is to be provided with an automatic sprinkler system, an on-site hydrant shall be located between 50 feet and 100 feet from the Fire Department connection." The letter is signed by Andrew C. Walker, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Inspection Department, dated October 24, 2006, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of October 16, 2006, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) At review it is unclear if the intention is to make the CVS a separate site/entity or remain as part of business center having four or more separate business uses. If it is to remain part of the center, they would be allowed 2 monument signs, 8 foot tall maximum with 40 square feet of signage each. As a single entity the sign maximum would be as drawn but only 1 sign would be allowed. (2) The parking count 23720 is not quite correct. There are 14 spaces not 15 to the west of the CVS. All parking is to be double striped. In addition, consideration should be given to shifting the CVS barrier free parking spaces to the immediate west near the front of the building to avoid crossing a traffic aisle (if available). (3) All light poles should be a maximum of 20 feet high including the base. (4) All landscaping should be irrigated. (5) Consideration should be given to pedestrian protection from the detention pond and what this protection will be. (6) This site is allowed one wall sign of approximately 90 square feet and a second wall sign of 45 square feet All other signage and additional square footage must obtain a zoning grant from the Zoning Board of Appeals. No identification is allowed on traffic control signs. (7) On the cover sheet, the site soils should be referencing a soil survey of Wayne County. (8) It is unclear where the sufficient amount of waiting space for the drive -up window is located. This should be clarifad to the Commission and Council's satisfaction. 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. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners before we go to the petitioner? Seeing none, gentlemen.... Lawrence McNally, Atwell -Hicks, 50182 Schoenherr Road, Shelby Township, Michigan. Al this time, we're very pleased to come before you. We have had several constructive meetings with staff as well as some study sessions. I think at this time what I would like to do is entertain any questions that the Commission may have. We did address the majority of the comments that were enumerated. Some of them were informational, and if you wish for me to touch on those, I'd be happy to at this time. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. LaPine: Regarding the basin, I mentioned to you the way it was done at Six Mile and Haggerty Road. They have boulders in there and they have the fountains. It looks like you just have landscaping there. Is that what we're going to have? Mr. McNally: Can we go to the cross-sections please? We do have boulders. There is lower lying shrubbery, if you will, along the water's edge itself, as well as deciduous trees planted around it. We have incorporated boulder outcroppings into the side bins which are on the 1:6 side slope. Again, at six feet we would come up one fool. So as tall as I am, that's as much as we would 23]21 actually change an elevation. The fountain, we looked at that and one of the items that we have realized in many of the developments that we have done over time, is fountains can be quite a bit of a maintenance issue, particularly if they're . we're going to have fluctuating water elevations in this detention pond. We'll have three to four fool of standing water in it at all limes pursuant to Wayne County requirements. And then when you do have a storm, you increase that water level up by the required amount of detention. So what you actually end up with is just a little ripple in the middle of it and then down over time it will come back up. That will continue to fluctuate, and that can kind of play havoc on some of the pump systems in there. Mr. LaPine: The only reason I mention it is because I know the one on Six Mile and Newburgh operates beautifully and the water is always clear looking because the fountains keep going and it keeps circulation in the water. Here you're just going to have the water standing. Is that correct? Mr. McNally: There will be a permanent water elevation in there. Mr. La Pine: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: 1, loo, have a bit of a concern over standing water just forming algae or you know collecting material in it or what have you, you know, making sure it stays attractive. I appreciate those questions Mr. LaPine asked. I do also have a couple questions about the signage. Obviously, you have quite a few different pieces of signs. One of the monument signs is a Century Plaza sign thafs currently there that you're going to modify to basically put your name on along with Century Plaza at the lop. That you have in your package here as Sign No. 2. Is Century Plaza okay with you doing that? Did you gel approval from them to modify that sign? Mr. McNally: Yes. That is the shared development sign. Yes, that is consistent with our dealings with the landlord. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. So they're okay with you putting your name on it. And then the north entrance to your facility off of Newburgh, which is really toward the drive-lhrus, is that going to be a two-way entrance and exit or is it strictlyjusl an entrance? Mr. McNally: In this area right here? Mr. Wilshaw: Yes. 23]22 Mr. McNally: That will remain as it is right now -two-way, full service. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Because you have indicated that Sign No. 8 is a entrance sign that is right by that driveway. Mr. McNally: Correct. That was actually a result of our study session. There's an entrance sign that is a pharmacy entrance sign and that was at the recommendation so that people would know when they come in off of Newburgh that they would travel around this way of the site to gel into the drop-off and also the pickup for the pharmacy. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Mr. McNally: We originally did not have it on there, but as a recommendation of our study session, we were encouraged to include it as just directional information. Mr. Wilshaw: That's the only two questions I have for now. Thank you. Mr. La Pine: Are there any other questions from members of the Commission? Mr. Morrow: Did I hear thatthe CVS will own their own parcel? Mr. McNally: Thal they will not own their own parcel? Mr. Morrow: They will own their parcel. Mr. McNally: They will not own their parcel. It will be a leased deal with the landlord. Mr. Morrow: Okay. That's what I was wondering. I saw that line up the middle there and I thought maybe the property was being split. Mr. McNally: That's a demising line just showing the acreage calculations, number one, and this would be the area that CVS is going to be included in their lease. Mr. Morrow: So you will be a lessee? Mr. McNally: Yes. Mr. Morrow: Thank you. 23]23 Mr. Taormina: I'm just curious as to whether the detention basin will serve the needs of just the CVS property or whether it includes portions of the adjacent shopping center property. I'm just wondering from a practical standpoint how that overall parking lot drains and whether there is a clean divide where you show that demising line. That doesn't necessarily follow the sub -drainage districts of the parking lot, does it? Mr. McNally: No, it does not. There will have to be ... its a single ownership so there is no need for a cross -easement as far as slormwaler detention because it will be owned by one property. The only thing that would be affected would be maintenance of it, and even then that would still fall back to the landlord and/or CVS, depending on how the site development agreement is written. To answer your question, there is no clear ridge separating the drainage between the two demised premises. Mr. Taormina: So some of the water falling on the adjacent shopping center property will find its way into that detention pond but not all of it necessarily. Mr. McNally: Correct. Mr. LaPine: I just have one question. I just want to gel it clear in my mind. Will the Dammon Hardware building still be there? And where Blockbuster used to be, that's the building that's coming down? Blockbuster was the closest one to Newburgh Road. Mr. McNally: Could we go to the demo plan? Mr. Taormina: I'm going to go to this aerial photograph. As I understand the plan, you can actually see what was originally the grocery store built on this site by the difference in the roofline. This was the original Dammon Hardware space here, and adjacent to that was where Blockbuster occupied the west end of the center. Then Dammon expanded to include the space of the former Blockbuster, and what s being demolished is this entire part of the shopping center. Again, the net reduction in floor area space overall is about 12,900 square feet, almost the size of the CVS itself. Mr. LaPine: Okay. That makes it clearer for me. Are there any other questions? Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Please give us your name and address and your comments. 23724 Kathleen Lipinski, 15523 Liverpool. As you come in the driveway of off Newburgh Road, what he says is going to be for the pharmacy, I lake its going to be a 24-hour pharmacy. Those headlights are going right into all my windows. I live right where Ameritech and the Dammon complex meet in the corner. So I don't know. Is it Lot 22, Lot 23? Right there. That's me. But I like CVS. Don't gel me wrong. I like the idea. I just have some concerns. I'm concerned about CVS on the comer and Walgreens just a mile down. I don't want to see that Century Plaza have abandoned buildings. Next door to where Dammon Hardware is empty and has been empty for some time already, so you've got quite a few empty right there. The other thing is that retention pond out in front. It would be wonderful if it looked like something like Six Mile and Haggerty instead of just a dirty water pond. I think that corner, it looks dumpy. And sitting here listening to the Aloha Market when you questioned how old is that building and lets like juice it up a little bit. Five and Newburgh looks a little junky loo. And that retention pond would look great if it had a fountain in it. You know, something to make it look attractive. My other concern is when you cul down the building and leave the old building and build a new building, to what use is that little building going to be left? Whats left? You know, is it going to be an eyesore? An old dumpy complex, half a complex and a brand new CVS. Mr. LaPine: We have no control over that. I would assume when the CVS goes in there, which is a new building, that it may generale somebody coming in there and renting that building and maybe upgrading it. Vt hope that's what happens. That was our hope, but we can't guarantee that. Ms. Lipinski: Right. I'm just throwing out things to think about. Mr. LaPine: I understand where you're coming from. Ms. Lipinski: The complex does need updating because I mean the wall and everything is just old. Its just such an old appearance. Mr. LaPine: If we're lucky, after CVS builds their building, maybe Blockbuster will come back and tear down and build another store there. Ms. Lipinski: Something because it's so old and dirty. You know, its aged itself and it makes the comer look dingy. The only other thing I'm concern with is basically, living, obviously as everybody else says, behind commercial. And I've lived there going on 10 23]25 years. Liverpool Street is really tired of coming to Council. I sat here through all these people, listened to all their complaints about construction and commercial. We've been there. We've lived through it, and it's always good to just come air my feelings. Mr. LaPine: We appreciate it. Ms. Lipinski: Deliveries — is it going to be a 24-hour pharmacy? I'm not real happy about that. Right now we have a street sweeper that comes every night, three or four nights a week at 10:30 at night. In the summertime, you're silting outside. Okay, you listen to that ramble jamble of the thing. But in the wintertime, most of us are in bed by 11:00, you know, 10:30, and that thing is annoying. So when will your street sweeper come if its a 24- hour business? We were told they couldn't come until 10:30 at night for the shopping center to close. Mr. LaPine: CVS, I would assume, doesn't control that. The landlord controls that. Ms. Lipinski: That would be the landlord but when you're bringing in a 24- hour business, when are they going to sweep? Mr. LaPine: I have no idea. I'll ask the petitioner when you gel done here. Ms. Lipinski: Okay. And my other thing is the dumpsler. I can't tell where your dumpsler is going to be because I look at them all in my kitchen window when I do my dishes. I can see them all. Everybody abuses the rules. But hopefully it's not where I'm going to see that one loo. The lighting ... is there going to be high lights on the building too in the back? Mr. LaPine: We'll ask the question. You have to go through the chair. Ms. Lipinski: Oh, sorry. The lighting. I mean that's always an issue. There are some trees along that brick wall on the residential side, but obviously those trees are old now. The city, Detroit Edison, has come by and chopped them a million limes, and they're just, I mean they're hanging by a leaf. The lights retied obviously right into our windows, just as everybody else's complaints are. You guys must have nightmares about all the stories every week. And if we could get the name of the maintenance company for that complex. We used to go to the real estate office when there was an issue with the wall falling apart. The real estate office is gone. We have no contact with the 23726 management office now to repair the brick wall. Otherwise, I'm not happy with the 24-hour pharmacy. Mr. LaPine: All I can tell you about the 24-hour pharmacy, it's open 24 hours but that doesn't mean you're going to have a thousand people going through. Probably maybe during the week if you get half a dozen people or a dozen people going through there, that's a lot of people. Ms. Lipinski: Right. I do understand that. Thank you. Mr. LaPine: If the petifioner will answer a few of her questions. First, let's talk about the lighting. Mr. McNally: I'll try. I took notes going through it. If I miss one, please correct me. There were two mentions of light. One was the headlights coming in. Again, the pharmacy is oriented such ... Mr. LaPine: Going west... Mr. McNally: Yes, vehicles will be coming in and facing this direction. There is also the screen wall along the side, or along the property line over in this area, the existing one. It may be in a deteriorated state but that is something that has already been provided for. Another item was the lighting of the site itself. We are actually reducing the Iighfing on the site. We are eliminating one of the existing parking lot fixtures out in this area. Everything else is pretty much going to stay the same. Lighting in the rear of the building is under the canopy of the pharmacy drive-through. Mr. LaPine: The lighting goes down. Mr. McNally: Correct. And the dumpster is actually located in this area here in an enclosure as specified by the city. I believe what the resident may be referring to is some of the freestanding dumpsters that are out on the remainder of the parcel. Is it a 24-hour pharmacy? It is a 24-hour store. The pharmacy is not anticipated to be staffed 24 hours. Mr. LaPine: And the name of somebody so she can get a hold of them and something about when they sweep up the parking lot that it's done at a reasonable hour. Mr. McNally: Again, Council was correct in as far as we don't have control over that. It is the overall landlord, and I would be happy to work with the staff or pass on any information we may have. I 23727 think the city's information may be better as far as, you know, the actual entities. Mr. La Pine: If somebody could get that information to our staff and if you call staff in a few days, maybe he can give you some information. Okay? Anything else? Is there any other discussion? A motion is in order. Mr. Wilshaw: I'll go ahead and take this one if you'd like. Lel me gel ready here. I think this is an attractive building. We didn't talk much about the look of the building because of all the previous meetings, but this is very attractive building that you're proposing. And while it's a shame that the facility over at Levan and Five Mile will be dosed as a result, you're essentially moving it down the road, this may present some other opportunities for that strip mall at Five and Levan to get a new tenant. Needless to say, I will offer an approving resolution. On a motion by Wilshaw, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-124-2006 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 2006, on Petition 2006-10-02-28 submitted by The Velmeir Companies requesting waiver use approval to construct a commercial building (CVS Pharmacy) with a drive-thru pharmacy at 37300 Five Mile Road, located on the northeast corner of Five Mile Road and Newburgh Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2006-10-02-28 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Site Plan (Layout Plan) marked Sheet SP -1-03 prepared by Atwell -Hicks Development Consultants, dated November 2, 2006, as revised, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2. That the Landscape Plan marked Sheet SP -1-04 prepared by Atwell Hicks Development Consultants, dated November 2, 2006, as revised, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, subject to the following stipulations: - That all planted materials shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition; 23728 - That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu of hydroseeding; - That all landscaped and sodded areas shall be provided with an automatic underground irngaton system; 3. That the Exterior Elevations Plan marked Sheet A4.1 prepared by Atwell -Hicks Development Consultants, dated October 18, 2006, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 4. That brick used in the construction of the building shall be full face flinch brick, and precast masonry unit systems shall meet ASTM 216 standards; 5. That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be 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; 6. That the refuse enclosure shall be constructed of brick as shown on the Refuse Enclosure Detail on the Site Plan, and with steel gates which, when not in use, shall be closed at all times; 7. That all light poles shall be a maximum of 20 feet high including the base and all light fixtures shall be shielded to minimize glare trespassing on adjacent properties and roadway; 8. That the only additional lighting to be provided at the rear (north end) of the CVS/pharmacy shall consist of lighting beneath the canopy of the cine -through pharmacy and that no light poles be installed; 9. Thatall parking spaces shall be double striped; 10. That the traffic lanes serving the drive -up facility shall each be at least 12 feet in width; 11. That this approval shall incorporate the stipulation contained in the correspondence dated October 18, 2006 from the Fire Marshal; 23729 12. That the petitioner shall secure the necessary stormwater management permits from Wayne County, the City of Livonia, and/or the State of Michigan; 13. That the Developer shall submit for approval an ongoing mosquito control program, as approved by the Department of Public Works, describing maintenance operations and larvicide applications to the City of Livonia Inspection Department prior to the construction of the stormwater retenfion facility; 14. That the owner shall provide annual reports to the Inspection Department on the maintenance and larvicide treatments completed on the stormwater detention pond; 15. That signage for this use shall be limited to the signs portrayed in the Sign Package prepared by Sign Art, dated October 31, 2006, subject to any variances that may be needed from the Zoning Board of Appeals in regard to directional signs for the drive -up facility and any conditions pertaining thereto. Any additional signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council; 16. That no LED lighlband or exposed neon shall be permitted on this site including, but not limited to, the building or around the windows; 17. 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; and 18. That any defects in the screening wall be repaired to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department. Subjecllo 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 23730 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. LaPine: Is there any discussion? Mr. Wilshaw: For the resident's benefit, I believe those dumpster gates will be facing westbound, so you will be looking at a brick wall basically. Mr. Taormina: If the maker of the motion would consider changes relative to the wall at the rear. If it is in need of repair, that it be repaired to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department. And then also that the lighting on the north side of the building be limited to lighting beneath the canopy of the drive-thru pharmacy only and that no additional poles shall be installed at the rear of the property. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, I think both those stipulations should be included. Mr. LaPine: Is that okay with you, Ms. Smiley? Ms. Smiley: Yes. That's fine. Mr. LaPine: Just one thing I'd like you to consider. Take another look at that fountain. I think it might be an advantage to have that fountain in there. Mr. LaPine, Acting Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. Lel the record show that Mr. Walsh left at 11:05 please. ITEM#10 PETITION 2006-08-03-03 PAULCAMILLERI Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2006- 08-03-03 submitted by Paul Camilleri, and pursuant to Council Resolution #442-06, requesting to vacate the easement on the vacated road portion of his property at 29818 Hoy, located on the north side of Hoy Road between Melvin Avenue and Beatrice Avenue in the Northwest % of Section 23. 23731 Mr. Taormina: This properly is at the northeast corner of Hoy Road and Melvin Avenue. This is Lot 111 of B.E. Taylors Green Acres Subdivision. This is a site that includes as part of its legal description a portion of vacated Melvin Avenue right-of-way that lies west of and adjacent to Lot 111. A portion of this right-of- way was vacated some years ago, and when it was vacated the city maintained an easement for utilities over that portion of the vacation righlotway. What Mr. Camillen would like to do is construct an addition to his existing residence. That addition will extend into a portion of that described easement. He'd like to vacate that easement accordingly in order to permit the addition to his structure. We have no objection to that. The Engineering is supportive of that. However, they are requesting that the westerly 10 feet of the easement be left in place for maintenance of a gas main and storm sewer that are in close proximity in the Melvin Avenue rightof-way. Thank you. Mr. LaPine: Is there any correspondence, Mr. Nowak? Mr. Nowak: There is one item of correspondence from the Engineering Division, dated September 27, 2006, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced petition. We have no objection to the proposal at this time. We would recommend that the westerly 10 feet of the easement be left in place for maintenance of the gas mains and storm sewers that are in close proximity in the Melvin Avenue right-of-way. The legal description for the vacation follows." The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., City Engineer. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. LaPine: Are there any questions for the staff? Is the petitioner here this evening? Do you have anything you'd like to add? Paul Camilleri, 29818 Hoy, Livonia, Michigan 48154. Just that I am pulling an addition on my home. I have a one car garage currently which I cant park my car in there for lawn mowers and sluff. So I'd like to expand my garage and put in a hobby room basically. I have talked to my ... I don't see any of my neighbors here. I have mentioned what I was doing to my neighbors. They seem to be in agreement and that's all I have. I'll try to keep this short. My day starts at about 3:30 in the morning every day so it's past my bedtime. Mr. LaPine: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Hearing none, the public hearing is closed. A motion is in order. 23732 On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Wilshaw, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-125-2006 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 2006, on Petition 2006-08-03-03 submitted by Paul Camilleri, and pursuant to Council Resolution #442-06, requesting to vacate the easement on the vacated road portion of his property at 29818 Hoy, located on the north side of Hoy Road between Melvin Avenue and Beatrice Avenue in the Northwest ''/ of Section 23, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2006-08-03-03 be approved, as modified, so as to retain the westerly 10 feel of the easement as recommended by the Engineering Division in their correspondence dated September 27, 2006, for the following reasons: 1. That the Engineering Division has no objections to the vacating ofthe specified portion ofthe subject easement; 2. That the remaining easement area will adequately provide for maintenance of existing public utility equipment; 3. That the portion of the easement area proposed to be vacated can be more advantageously utilized by the property owner if unencumbered by the easement; and 4. That no public utility company has objected to the proposed vacating. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances, as amended. Mr. LaPine, Acting Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM#11 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 933'" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 933`° Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on October 3, 2006. 23]33 On a motion by Morrow, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-126-2006 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 933" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on October 3, 2006, are hereby approved. A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Morrow, Smiley, McDermott, Wilshaw, LaPine NAYS: None ABSENT: Shane, Walsh ABSTAIN: None Mr. LaPine, Acting Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 935" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on November 14, 2006, was adjourned at 11:28 p.m. ATTEST: John Walsh, Chairman CIN PLANNING COMMISSION Carol A. Smiley, Secretary