Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1,165 - February 23, 2021 signedMINUTES OF THE 1,165PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, February 23, 2021, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 1,165th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting via Zoom Meeting Software. Mr. Ian Wilshaw, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present: David Bongero Sam Caramagno Glen Long Betsy McCue Carol Smiley Peter Ventura Ian Wilshaw Mr. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, Scott Miller, Planner IV, and Stephanie Reece, Program Supervisor, were also present. Chairman Wilshaw informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and make the final determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City Council for the final determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected. If a petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan approval is denied tonight, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City Council. Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Commission become effective seven (7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning Commission and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their filing. The staff has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions, which the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the proceedings tonight. ITEM #1 PETITION 2021-01-02-01 The Space Shop Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2021- 01-02-01 submitted by Stein Investment Company, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(x) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to develop and operate a climate -controlled, indoor self -storage facility at 31100 Plymouth Road, located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Sears Drive and Merriman Road in the Southwest '% of Section 26, February 23, 2021 29859 Mr. Taormina: This is a request to redevelop and operate an indoor self -storage facility at the site of the former AT&T building, which is on the north side of Plymouth Road, just east of Merriman Road. As you can see from the map, the zoning of the property is C-2 (General Business), which treats indoor self -storage facilities as a waiver - use, subject to 11 special requirements. The site is 4.9 acres in size. It has 738 feet of frontage on Plymouth Road. There is an existing building on the site that has three levels and a gross floor area of 114,000 square feet. Following the departure of AT&T the building has mostly sat vacant. This redevelopment proposal involves the westerly three acres of the site, including the building. The remaining easterly portion, which includes mostly parking, is not a part of this project and would be reserved for future development. To the west, east, and south are commercially zoned properties. Lying immediately to the north is property that is still owned by Michigan Bell/AT&T and is part of their regional switch and hub. That property is zoned M-1. The existing building is somewhat unique in that it does not contain a floor at grade level. The finished floor elevation of the middle level is over six feet above the surrounding ground elevation and the lower level is about five feet nine inches below the ground. Each floor plate is roughly 38,000 square feet in size. Self - storage units would be on all three levels of the building. The total number of units would be roughly 700 and these would be of various sizes. Customer access would be from within the building. There would not be any exterior roll -up doors. Converting the building for the new use is going to require extensive reconstruction. There would be an elevator tower with two elevators built on the north or rear side of the building. A small addition would be built at the northeast corner for use as a leasing service office. These additions total about 1,050 square feet which increases the total floor area of the building to about 115,229 square feet. The required front yard building setback in a C-2 zoning district is 60 feet. This building contains a non- conforming setback of 53 feet. The expansion of the building is going to require a variance from Zoning Board of Appeals. All loading and unloading will take place at the rear of the building. This would be accomplished by creating two ramped access points. One to the lower level of the building and the other to the middle level. For the lower level, the ramp would be about 30 feet wide, and it would allow for two lanes that would descend on both sides to a covered landing area and an entrance to the elevator tower. I am going to show everyone where that is on the site. The elevator tower is located here, and this would be in the addition on the back of the building. The landing area for the ramps is located here. These grey areas depict the ramps. On February 23, 2021 29860 each side of the this covered area for the elevators are the ramps that would go down to anelevation that is equal to the lower level of the building. There would be access to the elevators that would provide access to the upper two levels of the building. The canopy above the landing area on the lower area meausres 35 feet by 29 feet. It would cover both drive-thru lanes. For the middle level there would be a ramp going up and it would be located between the building and the lower -level access ramp. That area is located here. The ramp that goes to the middle level is between the lower -level ramp and the building itself. This ramp would be about 19 Y feet wide and would contain a level platform at the top with access to the elevator tower. Unlike the lower - level, the upper -level ramp is not a drive-thru and the upper platform is not large enough for vehicles to turn around. Thus, vehicles would either have to back up the ramp and exit moving forward or drive forward up the ramp and then exit backing down. Like the lower -level, the upper -level ramp would be covered by a canopy. In terms of parking for the proposed use, the site plan shows only 13 parking spaces that would be along the east side of the building. The ordinance does not provide specific parking requirements for self -storage. Instead, parking is based on the recommendation of the Planning Commission. The existing striped spaces on the west side and behind the building would be removed in order to increase the amount of landscaping, as well as to allow for adequate maneuvering past trucks and other vehicles. The exterior of the existing building is mostly brick. There is a series of E.I.F.S. panels that run along the top of the building. Those are shown here in this rendering. The elevation plans show that the brick remains on most of the building. The panels on the top would be replaced with new E.I.F.S. At both ends there would be E.I.F.S. that would either cover or replace the brick, as well as fiber cement board panels. The same combination of materials would be used to accent the central feature that currently serves at the buildings main lobby. This is the front of the building facing Plymouth Road. The brown areas shown on the rendering represent the existing brick material. These are the E.I.F.S, panels along the top that would be replaced. As I had mentioned, at both ends, there would be new features that would consist primarily of E.I.F.S. and cement fiber panels. E.I.F.S. would also be provided along the central portion of the building. This is the central feature. This served previously as the main lobby. The glazing would remain, and this new feature would be used primarily for display purposes. Fully detailed landscaping plans were provided with the application. This is the latest plan as presented with only minor changes involving some of the plant material along the front of the building. In terms of signage, this has not been reviewed, but the ordinance February 23, 2021 29861 would allow for one wall sign not to exceed one square foot for each foot of building frontage. We haven't computed exactly what that would be. They are showing on their renderings more than one sign, so that is something that would require a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Additional signage would be allowed in the form of a monument sign and that would be limited to 30 square feet. With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please. Mr. Taormina: The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated February 4, 2021, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposed waiver use at this time. The proposed project parcel is assigned the address of #33110 Plymouth Road. The existing building is currently serviced by public water main and sanitary sewer, as well as private storm sewer. The developer has been in contact with this office regarding Engineering requirements for the proposed project, and we do not believe there will be any impacts to the existing systems. It should be noted that the developer may be required to obtain a permit from the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT), should any work occur within the Plymouth Road right-of-way." The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The next letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated January 29, 2021, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct a commercial building on property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal with the following stipulations: The Livonia Fire Department, Fire Inspection Division is requiring that this structure provide complete fire sprinkler protection on all levels as highlighted in the National Fire Protection Administration (NFPA) Life Safety Code 2015 and the Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems (NFPA 13) 2013." The letter is signed by Greg Thomas, Fire Marshal. The next letter is from the Division of Police, dated January 28, 2021, which reads as follows: I have reviewed the plans in connection with the petition. I have no objections to the proposal.' The letter is signed by Scott Sczepanski, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The next letter is from the Inspection Department, dated February 22, 2021, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to yourrequest, the above referenced Petition has been reviewed. 1. A variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals would be required to expand an existing, non- conforming building. 2. The parking lot shall be repaired/replaced and restriped, as necessary. Parking spaces shall be 10' wide February 23, 2021 29862 and 20deep and double striped. 3. This space must meet all current barrier free codes. This will be addressed at the time of Plan Review if this project moves forward. This Department has no further objections to this Petition. I trust this provides the requested information." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Director of Inspection. The next letter is from the Finance Department, dated February 3, 2021, which reads as follows: "1 have reviewed the address connected with the above noted petition. There are no past due amounts receivable, however, their water bill of $236.60 is currently due on February 10, 2021. 1 have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Connie Kumpula, Chief Accountant. The next letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated February 3 , 2021, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Treasurer's Office has reviewed the name and addresses connected with the above noted petition. At this time, there are no taxes due, therefore I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Mr. Bongero: Question for Mark, on Jerome Hanna's letter, is he just stating a generalization of a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals would be required to expand an existing non -conforming building? Is that because of the front setback or is there something else in this building that is non -conforming? Mr. Taormina: It is only because the existing building is non -conforming and even though the expansion as shown would not increase the non- conformity it would still require a variance. That has been a long- standing practice of the city. Mr. Bongero: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Bongero. Any other questions for our planning staff? Ms. Smiley: Is the PRDA still looking at buildings on Plymouth Road ...like this one is being repurposed and redone... Mr. Taormina: Yes, they are. They have not reviewed this project yet. As. Smiley: Okay, thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Good question. Any other questions? February 23, 2021 29863 Mr. Taormina: If I could just qualify that or expand on that. Mr. Wilshaw: Certainly, Mr. Taormina: The PRDA does not typically look at the use as much as the improvements to the site as it effects the frontage along Plymouth Road, which is their primary concern. Aesthetics including landscaping is what the PRDA focuses on. There will be an opportunity for this item to go before the PRDA. Unfortunately, we were unable to take it prior to this evenings meeting. Ms. Smiley: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Ms. Smiley. Any other questions or comments for our planning staff? If not, our petitioners are in the audience I believe. Anyone who is representing this petition can click the raise hand and I will try to recognize each one of you. You can then speak at appropriate times. We have Mr. Butler, Mr. Gaber, Mr. Linscott. There we go. If there is anyone else, you can click raise hand. I think I got all of you. Okay, who is our representative? We have Mr. Linscott, are you representing the petitioner tonight? Jason Linscott, Stein Investment Group, 5607 Glenrich Drive, Atlanta, GA 30342. Yes. We have John Gaber also on tonight. He is going to lead us off, I think. Mr. Wilshaw: So, how we work is that we will need your name and address for the record please. John Gaber, 380 North Old Woodward, 4300, Birmingham, MI, 48009. Thank you for your time. Mr. Butler, who is on the phone, is our Civil Engineer and Mr. Linscott is with Stein Investments, the applicant. Essentially, we appreciate the presentation. It was very thorough that Mr. Taormina gave on this site and what the proposal is for the development. What I would like to do is turn the floor over to Mr. Linscott to give a little bit of information about Stein and its ventures with RCG Ventures to create these redevelopment projects in other communities and to show you whatwe have done and essentially say a little bit more about what we are proposing here. Jr. Linscott: I know we went over this last week. I just want to make sure that I am respecting your time and doing what you guys want me to do. Should I give a similar presentation as last week? Or. Wilshaw: Yes, please. If you would like to just start off by letting us know what your intended use of the property is, why you believe this is February 23, 2021 29864 a good use, and once you are done with your presentation, we will see if we have any questions for you. Mr. Linscott: The intended use for this property, as you see it on the screen, is for interior climate controlled self -storage. This is a consumer product, so these are an average of ten by 10 units. These are residential use interior self -storage units. As Mark so eloquently went through the entire coverage of the plan, this is an existing office building. It is a little awkward. In my career it is the first building the I walked into where there is no floor at grade. It is a kind of an odd duck here. As he said, when you walk in the door it is a bit like walking into a split-level home. You walk in and you immediately have to go down a set of stairs or up a set of stairs to either the basement floor or the middle level floor. Of course, there is a third level floor as well. It is a three-story building. It was vacated by AT & T about four or five years ago and it has sort of been vacant since. I would like to backtrackjust a moment to give you a bit of background on us so you can understand why we chose this site and why we kind of approach the project the way we do. We are a family -based real estate company in Atlanta. We do real estate projects... develop and own real estate projects throughout... sort of east of the Mississippi. We are in Southeast Mid -Atlantic and Midwest. That is Ohio and Michigan in the Midwest and then over to the Mid -Atlantic and Virginia and the Carolinas and then of course all over the southeast as well. We primarily do self -storage and retail. Those are out kind of two primary products. We actually started off in retail. Mostly in retail. Eleven or twelve years ago we started developing self -storage and really took a different approach about it. We were retail - minded folks, so we took more of a retail angled approach at it. We really addressed what the consumer would want. We sort of see it as a retail product. Our customers are the community members. This isn't a traditional... you know you build a shopping center, and you have a tenant, which is a business. We are the operator here. The brand here is The Space Shop. That is our brand. It is our management company. We own and operate these facilities ourselves with our platform. We like to think that we are pretty good at it. I will pat my operations guys on the back. We take care on how we operate, and we take care on how we develop them and we take care on how we look for the right product in the right market. This approach we have done many times over the years. We have done a little over three and a half million square feet of this type of self -storage product. About half of those have been building conversions like this one. We have used buildings... from office buildings to bowling alleys and Toys R Us', K-marts, movie theatres, that type of stuff. As you guys are probably well aware, bricks and mortar retail and other types February 23, 2021 29865 of real estate is changing dramatically with the internet, and things keep continuing to accelerate. There is a lot of buildings that are somewhat functionally obsolete in various ways, from retail buildings to office buildings. We take an approach when we look for self -storage where we really start with markets. We look at ... we have a pretty methodical analysis at how we look at supply saturation. I won't geek out on it too much. It is basically a process where we look at the demographics of an area, understanding the type of housing, the type of traffic patterns, the type of community that you have, and then we overlay that with the trade area competitive maps, and we look at other self - storage facilities. It is a pretty small industry. We all sort of know each other. We will check on one another and see how you are doing here, how you are doing there, what are rates like. This is just to kind of understand what the saturation level is like. We don't want to invest all of this money in a market where the product doesn't have enough demand. We take a lot of pride in that process. In this particular area you would normally expect to find something in the seven or eight square feet per person in a trade area such as this. This trade area has about five square feet per person including this project. I would always include our project in it if we were looking to build one. From a market supply standpoint, it is in a net demand scenario. Further, there is actually less than two square feet per person of climate controlled self -storage, including this project in the trade area. There is good demand for this product in the market. We have had a lot of success with it and customers really like our brand and the product that we provide. This site really sets up well for self - storage also because it is mid -block which is challenging for some real estate uses. For example, retail is pretty difficult sometimes with mid -block, particularly because this site is surrounded by industrial uses. This is a really nice use for this property. That said, there is also a great opportunity for repurposing a building like this and formerly needed a lot of parking. We are able to repurpose this building and as Mark mentioned, we don't need all the parking for this use. We have provided some parking on the east side of the building, which I believe is 13 spaces. I am blanking here for a second. It is 13 spaces and that is probably 50% more than what we need. Customers only visit and use those parking space when they visit the office to do their initial lease and tour the facility. After that they are always in the back of the facility either loading or unloading. Those parking spaces don't generally get used a ton. What it does is unlocks the east part of this site. I don't know if you can flip back to the site plan with the color... yeah, there you go. The east side of the site on the right where the blue box is, that is the parking field now that is just sitting vacant. We are able now to activate that with February 23, 2021 29866 something else. It can be an office use or a freestanding restaurant or something like that. We will have to see how it goes. It is a nice way to unlock the piece of property that really is captive parking for the office building. Of course, the office building is functional obsolete as we talked about before. Those are some of the ingredients that come together and why we chose this site. I have some before and after pictures in here of some of our other conversion projects so you can get a flavor of the type of projects we do. If you could visualize it. I think it is in here. Yes, thank you, great. So, this is for example and I will go through them quickly...I know you have seen some of these. This was a car dealership which you can see and if you flip through that is the after we did our conversion of it. This particular city here, wanted it to look like a retail shopping center on the left. That was the goal for what they wanted us to accomplish. You will see generally that we are working with the community and trying to make it work within the community. We don't have a particular box that is has to look like. This one is actually a former K-Mart near Charleston, South Carolina. That is what it looked like afterwards. I will just point out ... with this one the building when we are finished with them, they look purpose built. It doesn't look like a converted K-Mart. A lot of guys will do that, and I have seen it before. They don't succeed and customers don't feel comfortable because it looks like you are going into a broken real estate deal. You know, someone just put a new sign up. The objective is always that it looks like a purpose-built deal. No one would ever know that that wasn't built as a self -storage facility. I will go through the next ones really quickly. Thank you for doing that. That is a bowling alley. You can see that this is a more modern look that the city wanted here with this building. The next one is an old office building. It is similar condition to this one that turned into this ... you can see how dramatic the difference is on this. It looks like a purpose-built building now instead of this office building. This was just an old dumpy facility that we redid with brick and put a parapet on it and sort of really modernized it. Hopefully that gives a real quick... oh yeah, there is one more. That was a single -level furniture store that somebody had done. Love it that climatized was spelled wrong on the roof. Anyway, we made it more modern and this is sort of in conjunction with what the city was looking for. Hopefully that gives you a visual of what we try and accomplish with these buildings. It is definitely not just slapping some paint on it and put a sign on it kind of approach. If you go on our website, you can look at all of our other projects. We have plenty of photos on the website, which is spaces hopselfstorage.com. You will see all of our ground up ones plus all of the building conversions that I just showed you. That is kind of the intent of it and this is a rendering of the February 23, 2021 29867 property. What we are doing here is replacing all of the landscaping in the front, creating some kind of rhythm to it. Then the glass that is ... the best way to describe it is ... the vertical pieces that are grey ... yep, thank you ... those are partially glass and partially, I believe, metal or E.I.F.S. We are going to pull those out. The glass is old, and it is old glazing. It looks 20 — 30 years old and they need a lot of work. Our intention is to pull the glass out and replace them with the same rhythm with these J.F.S. and fiber cement board panels. What the fiber cement board panels are like a wood look with a wood grain. It is a product called Nichiha if you guys are familiar with it. It is really nice. It looks like a wooden board with wood grain and it really looks nice. It is not a smooth boring product. It is really an upscale woodgrain product. That is the grey and that is the grey on the ends too on those large columns on the corners. Those are the same materials. It really dresses up the building. In the middle with the glass lobby area. We are removing the glazing and glass that is there now and replacing it with it a new more modern storefront. See the grey band in the middle between the floors is the same wood product or fiber cement with wood grain product to sort of modernize the building and upgrade it. Those doors that you see there are not operating doors. We generally don't like to have operating doors in front of glass like that. You will have customers loading or unloading. Those look like they are operating doors, but they are not operating doors. It is really just so when folks drive by, they know what the building is and they see that there is storage there and what is inside. It is particularly important if you are changing the use of an existing building that people are used to seeing that they know it is something new. That is what is going on there. Thank you for that. On the right we will have the office. It might be easier if you switch back to colored site plan. Yeah, thank you. That square at the top right is an existing sort of lobby. It is sort of small, but it is kind works well for an office. You see that there is a line through the middle of it kind of at an angle? That is actually an over hanged roof that we are going to infill with new storefront. We are going to kind of complete the square there and that will be our leasing office. That is where our customers will come to. All of the loading and unloading to the building occurs at the rear on the north side of the building, so all of that happens behind the building. It won't be visible from the street and the customers are sort of protected from traffic and visibility which makes folks feel better when you are back there loading and unloading. The sort of pink areas you see ... the lower part is the roof for the elevator and lobby you walk in to. The one with the X on it is actually a roof. That covers the loading area underneath. We will have lighting and heat there so that when you drive in there you can February 23, 2021 29868 load with a little bit of heat and underneath a roof. On the top side you see a little band with yellow and pink and yellow and pink. That is a landscaping strip. We want to make sure that it looks nice up there and that it isn't just hardscape materials. The hardscape materials, you know like concrete and asphalt. That is a landscape strip to soften that up a little bit. I think that kind of basically explains the building. One more thing that I know we spoke about at the last meeting... the traffic here is generally consumers with their SUV's and trucks. That type of thing. We don't get very many 18-wheelers. It's kind of a joke. It would be nice if we did. That is certainly a lot of storage units if someone comes with an 18-wheeler. They do from time to time, but it is not very often. So, generally that is how it is set up for those customers, residential customers. Hopefully I answered all of your questions. I am happy to answer any other questions if there is anything I left out. Mr. Wilshaw: That was a great presentation Mr. Linscott. We appreciate that. Is there any questions from any of the Planning Commissioners? Ms. Smiley: I was wondering what kind of stuff is stored and what precautions you take so that there is not hazardous materials or weapons or explosives or anything like that? Mr. Linscott: That is a good question, Ms. Smiley. It is definitely something you have to be careful of in the industry. It is basically... our leases prohibit anything dangerous or flammable and our manager, when a customer signs a lease, goes over that with the tenant. You can't store anything that could be ... you can't store anything with any kind of flammable material in it like gasoline or anything like that. You also can't store certain items like tires. They aren't necessarily flammable, those are just items we don't want people storing in the facility. The manager goes through that with every customer. Basically, what we do is the manager keeps an eye on the property. We will have two employees here that work everyday during business hours. They are pretty aware of what is going on and what is going in and out of the property. The managers do daily site walks constantly. They are walking the property to observe and see what is going on. Are people moving, talking to the customers, we will bring waters out to people. You just sort of create a relationship and see what people are doing. The facility has cameras at every entrance and exit, inside and outside. Customers are aware that we know what is going in and out of the property. If they aren't, then we really don't want them to be leasing. It is a secure facility. Every entrance has a keypad. The only way to get in is to have your own pin number that you would enter into the keypad. We know who is February 23, 2021 29869 coming and going. There is lighting and security at every entrance inside the facility. That is how we approach it. Ms. Smiley: Okay, thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions for our petitioner? Mr. Bongero: A couple questions. On the elevation you show a mix of brick, E.I.F.S., and cement fiber. Some of the E.I.F.S. extends down to the grade. In the northern states we have found through the years that it doesn't fair very well. Would you consider putting cement fiber at grade level? Mr. Linscott: Thank you. That is a great question. I don't know if it shows it really well, but the E.I.F.S. won't touch the ground. Where it would, itwould be concrete or any kind of ... we actually just talked to our architect about it. It won't touch the ground in any situation. It will either be concrete, or we may extend the brick to make it a sort of brick...I don't want to say water table because it wouldn't be very high but use the same kind of brick color. There are a couple ways we could accomplish that. Agreed and none of the E.I.F.S. will be touching the earth material. Mr. Bongero: Thank you. Then I thought it came up last week, we threw it out there about using spandrel glass. Mr. Linscott: Right. We have done that before, and it makes sense. When we have a lot of it time this, we haven't liked the way it turned out. It generally looks like the building sort of has a blank stare about it. There is nothing going on and it always dark. It just looks closed. We have worked on different ways to do it and we liked this look where we create an element that creates the same repeating pattern of the windows and it just ... I am trying to think if any of these have that same example. It looks nice. It has different materials and creates that same pattern, but this one ... this is an example. If you could go back to that one if possible. Thank you. In this one ... you can see on the right that's the office. So, we had glass at the office and in this one ... glass in the middle when you walk in and on the left we have the same sort of repeating patterns. We approached this one a little bit differently. It has a nice look to it and it looks kind of warmer than just some black glass that looks like the lights are off all the time and is closed, which is how we have experienced it in the past. Mr. Bongero: I understand, okay. Thank you. That answers my question. February 23, 2021 29870 Mr, Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Bongero. Any other commissioners with questions for our petitioner? I don't see any other questions. Mr. Linscott, just one question. Is the facility going to be open 24 hours a day for customers or will they only be able to access their units when staff is there? Mr. Linscott: So, it is not open 24/7. Customers can access it without staff being there. Generally, we are open 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., meaning your keypad will work between 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. If you come to the facility after 10:00 p.m. it just won't allow you access. Just over the years we have discovered that people don't need access to their units at 2:00 a.m. Mr. Wilshaw: That makes sense. Nothing good happens after 11, right? Mr. Linscott: That's right. The store hours where the managers are there are general business hours, so 8 to 6 type of hours. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, thank you. Any other questions from any of our commissioners for the petitioner? Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? If so, you can click raise hand and we will recognize you to speak. Seeing no one I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Ventura, and unanimously adopted, it was #02-03-2021 RESOLVED, That pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on February 23, 2021, on Petition 2021-01-02-01 submitted by Stein Investment Company, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(x) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to develop and operate a climate -controlled, indoor self -storage facility at 31100 Plymouth Road, located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Sears Drive and Merriman Road in the Southwest'% of Section 26, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2021-01-02- 01 be approved with the following conditions: That the Site Plan identified as C-3.0 prepared by PEA Group, as received by the Planning Department on January 25, 2021, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to. 2. That the Landscape Plan identified as L-1.0 prepared by PEA Group, as received by the Planning Department on January 25, 2021, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to. February 23, 2021 29871 3. That all disturbed lawn areas, including road rights -of -way, shall be sodded in lieu of hydroseeding. 4. That underground sprinklers are to be provided for all landscaped and sodded areas and all planted materials shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition. 5. That the Exterior Elevation Plans identified as A2.1 and A2.2 prepared by Kevin J. Maher AIA, both dated January 12, 2021, are hereby approved and shall be adhered to, except for the fact that on the lower portions of the exterior of the building, all EIFS material shall be replaced with either masonry (brick) or cement fiber panels. 6. That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be concealed from public view on all sides by screening that shall be of a compatible character, material, and color to other exterior materials on the building. 7. That this site shall meet either the City of Livonia or the Wayne County Storm Water Management Ordinance, whichever applies, and shall secure any required permits, including soil erosion and sedimentation control permits. 8. The use of the self -storage facility shall be limited to the storage of personal and business items only, and no unit designed or intended for storage purposes shall be used for operating a business or recreational activity including, but not limited to, repairs, manufacturing, assembly, personal service, hobby, retail or office. 9. Outdoor storage of vehicles or equipment, including work trailers and trucks, is strictly prohibited. 10. That there shall be no outdoor storage of disabled or inoperative equipment and vehicles, scrap material, debris, or other similar items. 11. That the hours of operation for the indoor climate -controlled self -storage facility shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., as proposed by the applicant, subject to City Council approval of a modification of special requirement 11.03(x)(6) to extend the operating hours from 9:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. February 23, 2021 29872 12. The entire building and property shall have a camera security system in place and key code access. 13. That any additional pole -mounted light fixtures shall not exceed twenty feet (20') in height, and all light fixtures, including building -mounted and wall -pack units, shall be aimed and shielded to minimize stray light trespassing across property lines and glaring into adjacent roadways. 14. That any facilities for the outdoor storage of refuse shall be screened by means of an enclosure constructed of masonry walls. The enclosure gates shall be of solid panel steel construction or durable, long-lasting solid panel fiberglass. The trash dumpster area shall always be maintained and when not in use closed. 15. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals. 16. No window signs shall be allowed. 17. That no LED lightband or exposed neon shall be permitted on this site including, but not limited to, the building or around the windows. 18. That unless approved by the proper local authority, any type of exterior advertising, such as promotional flags, streamers or sponsor vehicles designed to attract the attention of passing motorists, shall be prohibited. 19. That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time the building permits are applied for; and 20. Pursuant to Section 19.10 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, this approval is valid for a period of one year only from the date of approval by City Council, and unless a building permit is obtained, this approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. FURTHER RESOLVED, That notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion? February 23, 2021 29873 Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #2 PETITION 2021-01-03-01 Botsford General Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2021- 01-03-01 submitted by Anderson, Eckstein & Westrick, Inc., on behalf of Botsford General Hospital, pursuant to Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine whether or not to vacate an existing public utility easement at 39000 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between the 1-275/96 Expressway and Haggerty Road in the Southwest 'Y4 of Section 6. Mr. Taormina: This petition involves vacating an existing public water main easement. The location is on the north side of Seven Mile Road just west of 1-275, This site is currently under development by Beaumont Health System as an outpatient care center. The new professional medical building will be four- and one-half stories in height and will have a gross floor area of about 162,000 square feet. The new building replaces the former office and manufacturing facility that was last occupied by A123 Systems. With the demolition of the old building and redevelopment of the site most of the utilities are being relocated. This includes a water main, which renders the current easement no longer useful, hence the reason for this request to vacate and remove it to prevent it from becoming an encumbrance on the property. This plan shows where that water main easement is located on the property, which would be vacated. City Engineering Department has no objections to this request. With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please. Mr. Taormina: The first item is from the Finance Department, dated January 26, 2021, which reads as follows: "1 have reviewed the addresses connected with the above noted petition. As there are no outstanding amounts receivable, general or water and sewer, I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Connie Kumpula, Chief Accountant. The next letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated February 3, 2021, which reads as follows: `In accordance with your request, the Treasurer's Office has reviewed the name and addresses connected with the above noted petition. At this time, there are no taxes due, therefore I February 23, 2021 29874 have no objections to the proposal. The letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? If not, is there anyone representing the petitioner tonight? If so, you can click the raise hand button. We will make sure you are recognized. Mr. Taormina: I don't believe that is the case, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Wilshaw: I don't see anyone. This is a fairly small in terms of an almost housekeeping type of petition that we deal with. Although, it is still a Public Hearing and we want to make sure we give anybody an opportunity to speak on it. Is there anyone else in our audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Seeing no one else raising their hand, I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion. On a motion by McCue, seconded by Bongero, and unanimously adopted, it was #02-04-2021 RESOLVED, That pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on February 23, 2021, on Petition 2021-01-03-01 submitted by Anderson, Eckstein & Westrick, Inc., on behalf of Botsford General Hospital, pursuant to Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine whether or not to vacate an existing public utility easement at 39000 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between the I- 275/96 Expressway and Haggerty Road in the Southwest % of Section 6.the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2021-01-03-01 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That with the demolition of the old building, and redevelopment of the property as a new four and one-half (4-'/) stories professional/medical building, this part of the easement is no longer needed for public utility purposes. 2. That the work has been completed, and upon vacation of the old easement, a new easement will be recorded that encompasses the relocated section(s) of the utilities, and 3. No reporting City department or public utility has objected to the proposed vacating. February 23, 2021 29875 FURTHER RESOLVED, That notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion? Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #3 PETITION 2020-11-08-06 Roma Court Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2020- 11-08-06 submitted by Leo Soave Building Company, Inc. requesting approval of the Master Deed, Bylaws and site plan pursuant to Section 18.62 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to develop a site condominium (Roma Court) consisting of thirty-two (32) single-family homes on the property at 37855 Lyndon Avenue (former Webster Elementary School site) located on the south side of Lyndon Avenue between Newburgh and Hix Roads in the Southeast % of Section 19. Mr. Taormina: Thank you. This is a request to develop a condominium subdivision, sometimes referred to as a site condominium at the former Webster Elementary School site, which is on the south side of Lyndon between Newburgh and Hix Roads. This property is in the process of being rezoned from PL (Public Land) to R-1 (One -Family Residential). City Council gave first reading to the zoning change on September 28, 2020, The R-1 minimum lot size requirements are 7,200 square feet for lot area, 60 feet for lot width, and 120 feet for lot depth. As you can see from this map, the site is surrounded by R-1 zoning and developed platted lots that are located in the Castle Gardens subdivision. The proposed site layout shows 32 lots or site condominium units, all of which meet the minimum R-1 lot size requirements. The design includes a cul-de-sac extending south from Lyndon that would provide access to 22 of the 32 lots identified on the plans as units 11 through 32, Units 8,9 and 10 shown in the northeast corner would have direct access from Lyndon. Units 1 through 7 would have direct frontage on Mason located at the south end of the development. Along the east side of the subdivision the plans show a storm water detention basin that is part of a larger open space park. The detention system includes a forebay as well as a main storage basin. The basin would have an overall depth of about six feet and one on six side slopes to avoid the need for a fence. The street right-of-way as shown would be 60 feet wide and would have a 120-foot diameter cul-de-sac. For landscaping, February 23, 2021 29876 the plan shows one tree per lot as required by the City. Trees and shrubs are also shown along the perimeter of the open space park and detention basin. In addition, parallel along the right-of- way of Lyndon on the two corner lots at the main entrance to subdivision, the plan shows evergreen and flowers. In response to the Commission's comments at the Study Meeting, the grading pIan has been adjusted. The proposed site grades have been lowered about three and a half feet. Additionally, the petitioner is willing to restrict along the west side of the development the construction of ranch style homes only. Your packet includes the Master Deed and By -Laws. These address various issues including construction materials as well as size of homes and other improvements. I won't go into those details, but they are very typical for the developments that we have seen as of late. I will show you some photographs or renderings of the types of homes that the petitioner intends to develop on this site. With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please. Mr. Taormina: The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated February 161 2021, which reads as follows: `In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposed project at this time. The property is assigned the address of #37855 Lyndon Avenue. The legal description included on the plans submitted by the owner appears to be correct, and should be used to describe the parcel. The proposed development is currently serviced by public water main, storm and sanitary sewers, and the submitted drawings indicate that new utility connections will be constructed to service the proposed parcel layout. Easements will need to be provided for the new water and sanitary sewers, as well as portions of the storm sewer that are to be maintained by the City. At this time, Exhibit `B" drawings have not been provided to show proposed easements, so we cannot determine if they proposed easements are correct. The proposed construction will be required to meet the Wayne County Stormwater Ordinance, including detention requirements. Detention is shown on the preliminary plans, but no calculations are given. A full review of the proposed development will be completed when plans are submitted for permitting. It should be noted that the area of the proposed development has experienced issues with sanitary sewer backups during heavy storm situations in the past. Since that time, the City has been trying to mitigate flow issues by removing existing house footing drain connections from the sewers to free up capacity. Per February 23, 2021 29877 revised ordinances, the Developer will be required to contribute Towards funding future projects, further reducing the existing flows in the sewer system. With the projects that have been completed to date (and future projects to reduce flows) there should not be any adverse affects to the existing sewer systems." The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The next letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated January 29, 2021, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct site condominiums on property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal with the following stipulations: Using the city of Livonia Department of Public Works, Engineering Division, Site Plan Design Standards (Pg. 11 of 32) as a guide, fire hydrant spacing for multiple single-family home sites must at a maximum, be spaced every 500 feet. The distance from the entry of the site condominiums to the proposed hydrant location (as indicated on the site plan) exceeds this distance. The Livonia Fire Department, Fire Inspection Division will be requiring an additional fire hydrant be located near the entry to the proposed site." The letter is signed by Greg Thomas, Fire Marshal. The next letter is from the Division of Police, dated January 28, 2021, which reads as follows: "1 have reviewed the plans in connection with the petition. 1 have no objections to the proposal. " The letter is signed by Scott Sczepanski, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The next letter is from the Inspection Department, dated February 18, 2021, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. This Department has no objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Director of Inspection. The next letter is from the Finance Department, dated February 3, 2021, which reads as follows: "I have reviewed the addresses connected with the above noted petition. As there are no outstanding amounts receivable, general or water and sewer, 1 have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Connie Kumpula, Chief Accountant. That is the extent of the correspondence. The next letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated February 3, 2021, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Treasurer's Office has reviewed the address connected with the above noted petition. At this time, there are no outstanding amounts receivable for taxes. Therefore, I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? I don't see any questions from any of the commissioners. Our petition is in the audience. Mr. Soave. Is there anyone else here with the February 23, 2021 29878 petitioner? If so, please click raise hand so that we can recognize you. We will go to Mr. Soave to start. Enrico Soave, 37771 Seven Mile Road, Ste C, Livonia, MI. Good evening. Also in tonight's attendance online is our Civil Engineer for the project, Mr. Fadi Khalil. Mark, thank you for your presentation this evening. As he correctly stated, this is a conforming R-1 site condominium, which is also in harmony with the surrounding areas. This development will mirror Heritage Square which is about a mile north from the proposed development. Housing will primarily be the same. Very similar. Minimum size homes will be 1,600 square feet for the ranches and exceeding 1,900 square feet approximately for colonials. Also, the brick requirements will be in conformance with the city ordinance and exactly the same as Heritage Square that we just finished up to the north. Mr. Khalil, if you have anything to add to this at this time? Fadi Khalil, Angle Design, 6200 Schaffer Road, Dearborn, MI. You said everything you want to say, but we are conforming with everything like Wayne County and we looked at the comments. We are adding that fire hydrant as required by the Fire Department. The exhibit is going to be provided showing the easements for all of the utilities. I think that is basically all we have. Mr. Wilshaw: Great, thank you, Mr. Khalil and Mr. Soave. Do we have any questions from any of our commissioners for our petitioner? Mr. Soave: Mr. Chairman, if I may? Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Soave, sure. Mr. Soave: I know Mark read out the self -imposition of ranch style homes on the west side of the property. We looked at this and we are willing to encumber units 24 thru 30, which we believe would be the only ones impacted by any major change in topography. To reiterate, units 24 through 30 will be the ones we will agree to self -impose the ranch requirement. Mr. Wilshaw: We appreciate that Mr. Soave. Will any of these units, either those or any of the others due to the grade, be either a daylight style basement or a walk out? Mr. Soave: Maybe a daylight, but Fadi would be more leaned to answer that question at this time. Mr. Khalil: Yeah, now we are working...we just lowered the road by three and a half feet like some of them are going to have a daylight on February 23, 2021 29879 the east side actually. We are going to have... almost.... its like high daylight. It's almost six feet. Like you are going to have clear. On the west side we might just have... by the cul-de-sac we might have two or three lots that we might have three or four feet daylight. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, very good. Thank you. Any other questions from any of the other commissioners? If not, is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? If so, you can click raise hand. Seeing no one else wishing to speak on this item, and there are not other questions or comments from our commissioners, I will ask for a motion. On a motion by Ventura, seconded by Long, and unanimously adopted, it was #02-05-2021 RESOLVED, That the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2020-11-08-06 submitted by Leo Soave Building Company, Inc. requesting approval of the Master Deed, Bylaws and site plan pursuant to Section 18.62 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to develop a site condominium (Roma Court) consisting of thirty-two (32) single-family homes on the property at 37855 Lyndon Avenue (former Webster Elementary School site) located on the south side of Lyndon Avenue between Newburgh and Hix Roads in the Southeast'% of Section 19, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Site Plan identified as Drawing No. CS-100 dated November 193 2020, prepared by Angle Design & Engineering L.L.C., is hereby approved and shall be adhered to. 2. That the Landscape Plan identified as LP-1 and the Landscape Notes &Details identified as LP-2, both dated November 13, 2020, prepared by Nagy Devlin Land Design, are hereby approved and shall be adhered to. 3. That the condominium Master Deed and Bylaws comply with the requirements of the Subdivision Control Ordinance, Title 16, Chapter 16.04-16.40 of the Livonia Code of Ordinance, and Article XX, Section 20.01-20.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. 4. That the Master Deed and Bylaws shall include language in the building and use restrictions that requires the homes on Lots 24 thru 30, located along the west side of the cul-de- February 23, 2021 29880 sac street identified on the plans as Roma Court, shall be a maximum of one-story in height. 5. That the brick used in the construction of each condominium unit shall be full face four -inch (4") brick. 6. In the event of a conflict between the provisions set forth in the Master Deed and Bylaws, and the requirements set forth in the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance No. 543, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance requirements shall prevail, and petitioner shall comply with the Zoning Ordinance requirements. 7. That only a conforming entrance marker is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals. 8. That the petitioner shall include language in the Master Deed and bylaws or a separate recordable instrument wherein the condominium association shall reimburse the City of Livonia for any maintenance or repair costs incurred for the storm water detention/retention and outlet facilities, and giving the City of Livonia the right to impose liens on each lot owner's property pro rata and place said charges on their real estate tax bills in the event said charges are not paid by the condominium association (or each lot owner) within thirty (30) days of billing for the City of Livonia. 9. That all required cash deposits, certified checks, irrevocable bank letters of credit and/or surety bonds which shall be established by the City Engineer pursuant to Article XVIII of Ordinance No. 543, Section 18.66 of the ordinance, shall be deposited with the City prior to the issuance of engineering permits for this site condominium development; and 10. Pursuant to Section 19.10 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, this approval is valid for a period of one year only from the date of approval by City Council, and unless a building permit is obtained, this approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion? February 23, 2021 29881 Mr. Bongero: Just on condition #8 with the right to impose liens from the city...1 guess this would go to Mark. Is itjust because we know that there is a problem with or there has been a problem in the past with flooding in that area, so it is imperative that the detention pond is serviced regularly, right? So, if the city comes in and they have to service it, they are going to charge the association. Is there an agreement that is going to be annual... like an annual service on it? You know what I mean? Is that why that condition is worded like that? Mr. Taormina: That is standard language for these types of projects. It is language that is not unique to this development. Whether this area experiences flooding problems... what was referenced earlier it does not have bearing on this particular condition in terms of the sanitary sewer issue. This relates to the maintenance of the storm water management basin I believe and if there is a failure to maintain that then the city has the right to go in there to perform the maintenance and then charge that back to the owners within the development. That only happens in circumstances where there has been a failure to maintain it. I am not aware of there being an annual service check or anything like that. Mr. Bongero: I know we kind of ran into it in our neighborhood. That is why I was inquiring about it. Mr. Taormina: I think it is in the event that there are any issues, the city will inspect it and if they require maintenance to be performed and there is a failure to do so, that is when that provision kicks in. Mr. Bongero: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Bongero. Any other questions or comments regarding this motion? Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #4 PETITION 2014-02-08-02 Victor East Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, request for an Extension of Petition 2014-02-08-02 which previously received approval by the City Council on April 21, 2014 (Council Resolution #104-14), to construct a one-story office -research building (Victor East) on property at 37640 Seven Mile Road, February 23, 2021 29882 located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Newburgh Road and Victor Parkway in the Southeast Y4 of Section 6. Mr. Taormina: This is a request to extend site plan approval for the development of an office building located at the corner of Seven Mile Road and Victor Parkway. The property in question is 6.4 acres in size, and the name given to the project is Victor East. The original site plan for Victor East was approved in 2014. Victor East involved the development of a single -story 54,000 square foot office building. Prior to 2014, the site has a long history connected with this project that began in the mid-1990's with Oakwood Hospital. The Oakwood proposal eventually led to a lawsuit and then a consent judgement that was entered in 1998. Neither Oakwood nor the subsequent approval of a 100,000 square foot office building were ever built. This led to the 2014 approval of Victor East.made possible by a third amendment to the consent judgement. Since then, Victor East has been extended four times. The most recent occurred on April 9, 2018, at which time Council granted a three- year extension. This marks the fifth request to extend the site plan. In a letter dated January 14, 2021, from Josh Suardini, Vice -President of Etkin Management, Victor East L.L.C. is requesting that the site plan be approved for an additional 36 months. I believe Josh is on the call this evening and can provide additional information. With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please. Mr. Taormina: The first item is from the Treasurer's Department, dated February 12, 2021, and it reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Treasurer's Office has reviewed the addresses connected with the above noted petition. At this time there are no outstanding amounts receivable for taxes, therefore I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. The next item is from the Finance Department, dated February 19, 2021, and it reads as follows: "/ have reviewed the address connected with the above noted petition. As there are no outstanding amounts receivable (general or water and sewer), I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Connie Kumpula, Chief Accountant. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Any questions for our planning staff? If there are no questions of our planning staff, Mr. Suardini is on the call this evening. Good evening. February 23, 2021 29883 Josh Suardini, Etkin Management, 150 West 2n Street, Royal Oak, MI. Yes, coming in front of you guys again for a simple approval of an extension of the site plan approval as Mark indicated for this 54,000 square foot single -story office building. Or. Wilshaw: Okay. Is there any questions for the petitioner? I don't think so. We have seen this a number of times and Mr. Suardini, we appreciate you coming and continuing to represent Elkin on this property. Mr. Suardini: Thank you. I appreciate it. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak for or against this item? I want to make sure I give the opportunity. I don't see anyone else raising their hand. I will go to the commissioners and ask for a motion. On a motion by McCue, seconded by Bongero, and unanimously adopted, it was #02-06-2021 RESOLVED, That the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2014-02-08-02 which previously received approval by the City Council on April 21, 2014 (Council Resolution #104-14), to construct a one-story office - research building (Victor East) on property at 37640 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Newburgh Road and Victor Parkway in the Southeast Y4 of Section 6, be approved subject to the following conditions: That the request for an extension of waiver use approval by Elkin Management, L.L.C, in a letter dated January 14, 2021, is hereby approved for a three-year period; and 2. That all conditions imposed by Council Resolution #104-14 in connection with Petition 2014-02-08-02, which permitted the construction of a one-story office -research building, shall remain in effect to the extent that they are not in conflict with the foregoing condition. ITEM #5 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,164th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 1,1641h Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on January 26, 2021. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by McCue, and unanimously adopted, it was February 23, 2021 29884 #02-07-2021 RESOLVED, That the Minutes of 1,1641h Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on January 261 2021, are hereby approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Long, McCue, Smiley, Bongero, Ventura, Caramagno, Wilshaw NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 1,165�h Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on February 23, 2021, was adjourned at 8:23 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Sam Caramagno, Sec etary ATTEST: Ian Wilshaw, Chairman