Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA MINTUES 2017-12-24 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY:OF LIVONIA MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JANUARY 24, 2017 A Special Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Livonia was held in the Gallery of the Livonia City Hall on Tuesday, January 24, 2017. MEMBERS PRESENT Craig Pastor, Vice Chairman James M. Baringhaus, Secretary Gregory G. Coppola Leo Neville Benjamin A. Schepis Timothy J. Klisz MEMBERS ABSENT: Matt Henzi OTHERS PRESENT: Mike Fisher, City Attorney Craig Hanosh, City Inspector Beth Niemczewski, CER-7224 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Henzi 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. Six (6) 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 6 people present in the audience. (7:00) City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 of 43 January 24, 2017 APPEAL CASE NO. 2017-01-02: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by DFCU Financial, Ogg Town Center, Dearborn, MI 48126, seeking to erect a wall sign, while maintaining two (2) existing ground signs, resulting in excess number of wall signs and wall sign area. The two (2) ground signs were granted a previous variance (2002-09-123) and are 20 sq. ft. each. u h Number of Wall Siena: Wall Sign Area: Allowed: None Allowed: 0 sq. ft. Proposed: One l:.-Iiu o l.),)o ed 40 sq, ft. Excess: One Excess: 40 sq. ft The properly is located on the south side of Seven Mile Road (37373), between Newburgh and Olen Eagles, Lot. No. 030-99-00013-003, OS Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 643, Section 18.50F(a) "Sign Regulations in Office Services Districts." Pastor: Is there anything additional for the Inspection Department? Hanosh: Not at this time, Mr. Chair. Pastor: Petitioner, please step forward. Winnick: Hello. My name in Mark Winnick, DFCU �- Pastor: Mark, you can have a seat if you would like. Winnick: Sure. Hello. My name is Mark Winnick, DFCU Financial, address its 400 Town Center Drive, Dearborn, Michigan, 48126. Pastor: Do you have anything to add to the petition? Winnick: I think, originally, we did submit 40 square feet -- I'm not sure haw it changed. We went through the process with the study committee and through Planning, and through all those meetings we did submit to 40 square feet. Pastor: Okay, thank you. Any questions? Baringhaus: Mr.. Chairman. You indicated in your proposal that there was going to be one sign that was going to be moved. Can you clarify which one that was. Winnick: Yes. It's near the entrance -- the main entrance to the -- the building. There's a small half wall, and there's building letters on that wall. It's a 1 x6 -- 6 square feet. You City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 of 43 January 24, 2017 might not even be able to see it sometimes in the summer time because the landscaping blocks it. Baringhaus: And then also, you're proposing to place a sign on the north west corner of the building. Winnick: Correct. Baringhaus: Can you describe that sign for us? Winnick: It would be a non-illuminated wall sign, aluminum letters. It would be our logo. It would say DFCU, and then the letters are roughly 28 inches for DFCU, and then underneath that would say Livonia, and those letters are roughly 6.5 inches. Then it would have a logo of our columns there. And that's what we would have at all the communities that we are in. Basically, it's DFCU and then the community name underneath that. Baringhaus: How long has the credit union been at that location? Winnick: Twenty years, 1996 we opened. Baringhaus: 1996, okay. And is that the original signage that's presently up there? Winnick: The two ground signs was originally Dearborn Federal Credit Union. In 2002, we went through a branding and a name change. In 2002 we had six branches, and we had five -- four in Dearborn, the Livonia one here, and then one in Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit. So we're not at 24 branches, and we knew we were going to expand, and we want to identify with the community. So every community we went into, we wanted to identify with that city's name or that township's name. And we came in for-- our variance was to replace the sign faces for those signs -- those ground signs that were there at that time, and we needed to go through the Planning and the Zoning because we were changing out the name on those faces. Baringhaus: Okay. Winnick: And we went to DFCU Financial with the community name -- from Dearborn Federal Credit Union and we changed our name at that time. Baringhaus: Okay. Thank you. Coppola: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Coppola. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 of 43 January.24, 2017 Coppola: So, Mr. Winnick, so they've been in this location for 20 years and you haven't had a wall sign. What's -- what's-- what precipitates the need of a wall sign, yeah? Winnick: We have a lot of members in the area here. We have over 200,000 members for DFCU Financial. In the area there, what we get from a lot of our members or people that become members, they kind of recognize the building a little that it's a financial institution, but the ground signs are placed in a way on Newburgh and on Seven Mile that a lot times that people don't see them. Both of those roads are fairly busy roads, and if they're traveling, they're not looking all the time. We're hoping that we can capture people that are traveling down Seven Mile going eastbound and will be able to catch that sign there, and anyone also, if they miss -- miss our ground sign on Newburgh traveling northbound, that they will see it as they come to the light. Because as they're at the light, they're more apt to be looking around at what's going on. When they're driving, they don't really see our ground signs. Coppola: Okay. Pastor: Any other questions? Neville: Mr. Chair. Just point of clarification. Because I know that City Council and Planning, one of the conditions was that they wanted the removal of an existing ground sign near the rear entrance to the property, correct? Winnick: The wall sign -- the existing wall sign. Neville: Well, I think the records reflect that it's actually a ground sign that you're -- Winnick: No, I think they -- I think when we discussed it, it was a wall sign. The 1 xE wall sign that we would remove. Hanosh: My me it's actually it's on -- it's on the -- it's on the deep wall coming off the build -- it's not on the building. So that's why it's classified as maybe ground sign? Winnick: Yeah. Hanosh: It's actually -- Coppola: Page 21 -- Hanosh: Page 21 in the -- Coppola: Page 21 there's a picture of it. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 of 43 January 24, 2017 Neville: Well, I was just looking at the -- at the resolutions passed by the City Council on October 25, 2016. The Planning Commission notes, and it clearly states the existing ground sign next to the credit union's rear entrance shall be removed. Winnick: Yeah, I think they're -- they're calling that -- I call it a wall sign because it's on a half wall, but it's considered a ground sign. Neville: Okay. I just want to make sure that we're talking about the same thing, correct? Winnick: Yeah. We're talking about that that sign, yes. Neville: Okay. I just want to make sure. All right. Thank you. Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Pastor: Yes. Baringhaus: Yeah, I'm looking at a photo on page 73, and I think the sign that is going to be removed is at the entrance that you mentioned, is the one in the summer that gets covered with a lot of foliage, shrubs, things like that, and it's not very visible. Winnick: Correct. Baringhaus: And just to clarify and to confirm Mr. Neville's point. That's the sign to be removed? Winnick: Correct. Baringhaus: Thank you. Pastor: Any other questions? Klisz: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Yes. Klisz: You're familiar with neighbor across the street, Lake Michigan Credit Union? Winnick: Yes. Klisz: And that they have come before us back in June? Winnick: Yes. Klisz: And you guys objected to their signs? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5 of 43 January 24, 2017 iS Winnick: I object -- I did not necessarily object. I objected -- what I said was -- I objected because there's only one or two boxes, either object or approve. If you read what I said I said I object, but I understand in certain cases it makes sense to have zoning variance approvals, and if you deem that that is a necessity, 1 do not object to that, as long as you keep it fair and consistent with other property owners. Klisz: And then we approved it, but we had reduced what they had requested in terms of size. So my question would be, if we were considering granting this, would a smaller sign -- let's say that we -- we approve the two signs, but in a smaller size, would that be -- would you have something in mind that would work still for your needs? Winnick: You know, the 40 square foot, I think, would show better. We looked at other options of what sizes of what we could put up there. When you start getting into small letters, you really don't see much. Now, granted the DFC's large, if we reduce the size, Livonia's going to get smaller on that sign, also. I think there's a benefit to having Livonia out there as big as you can get, also. When you look at what Lake Michigan got approval for, they get approval for 60 square feet of signage. Right now, we're at 40. We're asking for a variance of 40, which would take us to 80. We've got 5.5 acres there, we've got 400 feet of frontage on Newburgh, 400 feet of frontage on Seven Mile. Our west elevation is 57 feet. It's a 10,000 square foot building. It's extremely -- a much larger building than what Lake Michigan has, or property size, or presence on that corner. I really think the 40 square feet fits with what that building should have. Klisz: Thanks. Winnick: Thank you. Pastor: Any other questions? Hearing none, is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against this, please come forward. Seeing none, is there any letters? Baringhaus: We have four letters, Mr. Chairman. First letter is from Shelly and Shirley Moncrief, 37328 Kingsburn Court, (letter read). Letter from Ingrid Francis-Guest, 37061 Seven Mile, (letter read). Letter from Gerald Mazur, 37060 Clarita, (letter read). Letter from John and Mary Bahu, 37082 Clarita, (letter read). Pastor: Do you have anything else to say? Winnick: You know, on the objections, the--the signs that we have, the two ground signs and the proposed wall sign, neither of them face any residential. So I'd just throw that point out there. We've been there 20 years. I think we've been a really good neighbor to the subdivision behind us and around us there. I think we've been a good community neighbor. We have -- I've -- I've had discussions with several members of that City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6 of 43 January 24, 2017 neighborhood behind us. They'll ask if we can do something landscape wise, and we're always willing to do whatever we canto -- to help them out with that. So I'll just throw that out for a comment. Pastor: Thank you. I'll close the public portion of this and go to comments with Mr. -- I'm sorry Mr. Neville. Neville: Thank you, Mr. Chair. l think that the given the size of the -- the lot that we're talking about, and the fact that if had been across the street on the north, you would have been allowed a much greater signage. And I think with the removal of the sign that we discussed that we're talking about --- at least the one that's designated on page 21 of the plans — I find that it's a reasonable concession, and I would be in support of granting the variance to DFCU. Pastor: Mr. Schepis. Schepis: Yeah, I would also support this variance. It's a big piece of property and — and I think your point about having a lot of frontage on both Newburgh and Seven Mile is a good one. Also, as the city's perspective, l think a sign that says DFCU Livonia, I kind of like that. So I would support it. Pastor: Mr. Baringhaus Schepis: I'm sorry can I add one more thing? Pastor: I'm sorry. Schepis: I'm sorry. It is consistent with other variances we've granted in the area for similar— similar enterprises. Pastor: Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: I — I agree with the previous comments. I think it's a very fair exchange to remove the one sign and then replace with it the other sign. As well as the fact that it's not— it's not illuminated. I don't think that will be a distraction to the area. I think you've demonstrated concern for your neighbors by directing your existing signage away from those neighborhoods so it doesn't cause a disturbance. I'm familiar with the area. I've lived in it for more than 20 years. Beautiful building. It's an asset to the community. Very well maintained, and I'll support the variance. Pastor: Mr. Coppola. Winnick: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 7 of 43 January 24, 2017 Baringhaus: Yeah, I can — I can be in support of the request. I don't see this as — as an overwhelming request in regards to signage. Two ground signs, generally, for one property seems to be excessive. This is a large piece of property. So it's — it's not overly — overly done, and I actually think that the design on the sign looks — looks pretty good, and not being illuminated, I think, is a big positive — positive for me. I'm generally not a big fan of a bunch of signs, but I can be supportive of this. Pastor: Mr. Klisz. Klisz: I — I think 1 can get on board with this, as well. Again, it's a little big and there weren't signs there before that will be there now. Neighbors kind of seem to be split on it. But now that I've heard the comments of the rest of the Board as — as it relates to the fact that it's not illuminated, and it is a big building on a big lot, I would in support. Pastor: I will also be in support. I'm not a big proponent of a lot of signage. I'm usually the one that beats up the sign people due to the fact everybody wants more, and that necessarily that more is not always better. But I can — this is a large piece of property. The two monument signs, or ground signs, are quite far apart. So I can be in support of this. So would someone make a motion? Schepis: Mr. Chairman. Upon Motion by Schepis supported by Coppola, it was: RESOLVED:APPEAL CASE NO, 2097-09-02:An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by DFCU Financial, 400 Town Center, Dearborn, MI 48126, seeking to erect a wall sign, while maintaining two (2) existing ground signs, resulting in excess number of wall signs and wall sign area. The two (2) ground signs were granted a previous variance (2002-09-123) and are 20 sq. ft. each. Number of Wall Signs: Wall Sign Area: Allowed: None Allowed: 0 sq. ft. Proposed: One Proposed 40 sq. ft. Excess: One Excess: 40 sq. ft. The property is located on the south side of Seven Mile Road (37373), between Newburgh and Glen Eagles, Lot. No. 030-99-0003-003, OS Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50F(a) "Sign Regulations in Office Services Districts," be granted as amended for the following reasons and findings of fact: City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8 of 43 January 24, 2017 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because this is large property on two main roads with a need to identify the building. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because of the need for identification. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because it's consistent with other variances granted in the area on smaller lots. 4. The Board received 2 letters of approval and 2 objection letters from neighboring property owners. 5. The property is classified as "Office" in the Master Plan and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That it be constructed as presented here and that Petitioner comply with City Council Resolution 449-16 and Planning Commission Resolution 10-102-2016. 2. That the sign not be illuminated. 3. That the smaller ground sign on the site be removed. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Schepis, Neville, Klisz, Coppola, Pastor, Baringhaus NAYS: None ABSENT. Henzi City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 9 of 43 January 24, 2017 APPEAL CASE NO. 2017-01-06: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Livonia Industrial Develop., LLC, 23179 Telegraph, Southfield, MI 48003, on behalf of Lessee Lennox, 31659 Glendale, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to erect a wall sign, while maintaining an existing ground sign, resulting in a wall sign not allowed. In this zoning district, only a wall or ground sign is permitted. Number of Wall Signs: Wall Siqn Area: Allowed: Zero Allowed: 0 sq. ft. Proposed: One Proposed 28 sq. ft. Excess: One Excess: 28 sq. ft. The property is located on the south side of Glendale (31659), between Merriman and Westmore, Lot. No. 105-03-0007-001, M-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50I(a)1,2 "Sign Regulations for R- E and Industrial Districts." Pastor: Anything additional from the Building? Hanosh: Not at this time, Mr. Chair. Pastor: Thank you. Hi there. Brown: Hi, good evening. Pastor: Good evening. Brown: My name's Tim Brown. I'm from Aver Sign Company, representing the owners of 31659 Glendale. This is zoned industrial. And -- so they're proposing to install a wall sign that would be internally lit LED's. They have -- they're actually a new tenant to the property, Lennox. And -- there's an existing ground sign -- you may not even be able to see from the rendering. So that's one -- one reason they want more visibility with the wall sign. The ground sign's kind of obstructed from the landscaping and the tree out front. We actually have refaced that for them. So then we were told from the Building Department they're only allowed one or the other. So it wouldn't be a detriment to the neighborhood. There's a combination of wall and ground signs down that street, and it's not near residential or anything like that. So yeah really it's just to increase their visibility for identification. Pastor: Who is Parts Plus? Brown: That's Lennox Parts Plus. It's a -- they do parts for cars and different industrial manufacturing. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10 of 43 January 24, 2017 Pastor: They do parts for cars or parts for HVAC units? Because Lennox is -- Brown: Actually, I'm not sure. I think it's different-- different types of industrial parts. So I'm not sure exactly. There are customers -- so -- I work for Aver Signs. So I just know the sign business. Pastor: So you -- Coppola: So no one here representing the business-- Brown: I'm representing Lennox. Coppola: -- that actually is a member of the business? Brown: The -- Coppola: The owner or the manager or -- Brown: Yeah, the owner was unable to make it here. Under their consent, though, the owner had no objection to installing the wall sign. Pastor: Any questions? Schepis: Mr. Chairman. Pastor: Yes. Schepis: I think-- I don't want to get ahead of ourselves, but I think some of the questions probably relate to, do people come here to pick stuff up, or-- you know -- are you sending stuff out. I mean, that sort of depends on -- I think the need for a sign kind of depends on the nature of the business, and -- and -- Brown: Right. It is a warehouse -- Schepis: Yeah. Brown: -- and they have the office space up front. I'm not sure if they plan on adding an address to the front. So that's one reason they wanted to add -- like I said for identification purposes. I have some photos of the front of the building just to know how the sign out front isn't very visible the way it sits. Pastor: Any other questions? Coppola: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Mr. Coppola. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 11 of 43 January 24, 2017 Coppola: I've seen from the pictures that that have been submitted along with the application that the ground sign is obstructed by landscaping. But would it be better to just remove some of the landscaping? Brown: That's probably their plan. Coppola: Would that kind of resolve the issue of visibility of signage? Brown: Yeah, absolutely. And then I know that, obviously, for them to update that sign, or improve it, I think they would have to go through the Building Department to do that. Like I've said, we've just refaced it because they just moved in. So it's kind of -- before they moved in, they wanted to have some sort of identification out there. Coppola: So is it -- is -- is the pictures that were submitted, the sign has been refaced or is that just a rendition of what it would be like after it's been -- Brown: That what -- yeah that was just a rendering. Coppola: Okay. Brown: Actually, I don't have any updated photos, but -- because obviously right now the trees aren't as full, but-- Pastor: Wentl by there and seen that Parts Plus sign there. That's not a rendering. Brown: What's that? Pastor: That sign -- that face on that sign was already existing. Brown: The ground sign? Pastor: Yes. Brown: Right. Right. So -- Pastor: He asked you if it was a rendering and you said yes. Brown: Oh, I mean for the reface. It was just blank. It was just a black box cabinet. Pastor: Okay. Brown: So now they do have the Lennox Parts Plus logo in there. Pastor: Okay. Any other questions? Baringhaus: Yeah, Mr. Chairman. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 12 of 43 January 24, 2017 Pastor: Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: My preference would be to have the owner here because I'm curious to see what the nature of the business is, what their plans are, and what their rationale is for, really having the signage plan that they've put before us tonight. I think you've been placed in a very unfair position to have -- by having to speculate on what the intension are -- you know -- of your client, the owner of the business, regarding these signs. It would be my preference to just table this tonight, and then have the owner appear at a later date. Pastor: When we get to the motions, I think you can make that motion. Thank you. Any other questions? Is there anyone in the audience speaking -- wishing to speak about this? Come forward. Stieber: Yeah, I would just like to say -- Pastor: State your name, please. Stieber: Patrick Stieber. I would just like to add to the conversation that Lennox -- we've been a client -- they've been a client of ours in the past as well. It is HVAC parts distribution, and there are lots of-- not public people, but general contractors and HVAC guys that are traveling here to pick up parts. So it's not -- it's not for the everyday person. They can't sell directly to you or me, but it is a parts distribution for HVAC general contractors. Pastor: Thank you. Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Pastor. Yes. Baringhaus: Oh, I'm sorry, I had a question. Pastor: Patrick will you come back up, please? Baringhaus: Yeah, what type of business are you in? Stieber: I'm in the sign business, too, and I've done signs for them in the past. So I'm familiar with -- with who they are. Baringhaus: Okay. Thank you. Pastor: Okay, is there any other questions? Oh, do we have letters? Baringhaus: There are no letters. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 13 of 43 January 24, 2017 Pastor: There are no letters. Do you have -- you can make a final statement if you so choose. Brown: Just if you have any question for me. Pastor: Thank you. I'll close the public portion of this meeting, and start comments out with Mr. Schepis. Schepis: I would go with what Mr. Baringhaus said. I mean -- I don't think, philosophically, oppose to the sign, but I --you know-- I don't think we have all the facts before us tonight. And I'm not comfortable making a decision -- you know -- with that being the case. If it were up to me, we would table this and have it addressed again at a later date with -- with the owner here. We thank Patrick for -- for his comments, but I -- I -- I still think there are some facts missing. Pastor: Thank you. Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: Yes. 1 definitely feel that tabling this case would be appropriate until the owner can appear before us and answer our questions. I feel like there is a lot of or lack of information at this point, and then we don't have enough credible information to make a decision regarding this case. Pastor: Mr. Coppola. Coppola: Yeah, I'm -- I'm currently wouldn't be in support of -- of this application as it as it stands right now. I think there's a ground sign that if you move some -- some landscaping, it would be more than visible. That just seems to be sufficient from my perspective. I'm more than open to hearing from the owner. Actually, I'm a little disappointed. If it was that important to the owner, I would have assumed he would be here. So I'll be happy to support a tabling, but if-- if we were to move forward to vote, my vote would be no. Pastor: Mr. Klisz. Klisz: I agree. I think that -- and we've been fairly consistent with this, is that when we have questions and there's not an owner present to answer them, how can we proceed with any good faith. So I would support tabling this. Pastor: Mr. Neville. Neville: I have to echo it what my colleague, Mr. Coppola, had to state because as l look at the photographs by removing some of the landscaping around the ground sign, that to me would appear to provide better visibility. l just don't see the added value to the -- to City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 of 43 January 24, 2017 the sign that's -- the proposed wall sign, given its size, etcetera. So I would be willing to listen the owner and hear what --what -- what their thoughts and -- and -- and what their rationale on what the reasons are. And I would be in support of a tabling motion to provide that information. Pastor: I also would be in favor of a tabling motion. I don't care if it's an owner or a manager. If the manager has knowledge of why they want to, or need this sign. I don't care if it's either or, but we are not getting any of our questions answered. So I would definitely be in favor of tabling motion. I'll leave it up to the Board to make a motion. Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Pastor: Mr. Baringhaus. Upon Motion by Baringhaus and supported by Coppola, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2017-01-06:An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Livonia Industrial Develop., LLC, 23179 Telegraph, Southfield, MI 48003, on behalf of Lessee Lennox, 31659 Glendale, Livonia, MI 48150, seeking to erect a wall sign, while maintaining an existing ground sign, resulting in a wall sign not allowed. In this zoning district, only a wall or ground sign is permitted. Number of Wall Signs: Wall Sign Area: Allowed: Zero Allowed: 0 sq. ft. Proposed: One Proposed 28 sq. ft. Excess: One Excess: 28 sq. ft. The property is located on the south side of Glendale (31659), between Merriman and Westmore, Lot. No. 105-03-0007-001, M-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.501(a)1,2 "Sign Regulations for R- E and Industrial Districts," be tabled to allow the owner to be present to answer the Board's questions. ROLL CALL VOTE AYES: Pastor, Coppola, Klisz, Neville, Schepis, Baringhaus NAYS: None ABSENT: Henzi City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 of 43 January 24, 2017 Pastor: You've been tabled. You can come back, not come back. Have someone with you please. Brown: So would we reapply or -- Pastor: No. Tabling motion has actually saved you the application fee. So you go downstairs and talk to them about whenever you want your next meeting when you can get your manager or owner there. Brown: Thank you for your time. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 of 43 January 24, 2017 APPEAL CASE NO. 2017-09-07: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Schoolcraft College, 18600 Haggerty, Livonia, MI 48152, on behalf of Lessee Masco, 17450 College Parkway, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to erect two (2) wall signs, resulting in excess number of wall signs. Number of Wall Signs__ Allowed: One Proposed: Two Excess: One The property is located on the north side of College Parkway (17450), between Haggerty and east end. Lot. No. 189-99-0036-000, PO Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50G(a)2 "Sign Regulations for Professional Office Districts." Pastor: Mr. Fisher. Fisher: Yes, sir. Pastor: I have done with Schostak in the past, although I haven't done anything for the last couple years. Should I step away from this case? Fisher: Well, pretty much by the fact that you have raised the question. Pastor: Okay. Then, Mr. Coppola, do you want to take Mr. Baringhaus' position. Baringhaus: Okay. Can the representative of Schoolcraft College step forward, please? Johns: Sure. Good evening. Baringhaus: Please state your and address. Johns: Sure. My name's Dave Johns. I'm with Schostak Brothers. The address is 17800 Laurel Park Drive North, Suite 200C, Livonia. So I'm here this evening representing both, Schoolcraft College, 7 Delta LLC, who has the control of the property through the college, and the Masco Corporation who's seeking the variance this evening for the sign. Baringhaus: Okay. Can you give a brief description of the signage you're requesting? Johns: Yeah. The property that we're talking about this evening is the Masco Corporation headquarters building. It's currently under construction at the eleven-acre site on the east side of 1275, just north of Six Mile, at the south limits of the Schoolcraft College campus. If you're familiar with where the TCF building is currently at the end of College Parkway, the building for the Masco Corporation that is currently under construction. We're about City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 17 of 43 January 24, 2017 two months or so from being completed with the project. As part of our site plan approval process, we had before the Planning Commission and the City Council, back in July — August of 2015, we indicated that we were -- would have liked to pursue a second wall sign for the building. So consistent with those details that were submitted and approved by both Planning Commission and City Comm -- City Council at that, we're here this evening to seek that approval. The sign that we're proposing is an identical sign to the opposite side of the building. These signs are, basically, two-foot either inches tall by eleven feet long. They are located on the stairwell units at the east and west ends of the building. The one that we're here for the variance for is on the west end of the building. The east end has already been submitted under a sign permit, and it's our understanding that the permit has been granted by the City. The second sign that we're talking about - - the reason we're asking for is, obviously, for way finding within the Schoolcraft College campus. The site is accessible, both from the college campus and their ring road connections that exist all the way through the campus, from the north limits down for Seven Mile as well as from Haggerty Road. There's drive access points to each, this site as well as another road connection to the south that goes through the existing College Parkway connections. This site sits about 2000 feet back in from Haggerty Road, and obviously there's the drive connection out there. Although they anticipate a number of their visitors to this property may access at a number of different points. They felt that the way finding and the branding of the building on the east -- west end was essentially to the overall project. Baringhaus: Total signage on the property itself, it looks like from the illustration here there's one ground sign in front of the building. Johns: Yeah. There's one ground sign that's located on the very south limits of the ring road right by the connection to the College Parkway. That was extended up from adjacent to the TCF site. That ring road now ties on from where the road stopped there by TCF all the way in to the College Park campus. And that sign is roughly 18 inches tall lettering by, 1 believe, it's let me check here, by six feet. So that's the ground sign, and then obviously there's a masonry back panel to it that's not illuminated that is roughly 10 feet in length. Baringhaus: Okay. So the south side as well as the west side, and then the east side is a total of three? Johns: Correct. Baringhaus: Questions? Coppola: Mr. Chair. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 18 of 43 January 24, 2017 Baringhaus: Mr. Coppola. Coppola: So both of the wall signs would be illuminated? Johns: Yes. Coppola: And the ground sign will not be illuminated? Johns: No. The ground sign is illuminated as well. It's just that it has a masonry back panel behind it, and the masonry itself is not illuminated. Coppola: So the ground sign seems to -- to provide visibility of --- of -- of who's in the building from -- from the direction, I think it's the west side there. So why the duplication then of the wall sign and the ground sign? Johns: It really doesn't. The ground sign really provides identification. Their primary visitor entrance with the layout of this building is the south side of the building. The building is a three story building, but it has about a 14-foot grade differential between the north side of the building to the south side. So their primary entrance for the majority of their visitor's will obviously access from the south as the come in through College Parkway, but they know that there will be a number of other parties that will also access the site from the north, and you cannot see that ground sign at all from the north side of the site, or even west of the site. You can only see it at the point at which you come around the turn of the drive right in front. There's a large wetlands area there. If you've ever been back there, where the wetlands grow six to eight feet tall with the cattails. And so the ground sign really has more than just a branding element for them as their world headquarters. The building sign will really become the -- the way finding for primary purposes. Coppola: Okay. Thank you. Schepis: Mr. Chairman. Baringhaus: Mr. Schepis. Schepis: So do expect that with -- with this request this will be the complete application for signage on this building? Johns: Yeah. Yeah -- I mean -- with our other two signs, both the easterly wall sign and the ground sign, have both gone under permit and have been approved. Schepis: Okay. So you're not anticipating -- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 19 of 43 January 24, 2017 Johns: Nothing has been indicated to us. And since it's not been indicated to us, I don't anticipate they will become four. Schepis: Okay. Thank you. Johns: Yep. Baringhaus: I have one question. You indicated that all three signs were illuminated? Johns: Correct. Baringhaus: Are three signs on timers? Johns: Right now they plan on -- you know -- running them through a photo cell consideration. Coppola: So they'll be -- excuse me, Mr. Chair. Baringhaus: Please. Coppola: They'll be lit all night? Johns: They'll be lit all night, yep. Coppola: Okay. Baringhaus: Are there any other questions from the Board? Would you like to make a final statement? Johns: No. We're certainly-- Masco Corporation is excited to be a part of the community, and has been before a number of the committee boards on their own behalf. We're excited to, obviously, get them in there and get this building open, and have them become a citizen of Livonia. Baringhaus: Okay. Thank you very much. Are there any letters? Coppola: No letter. Baringhaus: Okay. No letters. With that, we'll open the comments up with Mr. Klisz. Klisz: Thank them for building their headquarters in Livonia. I remember when that was discussed and approved, and that's a very cool thing. This area is very windy and complex. I've driven through there just recently looking for something. It can get a little crazy in there, and it's a very large building. So the fact that --- and I think you explained it really well, why the need for actually having the signs on the two ends, the building with City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 20 of 43 January 24, 2017 the different elevations, and the ground sign is not quite the same thing. I can be in support of this. Baringhaus: Mr. Coppola. Coppola: Well, first of all, I echo Mr. Klisz's comments in regards to appreciating Masco support of Livonia and coming to town. Welcome and look forward to them being here for a very long time. Again, generally, not a big fan of lots of signs. And I would, generally, say not for it, particularly being facing the freeway. 1 probably wouldn't approve this, but I think the one that faces the freeway, the east facing, is important for your guests, which I assume will have--you'll have many guests. So they'll know where to get off the freeway to get to your building. So from that perspective, I can be supportive. If this was something that was further inside, wasn't facing the freeway, I would not have supported this, but I think from that perspective, 1 can be supportive. Baringhaus: Mr. Schepis. Schepis: I agree. I think this sign package makes sense. I mean, you've got 275 on one side and Haggerty on another, but Haggerty is -- I don't know how far it is away from your building, but it's a ways. Johns: It's about 2000 feet. Schepis: Two thousand feet. And there is some -- some winding roads that need to be traveled to get there. You know, I don't think the ground sign that's there now satisfies that--that requirement. And so I think it makes sense to have this on the building just for people to orient themselves on that campus. So I would support it. Baringhaus: Mr. Neville. Neville: Thank you. I guess it -- it's kind of puzzling to me, the utility to that ground sign. I don't know if it's branding because it seems like the wall signs would provide the most assistance for directing people there. if the comments are correct and the ground sign is just:--you know-- I'm not sure exactly what the --the benefit is. However, the -- the point being with respect to the variance is whether or not you should have one or two wall signs. I agree with my colleagues from the stand point of that 1 think that the wall signs on both ends of the building are a beneficial value, and that the absence of them would pose a hardship for the location of your building. So just, I guess if I'm not taking into consideration the ground signage here, I would support the variance of the two wall signs, if that makes sense. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 21 of 43 January 24, 2017 Baringhaus: I, too, I will support the variance as well. I think there was some very good points brought out. One is, the present location of the building, and the fact that it's on a parkway, which in Mr. Klisz's opinion, represents a very challenging navigation to get to that lot. The signs on each end of the building, I think, given the size of the building, they're widely spaced. They serve a purpose where they highlight the location of the building from the two distinct directions, as well. So based on that, I would be in support of the variance. Floor's open for a motion. Klisz: Mr. Chair. Baringhaus: Mr. Klisz. Upon Motion by Klisz supported by Coppola, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2017-01-07:An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Schoolcraft College, 18600 Haggerty, Livonia, MI 48152, on behalf of Lessee Masco, 17450 College Parkway, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to erect two (2) wall signs, resulting in excess number of wall signs. Number of Wall Signs; Allowed: One Proposed: Two Excess: One The property is located on the north side of College Parkway (17450), between Haggerty and east end. Lot. No. 189-99-0036-000, PO Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50G(a)2 "Sign Regulations for Professional Office Districts," be granted as amended for the following reasons and findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because of the size of the building and the distance from Haggerty Road and frontage on 1-275. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because of the difficulty in finding this building on the school grounds. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 22 of 43 January 24, 2017 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because it is part of a commercial area and not near any residential areas. 4. The Board received zero letters of approval and zero objection letters from neighboring property owners. 5. The property is classified as "Community Service/Public Land" in 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 sign be built as presented. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Klisz, Coppola, Baringhaus, Schepis, Neville NAYS: None ABSENT: Henzi, Pastor excused himself from this case due to conflict Baringhaus: Motion carried. Johns: Appreciate your consideration tonight. Baringhaus: Thank you very much. Johns: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 23 of 43 January 24, 2017 APPEAL CASE NO. 2017-09-08 An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by McDonalds Corporation 211538, P.O. Box 1000, Birmingham, Ml 48012, seeking to erect three (3) wall signs and a ground sign with electronic reader board, resulting in excess amount of wall signs, ground sign height and area. An electronic board on a ground sign is not allowed, because of the nonconforming signage being proposed. Number of Wall Signs: Ground Sign Height: Ground Sign Area: Allowed: One Allowed: 6 ft. Allowed: 30.0 sq. ft. Proposed: Three Proposed: 8 ft. Proposed: 47.5 sq. ft. Excess: Two Excess: 2 ft. Excess: 17.5 sq. ft. If an Electronic Message Board was Allowed: Permitted Area: 15 sq, ft. Proposed: 24 sq. ft. Excess: 9 sq. ft. The property is located on the south side of Ann Arbor Road (38015), between Ann Arbor Trail and West Chicago. Lot. No. 121-99-0013-001, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50H(a)1,2 and Section 18.50H(o), "Sign Regulations in C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts." Pastor: Anything from the Inspection's? Hanosh: Not at this time, Mr. Chair. Pastor: Will the Petitioner please step forward? Please state your name and address. Stieber: Good evening. Patrick Stieber, 33650 Giftos Drive, Clinton Township, Michigan. Pastor: Anything you want to add to this? Stieber: Yeah, sure. There's another McDonald's here in Livonia that's going through a MRP -- a major remodel project to update one of their McDonald's stores. So they're proposing to redo the entire building. Along with doing the entire building entails updating their signage to their new sign standards and logos. As you can, we're proposing here - - it's -- it's three signs. We've already submitted for the permit for the McDonald's lettering. That would be the 32.83 square foot sign. And the additional signs on top of that are the arch logos. Getting the branding of the arch onto the building is a important thing for the identification of the building. The way they've designed these buildings with these brand walls, you can see where they're putting these arch logos. In this case here with the way that this building is set up and the angle to the building to road, it's kind of a unique situation how that angle fronts Ann Arbor Road. So what they're trying to do is get this arch on the west elevation, which would be just adjacent to that McDonald's logo City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 24 of 43 January 24, 2017 that's going to be on the angled wall. That will kind of face to the south west, kind of. And the second arch logo would be the arch logo on the side elevation of the building, which is basically becomes the main entrance into that building, and it's kind of directing the customers into that area with this arch logo on that wall. We feel that what's being proposed is that it fits in well with the architecture of the building. The size of these signs are rather small. Just to point out that, we're allowed 66 square feet of signage, and what we're proposing with these three signs is only 60.83 square feet. And you know, I always like to throw out there the fact that—you know— those arches —the actual square foot of those is much less. It's actually only four. You know — and 1 know those guys don't see it. They box everything. I know that. But just look at all the blank wall space in there on these, and you can see how — how small they are fitting in on these walls. But basically that's what we're asking for there. It's a very similar sign package that they're doing in lots of other cities. In fact, we've done some here in Livonia, as well. So I — I don't know if you guys want to talk about wall signage or first, or if you want to move on to the road sign at this time, as well? Pastor: We can talk about it all because we have to. Stieber: All right. Okay. So moving on, part of the upgrade of the signage is to upgrade the road sign, as well. In this case, they currently have a McDonald's old style road sign arch with the red section, and then underneath that they've got the manual reader board. So obviously, the new design that they've been doing is the shared combo sign with the arch logo with the digital message center to get rid of the manual reader boards. This is their new design style for—for signage. What we proposed here — a little bit bigger than what code allows, but splitting the ratios between the digital board and the logo equally to kind of help meet that requirement of ratio from sign to digital board. What we're proposing, we feel, is not excessive. It definitely will serve the purpose of giving them the identification they need for traffic flows on Ann Arbor Road. Getting the sign up off the ground a little bit with the digital board part of it will help get it the better visibility it needs and keep the snow and ice away from the sign in the winter months. This sign is the exact same sign we that we did at the last location on Middlebelt Road, where we worked with the City to come up with this design to help me the design standards of what they're looking for with the City. So we actually took that exact same design that the Board approved at that location and brought it back here to — to this location, as well. We felt that there wouldn't be any detrimental effects. There's currently an existing sign. This sign will actually be smaller than what's there now, less square footage wise, what we're proposing. So we are even reducing from what's there now. But due to the setback of the building, the ingress and egress off Ann Arbor Road, and then also traffic's coming off of Ann Arbor Trail, we feel like there is a hardship of lack of identification due to the angle of the building and the ingress and egress into the property. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 25 of 43 January 24, 2017 Pastor: Is that it? Stieber: That's it. Pastor: So let's start with the reader board, I suppose. The ordinance does not allow us to give a reader if your over on your signs — if you're not within compliance with your signs. How do we get around that by your standards because you're asking for, number of wall signs -- three, you're allowed one. Stieber: One. Pastor: Yep. Ground sign, allowed six foot, you're asking for eight foot. Ground sign area is excess of by seventeen feet. So where are you in compliance with any of this? Stieber: As far as — as far as the road sign? Pastor: As far as us not being able to give you a reader board because our ordinance says, unless you're in compliance with all the signage — Mr. Fisher, am I correct on this? Fisher: Absolutely correct. Pastor: Unless you're in compliance with all signage, you cannot have a reader board — electronic reader board. What I'm seeing in from of me is none of your signs are in compliance. Stieber: Okay. So if the building signage was in compliance, meaning that we met the square footage requirement and number of signs, and then we could have a variance for Pastor: We could allow you to have a reader — an electronic reader board. Is that, Mr. Fisher, am I explaining that correctly? Stieber: Because we're still asking for a variance — Fisher: You also have to have a compliant ground sign, yes. Stieber: But we've — so — but we have gotten a variance in the past for build — an additional building sign and this same ground sign, same signs. Coppola: Where? Pastor: You know— I actually don't remember that case, and I've been here a long time. Maybe that was one I was missing, or maybe I'm just failing to remember it. But you're saying a additional ground and you're asking for two additional wall signs — excuse me -- wall signs. So — City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 26 of 43 January 24, 2017 Stieber: Right. And —and I — and I — I —the excessive number thing is --- I get it. They're spreading it apart on the building. They're way below the square — they're below the square footage, but— you know— if getting that arch on the building at some point is very important to them to have that identification — it's a brand new style building, and that arch is what people want to see. I think, at least letting them have one would —would definitely help their situation in getting that identification, but if the Board — if — if — if what we're saying is that any variance, at all, for building signs doesn't allow the ground sign to be approved, that's — that's something that I wasn't aware of. Because then, why are we asking for a variance —why would they even let us ask for a variance for wall signage? Pastor: Because you're also asking for other—you're also for wall signage. Then you're asking for the reader board. Stieber: Right. But if— but if they won't allow the reader board — if the other signs aren't complying, why would they allow us a variance to come here for that? I'm confused by that. Fisher: Well, if I may address this. Pastor: Thank you. Fisher: The ordinance is designed to make you choose. You either choose to have totally compliant signage and an electronic sign, or an electronic — or whatever sign variances you want and no electronic sign. Stieber: Got you. Got you. So if we — if we just say, okay no variance for building signs, that — that's what we're looking if to get — if we didn't ask for any variance for a building sign, then coming to the Board for a variance for the ground sign would be possible then. Pastor: Yes. Stieber: So why wouldn't—why didn't they tell us that when we — Coppola: You can ask a variance for anything. Hanosh: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Yes. Hanosh: If he was compliant on all of his building signs and he was compliant with the ground sign, such as the size, the height and everything, we could issue it without going through the Board. Coppola: Right. That's —that's the point. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 27 of 43 January 24, 2017 Hanosh: He's at the Board for excessive signs on the building, which doesn't allow for the ground sign, and then on top that, he's increasing the size. So he's — he's a double whammy. Pastor: Right. Fisher: Sort of multiple whammy, actually. Hanosh: Yes. Coppola: Technical term. Stieber: So you'd have to issue — if a variance was issued for the building signs, then it would be compliant to then get a variance for— Pastor: No. It would not be compliant. A variance is a variance. Stieber: Right. Okay. So there's no — there's no way for you guys to approve it then? From what I'm —the way I'm hearing it. Pastor: We can approve either your— your building signs, or you can be compliant with your building signs, and we give you a variance for the electronic reader board. So if we can get passed this point just a little bit. When I was driving around the property today, you have in and out signs, big arches on the signs. Are you keeping those? Stieber: You know what, I don't think that's part of any construction to touch those. I would assume they're staying then. l haven't heard anything about any directional sign changes. Pastor: Okay. Because — and I'm not sure — would that be considered signage if that's right at the road side and it's got the golden arches right on top of the thank you sign and enter sign? Fisher: I don't see there would be any reason why not. Stieber: Exit and enter, yeah. Hanosh: It's a directional sign. Fisher: Yeah. Pastor: But it's also got the golden arches right on top of it. Hanosh: Correct. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 28 of 43 January 24, 2017 Pastor: My next question, or my last question, possibly. In the— in the window—the front window of this restaurant, once again, big golden arches. Stieber: Right. That's going away. Pastor: Been there for years. Stieber: Right. And that's part of this new design concept. Because all the old stores had that. They actually had that on all three windows on all three sides of the building, and it was their way of double dipping on signage, I think obviously. Pastor: Of course. Stieber: Because they put them on second surface behind the glass. But, yeah, that stuff goes away for sure. Pastor: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions. Neville: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Yes, Mr. Neville. Neville: So the last time you were before, whether it was the ZBA or the City, you indicated that there was a remodel on many of those stores. Does that include Middlebelt and Five Mile? Stieber: Yes. Neville: Okay. Now is there — and I haven't been there in a while, but do you have a reader board sign there, as well? Stieber: This exact same sign was approved by the Variance Board. The exact same monument. Same height. Same width. Same ratio. We actually came to the Board and changed the ratio to split the sign in half. Neville: Okay. Stieber: Because usually the digital board's a little bit bigger than the ID section. Neville: Okay. And have the same number of wall signs and — so it was almost a — or was it an identical plan to what you have — Stieber: This one's a little bit different as far as the building itself. Neville: Okay. In what respect? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 29 of 43 January 24, 2017 Stieber: Just the layout of it. If you look at the overhead sight plan view, if you guys have that. The shape of this building is very odd for a McDonald's. The way that they had to configure this to — you know — get the drive thru flows in there. It's got a weird angle cut into the corner of it. So this building is definitely a little bit different. Neville: Is this -- Stieber: This is — Neville: property smaller or larger? It's looks a little bit bigger than the one that was on Middlebelt. Because I know the one on Middlebelt is — all little more north and south versus depth is here -- Stieber: Right. Neville: -- east in front and north and south. But it seems like the configuration at the Middlebelt store is, perhaps, different of what you present here. Stieber: Right. Neville: So at this one — Stieber: I think the one — I think the one down, actually, on Farming — Farmington would be a better example of this store. Now that sign also — the variance approved a digital board for that one as well. Neville: Okay. Stieber: But that was a more vertical design with the arches on top and the reader board below it. And then, obviously, that was, I think, probably five years ago we did that one. It was one of the first reimage ones in the city. Since then, they changed the — the road sign design to this horizontal, stacking them next to each other. And that one over there, they got approved for two signs. I don't know if the code changed since that one, as well, to not allow the variance for the --for the ground sign. Because we had to get the same variance at that, as well. Pastor: As 1 remember on that one, though, we made you guys cut back on your signage. Stieber: We did. We got rid of one of the signs — one of the building signs on the side. Pastor: Did that make you within compliance? l can't remember. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 30 of 43 January 24, 2017 Stieber: Well, not with number of signs because we still had the arch on the front with the —with the McDonald's lettering. So it's definitely still two signs. Let me take a quick look here. Schepis: I mean — isn't it possible they were allowed a different amount of signs on that site because it was — Pastor: I don't recall the amounts or anything. It is possible. Stieber: Now it's — it's just one wall sign. It's only— it doesn't front two roads or anything. So it would have been one building, one ground. Pastor: I also remember they had a representative from McDonald's here at the time. Stieber: What's that? Pastor: I said, I also remember they had a representative from McDonald's. Stieber: Oh, yeah. Paul Hammer's store on Farmington. Pastor: Yeah. Wasn't his name Ziggy or something like that, the representative. Stieber: Iggy wasn't at that— yeah Iggy. Pastor: Iggy. Yeah that was him. Stieber: Yeah. He — he actually isn't with McDonald's anymore. They're a little short staffed in that area right now. Fisher: Mr. Chair, I think we've had a number of McDonald's stores —we've had the one on Farmington Road, that he is referring to, I think is one that had the sign high in the sky, and they gave that up to get the electronic sign they have now. Stieber: Correct. Fisher: The one at Middlebelt and Five, I don't think — I don't remember them having an electronic sign at all, but I could be wrong about that. Pastor: I don't remember that one either. Fisher: The — the one —the one that has the electronic sign, I think you're talking about, is Middlebelt down by Plymouth. Stieber: Middle — yeah, you're right, Middlebelt and Plymouth. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 31 of 43 January 24, 2017 Fisher: Candidly, that variance was a mistake, I think. I mean—those guys are in violation every time I drive by that sign. It makes me wonder if they know the rules, or they're just trying to see if they get caught. Stieber: Well, as far as — Fisher: The Livonia rules are for those electronic signs are things like you have to have a constant image for five seconds, you can't do any scrolling, and things like that. They do that all the time. Stieber: If there's issues like that, they need — they need to know about it. You should have code enforcement go by there. There's no doubt. But this is — I'm looking at the one —the one from Farmington, we sat here on that meeting. We got rid of the side sign over the side entrance, and got the two — the arch logo on the front with the McDonald's letters, and the road sign — the digital board in the front. But we did have that playing card in our pocket on that one with that big sign that they had. You're right about that. Fisher: Right. Stieber: That one — that situation — because they had a 250 square foot pylon sign like 25 feet tall there. Pastor: Is there any other questions? Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Pastor: Yes, Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: Looking at the diagrams, the two other additional McDonald's arches signs, one is on each side of the building. Is that correct? Stieber: Correct. One is on — the — the drawing is kind of confusing. Maybe I can kind of help — help you guys understand this. Do you guys have the site — site plan overhead view? Coppola: Yes. Stieber: And the McDonald's lettering is going cur— like currently where it is now on that angle. You guys can all take a look at this. The McDonald's lettering here, the M logo here, and there's the side elevation. You can see these little build out. They call them their tower walls — branding walls. So it would an arch logo there, arch logo there, McDonald's logo here. See that? Arch logo there — McDonald's there. And on this drawing, it's hard to see this. You can kind of see that that's kind of on an angle right there, the way that that lettering isn't straight. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 32 of 43 January 24, 2017 Schepis: And then there's another here. Stieber: Right — right there. Yep. Right around the corner. (Petitioner approaches the Board for explanation) Stieber: It's kind of — like I said — here's the angle. It starts here, which would be this area, and then this the sign. Yep, that's the ground sign right there. Baringhaus: Okay. Thank you. Stieber: But, back to that conversation about that side sign, obviously that's the sign they feel that they need to — because of the parking and the traffic going in that door. But the other two signs, in my eyes, are the ones that are the important ones. You get the arch branding on the building and the McDonald's lettering, and giving up that one over the entrance, in my eyes, is I don't see any issue with that because it's set back further. It's not going to get—the only visibility it's going to get them is from the parking lot, and that's what they're looking for, but—you know— and the way that everybody— you know—they all look at this, look at small these signs are. You know—if you put them all three together, they'd stili have — be able to have another McDonald's letters set next to that— you know — square footage wise. Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Pastor. Yes. Baringhaus: I apologize. You may have mentioned this earlier, but the two golden arches signs -- Stieber: Yeah. Baringhaus: -- those illuminated or not illuminated? Stieber: They are. They are LED illuminated, yep. Baringhaus: They are okay. Okay. Thank you. Pastor: Anybody else? So, Pat, so we're all clear, you're looking for the — I'm going to call it the long arch above the building, the M on the side and the front of the building, the M over the front doors, and the McDonald's up towards the front of the building, and if you can get it, you're looking for a LED monument sign. Am I correct on all of that? Stieber: Correct. Yep. Pastor: Thank you. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 33 of 43 January 24, 2017 Stieber: But out of those signs, the least important one that I think they can live without is that—that south — south — Pastor: The one over the front doors. Stieber: Yeah. Which is really the side door. Yeah, whatever you want to call it. And that's where most of the traffic — Pastor: raffic —Pastor: That's the main — that's the main doors. Stieber: Yeah. Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Pastor: Yes. Baringhaus: Going back to the electronic message board, and the dimension of it, the permitted area is 15 square feet, and you're requesting 24 square feet. Given the location of that sign, it's in a fairly wide open unobstructed area, which is clearly visible to traffic and — you know— people in the surrounding are. Why the additional —why the additional square footage? Stieber: Visibility for sure. Visibility at that size. With the way that they had to design this thing with the ratio, and it's like a square now — square and square. So they — they designed it to — when we did this the last time to help comply more with the ratio of the code, and when you box and square that reader board out like that, there's some wasted space on it. Because they're better designed to be longer. So yes, it is more square footage, but when you —when you actually have to design the board more like a square, you actually lose some visibility to run your copy on it. So it had to be a little bit smaller on the board because you're only going to be reading 4 feet of the reader board. But anyway, that size at what's being proposed here with traffic flows — there's been lots of studies done on it and size of lettering, having it at this size, minimum size, is what they need to get the message out safely to the customers that are traveling by. Baringhaus: But I mean, generally, that business has been there for a number of years. Stieber: Oh yeah. Baringhaus: It's McDonald's. Stieber: Oh yeah. Baringhaus: It's an established brand identity, very recognizable worldwide. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 34 of 43 January 24, 2017 Stieber: Right. Right, and that's part of the reason — Baringhaus: You really think that needs an additional nine feet of signage, despite all that — those advantages that — Stieber: Yeah. To be honest with you, the way that these buildings look after they're remodeled, they look nothing like the McDonald's that you and I are used to seeing since we were — you know— kids. It's a completely different building design, and that's part of the reason why it's so important to them to get that arch logo on the building somewhere, as well, with the lettering. But, yeah, I hear what you're saying. Everybody knows that McDonald's, but not everybody does, and not only do they all know, but they're also when they put things on that digital -- digital board about special or things that they're running for the seasons, and that gets the message to the local consumers as well. So even local consumers benefit by it. Baringhaus: Well given the area -- I mean -- some of the surrounding businesses do have -- you know -- some ground signage, but nothing quite as large or is on that scale. And you still feel that's justified given the history, the brand name of McDonald's? Stieber: Yeah, for sure. The size in -- in my experience and my expertise in the sign business, it's not excessive at all for what they're proposing here. Baringhaus: Thank you. Pastor: Pat, why are your -- your elevations on page 121 different than the elevations at the beginning of our sheets here -- and I got to find it. The ones on 121 does not show that long arch. Stieber: You lost me there, man. Pastor: On page 121 of our -- I'm sorry, we have these tablets. You have an elevation that does not show that long arch, but on some of the other elevations, it does. Let me find it. Stieber: This right here? Is that what he's talking about? Fisher: 121 is the drawing with the -- Pastor: And if you go to page 19, on the front of the building have the long arch. Stieber: Let me see what you're looking at. Pastor: Here's your long arch, right here, right? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 35 of 43 January 24, 2017 Stieber: Oh, no. Pastor: Yeah. Oh, yeah. That's what it shows. And I asked you if that's what you want, and you said yes. Stieber: No. That's not it at all. Nope. Where's that drawing from? Pastor: From you guys, somewhere. I mean -- that's the store. No question, that's the store. Stieber: That's not on -- Pastor: The 119 -- or whatever it is, is these elevations. Stieber: Is this -- is this the plan for the variance meeting, or is this -- Pastor: This all the information you guys shipped us -- or somebody shipped us. Stieber: Yeah, because this design does not -- does not have that in it at all. Pastor: That's why when I asked you earlier -- Stieber: Because when you were saying about the arch -- that third arch -- Pastor: I said -- I said the long arch, and that's why -- Stieber: Oh, okay. Yeah -- Pastor: And I feel like -- Hanosh: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Yes. Hanosh: It's more of a building design compared to a signage, such as -- Pastor: It's not on his sheet -- Stieber: But that's not -- but that's not on there. Pastor: -- that's why I'm asking. Hanosh: Oh. Pastor: So this is the one that you got. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 36 of 43 January 24, 2017 Stieber: Yeah. That's -- okay. So that would be the -- the side. There's the angle of the front right there. This is the extension of that. And then that would be this one right here. I don't know where those -- I don't have any of that in my drawings. I wonder if the City had a copy of that drawing from like a -- and earlier -- Pastor: Well, it's that store. I mean, it's definitely that store, and it's definitely -- Stieber: Right. No, I'm not saying it's not, but I don't even have a copy of that. So I'm wondering -- Pastor: It's definitely a new style. Stieber: And it doesn't -- there's no architecture. Pastor: It's got very similar -- Stieber: Right. And it's completely -- completely different. And this -- this was put together by somebody at Livonia because that's not what we submitted. Pastor: You didn't submit that? Stieber: No. We submitted these elevations. Pastor: You didn't submit there, or there, or there? Stieber: No. I wonder if that's the Planners or somebody that helped -- you know -- put the presentation together for you guys. Coppola: Chair, maybe that was, perhaps, what -- it's part of the Planning Commission's package back in 2015. Fisher: You don't think they -- they didn't review signage. Coppola: 1 understand that, but that didn't mean that they didn't have elevations in their package. Pastor: Right. I would agree with that. I guess my questions is, why are they given us two sets of elevations? Coppola: Well, again, this may have been included in part of the Planning Commission package that they included as part of our reviews. Fisher: Yeah, but why then does it have the Treasurer stamp on it? That doesn't make any sense. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 37 of 43 January 24, 2017 Stieber: I wouldn't have a Treasurer stamp on something. (Discussion amongst the Board Members) Stieber: So it's even less signs than you thought, way less. Pastor: Good recovery, Pat. Okay, there's no on in the audience. So any letters? Baringhaus: We have no letters. Pastor: No letters. Stieber: No objections? Pastor: You haven't beard that part yet. Do you have a final statement? Stieber: Yeah. I would just like to reiterate that -- you know -- looking at the building signs as a whole and the size of them we're — we're well under the allowable square footage for wall signage. The signs fit well within the building. I'm willing to, even -- you know -- eliminate that second arch from the request for the building signs. I know that that would make you guys a lot more happy to -- to not even have to deal with that sign. Then it would just be the -- the one arch logo that we're asking for, and then we'd just be way under the square footage of the -- of what's allowed for building signage. And same thing with the road sign. You know -- the only other thing I could say is that -- you know -- I think that they could get away with maybe lowering the sign one -- to seven feet instead of eight, and they'd still be able to get the sign up off the ground and keep the snow and ice away from it. l mean -- eight foot is definitely better than -- you know. We just took this same design from the last one that was approved because a lot of work went into the design of the last one that got approved by the Board. So we figured that coming in with the same sign, with the same specs, after going through that stuff, would kind of be a no brainer. Pastor: Okay. I'll close the public portion of this meeting, and start our comments out with Mr. Coppola. Coppola: Thank you, Mr. Chair. First of all, I mean, the redesign looks -- looks really nice compared to -- to what's there. It's a substantial improvement. And really, from my perspective, there was a significant reduction on the building itself of what I'll call signage. That being said, l think I'd be willing to have some level of compromise, but one of-- one of my questions is you keep stating about something that's already been approved that's exactly like this. And obviously that happened before my time. I've been on the Board, what about a year and a half, maybe a little bit longer. I -- I guess I'd -- I'd like to see that, but in -- in -- at this point, we haven't seen that. We can go City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 38 of 43 January 24, 2017 back -- we can table it and look at that. But but if-- if you wanted to move forward at this point, instead of waiting, what I would probably willing to find acceptable is, as you suggested, to -- to remove the south elevation M, and to be honest with you, I wouldn't be opposed. You've still got that sign square footage. You can make the McDonald's a little bigger if you really wanted to, but I'm assuming that's probably the standard size that -- that you're doing. Stieber: Yeah. Coppola: But then -- then as you go into the -- into into the ground sign, I'm -- I'm willing to allow the additional sign, but I would want -- I would want everything on the ground sign to comply with what normally we would want on a ground sign. In other words, six-foot height, no longer -- no bigger than the thirty square feet. And I'm willing to allow the -- the reader board, but it would be limited to the fifteen square feet that that is normally permitted if we had conforming signage on the building. So I don't if that made sense. I did that last time and I think I confused everybody, but hopefully that made sense. Pastor: Mr. Klisz. Klisz: I agree. That's actually the thought I was having is that take away one sign, reduce the ground sign to something that's passable to the Board, or the other alternative would be, I would like to see the one that was approved, and how big is it. Is it -- is it a full size as presented here, and therefore -- then I'd be going well to be consistent -- Stieber: That's what we figured here is be consistent -- you know -- based on the last approval, and all that went into it. Klisz: And -- and, yeah I wasn't here for that as well. So I would be in support of a reduction along with Mr. Coppola's suggestions, or tabling to come back and show me that this other one was approved, and I'd want to see what other signs went along with that because, again, if it was a compromise when it was reduced, or something like that, then I think we would want to take a look at that. That's my thoughts. Pastor: Mr. Neville. Neville: Well I'm just trying to calculate if you lower the ground sign height from eight to seven feet, what would the total ground sign area be reduced to? I don't if that gets -- definitely eat away to the 17.5 excess for the ground sign area. I really think there needs to be some tweaking -- some modifications regarding that ground sign. If-- if -- if the desire is that having an electronic message board, and the only way that's going to City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 39 of 43 January 24, 2017 fly is if reducing it in different respects. So 1 guess I would like to see it tabled just so we can come back with, perhaps, a -- I don't know a different design relative to that. I think the wall signs -- I think it flows perfectly. I mean it's -- it suits that building. I think it's a very, for a McDonald's, a very classic look. I can support that, but my hang up is relative to, how do we modify the ground sign height, not only so that -- the ground sign -- because you want it to be workable as well as -- you know -- fitting into size, and that's where I'm rustling with tonight. Stieber: Just to comment on what you say about this -- Pastor: We closed the public portion of this. Stieber: Oh. Sorry. Okay. About the square footage, if we took away the brick, it doesn't take away from the square footage of the sign. I just wanted to make sure he knew that. Pastor: Thank you. Mr. Schepis. Schepis: First of all, 1 -- I agree that the remodel will look good. You know -- the -- the sign package you've proposed fits well with the building. The problem is that it's conflict with -- with the City ordinance. I like Mr. Coppola's suggestion, but I think it still leaves us with an electronic message board with nonconforming signs, as I understand it. I'm a little bit hung up on that. I -- I -- I guess I'd like to see what we approved. 1 -- I don't recall if-- if I was on the Board at the time, I don't recall it. It seems like this would have been an issue that we would -- that we would have addressed somehow. So those are my -- my thoughts. 1 -- I would not support it as presented tonight, l guess to make a definitive statement. Pastor: Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: We've heard a lot of different proposals and alternatives regarding this case tonight. So there's a lot of ideas on the table. My -- my feeling is I'd like to see all the ground signage and the electronic message board brought back into compliance, and I'd like to see a firmer plan based on what was done with the existing McDonald's in this area, and also considering the feedback you received tonight. At this point, I would recommend tabling it and having it brought back on a future date. Pastor: Pat, I got a question for you. Stieber: Yeah. Pastor: if we table this tonight, does that cause you a whole lot of heartache? Because the other alternative is to try to approve something you may not like. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 40 of 43 January 24, 2017 Stieber: Right. It definitely presents a hardship. Obviously, construction is is ongoing and they're ready for signage, but we want to work with the Board and see what we can come with. I would love the opportunity to come back with -- you know -- the plans from the -- the other two locations of-- you know -- what signage was approved by the Variance Board because I really think we set precedence. There's nothing different about those locations, circumstances about the sites, that are any different. So yeah, I would -- I would -- I would think that would be the best way to proceed. We have submitted for the permit for the building sign for the one McDonald's sign. So I think that we can get them branded with that one sign until we can figure out what we're doing here. They've got the existing ground sign right now that's bigger than what we're proposing. Pastor: Okay. Thank you. Stieber: So I think that branding will be there. Pastor: Okay. Thank you. I'm going to agree with them, the rest of the Board. I think we should table this motion. I remember the Farmington case, but not very clearly. 1 do not remember the other case. So I may have not been at that meeting. So would support any tabling motion. So we need to get more facts about these signs. Coppola: Mr. Chair. Pastor: Yes, Mr. Coppola. Upon Motion by Coppola and supported by Schepis, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2097-01-08 An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by McDonalds Corporation 211538, P.O. Box 1000, Birmingham, MI 48012, seeking to erect three (3) wall signs and a ground sign with electronic reader board, resulting in excess amount of wall signs, ground sign height and area. An electronic board on a ground sign is not allowed, because of the nonconforming signage being proposed. Number of Wall Signs: Ground Sign Height: Ground Sign Area: Allowed: One Allowed: 6 ft. Allowed: 30.0 sq. ft. Proposed: Three Proposed: 8 ft. Proposed: 47.5 sq. ft. Excess: Two Excess: 2 ft. Excess: 17.5 sq. ft. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 41 of 43 January 24, 2017 If an Electronic Message Board was Allowed: Permitted Area: 15 sq. ft. Proposed: 24 sq. ft. Excess 9 sq. ft. The property is located on the south side of Ann Arbor Road (38015), between Ann Arbor Trail and West Chicago. Lot. No. 121-99-0013-001, C-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 18.50H(a)1,2 and Section 18.50H(o), "Sign Regulations in C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 Districts," be tabled to allow the Petitioner and Board Members research the past variances that have been granted similar to this location, ROLL CALL VOTE AYES: Coppola, Schepis, Neville, Klisz, Pastor, Baringhaus NAYS: None ABSENT: Henzi Pastor: You've been tabled. Thank you. Stieber: Thanks for your time tonight. Pastor: Do we have any motions for adjournment? Baringhaus: Just one comment. Marilyn did send out a revised meeting schedule. On that meeting schedule, the February the 14th meeting has been cancelled now, but we do have that seminar session, Mr. Fisher, on February 21st -- Fisher: The 21st. Baringhaus: -- and that's reflected on the schedule. So you'll find in your SharePoint segment. And with that, motion to adjourn. Coppola: Second. Pastor: All in favor. Board Members: Aye. Pastor: We're adjourned. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 42 of 43 January 24, 2017 There being no further business to carne before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:37 p.m, Craig Paster, Wice _ n Jim r4haus, Secretary /ban City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 43 of 43 January 24, 2017