Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1994-04-12 13367 MINUTES OF THE 682nd REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA `1► On Tuesday, April 12, 1994, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 682nd Regular Meeting and 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 35 interested persons in the audience. Members present: Jack Engebretson R. Lee Morrow James C. McCann Robert Alanskas William LaPine Raymond W. Tent Members absent: Brenda Lee Fandrei 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 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. McCann, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is amended Petition 94-1-1-2 by Leo Soave requesting to rezone property located west of Newburgh Road between Plymouth Road and Grantland Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 30 from RUF to R-1. Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Miller: This is a rehearing to have a portion of this RUF subdivision rezoned to R-1 so that a subdivision can be developed. The reason for the rehearing is it was sent back to the Planning Commission by the City Council because it has been amended. The petitioner was able to buy additional property. To the original petition he has added 130 feet of the west of Lot 505a and 506a and the north half of Lot 517. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, do we have any correspondence regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: No additional correspondence. All the previous correspondence from the reporting City departments show no objections. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, would the record that existed based on the original public hearing all still be part of this case? rr.. 13368 Mr. Nagy: Yes it would. Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please come forward and tell us why you are making these changes. Leo Soave, 34822 Pembroke: We found out we had to come from Newburgh and Plymouth for the sewer. That is why we tried to acquire additional property to offset the cost. As you recall, this was approved once before. The plan is the same. The price of the homes will be from $150,000 on up with full basement. It will be a quality project once it is approved. I will answer any questions. Mr. Morrow: For the record, where will you be gaining access into the new property? Whereabouts on Plymouth Road? Mr. Soave: If I remember correctly it is Lot 519. Mr. Morrow: Is there a little bit extra on the one side to give it the 60 foot right-of-way? Mr. Soave: Correct, we have an additional ten feet to the west. Mr. Morrow: That will remain the same as in the prior request. Mr. Soave: Nothing has changed with the exception of the two pieces of property that the gentleman indicated. Mr. Morrow: I just wanted to make sure that was still part of your program. Mr. LaPine: The two new parcels you have obtained, is that going to increase "%sr the number of homes? Mr. Soave: Yes, instead of 20, it will be 22 developed lots. Mr. LaPine: Where does the sewer come in? Mr. Soave: The storm sewer, once all the necessary easements have been obtained, we will come from Newburgh and Plymouth. As far as water and sanitary, those are on site. Mr. Engebretson: We will go to the audience to see if anyone wishes to speak for or against this proposal. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Amended Petition 94-1-1-2 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Tent and unanimously approved, it was #4-72-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 12, 1994 on Amended Petition 94-1-1-2 by Leo Soave requesting to rezone property located west of Newburgh Road between Plymouth Road and Grantland Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 30 from RUF to R-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that `r.. Amended Petition 94-1-1-2 be approved for the following reasons: 13369 1) That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. 2) That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Future Land Use Plan designation of medium density residential for this '�•► area. 3) That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the developing character of this general area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-2-1-7 by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #83-94, proposing to rezone property located west of Middlebelt Road between Five Mile Road and Wentworth Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14 from PL to R-9. Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating they have no objections to this rezoning proposal. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, I would like to ask you to please give us a synopsis of \ry what is involved in this transaction. It is very complex. It involves more than just this particular isolated piece of property. I am sure the audience would appreciate hearing a synopsis of what is going on here. Mr. Nagy: What has precipitated this request on the part of the City Council directing the Planning Commission to initiate this public hearing on the question of whether or not to rezone the subject area really came about as a request of the Woodhaven Home people approaching the City of Livonia expressing an interest in acquiring the area subject to this rezoning petition from the City of Livonia. In an exchange for diminishing the park area by taking this land and using it for their residential home purposes, they proposed to acquire an equal area of land from the Faith Lutheran Church. So in a sense the total park land that is available in the area will not diminish. It will be reconfigured. Instead of being the "L" shaped area that it is now where you see the public land indicated on that map, it also moves in an easterly direction towards the R-9 area of the Armenian Home so that is all park land, and they propose to take that parcel, just the width of their property on the south, from their south property line to the north right-of-way line of Hidden Lane, and use that to expand their project onto that area but acquire portions immediately south of the public land zoned area so as to have a long rectangular shaped park. The City 13370 of Livonia was asked to determine whether or not that would be, from a zoning standpoint, in the City's best interest. We are looking at that right now to determine not only whether or not this area should be rezoned, but if so, does it make sense to have the park land reconfigured. The shape of the park land right now is *4111. really more contiguous to just one residential lot and, of course, the Armenian Home to the east. With the new configuration that park land will actually be extended well behind much more residential homes so as to act as a buffer and protect the neighborhood by giving permanent public space to backyards of those homes that are either on the west side of Hidden Lane or the east side of Oporto Avenue. On the surface, at least, it is attractive to the City of Livonia and that is why we are pursuing this matter and holding this public hearing. The City has not acted on this. This is the first phase, the first phase of examining the zoning question, and from there the Council will ultimately make the final determination. Mr. Engebretson: Thank you Mr. Nagy. Mr. Morrow: Mr. Nagy, this is more or less open space, which is more of a passive type park as opposed to an active park, and there are no immediate plans to develop this park. Mr. Nagy: That is a good point. This is what we consider a passive open space park. It is not an active neighborhood park. There are no plans to develop it in any active recreation sort of way. It is there really to provide open space and relief to the housing development in the area. Mr. LaPine: Mr. Nagy, isn't it also true that when we swap these two parcels, if the parcel that we are giving to the church is of more value than the parcel we are getting, then they are going to make up the difference in the value? Mr. Nagy: Yes that appears to be the case on the surface. One of the conditions of the sale is since we are giving up land that is held in the public interest, City of Livonia property, we will have to, by law, have the properties appraised to determine fair and equal value. We think, because Livonia's property has direct access to Hidden Lane, it might be more valuable from the access standpoint than a comparable area, square foot per square foot, from the land in back of Faith Lutheran Church. So in the event there is some differential in value, it will be made up by dollars. Mr. Alanskas: John, where it says R-5A, how far down would that public land come? About five homes down? Mr. Nagy: Exactly. Mr. Engebretson: Since this is the City's petition, we will go immediately to the audience to see if anyone wishes to speak for or against this proposed zoning change. 13371 Randy Gasser, Administrator of Woodhaven of Livonia, 29667 Wentworth: I just wanted to make a few comments in addition to what Mr. Nagy has already stated. The first comment is two of the benefits that we see to the Livonia community, in addition to the benefit already mentioned of providing the park land to a greater number of homes. �.�► The first benefit of our objective with this land would be to expand the continuum of care that we have currently, and for those that might not be aware currently at our operation we have assisted living, adult day care, respite care and Alzheimer's care. What we wish to add to that is an independent level of living for seniors. An important point to note about this is communities such as this are very popular and every adjacent suburb to Livonia has one, and Livonia does not. The community would be well served by adding this type of continuum of care retirement community. The second point is, the parcel of property that we propose to purchase right now is not generating any tax revenue for the City and although our organization is a non-profit organization, the type of independent living housing that we would propose to develop on that parcel would be subject to property taxes and would be revenue generating for the City of Livonia. Those are the two points that I wish to begin with. Mr. Engebretson: Sir, what do you mean regarding the uniqueness of what it is that you offer versus an American House, St. Mary's facility or other such facilities? What makes you so unique? Mr. Gasser: If you look at, for example, as you mentioned the American House you have only non-licensed independent living, so to speak, in a congregate setting. If you look at the other end of the spectrum, for example at Marywood Nursing Center, you have a skilled care Now nursing home and assisted living. Those are at opposite ends of the spectrum and neither of those have both of those options so we propose to add to our existing operation to have independent living to assisted living, to as most of you know we are in the process of adding a special care unit for those residents that require extra care so that as someone moves through the continual of care, or as in the industry it is called aging in place, they can stay in one retirement community and don't have to move, in your example, from American House to Marywood, because a long range goal of ours continues to be to some day have some skilled nursing beds also on the same campus. Our current beds that are in operation right now can be converted to that with minimal cost without additional land. Mr. Engebretson: What impact, if any, would you say that this facility that covers all of these bases, what impact, if any, would that have on the surrounding community? Mr. Gasser: I think that number one, it would provide a significant enhancement to the immediate area because, as all of you that have driven back there have seen, when we construct a property we do a quality construction and our grounds are immaculate and what we do we have received recognition for doing well and I think to that extent aesthetically it will enhance the neighborhood. In terms of a more far-reaching impact, we chart all of our admissions by zip code and fully 90% of all of our admissions come from within a five mile om.• radius so it is obvious that our community would serve first and foremost and primarily the Livonia community. 13372 Mr. Tent: Mr. Gasser, I am familiar with your operation there and you certainly do run a good shop. With this proposal that you have here, is it similar to what they have in Redford at Beech Daly and Six Mile? `"` Mr. Gasser: Presbyterian Village? Mr. Tent: Yes Presbyterian Village, which means it is all encompassing and it includes everything, a nursing home, the independent living, the assisted care, etc. Mr. Gasser: What we would have at this point would be similar with one notable exception and that is we, at this point, do not have skilled nursing services. That is a longer range goal of ours at this point so immediately we would be one step short of Presbyterian Village. Interestingly enough I might add that before we were filled, and we have stayed full for sometime now, Presbyterian Village, which is a first class operation, sent their overflow waiting list people to our organization, which we took as a vote of confidence. Mr. Tent: If you are successful with the zoning change, etc. when would you anticipate that you would go forth with the development of the project? Mr. Gasser: That is a really good question because as Mr. Nagy mentioned this is a rather complicated arrangement. We have been in negotiations with the Faith Lutheran Church for 2 1/2 to 3 years and have agreed upon a price with them but the property that we would purchase from Faith Lutheran has four or five conditions which would have to be `tow satisfied, none of which are ominous but we would proceed as soon as we could but I think there are several more hurdles that would have to be climbed. Mr. Tent: What I mean is are you financially able to go ahead as soon as you got all the approvals? Mr. Gasser: Financially there would be no problem. We recently needed to borrow some money for our special care unit and the lenders that we talked to were only too eager to give us additional money for this. We have a very good credit rating and money would be readily available from local lenders. Mr. Tent: When you would acquire the property, one thing I am always concerned about is that the developers come in and cut down all the trees. With the beautiful woods there would you see to it that the landscaping, I realize this isn't a site plan yet but I would like to get your commitment to that. Mr. Gasser: We have no problem committing to that. We enjoy the surrounding woods and the wildlife and, in fact, I think in some ways we have served to promote the growth of the wildlife with the way that we feed it and other things. What I might add is we are committed to providing a significant greenbelt on the southern most 13373 edge of that property, which would be adjacent to the last house on the west side of Hidden Lane so that from Hidden Lane there would still be a wooded view as there is today. y,ft. Mr. Tent: I know you will be an asset to the community. Jim Wakeman, 15550 Oporto: My property would butt into what I understand would be the purchased property from Faith Lutheran Church. My concern was if these people purchased that then they weren't planning to build on that piece of property but I understand now it will be a trade off but the gentleman here, Mr. Nagy, indicated that hasn't really been resolved yet. What hasn't been resolved is the fact that you won't trade or what? Mr. Engebretson: Sir, let me try to clarify that. It is an extremely complex transaction and I can understand why you have questions. Mr. Wakeman: Maybe I don't need a broad explanation if I can just have your assurance there will be no building done on that corridor that is being purchased from Faith Lutheran Church. Mr. Engebretson: The plan sir is if this is successful in going through all the steps, then there will be a land exchange between the City, that owns this property, and Faith Lutheran Church, which owns the property behind your home, with Woodhaven being somewhere in the mix, and what we would then do is rezone the land to the rear of your home and it would become public land and you would have the benefit of a City-owned park. Faith Lutheran Church right now could put in parking lots. They could do a lot of things but if this project were to be concluded in the way it is planned, that would become public land, park land, owned by the City. It would not be developed. Mr. Wakeman: I spoke to this gentleman once before and he indicated in the purchase agreement with the church that one of the stipulations was that there would not be any building to go on that purchased land. Mr. Engebretson: What I just outlined and what Mr. Nagy outlined earlier, is the way it will be. They are out of the loop once the land exchange occurs with the City of Livonia. They have no control of that as it becomes City property at that point and you have the benefit of that park land. Robert Regan, 15621 Hidden Lane: My concern would be any increase in traffic on Hidden Lane. One of the things we value on that street is the privacy and the low traffic that is there now. I heard someone here mention that piece of property might be considered more valuable than the church property because of the access provided to it by Hidden Lane and that kind of implies Hidden Lane might be used to access that land and if that were the case, then there would be a new shortcut to get around the busy Five Mile/Middlebelt intersection and the potential for traffic not only to get to this new facility but for people commuting trying to get through, is 'taw 13374 real significant and a little scary for those of us that have small children out in the yard. That would be putting them at great risk. My only other concern is, and he was addressing that, the destruction of the trees and the view we have. Mr. Engebretson: Before we finish sir we will ask Mr. Gasser to come back to the podium and address your question as to what their plans are regarding accessing this property. One thing you can be sure of, even though he indicated that there would still be a wooded view, on the southern edge of the property some trees are going to come down. It is pretty clear they are going to build the building there. Mr. Regan: Is it possible that the Fire Marshal might order that there be added access? Mr. Engebretson: The Fire Marshal would become involved in this process at another time if the zoning issues are resolved. At the site plan approval stage the Fire Marshal is always involved and would have comment and significant input as to the feasibility of whether or not such a project should be concluded. Edna McCullough, 15688 Oporto: As a matter of fact, you people did me wrong. See where that public land is. I happen to be the lot where it juts out. I got taken for more of a buffer zone than anyone else I think. I am curious too about, I don't happen to live on Hidden Lane, but they are going to have a problem because judging from this little old deal I got from Woodhaven, they say they are going to build a limited amount of senior living, condominiums/duplexes/ apartments. That isn't quite the same as the nursing home bit. Those people are mobile and can get in and out. You almost have to use Hidden Lane because the only other choice you have is to come in on Wentworth and I don't know does that road dead end, but now you are building right behind me. They are building the Alzheimer's wing. I know you are doing a nice job of trying to keep things the way they were but you would be amazed how much of that woods has been destroyed. I am really not here to try to stop this. You have already done as much damage to me, the Planning Commission and the City of Livonia, as you can possibly do. You have already destroyed the woods behind me. Now I can see the whole bit where six or seven years ago before they went in I saw nothing but trees. I was just curious if Hidden Lane is going to be the access road to these apartments. Mr. Engebretson: We are going to determine that. Mike Rupp, 15617 Hidden Lane: Basically the only questions I have, they mentioned a greenbelt previously, my first thought would be how big of a greenbelt is that going to be? What is the normal requirement for it as far as size goes? Also would there be some type of a fence put along there to keep the residential separate from the care center itself? Mr. Engebretson: We will address that. 13375 Mr. Rupp: The only other concern is Hidden Lane is just that, it is a hidden lane. It is nice and private. All of us have young kids and one of our concerns is what are they going to do with Hidden Lane after this is built? Last question would be how many units do they plan on putting in there and what is the density factor? Mr. Engebretson: Thank you sir for raising those questions. All of them are probably going to be impossible to delve into tonight because we are only dealing with the zoning issue tonight. The kinds of question that you raise regarding density, etc. would be more appropriately dealt with at the site plan approval process if this is successful. By the same token, to have some sense of what is going in there at this stage of the game is not an unreasonable issue and to that extent we will ask the gentleman to comment on that. We have to keep it abstract at this point because whatever agreements occur tonight regarding density and those kinds of issues are really impossible to enforce. We can't condition zoning based on those kinds of commitments but the City would have a huge hammer to not only enforce all of the ordinances but to get as little impact on the community as possible, while at the same time giving someone the right to use their land. Mr. Rupp: Do you know what the normal density would be? Mr. Engebretson: I am going to ask Mr. Nagy. Mr. Nagy: The maximum allowable density for one-bedroom elderly housing in R-9 is 17 units to the acre. That would be the maximum. We are talking a little over two acres here so if they were to build to ,` the maximum, we are looking at in excess of 30 units. Mr. Rupp: Do you know if they are going to be two-story units? Mr. Nagy: I would doubt it. With the handicap and barrier-free requirements I really don't see us having two stories. The maximum allowable in the R-9 is two stories but dealing with the elderly and the requirement of elevators if you go over one story, I don't think it is economically viable. I really think we are looking at one story, 30 some units. Mr. Rupp: One other item, in their addition they are building right now, which is adjacent to the park area, I would say they are within two feet of the property line. Is that normal? Mr. Nagy: There are different setbacks for different zoning classifications. In this case, unlike the office service, we are talking about R-9, Housing for Elderly Independent Living. No building can be closer than 50 feet to property lines in the R-9 zone. Any units would have to be away from lots on Hidden Lane at least 50 feet. Mr. Engebretson: There are ordinances to deal with the issue of greenbelt divisions between lot lines, etc. , all of which will be adhered to. I am going to ask the Woodhaven gentleman to come back to the podium and address the issue regarding ingress and egress as to what your plans are, if any, at this point. 13376 Mr. Gasser: From the beginning of our plan to construct an independent living unit on this property we have never planned on Hidden Lane access because we have all along been very sensitive to the fact that could change the nature of that street. Our plan is that this ;� would be one large continuous campus that would continue to be accessed as it is today from Wentworth with the access road being totally on the interior. I might add another two comments about that and that is, these questions tonight are very good and they are not all totally able to be answered tonight, but in terms of the density and the number of units, all along the demand for these units that we would try to meet would be such that we are planning for the most on having attached garages. When you talk about attached garages and driveways you can't begin to approach the maximum density that Mr. Nagy mentioned and I would like to add that for the benefit of the neighbors. Mr. Engebretson: Thank you very much for coming sir. If there is no one else in the audience wishing to speak for or against this proposal, we will close the public hearing. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 94-2-1-7 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously approved, it was #4-73-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 12, 1994 on Petition 94-2-1-7 by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #83-94, proposing to rezone property located west of Middlebelt Road between Five Mile Road and Wentworth Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14 from PL to R-9, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 94-2-1-7 be approved for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. 2) That the proposed change of zoning will provide for the development of the subject land for a use which is very much in need in the community. 3) That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with adjacent uses and zoning districts in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 13377 Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-3-2-6 by Paul Tootikian requesting waiver use approval to operate a carryout restaurant with seating in an existing building located on the north side of Joy Road between Harrison Road and Thorpe Drive in the Southeast ,,` 1/4 of Section 36. Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating they have no objections to this waiver use proposal. We have also received a letter from the Fire Marshal's office stating they have no objection to this proposal. Also in our file is a letter from the Inspection Department stating the following information relates to this proposal: Ownership of this strip center is divided into 5 different groups and overall conditions leave a lot to be desired. Dad's Meats and Catering occupied 28426 Joy Road in January 1984. The consumption of food on the premises was not part of the proposed use at the time, nor was it permitted when the occupancy permit was issued. The storefronts on the west end, including this unit, were remodeled last year. Other improvements were made to the building and parking lot on this part of the center. Mr. Tent: Mr. Nagy, on this multiple ownership, there are five owners here. Is this kind of unique in this area or do we have this in other sections of Livonia? Mr. Nagy: It is to the extent of the five different owners of such a small strip center. It is unique. It is not typical of other centers in -sr Livonia. Mr. Tent: I didn't think it was because just reviewing that site there are a lot of things that have to be done. You can't penalize one owner at the expense of the others. Would there be any type of association where these people get together that you would know of or is that strictly independent and there is nothing we can do about it? Mr. Nagy: It appears to be independent Mr. Tent. I know Ordinance Enforcement Division of the Bureau of Inspection has tried through the years to have a better fix-up/clean-up of the center and that is the problem they have been confronted with is the multiple jurisdictions of the various owners within the center. Some of their efforts to seek certain site improvements have been frustrated because of the many owners and trying to clearly define lines of responsibility. There does not appear to be a common ownership association to deal with in coordinating the overall interests of the center but having to deal with the individual owners and their respective parcels. Mr. Tent: There are light poles that are twisted over and there are dumpsters, etc. and I don't want to penalize the petitioner here or his business but I was wondering if there is anything that could be done from the City's standpoint about the light poles, etc. It really is in disrepair, but as you indicated this is the exception 'vow" in the City and not the rule. 13378 Mr. Engebretson: I think there is something we can do without penalizing this particular petitioner. I think we can refer this piece of property to the Roads Beautification Committee, which is headed by the Mayor, and Mr. Shane and I sit on that committee, and because it is on a mile road it is a concern. We are not only interested in recognizing and acknowledging and giving awards for those that deal with their property in a responsible way, we also deal with violations and appearances in court for people that choose to not be good corporate citizens, so maybe we can do that. That is my request to Mr. Nagy to refer this to the Mayor's office for addition to the Roads Beautification agenda. Mr. Engebretson: Would the petitioner please come forward and tell us why you are making this request. Paul Tootikian, 28631 Grandon: I am a Livonia resident and I am a new small business owner in the City of Livonia. I live about three blocks from the strip mall you were just discussing. We are very active in the community and I would like to point out to the Commission that in that community there isn't very good access to much food or restaurants for the children and people to walk to without crossing major roads. I have taken over the catering company that has been in existence there for about the last 11 years. He had a small retail storefront there at one time and I have reopened it back up as a carry-out. What I would like to do, with the Planning Commission's decision, is put tables and chairs in there. I understand the previous owner did have some tables and chairs in there when he did open up 11 years ago but I wouldn't do that without Planning Commission's approval. I would just like to ask '�.. for permission to have tables and chairs in there. Mr. LaPine: You are still going to have the catering business? Mr. Tootikian: Yes sir. Mr. LaPine: How many chairs and tables are you asking for? Mr. Tootikian: I am only asking for 9 seats and three tables. Mr. LaPine: What type of food, hot food or sandwiches? Mr. Tootikian: Mostly sandwiches and ice cream and ice cream sundaes, desserts basically. It is not going to be a full sit-down type of restaurant. You can come in and order some food and if you choose to sit down there you can. Mr. LaPine: So it is basically a carry-out that if somebody wants to order something they go up to the counter and order it and rather than sit out in the car and eat it they can eat it in your facility. Is that it? Mr. Tootikian: That is correct. Mr. LaPine: What are your hours of operation? 13379 Mr. Tootikian: I open up at eleven and I close at seven on weekdays. From Memorial Day until Labor Day we will be open until nine. Mr. Engebretson: How much space do you have available sir if you were to decide to ,Nay add a fourth or fifth table? Would you have room to do that? Mr. Tootikian: No I don't have room. Mr. Engebretson: Good, then we are dealing with a true straight-up request for three tables and nine chairs. Mr. Tootikian: If I added any more, it wouldn't be comfortable in there. Mr. Engebretson: We have dealt with petitioners in the past where numbers were given, to discover they were tripled later. If you don't have the space to do it, that is reassuring to me. Not that I question your integrity but I am interested in knowing for sure that what you see is what you get. Mr. Tootikian: That is correct. Mr. Morrow: When did you say you acquired the business? Mr. Tootikian: I took possession on March 7th of this year. Mr. LaPine: If we allow this waiver use, that goes with the building now? Mr. Nagy: Yes. Mr. LaPine: If he moves out could that whole building become a restaurant or is it restricted to the number of seats that we say here tonight. Mr. Nagy: You will be granting a conditional approval based upon nine and that will run with the land but cannot be exceeded even if the ownership changes. Mr. Engebretson: And it is just this unit that is under petition here? Mr. Nagy: The site legal description describes this portion of the building only. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 94-3-2-6 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimously approved, it was #4-74-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on April 12, 1994 on Petition 94-3-2-6 by Paul Tootikian requesting waiver use approval to operate a carryout restaurant with seating in an existing building located on the north side of Joy Road between Harrison Road and Thorpe Drive in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 36, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 94-3-2-6 be approved subject to the following condition: 13380 1) That the number of tables shall be limited to three (3) and the number of seats limited to nine (9). for the following reasons: `r. 1) That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 11.03 of the Zoning Ordinance #543. 2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. 3) That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-3-2-7 by Farida Investments requesting waiver use approval to construct a building in excess of 30,000 square feet to be located on the north side of Six Mile Road between Inkster Road and Dolores Drive in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 12. Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Miller just to clarify, the existing building will be demolished all except that which is occupied by the drugstore. The finished project will be somewhat larger but the new building will include the drugstore as though it were part of the new building. Mr. Miller: That is correct. Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Engineering Department stating they have no objections to this waiver use proposal. We have also received letters from the Fire Marshal and Traffic Bureau stating they have no objections to this proposal. Lastly, we have received a letter from the Inspection Department stating their office has no objections to this proposal, however, the following deficiencies were found: 1. The dumpster enclosure shown on the site plan at the rear of the drug store should be turned 45 degrees to permit the truck to service the dumpsters. 2. The existing asphalt has areas of extensive damage. 3. Buildings in excess of 30,000 s.f. of gross floor area are required to have a minimum 60 foot rear and side yard if they abut residential districts, as they do in this proposal. Proposed in this case is a 50 foot rear yard and a 44 foot west side yard. 4. The parking required for a building of this size is 335 spaces; proposed are 257 spaces. Items number 3 and 4 may be appealed to the Zoning Board of Appeals for variances. 13381 Mr. Engebretson: I also have a letter here from a citizen. I don't know if he is here or at home but I am going to read it into the record. It is from R. A. Cicchelli, 18211 Fremont Street, 48152. The body of the letter states: "The petition requesting waiver use approval to construct a building in excess of 30,000 square feet, to be located on the north side of Six Mile between Inkster Road and Dolores Drive, is at the very location of the empty super market. Is this petition a request to build an additional building? I hope not. Please let me know what this request is for." That is why I asked Mr. Miller to clarify. Just so there was no misunderstanding of what was going on. Thank you for your letter sir. Now we will ask if the petitioner is present. Charles Tangora, 33300 Five Mile Road: I represent the petitioner Farida Investment Group. This is a family group. They own 200 stores. One happens to be at Nine Mile and Ryan Road and I will show you some pictures of the establishment in a few minutes. The petitioner, as the presenter mentioned, intends to tear down the entire building of Great Scott and several small stores directly to and adjoining to the Great Scott to the west of the building. They are going to do a complete rehabilitation. The only thing that is going to remain is the drug store, but the drug store will be completely enclosed on the outer surface with the same type of material that the new store will have, which is a Value Center Market, which is part of the Spartan chain. It is not owned by Spartan but they are a common buyer with Spartan. The petitioner also intends to remove the entire parking lot. It is not going to be resurfaced. It is going to be a brand new parking lot through the entire development. The wires you see out in the parking lot attached to the building will all be removed and there are going to be no overhead wires out in front whatsoever. I think it will cost the petitioner almost as much as if they were starting with a brand new piece of property. It will be in excess of five million dollars. I think you will see that when the architect presents some of the site plans and some of the renderings that you will be surprised that they can upgrade a corner that has been badly in need of upgrading. We have the architect Mr. Dixon from Dixon & Associates. I am going to ask him to step forward and go through the presentation. If you have any questions, I can take them right now. Mr. Tent: Mr. Tangora, this area can really support a supermarket. It is a viable area and the closest one is quite a distance. They are talking about leasing some of the building. Can you tell me something about that? Mr. Tangora: There is about 8,000 square feet. I am not really sure of the size of the Great Scott but it is probably somewhere around the 30,000 square footage or below that. The Value Center Market would be in excess of 38,000 and this ties right in with what the market is doing today. I think you all see that the new supermarkets are in the range of 45,000 square feet. It is bigger/more. That is the name of the game today when you are in a supermarket so they tend to be competitive and you feel you have to have a store close to 40,000 to be competitive with the other supermarkets. There is 8,000 square feet in between the drug store and the Value Center. 13382 Mr. Tent: If you are successful with this waiver, how soon would they start this building? Mr. Tangora: I understand they are ready as soon as they get their final approvals. Mr. Alanskas: Mr. Tangora, in regards to the truck well in back, it will be taken out completely as I see in the site plan and you are going to put it on the west side of the building? Mr. Tangora: Yes. Mr. Alanskas: Will those trucks have to back into that well to unload? Mr. Tangora: I believe so. Mr. LaPine: Mr. Tangora, the 8,000 feet that will be for lease, do you know at this time will that be one lessee or can that building be split into more? Mr. Tangora: The petitioners are here, two of the Farida family. They could tell you of the contacts they have. It appears there is enough interest that they will either lease the whole area to one user or they will divide it into two. I might mention we have different figures on the deficiency in parking. Mr. Dixon may address that. I would like to show you a series of photographs. One is the present corner. I think you are all familiar with that. The other is their market at Nine Mile & Ryan Road. Some of you may have seen it. (He presented the photographs to the Commissioners) '4111' Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Tangora, are you representing the Nine Mile Road pictures as being representative of what we would get here. Mr. Tangora: What you see is upgraded from Nine Mile and Ryan Roads. Bob Dixon: I am President of Dixon & Associates, Architects and Planners. I have some drawings I would like to present. I am sure you are all familiar with that corner. (He presented plans showing the property as it exists now) Presently there is a little bit of landscaping along the front. I think I calculated that out to be about 2% of the area. What you see here is what we are intending to do. (He presented the plans for the new development) A little bit about why we are going to go in and not use the food store the way it is right now. The size of the total building area as it presently exists is around 38,000 square feet, 6,000 of that belongs to the pharmacy so we have around 31,000 square feet of sales area. Storage would be about one-third of that building. That just makes this building unusable for the Farida family. They have had some market studies done by Spartan stores and they indicated in order to support a store on this corner they need to construct a building of at least 45,000 square feet. We are not going to go to that much for the food store. We are looking at a couple of other ways to supplement the fact that we are not going 13383 to that square footage. Also, the present building only has about a 12 foot clear span on the inside. I know most of you, if you have been in any of the new stores, they are much taller at least by a couple of feet. The lighting is a 100% improvement over the time that this store was designed. That is the reason we went o► through it and looked at what we could do with the existing building and that is why we decided it wasn't worth it to keep the existing food store. What we want to do is simply raze that building and then we would construct over that store providing some of the new amenities that would go along with the food store of the magnitude that would support this area. I would also like to point out that as part of our overall planning we are going to increase the amount of landscaping in that corner basically to buffer ourselves from Six Mile Road. Also to increase along our entry drive, and you will see on my final site plan we are also going to soften the edge along Inkster Road that is really outside of our property line. It is in no man's land between the road and the property line but we feel we need to soften that. Right now it is all concrete. (Mr. Dixon presented the site plan for the new store) Basically we are encompassing the pharmacy brought into the same elevation where the materials on the outside will wrap around it and make it conform to the rest of the design. We are going to be increasing the landscaping by a great quantity. Right now there is probably less than two dozen trees. We are going to be adding quite a bit of improvement. We are also going to bring some landscaping right up to the building area to soften the appearance of the building itself. Part of what we are doing is we are bringing some parking along the back of the building. We will have our employees park back in there. We are getting rid of the open truck well and moving the truck well to the west side. It is a depressed truck well area and trucks will back into it up against the building. All the loading will be done inside and no longer will they be out here moving things around and having all the mess that is associated with unloading the truck and everything. We are enclosing a couple of trash areas. We will be turning this trash enclosure so the trucks have better access to it. Currently out there there is no screening. We have improved the drives a little bit so accessing the site has been improved. We are not changing any of the traffic patterns that have already been established here. Mr. Alanskas: You said the trucks are going to be backing into the truck well. How are trucks going to get in there and not have a problem with Six Mile Road? Will they be coming in off Inkster and going around? Mr. Dixon: They will be coming off Inkster around the back of the building. The trucks come in very early in the morning so while we have said there is parking here, obviously at the time the trucks are pulling in, which will be very early in the morning, there will be no parking there to restrict their turning around the corner. They will come in, make the turn and then simply back in. Then when they leave they will simply come out and exit onto Six Mile Road. 13384 Mr. Alanskas: They will not be stopping and backing onto Six Mile because that would be dangerous? Mr. Dixon: We realize that and that is why we have approved this entrance at the back so the trucks can make this turn and it is a direct shot in and they don't have to back out. Mr. Alanskas: Are you going to have a small sign on Inkster Road saying all truck deliveries to the rear? Mr. Dixon: That is their intent. All their suppliers will be told that this is where they come in. We will have some signage. In order for the trucks to pull out they will have to have direct access. Mr. Tent: The mechanical equipment on the roof, is it going to be screened? Mr. Dixon: Yes it will be all screened. We are using some metal screening along the front face of the building and some returning along the side facade. At the rear of the building where it is not covered by parapet, then we will use a wood screen wall to hide that equipment. The equipment is not basically right on the edge of the building so it is set back in a ways. With the depth of our building it will be difficult to see but I can't say it won't be impossible to see. That is why we are providing a screen wall around it. Mr. Tent: Your parking lot, you are going to redo it completely as Mr. Tangora said. Is that correct? Mr. Dixon: That is correct. Mr. Tent: It will be striped? Mr. Dixon: Yes. Mr. Tent: The size of your bays, that is important. Your parking bays will be ten foot wide? Mr. Dixon: That is correct. That is what we have used 10'x20' bays and the handicap bays are 12'x29' . You were talking about the parking surface. There is a lot of lighting right now and there are a couple of utility poles that run across the property. All that is coming down. We are redoing all that. The overhead lines are going to be rerouted around and we are going to clean this up. I think as I indicated on the site plan a nice fixture about 20 feet high to give us better lighting to the site because taking out the poles and putting in some new fixtures we are basically talking repaving. It is not just a patch job. We have to go back in there and repave the entire surface. It will look like a brand new job. That is what it is basically. Mr. Tent: There will be no outside displays as far as produce and things like that are concerned? Everything will be contained within the market? r.. 13385 Mr. Dixon: I am going to leave that to Mr. Farida to answer. Mr. Engebretson: Regarding these delivery trucks that are coming in. How many per day and at what time? Mr. Dixon: I will have to ask the owner because I really don't know. Terry would you like to respond to that? Terry Farida: I am a General Partner in Farida Investments. We start receiving at approximately six o'clock in the morning. Not all trucks come in at six but some of the trucks do come in between six and eight before we open. It all depends on the day when deliveries come. A lot of the vendors do come every day like bread and milk and sometimes we have between 20 to 30 trucks depending on the day. Mr. Engebretson: How many are diesel tractor-trailers? Mr. Farida: Not too many. Our basic big load is from Spartan where we are buying most of our groceries. We have one Spartan load approximately five days a week. The others that come on big diesel trailers, we would probably get six or seven total a week. Mr. Engebretson: Those kinds of trucks tends to do their business while idling and I am concerned about trucks coming in early in the morning, or any other time for that matter, and sitting there idling for an hour or two putting diesel fumes out. What control do you have over that? Mr. Farida: We really have no control over that. With Spartan we get charged by the time it takes us to unload. They want us to get the trucks in and out. Usually we have a pretty good track record of getting the trucks in and out in less than an hour. Mr. Engebretson: What if these trucks become a noxious problem? Would you have the ability to require them to turn their engines off? Mr. Farida: Oh yes it would be no problem. Mr. Engebretson: Would you do that if the neighbors were concerned about it? Mr. Farida: If it was a concern, yes we would. Mr. Engebretson: You don't have deliveries before 6:00 a.m.? Mr. Farida: No we don't. Mr. Engebretson: Regarding the screening of the HVAC equipment, I wasn't sure if you were referring sir to the screening in the front of the building or were you also concerned about screening in the back? Mr. Dixon: We are addressing basically screening from all four corners. I will put up the elevations so you can see it. Our elevation for the front is going to incorporate a metal canopy roof which will act as a screen wall along the front. At the sides of the building we will have the wood screen wall to wrap around the HVAC and that `r.. 13386 would also include the back. Our parapet height around that part of the building, basically the food store being the highest structure, right now we are proposing a four foot parapet. With the equipment moved towards the center and not the edge it would be difficult to see but that sort of equipment is big so that is why `low we are proposing that there will be a wood screen wall all the way around the equipment at the sides and the rear of the building. The screen wall at the front is more than enough to screen from the front of the building. Mr. Tent: Mr. Farida, you are not proposing any outdoor sales or storage of any vegetables or plants? Mr. Farida: All business will be conducted inside the store. Mr. Dixon: I would just like to briefly look at this elevation to show you the fact that obviously the food store is the biggest thing, our lease area falls in here and here is the pharmacy on the corner and just so you know the fact we are wrapping the facade around that side and that way we incorporate the pharmacy into the scheme of the whole site. I also have material samples. (He presented the material samples to the Commission) Mr. LaPine: Along the east side where the drugstore is, which abuts Inkster Road, there are windows up high. Are those windows staying? Mr. Dixon: To be honest with you I don't know. I have gone out there and measured the building and I believe those windows fall above the fascia height right now and if that is the case, no they would end up getting covered but I am not 100% positive. \r. Mr. LaPine: The reason I brought that up he has a lot of signs in those windows but that is not your problem. The other question I have is the drugstore a separate building or do you have a common wall? Mr. Dixon: There is a masonry block wall there now that separates out so the new building will just butt into that wall. Mr. LaPine: Does the drugstore have a long-term lease there? Mr. Dixon: We are hoping that once the owner sees the effort that is gong in, he might be receptive to the fact that he might want to move his operation to the lease area right now so that would allow us to go back in and redo that. Mr. LaPine: I would think he would be amenable to that because it is a nice job you are doing here. Mr. Engebretson: Regarding the parking lot, Mr. Tent asked about 10'x20' parking bays and you indicated you would comply with the ordinance and did, in fact, have it laid out that way. I would like to ask you to double stripe that parking lot. I found that when I go into a lot like K-Marts that is double striped, everybody parks within the confines of the interior definition of that parking bay in contrast 13387 to parking all over the place, and on behalf of car owners everywhere I would like to implore you to do that. I think it creates immense good will and is responsible too. 41ft" Mr. Dixon: I have to agree with you. I have been in the same situation. I am sure that is not a problem. Mr. Engebretson: I would mention to Mr. Farida the signage that you are showing in your existing store here would result in a violation in Livonia. You can't do that here. You can cover 20% of your window. Not to make a big point but just to be up front with you here. Don McMillan, 17100 Dolores: All I can say is thank God they are finally going to do something with that corner and bring us a grocery store. Dennis Ramey: I am the current leaseholder of the drugstore. That center desperately needs improvement. I would like to retain the windows along Inkster Road and I am much concerned about access to my deliveries. My deliveries come between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. We use smaller trucks. I don't understand where their loading bay is going to be. Mr. Engebretson: Their truckwell is on the opposite end of the building. Those are things you need to work out with them but I would mention to you sir that according to these pictures that we are looking at here, it looks like you may be getting a visit from the Inspection Department. You appear to be substantially in violation of the ordinance regarding the signage you have in the window. Twenty percent is permitted. Mr. Ramey: The windows do exist. We can discuss that later. Mr. Engebretson: You are permitted 20%. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 94-3-2-7 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously approved, it was #4-75-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on April 12, 1994 on Petition 94-3-2-7 by Farida Investments requesting waiver use approval to construct a building in excess of 30,000 square feet to be located on the north side of Six Mile Road between Inkster Road and Dolores Drive in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 12, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 94-3-2-7 be approved subject to a variance being granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals with respect to side and rear yard setback deficiencies and off-street parking deficiencies and to the following additional conditions: 1) That the Site Plan marked Sheet SP-1 dated 3-28-94, as revised, prepared by Dixon & Associates, Inc. , Architects, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. 13388 2) That the Landscape Plan marked Sheet L1 dated 3-21-94 prepared by Dixon & Associates, Inc. , Architects, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to and the landscape materials shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and shall thereafter be maintained in a healthy condition. 3) That the Building Elevation Plan marked Sheet A-2 dated 4-7-94, as revised, prepared by Dixon & Associates, Inc. , Architects, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. 4) That the parking bays shall be doubled striped. 5) That the proprietor will require tractor-trailer operators to turn their engines off while unloading, if possible. 6) That there shall be no outside sales of any products whatsoever. for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed use is in compliance with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543. 2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. 3) That the proposed use represents the removal of a vacant, poorly maintained building and redevelopment of a poorly maintained site. 4) That the proposed use will provide for a viable commercial use for `' the subject site. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-3-7-1 by the City Planning Commission to amend the Future Land Use Plan so as to change the designation of certain described properties so as to reflect recent changes of zoning. Mr. Engebretson: This is a housekeeping matter. Mr. Nagy could you just briefly summarize what is being proposed here? Mr. Nagy: As you have pointed out it is a housekeeping matter. On a semi-annual basis we try to go through and re-evaluate the Future Land Use Plan to make sure it properly reflects the latest development of the City of Livonia. In this case we are adjusting some land use classifications to reflect some recent zoning changes that have taken place throughout the community. Those four areas are indicated on our map, highlighted in the red coloration. 13389 Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, would it be appropriate to add not conditional items to be reflected on the map to reflect the current uses you have discussed but in the text of the Future Land Use Plan, the references that tables to the current use of the land is significantly out of date. Would it be appropriate to include an updating of that language as part of this whole process here? Mr. Nagy: We could do that at a future date as a separate item. Mr. Engebretson: Could you do that because I think while it is from a philosophical point of view all still as valid as it was when it was written many, many years ago, the use of the land in the City has changed quite a lot. Mr. Morrow: One question, we did remove that Rennold's Ravine site? Mr. Nagy: Yes, there are only four sites. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 94-3-7-1 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Alanskas and unanimously approved, it was #4-76-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the provisions of Act 285 of the Public Acts of Michigan, 1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia, having held a Public Hearing on April 12, 1994 for the purpose of amending Part VII of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia entitled "The Future Land Use Plan", the same is hereby amended so as to update the Future Land Use Plan in accord with actual and proposed — revisions having occurred since adoption of the Plan on June 10, 1975 for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Plan Map are consistent with recent changes of zoning and/or with the current established uses of the land. 2) That the proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Plan Map will keep the Map current in keeping with the Planning Commission's policy. 3) That the proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Plan Map are logical and reasonable. AND, having given proper notice of such hearing as required by Act 285 of the Public Acts of Michigan, 1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission does hereby adopt said amendment as part of the Future Land Use Plan of the City of Livonia which is incorporated herein by reference, the same having been adopted by resolution of the City Planning Commission with all amendments thereto, and further that this amendment shall be filed with the City Council, City Clerk and the City Planning Commission and a certified copy shall also be forwarded to the Register of Deeds for the County of Wayne for recording. '`. 13390 Mr. Engebretson: So everyone knows what is going on here, we are talking about the Target and Source Club locations, the Macaroni Grill, Home Quarters and the Ford Day Care Center on Ann Arbor Road. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing Nor resolution adopted. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat approval for Victor Hill Subdivision proposed to be located between Northland and Seven Mile Roads, west of Newburgh Road, in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 6. Mr. Miller presented a map showing the property under petition plus the existing zoning of the surrounding area. Mr. Nagy: We have received a letter from the Parks and Recreation Department stating they find no problems or discrepancies with the plan. We have also received a letter from the Traffic Bureau stating they have no objections to this preliminary plat as submitted. Also in our file is a letter from the Engineering Department stating their office has no objections to the preliminary layout. They do recommend that the proposed out lot A be made a part of one of the lots within the subdivision subject to an easement for storm water detention. This letter was signed by Gary Clark, the Assistant City Engineer and his recommendation of incorporating what was identified as out lot A for storm water detention purposes, that matter has been corrected and the plat has been revised accordingly. Mr. Engebretson: Is the petitioner here? Nur Leo Soave, 34822 Pembroke: These are all 1/2 acre lots. The homes are going to be in excess of $200,000. They are going to be all brick with full basements. That is going to be a good addition to the area. Mr. LaPine: Mr. Soave, is one of your lots going to have the entrance to the lot going off Victor Parkway? Mr. Soave: Yes sir. Mr. LaPine: And the others all come off Northland? Mr. Soave: Right. Mr. LaPine: Are there any water problems in that area? Mr. Soave: The lot that is on Victor Road, there is a little bit of water but this time of year everything is wet. Mr. LaPine: But there is no problem building any homes there? Mr. Soave: No. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, I am a little bit confused. We are looking at a 13391 preliminary plat here for six lots and normally my recollection is when you go through a preliminary plat process we have streets and lots all laid out and I don't think we are looking at that or am I misreading this? Mr. Nagy: The Subdivision Rules and Regulations or the State Plat Act says no parcel of record can be divided into more than four parcels. Upon creation of the fifth parcel you are in violation of the Plat Act. You must plat. What Mr. Soave has done is taken the original parcel and divided it into four parcels. Three of the parcels are comparable in size. The fourth one is left large and that fourth one he is bringing a plat in and further dividing that into three so as to end up with six parcels. Three are going back to the original split. The fourth parcel is being turned into a subdivision of three lots. That is the full six. We are just dealing with the three lots but looking at the parcel in total. You are seeing how the total parcel is being used, three through splits and three through the platting process. Mr. Engebretson: So we are dealing with phase two. The first phase took care of the first three lots. Mr. Nagy: Right, but all of them are being incorporated in terms of the site improvements that will take place, the extension of the sanitary sewers, the water mains, the underground utilities, storm water retention. All of that is being treated as one. What Mr. Soave is doing is accelerating his development by being able to start through the lot split process by getting three homes started early on and going through the long procedure of platting through the county and through the state for the other three lots. `4111. Donald Scharchburg, 37723 Northland: I am the last house before these four acres beyond us and we were wondering the last three lots that go clear to the end of the street, what is happening to the other two lots there? Mr. Engebretson: They are part of the overall plan to construct six homes. You will have new neighbors. Mr. Scharchburg: There are supposed to be three right now. Our lot goes back. I understand these lots are only two hundred and some feet deep and ours is 398 foot deep, the same as all the others on the street. What is happening? Mr. Engebretson: If you will notice sir, at the bottom there is another lot that runs perpendicular to the lots that run in the same direction of yours. That is why they run only 266 feet deep. Mr. Scharchburg: How many lots altogether are going to go in there? Mr. Engebretson: Six. Mr. Scharchburg: That is a watershed down in there we understand. How far can they build down in there where we always called the low land? I 13392 have seen that at times when there was nothing but water down there and I don't know how they could put a basement down in there because you dig a hole down there and the next morning that hole is full of water even on our property. Is there any limit to how far they can go down? Mr. Engebretson: The issue that you raise sir relative to the water, it would seem to me that would be an engineering type of problem. If it is as bad as you suspect it is, they may well have a hard time building a home there. I suspect the developer has done some engineering work back there to determine whether or not he can build there or not. He is indicating that he has. I guess there are no restrictions on them building there from the City's point of view. From the standpoint of what is possible regarding the water issue is a different matter. Mr. Scharchburg: That lower lot would have to have a road. Where would they go? Mr. Engebretson: That lot, as I understand it sir, would take access from Victor Parkway. Mr. Scharchburg: There would have to be a road put in there. Mr. Engebretson: No. Mr. Nagy: It would be a driveway sir. Mr. Engebretson: They would just exit onto Victor Parkway. Just that one. Mr. Scharchburg: What type of homes are they going to put in there? Mr. Engebretson: The gentleman indicated in the $200,000 plus category, all brick. Mr. Scharchburg: I was just wondering how far they can go down from Northland in toward Seven Mile, which is all vacant in there now. It is just a low land. They filled that all in a few years ago. They must have put in about five or six foot of dirt through that whole low land. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Preliminary Plat approval for Victor Hill Subdivision closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously approved, it was #4-77-94 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 12, 1994 on Preliminary Plat approval for Victor Hill Subdivision proposed to be located between Northland and Seven Mile Roads, west of Newburgh Road, in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 6, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the Preliminary Plat for Victor Hill Subdivision be approved subject to the following condition: 13393 1) That a landscape plan for the proposed storm water retention area be submitted to the Planning Commission for its approval prior to the approval of the Final Plat. for the following reasons: Nor 1) That the proposed Preliminary Plat complies with all of the applicable standards and requirements as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance #543 and the Subdivision Rules and Regulations. 2) That no City Department has objected to the approval of the Preliminary Plat. 3) That the proposed Preliminary Plat represents a good land use solution to development of the subject area. 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. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Scharchburg, I don't know if you could hear but part of the condition of this approval is that the developer is required to bring back a plan proposing the retention of storm water in the area so that issue of the water that you had a concern about will be addressed. *41111. 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. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes of the 681st Regular Meeting held on March 22, 1994. On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine and seconded by Mr. Alanskas, it was #4-78-94 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 681st Regular Meeting of the City Planning Commission held on March 22, 1994 are hereby approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: LaPine, Morrow, Alanskas, McCann, Engebretson NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Tent ABSENT: Fandrei Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-3-8-5 by William C. Forster Corp. requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to alter exterior building elevations of the restaurant located at 17050 \► Laurel Park Drive in Section 28. 13394 Mr. Engebretson: We will need a motion to remove this from the table. On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas, seconded by Mr. Tent and unanimously approved, it was #4-79-94 RESOLVED that, Petition 94-3-8-5 by William C. Forster Corp. requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to alter exterior building elevations of the restaurant located at 17050 Laurel Park Drive in Section 18, be taken from the table. Mr. Engebretson: We asked the petitioner to consider toning down the yellow and green awning. He said he would go to his client and discuss that matter and come back and visit us again tonight. Mr. Hinds: Which we did and we came up with some colors and some photographs. We have photographs here showing the original colors that we proposed as well as photographs of the new colors. Mr. Alanskas: Is this the actual color of the yellow? It says beige here but it is a light yellow? Mr. Hinds: Yes. Mr. Morrow: They certainly toned it down but I would not call that a beige. I would call it cream as opposed to a yellow, which is a downgrade from yellow. Mr. Engebretson: We are not really wanting to be argumentative or hard to get along with but we also don't want to create eyesores in the "tim. community, and most particularly in this section of the community across the street from a magnificent regional shopping center. I told you that last time. The pictures that you are showing us here, apparently they are of another Ground Round. This does not appear to be nearly as yellow as this sample. Mr. Hinds: It is the same color. Mr. Morrow: Does the canopy have a tendency to diminish in color with time? Mr. Hinds: Yes it does. Mr. Morrow: It will kind of mute down after it has been installed. Mr. Hinds: Absolutely. I might mention that Ground Round has a striped awning on it now, which we would coordinate it and make it all uniform. They have a striped awning on the entrance and they have a solid awning over the windows, which we would like to put three striped awnings so it looks more uniform. Mr. Engebretson: You have improved it but I am not sure you have improved it a lot. Mr. McCann: Would you be willing to go with the new colors without the interior lighting or is that a decision you can make? 13395 Gary Magill: I am the General Manager of the property at 17050 Laurel Park Drive and I would like to speak for this. Obviously I work in the building and there are a couple of things that we have been combating over the past five years since we have been in business. Number one, we do set off Six Mile probably about 70 yards and '4101. there is quite a large berm right in front of our building to where it is very difficult to see the bottom two-thirds of our building. Not only that but we do not have the benefit of a road sign. The signage laws have changed since Bill Knapps was constructed. They have a sign right out by Six Mile Road that is lit. We do have a sign that is on our building but both of these issues, what happens is we have a lot of guests and not too many people know this unless you are working in the building, but they have a hard time finding our building and the recent cut in the pavement there to the doctor's office has helped that issue. However, we still have the problem of people finding our restaurant. We feel we can keep the people coming to our building if we can get them into it. We feel this would help us enhance our image and also help people find our location. Mr. McCann: One of the things I was getting to is that basically what we are finding is an internally lit awning becomes a sign in itself. You really don't need a sign if you say look at the bright building coming down the street. Right now you have the darker colors. I am in the restaurant business myself and it is very important to be seen. You are lost there. I have gone to lunch there and I have always felt that. I think you are going to get a lot of play out of these striped awnings. The lighter color and the green is going to make you a lot easier to find. Ground Round is internally lit, the individual letters correct? Mr. Magill: Yes it is. Mr. McCann: I want to help you out but on the other hand we are trying to cut down on having a tremendous amount of lighting. One other possibility after listening to you and your concerns, would you consider, and it would make more sense to me, having the striped awning over the entrance way lit and the other ones not lit. They won't serve a purpose. By lighting over the entrance providing downlighting for the people entering, people will know where to enter. It will be a little easier to find. That is about one-third of what you are requesting and it won't affect the people in the subdivision looking over their backyards and seeing the bright lights quite as much. Mr. Magill: I guess I am not really schooled to answer that as far as if we are prepared to do that. The rehabilitation of all the Ground Rounds has come from the President of the Corporation. Mr. McCann: I understand that. Mr. Magill: The only thing I can say is that the majority of the problem that we have right now is that the people that are coming down Six Mile Road, that is where I think our problem is. I think that would 13396 help us out immensely. I also think we do bring in people from other communities. Of course we are very strong in Livonia but we also bring in Novi and Northville and Plymouth and we would like to think that those folks would be in the community of Livonia to hopefully spend more money in the community. I would think the far. importance on the awning that is facing Six Mile, that is important because I think it will enhance our image. Mr. LaPine: I think the gentleman brings up a very valid point. The problem he has probably more than anything is the berm. If the berm wasn't there I don't think he would have the problem he has. Therefore, with the lighting up of the canopy it gives him the recognition he really needs. There is no doubt about it. The last time I heard there were 15 or 16 restaurants in that vicinity. The competition is very keen. Anything you can do to enhance your chance to be one up on your competition has to be to your benefit. I personally have no big hang-up on the canopy being lit. It isn't going to be lit all night. What time do you close? Mr. Magill: We are open until 12:30 a.m. Monday through Thursday and 11:30 p.m. on Sunday and we are open until 1:30 a.m. on Friday and Saturday. Mr. LaPine: Once the restaurant closes, within a half hour or so after closing the lights could be turned off? Mr. Magill: Until the employees are able to leave. The lights are kept on for approximately half an hour. Mr. LaPine: I think it also helps in the respect of security for the people leaving the building. `r.. Mr. Magill: Can I just add one more thing. I believe our plans are not to have a back-lit awning on the south side of the building. That would be the only access to the subdivision behind us and the only way they could see the awning lit and we have no plans to put it on the back. Mr. Engebretson: I want to go back to your comment you made earlier that you want to enhance your image. I happen to like your restaurant a lot. I think you have a good product, good service, good prices, etc. That is why I go there. I don't think the people are driving around looking for the brightest-lit, gaudiest restaurant that is going to grab their eye and cause them to do a U-turn at Six Mile and find a way back into your building. I think that the back-lit sign facing Six Mile Road addresses the recognition that you are concerned about on Six Mile Road. I think I could go along with Mr. McCann's compromise proposal to eliminate the awning that is over the entrance but I am really getting concerned that we are getting into a battle of canopies, particularly among restaurants. The louder and more gaudy an awning can become seems to be the objective these days to outdo the next person. Frankly, I think that detracts from your image. I think if you really are looking for something to attract attention in there, there are a lot of things you could do but awnings, as Mr. McCann indicated, become 13397 signs especially when they are back-lit. They just become gigantic signs. We appreciate the fact that you have toned it down. I think that your chances were greatly enhanced by making that compromise but I think you would enhance your chances even further by considering not illuminating the awning that faces Six Mile Nft. Road, that faces the Jacobson's parking lot and to not illuminate the awning that would be visible to the residents. I think you could make a case for illuminating the awning over the entrance. That is where I am coming from. I think you should rely on the good reputation your restaurant has. Once you get someone in there then it is up to you to do a good job to get them back. They are not going to come back because you have a loud awning or a brightly lit awning or whatever. Awnings and signs may be good for the first attempt to attract someone in there but that is not what makes a business successful. That is my position. I appreciate the cooperation you have given us. I am willing to compromise to the extent that Mr. McCann has outlined if you are willing to do that. If you are not, then I guess I can't support your proposal. Mr. LaPine: I think the point you made at the end was very important. I agree once they get the people in there. I have only been there twice in my lifetime. They have good service. They have good food and they have reasonable prices and I think once the people get to the building he is going to get repeat business, but I think the object is to find the building. I think that is what he is trying to do with lighting the canopies so the people will know where the building is. That is where you and I have a disagreement. Mr. Engebretson: My wife and I go out to eat quite a lot and we never say let's go find a restaurant. When we leave the house we know where we are '4411. going. Mr. Magill: I understand. We just continue to have the problem with people saying we didn't know you were here. We had a hard time finding your building and I think it would be an asset to the community if they could find the building easily. Mr. Engebretson: So where we are is we have a revised color, we have an illuminated back-lit channel letter sign that says Ground Round and you have three striped awnings, whatever color they really are, and you want two of them to be illuminated, Six Mile and the entrance. You want them illuminated for business hours operation. Is that correct? Mr. Magill: Correct. On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine and seconded by Mr. Alanskas, it was #4-80-94 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 94-3-8-5 by William C. Forster Corp. requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to alter exterior building elevations of the restaurant located at 17050 Laurel Park Drive in Section 18, be approved subject to the following conditions: \.. 13398 1) That the Elevation Plans, defined as D-94032 dated 2/25/94 by William C. Forster Corp. , are hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2) That the colors of the canopies shall be beige and forest green; 3) That the canopies shall not be illuminated beyond one hour after closing. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: LaPine, Morrow, Alanskas, McCann NAYS: Tent, Engebretson ABSENT: Fandrei Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 94-3-8-6 by Ross Financial, Inc. requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to construct a building addition to the shopping center located at 33523 Eight Mile Road in Section 4. Mr. Engebretson: We need a motion to remove this from the table. On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Alanskas and unanimously approved, it was ##4-81-94 RESOLVED that, Petition 94-3-8-6 by Ross Financial, Inc. requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to construct a building addition to the shopping center located at 33523 Eight Mile Road in Section 4, be taken from the table. Melissa Jenkins: I represent the landlord of the shopping center, Northridge Commons Associates, 31360 Northwestern Hwy. , Farmington Hills, 48334. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Miller, are you ready to give us the initial presentation? Mr. Miller: This is the Northridge Commons. They are proposing to add an addition of 800 square feet that they call a staging area located between the clock tower and the existing L-shaped shopping center. The MESC is already in the building and it has taken over about 1400 square feet of tenant space. The new material on the building will match the existing materials on the shopping center. Also requested was that the handicap spaces be located in front of the staging area. I have in yellow how many handicap spaces they have. Mr. Tent: Are you the manager of the operation? Ms. Jenkins: No, I am the Director of Leasing. Mr. Tent: There are two things that concern me there. I have been down to 13399 that location and I was watching the activity in the parking lot. What are you doing about the skateboards? I have seen tenants come out of their stores and chase them away. They are at the far side of the building and it is a nuisance. How do you control that? Ms. Jenkins: As of last week we have been calling the police. Finally one of `r. the policemen came and said we can't do anything until there is a sign posted which says no loitering, no skateboarding. If you go by there today you will see signs up that say that. Mr. Tent: You feel that will control it? Ms. Jenkins: It will control it quite a bit because the police say that if that sign exists and they are called and the skateboarders are still there, then they can confiscate the skateboard and possibly the skateboarders. Mr. Tent: Where you have your unfinished building, there is an area there where these kids are skateboarding there too. Ms. Jenkins: It is right there, which is the primary problem, which is the east elevation of the shopping center next door to Blockbuster. We posted a sign there in the past week and between the manager there and the police in Livonia, they are coordinating quite nicely. Mr. Tent: How about in front of the restaurant. They are jumping up into your flower boxes, etc. in front of the restaurant. Ms. Jenkins: Which restaurant, the Coney Island? '441111, Mr. Tent: The Coney Island and the merchant right next door to the cleaners. He came out and he was chasing those kids away and they just sat down on their skateboards. Ms. Jenkins: We can put one there. I wasn't aware of that being a problem as much as next to Blockbuster. Mr. Tent: The third problem I see over there is the parking. Are the people that are going to the MESC office are they suppose to park in the back or the front? Ms. Jenkins: The employees of the MESC office park in the back. The customers will park in normal parking in the front of the shopping center. Mr. LaPine: The reason I postponed this I wanted to find out what was happening on the building and I understand they have to go to court. Is that correct? Mr. Nagy: That is correct. Mr. LaPine: Even if they go to court and we lose the case, what can we do to get all that dirt cleaned up back there? ti1r 13400 Mr. Nagy: I think that is going to be part of the recommendations. There are certain conditions the City may want to compromise and allow the building to stand providing certain site conditions are met and that will be part of the argument our Inspection Department will advance with the judge at the time of the hearing. so" On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow and seconded by Mr. LaPine, it was ##4-82-94 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 94-3-8-6 by Ross Financial, Inc. requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to construct a building addition to the shopping center located at 33523 Eight Mile Road in Section 4, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the Site Plan, received by the Livonia Planning Commission on March 21, 1994, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2) That the Elevation Plan, received by the Livonia Planning Commission on March 10, 1994, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to. Mr. LaPine: I am supporting the motion although I am very dissatisfied with that whole shopping center. When that shopping center came in here to be built we were told it was going to be a quality center. It is a nice center. It is well constructed. The tenants you have brought in there, if they are quality, you have a different idea of quality than I have. I don't think you have done any good for the City of Livonia with some of the tenants you have brought into that center but I am going to vote for your proposal because it is Nifty there, there is nothing I can do about it and we are going to have the smoking there and that is primarily what this area is for. At least we are going to keep it all confined to one area. I would hope in the future with any other ventures you would do in that area that we get some better quality tenants but I don't see any reason to deny this. Mr. Morrow: I am certainly not going to go over the past history. The reason I offered the motion was because it was an attempt on the part of the people who have this center to clean up an existing situation that we would probably classify as being a negative impact on the City and on the merchants around there and they are in there so in order to clean that up, that is the reason I offered that motion. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Tent, LaPine, Morrow, Engebretson NAYS: Alanskas, McCann ABSENT: Fandrei Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 13401 Mr. McCann, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Sign Permit Application by Planet Neon Signs requesting approval for one ground sign and one wall sign for the property located at 17001 Newburgh Road in Section 18. Mr. Miller: The petition site is the former site of the Comerica Bank. It is on the southwest corner of Newburgh Road and Six Mile Road. This property is zoned OS so they are allowed one identification sign at ten square feet. They are proposing excessive signage which they were granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals at a recent meeting. They are proposing one ground sign at 24 square feet and it will be located just south of the north drive as you drive into the property. They are also proposing one wall sign at 40 square feet which will be located on the elevation of the building that faces Newburgh. They are in excess on signage but they were granted a variance by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Engebretson: Which, in effect, makes them conforming. We had indicated to the petitioner, because he was a conforming user here, it was not necessary to appear tonight. On a motion duly made by Mr. Alanskas and seconded by Mr. Tent, it was #4-83-94 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Sign Permit Application by Planet Neon Signs requesting approval for one ground sign and one wall sign for the property located at 17001 Newburgh Road in Section 18, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the Sign Package by Planet Neon Signs, received by the Planning Commission on March 23, 1994, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2) That both signs shall not be illuminated beyond 10:00 p.m. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Tent, LaPine, Morrow, Alanskas, Engebretson NAYS: McCann ABSENT: Fandrei Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 682nd Regular Meeting & Public Hearings held on April 12, 1994 was adjourned at 9:46 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION J.m C. McCann, Secretary `► ATTEST: 't . Jack ngebrets• , Chairman jg