HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1995-12-19 14556
MINUTES OF THE 716th REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LIVONIA
On Tuesday, December 19, 1995 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 716th Regular Meeting& Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic
Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Jack Engebretson, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m., with
approximately 45 interested persons in the audience.
Members present: Jack Engebretson William LaPine Robert Alanskas
James C. McCann R. Lee Morrow Daniel Piercecchi
Patricia Blomberg
Mr. H. G. Shane, Ass't. Planning Director; and Scott Miller*, Planner I, were also
present.
Mr. Engebretson informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a
rezoning request, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council
who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and decide the question. If a petition
involves a waiver of use request and the request is denied, the petitioner has ten days in
which to appeal the decision to the City Council; otherwise the petition is terminated. The
Planning Commission holds the only public hearing on a preliminary plat and/or a vacating
Nftily petition. Planning Commission resolutions become effective seven days after the
resolutions are adopted. The Planning Commission has reviewed the petitions upon their
filing and have been furnished by the staff with approving and denying resolutions. The
Commission may use them or not use them depending upon the outcome of the hearing
tonight.
Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 95-9-1-20 by
the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution#182-94,
proposing to rezone property located west of Middlebelt Road between Five
Mile Road and Puritan Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14 from PL
and RUF to NP.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Shane, while you are getting ready to present this, would you begin
by giving the audience just a brief overview as to what is involved in
these five petitions involving changing the zoning from the current
zoning district to Nature Preserve. Would you just cover that briefly as
to how this comes about and what the intent is.
Mr. Shane: This particular petition, along with the next four, deal with City-owned
property throughout the City. All of these properties are park land and
they are all presently zoned in the Public Land classification. Because
14557
heavily wooded, this places them in a situation where they can be
considered as a Nature Preserve because they qualify under the Nature
Preserve part of the Zoning Ordinance. What that particular
`.. classification will do is to further classify these pieces of property so
they can be used for nothing except for hiking, educational type of
uses, camping, and that type of thing. There will be no active park
lands ever developed on the site. It will never be developed for
anything but park purposes. What this really does is further protect
them and assure the people that live near them that they will forever be
in a wooded state and as a Nature Preserve. So each one of these
petitions as they come up I will explain where they are and what the
issue is that if this is approved they will be rezoned from a Public Lands
to Nature Preserve. They will remain City-owned property. Nothing is
going to happen to them except they will have this further designation
on the property.
Mr. Shane presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the surrounding area.
Mr. Engebretson: Is there any correspondence on this petition?
Mr. Shane: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating
their office has no objections to this rezoning proposal.
Mr. Engebretson: Since the City is the petitioner in this case, we will go immediately to
the audience to see if there is anyone wishing to speak for or against
`or these issues or to raise any questions.
Colonel Meyers, 15127 Ellen Dr.: Will the City still maintain them as they presently do,
like mowing and things of this nature?
Mr. Shane: To the extent they mow any part of the property now, they will
continue to do so.
Mr. Engebretson: I would like to add to that the only thing that really changes here is the
assurance that there will never be any development on that property.
The use will be the same as it is, and the City is bound by the same
regulations as any landowner to maintain property. If mowing is
appropriate, then it will be mowed. If it is not, it won't be. What really
evolves out of this is if the City were to ever sell that property, which I
don't think they can based upon how it was acquired, it would have to
go through a zoning process for any kind of development so it really
locks in the present use forever.
Colonel Meyers: I was concerned relative to the upkeep of it and it is just growing wild
back there and all kind of varmints are coming out of there.
14558
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 95-9-1-20 closed.
`.. On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mrs. Blomberg and unanimously
approved, it was
#12-243-95 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City
Planning Commission on December 19, 1995 on Petition 95-9-1-20 by the
City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution#482-94,
proposing to rezone property located west of Middlebelt Road between Five
Mile Road and Puritan Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14 from PL
and RUF to NP, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
the City Council that Petition 95-9-1-20 be approved for the following
reasons:
1) That the proposed change of zoning will further protect the unique
features of the subject land;
2) That the proposed change of zoning will serve to notify the public that
the subject land has the special characteristics needed to be designated
as a nature preserve; and
3) That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Planning
Commission's policy of seeking to protect the unique natural
characteristics of selected public open space.
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. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 95-10-1-21 by
the City Planning Commission proposing to rezone a portion of Helman Park
located on the east side of Gill Road between Southampton Avenue and
Curtis Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9 from PL to NP.
Mr. Engebretson: While H is approaching the projector I will just mention to the audience
that each of these items needs to go next to the City Council where
they will hold their own public hearing, as I indicated earlier, and
assuming that they get approval they will then run it through their
approval process, which goes to public voting meetings and then the
zoning change is published in the newspaper and it becomes law at that
point. This process will go on for the next couple of months.
14559
Mr. Shane presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the surrounding area.
Mr. Engebretson: I presume we have the same correspondence on this.
Mr. Shane: There is a short note from a gentleman who lives on Southampton. His
name is Ed Martin and he is indicating that he is in favor of this
rezoning.
Mr. Engebretson: As before, since the City is the petitioner, we will go immediately to the
audience to see if anyone wishes to speak for or against the proposed
zoning change.
Cheryl Ramsden, 18219 Gill: Does this change have any affect on the property
assessments for taxes?
Mr. Engebretson: I can't imagine how. It is City owned. The City doesn't pay property
taxes.
Ms. Ramsden: No, the property owners that surround this property.
Mr. Engebretson: I wouldn't think so, although this is an enhancement to your property
value, but I wouldn't think so. You would have to check with the
Assessor on that. Theoretically there could have been a subdivision
going in there. That might have enhanced your property value also.
Some people would argue that it might cause them to decline but I
seriously doubt that this would have any affect. I would suggest if you
have a concern about that, obviously you do, you should call Judie
Nagy tomorrow, the City Assessor, and ask her the question. As you
heard earlier, this is the first step in a whole series of hearings and
meetings so if you got any information from her that would disturb you,
you would be well armed before the next meeting, which will be a
public hearing by the City Council. I would be very surprised if it does
but if it does, ask her to call me too.
Ms. Ramsden: Will there be any extra police or any extra fines for dumping in that
area if this changes from Public Lands to Nature Preserve?
Mr. Engebretson: I don't think so.
Ms. Ramsden: There is dumping going on along Gill Road along that side.
14560
Mr. Engebretson: I guess the Inspection Department would be interested in that but I
can't imagine that it is going to make any punishment more severe, is it
H?
Mr. Shane: It will be maintained as it always has, and any infraction of the law of
the City of Livonia will be taken care of as it always has. I think the
best thing is to make sure that the Police Department and Inspection
Department know about the dumping that is going on. If they don't
know it, they are not going to do anything about it. That is the best
way to handle it.
Ms. Ramsden: There is public land attached to that. Why isn't that being converted to
Nature Preserve also?
Mr. Shane: These particular properties that you are seeing tonight have been
recommended to us by the Parks & Recreation Commission, whose job
it is to look after the parks in the City, and in their judgment the rest of
the land does not qualify as Nature Preserve because it does not have
the same attributes as that particular property does. That is a heavily
wooded area. There are no wetlands or anything in there to qualify it.
Kelly Burton, 18483 Gill: I am here to speak for several residents who could not be here
because of the Christmas timing of this hearing, to say we are very
much in favor of zoning this to Nature Preserve. We just moved into
Newthe area and our children refer to that as the"woods". They are thrilled
that they can go there. Hopefully my son will not realize his dream of
finding a snake in the woods and bring it home, but there are not very
many places in Livonia where we can do that any more. Livonia has a
lot of wonderful services. Very little, however, what we have to offer
is a Nature Preserve or wooded area. I am very, very much in favor of
keeping what little wooded land we have in Livonia left. It will
enhance not only our property value and the enjoyment of the residents
around that, but the property value of Livonia as a whole if we do not
allow all of it to have the potential of becoming level and putting in 17
more houses. We are very, very much in favor of this proposal.
Mr. Engebretson: Thank you for taking the time to come down tonight.
Laura Holtz, 18486 Southampton: We are also very pleased that this is hopefully going to
become a Nature Preserve. We were also wondering why the other
land also wasn't designated as Nature Preserve. I think you have
answered that, and we are hoping that will never be developed because
I think the Stevenson High School track and the bleachers there when
they have their football games, I think that would become a nuisance to
our neighborhood. It is very loud as it is right now and if the trees
14561
were cut down and that were developed, I think that would be a
nuisance to the neighborhood.
v.. Mr. Engebretson: The fact that it is Public Land would make it highly unlikely that it
would ever be developed but what we are doing with the petition area
there is to make sure that it will never be developed, but you are only
one notch less protected in the area to the south. It is a step in the right
direction.
Mr. Morrow: Just to make a further comment. The Parks & Recreation, we have
two types of parks, active parks and passive parks. By going to Nature
Preserve we are saying we have no interest in making that an active
park. It will remain in its natural state. If it is a park, you always have
the potential that maybe they are going to develop it further for
whatever reason but this just takes it one classification lower so they
cannot be putting in baseball diamonds, or picnic grounds or anything.
It will just be Nature Preserve.
Ms. Holtz: Would that mean then that Gill Road would never be continued on to
Six Mile Road?
Mr. Morrow: There is the potential that Gill could be developed but that is a separate
process.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 95-10-1-21 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Blomberg, seconded by Mr. McCann and unanimously
approved, it was
#12-244-95 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City
Planning Commission on December 19, 1995 on Petition 95-10-1-21 by the
City Planning Commission proposing to rezone a portion of Helman Park
located on the east side of Gill Road between Southampton Avenue and
Curtis Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9 from PL to NP, the City
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 95-10-1-21 be approved for the following reasons:
1) That the proposed change of zoning will further protect the unique
features of the subject land;
2) That the proposed change of zoning will serve to notify the public
that the subject land has the special characteristics needed to be
designated as a nature preserve; and
14562
3) That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Planning
Commission's policy of seeking to protect the unique natural
characteristics of selected public open space.
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. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
* Mr. Miller entered the meeting at this time.
Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 95-10-1-22 by
the City Planning Commission proposing to rezone Denmar Park located on
the north side of Curtis Road between Golfview Drive and Hampton Court in
the Northeast 1/4 of Section 8 from PL to NP.
Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the surrounding area.
Mr. Shane: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating
they have no objections to this rezoning proposal. We have also
received a letter from W. B. Johnson of 35443 Curtis stating he will be
out of town on December 19th and therefore unable to present his
views on this petition but he does support this action and hopes that the
concerned citizens of Livonia are informed of the results of this
hearing.
Mr. Engebretson: Would you let him know the outcome either by phone or by return
note. Again, we will go to the audience.
George Boller, 36270 Hammer: May I approach the map. Where I am pointing right now
is access to the northeast corner of this part of the present park. That
does not show it as being part of the park itself. I would like to ask if
that is a correct understanding.
Mr. Engebretson: It is on private property?
Mr. Shane: It is not actually part of the park. It is an access easement.
Mr. Engebretson: Which is not uncommon. There are access easements in any number of
parks that I am familiar with.
Mr. Boller: My question is, by changing the zoning, would that have any affect on
that particular easement. In other words, if this were to be rezoned,
14563
would that extinguish the easement such that there would be no access
to the park?
- Mr. Shane: No it does not affect the easement because it is still a park site.
Mr. Boller: Even though this is going to be zoned Nature Preserve, is it still going
to be referred to as Denmar Park or is it going to be Denmar Nature
Preserve?
Mr. Shane: It will keep the same name of Denmar Park unless the Parks and
Recreation Commission decides to change its name, and we have no
indication that is the case.
Mr. Boller: Mr. Shane is anticipating my questions very well. My next one was
does the Parks Department still retain jurisdiction over Nature
Preserves?
Mr. Shane: Yes.
Mr. Boller: Does that include the maintenance of Nature Preserves or are they left
strictly in the natural state?
Mr. Shane: It will be maintained as any other park site is to the extent it needs
maintaining. The whole idea of Nature Preserves is to leave it in its
44•80, natural state as much as possible. I think there would be very little
mowing and that type of thing until they determine it needs to be done.
Mr. Boller: Am I correct in understanding one of the benefits from this rezoning
would be that the Parks Department would not have the jurisdiction to
go in and initiate on its own whatever actions it wanted to do in there.
Mr. Shane: It still has jurisdiction over the park land but the zoning ordinance is
now going to dictate to them what they can do and what they can't do.
In other words, they cannot now develop it into a ball diamond or any
other active type recreation. It will be confined to nature trails
allowing educational trips and that type of thing.
Mr. Boller: There are several pathways that go through there and if for some
reason those get overgrown, they will come and maintain those?
Mr. Shane: They will maintain it.
Mr. Boller: By designating a rezoning to a Nature Preserve, does that in any way
raise the possibility, or is there any law which might enable some other
unit of government, such as the county or state or federal government,
14564
to come in. Obviously they would have eminent domain power even
over the city, but I mean apart from that. Simply by rezoning a park as
,` a Nature Preserve are there any special statutes that could cause that?
Mr. Engebretson: Since you are the attorney, you should know the answer to that.
Mr. Boller: I don't deal in that.
Mr. Engebretson: It is our impression, Mr. Boller, that the only thing that this action
accomplishes is to dedicate these areas to a passive usage as compared
to a potential for an active usage and it clearly defines that use, which is
spelled out in the ordinance. Everything else stays the same.
Mr. Boller: I don't mean to be argumentative, but Mr. Morrow before referred to a
passive and an active park. Is Denmar right now a passive park?
Mr. Engebretson: Yes and it will be forever. There will never be a ball diamond there,
which is perhaps the best example I can think of, to differentiate
between a passive and an active park. It will remain in that state Mr.
Boller.
Andrew Pastir, 18262 Golfview Drive: My property backs Denmar Park. I have two
concerns. One is presently there is no designation or name on the park.
Will there be some designation made, a sign of some kind?
%.
Mr. Engebretson: Not as a result of this action. If there is, it will be a mutually exclusive
issue to what we do up here.
Mr. Pastir: Presently there are signs up there that say"no motorcycles" or
something which seems to designate it as a City park.
Mr. Engebretson: Those issues really originate with the Parks & Recreation Commission
and Parks and Recreation Department. If you were to believe there is a
need for some more appropriate signage, it would be appropriate to
bring it to their attention, and I am sure they would be glad to help you.
Mr. Pastir: My second point is probably more important. We have had in the past
several years some very poor maintenance of the public sidewalk along
Curtis Avenue, which stretches the length of the park. In the
summertime the vegetation completely overgrows the concrete. The
elevation of the park itself is higher than the sidewalk, which means
that during heavy rain any drainage runs across the sidewalk forming
ice in the winter time and puddles in the summertime, and we have been
unsuccessful at this time in getting Parks and Recreation to do anything
about it. They have been out there. We have maintained contact with
14565
them. So far we have had no action and this has gone on for several
years now particularly in the spring when the children walk across there
going to Taylor School. It is very difficult for them to stay on the
sidewalk because it is completely overgrown. I wonder if anything can
be included in the approving resolution calling this to the attention of
the Parks & Recreation to get in there and clean up that portion along
the sidewalk.
Mr. Engebretson: Your point is well taken sir. We are not able to deal with that as part
of this resolution but what we can do is send a separate message to the
Parks& Recreation Department asking them to give attention to this
matter. We can do that.
Mr. Pastir: I would appreciate that. Particularly now would be an excellent time
for them to get in there and clean that up while winter is on and get it
ready for springtime. I would appreciate any efforts along that line.
Mr. Engebretson: We will follow up and we will do that. H is making a note and we will
address it to Parks & Recreation Department and we will copy it to the
Mayor's office.
Mr. Pastir: The last point is, I know I speak for neighbors along Golfview there
whose property backs up to the park like mine does, that we are all in
complete favor of this proposal and wish it well.
'`a.
Bob Tabeling, 35945 Brookview: I also live in Denmar Estates and I have been there for
30 years. I was past Vice President of Denmar Association back in
1970 and we took up a petition. I had 277 signatures just in Denmar
alone to try to get that park developed because back in those days
people were cutting firewood and destroying the park. The kids were
destroying it and the neighbors all the way around the park were
encroaching on it. They were cutting it back making their lots larger,
and we wanted to put a stop to that. I came over here and met with the
Council at that time with my petition and Ed McNamara was the
Mayor then. He came into the Council meeting and sat down and
assured us they were going to do something about developing that
because just a mass of trees wasn't doing Livonia or any of the
neighbors around there any good. We really wanted to have some
nature trails built in there. He assured us that they would do something
about that. It has been 30 years and no one has ever done anything
about it. I personally am a vigilante committee making sure that no one
is cutting any more trees over there but still no one has ever done
anything to develop this park into a nature theme and so it is useless. I
am just raising it for a point of information to see if I can get the
Planning Commission to poke the right people and get them to do
14566
something about that park. It is a beautiful area. I was told 25 years
ago that we have some of the biggest beech trees in Michigan right
there in that park. It is something we shouldn't be destroying. Kids
are destroying it by carving their initials in the trees. I hate to bother
you with things like this but they are just chipping away at it. There is
going to be nothing left there but a hull. We should do something to
make this park a nature park.
Mr. Engebretson: Thank you sir. We will pass those comments on to the Parks &
Recreation Department. In fact, I would ask H when these minutes
have been approved that the Parks & Recreation certainly get a copy of
our verbatim minutes of each one of the cases here tonight so all these
comments that the citizens are making will surely be a matter of the
official record and will be well known to the Parks and Recreation
Department.
Mr. Piercecchi: Before making an approving motion on this, I would like to comment
on that gentleman that was here reference the sidewalk maintenance,
the next stage of this would be City Council. That would be a good
place to bring up these problems. People mention about parks, for
your information, we just received this tonight, Livonia has 1,409 acres
of park land.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
`ft. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 95-10-1-22 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mrs. Blomberg and unanimously
approved, it was
#12-245-95 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City
Planning Commission on Petition 95-10-1-22 by the City Planning
Commission proposing to rezone Denmar Park located on the north side of
Curtis Road between Golfview Drive and Hampton Court in the Northeast
1/4 of Section 8 from PL to NP, the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 95-10-1-22 be approved for the
following reasons:
1) That the proposed change of zoning will further protect the unique
features of the subject land;
2) That the proposed change of zoning will serve to notify the public
that the subject land has the special characteristics needed to be
designated as a nature preserve; and
14567
3) That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Planning
Commission's policy of seeking to protect the unique natural
�.. characteristics of selected public open space.
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. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 95-10-1-23 by
the City Planning Commission proposing to rezone Madonna Park located on
the south side of Lyndon Avenue between Fairway Drive and Parklane Drive in
the Southwest 1/4 of Section 20 from PL to NP.
Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the surrounding area.
Mr. Shane: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating
their office has no objections to this rezoning proposal. We have also
received a letter from Mary Revak of 14547 Fairway stating she will be
unable to attend the public hearing, however, she would like to state
that she would like to see Madonna Park rezoned to a Nature Preserve.
Mr. Engebretson: As before we will go immediately to the audience to see if anyone
wishes to speak for or against the proposed zoning change.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 95-10-1-23 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. McCann and unanimously
approved, it was
#12-246-95 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City
Planning Commission on December 19, 1995 on Petition 95-10-1-23 by the
City Planning Commission proposing to rezone Madonna Park located on the
south side of Lyndon Avenue between Fairway Drive and Parklane Drive in
the Southwest 1/4 of Section 20 from PL to NP, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
95-10-1-23 be approved for the following reasons:
1) That the proposed change of zoning will further protect the unique
features of the subject land;
14568
2) That the proposed change of zoning will serve to notify the public
that the subject land has the special characteristics needed to be
designated as a nature preserve; and
3) That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Planning
Commission's policy of seeking to protect the unique natural
characteristics of selected public open space.
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. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 95-10-1-24 by
the City Planning Commission proposing to rezone Greenbriar Park located
on the north side of Lyndon Avenue between Yale Avenue and Ellen Drive in
the Northwest 1/4 of Section 21 from PL to NP.
Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the surrounding area.
Mr. Shane: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating
`,,,or their office has no objections to this rezoning proposal
Colonel Meyers, 15127 Ellen Drive: I have a question. The property directly above this
on the map, who owns that? Does the City own that?
Mr. Shane: The only part the City owns is that section on the map that is cross-
hatched.
Colonel Meyers: Can you tell us who owns that property?
Mr. Engebretson: I bet Mrs. Jablonski can.
Mrs. Jablonski: The Chinese Gospel Church owns that. That goes about as far as the
8th house south of Yale. That is church property and they intend to
extend further. They have kept it very well.
Colonel Meyers: You are saying the property will still be maintained as it presently is.
That is what I wanted to get clear.
Mr. Engebretson: Yes sir.
14569
Colonel Meyers: I have some neighbors here that have some questions but all of a
sudden they are camera shy apparently. Will the wooded area be
cleared? Will this property be further developed in any way. I think
you guys would have to say no.
Mr. Morrow: Just to further amplify what we are saying here, there is a Parks&
Recreation Commission. There is a Planning Commission. We deal
with zoning. They deal with the maintenance, upkeep and the
development of parks. I would suggest that you, or anyone else that
has any concerns about how that property is being maintained or what
is in store for it, I would find out when their commission meets and you
can discuss it with them directly. We are a conduit to them but we are
not meeting directly with them. A lot of these questions we don't
really know. We are going to change the zoning.
Colonel Meyers: We were afraid this might be a step toward developing it.
Mr. Morrow: It is going in the opposite direction.
Colonel Meyers: I can appreciate that. You normally don't have citizens down here that
are so cooperative right? Last time we were down here we were really
fighting you.
Mr. Engebretson: This is probably, so far anyway, the easiest meeting we have ever had.
'to"' That could change.
Colonel Meyers: I have a couple more questions to ask. Will the City continue to mow
the areas?
Mr. Engebretson: Yes.
Colonel Meyers: Will there be any increase in taxes or property assessments? I think
you basically answered that. What are the advantages of rezoning the
land from Public Land to Nature Preserve?
Mr. Engebretson: We have tried to address that. To guarantee its passive use and that
there would be no development of any kind for recreation purposes, or
any other purpose.
Colonel Meyers: We thought if this was going to be a Nature Preserve you might scoop
up some land and make a pond back there and we would have all the
mallards from Eight Mile Road over by our house. What changes will
take place? You are saying none. Will adjacent property owners still
be able to use the area for walking, running, etc.?
14570
Mr. Engebretson: Yes.
Colonel Meyers: Will public access from other areas be increased? I think that is a no.
Mr. Engebretson: Actually there were some good questions there. It is regrettable that
they put all that responsibility on you. I would like to have seen some
other representatives, although you represented them very well.
Doris Jablonski, 15080 Yale: Perhaps this is premature but the rest of them that live on
Yale and Ellen Drive want to thank the Planning Commission for the
plan to rezone the land as written in the petition from PL, Public Land,
to NP, Nature Preserve. As we all know, there isn't too much land left
in Livonia. This particular site has become a habitat for many types of
birds as well as animals. I might add there are no geese there though.
There are various types of trees and plants that can't be found in one's
backyard. The trail that goes through this property draws many parents
with their children where many of the features are pointed out to the
youngsters and they grow to know what the natural habitat of the trees
and the plants and everything are. Many of the residents have been
unable to come to this hearing but strongly urge the Commission to do
the necessary rezoning for the restoration of this site. Once again, we
thank you, and have a happy holiday.
*`'`" Brad Summers, 14576 Yale: I have lived there for about five years. I wanted to just
make a comment, I know it is not your jurisdiction, about the
maintenance of the property. They do maintain the outer edge of the
woods very well but when you get into the inner structure of the woods
where the trails are and where the kids are going to be walking and the
dogs are going to be running, I probably have taken 10 bags of garbage
out of that woods. Kids like to congregate back in there. I have
contacted the police. I have contacted Parks& Rec. to notify them of
what is going on back there. There are people that dump car seats
back in there.
Mr. McCann: I might make a recommendation, the court might get upset with me for
this, but we do have a voluntary work program out of the 16th District
Court. It is volunteer services to help the community. We do have a
problem with parks and that with clean up and that type of thing. You
might contact the Probation Department of the Court to see during the
spring or the fall if they could send out work crews to help clean it up.
They provide their own garbage bags and trash removal and everything
else, and it is a service offered to a lot of the local areas for community
projects such as that. That might be a solution to your problem.
14571
Mr. Summers: Also like other people have mentioned, if you are going to make it a
Nature Preserve we need some kind of maintenance to the trail because
I go in there with my cutters and clean out the trail.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 95-10-1-24 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously
approved, it was
#12-247-95 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the
City Planning Commission on December 19, 1995 on Petition 95-10-1-24
by the City Planning Commission proposing to rezone Greenbriar Park
located on the north side of Lyndon Avenue between Yale Avenue and
Ellen Drive in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 21 from PL to NP, the City
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 95-10-1-24 be approved for the following reasons:
1) That the proposed change of zoning will further protect the unique
features of the subject land;
2) That the proposed change of zoning will serve to notify the public
that the subject land has the special characteristics needed to
r. be designated as a nature preserve; and
3) That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Planning
Commission's policy of seeking to protect the unique natural
characteristics of selected public open space.
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. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 95-10-3-5 by
Garfield Kindred Associates, P.C., Architects, on behalf of the Livonia
Community Credit Union, requesting to vacate a portion of Westmore
Avenue south of Roycroft Avenue and East of Farmington Road in the
Southwest 1/4 of Section 15.
Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the surrounding area.
14572
Mr. Shane: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating
since there are public utilities within the subject right-of-way, it is
recommended that a full width easement for public utilities be retained
`"' over the right-of-way vacated. We have also received a letter from
Consumers Power stating they have gas main facilities in the area of the
proposed vacation. Should the City decide to vacate the street, they
request that full width easement protection be maintained, for facility
maintenance and survey. They end by saying if the facility is no longer
needed for existing or proposed customers, the petition submitter
should contact them with their plans to see if retirement is in order.
This may be at the submitter's expense.
Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please step forward.
Mike Nault, Garfield Kindred Associates, 28557 Canal, Clinton Township, MI.: We are,
with a latter item on the agenda, requesting the closure of the right-of-
way, understanding the comments that were just made, and I do
understand that a full-width easement would mean maintaining the full
right-of-way for both public and private utilities. I completely
understand it.
Mr. Engebretson: That is not going to interfere with the other plans that you have with
the site plan that is coming later?
'414. Mr. Nault: No sir.
Mr. Engebretson: Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak for or against this
proposal? H,just for the information of those that might be interested,
it is my recollection that the credit union owns the property on both
sides of the area to be vacated, so all of this land would revert to the
credit union. Is that correct?
Mr. Shane: Yes that is correct.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 95-10-3-5 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Piercecchi and unanimously
approved, it was
#12-248-95 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City
Planning Commission on December 19, 1995 on Petition 95-10-3-5 by
Garfield Kindred Associates, P.C., Architects, on behalf of the Livonia
Community Credit Union, requesting to vacate a portion of Westmore
Avenue south of Roycroft Avenue and East of Farmington Road in the
14573
Southwest 1/4 of Section 15, the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 95-10-3-5 be approved subject
to a full width easement for public utilities, for the following reasons:
Noir
1) That the proposed vacating will provide for private use of an area
no longer needed to serve any public need;
2) That the proposed vacating will place the subject land area back on
the City tax roles; and
3) That the area proposed to be vacated can be utilized to solve a
vehicular access problem occurring on the adjacent Livonia Credit
Union property.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given
in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code
of Ordinances.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat
Approval for Camborne Stark School Subdivision proposed to be located on
the southwest corner of Stark Road and Pinetree Avenue in the Northwest
*ft, 1/4 of Section 33.
Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning
of the surrounding area.
Mr. Engebretson: Scott, does that drawing accurately represent the alignment of Richland
with the new street entering the cul-de-sac?
Mr. Miller: As close as I could match it up.
Mr. Engebretson: So it is offset just a little bit?
Mr. Miller: I believe so.
Mr. Engebretson: How much?
Mr. Miller: I don't know.
Mr. Shane: Five feet or so.
Mr. Engebretson: Is that a problem?
Mr. Shane: No.
Mr. Engebretson: Is there correspondence Mr. Shane?
Mr. Shane: We have received a letter from the Superintendent of Parks and
Recreation stating they found no discrepancies or problems with this
14574
project as submitted. We have also received a letter from the Traffic
Bureau stating they have no objections to this preliminary plat,
however, they are requesting the placement of a stop sign for traffic
exiting the cul-de-sac (Richland Court) at Stark. We have also
received a letter from the Livonia Public Schools stating they could not
find any problems or discrepancies in its design. We have also received
a letter from the Department of Public Safety stating their office has no
objections to its development. Also in our file is a letter from the
Engineering Department stating they will require the widening of Stark
Road (west side) as an Alternate II type pavement. Further, they will
require a detention basin within the limits of the subdivision due to the
limited capacity of the storm sewer outlet to Laurel Avenue. The
Commission may wish to consider landscaping requirements in the area
of the detention pond.
You may recall at the study meeting that it was indicated to you that a
detention basin would not be required because the petitioner had
secured an outlet for a sewer to the west. I think that still is the case. I
think this letter came prior to the solution of the problem so I don't
believe the basin will be needed.
Mr. Engebretson: But the official position at the moment is that they do need it.
Mr. Shane: I also have a letter here that was written to Mr. Roskelly by John Nagy
indicating that he would recommend that they refer the matter to the
Engineering Department in the hope they would agree the detention
pond is no longer needed. I don't think it is needed but I don't have
any official letter saying that. In any case if he has to have a detention
pond, he simply will have to lose one lot. I think the storm sewer
problem is straightened out though.
Mr. McCann: Would you review that letter that said because of the limited ability of
the storm sewer, as the letter read, which would indicate they were
aware of it.
Mr. Shane: We had indication later on that there may be a solution so at this point
in time we can't tell you one way or another.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Shane, regarding the improvement of Stark Road. What would the
limits of that be? What would the area of improvement involve?
Mr. Shane: This petitioner would be required to participate in the improvement of
Stark Road in relationship to his land area.
Mr. Engebretson: Just from the northern to the southern extent of that property?
14575
Mr. Shane: Exactly.
`" Mr. Engebretson: I see the petitioner is here ready to make his comments.
William Roskelly, 33177 Schoolcraft Road: Certainly none of you are strangers to this
layout. This is the same layout that I presented at the time of the
petition for rezoning. Perhaps I can clear up these items that are a little
in the gray area. As far as the storm sewer, originally we thought our
only outlet would be along Stark Road going down to the park, and
then the extreme southeastern lot would have become a retention pond.
Immediately after that I dealt with a Mr. and Mrs. Potts, who live to
the south, and you notice their land goes from Stark Road all the way
to Laurel. Laurel Avenue is a storm sewer 18 inches in diameter that
runs down to the park with adequate spillways, etc. with quite a
velocity because of the grade. So in discussing with Mr. Clark that in
the event I was able to get access to that storm sewer, would in fact
that be capable in taking the runoff I would require for this subdivision?
Mr. Clark indicated it appeared that certain calculations would have to
be done by my company, which I admitted I would do, and certainly the
majority, and perhaps all of it, would go and spill into that sewer
without causing any problems depending on the cubic feet per second
we would be generating along with what is going in it now. At best, if
I could get this so-called easement to get to that pipe, that almost all
`r.. or, in my opinion, all of the water, that hasn't been calculated yet, but
we certainly wouldn't be choked just to agriculture runoff Perhaps we
would have a 12-inch pipe which would be adequate to take all our
water and if, in fact, it surcharged that pipe, then we in turn would put
a choker in it that maybe would take whatever the case may be. In that
case, we would have not a retention pond but a detention area which
would be in the back of that pie shaped lot, known as lot 11 in the
extreme southwest corner. But it would not be a retention pond as
would have been required had we not been able to get into Laurel.
I presently am dealing with Mr. and Mrs. Potts. I am meeting with
their attorney on Thursday. We now have a verbal agreement that they
will supply the City of Livonia an adequate easement of twelve foot
wide so I may construct and put in a storm sewer line into that storm
sewer at Laurel.
I believe some computations which we have to work out with your
Engineering Department, whatever capacity is available, I suggest it
would be all of it, but as Mr. Clark said show me the calculations
showing all the area that is running into that pipe and then we will
14576
determine if it all will go, but certainly the majority will be able to go
into that.
'v.. That does two things for me. Number one, I gain that specific lot on
the southeast corner. I am also, if you will recall when we were in the
rezoning, Mr. and Mrs. Potts were here and they were quite concerned
because they have some pockets of water in their property. I have
assured them and agreed that I would add a catch basin and do certain
grading to avoid the little potholes and do certain things in exchange
for this easement to the City. So I feel quite confident that at best a
detention area,just in the form of a very fine swale in that lot 11 in this
corner if anything, would be available. But until such time as we get to
Engineering and get into the nuts and bolts of this, I don't know if any
is required, and if it is, it will be a very nominal area.
The other question is the widening of Stark Road. I spoke with
Engineering and what that would amount to would be adding, I think,
maybe 4 feet, and perhaps curb, on my side of Stark Road. It is not
another lane or something like that. It is just to widen it out to their
Alternate II road. That will be taken care of in engineering as part of
their requirements.
I think I would like to point out that although we did get this land
zoned for R-1, there are only five lots that are a minimum size of 60' by
�.. 120'. The balance of the lots are far in excess of the minimum
required. The acreage on this is 4.74 acres and the lot yield is less than
four per acre so I don't think we are really getting down to absolute
minimum as far as square footage or area of the lots.
The type of homes we will be building, of course you are all aware that
their Industrial Arts Program will retain four lots to build on. They also
agreed they would use either our plans or plans we would accept so
that they would be comparable to the homes we are going to build. In
an R-1 district we would be permitted a minimum of 1,000 sq. ft. per
house. Our minimum house size would be 1,250 sq. ft. along with an
attached two-car garage, at least one and a half baths and a full
basement. It would be, I am sure you are all familiar with my Western
Golf Estates Subdivision across from Western Golf Course on Inkster
Road south of Five Mile Road. The base house there, which is the
model, would be one of the typical homes that we would be building.
We are trying to keep these homes in the area of about $115,000 to
$120,000. They will be very nice homes. We discovered we will not
build tract homes per se and say here is the house you get. We have an
architect for every one of our homes where they will increase the size
of any room or add a room. In fact, at Western we started at
14577
$119,900. Presently our lowest home is $144,900 and we have one
home in there for $202,000, and the average now is $160,000 and I
think we have 19 lots left. We have 18 building jobs at this time. I
`+�.• believe it is important that in most cases I would say you would have
two baths in this house but certainly no less than one and a half, a full
basement and an attached garage and other amenities available to these
individual people, and we find most people who buy a home without
hesitation would add another 10% to 15% to the base price for extras.
Other than that, I would be happy to answer any questions.
Mr. Alanskas: Would they be all brick?
Mr. Roskelly: There will be brick on the homes but no I will not stand here and tell
you they will be 100% brick. Typically in Western we have brick on
every house. Some have the front brick. Some of them have to the
belt brick. In the case of a colonial or cape cod, hardly ever do we go
above the first floor with brick. It seems another material like stucco,
siding or something seems to be better. It is just too monotonous and
too expensive in most cases, and we usually have the people select.
Right now we have I think 32 different house plans that we have built
in Western and usually people will pick one of those. You will find in
Western they do all have brick but certainly not the house in its
entirety.
v— Mr. Alanskas: What percentage?
Mr. Roskelly: I would say most of them are anywhere from, we have a couple of
ranches that are full brick. We have some that are brick fronts. We
have some brick to the belt. Certainly we would have brick fronts at
least and wraparounds, but again in the two-story, we would not have
the two-story brick.
Mr. Piercecchi: Bob really asked, for all practical purposes, my entire line of questions.
Mr. Roskelly, you indicated the people are going to have a lot of choice
in these houses so you would have no objections if they wanted to go
50% brick all the way around.
Mr. Roskelly: Absolutely not. In most cases we have a base house and say here is our
base, you cannot go below this. If you look at our model on lot 1 at
Western right off the corner of Inkster Road, that has a brick front. We
would not go below that amount of brick.
Mr. Piercecchi: It is the impression of the Planning Commission that for durability and
longevity for beauty, the more brick that is on the house it seems the
better they hold up.
14578
Mr. Roskelly: I tend to agree with you but if you take an average home you could be
adding $4,000 to $6,000 to $8,000 if you go full brick.
Mr. Piercecchi: We are not talking full brick. We are talking half brick.
Mr. Roskelly: I kind of like, and we have been very successful in Western with
allowing the people to say this is the minimum amount but certainly we
encourage you to put more if you want. As a result we don't have 99
cookie cutter houses. Of course you get a lot of siding on them but I
am well pleased. I am very proud of Western Golf Estates and I will be
very proud of this one.
Mr. McCann: Mr. Roskelly, you stated this was a similar plan as when you came to us
with the zoning change. As I recall we were dealing with 15 lots and
one of them was going to be used for the retention pond.
Mr. Roskelly: No sir. It is the same drawing. The only difference was the one on the
southeast corner was represented as a lot but that would have been
retained for the retention pond. Therefore, we would have had 16
usable lots.
Mr. McCann: The detention pond, as long as we are dealing with that, you don't have
the numbers at this point worked out as to the amount.
Mr. Roskelly: At this point I would almost say we will need no detention.
Mr. McCann: When you were talking swale, are you trying to put a swale between
the home, keep the lot and build a home?
Mr. Roskelly pointed out on the map what his plans were.
Mr. Roskelly: It would be right in the corner but it would not be a ditch or big cut. It
would be a swale.
Mr. McCann: In a person's backyard?
Mr. Roskelly: Yes. There is an easement back in here which is really a swale and
water seeps down into that area at a slower rate and there is a certain
amount of percolation, etc. so I do not believe we will need any. There
certainly would not be any wetlands no longer than 20 or 30 minutes
during a rain.
14579
Mr. McCann: Mr. Shane, if in fact they did need four more feet of his property for
Stark Road, would that then still be sufficient for lots 3 and 4 and 7 and
o.. 8.
Mr. Shane: They are not asking for additional right-of-way. They are asking for
additional width of the pavement. They just want to make the
pavement four feet wider. They don't need any right-of-way.
Mr. McCann: That would not affect his classification. It would still remain within the
R-1 zoning?
Mr. Roskelly: I perhaps didn't make that clear. It is only the slab itself that they
would like to have three or four feet wider on our side.
Mr. McCann: The other thing Mr. Roskelly, did you look at trying to align Richland
Avenue into the subdivision?
Mr. Roskelly: Yes. I spoke with Engineering. The pavement will be offset by five
feet, which is what this offset really is. Perhaps that is not totally to
scale but it is a five foot jog but at the same time we can adjust the
pavement so it will be in direct line. The center line of the road coming
from Richland going into Richland Court will be a straight line.
Mr. McCann: I was going to say it looks like lot 5 is wide enough so you could have
rearranged it somehow.
Mr. Roskelly: The corner lot is as wide as the other one and maybe that is not exactly
to scale but what it gives me is a little more side yard on the corner lot
by making them much wider than strictly sixty feet.
Mr. McCann: One of the subdivisions we did just north of Seven Mile is very similar
in size to this. The Planning Commission restricted it to 50% brick.
Would you have any problem making that commitment?
Mr. Roskelly: I would be reluctant to having 50% brick. I have found, I think from
aesthetics and I think people have a tendency to have a brick front, I
would go 20% or something of that nature. In this area we are trying
to give them a lot of house. We are trying to give them a two-car
garage. We want to give them a full basement. In turn we certainly
want to keep a certain aesthetics and I don't believe whether you have
30%, 50% or 80%, it adds too much to the aesthetics, and I think these
people being budget minded, that extra $2,000 to $3,000 or $4,000,
they would like to put it in a better furnace, or air conditioning or one
of those kinds of things. I would like to have the flexibility that I have
in Western.
14580
Mr. LaPine: Mr. Shane, I just want to get something clear. At this point we do not
know if there is going to be a retention basin. We don't think there is
going to be but we don't know for sure. We don't know about the
swale until such time as he gets these numbers to Engineering. Is that
correct?
Mr. Shane: That is correct.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Roskelly, has it been determined which four lots are to be
developed by the Livonia school system?
Mr. Roskelly: No. They have certain options. They are going to stay together. They
are going to keep them together in one group. We are still working on
that and I think most important I was quite concerned I would have
some jurisdiction as to what home and quality of home they would
build, so they agreed that we could supply them with the plans with
their guidance but it would certainly be to our specifications or perhaps
typical of one of the homes we are going to build.
Mr. Engebretson: Would those homes be constructed simultaneously with yours?
Mr. Roskelly: No. We dealt with them quite closely on Stonehouse near Joy. They
built I believe three in that area, and they only did them one at a time.
Mr. Engebretson: One each year?
Mr. Roskelly: I think they built three in about two years, which is not an unusually
large time for us to put this together, two years.
Mr. Engebretson: Anything else?
Mr. Roskelly: One more request. Presently I am sitting with the contract for the
demolishing of this school and of course it is quite an undertaking with
all the asbestos, etc. I am quite anxious to get going and if you see it in
your mind, I might hope you would waive the seven days. The
President of the Council has agreed to put this on the agenda as an X
item if you would waive the seven days.
Mr. Engebretson: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak for or against this
item. (There was no one in the audience wishing to speak) I want to
just express a personal view that is the opposite of yours relative to the
aesthetic impact of the brick. When we dealt with that subdivision that
was referenced earlier, we went off and looked at a subdivision that
was constructed recently by that developer and the walls were wavy.
14581
Brick walls tend to be squared off and straight, etc. I think aesthetics
are, of course, very personal and a very subjective issue, but it was our
impression as we dealt with that last case that it was very important to
keep the brick to the 50% level, that is to say to go up on all four sides
50% and we held to that, and I just wanted you to know that this is not
an idea here. This has been going on for some time.
Mr. Roskelly: I am aware of that, but in Western Golf we do not have 50% brick and
I would challenge anyone to tell me that this is not a desirable,
aesthetically pleasing, and a very good subdivision. It is very possible
we would have 50% brick but I would not want to turn down a plan
because he was $3,000 short and he couldn't have a home if it was
20% to 25% brick. Every home will have brick.
Mr. Engebretson: I understand. I just want to make sure that all points of view have been
heard.
Mr. Alanskas: I think it is a good plan but I don't see how we can act on this until,
you are going to meet with that lady when, next week?
Mr. Roskelly: Thursday. That is an engineering situation. The lot would still be there
only it would become a retention pond opposed to detention in that
area.
*low Mr. Shane: I wanted to mention the preliminary plat process is only dealing with
the lot layout, the location of the streets to make sure the lots are the
size the ordinance requires. Engineering questions are separate.
Engineering will be handled by the Engineering Department and he will
not be able to build until he satisfies Engineering and provides proper
plans. So whether or not he has a detention pond, it doesn't really
affect the layout of the preliminary plat.
Mr. McCann: I do want to go forward with a motion. We are talking about putting a
swale in someone's backyard. There is just a lot of information that I
am not comfortable with regarding this four foot on Stark Road. I
would like some more background and information on that. There are
just a lot of issues that I am uncomfortable with. I want those things
brought to our attention before we go forward with this. There was a
lot of discussion regarding this property when it first came before us,
and I think we should take our time and have the facts before we move
forward on this. Therefore I would make a motion to table this to the
January 16th meeting.
14582
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr.
Engebretson, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on the Preliminary Plat approval for
Camborne Stark School Subdivision closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. McCann and seconded by Mrs. Blomberg, it was
#12-249-95 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the
City Planning Commission on December 19, 1995 on Preliminary Plat
approval for Camborne Stark School Subdivision proposed to be located
on the southwest corner of Stark Road and Pinetree Avenue in the
Northwest 1/4 of Section 33, the City Planning Commission does hereby
determine to table the Preliminary Plat for Camborne Stark School
Subdivision until the meeting of January 16, 1996.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was sent to the
abutting property owners, proprietor, City Departments as listed in the
Proof of Service, and copies of the plat together with the notices have been
sent to the Building Department, Superintendent of Schools, Fire
Department, Police Department, and the Parks and Recreation Department.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Alanskas, Blomberg, LaPine, McCann, Piercecchi,
Engebretson
NAYS: Morrow
ABSENT: None
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, announced that the public hearing portion of the meeting is
concluded and the Commission would proceed with items pending before it.
Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is approval of the
minutes of the 715th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings held on November
28, 1995.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mrs. Blomberg and unanimously
approved, it was
#12-250-95 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 715th Regular Meeting & Public
Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on November 28, 1995 are
approved.
14583
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
r..
Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 95-11-8-27 by
Livonia Community Credit Union requesting approval for all plans required
by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to
construct a new driveway for the financial facility located at 15420
Farmington Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15.
Mr. Miller: This is the Livonia Community Credit Union at Farmington between
Five Mile and Roycroft. They are proposing to construct a drive off
Westmore Avenue. If this is allowed, they would be able to re-route
their drive-thru traffic. Right now their drive-thru traffic is directed off
Farmington Road to the back of the building. Because of their public
hearing tonight to get this street vacated if that goes through, what they
would like to do is re-route their drive-thru traffic off Roycroft
Avenue along this vacated street and use this new drive for a drive-thru
facility so what is now Westmore Avenue would become overflow
lanes for the drive-thru traffic.
Mr. Engebretson: Is that lane for that traffic entering the drive-thru facility located right
on top of the street to be vacated? I was under the impression it
wasn't.
Mr. Miller: No. Here is the street and here is the right-of-way here. It is 15 feet
off the street now.
Mr. Engebretson: They will use that existing pavement then?
Mr. Miller: Yes.
Mr. Engebretson: Is the petitioner here?
Mike Nault, Garfield Kindren Assoc., 28557 Canal Road, Clinton Twp.: The only thing I
would add to Scott's words here is the current situation with the
entrance to the drive-in allows for no more than eight cars to be cued
up waiting to go through the drive-thru before they overflow onto
Farmington Road. This proposal, along with the vacating of
Westmore, would allow for 30 cars to be completely off public rights-
of-way cued up to go through.
Mr. Alanakas: Is your busiest days on Fridays and Saturdays?
Vr.►
14584
Mr. Nault: I think typically that would be true. Thursday evenings, from the
industrial side of town, and Fridays definitely. There is quite a bit of
traffic on Saturday mornings also.
Mr. Alanskas: How late are you open evenings and on the weekend?
Mr. Nault: I don't know. I believe 8:00 p.m.
On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously
approved, it was
#12-251-95 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
the City Council that Petition 95-11-8-27 by Livonia Community Credit
Union requesting approval for all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning
Ordinance#543 in connection with a proposal to construct a new driveway
for the financial facility located at 15420 Farmington Road in the Southwest
1/4 of Section 15, be approved subject to the following conditions:
1) That the Site Plan marked Sheet A-1 dated October 20, 1995
prepared by Garfield Kindred Associates, is hereby approved and shall
be adhered to;
2) That this approval is contingent on City Council approval to vacate the
adjacent section of Westmore Avenue;
*taw 3) That the directional signs shown on the plan, which are in compliance
with Section 18.50D Permitted Signs, subheading Directional Signs,
are hereby approved.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 95-11-8-28 by
Media Play, Inc. requesting approval for all plans required by Section
18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to renovate
the exterior of the commercial building located at 30000 Plymouth Road in
the Southeast 1/4 of Section 26.
Mr. Miller: This is the site that formerly was Builder's Square on the north side of
Plymouth Road between Middlebelt and Tech Center Drive. Media
Play will be occupying a portion of the building. They will be
occupying 43,000 square feet with 36,000 square feet left over. They
are proposing to redo their portion of the storefront. Right now
Builder's Square has certain canopies on their pillars. They will be
taking that completely down and putting up a stucco finish on this
14585
portion of the building, on the top half of the building. They will also
be projecting out about five feet their entrance area of their storefront.
At the study meeting the petitioner stated that the entrance now would
also have to be relocated in this area so right now this will be the
vow
entrance area and it will be highlighted by glass doors and windows.
Media Play will also be painting this portion of the building to match
the color scheme of their storefront and they hope this would be
redeveloped with the same color scheme when a future sub-tenant
occupies this building.
Mr. Engebretson: I see the petitioner is present.
Carl Parrague, Director of Architecture and Construction for Media Play: We are based
in Minneapolis, Minnesota. A couple of things I would like to add.
We do have an ancillary use within the premises of a cafe of less than
18 seats. The majority of the premises are for retail purposes. We are
currently speaking to other sub-tenants that are interested in the
balance of the property and would hope that it would be developed, if
not concurrent with our work, very soon after. We obviously cannot
discuss who that will be at this time and we have no firm agreement
with them about it. I hope you have had a chance to visit our store and
the aesthetics that we are planning is very similar on the interior,
actually it should be the same.
Mr. Alanskas: We did go out to Tel-Twelve last Saturday and saw your facility there.
It is a gorgeous building with a very nice interior. Is that how they are
all going to be?
Mr. Parrague: The Tel-Twelve is probably a flagship store in the sense we had to do
two levels. We had a very unique site. I think Pontiac, Saginaw, and
this site resembles more our typical store because it is one level.
Mr. Alanskas: The reason I ask is because on your exterior, this large triangle that you
have showing here, at this store out there it is very, very small. I would
say it is not even 1/10th the size of this one. Why do you want this one
so big?
Mr. Parrague: We have some different issues there. We were trying to capture that
corner and get some visibility from the interstate because there are a lot
of buildings in that area and people only have a glimpse of what is
going on in that area so we were trying to really capture some kind of
attention through the design of the building to effect its visibility. In
this case, the triangle is really a part of the building. It is a different
kind of a design. It is not an illuminated sign like the one you have at
14586
the Tel-Twelve store. There is an illuminated sign similar to that here
on top but it is somewhat hidden in the rendering.
�.. Mr. Alanskas: Question number two, where it says music, books, etc., I didn't see
those on that building out there.
Mr. Parrague: It is probably because they are not up yet. It is pretty typical for us to
put them up. I will have to check why that didn't happen.
Mr. Piercecchi: What is the height of that stripe?
Mr. Parrague: The bottom is 10 feet and it is approximately 18 inches to 2 feet wide.
Mr. Piercecchi: Do you find that essential to have that stripe?
Mr. Parrague: It is part of our imagery. We have tried to maintain it as often as
possible on our storefronts.
Mr. Morrow: Mr. Chairman, as I recall from the study session, the signage is not part
of the package here tonight.
Mr. Engebretson: That is correct.
Mr. Morrow: I guess what I am asking here are the four squares there showing the
`.• different types of media, the triangle and Media Play, for all intents and
purposes that should not be part of this tonight.
Mr. Shane: Signage is not a part of this issue.
Mr. Morrow: But the stripe would be.
Mr. Shane: Yes the stripe would be.
Mr. Morrow: In other words, they will come back later to show us how they want to
do the triangle, Media Play and those four other areas?
Mr. Shane: Right.
Mr. Morrow: As far as the size of that stripe, you say it is two feet?
Mr. Parrague: Yes.
Mr. Morrow: Then it is the length of the building?
14587
Mr. Parrague: Not necessarily. Right now we are are just trying to maintain the
aesthethics. At this time we do not know who the other tenant would
be.
Mr. Morrow: It is just the length of your section.
Mr. Parrague: That is all we want it to be.
Mr. Morrow: I understand that.
Mr. Parrague: Also for a point of clarification, the large blue area is part of the
building and it is part of the color scheme of the building. It is not an
applied sign. The sign on it is something we understand we would have
to request. We understand we would have to come back for review but
the color scheme is the red stripe, the tan and then the blue form is part
of the building structure.
Mr. Morrow: So it is not part of the logo or anything like that?
Mr. Parrague: No. It is no different than other entry forms. If you have seen a Circuit
City in your community, they have this red form that defines their entry.
This is a form that we have come up with that defines our entry. It is
just sculptural and architectural and it happens to be a color scheme
that we find pleasing for the aesthetic.
m` Mr. Morrow: Is that the same size you have in Pontiac?
Mr. Parrague: Yes it is.
Mr. Morrow: I have to apologize because I thought that was part of the sign and I
said there is no use going out and look at Pontiac if we don't know
what they are going to bring us back. So I didn't have a chance to look
at the sign because I thought that was going to be at a future date. I
am in a quandry now to move on this thing until I have had an
opportunity to see that blue triangle for two reasons, one how the size
compares, and also how representative those colors are to what we see
from this drawing.
Mr. Parrague: They are pretty accurate. I have some photographs here to show you
other facilities where we have done this.
Mr. Morrow: As far as the Pontiac store, are the setbacks about the same?
14588
Mr. Parrague: I believe the setback is actually far greater here. In Pontiac the side of
the building, if I remember correctly, is within 50 feet of the road.
Here we are I would say over 1,000 feet from the street.
Mr. Morrow: H, did the petitioner get the remarks from the Senior Building
Inspector.
Mr. Shane: Probably not because we just received them this afternoon.
Mr. Morrow: Did we make that a part of the record?
Mr. Shane: We can make it a part of the record but I was going to make it part of
the resolution, if in fact there is a resolution.
Mr. Engebretson: Why don't you just read it H.
Mr. Shane: This is from our Inspection Department. It reads as follows: The
following deficiencies or problems were found. 1. The signage as
proposed will require a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
2. The parking areas need to be re-sealed and re-striped. 3. All
miscellaneous debris left by the previous tenant should be removed
from the site. This was signed by David Woodcox, Sr. Building
Inspector. There are really two issues and that is the parking area and
the debris.
Mr. Parrague: We have no objection to that.
Mr. Piercecchi: You have to understand sir if this stripe is approved and you have
another tenant, is it possible that stripe will not go into that part of that
36,000 sq. ft. area?
Mr. Parrague: That is true.
Mr. Piercecchi: So you would have one half the building with a stripe and one half of
the building with no stripe.
Mr. Parrague: What you would have is the aesthetics of two buildings. Just because it
happens to be constructed as one building doesn't mean it cannot look
like two buildings side by side.
Mr. Piercecchi: But they both follow the same line.
Mr. Parrague: So do a thousand other buildings in your community. Buildings reside
side by side in every City in the world, and they are different, and they
14589
don't necessarily have to be on a different plane or they don't
necessarily have to look alike. As a matter of fact, they seldom do.
Mr. Piercecchi: That point is taken and I can see that but this is a stripe. It looks like it
vow
goes so far and then just stops. It looks to me like it would be better if
it went all the way or not at all.
Mr. Engebretson: It defines their section Dan and it remains to be seen what will happen
with the rest of the building but perhaps it would be inappropriate to
make it continue all the way because it might make people think it is all
one operation.
Mr. Morrow: Now that I have the pictures I just want to follow up. I don't want to
give the impression that I am not supportive of what you are trying to
do here. I think it is tremendous. I am just trying to get it in my mind.
This blue triangle, I notice in the picture we have, it looks like some
notes, some film and some books.
Mr. Parrague: That is the actual signage. A portion that is attached.
Mr. Morrow: But it is part of the triangle, right?
Mr. Parrague: There are two parts. There is a part that is part of the building and then
there is a sign that is attached.
Mr. Shane: I was going to say what I think the gentleman is trying to say just
forget signage altogether. The red stripe line will become part of the
architecture. So will the blue triangle. In other words it will be painted
or somehow attached to the building like the stripe is going to be. So
when the signage comes along, there will be signs along the stripe and
there will be signs on top of the triangle, so the signage is actually
separate and the triangle becomes part of the architecture just like the
red stripe. I think that is what he is trying to say.
Mr. Parrague: That is correct.
Mr. Morrow: Based on that setback from Plymouth Road and the size of that, is it
your opinion that the size of that is excessive as far as size of triangle?
Mr. Shane: I don't think so because it does set back considerably. I don't know if
it is 1,000 feet but it is darn close to it. If you are going to view this
building from Plymouth Road, which is what they want to do, that
stripe or triangle is not going to appear nearly as large as what you are
perceiving it to be. Just a point for Mr. Piercecchi, the other half of the
building, when that is rented there is going to be another entryway.
14590
You are not going to just see a blank wall. You are going to have
some different architecture. If I am reading the plan right, the colors of
the background are probably going to be the same. The difference will
come in from other aesthetics. I don't think it is going to appear quite
as stark as what you are looking at now.
Mr. Parrague: For instance if it were Circuit City, which we happen to have a co-
tenancy with in Grand Rapids and in Saginaw, I believe in Pontiac also,
they introduce an entry form that is their entry form and the coloration
stays more or less the same for the rest of the building. So you have
two distinct entries identified for one building and it begins to look like
two buildings side by side.
Mr. Piercecchi: Will that be presented to us?
Mr. Shane: Yes.
Mrs. Blomberg: I understand that your triangle is part of your graphics as far as your
ID.
Mr. Parrague: No. The small triangle, which is our logo, which represents our
rendition of the modern classics, which someone pointed out is some
film strips. The film strip is the hair. The book is the face and the
music denotes the eyes. That is part of our corporate identity but that
`r.., is a small portion.
Mrs. Blomberg: I mean the big blue triangle will be part of the architecture, still to me it
looks like a sign. It is your ID in a way.
Mr. Parrague: It is part of the building identity. If we were to come to City Hall and
see some of the icons that you use. Every time I have approached here
it has been dark so I haven't had the opportunity to see those, but you
know you go to the capital, it has Romanesque architecture. The
reason for that it has a significance of time of power and those sorts of
things so they create that architecture. I guess we believe this is a
design that seems to fit our aesthetic look. It is just a selected choice
of an aesthetic for the entire exterior of the building.
Mrs. Blomberg: I understand that but I also understand that on your other store you
have a smaller blue triangle.
Mr. Parrague: Only because it is a different size building.
Mrs. Blomberg: If you took the Red Roof Inn. They have a red roof all over the
country. Is that a sign? How about Howard Johnsons? They are
ti..
14591
green and orange all over the country. Is that a sign? We are using
paint and a structure here that isn't a sign any more than Howard
Johnsons. By that definition Howard Johnsons or any of those building
types would not be allowed.
Mr. Engebretson: I think you are stretching it sir. We have had some buildings in Livonia
that have been decorated with wild colors to draw attention and they
are real eyesores, so to invoke Howard Johnsons and these other
corporate identities and their colors I think is a stretch. This color
scheme that you have here and that triangle and that shape and that sign
and the notes, etc., it is a sign. If you wanted to paint that building
purple, you certainly have the right to adopt that as your corporate
logo, but that doesn't mean that we have to accept that in Livonia.
Mr. Parrague: Don't get me wrong. I am just trying to make a comparison.
Mr. Engebretson: I am not sure the comparison is fair, and that is my point. The sign is
not really an issue here tonight but it is going to be, and the fact that
you provided for the shape of this sign as a part of the building almost
makes it part of the issue here tonight. Mrs. Blomberg has the floor
but I just wanted to get off that comparison. I could turn some right
back on you where exceptions are made in those corporate identities. I
am not going to do that but I know that you know it happens.
Mr. Parrague: I know it happens. We are trying to reach an identity that we tried to
carry out throughout the country. That is what we are trying to do and
we consider this part of our identity.
Mrs. Blomberg: What I am asking also is there any way you can shrink that blue part of
your architecture?
Mr. Parrague: If we did, it would not be part of the identity so I am not sure what the
answer would be other than redesigning the building.
Mr. Engebretson: As in Southfield?
Mr. Parrague: Southfield is a two-story building and it has a whole different
architecture. If you visited the Tel-Twelve store you know it is only
100 feet wide and 40 feet high. This is an existing building here.
Mr. Engebretson: Wasn't that an existing building?
Mr. Parrague: Absolutely not.
Mr. Engebretson: You built that building?
14592
Mr. Parrague: Yes sir.
Mr. McCann: Mr. Shane, the triangle I understand is going to be an addition on the
front of the building, correct? You are going to do some type of dryvet
or something to build the triangle?
Mr. Parrague: It is a structure. We have to put some steel in order to support it.
Mr. Shane: It becomes part of the building structure.
Mr. McCann: You can say that about any sign that you put on, that it is part of the
building because it is attached. What makes this different is because
you have a design within the triangle. What did the staff do to
determine that triangle isn't part of the logo or sign where other forms
are. Say we put something on overhang, we make them use most of
the overhang or whatever area is lit. If the whole thing is lit, it all
counts as signage. In this instance there is a determination made,
evidently by the staff, that that triangle with the image in the center of it
is not signage or logo. If it is determined to be logo, then it is
determined to be part of the signage, correct?
Mr. Shane: The image in the center I would agree it would be part of the signage.
In any case, the signage itself does not meet the ordinance and
`r.. therefore it cannot be acted on, so you could take the position it will
come back once they go to the Zoning Board of Appeals. They have to
conform to the ordinance and they have to go to the Zoning Board of
Appeals, and then they will come back to you. If they put that triangle
on there without the logo in the center, it becomes part of the
architecture, in my opinion. Just like the stripe does. The stripe is not
a sign neither would the triangle be.
Mr. McCann: Where there is an S running through the stripe, we determined that to
be a sign because it had a letter on it.
Mr. Shane: If this has a logo on it, then it becomes a sign, but without a logo it is
part of the architecture.
Mr. McCann: Except the triangle with the logo in the center is used as a logo
throughout the advertising. The blue triangle with the logo in the
center throughout their store is their logo.
Mr. Shane: With the logo inside I agree it is signage. Without the logo it is part of
the architecture.
14593
Mr. McCann: So at this point we would be approving the building without the blue
triangle because according to the plans there is an insignia inside it?
Mr. Shane: I agree.
Mr. McCann: So we can approve it tonight without the blue triangle.
Mr. Engebretson: I would just like to clarify. If this proposal were approved and you
were to renovate the front of this building to this plan, and you
constructed that entrance with the expectation of making it look like
that, and for whatever reason you were required to sign that building
similar to the store on Telegraph Road where the little triangle is
parked between the two words "Media Play", what would that do to
your building? Would it look like there is suddenly a problem there
that was somehow overlooked or badly engineered or bad architecture?
Mr. Parrague: I would love to tell you that building could be designed in a different
fashion. There are obviously a lot of different aesthetics that can be
reached. I can only ask that we have done a lot of research. We have
tried to do all our buildings this way. I concur that Tel-Twelve is
different but that was a very unique set of circumstances. We are
trying to maintain an image and yes that triangle could be painted beige
like the rest of the building. I can't deny that and I can't, in my mind,
understand why the color has anything to do with it.
New
Mr. Engebretson: It doesn't. It is the size.
Mr. Parrague: Again, if I painted that blue portion beige, you wouldn't even ask the
question?
Mr. Engebretson: Probably not.
Mr. Parrague: So why is it a sign. Is color now considered signage?
Mr. Engebretson: The way we define the size of a sign is to measure the perimeter of the
area that contains letters in or some kind of corporate identity in the
form of a logo or whatever.
Mr. Parrague: The logo is the small piece in the middle.
Mr. Engebretson: The reason that is painted clearly is to draw attention to the sign that is
within.
Mr. Parrague: It is painted to identify the entrance.
14594
Mr. Engebretson: You have two different styles here. I guess I am wondering which it is
that you are proposing. In your prototypical front elevation in the
pictures here you show one that has the same kind of insert in the sign
as the one we have been discussing with the notes and the book, etc.,
and the other one appears to be a gray center without the material that
I just described written on it.
Mr. Parrague: I apologize for the photograph. It is the same building. You just need
to see it from an angle.
Mr. Engebretson: There is another building here that appears not to have the stripe. It is
a different style.
Mr. Parrague: Sometimes you are limited when you are building with existing
buildings. This is an existing building that is concrete block today, and
we are working with the materials that are there and trying to preserve
as much of it as is there. Obviously there are cost factors associated
with it, but that is the only real difference between the two aesthetics I
have presented to you. One of them was built from the ground and one
was a remodeled situation.
Mr. Engebretson: I want to tell you when we visited that Telegraph Road store on
Saturday, we were really impressed. It is a beautiful operation. I liked
everything I saw about it including the sign, which struck me as being
�•• very reasonable and very acceptable. I guess I am really struggling here
with the proposal that you are making to modify the building in such a
way so to support that particular, call it a painting, call it whatever you
want to. I think it is a sign, and I am concerned that without having
seen this, what I saw I thought was what we were getting here.
Mr. Parrague: Maybe we can get off this for a little while and go to other business.
We can certainly approve what we can at this point pending your ability
to go see one of the other facilities that is designed in a similar fashion.
Perhaps you might change your mind about it. I obviously respect your
opinion about the aesthetics because you want to maintain the
community and I am not trying to be here in an aggressive fashion. We
are here for a long time. It is a long-term deal for us. We will hire 120
people to work at this facility. We will spend several million dollars to
renovate it and make it look brand new, and we are here for a long
time. We are not here to make enemies at all and we certainly want to
work with you to make this something that you find acceptable in your
community. If we can work beyond this at this point and maybe leave
that until we can deal with it as signage, hopefully you will be open
minded at that time about the fact that it may not be. If we can
evaluate it that way, I would really appreciate it.
N..
14595
Mr. Engebretson: Let me assure you that we do our homework. I think that the fact that
the building form is being constructed in a manner that anticipates this
particular signage and logo is the thing that causes me to have concern
about giving the impression that if I support this proposal that I am also
supporting the underlying signage that will come later. While I support
what it is you are proposing here, at this point in time I am very
troubled by the sign proposal, but I will go to Pontiac to see that.
When I saw the Southfield store I was very pleased and said it is a
home run.
Mr. LaPine: I have two questions. Number one, I think you said at our last meeting
you are building 47 stores this year. Is that correct?
Mr. Parrague: We have opened 47 stores this year.
Mr. LaPine: Of those 47 stores, except for that one in Southfield that we went out
and looked at, are all the other 47 stores basically exactly like this one
or have you deviated from your design from community to community
because of either building restrictions or zoning restrictions or Planning
Commission's objections?
Mr. Parrague: That is a multiple faceted question, and I will answer it as best I can.
We have some buildings that do not conform to this one-story
`w prototype that are very different than Tel-Twelve even, where they are
attached to a mall or we have other constraints that are affecting
design. Our one-story building facilities we have conformed to the
communities that we have gone into in regards to some of the aesthetic
values that we have tried to maintain. As a general answer, we have
that in more cases than not as far as our prototypical design. As you
can see in the one photograph, the essence of the stripe is there through
a brick coloration difference. It is not the same coloration but there is
the essence of a stripe and then there is brick below and there is stucco
above. That is an adjustment to the aesthetic board of that community.
It was a ground-up building. We were building a new facility at that
location.
Mr. LaPine: I guess what I am saying is when you talk about corporate identity, that
means to me that no matter where you go in the continental United
States, every building would be the same. That is not true. It does
deviate some?
Mr. Parrague: Somewhat. We try to build the same building everywhere.
r..
14596
Mr. LaPine: Second question, the restaurant or the snack bar at the Southfield store,
is that about the size of the one that is going to be at this location?
"vmp, Mr. Parrague: I believe so.
Mr. LaPine: The one at Southfield was very small.
Mr. Parrague: The others are probably smaller.
Mr. Shane: I had a question to the architect. You can build this structure as you
have shown it here absent the logo right now, can you not? That
triangle is not a part of the structural part of this building?
Mr. Parrague: We can build it and it will be the same color as everything else.
Mr. Shane: What I am saying is, if that triangle ends up to be smaller, for example,
it can still be worked into your design?
Mr. Parrague: If it were determined to be signage, we would paint it the same color as
everything else and you wouldn't even know there was a triangle there.
Mr. Shane: You would get rid of your logo?
Mr. Parrague: It is not a logo. The logo is the form that is sitting on top.
Mr. Shane: My whole point is if that logo wasn't there.
Mr. Parrague: If the big blue triangle isn't there, let's say we painted it beige, you
wouldn't see it as a triangle, and then we would apply for a normal sign
package which is the same as you saw on the other drawings, which is
a small logo, the same as the one you saw at Tel-Twelve. The blue
triangle is part of the building and that can be painted green, purple,
beige. It is part of the building.
Mr. Engebretson: As you come across the lower part of the Media Play, is that one
continuous dryvet?
Mr. Parrague: Yes. There is a steel beam underneath that area supporting the
structure above.
Mr. Engebretson: There is no relief here?
Mr. Parrague: In this case we have scored it just to separate the paint but it doesn't
have to be there. It is just dryvet scoring.
14597
Mr. Alanskas: H, you said this is 1,000 feet from Plymouth Road? How many feet is
Wonderland Mall?
Mr. Shane: I would say maybe 600 to 700 feet.
Mr. Alanskas: Number one, going out to Southfield with that small triangle on your
building, it could be seen very well from the freeway. I don't care if
you paint this thing blue, white or purple, is it a problem to make that
triangle smaller? Forget what color you are going to paint it.
Mr. Parrague: What we would do, you wouldn't see it as a triangle. We would paint
it the same as the rest of the color.
Mr. Alanskas: I don't care what color you would paint it. Would it be a problem to
make that triangle smaller on this building?
Mr. Parrague: Yes because I would have to change the aesthetics of what is on there.
Mr. Alanskas: What would you be changing?
Mr. Parrague: What we would do is not see the triangle, which I think is what you are
trying to do.
Mr. Alanskas: No, what I am saying if it were still blue but you made the triangle
view smaller, would that be a problem?
Mr. Parrague: It would not be a problem. I understand your question.
Mr. Alanskas: That is what I am trying to find out. This is not a sign. What I am
asking is could you make that blue triangle smaller on this building, no
matter what color you make it?
Mr. Parrague: Sure.
Mr. McCann: Mr. Chairman, we have gone through this. It is my opinion that the
logo is the triangle, and whether it is the inner logo, the outer triangle,
it is all part of the image or the logo. What I would like to do is make
an approving resolution.
On a motion duly made by Mr. McCann, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously
approved, it was
#12-252-95 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 95-11-8-28 by Media Play, Inc. requesting
approval for all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance#543
14598
in connection with a proposal to renovate the exterior of the commercial
building located at 30000 Plymouth Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section
26, be approved subject to the following conditions:
1) That the Building Elevation Plan received by the Planning
Commission on November 13, 1995 by Media Play, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to, with the exception that the
triangle be brought back under the sign plan;
2) That the section of storefront described as "Future Sub-tenant" on
the above approved plan shall, at this time, be painted in such a
manner as to match the color scheme of Media Play's storefront
and once a tenant is found they too shall be required to incorporate
the same colors within their architecture.
3) That this approval does not authorize consent of any signage shown
on the plan.
4) That all parking areas shall be re-sealed and re-striped;
5) That all miscellaneous debris left by the previous tenant shall be
removed from the site.
Mr. LaPine: I am going to support this but quite frankly I am not really happy with
%t" this but we have to face up to a very important fact. We have a big
building there, Builders Square, and it is not an easy building to work
with. It is not an easy building to find tenants for, therefore, I think it is
incumbent upon us to get something in the building. I am not really
happy. I don't like the movie signs but at least he is going to drop the
ceiling on the inside, I think he indicated, to some degree. It is going to
be an improvement rather than having that building sitting there empty
for a long period of time. I think that is all we should really look at this
time.
Mr. Engebretson: I think it is going to be a great improvement. I think it is a wonderful
business, and it will be very welcome in Livonia. I am glad we will
have another opportunity to work out all the issues of the sign or
whatever it is.
Mr. Piercecchi: Jack, what we are saying here is that both triangles are going to be
classified as part of the signage?
Mr. Engebretson: It is not part of this package here tonight. It is excluded from this
approval and for all intents and purposes it is being handled as a sign.
LV7v
14599
Mr. Morrow: I want to second the comments Mr. LaPine made because I look
forward to Media Play coming. As you go into your sign package,just
as one Commissioner, your diamond with your corporate logo, at least
on this plan, gets lost to the background of that blue. To me it would
seem to stand out more if it had some sort of contrasting background
rather than similar background, but that is just one man's opinion. We
are not talking about the signage but we will see it again.
Mr. Parrague: I am afraid that is true.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Parrague: I would like to ask the board just a small favor. As you walk around
your community, glance around as to what you consider signage and
what you don't, because I strongly feel what I brought up was
architecture before. If you look around you, you will see many
buildings with either colorations or forms that are distinctly designed
for their aesthetic value to create an image outside of what may be
considered a sign, and they are approved. I think that is an important
thing we need to think about, and I would appreciate your
consideration of that.
Mr. Engebretson: We understand there have been some of those situations occur in the
past. I can assure you that it doesn't happen often. We have even seen
people going to the extent of proposing six-foot diameter tomatoes as a
part of a sign. You look around our City too as you visit here.
Mr. Parrague: I am just asking for your consideration.
Mr. Alanskas: I just want to make one comment. I want to make it very clear that I,
as one Commissioner, have no problem with your logo, I just would
like to see it made smaller.
Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 95-12-8-29 by
Aldo Abate requesting approval for all plans required by Section 18.47 of
Zoning Ordinance#543 in connection with a proposal to construct an office
building on property located at 15624 Farmington Road in the Southwest 1/4
of Section 15.
Mr. Miller: This is a proposal to construct a 3500 sq. ft. office building. It will
abut the south property line and will set back 40 feet from Farmington
Road. The parking lot will be located on the north of the building. The
entrance will be one access to the site from Farmington Road. This
office building is required to have 14 parking spaces. The site plan
14600
shows 18 so they comply with the parking requirement. They are
proposing to landscape the area in front of the building along the north
'4111Ielevation area and in back of this area. They are required to have 15%
and they have 30% so they meet the landscaping requirement. This is
the north elevation and this would be the entrance into the building,
facing the parking lot of the site. There are two entrances to the
building. This elevation will be constructed out of brick. Both
entrances would have a dryvet type of peak, a decorative system. Also,
the west elevation, which is the elevation which faces Farmington
Road, would be brick. The other two elevations which face the south
and the east would be constructed out of block. Those are the two
elevations facing the residential type of uses.
Mr. Engebretson: Scott, does the site plan indicate whether it is scored block?
Mr. Miller: It says decorative masonry.
Mr. Piercecchi: Scott, is there going to be a wall around the east boundary all the way?
There is one there now but it stops at that home that is in there.
Mr. Miller: Yes they are required to have a wall.
Mr. Engebretson: I see the petitioner is at the podium.
— Kenneth West, Controlling Engineer, 1052 Coolidge, Plymouth: I represent Mr. Abate
who plans to build a professional building, and he has samples of the
brick and dryvet here so you can get an idea of the color.
Mr. Morrow: At the study session you said you would use a different type of block.
What type of block was that?
Mr. West: Split face.
Mr. Morrow: The plans don't show that.
Mr. Engebretson: We could mention that in the resolution if that is appropriate.
Mr. McCann: H, the future land use calls for office all through that strip there?
Mr. Shane: Correct.
Mr. McCann: The front of the building is really facing the north. In looking at that in
ten years, or however long it takes before the rest of it is developed in
an office use, I would think that having the building sitting on the south
property line facing the north is not what we want to design for future
14601
land use plan. Along there you want to eventually, putting the other
two pieces in, it would seem to me you would want a westerly facing
,`, building and not on Farmington Road with the non-abutting property
lines because it kind of forces the next property owner to go in there
and build on one edge instead of the center of his property. It troubles
me being on the property line how it will affect the future development.
Mr. Shane: I think what could happen, it could be added to. Someone could attach
their building to the south to this building and that is the purpose for
their wanting to use block. I think a better thing to do, in my mind,
would be to put brick along that side because as far as I know there is
no prospects for developing the residential property to the south even
though the master plan has office there. It is residential property and
they might think it will stay that way for a while. I think it would be a
better move to put brick on that one side. I am sure it will stay
residential for some period of time. I don't have a problem facing the
building that way because depending on how the next building is built,
you could still have good architecture either way.
Mr. McCann: What about the property lines?
Mr. Shane: I don't have a problem with that because of the prospects for office
going south of there, but what I do have a problem with is leaving it
block.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. West would you want to introduce the samples?
Mr. West presented the samples to the Commission.
Mr. McCann: Mr. Shane, it was one of my concerns if you are driving north you are
kind of coming out at the point, you would be looking at the side of the
building. Since it is going to be the most visible side to traffic, is there
something we could do to make it more decorative than just brick?
The windows face the subdivision?
Mr. Shane: Yes. I would say either brick or decorative block that had the same
color as the rest of the building would suffice. I would rather see brick
myself. I don't have a problem with a wall without windows but I
think I would have a problem if it was just a plain block. Either a
decorative block the same color as the rest of the building or brick.
Mr. Morrow: I think that is where I was coming from. I am not saying I am against
the brick but I was trying to come up with something if it wasn't brick
it would closely approximate it.
v..
14602
Mr. Shane: Split face would suffice.
Mr. West: This is Tony Schimizze, my associate.
Mr. Schimizze: This split faced brick would be a different material than split faced
block. Split faced block you could paint. Brick normally you don't
paint.
Mr. Engebretson: You say you normally would paint the block, and it is your intention to
do that?
Mr. Schimizze: Yes.
Mr. Engebrtson: How would that match the brick on the Farmington Road side of the
building. What color would you paint that?
Mr. Schimizze: Beige or off white.
Mr. Engebretson: What do you think about putting brick there on the southern side of the
building?
Mr. Schimizze: You could. The only thing is if in the future someone builds right
alongside it, there goes the brick.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Shane is of the belief that is not likely to happen for some
considerable time and in the meantime we would have a building that is
a little bit less attractive than it could be. Do you have any objection to
putting brick on that?
Mr. Schimizze: We could put brick all the way around.
Mr. Engebretson: Mr. West what do you think of that idea from an architectural point of
view? Would that make that building look somewhat nicer?
Mr. West: Yes it would look nicer basically for the person that lives to the south.
The traveling public won't see much of it because of the setback from
our property line and because of the existing structure south of the
property. The general public is not going to benefit from the aesthetics
but the neighbor would.
Mr. Alanskas: Would it be possible to put some landscaping right across that side of
the building?
Mr. West: It would be on our neighbor's property.
r..
14603
On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimously
approved, it was,
#12-253-95 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve
Petition 95-12-8-29 by Aldo Abate requesting approval for all plans required
by Section 18.58 of Zoning Ordinance#543 in connection with a proposal to
construct an office building on property located at 15624 Farmington Road
in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15, subject to the following conditions:
1) That the Site and Landscape Plan marked Sheet 1 dated 10/27/95
prepared by Kenneth E. West Consulting Engineer, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to;
2) That the parking spaces for the entire site shall be double striped;
3) That the trash dumpster area is to be enclosed on three sides with
the same brick used in the construction of the principle building and
the wooden enclosure gates, when not in use, shall be maintained
and closed at all times;
4) That underground sprinklers are to be provided for all landscaped
and sodded lawn areas, and all planted materials shall be installed
prior to final inspection and to the satisfaction of the Inspection
Department and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy
`'o' condition;
5) That the Building Elevation Plan marked Sheet 3 dated 10/27/95
prepared by Kenneth E. West Consulting Engineer, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to.
6) That the east elevation will be split block.
7) That the south elevation will be entirely brick.
Mr. Engebretson: I need to ask a question. Where sir will you be locating your utility
meters and how will they be screened?
Mr. West: All the utilities are on the east property line and they will be screened
by a six foot screen wall that will be up.
Mr. Engebretson: It will be hidden from Farmington Road and all public view and
screened from the neighbors?
Mr. West: That is correct.
14604
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 95-12-8-30 by
Gallagher Group Construction Company, on behalf of Jimmies Rustics
Furniture, requesting approval for all plans required by Section 18.58 of
Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to construct a
warehouse addition on the building located at 29500 Six Mile Road in the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 11.
Mr. Miller: This is Jimmies Rustics. They are proposing to construct a 10,150 sq.
ft. addition to the existing warehouse. The warehouse is separated
from the showroom of Jimmies Rustics. 8,750 sq. ft. of addition will
•
be used for warehouse space and 1,400 sq. ft. will be used for office
purposes. Also included in this proposal is a truck well area which will
be located on the elevation facing Six Mile Road, and will be right next
to the existing warehouse. There is also a landscaping area to the south
and east of the site. This is the elevation. They are proposing to
construct a 16 foot metal seam type of roof along the top of the new
structure and the rest of the bottom half of the structure will be of
block construction. Over the entrance of the office building there will
be a decorative type of dryvet striping that will continue around the
building and go over the truck well doors of the facility. The existing
warehouse is 20 feet in height, and this structure will be 26 feet in
sow height so this structure will be about 6 feet higher than the existing
facility.
Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please step forward.
Richard Gallagher, 29991 Munger, Livonia: My office is right across the street from
Jimmies Rustics. Maybe some of you have seen the total site plan but
Jimmie needs that space desperately over there. We decorated the
front of it a little bit just to make the building look nice. I think we
have some attractive landscaping. It is going to be just a nice looking
little program. We have a new driveway coming in, well it is not new,
it is an existing driveway coming in from the east. I talked to the Fire
Marshal about this driveway and approach, and it is going to be 20 feet
wide. They are asking for 18. We will resurface all that. We think it is
going to be a nice place.
Mr. Piercecchi: Nothing has been mentioned about Dave Woodcox's letter. We have a
note here from Dave Woodcox, through Scott Miller, that the barbed
wire should be moved from the fenced in the area between the two
existing buildings. Will that be complied with?
14605
Mr. Abate: Yes.
Mr. Piercecchi: Also the exteriors of the existing buildings are in need of minor
'N` cosmetic maintenance.
Mr. Abate: No problem.
Mr. Morrow: You said the lot will be resurfaced. What surface will you be putting
on it?
Mr. Gallagher: The driveway to the east over to Middlebelt is going to be redone, and
the parking lot up front, we have landscaping plans in the office for
landscaping the front of the existing structures plus redoing the wood
face on the front of the building.
Mr. Abate: Asphalt surface coming off Middlebelt.
Mr. Morrow: When we were out there to look at it, it was pretty beat up.
Mr. Abate: There was a development back there that was not ours. I had no idea
the construction would take place and I am caught between a rock and
a hard place. I want to fully redo it.
Mr. Morrow: You will have to take access to that site through there.
Mr. Abate: They don't have access to my piece of property. They have an
easement from the north side of Phillip's property.
Mr. Morrow: I thought there was a gate on your side too? What Mr. Piercecchi had
reference to was correspondence from our Inspection Department.
That is who Mr. Woodcox is. He mentioned about the barbed wire.
Mr. Abate: I plan to put improvements in. I hate barbed wire personally but we
have lost a tremendous amount of unusual things like starters and tires,
everything but the trucks themselves. That was done to keep that
down. It has been effective, but from an aesthetic standpoint I want to
remove it. I am planning on putting a camera up.
Mr. Morrow: The reason for that is it is against the ordinance to have barbed wire.
They were just checking for ordinance compliance. Hopefully we are
not going to cause you to lose any parts. The security lights sound like
they will help.
Mr. Alanskas: Now that you will have that additional 10,000 sq. ft. delivering your
wonderful merchandise, will the trucks come at the same time?
14606
Mr. Abate: There are occasions when there might be two. Three would be
extremely rare. They are required to call and make appointments for
dropping things off. We could have a full container and a UPS truck
could pull in and a Federal Express truck too, but in terms of
scheduling freight, we schedule that.
Mr. Alanskas: You wouldn't have any early deliveries?
Mr. Abate: No.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mr. Alanskas and unanimously
approved, it was
#12-254-95 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve
Petition 95-12-8-30 by Gallagher Group Construction Company, on behalf of
Jimmies Rustics Furniture, requesting approval for all plans required by
Section 18.58 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to
construct a warehouse addition on the building located at 29500 Six Mile
Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 11, subject to the following conditions:
1) That the Site Plan marked Sheet 1 received by the Planning
Commission on December 1, 1995 prepared by Gallagher Group
Construction Company, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to,
41111i' except for the fact that all new parking spaces shall be conforming
at 10 ft. by 20 ft. and double striped;
2) That the Landscape Plan marked Sheet 1 dated December 4, 1995
prepared by Gallagher Group Construction Company, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to;
3) That underground sprinklers are to be provided for all new
landscaped and sodded lawn areas shown on the approved
Landscape Plan, and all planted materials shall be installed prior to
final inspection and to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department
and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition;
4) That the Building Elevation Plan marked Sheet 2 received by the
Planning Commission on December 1, 1995 prepared by Gallagher
Group Construction Company, is hereby approved and shall be
adhered to;
14607
5) That the petitioner shall meet to the Fire Department's satisfaction
the following requirements as enumerated in the correspondence
from the Fire Marshal dated December 14, 1995:
1. Due to the limited amount of building perimeter accessible
for fire emergencies and City Ordinance 10.60.010, the
asphalt drive from Middlebelt and along the east and north
side of the proposed warehouse be designated and posted
"Fire Lane - No Parking". The fire lane shall be a minimum
18 ft. wide. Any/all inside turning radii along the entire fire
lane route shall be a minimum of 26 ft.
2. If a minimum 2 hr. fire rated separation is not provided
between the existing 10,000 sq. ft. warehouse and the
proposed warehouse, both buildings are to be provided with
an automatic fire suppression system. Should a fire
suppression system be installed for one or both above
buildings, a hydrant shall be provided between 50 ft. and
100 ft. from the building fire department connection (FDC);
6) That the barbed wire shall be removed from the fenced in area
between the two existing buildings;
7) That the exteriors of the existing buildings be subjected to minor
`. cosmetic maintenance.
Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 716th Regular Meeting
& Public Hearings held on December 19, 1995 was adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Robert Alanskas, Secretary
ATTEST: fi (4 / 1 .L y:1 � 't
Jack Engebretson, Chairman
,4" g