Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-04-23City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1of23 April 23, 2013 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF LIVONIA MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING HELD APRIL 23, 2013 A Special Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Livonia was held in the Gallery of the Livonia City Hall on Tuesday, April 23, 2013. MEMBERS PRESENT: Matthew Henzi, Chairman Craig Pastor, Vice President Sam Caramagno, Secretary Edward E. Duggan, Jr. Elizabeth McCue Kathleen Mcintyre Robert E. Sills MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Fisher, Assistant City Attorney Scott Kearfott, City Inspector Bonnie Murphy, Court Reporter The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Henzi then explained the Rules of Procedure to those interested parties. Each petitioner must give their name and address and declare hardship for appeal. Appeals of the Zoning Board's decisions are made to the Wayne County Circuit Court. The Chairman advised the audience that appeals can be filed within 21 days of the date tonight's minutes are approved. The decision of the Zoning Board shall become final within five (5) calendar days following the hearing and the applicant shall be mailed a copy of the decision. There are four decisions the Board can make: to deny, to grant, to grant as modified by the Board, or to table for further information. Each petitioner may ask to be heard by a full seven (7) member Board. Seven (7) members were present this evening. The Chairman asked if anyone wished to be heard by a full Board and no one wished to do so. The Secretary then read the Agenda and Legal Notice to each appeal, and each petitioner indicated their presence. Appeals came up for hearing after due legal notice was given to all interested parties within 300 feet, petitioners and City Departments. There were five (5) persons present in the audience. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2of23 April 23, 2013 7:00 APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-03-09: Franchise Realty Int., 15399 Middlebelt, seeking to erect six wall signs and three ground menu board signs resulting in excess number of wall signs, wall sign area, number of menu board signs and menu board sign area. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I make a motion to remove this from the table. Caramagno: Support. Henzi: All in favor say aye. Board (in unison): Aye. Henzi: Thank you, this is removed. Mr. Kearfott, anything to add? Kearfott: Not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for the Inspection Department? Hearing none, will the Petitioner's representative please come forward. Representative: Hello. Patrick Stieber, 33650 Giftos Drive, Clinton Township, Michigan. Henzi: Mr. Stieber you were here once before, we were advised the Public Notice was sent out incorrectly, what would you like to say about the signs and about any changes That we might see on the Public Notice. Representative: Well, nothing has changed since we talked last time as far as what we're proposing other than the fact that the mailing was wrong. But starting with what we're doing in the drive-thru, we're proposing to erect two drive-thru menu boards for a double drive-thru. The standard for McDonald's now is the double drive-thru package. Along with those two menu boards is the pre-sell board for previewing before getting to the order points. So those are the three signs that we're requesting for the drive-thru portion of our request. We are over on the square footage and number of menu boards, you know, I think due to the fact that part of this is the fact that they have this new double drive-thru design now for McDonald's, so a second menu board is needed for the second order point. We feel that you know it's not excessive as far as the size goes, these are their standard menu boards, you know we've actually installed these similar boards in other locations in Livonia. But the basic just around that is to get the customer through the drive-thru quickly and efficiently to make the area safe they're trying to expedite the service for the drive-thru because they do so much business City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3of23 April 23, 2013 through the drive-thru. So that's the gist of what we're asking for in the drive-thru. If there's any questions about that, I'd be happy to answer anything I can. Henzi: The current pylon sign, is that going to stay? Representative: Yes, road sign is going to stay. Henzi: All right. Any questions for Mr. Stieber? Mcintyre: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. Mcintyre. Mcintyre: The pylon sign does not count, right, because it's a traffic directional sign, is that correct? Henzi: I don't know if that's why it doesn't count but it's not part of the package. Mcintyre: Okay. But if I am a business that doesn't count against my total amount of wall signs, correct? Henzi: Well, here's the reason I ask is if somebody says I need excess wall signs and I say you've got a giant golden arch in front of your building, why do you need six wall signs. Pastor: Well, I think your point is there's no square footage of that sign in our packet, does that count towards the total square footage in the package? Henzi: Mr. Fisher? Fisher: The Zoning Ordinance breaks down signage between ground and wall signs and the way we generally treat them for these cases is we lump all the wall signs together and all the ground signs together, we do not treat the whole thing as a package for the Board. But you're obviously conscious of the fact that there's a big honking ground sign. Mcintyre: It's a pylon sign, right? Fisher: Yes, but pylon is a part of ground sign, it's not a separate category in itself. Mcintyre: And the pylon sign is where in the package? Kearfott: There's a big picture of it. Mcintyre: In? Henzi: In that packet. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4of23 April 23, 2013 Kearfott: The ones I took. Henzi: Yes. Pastor: And correct me if I'm wrong, they're asking for overages on the menu board that could concern part of the pylon sign but twe don't have that excess calculated including the pylon sign. Fisher: Well, I guess I'd say to that the menu board is still a third category because it doesn't exist in most places and the Ordinance treats it separately from those other kind of signs. Pastor: Okay, thank you. Fisher: The menu board sign is not intended to be seen by the people on the street the way the ground sign is. Pastor: Okay, thank you. Henzi: Anything else? Mr. Stieber, did you say your company did Seven and Farmington McDonald's when they got their new signs? Representative: Yes. I was before this Board for that request as well. Henzi: Anything else? McCue: How many signs did we do on Seven and Farmington, do you remember? Henzi: We did not allow one of the signs. McCue: We did not allow the Playplace. Henzi: It's pretty much the same. There's a welcome on the north side with an arch above it. Welcome, we might not have treated it as a sign but we took away that golden arch. There was a McDonald's in the front, there was a Playplace, and then the menu boards that were the same. Kearfott: Didn't they also remove a pylon? Caramagno: Yes, a very, very large pylon. Fisher: Well, they traded down, I guess. Caramagno: There were pretty substantial differences between that McDonald's and this McDonald's. Henzi: Anything else? Does anybody in the audience want to speak for or against the project? If so, step forward. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5of23 April 23, 2013 Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: I'm sorry. Pastor: There are building signs, we just discussed the menu board. Henzi: I'm sorry. Go ahead, Mr. Stieber. Representative: So the other part of it reflects obviously the building signage. We're requesting additional identification for what would be the side elevation facing the main road. You can see we're proposing to have the PlayPiace sign on that elevation and the arch logo. We feel like there's a lack of identification due to that building elevation being so long and facing the main road, the main ingress and egress, yet the importance of having the McDonald's sign on the entrance elevation is a very important factor for McDonald's. So, it is important to us to get the signage on both elevations and obviously we're here to talk about this, you know, you see what we have proposed in front of you is you know what they want to have obviously, but having the identification on the main entrance at that elevation along with having some identification on the side elevation facing the traffic flow is what we're mainly concerned with getting. I feel like there is a lack of identification, it's a new type of building, it's a brand new looking building, to get the McDonald's identification on the building. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Pat, you have on drawings, three M's, logo M's; one on the PlayPiace side, one on the big McDonald's side and one on the door side. Representative: Yes. Pastor: The door side I can't see - Representative: Yes, and again, that's why we're here obviously. That sign on what would be the drive-thru, non drive-thru elevation doesn't have any visibility. You know once the customers are in there, either through the front they're going to know where they are at that point. I didn't even bring that up just now in my conversation, you know, this is a standard drawing package. Like I said, they'd love to have theM logo there for identification. Their thought behind it is it doesn't face anything, it wouldn't be obtrusive to anything, so, you know, see what the Board thinks about it. You know I know how the Board feels about the excess signage, you know, so that sign is not critical to getting the identification. Pastor: What about the M under the McDonald's? You've got McDonald's there, why do you need an M there? Representative: Yeah, I hear you and if we can get the M logo on the PlayPiace at the other elevation, you know, that will be great to get those two along with the McDonald's City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6of23 April 23, 2013 sign on this elevation and we would be happy. I think we'd have the proper identification we need, it wouldn't be obtrusive. You know, again, these signs are small, just keep that in consideration, the size of those M logos are small but I think those are the three main signs really to give us the identification we need. Pastor: Thank you. Duggan: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: How necessary is the PlayPiace sign, considering that you're going to get a couple on the one side, how necessary is that PlayPiace? Representative: Well, I know that we don't agree on this thing but it's pretty necessary, you know, to get to the public out there to say this is a PlayPiace building, you know, there are different types of McDonald's out there, not every McDonald's is a PlayPiace. So having that signage is very important to them, to get that identification out there. Duggan: So do you think by driving by you wouldn't be able to recognize or that kids wouldn't be able to recognize it's a PlayPiace area so it's necessary for branding purposes? Representative: It is, it definitely is. You know, especially due to the fact you know that whole elevation is so large and it does face the road, so being able to have that PlayPiace on that elevation along with the M logo, you know, to state that this is a McDonald's, this is definitely a major component to the identification. Duggan: All right, thank you. Henzi: Anything else? Hearing none, is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak for or against the project? If so, come on up to the table. Dorothy Bruce: I'm Dorothy Bruce, I have helped develop this area over many, many years and we don't object to McDonald's but we do object to the great big signs. And the one he's talking about near the road, I think would cause a problem with the traffic. The people that exit that area now do make left-hand turns and right turns and to put a sign up there, you might see those cars coming. Some are small, some are large, we have bad weather conditions from time to time and there's a very short distance from Five Mile and I think also you should consider, you start this with McDonald's, Burger King, they're right across the street, they're going to want bigger signs, they're going to want frontage with signs showing, we're going to turn this into a coney island commercial and we don't want that. That is a nice residential area. McDonald's serves our needs, so does Burger King. But we don't' want it to turn into a marquee of sorts. We have nice nursing homes just down the street, we have commercial property that we helped develop many, many years ago, according to the area we tried to keep the boundaries adjacent to the people that are using it within those boundaries so we wouldn't end up a slum area within the boundaries. We worked very hard to get that. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 7of23 April 23, 2013 Now to start putting these big signs up all over, we don't need it in Livonia. You don't see it anywhere else. We're not Plymouth. I think everybody knows without a doubt they're there, and on top of the menu signs, while those are in the back, they will be going around the back of the restaurant, I have no objection to those. But I don't think you need one near the street and I don't know what these wall signs are, it's not clear to me where those are going. Henzi: We'll show them. Can you tell us your address, by the way? Dorothy Bruce: That's three. Representative: These are the three signs we're talking about approving, this is the elevation that faces the main road, and it would be this sign, and this sign, which are very small in comparison. Dorothy Bruce: That would be on the building? Representative: Correct. We're not proposing anything different than what's there now. Dorothy Bruce: So, it's not going to be - you're saying you need it from the road, it's not going to be near your entrance, no signs at the entrance? Representative: No. The main ingress would come in right around here, so they would be the same signs when they pull in. Dorothy Bruce: So where do the six wall signs go? Representative: One, two, three, four, there's the side elevation which faces what would be north. Here's a site plan. Dorothy Bruce: Actually, you don't need, you don't need those north signs, that's what I'm objecting to, too. I don't think it's going to be nice enough to tell you the truth, not on the north wall. None of these restaurants have signs on their north walls, on their side walls like that. You drive right through, you don't look at that sign and you go through the drive-in, you see what's on the menu and that's all you need. You don't need McDonald's all over the building. You don't need the M's all over the building. The kids go there to play, their parents know they're there. I think you should use some discretion. You've had this before, a couple other boards, your City Council, your Planning Commission, I believe they voted no or it wouldn't be here. And I don't see the need for all these signs, I really don't. Henzi: Could you tell us your address, please? Dorothy Bruce: 29218 Broadmoor. That's a lot of advertising and it will stand out like a sore thumb and you're setting a dangerous precedent for Middlebelt Road. We've kept it very nice, all along we kept it very nice. When the consignment shop was there and they had shutters, they had one big sign. Now Bill & Rod's have moved in, they've kept City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8of23 April 23, 2013 it very nice. We have Banks down the street, that's turned out very good. They don't have signs all over their buildings, why should we start with McDonald's? Henzi: Are you satisified that you've seen the drawings of the proposed signs tonight? Dorothy Bruce: I don't think we need all those signs, the big McDonald's sign on the front, I don't see any objection to that. But I don't think the north wall needs signs, I object to that. And you're not going to be looking at the south wall either, if they're planning to put signs up there, the direction of the traffic is too far away to even give them any benefit from that. It's just a big play board as far as I can see, you're setting up a billboard so to speak. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: You know what the building looks like, right? Dorothy Bruce: Yes, yes. Pastor: Can I show you what they're proposing because I think you're a little confused on what they're proposing. Dorothy Bruce: I have a picture of the plan. Pastor: The main sign, the pylon sign is not the change in the wall. Dorothy Bruce: I have a picture of the plan he showed me. Pastor: Right. This is the existing building. Dorothy Bruce: Right. Pastor: This is what he's going to change this front to look like this. Dorothy Bruce: That's the front. Pastor: That's this part right here. Dorothy Bruce: Right, right. But he's also talking about the north side of that. Pastor: The front is the north side, that is the north side. Dorothy Bruce: No, that's facing east. Pastor: That's facing north, east is this way. This is facing north, this is facing east, excuse me, this is facing east, see the signs right here. That's how it looks on the east side of the building right now. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 9of23 April 23, 2013 Representative: And that's what's proposed. Pastor: And that's what's proposed, much smaller. Dorothy Bruce: The building, that's north, isn't it? Pastor: Yes. Dorothy Bruce: And this is south? Pastor: Yes. Dorothy Bruce: And this is east? Pastor: Yes, ma'am. Dorothy Bruce: And this is west? Pastor: Yes, ma'am. Dorothy Bruce: Well, the front of McDonald's faces east. McCue: I think if you look at that McDonald's the drive-thru is actually on the south? Pastor: Right. Dorothy Bruce: Pardon me? McCue: The drive-thru of that particular McDonald's is south, so then the north is actually what they're considering the front of McDonald's, it's not necessarily facing the road. Kearfott: Middlebelt is the east side of the building, the north side is actually the front of the building doesn't face Middlebelt. McCue: Exactly. Dorothy Bruce: The front of the building doesn't face Middlebelt? Kearfott: Correct. McCue: Right. Kearfott: Isn't this the front of the building? That faces north, not east. Pastor: That's north, this is east. This side would be east. So what they plan on doing is making this front like this. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10of23 April 23, 2013 Dorothy Bruce: So where is this big sign going then on here? Pastor: They're going to reconstruct the whole front of this building and they're going to make it look like that. Dorothy Bruce: And this sign would go here? Pastor: Right. Well, actually yes, approximately. Where on the east side of the building, this is what's existing, and this is what they're proposing. See how big the McDonald's PlayPiace is? That's what they're proposing. So, actually on this side of the building, they've cut down their signage. Dorothy Bruce: So where are the six signs going that were talking menu? Pastor: That's one, that's two, that's three, that's four, five. Where's your sixth sign? Representative: It would be the welcome. Pastor: The welcome which you can't even see on this. Dorothy Bruce: Well, which part of the building is that? Pastor: This would be the west side, their front door sign. Dorothy Bruce: This is the way we always went in, through this, and we'd call it the front because that's where the door is. Pastor: Right, right. Dorothy Bruce: That's why I'm confused. Pastor: Now that you understand what the plan or proposal is on the Mlddlebelt side, isn't that much nicer than this? Dorothy Bruce: I don't object to this. Pastor: Do you object to that? Because it's substantially smaller than this. Dorothy Bruce: Are they going to take this down? Pastor: Yes, that will be gone. Dorothy Bruce: And is this going to be a lit sign? Pastor: We haven't asked that question so we'll ask that for you. Mcintyre: Mr. Chair. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 11of23 April 23, 2013 Henzi: Mrs. Mcintyre. Mcintyre: I'm sorry, Mrs.? Henzi: Bruce. Mcintyre: Bruce. Where do you live in relation to the intersection? Dorothy Bruce: About two blocks down and three houses to the right. Mcintyre: So, east of Middlebelt, are you off of what? Dorothy Bruce: I'm east of Middlebelt, on Steve's, you know where Steve's is? Kearfott: Steve's Diner? Mcintyre: Yes, yes. Dorothy Bruce: I'm on that street. Mcintyre: Okay. So that's north of Six Mile? Dorothy Bruce: Right. North of Five Mile. Mcintyre: North of Five Mile, I'm sorry, north of Five, south of Six, got it. Thank you. Thank you, Mrs. Bruce. Dorothy Bruce: I have been the civic leader in my particular square mile there since 1958. Mcintyre: Wonderful. Dorothy Bruce: And helped develop all of that and that's why I became so concerned. This wasn't clear when it was printed that it's six signs and three menu signs, all I could see was billboards everywhere painted on the walls and it didn't even say McDonald's in your issue on the paper. It has to be clearer when you print these things. I probably wouldn't have bothered with it but I was very concerned, that's a lot of signage, a lot of signage. And I thought, here it is before the Zoning Board of Appeals which is like the last recourse. Henzi: I would like to clarify that, a couple things. This is a hearing based on an application that the owner of this property made for some signs and it's in excess of the ordinance so when it's a sign issue, when a building permit is refused by the Building Department, then any property owner's right is to appeal to this Board. So this isn't a new build, for example, that went through City Council, Planning Commission, and finally came here. This has been a McDonald's for decades and they're refacing their signs and that's why it comes before this Board only. And the reason it doesn't say City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 12of23 April 23, 2013 McDonald's on the application is because McDonald's doesn't own the land, Franchise Realty owns the land, so it is the person that's asking for the variance. Dorothy Bruce: Well, you can understand my concern. Henzi: Sure. Dorothy Bruce: When the printing says from Wentworth to Five Mile, I'm thinking what are we going to put in there that we need these six signs. I mean it was totally unclear, totally. Henzi: Well, and another reason why I can understand your predicament is that every golden arch is considered a sign and the welcome above the door is considered a sign. So we've had other petitioners say hey, the golden arch is an iconic piece of art and shouldn't be considered a sign, just a logo. But the welcome, you can't even see until you're in the parking lot, it's not a sign, but in Livonia we do consider each of those a sign. So that's why it's six. Dorothy Bruce: Well, I'm wondering if this new McDonald's, is that going to be in neon, too? Or is that just a sign. Pastor: We'll ask that question of the Petitioner. Henzi: Well, it's lighted now, and we typically like to- well, we don't like signs going on all night, particularly if they shine into a neighborhood, there's no doubt about that. We will have to ask the sign contractor. Dorothy Bruce: If it's oversized, I think I will say I think you should stick to what has been set up by our City planners, stick with the signage that has been established in our Zoning Ordinances because again as I've said if we go oversized here, across the street they'll start it. We don't know what else is going in down the street. I'd like to keep that area confined to residential on the inskirts and nice commercial on the outskirts. And we've been very successful doing that and we haven't got slum landlords in there, in fact Kramer's has just been torn down, unreal. The building was still in good shape but they decided to get rid of it. We don't know what's going in there and there are three houses across the street from there that are old, that's going to go commercial, so we have to be careful, that's my whole point. And I would say stick with what has been proposed by our City planners and try to keep these neon lights down to a minimum because they still bother people either driving or living in the area, they're on 24 hours a day most of the time and it's just - I'd appreciate your concern on those issues, okay? Thank you. Henzi: Certainly. Anybody else want to speak about the project? No. Mr. Stiever, you have the opportunity for a closing statement and you know what we're going to ask first. Caramagno: We have letters. Henzi: Oh, I'm sorry. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 13 of23 April 23, 2013 Caramagno: We have Crystal at 33044 Five Mile Road, writes an objection, (letter read). James Williams, 15431 Middlebelt, writes an objection, (letter read). Henzi: Mr. Stiever, before you make the closing statement can you address the speaker's question about whether any of the signs will be illuminated and if so, during what hours? Representative: Yes. Henzi: And what type of illumination? Representative: Yes. The proposed sign as far as the McDonald's letters, the M logos and the PlayPiace letters, those are illuminated signs. They are LED illuminated, it does have the green technology, you know, they're not as bright as neon, so to speak, but they are lit. McDonald's has all of their site lighting on timed systems so it would be their normal operation hours. I don't think this is a 24-hour store. But for their 24-hour store obviously they have their lights on for the whole time. But otherwise the lights go off when the store closes. Henzi: And so what exists now is lighted? Representative: Yes. What's there now is illuminated. And I would just like to say, you know, they are making a major investment in the property there to upgrade the store and you know part of that comes with upgrading the signage. What they're asking for fits in with the new architectural design of the building and it's not obtrusive when you look at it from a whole what we're asking for and obviously we're here to eliminate some things and talk about some things, you know what we're proposing. But as a whole they do feel that the property is unique, there are unique circumstances with how the building has to be set up within the property with the side entrance so to speak facing the main road and the north elevation, the main entrance elevation, the main architectural feature of the building facing north, that having the signs on these two elevations is definitely needed so they feel there's a hardship due to lack of identification. Henzi: Thank you. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Pat, on the north side of the elevation above the McDonald's you have a U-type of arch; that's not lit, is it? Representative: No. That's a building architectural feature, yes, it's not lit. Pastor: So you would be comfortable if we asked you to take off two of the M's like I suggested earlier? Representative: Yes. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 of23 April 23, 2013 Pastor: Okay, thank you. Mcintyre: Mr. Chairman. Henzi: Mrs. Mcintyre. Mcintyre: Mr. Pastor, you're suggesting the M on the north elevation part and the M above the welcome sign on the west elevation? Pastor: Exactly. Mcintyre: All right, thanks. Duggan: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: What is the relation in size between this one and the one for the Seven Mile and Farmington, do you know because I think this one is bigger, do you know how much? Representative: You know I don't know how much. The square footage-wise you mean? Duggan: Yes, or just in general? Pastor: Are you talking signs or the building? Duggan: No, building in general. The building at this McDonald's is bigger than that one, isn't it? Representative: You know I don't know if it just looks bigger because you see more of it from the road, you know. I do think it is bigger overall but to be able to give you an accurate number I don't recall offhand the square footage of the other building. But there definitely are some different circumstances here versus the last one for sure. Duggan: All right, thank you. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Don't most of these fast food restaurants have two or three different floor plans approximately within a couple hundred square feet of each other generally unless you have a training facility or something like that? Representative: Yes, there's one or two oddball ones that are much larger but not like this. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 of23 April 23, 2013 Pastor: Generally they're all pretty close in size? Representative: Yes. Pastor: Thank you. Henzi: I'll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board's comments with Mrs. McCue. McCue: I think obviously their biggest struggle is the way the building faces, to be honest with you. I mean I think it's unfortunate that we have to call the front of the building the end of your building and that's a challenge, I get that. I'm with Mr. Pastor in the discussion earlier that I'd be- that we should get rid of the M under the McDonald's front part of the building and I don't think we necessarily need the M on the parking lot, which I think we can leave off. In addition the one that I struggle with is that PlayPiace. And I get the marketing piece of it, but I also know is that we recently denied that someplace else. I understand the layout of the building and the way it faces is different but I don't know, I guess I'll have to hear what everybody else has to say on that but that's kind of my struggle to get how we would put that on there and not allow it on another one, that's just my opinion. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I'm kind of in the same place. I don't really like the PlayPiace sign but you do have an arch next to that and depending on which arches, I'd like to see some of the signs taken out. You asked for a lot of excess feet and a lot of excess wall signs, you know if we can get that arch out next to the PlayPiace, there's not really much signage on that side other than the PlayPiace and the arch. Representative: Yeah, that's it on that side, the long side of the building. Duggan: So if we can figure out a way to knock of some signage, the square feet, I'd be open to the PlayPiace but the PlayPiace is the only thing I'm struggling with. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Well, that's what brought us here. The PlayPiace is existing on the building now so I don't have too much heartburn over that because I believe you're actually making the PlayPiace smaller than what's existing. McCue: Let me see that picture. Pastor: It's a much more attractive package with the offer of taking two of the M's down. If you took the little one down it wouldn't bother me one bit but I can support the package as we discussed, not as we presented. I have no problems with the drive-thru menu boards at all. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 of23 April 23, 2013 Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: It's been a unique building placement for a long time. The upgrade is going to be very, very nice, it looks like. The menu boards don't affect me too much, I realize they're purpose built and they have a reason. The removing of the two M's, the one on the parking lot side or the west side, I agree with that. The removal of the M on the north side, I agree with that. The rest of it I'd like to see as is, the M on the west side wall and the PlayPiace which is there now, doesn't affect me at all, east side, I'm sorry, I might need a geography lesson. Henzi: Mrs. Mcintyre. Mcintyre: And I will also tell you I appreciate Mrs. Bruce's comments, you know, there's nothing better than citizens who pay attention and who take pride in their neighborhood and their area so I really appreciate you taking the time to come here and understand exactly what they're asking for. And I agree, it's very confusing. When I first started on this Board and I'd see somebody's realty and then it's McDonald's, I'm totally confused, like okay, I don't understand and then finally I understood. So I think that's a good point of information that we probably as a city need to take a look at that maybe we can add some clarifying information when we publish these so it's clearer to our citizens who are trying to be engaged. That said, I think that I'm delighted that McDonald's is upgrading this property because I think there's nothing that looks worse in a city than having the oldest, most out of date chain restaurants. I think to me that looks like a marker of a city that's gone downhill, right, when you go to new cities and they've got the new looks of everything and then you go to another city and they've got all the old designs and you go oh, my god. So I'm delighted to see this upgrade, I think it's esthetically a huge improvement over what's there now. I think the signage is reasonable. I do think the way that we count every logo as a sign makes it seem very extreme what you're asking for. I agree that those two extra M's that we talked about on the west and north elevation could be removed without detriment to your branding package. I like the PlayPiace, my kids are older, they don't do PlayPiace anymore but when I had two young kids and I was in an area that was unfamiliar, you can't always tell from the road where there is a PlayPiace and where there's not, so I think if you're a person driving through Livonia and you don't know if there's a PlayPiace it's helpful to know. And I think that's such a long side of a building, it's 115 feet long, that having the M there looks very appropriate with the branding so I can give this full support. And the menu boards, I don't have any problem with and the pre-sign, anything to get people through that line quicker, I'm all for. So I can support the package as we have discussed with the two M's on the north elevation and the east elevation removed. Other than that, I think it looks great. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: Kathy is a tough act to follow. Well, when I first looked at this package I said wow, six signs for a McDonald's. I'm driving down the highway, I look, I see an M three miles away, I know what it is. This building is not a new establishment. It's been there for years and years. Everybody in Livonia knows where it's at. As far as the playroom, maybe us adults don't know where it is but the kids know where it is, ask them, they'll City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 17 of23 April 23, 2013 tell you. I look at that kind of like computers so when I have a problem with a computer I don't ask my wife what the answer is, I ask my grandchild, he'll tell me. So I think originally when I looked at the package I said this is overkill but the more I get into it, the way it's presented, I would never accept it. But upon discussion I can understand it a little bit more and I could accept it with the elimination of the M on the north and on the west side, if we can eliminate those two signs it will ease the pain a little bit. But I can understand the young lady who came up and complained about the signs that McDonald's is putting up and I agree with her it could cause a snowball effect, it could start rolling with Burger King and everybody else wanting to add more signs. But I can accept this the way it is with the elimination of the M on the north and the west side. Henzi: I will approve this. There's certainly a hardship given that this is not your typical McDonald's where the front of the building faces for example Middlebelt Road, the side of the building faces Middlebelt Road. In my opinion this is merely a rearranging of signs. What's being presented tonight is no bigger, in fact it's a little smaller than what's been existing since 1995. In 1995 this Board approved a 40 square foot PlayPiace sign and a 67 square foot McDonald's sign, so 107 square feet all on the Middlebelt side. What's being proposed today is a 28 square foot PlayPiace sign that is imminently more attractive than what exists now and a McDonald's on the north side that's been proposed is much to fill out the architectural elements of the building and not so much to attract everyone. I think this looks better than what's existing, it's very difficult for me to deny somebody a PlayPiace sign when one has existed for eighteen years, especially when it's smaller and more attractive. So I will approve it with the conditions that Mr. Pastor suggested. The floor is open for a motion. Upon Motion by Mcintyre, supported by Caramagno, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-03-09 (Tabled on March 19, 2013): Franchise Realty Int., 15399 Middlebelt, Livonia, Ml 48154, seeking to erect six wall signs and three ground menu board signs resulting in excess number of wall signs, wall sign area, number of menu board signs and menu board sign area. Number of Wall Signs Wall Sign Area Number of Menu Boards Allowed: One Allowed: 42 sq. ft Allowed: One Proposed: Six Proposed: 106 sq. ft. Proposed: Three Excess: Five Excess: 64 sq. ft. Excess: Two Menu Board Sign Area Allowed: 30 sq. ft. Proposed: 90 sq. ft. Excess: 60 sq. ft. The property is located on the west side of Middlebelt (15399), between Five Mile and Wentworth, Lot No. 056-99-0031-006, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance No. 543, Section 18.50H (a),2 and Section 18.50H(m) "Sign regulations in C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts." be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because of the location of the building and how it is situated on the main roads. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because the signage would not be consistent with their corporate branding. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because it is esthetically more appealing. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 18 of23 April 23, 2013 4. The Board received two (0) letters of approval and two (2) letters of objection from neighboring property owners. 5. The granting of this variance will not adversely affect the purpose or objective of the Master Plan because it is zoned "Office" and the granting of this variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That the additional "M" on the north and west elevations will be removed. 2. That the lighting will be as described (LED) and only lit while the business is in operation. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Mcintyre, Caramagno, McCue, Duggan, Pastor, Sills, Henzi NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Henzi: This variance is granted with those two conditions, it's approved as presented except for the M arch on the north and west sides and the sign is only to be lit during hours of operation. Representative: Thank you for your time, thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 19 of23 April 23, 2013 APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-04-13: Kevin Overaitis, 18130 Fairway, Livonia, Ml 48152, seeking to construct a covered front porch resulting in deficient front yard setback. Henzi: Mr. Kearfott, anything to add to this case? Kearfott: Not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for the Inspection Department? Hearing none, will the Petitioner come forward. Good evening. Representative: Joseph Overaitis, 39111 West Six Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Petitioner: Kevin Overaitis, 18130 Fairway Street, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Henzi: Tell us why you want to construct a covered front porch. Representative: Currently I'm not sure if the Board is aware but there's a hole in the roof and right now we have an uncovered porch where we have a four foot square deficiency. What we're looking for is at the same that we're going to be repairing the roof, we're looking to cover the porch. As I've seen it with the weather we're currently having right now, anyone approaching the entrance to the building will face snow, rain, sleet, whatever and you're faced with two options, either letting them in or letting them face the weather which neither one is good. I had an opportunity to look at the neighborhood and I could see that this is one of the only houses that didn't have a covered porch, I think because of the deficiency they just let it through. There is an existing slab there. I had a chance, I have some new information if the Board will accept it, I went through and took a bunch of pictures of houses close by with the same type of basic design. Henzi: If you would pass them around. Representative: Again, like I said, right now we're looking to patch the roof and it would be a perfect time, some of the neighbors we talked to said that they're happy that someone moved in there and started working on the house so we've had no opposition to this. Henzi: We have some renderings in our packet, would you tell us the type of building materials, will the shingles match, what's the siding. Petitioner: The shingles are going to be the three dimensional shingles, kind of like an off brown and the columns are going to be solid wood painted white to match the existing house. Henzi: Are you reshingling the entire roof? Petitioner: Yes, so it's going to be all uniform shingles, all going to match and that's kind of why I held off on doing the roof until approval or denial. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 20 of23 April 23, 2013 Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: This covered porch, are you just covering the existing slab? Petitioner: Slab, yes. No new slab is being poured, that slab is 7 by 4. Pastor: Is there a footing under that slab? Petitioner: Yes. Pastor: Okay, thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? I have one. Do you intend to ever enclose this? Petitioner: No. Henzi: Any other questions? Is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against this project? If so, come on up. Hearing none, can you read the letters? Caramagno: Joe Nittle at 18051 Country Club writes an approval (letter read). And Rita Laird at 35515 Curtis sends an approval. Henzi: Gentlemen, anything you'd like to say in closing? Petitioner: No. Henzi: Okay. I'll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board's comments with Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I'll be in support. I think that the improvements that you're working on are great, driving around your neighborhood I think just about everyone in the neighborhood had some kind of covered front porch. I think the plans are great and I'll be in support. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Yes. I'll also be in support. Thank you very much for taking this house and remodeling it. I'm happy as your neighbors are that someone finally stepped up on this house so thank you. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno? Caramagno: Yes. A corner house always seem to mean a lot and as you pull into that Fairway Street there, this house's improvements will make a difference to the whole neighborhood, a porch is well needed for your safety and the safety of people visiting you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 21 of23 April 23, 2013 Henzi: Mrs. Mcintyre? Mcintyre: Always great to see an upgrade, the variance that you asked for is extremely reasonable and will result in nothing but an improvement in the appearance of the house and the neighborhood so thank you. Henzi: Mr. Sills? Sills: I think every porch needs a roof and you've done nothing but enhance the property as it stands, your neighbors are very pleased as we are very pleased so I will be in full support. Henzi: Mrs. McCue? McCue: I agree. The variance you're looking for is so minor and I will restate like everybody else did that we appreciate the fact that you're improving the house and I'm sure your neighbors will feel the same so I will support. Henzi: I agree. I think that we should approve it with the condition that it not be enclosed and that the materials match the proposed renovation to the roof. So, the floor is open for a motion. Upon Motion by Caramagno, supported by Pastor, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-04-13: Kevin Overaitis, 18130 Fairway, Livonia, Ml 48152, seeking to construct a covered front porch resulting in deficient front yard setback. Front Yard Setback Required: 35ft. Proposed: 31 ft. Deficient: 4 ft. The property is located on the east side of Fairway (18130) between Curtis and Bennett, Lot No. 032-01-0242-000, R-38 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance No. 543, Section 4.05, "Schedule of Minimum Front and Rear Yard Requirements in R-1 through R-5 Districts", be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 6. The uniqueness requirement is met because the home has no front porch covering and a hole in the roof. 7. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because of the safety factor of having no coverage over the front porch. 8. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because there are other covered porches in the neighborhood. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 22 of23 April 23, 2013 9. The Board received two (2) letters of approval and no letters of objection from neighboring property owners. 10. The granting of this variance will not adversely affect the purpose or objective of the Master Plan because it is zoned "Low Density Residential" and the granting of this variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 3. That the porch not be enclosed. 4. That matching materials to the roof be utilized. ROLL CALL VOTE: A YES: Caramagno, Pastor, Mcintyre, Sills, McCue, Duggan, Henzi NAYS: ABSENT: