Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-29-11 City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 of 56 November 29, 2011 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF LIVONIA MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 29, 2011 MEMBERS PRESENT: Matt Henzi, Chairman Craig Pastor, Vice Chairman Toni Aloe Ed Duggan Robert Sills Betsy McCue MEMBERS ABSENT: Sam Caramagno OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Fisher, Assistant City Attorney John Podina, City Inspector Helen Mininni, 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 21 persons present in the audience. ______________________________________________________________________ (7:10 #1/100) APPEAL CASE NO. 7704-46 (Rehearing): Smith and Sivertson, LLC, 31636 Schoolcraft, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to waive the requirement for the protective wall along the north and west property lines. The property is located on the north side of Schoolcraft (31636-31646) between Merriman and Berwick City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 of 56 November 29, 2011 Henzi: Mr. Podina, anything to add to this case? Podina: Not at this time, sir. Henzi: Any questions for the Inspection Department? Hearing none, will the Petitioner please come forward? Good evening. Sivertson: Hi, my name is John Sivertson, 31636 Schoolcraft, Livonia. Henzi: Can you tell us why it is that you want to continue the variance perhaps permanently. Sivertson: Sure, I would be happy to. The one thing that I do want to correct is that this is a request for only the west border not the north border. The north border was granted a number of years ago. So, this is a request just for the west border. The reason I would like to have this continued is that myself and my partner are the second owners of this building. The building, I believe, dates from the seventies and this variance has existed since that time in harmony with our western neighbor. We have complied with any wishes that our neighbor has requested to the end that we have established a very mature border now of arborvitaes which completely screen the building from the west side. The stockade fence has been renewed when necessary. I think that is now only four years old for this current one. The chain-link fence is repaired and renewed whenever it’s necessary and additional plantings have been established along the front parking area. If we are forced to comply and have a protective wall, we will lose a lot of aesthetics to the area. Not only will we lose the 20 some arborvitaes which are now over 12 ft. tall, but we will lose a number of very tall trees mature trees on our property. And as a consequence of footings that would be necessary, our neighbor would also lose mature or closely proximate trees on his property. So the end result I feel would be less aesthetic in satisfying my neighbor he would like not to see our building. My understanding of the protective wall is that the height, the wall at its highest is 5 ft. from the parking lot in grade then going down to 3 ft. towards the street to prevent obstruction of traffic view of people pulling out. So, I don’t feel that it would accomplish a screening of the building at all. I think it would make the area rather barren and rather apparent that it’s just a wall separating the two properties. The existing green barrier that we’ve established while not broad enough to have had in the past a permanent variance is I think substantial enough now to provide the screening that would be acceptable to I would think most people. Henzi: In your application you cite that within the last year there was a breakdown between you and the adjacent property owner over a citing by the Inspection Department from some ash that blew on to your property. Is there anything else about the dialogue between you and your neighbor that we need to know about? Petitioner: Not from my point of view, our current neighbor is I think three years in the property, four years in the property and prior to the current owner of that property, the prior owner would always allow or had allowed the five year exemption and we actually established the arborvitaes for their concern. And our relationship had always been City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 of 56 November 29, 2011 good. I expected the same thing to occur with the new neighbor because there was nothing that was changed. He moved in. He saw what our structure and what our greenbelt was like and I assumed that that was okay for him to buy the home. When I approached him about the continuation of the variance, he said there was no problem but he would like to do it on a one year basis. For whatever reason I said, you know, that’s fine I’m willing to just have one year at a time and come back each year to see if there is something that needs to be done to make both parties happy. That broke down this past year when I went with form in hand to see if it was going to continue and he was upset with a complaint that had occurred from our complex which extends back a number of ways. So there are a number of people that are in – a number of buildings in the complex about burning of basically green brush which produce smoke and produce ash. And this was done to my knowledge because I was not there during, the week during the business day. And there were a number of complaints at – as far as I know two separate times. So, that converted our relationship from one of mutual acceptance to an adversarial relationship because he was not sure that he was going to renew his agreement. I said, I understand that, I said - I asked him is it okay to burn in the City of Livonia? And he said sure the police didn’t cite him for that. So then I called the City and I said, is it okay to burn? They said seasoned hardwood. So, I didn’t press that issue. I assumed that if he was going to continue that he didn’t do it during the weekdays during the business hours, but at that time he said I’ll see if I want to renew the waiver. I waited and then I got, you know, a notice from the City saying please expedite this. So I went to see him again and he said I want a wall. I go and why do you want the wall? And he said, I just want the wall. I don’t want to see your building. I said, well, you realize that the wall is not going to hide my building and that the wall is going to make my building more visible because all the planting that I had is in the way of the wall and so the wall will go away – I mean the plantings will go away and the wall will be there and if that’s what you want, then I said I’ll have to do that. Then I called the City and I said do I have any options as a property owner because I’ve always felt that I really had limited with any options. And they said, well, you can appeal. So, here I am for the appeal. Henzi: Okay, thank you. Any questions for the Petitioner? Duggan: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: You know, there’s other - you have other neighbors than the one to the north, another house there, isn’t there a home there? Petitioner: Well, I have on the northern border -- Duggan: Right. Petitioner: -- there are at least two houses on my property plus a number -- Duggan: All right. My question to you is do you have any problems with them for anything over the years? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 of 56 November 29, 2011 Petitioner: No, I really don’t. As long as I do what I’m supposed to do and keep my property, I find them very acceptable. I mean, we actually chat over the fence because I go out there and have to pick up the trash. Duggan: Right. Petitioner: Because things – so I’m conscious of their concern for how it looks in their backyard. And we have had no complaints, in fact, they’ve been rather supportive of our complex because they would come and tell us that the dumpster for our complex which involves three buildings, there’s an extension of our complex farther to the east. People will come in from outside the complex and put their stuff in our dumpster and they would tell me about it. But it’s on the weekend and there’s no way I can enforce it I just have to go out there and pick up the stuff that overflows and put it in the dumpster. So to answer your question, we’ve had very good relationships with those neighbors. Duggan: All right, thank you. Petitioner: You’re welcome. Henzi: Any other questions? Sills: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: You have a line of arborvitaes on the west wall. Petitioner: Yes. Sills: And why would the people on your west side object to the arborvitaes rather than the fence? Petitioner: They don’t. They’re not objecting to the arborvitaes at all. They’re just, at this point I can’t speak for him, but they want a wall. Sills: That’s basically my question, why would they want the wall and the arborvitaes? Petitioner: It would be the question well put to my neighbor – personally I think it’s just because he is angry that somebody complained about burning trash and this is his hammer that he can use on me. Sills: It seems to me like they could eliminate the wall and keep the arborvitaes. The arborvitaes would serve as a buffer as far as noise is concerned and the wall won’t – all that does is make noise bounce off of it. Petitioner: Right. I mean, the arborvitaes are so mature that they do exceed almost the roof line now and I have had to have them cut back because they are the type that do grow tall. So, I think it’s an attractive barrier and I think from the point of view of City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5 of 56 November 29, 2011 separating his property and defining it more as a residential from my property as a professional property, I thought it was a very nice compromise between the prior owners because that was their request that we have some form of hedge to hide the building. Sills: I see. And you don’t have any problems with the neighbors from the north? Petitioner: Not at all. We have there a deeper barrier and that was granted I think as a permanent waiver I want to say four or five years ago. Sills: Thank you. Petitioner: You’re welcome. Henzi: Any other questions? John, do you agree that the northern adjacent property consented and there’s a permanent variance for that greenbelt? Podina: That I haven’t looked into because when I read the application it said north and west. I didn’t know that -- Petitioner: I just noticed that. I was out of town. I got the mailing on I think Monday of last week and that was the first time I noticed but it is – the waiver is only for the western border. And I called your secretary -- Henzi: Jackie. Petitioner: Jackie and she recognized that it was on the application just the western. That somehow the northern border got put in there. Henzi: So at some point you were successful in obtaining a permanent variance because of the consent of two neighbors to the north? Petitioner: Exactly. Henzi: But the neighbor to the west would only consent to a five year contingency. Petitioner: Well, if I remember correctly at that time and Jackie I think was still your secretary, she called me and said that this Board allowed that northern border for the entire complex to be waived permanently because the City of Livonia was rethinking their desire to have walls separating commercial, residential, and professional and residential. But that because my distance was not great enough that I would have to go through the five year renewal which I was – I understood and was willing to do until I was told I couldn’t do it. Fisher: Mr. Chair, I can maybe clear this up. If you look in your materials you have a Council Resolution 370-01. That Council Resolution grants a permanent greenbelt along the northern property line. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6 of 56 November 29, 2011 Henzi: Thank you. Are there any other questions for the Petitioner? Hearing none, is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against this project? If so, come on up to the podium. Good evening. Deering: Good evening, everybody. My name is Rick Deering and I live at 31763 Scone, Livonia and I am one of the people on the north side. And I would like if possible I would like zoning ordinance to put a wall up for myself. My reasons are as I think it would be a more of a security. I have friends down the street and some of that property way down towards Merriman commercials properties have a wall up there and it seems to help for security so that’s one of my reasons. And the second reason is, I think it would be good for a sound barrier type situation and so those are my two basic reasons for having a wall be built. Henzi: Are you 31763? Deering: Yes, sir, I am. Henzi: Based on the site plan that I have, your property doesn’t abut the property of the Petitioners. Deering: Actually its north of the neighbor that the Petitioner refers to. So, I’m -- Henzi: Oh, so you like that neighbor to the south of you, you want a western border? Deering: Yes. Henzi: A western wall. Deering: Correct. Henzi: I got it. Okay, thank you. Deering: Thank you. Henzi: Is there anybody else who wants to speak for or against the project? If so, come on up? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Excuse me, sir. How long have you lived there? Deering: I’m sorry? Pastor: How long have you lived in your house? Deering: Close to 20 years. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 7 of 56 November 29, 2011 Pastor: So were you there before the building was built? Deering: The building was already there. Pastor: The building was already there. So at that time you knew that there wasn’t a wall? Deering: Yes, sir. Pastor: Okay, thank you. Henzi: Good evening. Moricz: Good evening, my name is George Moricz. I have an office at 31620 Schoolcraft which is east of the property that we’re talking about. And this is a pretty, fairly large professional complex of about eight buildings and these buildings were built in ’76. We have had a good neighbor policy all of this time. We left all the mature trees on these properties from day one because we felt that it would get a little village atmosphere going in the professional complex and these buildings are – none of them are larger than 4,000 sq. ft. and they just are sprinkled through between the popples and the pines. If anybody wants to drive out there they can see it in the summertime we all plant flowers around the buildings. We always thought it was a great little property. The thing about the wall is my neighbors directly behind me – we happen to have a carport and the carport does have a wall where we pull in under the roof. And it provides a place for young people to have mischief on the weekends late into the night and that has been off and on in years past a complaint from the neighbors that they would see the headlights pull in and they park in the garage there. And I think when you put up walls and you’re behind buildings, it’s a great spot for people that are seeking privacy on public land to hang out. So, I don’t think the wall would provide security. If anything, it would provide a place for people to park and do mischief during the weekend late into the night. Henzi: Thank you. Is there anybody else who wants to speak for or against the project? I see no one else coming forward. Can you read the letter? Aloe: We have a letter of objection from Doru Gafencu [31670 Schoolcraft Rd.) (letter was read). Henzi: To the Petitioner, is there anything you would like to say in closing perhaps in response to the comments raised in the letter by the speakers? Petitioner: Having heard his objection and his written comment, I fail to see how the protective wall will accomplish what he wants. As to traffic and foot traffic, there is no foot traffic that really abuts his property within 20 ft. because all entrances into my building are on the east side so no one enters on the back except for the staff which occurs in the morning, at lunch, and at the end of the day. The parking will still be there. Patients don’t park in the adjacent parking lots to his property line those are staff parking. So if you look at the building, you would find the building is long going from City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8 of 56 November 29, 2011 north to south. Parking is all in the front which is the most, really convenient for the patients. The two “L” extensions that go on the south and the north side of the building are for staff. So, there isn’t an influx of traffic into those parking areas except morning, those are people who leave for lunch, and at the end of the day when they leave at the end of the day. So, I don’t know how the protective wall will accomplish what his desires are. Henzi: In the last 10 years has your practice grown, decreased, or stayed approximately the same? Petitioner: The last 10 years you’re talking about – the practice has been, we have been there for 25 years and we have an active practice, but we have suffered with the economy. So in the reality, sitting in an automotive heaven when the automotive companies do well, we do very, very well. When they don’t do well, we don’t do well either. So to the short answer to your question is yes, we have seen a decrease in volume on really all the practices just the way the county is at this point. Henzi: Is your packing and entrance door within 10 feet of this neighbor’s patio? Petitioner: The – ask me that again. Henzi: The writer indicated that your packing and entrance doors are right within 10 ft. from my patio. Petitioner: Packing? Henzi: That’s what he wrote. Petitioner: Oh, the only door that is within 10 ft. of his, I would say property line, is the staff entrance, the back door. Henzi: Maybe he meant parking. Is there parking within 10 ft. of the patio? Petitioner: There is – no, not really. If I understand where his patio is – the patio is directly behind our building and the parking is north of that or south of that. The only thing that is really directly close or adjacent to his patio would be the back entrance which is for staff. And we don’t take deliveries back there other than cylinders of oxygen and nitrous oxide. Henzi: Have you renovated your building such that there is more activity on the west side of the property than say, for example, five years ago? Petitioner: No. There is, as I said, there’s just the one entrance that’s used back there which to my office and then there is an entrance to a utility room which no one uses except for people when they have to fix the heating or the cooling. Henzi: Have those doors been there since 1976? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 9 of 56 November 29, 2011 Petitioner: Yes. Henzi: Has your neighbor renovated since moving in three years ago such that he’s repositioned the patio or done other renovations to his home? Petitioner: Actually when he moved in I think he did quite a bit of work. Henzi: I don’t mean fixing up. I mean did he change the footprint of his building such that for example his patio from east side to west side? Petitioner: No, no, the patio is existing, but what he has done recently to his great credit is that the property was heavily overgrown with volunteer trees and he has been taking those down. So, he has brushed out his property significantly. Henzi: Thank you. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: This building is strictly a professional building, you don’t have any night business there, do you? Petitioner: No, there are two practices. My practice is I’m a dentist; a periodontist and another practice oral surgery practice and we both practice basically during the day. The oral surgery practice I believe does have Saturday hours on alternate Saturday basis, but I’m not positive of that. My office is Monday through Thursday only with really no night hours. Pastor: So, what hours are you open? Petitioner: We’re open 8:30 to 5:30 and then on Wednesday we are open from 7:30 to 2:30. Pastor: So the other practice is approximately the same hours? Petitioner: I think they are more of the standard 8:00 to 5:00 because -- Pastor: Okay. Similar hours though. Petitioner: -- I know they leave before we leave. Pastor: Okay, thank you very much. Henzi: Any other questions? Then I will close the Public Portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Sills. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10 of 56 November 29, 2011 Sills: I found the Petitioner quite convincing in his petition and I personally do not like the sight of walls and he does have a nice line of arborvitae there and with only one letter of objection I am going to assume that everybody else is agreeing that he’s okay. So, I am going to go along with the Petitioner and waive the requirement for the protective wall. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: I also will be in support of the Petitioner. I don’t see any negative changes to this property. I think the Petitioner has made considerable improvement to the property as far as the greenbelt to try to be a good neighbor. So, I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: If this was a new case, a new building, I would probably have a seriously different take on it, but the building has been there for 30 years plus. Because a new neighbor moves in and possibly had an argument with the building owner, I can’t see why that would change our requirement on this wall. Both people that had negative comments about it were there after the building was already up, after this stuff was already. So, I think I can support this. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I, too, will be in support. Like he said, the building was there before your neighbor moved in. You have integrated yourself into the area. It looks great and I will be in support. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I agree. I don’t think there has been anything shown or stated to show that anything has really changed from the original plan and no real cause that says anything should change the requirements for a wall. Henzi: I, too, will support the request. One of the reasons probably the main reason why we sometimes make these variances terminal for a period of two or five years is to continue to monitor the progress and tonight I heard no evidence suggesting that there’s been tripling of staff or incredible increase in noise, or more traffic, anything like that. It sounds like everyone has existed for a long, long time and now there is one neighbor who disagrees. And to be frank, I think that the wall would worsen the look of that property. So, I will go along with the request. The floor is open for a motion. Upon Motion by Duggan, supported by Pastor, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 7704-46 (Rehearing): Smith and Sivertson, LLC, 31636 Schoolcraft, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to waive the requirement for the protective wall along the west property line. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 11 of 56 November 29, 2011 The property is located on the north side of Schoolcraft (31636-31646) between Merriman and Berwick, be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because the building has been built for almost 40 years and has been integrated into the area. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences because the area would suffer a loss of aesthetics. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on the neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because the neighboring properties would be negatively affected by the change to a wall from a greenbelt. 4. The Board received one (1) letter of approval and no 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 this property is classified “Office” under the Master Plan, and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That the variance be granted permanently. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Duggan, Pastor, Aloe, McCue, Sills, Henzi NAYS: None ABSENT: Caramagno Henzi: How many years? Pastor: I actually was thinking permanently. Henzi: It’s up to you. Duggan: Further, this variance is granted permanently. Henzi: The variance is granted permanently. Petitioner: Thank you very much. Henzi: Good luck. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 12 of 56 November 29, 2011 (7:39 #1/831) APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-11-48: Ingram Development, LLC, 32727 W. Eight Mile Road, Livonia, MI 48152, on behalf of Lessee Ingram Slotting and Machine, 32727 W. Eight Mile Road, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to construct an addition to a nonconforming industrial building requiring approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Nonconformity is based on the west side yard setback of 4 ft. where 20 ft. is required. The property is located on the south side of Eight Mile Road (31145) between Milburn and Merriman. Henzi: Mr. Podina, anything to add to this case? Podina: No, sir, not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Podina? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Mr. Podina, because of this 4 ft. offset is that because this property owned the property next door or is its original property or was this a lot that was already plotted this way and this building has been built like this for many, many years? Podina: I think it’s been that way for a number of years. Pastor: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Hearing none, will the Petitioner please come to the podium? I think you need to use that one. Helen, does it matter? Reporter: He can use that. Henzi: It doesn’t matter. We used to have problems with that one. I apologize. Petitioner: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is David Ingram. I’m the owner of Ingram Development, LLC, and the owner of the building. I am also owner and president of Ingram Slotting and Machine, 32727 W. Eight Mile, Livonia, Michigan, 48152. Currently, I’ve owned Ingram Slotting and Machine for 23 years. My uncle, who I bought the company from, had owned the company for 15 years previously always a Livonia-based business. He started out at Farmington and Jeffries Freeway and moved up to our current location at 32727 W. Eight Mile which is approximately one mile west of the building in question. Last year I purchased the building in question from Williams Properties, LLC. They were an overhead claim manufacturing business, larger piece of property, smaller building, and larger piece of property. We’ve outgrown our current City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 13 of 56 November 29, 2011 location. We were looking to expand. We want to stay in Livonia. Currently, we have nine to 10 employees. We’re looking to go to 15 approximately. We kind of took the ugly duckling building between Rite Aid which was Churches Lumber at one time. They tore it down and they put in Rite Aid and Ritter’s Custard is next door. The two buildings to the east of me are relatively new I want to say within the last 15 years, much nicer looking buildings. Mr. Williams passed away. He was the owner of the property before I bought it. The building was in pretty much disrepair. We’ve already cleaned up the west side of the building and we’ve done substantial clean up on the south side of the building. Pulled a permit last year to put up a privacy wall which backs up to the apartments behind us. We have a very good rapport with the neighbor behind us and the neighbor to the west of us, Ritter’s Custard, who is also here this evening. We’re looking to do something nice to speak for ourselves. Our current location at 32727, we won the Eight Mile Boulevard Association Award the last two years out of 1,700 businesses that have been juried from 275 all the way to I-94. And we’re looking to do something as nice down there. Henzi: Can you tell us about the building materials? You’ve obviously contracted with a builder so just tell us -- Petitioner: It will be cinder block with brick façade, brick veneer on the front. I have basically – a picture. Very congruent with what is in the neighborhood there right now. Basically just an upgrade from a structure that was built – actually the building was originally owned by Livonia Parks and Recs back in the sixties, I think. And they had asked the Williams to move from a residential area and moved them out to Eight Mile and Mr. Williams was granted at one time an addition to the front of the building and to the back of the building. And then to add on an office type structure to east which we would be taking down and turning into a manufacturing bay. And then new offices on the front we actually sit back 37 ft. from the easement and we’re then be looking to move out 31.4 I think. So, we’re still staying 6 ft. back from the front easement. They will all be basically offices across the front with a mezzanine across the top. Henzi: Looking into the manufacturing area? Petitioner: That primarily would be closed off. There would be an opening for, you know, like a 16 ft. opening to put things up there for storage, primarily storage. Henzi: Okay, any questions for the Petitioner? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I went by there this afternoon you had a lot of equipment – Petitioner: That’s my mason contractor’s stuff. He asked me if he could store some stuff because he’s out of room. He’s currently in negotiations to purchase the H. A. Smith Lumber Yard on Grand River and is supposed to close before the end of the year and City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 of 56 November 29, 2011 move a lot of that stuff over there. All that stuff is not mine a lot of that stuff is going to be moved. Pastor: What are you going to do with it -- Petitioner: We’re doing each other favors at this point right now just to - he’s out of room. Normally a lot of that stuff would be out off job sites and because they don’t have a lot of work right now it’s like, hey, I’m out of room in yard. Can I leave some stuff here and I said, yeah. Pastor: Okay. I just didn’t know if that was your equipment -- Petitioner: No, no. Pastor: -- and you had to find a place for it. Petitioner: No. Pastor: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Hearing none, is there anybody in the audience who wants to speak for or against this project? If so, come on up to the podium. Billings: Good evening, Brent Billings from Ritter’s Frozen Custard, 31227 Eight Mile. Mr. Ingram has done a terrific job in cleaning up the west side of that property. When he said ugly duckling I think that’s an understatement. That property was in very bad disrepair and he’s done a tremendous job in cleaning it up and I have a real good rapport with and certainly support him continuing to clean up that property and making a nice additional to the Eight Mile corridor. Henzi: Thank you. Billings: Thank you. Henzi: Is there anybody else who wants to speak for or against the project? Seeing no one else coming forward, can you read the letters? Aloe: We have a letter of approval from Lynne Kososki [31168 W. Eight Mile, Farmington Hills]. We have a letter of approval from Barry Reynolds [30945 Eight Mile] (letter read). We have a letter of objection Darryl Rogers [30945 W. Eight Mile] (letter read). Podina: Can I say something? Henzi: Sure. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 of 56 November 29, 2011 Podina: I notice that the last two letters have the same address. I didn’t understand that. Mr. Reynolds, the approval and Darryl Rogers had an objection, they’re showing the same address; am I correct? Aloe: One is Barry Reynolds. Podina: I understand, but I’m saying, they’re both showing the same address on Eight Mile Road. Aloe: They both have the same address. Fisher: Maybe one’s the owner and one’s the tenant. Podina: That’s a possibility. Darryl Rogers owns the building. He owns multiple properties. Henzi: Okay. To Mr. Ingram, is there anything you would like to say in closing? Petitioner: I’m not familiar with the gentleman that is objecting. I didn’t know what building he’s talking about. Henzi: 30945 Eight Mile, I’m not sure. Petitioner: It’s got to be further east. I talked to about 15 different neighbors including the neighbors in Farmington across the road about this project and received a very warm response from everybody about what I have already done and what we hope to do. Henzi: Thank you very much. Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: I will close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: I will be in support. This is an addition to an existing nonconforming industrial building. It’s an older building where the setback requirements weren’t there at that time so I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I also will be in support. I commend you for adding on to a building when you could have bought a hundred buildings in Livonia that probably fit the bill. I live right down the street from it. That building has been kind of an eyesore for a while, but I will be in full support. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 of 56 November 29, 2011 Duggan: I, too, will be in support. I think the plans look terrific. Good luck with it. It looks great. Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I, too, will support. Again, this is a nonconforming property and I will support it. I think we’re all excited to see what’s going on. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: Well, the addition is certainly going to enhance the building and the surrounding areas. And I would like to say that your reputation follows you. You have been in Livonia for quite a few years in all and a lot of people know your slotting business, so I am going to be in support. Henzi: I, too, will support the variance. I think it’s only fair to grant this when the Petitioner would have to come before this Board for any kind of addition based on something that pre-existed to his purchase of the property. So, the floor is open for a motion. Upon Motion by Aloe, supported by Sills, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-11-48: Ingram Development, LLC, 32727 W. Eight Mile Road, Livonia, MI 48152, on behalf of Lessee Ingram Slotting and Machine, 32727 W. Eight Mile Road, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to construct an addition to a nonconforming industrial building requiring approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Nonconformity is based on the west side yard setback of 4 ft. where 20 ft. is required. The property is located on the south side of Eight Mile Road (31145) between Milburn and Merriman, be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because this is a pre-existing nonconforming building. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because of the fact that it has a pre-existing nonconformity. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on the neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because this is an improvement to the industrial area. 4. The Board received two (2) letters of approval and one (1) letter 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 this property is classified “Commercial” under the City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 17 of 56 November 29, 2011 Master Plan, and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That this addition be constructed according to the plans that were submitted to the Board. 2. That the addition needs to be enclosed within ninety (90) days following commencement of construction. 3. That the variance is good for one (1) year. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Aloe, Sills, Duggan, McCue, Pastor, Henzi NAYS: None ABSENT: Caramagno Henzi: The variance is granted with those three conditions. I will read them one more time. You have to build it according to specifications you submitted with your application. You have to enclose it within 90 days after commencing construction and it is good for one year. That doesn’t mean that it expires that means that you’ve got one year within which to complete the construction. Petitioner: Complete it or start it? Complete the construction or start the construction? We’re going to start in April is our plan. Henzi: Will it be a problem? John, that won’t be a problem, is it? Podina: I don’t think so. Henzi: If worse came to worse, you would talk to the building department. Good luck Petitioner: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 18 of 56 November 29, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ (7:54 #1/1245) APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-11-50: Chase Bank, 1111 Polaris Parkway, Columbus, OH 43240, seeking to erect two wall signs and one ground sign resulting in excess number of wall signs and a ground sign excess in height. Number of Wall Signs Ground Sign Height Allowed: One Allowed: 6 ft. Proposed: Two Proposed: 12 ft. Excess: One Excess: 6 ft. The property is located on the south side of Plymouth (32201) between Cranston and Hubbard. McCue: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. McCue: I am going to recuse myself from this. Henzi: Okay, thank you. Mr. Podina, do you have anything to add to this case? Podina: No, sir, not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Podina? Hearing none, will the Petitioner please come forward? Petitioner: Good evening, my name is Mike Ellithorpe with Bill Carr Signs out of Flint. The address is 719 W. 12th Street. We also have with us tonight Dennis Bennett with Chase Bank. I apologize for the main petitioner here tonight from this sign company that actually builds the sign N.W. Sign Industries is stuck in Chicago because no flights are flying out of there so she couldn’t be here tonight. We are the installer for the signage if we can get approval tonight. We will be the one to do the installing. What we are asking for is a variance to be able to erect a 12 ft. tall sign where the existing sign is. The problem we’re having is we’re getting a lot of complaints from the customers that you’re not able to see the sign until you’re right up on to the drive. And one of the problems is the parking along the sidewalk and then also there’s parking in front of the bank itself that blocks the sign. Now with Chase Bank they have certain requirements for signage now and to be able to raise a sign up to the 6 ft. level, there’s not a sign that they make to be able to do that to be able to keep it on the setback so that’s why we are asking for a taller sign. And then the sign on the side of the building would go over by the ATM. There’s nothing to identify the ATM and this would help out to be able to – traffic going westbound, coming from the west going east would be able to see the Chase sign. Again, it’s not a very big sign. I think it’s only 25 sq. ft. So the biggest concern from Chase to be able to do this is from the customers talking about a safety issue being able to see the sign because the low profile sign is so low to the ground. Henzi: Is this sign package something that Chase Bank is doing all over the country? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 19 of 56 November 29, 2011 Petitioner: Yes, a lot of them have already been converted to the upright sign. I don’t know how long ago that this one was done or anything and I don’t – because of the setback I’m sure that’s why it’s such a small sign to be able to be setback correctly. Henzi: Okay. Petitioner: If you look at other signs that have low-profile signs, that’s what we call this existing sign, there are buildings if you look around I think its Enterprise their building setbacks and there’s not parking in front of this sign that’s going to block it. There’s a nice greenbelt and everything. If you look on the other side of the road, there’s a Chevrolet dealership that has a sign up in the air tall. There are two Ford signs and then down the road just a little bit there’s a lighting company and then there’s also I believe Daly’s Family Dining. So, there are some signs in the area that are up in the air and in this instance because this building sets so close to the property line in the area we have to be able to put a sign, we’re limited in what we can really do to be able to get the visibility there. Henzi: Is that logo on top something that Chase is pushing for? We hear that a lot from banks that -- Petitioner: Yes, right, that’s their identification with that logo. Henzi: Okay. Any questions for the Petitioner? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: On the side sign, you’re asking for a sign in front of the building and a sign on the side above the ATM. This picture is kind of poor quality, but I can see the ATM Chase sign from the road and you’re planning a sign above the ATM? Petitioner: Yes, it will set above into that -- Pastor: There’s a sign on the ATM that says Chase Bank. Petitioner: Very small, yes, that works in the parking lot. Pastor: I can see that from the road. Petitioner: It’s pretty, well, if you’re looking for it, I agree, you can, but I’m surprised -- Pastor: Actually I wasn’t looking for it. Petitioner: I’m surprised then because most people something that small they don’t pick it out. Now, at nighttime it could be different because, you know, there’s not that much parking going on or visibility. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 20 of 56 November 29, 2011 Pastor: I went by there at 2:30 this afternoon. I happen to – I picked up on it I don’t know why I did, but my question is, you’re asking for some additional signage. I can see the sign on the side of the building. The little monument sign I don’t know that it’s going to do you that much good. As you said, there’s going to parking. I did notice the monument sign there today. There was a pick-up truck parked up in front and you had a hard time seeing it coming from the east going – or coming from the west going to the east. Petitioner: Correct. Pastor: I understand why you want that, but I think the logo identifier on the side of the building is much more effective than even that would be. Petitioner: You don’t see it until you get up there. That’s one of the problems. Until you get – Pastor: I’m talking about for a new sign on the side of the building that you’re going to put -- Petitioner: Oh, on the – Pastor: Over the – Petitioner: On the west side of the building over the ATM? Pastor: Yes. Petitioner: But we still have a problem with people coming westbound from the east going westbound to be able to pick up that small sign. It’s just not a very big sign to be able to have out front for an important place like a bank, I mean, especially on Friday’s or during – after the first of the month, the middle of the month when paychecks - it’s tough. It’s tough to be able to pick that up. Pastor: So why wouldn’t you put that sign number two on the other side of the building, on the east side of the building? Then you’d have direction on both east and west side of the building. Petitioner: I apologize I won’t be able to answer that because I’m not really familiar with – there’s a street I think on the east side of the building; correct? Pastor: No. Petitioner: And I’m not really 100 percent sure what the visibility would be on that. Dennis Bennett from Chase Bank may be he can answer some of these questions. Pastor: Certainly. Bennett: We currently have a sign located on the front it’s a panel sign on the front of that building. Then we have that monument sign which is on the ground. We would like City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 21 of 56 November 29, 2011 to put this pylon sign up so that you can see it from both directions because if you’re coming westbound, you don’t see that flat sign on the building. So if we have a pylon sign and the monument sign you don’t see that at all. So if we have a pylon sign this is one of our small pylon signs, you would be able to see it both directions. Pastor: So then my question is why do you need the sign on the side of the building over the ATM because now you’ve just told the pylon sign -- Bennett: Well, I mean - I’m saying it’s nice if we can get that one on there. It would be perfect, but if we can’t, I’d prefer the pylon sign. Pastor: Okay, thank you very much. Henzi: Any other questions? Aloe: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: What is, Mr. Podina, what is consistent along there? I know we have given variances to -- Podina: There have been quite a few variances in the area. A lot of the other signs that they’re speaking of that are high, those are signs that have been there for 30, 40 years. Henzi: Grandfathered in. Podina: Yeah, grandfathered in. Aloe: We haven’t given anything at 12 ft. then, right? Podina: That I couldn’t tell you. Aloe: I don’t recall anything like that. Podina: I do know this that my father used to bank there maybe 50 years and I know he used to go to the Plymouth and Cranston office. And that bank is hard to see going westbound because it is right on the corner of Cranston. And I don’t even know if there’s a sign on the east side of the building. The visibility is just not there. Aloe: Which sign do you think would be the most effective? Podina: I think the tall sign on the front of the building. Aloe: The 12 ft. and not -- Podina: It can be easily seen from either direction City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 22 of 56 November 29, 2011 Aloe: So the sign they are asking for that would face the north would have really – Podina: Well, that’s an existing sign. Isn’t there an existing sign on the other side of the building? Bennett: Correct, yes. Petitioner: It’s a small, maybe 14, 15 sq. ft. sign because there’s not a big area right there. Podina: Exactly. Aloe: But are you saying to replace that sign or leave that sign? Petitioner: If it’s going to cause – we’re allowed one sign on the building. We can always – if you approve the pylon sign, then we can always take and eliminate that sign on the front of the building and use the one on the side of the building that’s going to be over the ATM machine and everything. It’s what happens at banks and everything. Most of them will have their name over the ATM machine. So, I mean we can eliminate one sign and I think we would still be allowed to have that – if we eliminate the front sign facing north, then we should be able to have the sign that’s on the west side facing west. Aloe: Do you think the sign needs to be 12 ft. high? Podina: I don’t know what the Ordinance for that if it goes by the standards of what they are trying to accomplish throughout the country. Petitioner: If we try to bring that down any, again, we’re going to be partially blocked by a truck or a car parking there if we bring it down to the ground more. Say you wanted it at 8 ft. it’s still going to be blocked Aloe: At 12 ft. is that over the roof of the building? Petitioner: No. Aloe: No. Petitioner: No, it should be right at the bottom peak – Aloe: Is that this picture? Petitioner: - right around where the gutter area is. Aloe: This one? Bennett: Yes. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 23 of 56 November 29, 2011 Petitioner: Yes. Aloe: It’s not very good that sign, but it’s this one. Petitioner: Correct and that’s going to be right at the – yes, and you can see where the dotted line is up here that’s where the sign is going the height of the sign. Aloe: If this is your logo, your emblem, does this say Chase on it? Petitioner: Oh, wow, there you go if you want to pass this around. Aloe: I think everybody would like to see that. Petitioner: Yes, that’s fine. Aloe: Okay. Petitioner: I apologize for that. Aloe: Okay, thank you Sills: I’ve got that in mine. Aloe: You have that? Sills: Yes, I have it right here. Aloe: You all have this color one? Pastor: Yes, I have the color one. Henzi: Yes. Aloe: Mine aren’t in color. Sills: Somebody is trying to tell you something. Petitioner: I apologize. Do you want that for your records? Aloe: No, it’s okay. I get it. Sills: What’s this right here? Aloe: He’s just showing you the height. It’s going to come right to there this sign. Henzi: Any other questions? Pastor: Mr. Chair. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 24 of 56 November 29, 2011 Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Mr. Podina, do you remember the case that we had – was it the storage unit? Henzi: I think so. Pastor: The storage unit on Plymouth Road. Do you remember what the height of the sign was when we approved that? Podina: Was I here for that? Pastor: It was quite a while ago. I didn’t know if you had any background on that. Podina: I don’t recall that. Pastor: It seems to me it was a little bit taller than normal, too. Podina: This one appears to be at the same height of the facia on the building just below the gutters. Pastor: Mr. Fisher. Fisher: There was a previous grant to the storage place on the north side on Plymouth. Pastor: Right. Fisher: But they never built that sign and they never built the one you originally granted and the subsequent owners reduced it quite a bit. So, although it was – so I’m going to estimate somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 ft. high – Pastor: Yeah, that’s right. I kind of remember it, too. Fisher: -- at its original approval. It’s not that now. Pastor: Okay, thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Aloe: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: Mr. Podina, would you say that’s at a zero setback that building? Podina: I didn’t notice. Henzi: 10 ft. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 25 of 56 November 29, 2011 Pastor: It’s 10 ft. about -- Aloe: It’s got to be pretty – no, it’s got some -- Petitioner: To the building from the sidewalk? Aloe: Yes. Petitioner: I should have that. Henzi: The front of your packet says 10 ft. setback from property line. Petitioner: Right, and the sign – the building from the sidewalk is probably at 16 ft, 15, 16 ft. Aloe: Okay, thank you. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: It doesn’t give us this dimension on your plan, the “C” from the ground to the beginning of the “C” how high is that approximately? Would you say that’s about 3 or 4 ft? Petitioner: How many? Pastor: 3 or 4 ft. off the ground. Petitioner: I would say probably 3 ft. Pastor: So just barely over the top of the hood of a car? So when I’m coming down the street and that truck or car is sitting there, I can start seeing the “C?” Petitioner: Correct. Pastor: Okay, thank you. It may be 4 ft. Petitioner: Yeah. Pastor: Okay, thank you. Henzi: Can you tell us about the illumination of the proposed signs are they going to match what you have now? Petitioner: Correct. Henzi: Photo-cell or something like that? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 26 of 56 November 29, 2011 Petitioner: Correct. Bennett: These are LED letters, they’re not neon, they are LED. Henzi: Okay. The other question I had is, you know, you said yourself when you started that one of the key person’s to this petition isn’t here tonight and if this Board wants to grant you the monument sign, but not that sign on the north side, is that something that you can agree to? Petitioner: Yes. Chase Bank representative is Dennis. He’ll be able to agree with that. Henzi: Okay. I just wanted to offer you the opportunity in case you said no, we have plan B. Petitioner: Yes, no, that’s fine. Bennett: We’d like all the signage, but – Petitioner: Thank you. Henzi: Okay. Any other questions? Fisher: Mr. Chair, if I may. Henzi: Mr. Fisher. Fisher: Did you consult with the Plymouth Road Development Authority about this plan? Petitioner: I’m sorry, with whom? Fisher: With the Plymouth Road Development Authority. Petitioner: No. Fisher: The reason I ask the question is that at one time the PRDA had an initiative and I don’t know whether it still does -- but there was an initiative at one point to remove pylon signs wherever possible on Plymouth Road. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I hate to ask this question but, would it be an inconvenience for you – I know it would be an inconvenience – would it be possible for you to go to the PDRA and get some kind of an approval from them before we move on with this. They have thrown millions of dollars in development on that street and I don’t know if I feel a little uncomfortable in approving something they might have a strong objection to. If they City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 27 of 56 November 29, 2011 don’t care, I don’t have a problem with it, but something with a strong objection I would have some heartburn over it. Petitioner: That’s something that you can have us do. I wasn’t aware of the group. Bennett: Right. Petitioner: I don’t think that’s anything that we’re aware of. I’d be more than happy to accommodate that. Bennett: The only thing is this pylon sign is a better looking sign than this monument sign that we have existing so it will improve the aesthetics. Pastor: I’m not going to argue with that because I agree with that, but okay – I’ve said enough. Henzi: Okay, any other comments? Is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against this project? If so, come on up. I see no one coming forward. Are there any letters? Aloe: We have a letter of approval from Andrew Demrovsky at Plymouth Management [32400 Plymouth Rd.] We have a letter of approval from John Demrovsky [32400 Plymouth Rd.] We have a letter of approval from Helen Demrovsky [32400 Plymouth Rd.] Letter of approval from Sam Demrovsky [32400 Plymouth Rd]. Letter of approval Rev. William Tindall [11441 Hubbard]. Letter of approval from LaVon B. Tryon [11428 Cranston]. Letter of objection from David M. Hetu (11418 Cranston] (letter read). Henzi: Gentlemen, is there anything you would like to say in closing? Petitioner: The one objection and that objection was going to be for three more signs. Henzi: I think the writer was mistaken. Petitioner: Mistaken. Okay. I just wanted to clarify that. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. I will close the Public Portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I’m actually in favor of the pylon sign. I’m not in favor of an additional sign on the building so I would actually leave that up to the Petitioner what sign he wants, but I’m kind of leaning towards giving him a tabling resolution to go to the PDRA to get something from them. That’s where I stand right now. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I like the pylon sign and I would be for that. And also I agree I will go with one sign on the building not the two, not the one on the north side. He can choose one or the other, but I do agree with PRDA, the Plymouth Road Development Association. I City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 28 of 56 November 29, 2011 know they market that pretty hard and they invest a lot of money and work really hard on it so I would like to make sure we get their approval, a final approval before we make a final decision on this, but I do like your plans very much. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: Well, I can’t say much more than my two colleagues have said already. I think that we should table this until we do get a resolution from the PRDA and that’s where I stand right now. I have no objection to what the Petitioners want to do. I will go with one sign on the building and the pylon sign I think are both good, but I will go along with my colleagues and say that we should have the Plymouth Road Development Association look at this thing, too. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: I would also approve the sign. I think the Petitioner has a uniqueness and a hardship due to the location of this building on Plymouth Road. I’m just wondering if we could approve it subject to the approval – then we wouldn’t have to have it come back as long as they approved it. Henzi: Mike, is that a possibility? Fisher: I guess there isn’t any reason you couldn’t condition your variance on having an approving resolution by the PRDA. Henzi: But then would the resolution have to be crafted tonight meaning if we said what signs the Petitioner would have no ability to make changes with the PRDA. Fisher: Maybe I’m not creative enough but I can’t see how to make a resolution if what you’re saying is he’d sort of abdicate all the Zoning Board’s authority to the PRDA -- Henzi: No, I mean the opposite. I mean, let’s say for example the Petitioner went to the PRDA’s members and came up with a different plan suggested to them by the PRDA and then wanted the change, but we have already approved signs that they submitted tonight. Fisher: Well, I guess what he could do if that’s what you’re trying to accomplish, you could say just add a provision in your resolution that says they could come back if the signs that they are requesting changes as a result of their dialogue with the PRDA. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I don’t know that we can do that only because there may be some minor objections so they don’t get it. I think we should have them come back either way. I think we can get a letter from them saying yeah we don’t have a big objection, but you know, can we change it around. Then we can once again make a decision on, you City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 29 of 56 November 29, 2011 know, as you say maybe they can come up with a little bit different sign package and I think we need to wait on that issue. Henzi: Okay. Mrs. Aloe, I’m sorry to cut you off. Aloe: No, that’s okay, but don’t they need to know what our approval is so they can present it to them? Pastor: I think they have a pretty good idea. Aloe: They know from what we said? Okay. Sills: Could we just have a tabling resolution contingent upon the results of the meeting with the Plymouth Road Development Association? Pastor: Yeah, that’s what -- Henzi: Yes, so I guess my comment is I think it’s fair to the Petitioner to have a tabling resolution that allows the Petitioner to go back to the PRDA and to come back within a certain period of time. I agree with Mr. Pastor that I wouldn’t want to cede control and then have what I think is approvable rejected because of some minor problems. So, I think that that’s fair and by the way, the PRDA might ask the Petitioner to follow another bank. I know that Chase has two banks on Plymouth Road. And I think that they have got a lot of good arguments to make the PRDA. So, the floor is open for a motion. RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-11-50: Chase Bank, 1111 Polaris Parkway, Columbus, OH 43240, seeking to erect two wall signs and one ground sign resulting in excess number of wall signs and a ground sign excess in height. Number of Wall Signs Ground Sign Height Allowed: One Allowed: 6 ft. Proposed: Two Proposed: 12 ft. Excess: One Excess: 6 ft. The property is located on the south side of Plymouth (32201) between Cranston and Hubbard, be tabled to allow the Petitioner time to go to the Plymouth Road Development Authority to seek their comments. Petitioner is to return within three months. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Pastor, Sills, Aloe, Duggan, Henzi NAYS: None ABSTAIN: McCue ABSENT: Caramagno Henzi: The variance is tabled. I’ll tell you that the first available meeting before this Board is January 10th. You’d have to get your packet back in by 10:00 a.m. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 30 of 56 November 29, 2011 Wednesday, December 21 and then the next following available meeting is January 24th. As you heard, you’ve got three months, but that’s what the calendar looks like for now. Petitioner: Thank you very much. We appreciate it. Henzi: Good luck. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 31 of 56 November 29, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________________ (7:20 #1/1999) APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-11-51: Covington Center LLC, 496 W. Ann Arbor Trail, Suite 103, Plymouth, MI 48170, on behalf of Lessee FedEx Ground, 38401 Amrhein Road, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to erect fencing with three strands of barbed wire within the established front yard setback, which is not allowed. The property is located on the south side of Amrhein (38401) between Newburg and Eckles. Henzi: Mr. Podina, anything to add? Podina: No, sir, not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Podina? Hearing none, will the Petitioners please come forward? There is an easel if you would like to use it. Watch your foot there. If you reference one, maybe turn and show it because it looks like there are some people who are here for this petition. Petitioner: Good evening, my name is Jim Jabara. I live in Plymouth and I am a consultant along with Jack Knowles here that is going to support or provide the information for this request along with the owner, Mr. John Allman. John Allman is an entrepreneur who has developed several pieces of property in the City of Livonia and the western part of the county, notably one almost across the street the one that we rewrote the ordinance, I don’t know, many of you probably don’t remember that, but it’s kitty corner to the northeast. That’s also one of his buildings and he built this building, the FedEx building in the middle nineties and now he’s here requesting the fence in order to provide the needed security for the FedEx operation. I’d like to introduce John Allman. Allman: I’m John Allman from 496 W. Ann Arbor Trail, Plymouth, Michigan. We have a long history in Livonia. We started purchasing properties in Livonia in 1985, the first property which is on Amrhein Road not far from this, kind of kitty corner. It was originally built by the Army Corps of Engineers as a tank plant. So we purchased it from Wolverine Moving and Storage and at the time we purchased it, it was 360,000 ft. empty. And it was also the color turquoise like the old Detroit Metro Airport used to be so it was quite a building to renovate and we went through spent lots of time and money on it and now it’s a modern facility today. We’ve worked hard to attract and retain the national tenants which we do have Ford Motor being one of them. We also have bought a facility in the nineties on Industrial Road did pretty much the same thing and have national tenants there. The history of the Covington Center is we purchased the land in ’98, I believe, from GM. We also then purchased the CSX land because there used to be a rail siding that went between the industrial property and the residential. And we purchased that land had the track removed. I used to come across the street so it was very industrial. In ’99 we built the building for RPS and RPS at the time was a small package delivery service that eventually was acquired by FedEx and became FedEx Ground and developed into FedEx Ground what it is today. So, I don’t know if you know City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 32 of 56 November 29, 2011 the history of FedEx, but FedEx originally started in Memphis and they started with the airline freight business for overnight packages and letters. And they also have FedEx Freight right now which is a trucking outfit. They bought some various trucking outfits around the country. They then bought RPS and developed RPS into what it is today. So, RPS became FedEx Ground. The business changed over time. They deliver high value small package items such as laptops and a lot of electronics these days and with that change became a real need for security. So, their security requirements had changed. We had built the building. It’s a total of 172,000 ft. They currently have about 112,000 ft. and they had a choice to make. They had a choice to either – we had 60,000 ft. which had been vacant for about two and a half years. They were either going to have to take the entire building to get the security they needed or move. So, they decided to take the entire building even though they will not need it all immediately, but they’ll have room to grow. So, we’ve got FedEx Ground this is an important part of their operation. When it comes to security, they really need to have one gate for trucks and another entrance for visitors and employees and to do that they need that perimeter fence. They ended up – they will be putting more then 10 million dollars in conveyers and equipment in this building. So, it’s a major investment in not only the building but the community and, I mean, they’re a very good corporate tenant and a good corporate citizen. They’re also the fastest growing division of FedEx. So, the employment will grow from about 80 to 145 so there will be 65 new jobs there. I do believe it will increase the property values in the area. I think they will encourage other industries to remain and relocate in Livonia. So, I think they are a great corporate citizen and it’s a nice proud facility for the city. So, I am – oh, also it will be - it’s the major FedEx Ground facility for Detroit. So, it will be, you know, a major plus. Do you want me to explain how the building works and why they need the added security? Henzi: Yes, I was just going to ask. Petitioner: You will find in your packet an 11 x 17 photo and what this is, is you’ve got the property line – Amrhein Road. This is the west entry right here and this is the next door neighbor to the west, the steel company. This is the old - the other GM land that was there. This is GM land across the street here the plant that used to be there. What they have is, they have a west entry that will only be for trucks and the way this actually moves is semi-trucks come in the west entry, like all cars do. They come around back and load at the docks, process the packages inside and then the vans are loaded. And he’s got these vans over here. The vans come out for delivery. Go back out the one truck entrance. So, all truck traffic is kept in the west, so it’s kept away from the residential area which I think is important and then all the car traffic is down to the east and you have an entry way here for employees and for business. So, there is one entry way for employees and visitors, one for trucks. You’ve got actually the non-secure area here. Then in here you’ve got the secure area and the rest is secured throughout. So, in order to do this that’s why they need this perimeter fence. So, the perimeter fence would be – again, we tried to keep it as close to the building as possible so it would be to a minimum. It’s a103 ft. back from the curb. Okay. So, if you look at the photo here, too, you’ll see we’ve done mature vegetation along here. We work to keep these buildings up. And in this economy especially we work hard to retain these tenants. So, anyway, we’ve got mature – we keep the building up well which you will end up with, we’ve got mature vegetation. There will be cars, two rows of cars in front of this fence. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 33 of 56 November 29, 2011 So the cars will help block the fence out and on top of that we are willing to do a black vinyl coated fence which really what happens is the fence will disappear. A higher end fence and it tends to disappear. It’s a typical fence that is put around tennis courts. Henzi: Could you talk about hours of operation for visitors? Why would a visitor go there that sort of thing? Petitioner: Oh, a visitor? Henzi: Yes. Petitioner: I think it’s typically only visitors. Henzi: Okay. Petitioner: It’s typically that type, you know, it’s a business. You don’t have the public coming and going. Henzi: Okay. Petitioner: This is not something that you come in and drop packages off. Henzi: Okay. You’re not visiting there because you need to pick up your I-phone? Petitioner: No, no. Henzi: Because they couldn’t leave it at the house. Petitioner: No, they don’t. No, in fact, no, that doesn’t happen at all. Henzi: Okay. And then the last question I had was, talk about why the barbed wire. That’s a very unique – Petitioner: Why what? Henzi: Why you want the extra fencing along the top. It’s a very unusual request. I understand the need for security. Petitioner: Oh, you mean the barbed wire? Henzi: Yes, maybe if you could give me an example of why that’s necessary. What sort of security catastrophe are you trying to avoid? Petitioner: Well, you know, this is what they – they have a standard around the country. It’s what they asked of us as far as their standard goes, but I can tell you I think as far as the barbed wire goes I mean we could not do the barbed wire and it be possible to put a barbed wire, could we get another foot of fence? Is that a possibility? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 34 of 56 November 29, 2011 Henzi: You’re flexible on that. Petitioner: We’re flexible. Henzi: Okay. Petitioner: And we will be flexible and the other – then the other photos, we actually went through and planted. This is on the east side this is on the residential neighbor’s side. We just wanted this - and these used on the east side of the property so that we could – and we did this voluntarily. The City didn’t ask us to do this. We went ahead just to be good neighbors and good residents. We’re sensitive to that issue and we want to make sure that we are the best neighbors we can be. Henzi: Thank you, any questions for the Petitioner? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Looking at your plan, and I didn’t catch it right away, but you’re not just fencing in the parking lot, you’re actually fencing in the front door, the side of the building? Petitioner: Yes, it’s the perimeter. It’s actually the, you know, there’s a fence there anyway. This would be a gate. There’s a fence that runs along here and then it comes down here close to the building. And this is an entry way. This is the one employee – this is their entry way. Then it comes around and goes down -- Pastor: So what’s the need to fence off the - I would call it the vendor area. Petitioner: It’s really the - it’s probably more the employee area. Pastor: Well, you have the front door, you have the front doors that are on the angle on the side of the building and I would call that a pedestrian area or something along those lines. Vendors may walk in that door right now. Petitioner: No, everyone will come in through here. Pastor: While I was there there was a person walking in that front door. Petitioner: Oh, well, I know. That’s what happens now and that’s – see that was the space that was vacant there. Pastor: Okay. Petitioner: That actually comes to here. This was the vacant space and so what will happen is they’ll use – this will be the only entry way in the building. Pastor: So why do you need those doors fenced off. The whole side will be -- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 35 of 56 November 29, 2011 Petitioner: They don’t want any doors that anyone can get out of and get to a non- secured area. So, that’s, you know, they want everyone to go through this – through their one entry way. I mean, they don’t want -- Pastor: Couldn’t they block off the door instead of putting a fence around the building? Petitioner: Well, I don’t think they want it for their employees. They want their employees to go out and they can have picnics out here in the summer or what they’ll do, but as far as the doors go they require a, you know, dividing line between the secure and non-secured area. So, I mean I think a lot of it is they – I mean FedEx you think of their reputation. It’s a trust with their customers. You ship something FedEx it’s going to get there no matter what. So whatever comes in that building, it has to get back on those trucks and be shipped back out and not disappear in somebody’s trunk? And what has happened to their business, like our lives it has changed with all the electronics and they have a very high value small package business. In fact, it is the fastest growing part of FedEx and I think part of the reason I’ve heard is that it’s taking business away from the mother FedEx because that’s what’s happened. It’s cheaper to ship FedEx Ground and they can be trusted to do it. So it’s a matter of - it’s a business of trust. Pastor: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Petitioner: Also in your packet you have pictures of our neighbors to the west. That’s the steel company. Henzi: Okay. Anything else? Mr. Allman, anything else you would like to say for now? Allman: I think we’re all set unless Jack you want to? Henzi: Okay. Is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against this project; if so, some on up to the podium. Allegrina: My name is Steven Allegrina. I am a property owner at 38101 Amrhein I live directly next to the property mentioned on the east boundary. That home is a foreclosure that I purchased recently with the intent to renovate it as my personal residence and while I love the FedEx story, it actually – FedEx actually started out as a term paper that Fred Smith wrote while in college and I wish one of my term papers would have been turned into a Fortune 500 company, but all that aside, Mr. Allman expressed his sensitivity to the neighbors and gave you a picture that unfortunately my x-ray vision is down tonight so I wasn’t able to see the configuration of what was going on there, but they put some vegetation in. When I saw this work being done, I first – I noticed engineer stakes all summer and I thought there might be something going on with the roadway work possibly a sidewalk. Didn’t really think of it until I came by the property about three weeks ago and I noticed there was about a 30 ft. greenbelt along the property line between the parking lot and my fence line. That greenbelt is now gone. It’s been reduced down to 8 or 10 ft. It’s filled with tiny gravel with a very City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 36 of 56 November 29, 2011 immediate slope down to my property line and there is going to be approximately, probably 40 cars that are going to be parked perpendicular to the fence line that I will be looking at if I choose to take the day off or if they’re running, you know, after hours items. And let’s further highlight FedEx. He’s speaking as the building owner, but not as the business operations. FedEx is a logistical operation. They run two shifts or more during peak seasons, holidays, et cetera. That means afternoon, that means after hours traffic. The employees go out into the parking lot and turn their stereos on during breaks which are something that in the residential area you hear it. Previous to this it wasn’t really a factor because it was on the other side of the parking lot. With that parking now 8 to 10 ft. away from my fence line, I have concerns over is that salary parking or are these people on break going to be able to go out and jam their stereos out 8 ft. from my fence line and approximately 30, 40 ft. from my house. That’s a concern. The vegetation that was planted out of sensitivity for the neighbors consists of about 5 to 10 arborvitaes spaced approximately 8 to 10 ft. apart. And then there’s, I believe some Yew-trees that are about this tall (gesturing height) right now. The benefits of any privacy are going to be in the next generation if that not real sufficient from the perspective of shielding the cars that are going to be parked there now. Henzi: How tall are they? Allegrina: The arborvitae, I believe, are 4 to 5 ft. and the Yew-trees are about the same. You know, typically when I see and I’m employed in the construction industry I’m a sales manager for a building supply company when I see privacy screens I’ll see trees usually on a 45 degree diagonal spacing in a line like this (gesturing). I’m not sure if the intent of this was just privacy or what, but it’s not cutting it from what I can see. I have no problems with this gentleman wanting to occupy the rest of this building. I’d rather the building be occupied than vacant as that end has been since Ethan Allen moved out, but I felt compelled to express my concerns regarding this even though they don’t pertain to the specific fence issue at hand but I wanted to still come in and have my say regarding this. I’m not averse to horse trading either in trade for further – the last thing I would want is a concrete screen wall. From my understanding these areas are exempt from that particular requirement anyway. I spoke to the gentleman from ordinance who told me that, but certainly more vegetation possibly a different type of fence. I went down to the end of Grantland and looked at the barbed wire fence they have back there. They erected the fence and they left the old one in. When I read the fence ordinance, it said double fence lines are not allowed because of the resulting vegetation and mess that ends up growing in between. So, you know, another issue to consider here. So, essentially those are my concerns. What’s going to be in the parking that is now 10 ft. from my property, is that going to be salaried only so just 8 to 5 activity or are they going to have anybody allowed to park there including at 9, 10 o’clock at night and having their stereos on? And then also the privacy issues of the fence line on the eastern boundary. Henzi: I’ll pose those two questions to the developer when he comes back. Allegrina: Thank you. Henzi: Does anybody else want to speak? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 37 of 56 November 29, 2011 Everhardt: Hi. My name is Donna Everhardt and I live at 38025 Amrhein. I moved in there in 1986. I’ve seen the area grow. I’m glad that they do occupy the building. I’m glad they’ve done all that, but I don’t see where a barbed wire fence is going to help anything or make it look any nicer or better there. I have never heard or seen of any issues with any problems with any break-ins or anything else like that going on, on my street. So, I don’t know, you know, I know they want to secure the area, but to me it’s secure because they do already have the gate that goes from the front of the building to the west side that the trucks do come out of after they’re loaded. So, I don’t see where adding a barbed wire fence to the front of the property would make it look any better or – I don’t know what they are trying to accomplish with that. And again, we don’t see the plans so we don’t really know what they want to do. Henzi: Do you want to take a look? Everhardt: Sure. Henzi: Come on up. Allegrina: May I as well? Henzi: Sure. Everhardt: Where are they – where are they wanting the barbed wire fence installed with this additional fence? Henzi: Mr. Allman, maybe you could come up and point it out? Allman: Sure. Everhardt: Our property is -- Allman: That’s the west side. Everhardt: Our property is the line. I guess our property isn’t included in the picture, but it’s that way. Allegrina: Where do you want to put -- Everhardt: Where do you want the fencing to go? Henzi: Take a look. Allman: Oh, yeah, -- Henzi: Come on over. Allman: See, what’s going to happen here is it will go this is – you’re over here, okay? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 38 of 56 November 29, 2011 Everhardt: Yes. Allman: And the fencing is going to go – it starts here, it comes across and comes back, up to the building and goes around. Everhardt: So, it’s going to be right through the middle of your parking lot. Allman: If this goes right, yeah, because that’s where the traffic is going to run. Everhardt: And I, I don’t see where that additional fencing is going to provide any more security other than for the people that work in there. I mean we don’t have a lot of traffic down that road. Henzi: To the speaker, just let Mr. Allman point it out and then you can go back to the podium. Everhardt: Okay, sure. Henzi: We have a reporter who is recording and she can’t identify whose talking. Allegrina: FedEx has a relationship with the people who they are shipping for. Allman: I mean we’re willing – we want to be good neighbors. So you’re next door -- Allegrina: I’m right here. Allman: One thing – you’re right there. Allegrina: Yeah. Allman: And so what if we did this? I mean so -- Allegrina: I would prefer that. Allman: What if we do this? This is more in the back and instead of this and then you could end up – these guys are almost 14 ft. tall. Allegrina: This would be -- Allman: You know, so these are big arborvitaes. Allegrina: That is -- Allman: And we can if we want, you know, we’ll bring the whole -- Allegrina: That would be beautiful. Allman: You know – City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 39 of 56 November 29, 2011 Henzi: Gentlemen, gentlemen, we can only have one person speaking. Everhardt: Yeah, come this way, please. Henzi: So now you know where the fence is we will resume with audience participation. So Mrs. Everhardt, go ahead. Everhardt: I still oppose to the fence and the barbed wire. That’s my opinion. Henzi: Okay. Everhardt: Thank you. Henzi: Anybody else want to speak for or against this project? I see no one else coming forward. Now, Mr. Allman, if you could speak in closing and then there were -- Aloe: Wait, wait. Henzi: Oh, I’m sorry. There’s a letter. Aloe: We have a letter of objection from Elaine Bielous [38101 Grantland St.] (letter was read). We have a letter of objection from Jesus Rivera [38025 Grantland St.] (letter was read). Henzi: Okay, Mr. Allman. Allman: Okay. Henzi: If you would like to address some of the points raised by the speakers and I will remind you of them hopefully. Pastor: Mr. Chair, I have one question. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: You know, I don’t see anywhere in here what the height of this fence is. Can you tell me the height? Allman: Yeah, it was 8 ft. with three strands of barbed wire which would make it 9 ft. Pastor: So essentially 9 ft. Allman: 9 ft. yeah. Pastor: Thank you. Henzi: Can we – I’m sorry, go ahead. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 40 of 56 November 29, 2011 Fisher: Can we clarify. You intend to have barbed wire down to the east side of the property along the side of the residential -- Allman: No. Fisher: No. Allman: No, no barbed wire there. This is only in front -- Fisher: Oh. Allman: -- this is only the new fence in front that’s all we’re talking about. Henzi: Can we start with the barbed wire. Are you willing to angle the fence or exchange for another foot? Allman: Absolutely. Henzi: Okay. Allman: At that point, we will do that. Henzi: Okay, so now we’re clear on that. Okay, go ahead. Allman: So I guess to sum up, you know, we believe granting the variance it will not aesthetically or essentially alter the character of the surrounding area. It is not materially detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. It won’t adversely affect or create nuisance conditions for adjacent properties. And will not adversely affect the purpose or objectives to the master plan. So, granting this variance will also do substantial justice not only to FedEx Ground but to the neighboring properties because the fence will be back, face Amrhein Road, be upscale black vinyl coated plus it will be attractive, harmonious, non-obtrusive with a new and existing landscape to be installed. Henzi: One of the speakers raised a couple questions for example, who will park along the east side of the property? Allman: Yeah, that’s going to be automobile parking again for the facility. Henzi: 24 hour, or 9 to 5, or something else? Allman: Well, you know, it’s a seasonal business so in the high season, Christmas season they may run three shifts. They go back to two shifts at times and they go to single at some times. So, it all depends on the volume. Henzi: But that’s employees – Allman: Those are employees, yeah, uh-huh. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 41 of 56 November 29, 2011 Henzi: -- those are folks who are going to stay there for 8 to 12 hours? Allman: Right. Henzi: Okay. His next question was what about - he has had problems with noise coming from cars. Allman: Well, I would hope the arborvitaes will help shield the noise. Henzi: Lastly he mentioned that there is a double fence on one portion of the property. Allman: You know, there is and we could actually take that out - John, have you seen a double fence? Knowles: I have not seen a double fence. Allman: It’s not a big portion, but we left an existing fence there and put a new fence right next to it and we can take out that existing fence. Henzi: Okay. And then while you were congregated around, you talked about changing the arborvitae along the east side of the property -- Allman: Yes. Henzi: -- to a more mature. Is there any other way you can describe it? I mean, is it 12 to 15 ft. Allman: Jack, the landscape architect. Knowles: Jack Knowles, 1435 Randolph, Detroit, 48226. Yeah, but what exists out there right now are actually white spruce, they’re 6 ft. tall in a row and then there’s some crabapples mixed in with them. What we have at the rear of the building is what Mr. Allman is talking about changing is there are roughly 12, I’d say 10 to 13 ft. high arborvitaes, very full, very mature and there’s I’m guessing they’re probably 8 or 10 of them Allman: There are 20 of them. Knowles: Are there 20 of them back there? Okay. Allman: There’s 20 right along the top. Knowles: That’s at the very rear kind of in the southeast corner of the property and so that’s what he’s talking about swapping out -- Allman: We’ll probably have to put in 40 or 50. Knowles: Yeah. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 42 of 56 November 29, 2011 Allman: We’ll bring those. Henzi: Can you give us a measurement, you know, like planted 4 ft. on center or 10 ft. on center. Knowles: I think what we have out there I believe they’re 5 to 6 ft. on center. You’ve got to remember these are sizeable plants going in. They’ve got some width to them. You’ve got to give them a little room to grow, but it’s as you can see from the one photo that he’s got there it’s a pretty immediate – Allman: It’s pretty – when they planted these I had them plant them closer – Knowles: Yeah, it’s about 5 or 6 ft. Allman: -- and they’re right up against each other. Knowles: So they’re automatically – and again, that was all done when we got approval for the parking expansion there on the east side, there was absolutely no requirement to do anything in the remainder of the green strip and what has been done there has all been at Mr. Allman’s own – trying to be a good neighbor, good citizen. Henzi: So the last question – did you have a question? Aloe: Yes, I’d like a better description of what you’re going to do on that east side where you’re abutting this neighbor who is very concerned. You’re going to run it down the east side the whole length of his yard and the yard that abuts his on Grantland? Knowles: Yes, from where the arborvitaes end in the southeast corner of the property, I’m guessing that’s probably 60 ft. north of the southeast corner from there all the way up to Amrhein right-a-way. Aloe: Okay, thank you. Henzi: The last question I had that we forgot to ask, why 8 or 9 ft. of fence why is 6 not high enough, 7’s not high enough it’s got to be 8 or 9? Allman: Again, it’s a FedEx requirement. Henzi: Thank you. Any other questions? Okay. Hearing none, we will close the Public Portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Duggan. Duggan: I will be in support. I was actually surprised that you didn’t have that much security at the building when I was driving it. Your neighbors seem to accept it so I will be in support. Henzi: Mrs. McCue. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 43 of 56 November 29, 2011 McCue: I agree, I am in support as well. Obviously FedEx has corporate standards. They know what their guidelines are, what their requirements are for security and I’m all in supporting that especially providing flexibility as far as what you’re going to do on that east side to make the neighbors happy. I will support. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: Well, I think there’s been a lot of thought and planning put into this project and obviously a lot of money. Greenery is not cheap. I like everything I see with the exception of the barbed wire. When I see barbed wire, I kind of associate it with a penal institution or a mental institution or something that shouldn’t be on Amrhein Road. If you could eliminate the barbed wire, I’d be perfectly happy with your plan. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: Well, I believe that there is a uniqueness and a hardship due to the nature of the FedEx business that makes it deserving of this fence. And with the agreements from the Petitioner to remove the double fencing, create a greenbelt for the neighbor to the east, no barbed wire, and the material that you showed us tonight, I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around this. I totally understand why you want it, I really do, but to have an 8 or 9 ft. fence – we’ve denied smaller fences in not quite the same situation but in other situations. Barbed wire, there is no way I would ever approve that. I think you’ve done a nice job I really do, but I don’t think I can support this. I want to, I really do, but I just can’t see it happening for me. Henzi: I will support with some conditions and I will tell you why. I think that the Petitioner and the residents have been very reasonable. I mean, this is an industrial zoned property it’s not abutting Whispering Willows and so I think that the residents were very reasonable in their request and we have accomplished a lot tonight. I would like to condition it for FedEx Ground only and this is why: I think that there is a uniqueness about that type of business. When I first saw this I thought well what’s different than, you know, Best Buy or one of our big box retailers. Well, there’s a lot different. This is a quiet secluded industrial zoned property where there are folks who can make out with a car load of a thousand I-pads probably within an hour and that would be detrimental to FedEx’s business. That’s unlike any business that I can think of in the city that is not in the logistics business. So, I will go along with the fence as proposed 8 ft. in height, black in color, no barbed wire, for FedEx only, remove the double fence, his offer 10 to 12 ft. arborvitae densely planted to the Petitioner’s discretion as suggested. I guess that’s it. So, the floor is open for a motion. Nolan: Are you saying we can have that extra foot? Henzi: I guess I could go either way. We will see if there’s a consensus. Allegrina: Can I ask a question? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 44 of 56 November 29, 2011 Henzi: Normally, we don’t but since we’ve had a lot of horse trading, I think that’s only fair. Allegrina: Correct me if I’m wrong. I’m not sure if it’s within your purview to speak for how FedEx runs their operation, but the thing that Donna expressed here as well as myself in terms of who will actually be parking there. You don’t really get into their comings and goings and this may be an issue we have to bring up with FedEx specifically, but the biggest concern is -- Henzi: Parking where? Allegrina: Parking along that fence line. That was previously about a 30 ft. wide greenbelt with a traffic lane. So the closest cars parking to that eastern properly line were probably 50 ft. away. Now they will be 8 to 10 ft. away. So if employees are parking there and I think you’re aware of the improved technology of car stereos speakers today those little bases can go probably a half mile. And if it’s a 9:00 at night, it will impact the neighborhood. I don’t know if that’s something you can bring up to FedEx, if you would, we certainly would appreciate it. Nolan: I most certainly will bring it up. Allegrina: And I was actually given the name of the operations person. Nolan: No, I will. I’ll mention it. Allegrina: Okay, because that’s our biggest thing. I mean the arborvitae are excellent in terms of attenuating sound et cetera, but those sounds will still get through. Nolan: We’ll plant those arborvitaes as close as we can. Allegrina: I would appreciate that. So, that’s all. Thank you. Henzi: Okay. The floor is open for a motion. Upon Motion by Aloe, supported by Sills, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-11-51: Covington Center LLC, 496 W. Ann Arbor Trail, Suite 103, Plymouth, MI 48170, on behalf of Lessee FedEx Ground, 38401 Amrhein Road, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to erect fencing with three strands of barbed wire within the established front yard setback, which is not allowed. The property is located on the south side of Amrhein (38401) between Newburg and Eckles, be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met due to the nature of FedEx Ground. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 45 of 56 November 29, 2011 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because this is a unique business that demands security in order to be able to provide a service to its clients. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on the neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because the Petitioner is providing a plan which he will implement to secure the property, but yet be fair to the neighboring properties. 4. The Board received no letters of approval and two 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 this property is “Industrial” under the Master Plan, and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That the fence be of the material that was presented to the Board. 2. That there be no barbed wire. 3. That any double fencing on the property will be removed. 4. That the fence be no more than 9 ft. high. 5. That the Petitioner will plant arborvitaes with a height of 10 to 13 ft. high and spaced 5 to 6 ft. apart on centers from the Amrhein right-of-way along the east property line to the existing 10 to 13 ft. tall arborvitaes. 6. That the fence will remain as long as FedEx Ground is the tenant. Henzi: This motion has been approved with conditions by Mrs. Aloe, supported by Mr. Sills, any discussion? Fisher: I thought he indicated from the Amrhein right-of-way down to the existing – Knowles: Yeah, I think what I was trying to say, where the existing plantings are is where we will extend to. Aloe: What it would a total then of 60 ft? Knowles: No, it’s not a total of 60 ft. I said that I believe starting from the southeast corner going north about 60 ft. is where the existing arborvitaes are. We are going to start at that point and then extend northward to the end of the newly planted materials. We are going to replace that newly planted material with the arborvitaes. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 46 of 56 November 29, 2011 Aloe: Okay. Thank you. And I tried to continue on because I didn’t quite understand the length of it either. Sills: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: May I address Mr. Podina? Podina: Yes, sir. Sills: Do we have a maximum height of fence that we have to live by in the City of Livonia? Podina: I really couldn’t tell you. I’ve seen 8 ft, 9 ft. fences around the city. I don’t know what the maximum height is what’s been granted in the past. Sills: I was just questioning whether there was a differential between residential and business fences that could be erected. Podina: I couldn’t answer that for sure. Aloe: Well, I offered the 9 ft. because they were willing to -- Sills: Eliminate the barbed wire and go the extra foot. Aloe: Right, right. Sills: That’s why I brought the question up whether there was a maximum height. Petitioner: And the steel company to the west does have an 8 ft. fence and a foot of barbed wire. Aloe: And it’s consistent with the neighboring fences. Petitioner: That’s our neighbor. Henzi: Any other discussion? Would you considered a condition made on FedEx Ground being the tenant? Aloe: Yes, this variance is good for FedEx ground only. Sills: I agree. Pastor: So if FedEx Ground moves out, he has to tear it down? Aloe: Pardon me? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 47 of 56 November 29, 2011 Pastor: If FedEx Ground moves out, he has to tear it down? They move out in five years and I don’t know how long the contract is, but if they move out in five years he has to tear down that fence. Petitioner: It is long term, a long term lease as much as they’re putting in. Like I said, they’re putting in over 10 million dollars -- Pastor: My point is once FedEx leaves, he has to tear down the fence. Petitioner: We’ll take the fence down. Henzi: Anything else? Please call the roll. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Aloe, Sills, Duggan, McCue, Henzi NAYS: Pastor ABSENT: Caramagno Henzi: The variance is granted with those, I counted six conditions. The fence material has to be as presented no barbed wire, remove the existing double fence on the property, fence height no greater than 9 ft, the landscape planting refer to the record. I don’t want to speak for Mr. Knowles again. I think you understand. And then it’s good for FedEx Ground as tenant. Thank you very much. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 48 of 56 November 29, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________________ (9:10 #1/3583) APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-11-52: John and Judy Girvan, 20015 Hubbard, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to construct an accessory building which is not allowed due to existing excess attached garage area. An accessory building is not allowed for an attached garage which is in excess of 720 sq. ft. for this parcel size. The property is located on the west side of Hubbard (20015) between Pembroke and Norfolk. Henzi: Mr. Podina, anything to add to this case? Podina: Not at this time. Henzi: Any questions for the inspection department? Aloe: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mrs. Aloe. Aloe: This says due to existing excess attached garage area excess. Did we give a variance on that? Podina: I don’t believe so. Aloe: Well, is this -- Fisher: Well, that may be a clumsy way of expressing the idea that you can have 720 sq. ft. of garage and an accessory building, but they have more than 720 sq. ft. of garage. That’s what Randy’s referring to as the excess of that garage variance. Aloe: When are they allowed to have one that’s attaches? Isn’t it 900? Sills: 900. Fisher: Yes, you can have 900 and no out building or you have 720 plus an out building. Aloe: So then my question without reading this, what is the existing square footage that we have on this three-car garage? Fisher: 860. Aloe: Okay, thank you. Henzi: Anything else? Will the Petitioner please come forward? Good evening. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 49 of 56 November 29, 2011 Petitioner: Good evening, my name is George Bogaert. I am with Tough Shed. I am here representing John and Judy Girvan of 20015 Hubbard. What we are requesting is construction of a 10 ft. x 16 ft. x 9 ft. wooden storage building. The Girvan’s are a four driver family and the difficulties that they are running into are they cannot store the cars in the garage due to lawn equipment. Just like all of us we all grow and we need more room. The lawn equipment they would like that put in the shed, of course, they have gas cans they want to get out of the garage, the fumes they say do seep into the house and they are quite strong. Also there is equipment – like a wheel barrel and other lawn equipment that is outside that’s not covered that they would like to get covered. It would make the property definitely look a lot better and not turn into a blight issue. The shed where we want to propose to put the shed there is another shed to the south of the variance and we would put this shed right in line with the shed and their shed I believe is around a 10 x 20 shed. Henzi: Any questions for the Petitioner? It’s not going to be for anything other then lawn equipment or things that they can’t store, you know, perhaps in the basement; is that right? Petitioner: That is correct, a riding mower obviously you cannot put in the basement. Snow blowers you cannot put in the basement. They would like to be able to obviously park their cars in the garage. The other difficulty we ran into the driveway itself is pretty narrow as you see on the site plan and any time you want to get something out, you have to move the car, move another car, move another car, you know, so on and so forth so that starts to become definitely a nuisance. And then having the lawn tractor and everything so close to the cars, you know, they can hit it, scratch the car so on and so forth. Henzi: Then is the photograph of an example shed the one that you’re going to build? Petitioner: I’m sorry? Henzi: There’s a photo of a shed in our packet is that the one that you’re going to build? Petitioner: That is correct. Henzi: Okay. Petitioner: But it’s not a metal shed or a plastic shed. We will put in a concrete slab and a rat wall. Put a wooden shed custom. It’s a very attractive looking building. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: In this shed are you providing any power for them out there? Petitioner: No, there will be no power in the shed. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 50 of 56 November 29, 2011 Pastor: No power and no heat? Petitioner: No power, no heat, no gas, no plumbing. Pastor: Okay. And the door on the shed is it wide enough to fit a car in? Petitioner: No, the door is only 6 ft. wide. Petitioner: Okay, thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? I hear none. Is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against this project? If so, come on up. Brewer: Yes, my name is Michelle Brewer. I reside at 20045 Hubbard. I did write in my charges against allowing this. They claim it’s going to be a garage or a building, but if it turns out to be a garage right now the way their existing garage has been built, it faces directly into our bedroom so any time a car pulls in and out of the garage, in and out of their driveway, it comes right past our bedrooms. We get the noise, the exhaust. If they’re going to be pulling in any vehicles towards the back, that’s going to allow for more noise, exhaust, lights, et cetera. We’ve had several discussions with our neighbors about this. Also because the swale was never properly installed and their building grade is 2 ft. above ours, right now our front lawn is our lake brewer we like to call it. And we had to put in a 6 to 8 ft. berm on the side of our house investing in 6 mature arborvitaes to block out some of the noise, the light and the exhaust from the existing garage as it is standing right now. So, we would be against this, I mean, they’re claiming it’s going to be a shed, but who’s to say with that size of shed in the future they will not turn it into another garage and start driving vehicles back there and creating more of what we have now. Henzi: Would you like to look at their plan? Have you ever seen it? Brewer: They’ve never discussed it with us. And listening to the gentleman that’s from Tough Shed it’s 10 x 16. I mean, that potentially could be turned into another garage. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Do you have a car that will fit in a 10 x 16 because I don’t? Michael Brewer: I got a motorcycle that will. Pastor: That’s true, but do you have an objection of someone putting a motorcycle back there like a lawn mover? Brewer: Well, yeah, because like I’m saying they’ve already got five cars and they’re coming in and out of their driveway right now. It’s not even 40, 50 ft. from our bedroom and we’ve got all – City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 51 of 56 November 29, 2011 Pastor: Well, you need to look at the plan -- Henzi: Let’s take a look at where it’s going to go. Brewer: Okay. Michael Brewer: Oh, I’m Michael Brewer. I’m her husband. Henzi: That’s your house and that’s where it’s going. Brewer: Right and this is where the driveway – as they come in whatever they bring in I don’t care what kind of equipment it is the way this is curved it lights – everything comes right to our house. Pastor: Yeah, we’re talking about the shed. We’re not talking about the garage. Brewer: Yeah, but in order to get back there this is the way they have to come in. Henzi: Well, let me show you a photograph of the shed. Brewer: Okay. I’d liked to see that please because – I shouldn’t talk without a microphone. Michael Brewer: You’re right in front of it. Brewer: They’ve never discussed any of that with us. Okay. Thank you. We’ve never been shown that. Michael Brewer: We’ve never seen anything about it. Aloe: Are you the neighbor that has the shed next door? Michael Brewer: No. Brewer: No, that’s not our house. We’re to the north. Aloe: Oh, okay. Henzi: Okay, anything else? Anything else, Mrs. Brewer? Brewer: Oh, no, I just – not at this time. Pastor: Now that you’ve seen the plan, do you still have the same objection because that shed is 138 ft. from the back of their house. Brewer: Yes, I understand that, but my whole point is, you know, when we were first told that it was going to be a garage, that was my objection because more cars coming past – I mean we’ve got a mess out there right now. I don’t know if any of you have City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 52 of 56 November 29, 2011 been by our house or this proposed, you know, thank God that we put the berm up otherwise our house would be flooded right now because of the elevation and where their current driveway is. Pastor: So my question was, now that you’ve seen what it is do you still have the same objection? Brewer: No, I don’t. Now, that I know it’s a shed and not a garage no, I don’t. Pastor: Thank you. And to the point of your flooding, you might want to talk to the City Engineer. Brewer: We have. Michael Brewer: We have but it’s like talking to that wall. Brewer: We’ve been calling them right from – really. Michael Brewer: I called when the first contractor was there -- Brewer: Speak into the mike. Michael Brewer: He can hear. Brewer: But she’s taping, Michael. Michael Brewer: I know it, she can hear, too, but anyways I called the Building Department. I left a message and there never was a returned call. They never called me back. When it was getting close to finishing time, I called again they said they have to have a swale. It’s supposed to be 3 ft. from the property line. It never occurred. It’s about a foot from the property line. They took part of our soil and moved it over to theirs because of the contractors and they blamed the guys that did the job. They put some trees in. They had a little berm there. They put a bunch of evergreens in. Now, all the dirt that was in the hole where the trees are is now in that swale. The 3 ft. from the property line is 1 ft. which – we put the berm in so we wouldn’t get the run off, but we’re still getting the run off. The soil was never returned to our side properly to give it that “V” thing. The other side is approximately 5 ft. from the fence line, the swale, on the south side. Brewer: Plus they do not have the elevation on the south side as we do on the north side. It’s literally 2 ft. above our existing property. Now, we’ve been there 14 years have never had a flood in our front yard and now we’ve got lake brewer in front yard and , I mean, we’re going to have ducks out there pretty soon. Michael Brewer: Also, I was wondering and I should have asked the Building Inspector or the engineer, but why wasn’t there a culvert put underneath their driveway so that you have water run off on either direction to the sewers? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 53 of 56 November 29, 2011 Brewer: And they were allowed to fill their culvert in in the front of their house where now instead of the run off going both ways, it comes over to ours because they have filled all theirs in with dirt. And we have addressed the Building Inspectors. Pastor: Okay, well, I do know that property very well and I know that whole subdivision floods because I live on the street right next to you. My neighbor’s backyard -- Brewer: We’ve been there 14 years it’s never flooded. Pastor: I’ve been there 18 years. My neighbor’s backyard floods all the time. Brewer: In the back of us, we have ducks back there, but never in the front. We have never had that and even the neighbors to the south of the existing building, they’ve never seen it flood like this either. Thank you for your time. Henzi: Anybody else who wants to speak for or against this project? Seeing no one coming forward, can you read the letters? Aloe: We have a letter of approval from no signature at [20020 Hubbard]. We have no objection. We have a letter of approval from Scott Ranta [20010 Mayfield](letter was read). We have an approval from Brenda Shaffer [19985 Hubbard]. And we have a letter of approval from Robert and Carolyn Zaske [20016 Hubbard](letter was read). Henzi: And then to Mr. and Mrs. Brewer, we have your letter in our packets so we will incorporate it into the record but we won’t read it out loud because you spoke. So to Mr. Bogaert, is there anything you would like to say in closing? Petitioner: Yeah, I just want to state that the shed it’s very small. It cannot be converted into a garage that was a concern and also I want to state that this hearing is strictly for the approval of a shed. Henzi: Thank you. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: What’s the elevation that you’re going to put the shed at, sir? Petitioner: I’m sorry? Pastor: How high above the existing soil are you putting the shed? Are you building up areas around to -- Petitioner: The area is fairly level. It looks like the concrete will probably about 4 to 6 inches above grade. Pastor: So, you’re not building anything up higher to push water away from it? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 54 of 56 November 29, 2011 Petitioner: No. Pastor: It’s going to be similar to what it is now? Petitioner: No, that’s correct. Henzi: Anything else? Okay. We’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mrs. McCue. McCue: I will support this action. It sounds like - I understand your concerns with the neighbor and I agree that some of that needs to be directed somewhere else, but on the whole I think the very fact that it is a shed that’s going to go back behind their house a distance and they have shown the necessity of why they wanted to do the shed. So, I will support. Henzi: Mr. Sills. Sills: I’ll also support it. I think the shed is put back far enough. I think the lot is large enough to handle the shed. I have a question. What’s the material of the shed going to be made of? Petitioner: The shed is 2 x 4 construction, the siding is called silverside. It’s engineered wooden siding and that resembles T-1-11 but it’s a treated siding. Sills: Does it require painting? Petitioner: It does require painting and the painting will be done by the homeowners to match their house. Sills: Thank you. Henzi: Mr. Aloe. Aloe: I also will be in support. This is a very large lot and I can understand the Petitioner needs a shed to keep lawn equipment in and it’s much better to keep it in a shed than having it stored outside under a tarp. So, I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I will be in support of this as well. This subdivision has a lot of sheds and a lot of second garages in it. I’d be willing to bet there’s almost 20 percent of the homes in that area have either a shed or a second garage on the back of their property. So, I don’t think it’s unreasonable. I do understand that their garage is large, but it sounds like they use it so I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Duggan. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 55 of 56 November 29, 2011 Duggan: I, too, will be in support. I can’t say it any better than it’s already been said, but yeah, I will be in support. Henzi: I, too, will be in support and I like the speakers don’t want to see a garage either so I will make some suggestion conditions. First, that the color matches the house and that it is built as presented. That there is no electrical, heat, or plumbing in the shed and that there is no hard surface, gravel or concrete leading from the existing structure to the proposed shed. The floor is open for a motion. Upon Motion by Aloe, supported by Pastor, it was: RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2011-11-52: John and Judy Girvan, 20015 Hubbard, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to construct an accessory building which is not allowed due to existing excess attached garage area. An accessory building is not allowed for an attached garage which is in excess of 720 sq. ft. for this parcel size. The property is located on the west side of Hubbard (20015) between Pembroke and Norfolk be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because this is a very large lot. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because in order to maintain a very large lot you need a lot of lawn equipment including oversized riding lawn mowers and tractors. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on the neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because this is consistent with the existing neighborhood. 4. The Board received four (4) letters of approval and one (1) letter 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 this property is classified “Low-density Residential” under the Master Plan, and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That the accessory building be built according to the plans as presented to the Board. 2. That the color and building materials match the existing home. 3. That there will be no electricity, heat, plumbing or hard surface drive to this building. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 56 of 56 November 29, 2011 4. There will be no additional buildings allowed on the property. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Aloe, Pastor, Duggan, McCue, Sills, Henzi NAYS: None ABSENT: Caramagno Henzi: The variance is granted with those conditions. You have to build as presented with the color to match the house. No electrical, heating, or plumbing. No hard surface to the shed and no additional outbuildings. Petitioner: I do have one question. Henzi: Yes. Petitioner: One question, I know you just said it will be built as plans submitted, but one difference the windows, obviously security reasons, the windows won’t be put on front of the shed. The two windows, I just wanted to make sure. Henzi: Does that bother anyone? Aloe: Fine with me. Henzi: Okay. Motion by Pastor, supported by Aloe, to approve the minutes of 10/25/11 ZBA meeting. All were in favor. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. __________________________ SAM CARAMAGNO, Secretary _________________________ MATTHEW HENZI, Chairman /hm