Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2019-01-15 MINUTES OF THE 1,135th PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, January 15, 2019, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 1,135th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. 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 Ian Wilshaw Members absent: Peter Ventura Mr. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, was 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 2018-12-02-22 MAYA ENTERPRISES Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2018- 12-02-22 submitted by Maya Enterprises, Inc. requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 19.06 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to operate a full-service restaurant (Maya Cocina Mexicana) at 33018 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Mayfield Avenue and Farmington Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3. Mr. Wilshaw: We do have two items regarding Maya Enterprises. One is for the waiver use and the other is for the Class C license, which we will hear after this. January 15, 2019 28861 Mr. Taormina: I will address each item separately except the correspondence that was received by the Departments does address both petitions. The first item is a request to operate the full service restaurant called Maya Cocina Mexicana. This is located at the Maiorana shopping center which is adjacent to Joe's Produce on the north side of Seven Mile between Mayfield and Farmington Roads. There are three different zoning classifications on this property — C-2 (General Business), C-1 (Local Business) and P (Parking). The property altogether is just under 4.5 acres in size with 577 feet of frontage on Seven Mile Road and a depth of roughly 240 feet. The easterly portion of this site contains the multi-tenant shopping center, which is zoned C-1. The shopping center is about 17,000 square feet in size and currently has eight tenants. Immediately to the west of this property are a variety of commercial and office uses under the C-2 zoning classification. Immediately to the north is the Canterbury Park Apartments, zoned R-7, Multi Family. To the east is another shopping plaza called Loveland Plaza zoned C-1. Across Seven Mile are a variety of commercial uses as well as the Open Arms Church, which is zoned C-1. The C-1 district regulations allow for limited service restaurants whereas the C-2 district allows more intense commercial operations including full service restaurants. What distinguishes the two is the amount of seating. Limited service restaurants have seating for up to 30 persons whereas full service restaurants have no limit in the amount of seating. The proposed restaurant would be classified as a full service restaurant because it would have a total of 67 seats. Under Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Council has the authority to waive or modify any special requirements of a waiver use. Doing so requires a separate resolution in which two-thirds of the members of the Council concur. They have done this on a number of cases including Qdoba Mexican Grill at Six Mile and Newburgh, Sheesh Restaurant at Five and Newburgh, Blue Plate Dinner located on Seven Mile Road just east of Farmington, and then most recently, China House Inn which is on the north side of Seven Mile just west of Farmington Road. This proposed restaurant would occupy a unit that is towards the east end of the shopping center. The site would be about 2,460 square feet. The unit was formally occupied by China House Inn, which recently moved to their new location on Seven Mile Road. It was in 2008 that China House was originally approved for this location with a maximum of 30 seats. Maya is asking to increase the seating to 67. Parking at this location does meet the requirements. Overall, 244 spaces required to satisfy the ordinance. The site provides for 254 spaces. There would be no exterior modifications other than the addition of a wall sign which is limited in this case to roughly 40 January 15, 2019 1 28862 square feet. As the Chair mentioned earlier, under the next Petition 2018-12-02-21, the same petitioner is requesting waiver use approval to utilize a Class C liquor license at this location. With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence. And as I mentioned, this will include both items as they were prepared by the Departments. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please. Mr. Taormina: There are several items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated December 21, 2018, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced waiver use petition. We have no objections to the proposed project at this time. The existing parcel is assigned the range of addresses of#33000 thru #33152 Seven Mile Road, with the address of#33100 Seven Mile Road being assigned to the overall parcel. The legal description provided with the petition appears to contain an error with the starting point of the parcel. The revised description as follows should be used to accurately describe the proposed waiver use area: That part of the southwest 4 of Section 3, T. 1S., R. 9E., City of Livonia, Wayne County, Michigan more particularly described as commencing at the southwest corner of said Section 3 and proceeding N 89°38'30" E, 686.51 feet along the south line of Section 3 and the centerline of Seven Mile Road; thence N 00°00'58"E, 60.00 feet to the North right-of-way line of Seven Mile Road and the Point of Beginning; thence N 00°02' W, 240.00 feet; thence N 89°38'30"E, 133.92 feet; thence N 00°02' W, 100.00 feet; thence N 89°38'30" E, 443.50 feet; thence S 00°00'58" W, 340.00 feet to the North right-of-way line of Seven Mile Road; thence S 89°38'30" W, 577.24 feet along said North right-of-way line to the Point of Beginning. It is suggested that the owner of the property have an updated ALTA survey completed on the property to correct the legal description errors, but the above description should be sufficient for the proposed waiver use. The existing building is currently serviced by public sanitary, storm and water main. The information submitted does not indicate any new connections to the existing utility services, so it appears that there will not be any additional impacts to the existing systems at this time. Should alterations to the existing services be required, the owner will need to provide plans to this Department to determine if permits will be required. Should the owner do any work within the Seven Mile Road right-of-way, they will need to contact the Wayne County Department of Public Service for any permits that may be required."The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated January January 15, 2019 28863 4, 2019, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to utilize a Class C liquor license and operate a full service restaurant on the property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal."The letter is signed by Keith Bo, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated December 18, 2018, 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 Brian Leigh, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Division of Police, dated December 19, 2018, which reads as follows: "We reviewed the plans submitted by Maya Enterprises, Inc., requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Sections 10.030) and 19.06 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to utilize a Class C liquor license (sale of beer, wine and spirits for consumption on the premises) and to operate a full-service restaurant- Maya Cocina Mexicana - located at 33018 Seven Mile Road, on the north side of Seven Mile, between Mayfield Avenue and Farmington Road, in the southwest quarter of Section 3. The proposed site is well within 500 feet of Joe's Meats &Seafood, located at 33066 Seven Mile, which holds a Specially Designated Merchant liquor license to sell beer and wine for off premises consumption and Joe's Produce, located at 33152 Seven Mile, which also holds a Specially Designated Merchant liquor license to sell beer and wine for off premises consumption, as well as a Class C liquor license to sell spirits for on premises consumption. Additionally, the proposed site is well within 1,000 feet of Coach's Corner Bar, located at 19170 Farmington, and Wintergarden Tavern located at 33320 Seven Mile. Both hold Class C liquor licenses for beer, wine and spirit consumption on premises. After reviewing the plans with the Chief of Police, we have no objections to the waiver being granted, contingent that the petitioner complies with: All State Laws, City Ordinances, Stipulations and conditions set by the Livonia Police Department, Liquor Investigation Unit, as approved by the Chief of Police, Stipulations and conditions set by the Traffic Bureau of the Livonia Police Department. We are available to provide any additional information you may desire on this subject." The letter is signed by Jeffrey Ronayne, Special Service Bureau. The next letter is from the Inspection Department, dated January 9, 2019, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above-referenced petition has been reviewed. This zoning district only allows for a maximum of 30 seats. The petitioner is requested 67 seats. This Department has no further objections to this petition."The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Director of Inspection. The next letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated December 17, 2018, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Treasurer's January 15, 2019 28864 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. The next letter is from the Finance Department, dated December 26, 2018, 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, I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Coline Coleman, Chief Accountant. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Mr. Long: Mark, the new restaurant is asking for 67 seats compared to 30 on the previous one. Mr. Taormina: That is correct. Mr. Long: I know we're in formula with the parking, but do we have any concerns. The formula was the same with the 30-seat restaurant, correct? Mr. Taormina: That is correct. Mr. Long: Are we worried at all now that we have 67 seats that we may have a parking problem? Mr. Taormina: No. Earlier today I had a conversation on this issue with the owner of the shopping center and Joe's Produce. He noted that this space is located on the end of the shopping center opposite where the majority of parking demand is for the site. In addition, there is ample parking at the rear of the shopping center, although it's not quite as convenient as parking directly in front. But most importantly, the peak hours of operation of the restaurant won't coincide with the peak hours of operation for most of the other tenants within this shopping center. Mr. Long: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Is the petitioner here this evening? We will need your name and address for the record please. What else would you like to tell us? Timothy Cruz, Maya Enterprises, Inc., 20011 Farmington Road, Livonia, Michigan 48152. My wife and I have lived in Livonia for the past 15 years. We also own and operate a construction company here in Livonia. I have an 18-year old son who just graduated from January 15, 2019 28865 Stevenson. I have an 11-year old daughter who attends Riley. The restaurant is something that my wife and I have been thinking about the for last decade and planning for the last five years. It's a contemporary Mexican restaurant, something that Michigan doesn't have. The concept is more of a farm-to-table gourmet Mexican food. An open kitchen, open ceiling concept. With my construction and design background, we also want it to be an architectural gem. Something that really wows you when you walk in, apart from the food and the whole concept. Do you have any questions for me? Ms. Smiley: I was wondering what your hours of operation are. Mr. Cruz: During the week until 10:00 and then the weekend until 11:00. We would open up at probably 10:00 or 11:00 in the morning. Ms. Smiley: And what would it be on the weekend? Mr. Cruz: On the weekends, 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Ms. Smiley: Thank you. Do you see any problems with the parking? Mr. Cruz: No, I don't. I live half a mile away from this spot. We frequent Joe's Produce and we're in there all the time. So we're very cognizant of the flow of traffic, when it's heavy, when it's not. Ms. Smiley: Thank you. Mr. Caramagno: Tell us a little bit more about farm-to-table and what that means. Mr. Cruz: Everything fresh. Nothing canned. Local providers trying to incorporate that gourmet, the way Grandma used to make it. The way I grew up with it. My grandmother is of Mexican descent and I grew up with Mexican food and that's what I consider Mexican food. I want to bring that to Michigan. Mr. Caramagno: At the study session, you were telling us a little more about the food and you elaborated a little more about that, about what type of food and how this is different than other restaurants and what you're trying to attract. Tell just a little more about that. Mr. Cruz: Well, not only would I like to create a restaurant to be great here, I'd also like to be able to take that same restaurant and plop it right down the middle of Mexico City and also have those people like it. Not just a cookie cutter version, not your typical multi- colored rainbows. When I leave here, I have some photos, some renditions of the way we would like the restaurant to look so you January 15, 2019 28866 get an idea of what it would look like. There's about a dozen photos here so you can get a rough idea. We'll take a little bit from every one of them. Mr. Caramagno: Sure, we'd like to see that. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: If you did want to hand that over to Mr. Taormina, we can pass it around and look at it as we decide. You also did provide us a copy of a potential menu for your restaurant. We have that in our packets. So thank you for doing that. Mr. Cruz: I've also applied for a liquor license, which is in the works right now. It's obviously contingent upon City of Livonia's approval. Mr. Wilshaw: We'll be talking about that next on our agenda. We'll get through this waiver use first. Are there any other questions for Mr. Cruz? I don't see any. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? We have one person coming forward. Good evening, sir. Joseph Maiorana, Jr., JOMA L.L.C., 1214 Copperwood Drive, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan 48302. I'm the landlord. I own Joe's Meat and Seafood and Joe's Produce and Maiorana Center. I met with Mr. Cruz in April and was very impressed with his plan, his detail, his business plan, the work that he wants to accomplish in the restaurant and his commitment. And we've been working throughout the summer to finalize his vision and his view of how he wants to do to his restaurant. I'm very impressed with the energy that he'll bring to the center and his commitment, his business plan and this is really well thought out. He's been working on this for I think probably four years, this exact restaurant and his vision of what he wants to create, not only aesthetically but how he wants to have the customer experience. So I think he's put a lot of work in this, and I think that he'll do a really good job. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Maiorana. Thank you coming as the landlord of the property. Are there any questions for him? Mr. Long: I would pose the same parking question to you. Are you confident? Mr. Maiorana: I am confident. There will be room. There is a cleaners. There is an eye doctor there and an UPS store. So it's somewhat low density traffic there. I think it will be fine. His dinner rush, a lot of those stores will be closed. I think it will work out quite well. January 15, 2019 28867 Mr. Long: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak? I don't see anyone coming forward. Mr. Cruz, we'll give you the last word. Is there anything else you'd like to finish with? Mr. Cruz: Not at this moment. I'm sure I'll think of something as soon as sit down. Mr. Wilshaw: Of course. In that case, we will close the public hearing and ask for a motion. On a motion by Long, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-01-2019 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on January 15, 2019, on Petition 2018-12-02-22 submitted by Maya Enterprises, Inc. requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 19.06 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to operate a full-service restaurant(Maya Cocina Mexicana) at 33018 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Mayfield Avenue and Farmington Road in the Southwest ' of Section 3, which property is zoned C-1, C-2, and P, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2018-12-02-22 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the maximum number of customer seats shall not exceed a total of sixty-seven (67) as illustrated on the floor plan drawn by C. Martone of Martone Design Studio, subject to City Council approval of a modification of the 30-seat maximum to which restaurants are limited in C-1 Zoning Districts per Sections 10.03(i) and 2.08 of Zoning Ordinance No. 543, as amended; 2. 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; 3. That no LED lightband or exposed neon shall be permitted on the site including, but not limited to, the building or around the windows; 4. That the plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time of application for the Certificate of Occupancy; and a January 15, 2019 28868 5. 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, 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 2018-12-02-21 MAYA ENTERPRISES Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2018- 12-02-21 submitted by Maya Enterprises, Inc. requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 10.03(j) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to utilize a Class C liquor license (sale of beer, wine and spirits for consumption on the premises) in connection with the operation of a full-service restaurant (Maya Cocina Mexicana) at 33018 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Mayfield Avenue and Farmington Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3. Mr. Taormina: The authority to operate a liquor license for on-premise consumption of alcohol within a C-1 zoning district was enacted pursuant to Ordnance #3077 adopted by City Council last November. This is the first petition under the new ordinance. As previously reported, the proposed restaurant would occupy a 2,460 square feet unit at the Maiorana shopping center with seating for 67. In a C-1 district, the following special requirements apply to businesses that seek waiver use approval to operate a Class C liquor license. (1) The principal use shall be that of a restaurant where the total gross receipts derived from the sale of all alcoholic beverages do not exceed 35 percent of the total gross receipts of all sales, both alcoholic and non-alcoholic. (2) Such use shall not be within 1,000 feet from any other such licensed establishment. In this case, there are two such licensed businesses located within 500 feet of the subject property. This includes Coaches Corner and Wintergarden Tavern, both of which carry a Class C license. (3) Such use shall be located at least 400 feet from any church or school building. In this case, Open Arms Church is located on the south side of Seven Mile, January 15, 2019 28869 directly across from the plaza and about 270 feet between the buildings. So for items two and three as mentioned, both of these would not be complied with. However, both separation requirements can be waived by the City Council by a separate resolution in which two-thirds of the members concur. Mr. Chairman, I read the correspondence previously on this item, making note of the Division of Police report provided by Mr. Ronayne, Special Services Bureau with respect to the liquor license at this location and the fact that he does not object to it. Mr. Wilshaw: Correct. Thank you. Are there any questions of the Planning Director? I don't see any. The petitioner is still here and we've already heard from him. Is there anything that you would like to add, Mr. Cruz? Timothy Cruz, Maya Enterprises, Inc., 22011 Farmington Road, Livonia, Michigan 48152. I know he said it's a maximum of 35 percent. In our business plan, we have allocated a maximum of 20 percent for alcohol sales. The restaurant is a restaurant first and foremost, serving margaritas and beer to complement the food as an Italian restaurant would serve wine. It's definitely by no means a watering hole or anything of that nature. Because my wife and I live half a mile down the block and our children grew up here, we're very cognizant of any bad or negative, or anything that would be negative that goes along with serving liquor. We're very conscious of the whole concept of serving in that manner. Mr. Wilshaw: Very good. Thank you, Mr. Cruz. Any questions for our petitioner? I don't see any. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Seeing no one coming forward, I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion. On a motion by McCue, seconded by Caramagno, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-02-2019 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on January 15, 2019, on Petition 2018-12-02-21 submitted by Maya Enterprises, Inc. requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 10.03(j) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance#543, as amended, to utilize a Class C liquor license (sale of beer, wine and spirits for consumption on the premises) in connection with the operation of a full-service restaurant(Maya Cocina Mexicana) at 33018 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Mayfield Avenue and Farmington Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3, which property is zoned C-1, C-2 and P, the Planning January 15, 2019 28870 Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2018-12-02-21 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That the use of a Class C liquor license at this location is subject to City Council waiving the 1,000-foot separation requirement from existing Class C licensed businesses per Sections 10.03(j)(2) and 19.06(1) of Zoning Ordinance No. 543, as amended; 2. That the use of a Class C liquor license at this location is subject to City Council waiving the 400-foot separation requirement from any church or school building per Sections 10.03(j)(3) and 19.06(1) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance No. 543, as amended; 3. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed Class C license; 4. That the proposed use of a Class C license is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area; and 5. 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 permit is obtained, this approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. FURTHER, the Planning Commission recommends the approval of a Conditional Agreement limiting this waiver use to this user only, with the provision to extend this waiver use approval to a new user only upon approval of the new user by the City Council. 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, 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 2018-12-02-23 LIVONIA HEALTHCARE Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2018- 12-02-23 submitted by Livonia Healthcare Real Estate, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(n) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to construct and operate a nursing and physical rehabilitation facility January 15, 2019 28871 at 8834 Wayne Road, located on the southeast corner of Wayne Road and Ann Arbor Trail in the Southwest % of Section 33. Mr. Taormina: This is a request to construct and operate a nursing facility at the southeast corner of Wayne Road and Ann Arbor Trail. The subject property is two acres in area. It is zoned C-2, General Business, with 300 feet of frontage on Wayne Road and approximately 290 feet along Ann Arbor Trail. The same petitioner was recently denied by the Planning Commission on a request to rezone the adjacent parcel from R-1 to OS, Office Services, for the same purpose, to develop a nursing facility. An appeal was filed but was subsequently withdrawn. The objective of the developers is to acquire and transfer the beds that are currently licensed at the St. Jude Nursing Center at 34350 Ann Arbor Trail to the proposed new facility, which would operate under a new name, Mission Point Livonia. In terms of the surrounding area, immediately to the south is the 2.25 acre vacant parcel zoned R-1 that the petitioner previously attempted to rezone. Immediately east of this site are single family homes zoned R-1, One Family Residential. West across Wayne Road are a variety of commercial businesses zoned Office Services and C-2, and then looking north across Ann Arbor Trail, there is a quick oil change facility zoned C-2 and C-1, and then additional single family homes. Convalescent and nursing homes are allowed in C-2 zoning districts subject to waiver use approval. Such use must be located on a parcel at least one acre in size plus 500 square feet of land per bed. Based on this standard, the subject two-acre site can easily accommodate the proposed 66- bed facility, which requires 1.76 acres altogether. Proposed is a two-story building with a gross floor area of roughly 50,200 square feet. Two site plan options are being considered and are included in your packets. Option One is the original submittal and it has the front of the building and the parking oriented towards Wayne Road. The rear service area would be on the east side adjacent to the existing residential homes. Looking at Option Two, this has the front oriented towards Ann Arbor Trail with the service area to the south adjacent to the vacant parcel. This option is the one we requested the petitioner submit so that the Commission could consider both options in determining which one would be preferred. In both cases, the building is positioned near the center of the property. With Option One, the setbacks are 69 feet from Wayne Road and 65 feet from Ann Arbor Trail where the minimum required setback is 60 feet. Along the east side adjacent to the existing homes, the setback shown is 36 feet and along the south property line the setback shown is 26 feet 9 inches. The minimum required setbacks when it adjoins the other property lines is 15 feet. So again, all the required setbacks are January 15, 2019 28872 being met on Option One. Looking at Option Two, the setback from Wayne Road and Ann Arbor Trail is 61 feet 4 inches and 70 feet, respectively, and along the east and south sides of the property, the setbacks are 22.5 feet and 37.2 feet, respectively. So both plans comply with the minimum setback requirements. However, a case could be made that Option Two is better than Option One for the following reasons: (1) It moves the service road, the parking and the receiving area, as well as the dumpster as shown on the plan, away from the residents, and (2) it provides a better opportunity for landscaping between the main road and the parking lot, it provides even more distance between the building and the existing homes and allows for additional landscaping in this area, and improves the curb appeal of the development along Wayne Road. We would further recommend that the building be shifted further west into the required building setback, but that would require a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. In terms of the overall bed count, the proposed facility would have 60 units and 66 beds, including 54 one-bed one-bath units, and six two-bed one bath units. Amenities within the facility include multiple lounges, computer rooms, dining rooms, theater, library, salon, break rooms and therapy areas, just to mention a few. In terms of parking, the ordinance requires one space for every three beds plus one space per employee. Based on this requirement, a total of 34 parking spaces is required to satisfy the ordinance. The plan shows 40 parking spaces. Thirty-six spaces are shown along Wayne Road between the building and the road, while there are four additional spaces located along the service drive that runs along the rear of the building and includes the trash dumpster and receiving area. In terms of the building's design, the principal materials shown are brick as well as horizontal and shake siding. There would be a peaked roof that would be asphalt shingled. This is a two-story structure in part where the maximum height would be 33 feet 6 inches, which is consistent with the C-2 zoning, which has a maximum height of 35 feet, the same height restriction that applies for residential zones. The dumpster is shown within the service area adjacent with the service road. In the case of Option One, it borders the residents. In the case of Option Two, it borders the vacant property to the south. It is required to be fully enclosed with gates. Also required is a protective wall that would border the residential districts. The wall is required to be five to seven feet in height. The plan shows a five-foot high wall running along the east and south property lines, which would comply with the ordinance requirements for protective screening in these areas. Landscaping is being met. Fifteen percent of the site would have to be landscaped. A landscape plan was provided with Option One. With Option Two there is no landscaping detail so that's January 15, 2019 28873 something that would have to come back if it moves in that direction. All of the site lighting is shown at 15 feet. This is five feet less than the maximum of 20 feet. That is the summary of the project. I'll be happy to read the correspondence. There are several items related to this case. Bear with me please. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please. Go ahead. Mr. Taormina: The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated December 21, 2018, 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 existing parcel is assigned the address of#8834 Wayne Road. The legal description provided with the petition appears to be correct and should be used in conjunction with the proposed project. The parcel is currently not serviced by sanitary sewer. The existing sanitary sewer bordering the north side of the property is a Wayne County interceptor main that would not be acceptable to service the site. The owner will need to extend the sewer from neighboring parcels to be able to service the proposed development. Public water main is available on the west side of Wayne Road, or the north side of Ann Arbor Trail. Storm sewer is available in the Wayne Road right-of-way but is owned by Wayne County. The owner will need to obtain permits for any connection, as well as for the required storm water detention, from the Wayne County Department of Public Services. Based on the current legal descriptions and ALTA survey provided, the existing parcel extends to the centerline of Ann Arbor Trail. If the proposed project moves forward, we would like to ask the owner to consider dedicating the north 60 feet of the parcel for the proposed Ann Arbor Trail right-of-way as indicated on the roadway master plan. The proposed right-of-way dedication would not affect setbacks as shown." The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated January 4, 2019, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct and operate a nursing and physical rehabilitation facility on property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal with the following stipulations: (1) Subject building(s) are to be provided with an automatic sprinkler system, and on-site hydrants shall be located between 50 feet and 100 feet from the Fire Department connection. (2) Adequate hydrants shall be provided and located with a maximum spacing of 300 feet between hydrants. Most remote hydrant shall flow 1,500 GPM with a residual pressure of 20 PSI. (3) This division requests that the entrance drive January 15, 2019 28874 be posted (on both sides) Fire Lane - No Parking. (4) Any curves or corner of streets shall accommodate emergency vehicles with a turning radius of fifty-three feet wall-to-wall and an inside turning radius of twenty-nine feet six inches. (5) Nursing homes shall be protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance to 13.3.2.11 NFPA 1, 2015. (6) Knox Box installation is required for Fire Department access." The letter is signed by Keith Bo, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated December 21, 2018, 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 Brian Leigh, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated January 9, 2019, 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 fifth letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated January 7, 2019, 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, due to Livonia Healthcare being associated with St. Jude Nursing Center Inc., currently operating in Livonia at 34350 Ann Arbor Trail, where there are outstanding amounts due for Real and Personal Property taxes, I do not recommend moving forward with this proposal. I have attached a summary of information and documentation for our review." The letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. The sixth letter is from the Finance Department, dated December 26, 2018, 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, I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Coline Coleman, Chief Accountant. The next is a email communication, received January 9, 2019, from Don Kleinknecht, which reads as follows: "I have the same questions previously asked regarding Petition 2018-09-01-07. If I resided on Laurel Street, I would ask: Will the office space be more than one story? Will the customer parking lot be on the west side of the complex? Will the parking lot be lighted? Will the medical waste and/or trash containers be visible to the residents on Laurel Street? Will Dover Street be extended to Wayne Road? Will the employee parking be east of the building? This petition was denied by the Planning Commission." That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: We also did receive a letter on our desks from Kimberley Plascencia, 34579 Dover. She posed a number of questions and January 15, 2019 28875 added some photographs from a similar facility. So we should also have that in our record as well. Mr. Taormina: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: We all did receive a copy of that letter. So with that, is there any questions of the Planning Director'? Mr. Bongero: The site plan. This is Option Two that we have in front of us? Mr. Taormina: On the screen is Option Two. Mr. Bongero: Okay. So we're also proposing possibly sliding it more to the west to get it further away from the neighbors, right? Mr. Taormina: Yes. Just to orient everyone to what's shown on the screen, Ann Arbor Trail is on the left-hand side of the drawing. Wayne Road is on the bottom of the drawing. What we're recommending is shifting the building to the west, which in this case would be further away from the residential homes, which are to the east and which are on the top side of this drawing. Mr. Bongero: Okay. So with that, they would need a zoning variance depending on how far they slide it, right? Mr. Taormina: Yes. It's shown only a foot and half off the setback line at this point. If the building is shifted anything more than 1.5 feet, it would encroach into that required setback and require a variance. Mr. Bongero: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Bongero, to answer your question that you originally asked, the physical plan that we had before us does appear to be Option Two since it's facing Ann Arbor Trail. Ms. Smiley: Just for clarification, we want to shift the whole building south how far? Mr. Taormina: I have noted a dimension at this point. Ms. Smiley: Because right now it's only 15 feet away from the residential area, right, or is it 22 feet? Mr. Taormina: It's 22.5 feet under this plan. Ms. Smiley: Okay. But they would lose parking. Is that a concern? January 15, 2019 28876 Mr. Taormina: Not necessarily. Ms. Smiley: Okay. It's just that they would need a variance. Mr. Caramagno: I'm hearing a couple questions on Option Two where the service entry is off Wayne Road. Does this fix the sidewalk problem that we were talking about where there's no gap with the parking off Wayne Road? I think it does. We had a problem there at one time, didn't we? Mr. Taormina: I'm sorry. Mr. Caramagno: There was a problem where the cars were parking right up against the sidewalk. Is that all good now with this version? Mr. Taormina: Yes. That's correct. Mr. Caramagno: Okay. So that's one. Moving the building west we already talked about. The 15-foot driveway around the building, fire lane I guess it's called. Is that proposed to be grass, asphalt, concrete? We talked about this the other day. Mr. Taormina: To be determined. This is a conversation we would have to have with our Fire Department to determine whether or not the fire lane is necessary because I believe they are complying with the code requirements relative to perimeter access to the building. They don't need full 360 degree access, but they need a certain percentage. If they do feel it's needed, then the question becomes in what form does it have to be? Could it be grass paver blocks? Does it have to be an asphalt drive? We would discuss that with them. Hopefully, it would be nothing more than maybe some type of hard surface, maybe grass paver block, which could be landscaped and concealed with grass or some other type of landscaping. We would hope to avoid it altogether though, and by shifting that building further to the west, enable more space for landscaping along the east property line to buffer the development from the existing residences. Mr. Caramagno: That's where I was going with that. If not, I would think we would get some trees and more buffer in there. The only other question I've got is, I'm looking at the service drive on the south side. I don't know if there's enough room there for that garbage truck or any of those trucks to turn around without having to back out onto Wayne Road, which has been said is very busy and therefore very dangerous. There needs to be some sort of consideration here where these trucks can turnaround and drive back out of there, something somehow. January 15, 2019 28877 Mr. Taormina: I agree. That was mentioned to the architect during our meetings and more than likely it would have to be relocated, maybe to the corner of that parking area or maybe an extension of the paved area in order to facilitate trucks turning around in that back area. Mr. Caramagno: You're probably looking at trucks that are 35 feet long, 38 feet long, whether it's delivery trucks, garbage trucks, uniform trucks. You're going to need at least a proper turning radius there, ability to back in at a T somewhere. That's all I've got. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Is the petitioner here this evening'? We will need your name and address for the record please. Roger Mali, Livonia Healthcare Real Estate, 721 Elmwood, Troy, Michigan 48083. Mr. Wilshaw: You've been here before. We've talked about this project, but there's obviously been some changes if you want to recap those for us. Mr. Mali: Yes, thank you for the opportunity to come back. So as this board knows, we were here before for a zoning change request on the parcel to the south. From a program change, what this development group intends to do or would like to do is to build a 64-bed facility. I just wanted to correct that because we may have it wrong in the application. I heard it as 66 beds. So it will be a 64- bed skilled nursing and rehabilitation center. This particular group has been successful in doing is, we are building first class nursing and rehab centers here in Michigan in the Detroit area through our affiliates throughout other parts of the country. The intention is for this place to deliver a truly enhanced patient care and resident living experience. It will be a first-class facility in every respect. The gentlemen here can talk a little big more about the design and the materials from how we're building this, how we're constructing it to first class design, first class materials, brand new furnishings throughout the entire facility. We're just going to have exquisite common areas. And then from a care delivery experience, changing the model a little bit or changing the model quite significantly from what is traditionally thought of as a nursing home or convalescent. So this facility is going to focus primarily on physical rehabilitation and short-term transitional rehab services. So the typical person that would be coming to this facility, 65 years old, broken hip, they're x number of days in the hospital. They need 10, 14, 21 days of physical rehab in-house in-patient at this facility, and that's what we'll be providing. Other amenities, all of the rooms will have very limited double rooms, I believe in the site plan we have there may be only four or six semi-private rooms, but even all of those semi-private will have January 15, 2019 28878 full private showers, private bathrooms. Again, ceramic tile type materials. We'll have private dining experiences, enhanced common areas, activities areas, and just so all around, I think for a first-class facility from a program area. To comment on one of them, this development group - I know we talked a little bit about it at the study sessions - so we are not affiliated with the St. Jude facility so it is completely different ownership and Livonia Healthcare Real Estate and its partners, we are buying just the nursing home bed licenses from the St. Jude facility, so we are not acquiring any of the other assets or any of their business or the going concern. In addition to that, I think Jason or Dan, would you like to talk a little bit more about the mechanics of the project? Mr. Wilshaw: Sure. Dan Tosch, Progressive Associates, Inc., 838 West Long Lake, Bloomfield. I'm the architect for the project. A couple things that were discussed regarding an alternate site plan. The original site plan had the main entrance off of Wayne Road. As discussed at the study session, what if we rotated the building because it would solve some of the concerns and problems that we had. Fortunately, when we went back to the drawing board and met with Mr. Taormina and kind of reviewed the concept, which is the second site plan or the alternate site plan, which I think has definite advantages for the overall site. Primarily, it helps buffering the single-family homes to the east and pulls the building away from that area and relocates the service drive to the south of the building. In addition, there is a possibility of adjusting the building further west 10 feet or so which would give us more green space on the east side of the building, which again will benefit the homeowners to the east on that side. Predominately what we wanted to do based on the rendering also is utilize residential materials and different design concepts that would blend in with the overall neighborhood and the residential areas in Livonia. You see brick, horizontal siding, horizontal shakes that are of the Hardyplank or composite materials for long-term maintenance and such, utilizing shutters and some other dormer details, front porch for the residents based on the rendering. So that gives us all the residential feel that we're looking for. The service area to the south of the building, we'll have to manipulate that regarding the truck access. Relocate the truck dumpster and provide more of a turnaround space for that. I think we can do that within the space that's there working with trash removal companies and such. I think with that area on the south side of the building, it does buffer the single-family homes to the east. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Tosch. Is there a material sample board? January 15, 2019 28879 Mr. Tosch: We can do that. We can put one together. We have one but the colors that you see on the rendering, but we can put actual samples together for the roof shingles, the color of the brick, siding and the trim materials. That's easy enough to do. We could bring that. Okay. If this moves on to City Wilshaw: y Council, I would certainly recommend you have that for them. I would say that at this point is the color renderings that we have a reasonably accurate assessment of the colors and materials? Mr. Tosch: Yes. We have some specific colors and brick in mind. It's kind of hard to transmit that into the actual, but the color sample board would be in that family of what you see on the rendering. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Do we have any questions for the architect? Ms. Smiley: When you talk about shifting the building to the west, would that be possible? Mr. Tosch: Yes. We tried to do the design as it is presented to stay within the confines of the Zoning Ordinance. With the support of the Planning Commission and the Planning Staff, if we adjusted that, we can do that very easily. The reason for the design, we're not trying to request a variance at this point. We just want to make sure that we could make the overall development work within the confines of the statutes and the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Smiley: Okay. How much of a shift were you thinking? Mr. Tosch Ten or 15 feet which would give us a landscape buffer on the east property line. So rather than just a wall, we would have a 15-foot berm with landscape material and green space. Ms. Smiley: Okay. And then you would have to submit a whole landscape plan too. Mr. Tosch: Correct. We had a landscape plan for the original concept. We would have to modify that. We can do that. Mr. Bongero: Going back to Mr. Caramagno's concern about the dumpster enclosure, can you guys give some consideration to relocating that or getting it positioned so that . . . because it is going to be a problem with what Sam's saying for a truck to make that turn. Mr. Tosch: We will come back with a redesign on that basis. January 15, 2019 28880 Mr. Bongero: Maybe pulling it to the west allows you some more room for the enclosure in that back corner. Maybe you could look at that. Mr. Tosch: Right. That's correct. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. Is there anything else, Mr. Mali, that you'd like to present? Mr. Mali: The engineer is here as well if you have any questions for him. Mr. Wilshaw: Do we have any other questions for our petitioner'? Mr. Long: Mr. Mali, you made the comment that the ownership of St. Jude is different than the ownership of Livonia Healthcare Real Estate. Correct? Mr. Mali: Correct. Mr. Long: On the Michigan Annual Reports that are in our packet, both are listed at the same address though. Mr. Mali: So they are, and we discussed this at the study session. There's two parts of confusion to it. I think years ago when we had come in for this, it was contemplated that we would be doing a development at the existing site, at the Livonia site, which cannot happen for . . . nothing to do with the city ordinances. That's a state requirement. And then I had mentioned my brother owns the St. Jude Nursing Facility and he is exiting the business completely, and that's why the addresses are there. So that business and his involvement in this particular business is coming to an end with this liquidation. Mr. Long: Thank you. Mr. Taormina: This is actually a question for the architect. Neither the site plan nor the elevation plan indicates the location of any exterior mechanicals. Can you describe where those would go? Mr. Wilshaw: It's a question for either the engineer or the architect. We're trying to find out where the location of the mechanical, HVAC units and so forth are going to be located. Mr. Tosch: There are some small mechanical rooms in the building, on the back side of the building, which is the one story and the roof area, is where some of the air handling units and such will go and they will be screened. January 15, 2019 28881 Mr. Taormina: I'm confused because as I look at this elevation, I don't see any area that's screened. You have a peaked roof. Mr. Tosch: It would be within the roof structure on the rear of the building. There is also some mechanical area and handling units that are inside the floor plan of the building. Mr. Taormina: So let me understand this correctly. Those would be concealed by the roof itself. There is no flat portion. They don't sit on top. Mr. Tosch: Right. They would be within the roof structure, but if they are cut out of the roof structure, then they would be screened. They won't be exposed. Mr. Taormina: In this case, it's on the rear of the building, which on Option One would be the east side towards the residents and on Option Two would be on the south side adjacent to the vacant parcel. Mr. Tosch: That is correct. Mr. Taormina: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Tosch: You would not see those from the front or from the street side. Mr. Taormina: Because we're looking at photographs, and I believe that one of the residents will probably speak to this issue, but it shows how 1 the HVAC was handled at your facility which is in Holly, apparently, and they are all exterior. Thank you. Mr. Caramagno: I have a question for Mark. Mark, is this property that's being proposed zoned C-2? It's been C-2 for a long time. Mr. Taormina: It has. I didn't check. I'd have to go back and take a look to see when the zoning change occurred, but ever since I've been here. I know that. Mr. Caramagno: A long time. 20 years. Mr. Taormina: Yes. Mr. Caramagno: Thank you. Ms. Smiley: I have one more question and I'm sorry to make you repeat this. You said that it's gone into bankruptcy? What's the deal again? January 15, 2019 28882 Mr. Mali: St. Jude Nursing Center, yes, it is in bankruptcy and it is closing. It is liquidating. Ms. Smiley: But they own the property and you're going to buy the property from them? Mr. Mali: No. Only the licenses. We are not buying the St. Jude property. We're not buying any of the real estate, none of the equipment, nothing. Like buying a liquor license, we're buying just the operating rights for the nursing home bed license. Ms. Smiley: Then who owns the property? Mr. Mali: The property is owned by St. Jude and it's going to be sold. Ms. Smiley: But not to you. Mr. Mali: But not to us. No, not to me. And not to anybody in this development group. It's going to be listed and sold. Ms. Smiley: We had a letter from our Finance Department. How is all that going to get corrected? Do you know? Mr. Mali: Subject to what happens with the site plan, we talked to Ms. Scheel. We did speak with her and we had this conversation with her and what was going on with it. She advised to proceed with this meeting but to let this Commission know, which we did at the last study session, that we were in discussions with her and that it would be something that we would have to discuss with her and with City Council outside of the site planning issue. Ms. Smiley: I'm just guessing that Council will take a very serious look at it before it would proceed beyond them. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Bongero: Mark, going back to your concern about the mechanicals, I think it shows on the north and front elevations. There some doghouse dormers on the roof. Would that be where the mechanical rooms are going to be? Mr. Taormina: On the north elevation? Mr. Bongero: See on the roof, it's got some dormers on top of the roof? Those little doghouse dormers is what they call them. Mr. Taormina: I don't believe so. Mr. Tosch: Those are for rooftop ventilation. January 15, 2019 28883 Mr. Bongero: It's not going on the ground like the picture of these? Mr. Taormina: I think what he said is that it's going up into the roof on this projection which houses the mechanical room and the back service area and kitchen area. Mr. Bongero: I understand. I just thought maybe that's where they're going with those dormers, but I get it. Mr. Mali: Holly Just to add, the project was also a renovation. There was only a partial new and we had some challenges with the mechanical there, and of course, what you don't see there is that backs up to a river. So those mechanicals back up there and then to a rental property on the other side. So they're still shielded from the residential area because in Holly we own the five acres behind that property, which the mechanicals are basically hidden from the rest of the world. Mr. Bongero: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Mr. Taormina: And please sign in. Mr. Wilshaw: We do have a secretary that is remotely going to be taking minutes, so it would be helpful if we had your name and address signed in. Mike Furgerson, 8880 Hanlon Avenue, Livonia, Michigan. I'm directly east of the site area. I'm not in favor of this development. In general, I have concerns about mixing commercial of whatnot types of developments so close to residential. I imagine there will be noise additions for these mechanicals. It's going to be a lot more just built up in general. There will be more traffic. I expect there are medications and whatnot in use in this type of facility and there's going to be added waste one way or another. I imagine there's chemicals required, bleaches and whatnot that are required for a medical facility that won't benefit our area. I question, I'm curious, I guess, how those bed licenses are sold. I don't know the petitioner at all, but in general, when family are selling products or items to family, if there is any kind of oversight in that area. I guess I'd like to hear from the rest of our residents. But I just want to put up my objection to start with, but I am looking forward to the development of the discussion. January 15, 2019 28884 Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Furgerson. One question. This is zoned C-2, which is commercial zoning. Do you have any thoughts as to what you would rather see on this property as it's developed? Mr. Furgerson: I would prefer to be residential. That would kind of tie off the rest of that area to be consistent. I know there's commercial across the roads, but there's a church directly south of the two parcels and residential all to the east of it, and it seems odd to have a small commercial plot right up next to the residential. I haven't brought all of my mental questions with me yet, but I might have more. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Furgerson. I appreciate you coming. Any other folks in the audience wishing to speak? Sandra Williams, 8949 Laurel, Livonia, Michigan. I'm with my husband, Tim. We're the original owners of that property. So the whole time we've lived there, we've always been able to look out back and see trees. Yes, there's noise because it is fairly busy streets, but it's nothing where it's going to be a 24/7 building, noise all the time, the HVAC units, the trucks. But mainly we're concerned. Of course we oppose this. Besides the noise and lights, the sirens and the HVAC units, we're also concerned about the traffic backups. Right now, anytime between 4:30 and 6:00 Monday through Friday, you basically have to turn right to go left. You have to go through the subdivision across Ann Arbor Trail or go around the subdivision to get out. The backups are really bad. Additionally, we're concerned about the water runoff if this building is to be built with all the cement. Right now, we have no water issues in our basement or flooding anywhere, but we're concerned with all the cement there that this may now cause some issues for flooding. And I'm concerned about the hookups for the water and all that. Is that going to be lower pressure for us going forward? Then there's also the famous Livonia rat problem that we hear about on Facebook all the time. We've never had a rat issue, but we know once the digging begins, that can cause stirring of nests up or whatever is out there in the sewers or whatever. So very concerned about that. And then also the easement between our property and the wall. We have a six-foot composite fence right now but a five-foot fence is going to do nothing basically for us. I'm very concerned about that. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. and just so you know and anyone else who speaks, we are taking notes. Our petitioner is also taking notes and we're going to have him come back up and address these issues that you're raising. So don't think we're not answering all your questions off the bat. But thank you, Ms. Williams. January 15, 2019 28885 Donald Plasencia, 34579 Dover, Livonia, Michigan. I'm just on the backside of the neighborhood, but first of all, I had a couple questions. Where is the entrance coming from where the cars pull into that facility? Mr. Wilshaw: We're looking at two options tonight, sir. The original plan that was presented to us was off of Wayne Road and would have a service entrance that comes off of Ann Arbor Trail to access the back of the building. What we've also spoke to the petitioner about, and he's presented a plan, which is what we're calling Option Two. It rotates the building so that the guests would come off of Ann Arbor Trail and the service entrance would be off of Wayne Road. Mr. Plasencia: Well, that would not work because that's a left-hand turn lane there and that's the part that's backed up all day. They won't be able to turn in on that. Like she said, Sandy, that we have to actually turn right now to turn left. All the time. The traffic would be a big problem. That would not work. I personally visited their other location that was brand new. The last time they were here they said it was a brand new located in the center of a residential area. It's not located in the center of a residential. There is no houses behind them. There's one house on the side of them with a pole barn, and then they have like an area next to them where there's flagpole and there's a couple garages and a couple houses there. Across the street is one acre lots with houses, and they have woods behind them. I visited it and drove by most of the nursing homes in Livonia. They're all backed up to woods, unless you know of one that isn't. So I noticed that. So the noise problem, yes, will be a problem. I did listen to the HVAC. I drove out there and I walked back the longer sidewalk that goes back there. It is loud. Those peaks that you're talking about. That's just for ventilation for the roof. The mechanicals have to be somewhere and you have to have room for that and that's going to be pretty close to the house. It's very loud. This is an existing residential area right now. Now we're going to try to put a commercial building up against us on one of the busiest roads and intersections in Livonia. My big thing is that every bit of greenery that we have here in Livonia, we're trying to pound a commercial building to benefit individuals that are running the facilities. Livonia was originally built as residential mainly with commercial areas that they built separately. I just think that this project is not going to work. It's just going to take up more and more of our area that is just open. All these people that are lined up against there, they're not going to have the view anymore that they had. I actually own a business in Plymouth, Michigan, a Goodyear store, and we have a dumpster just like they have. It January 15, 2019 28886 requires at least 40 feet to backup out of there. They have a difficult time getting out there without almost backing right up to the main street. So it is going to be a problem with that. I've seen it. I've been there 40 years. That was another one of my concerns. We're going to have lights in the facility. Are those lights going to be up top and how long are they going to be on to benefit parking spaces there? I know in the summertime, just like Sandy said, it's the smell. We still get smells even though we usually are putting ... we don't put oil because those have to be disposed of properly, but just whatever you're putting into it, it just does smell after a while. And ours is far away from . . . there's condos behind them. We keep it far enough away at least 1,000 feet, somewhere in there. That will be a problem if you guys decide to do this. That's all I got. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Plasencia. I appreciate the letter that your wife sent and the photographs as well of the other location. Thank you. James Klinebriel, 8921 Hanlon, Livonia, Michigan. I have a couple concerns with the stormwater runoff. Where will you be dumping that at, onto Wayne Road? Mr. Wilshaw: No. Everybody who develops anything in the city and Wayne County is required to manage their stormwater runoff. We'll have the petitioner speak a little more in detail about how they're going to manage that, but typically that's got to be managed on-site and then it's slowly released. Mr. Klinebriel: Like a retention pond or something. Is that correct? Mr. Wilshaw: Retention pond or underground. Mr. Klinebriel: Or underground. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes. They can do underground retention systems as well. Mr. Klinebriel: Okay. And where is the sanitary sewer tapped into? Do you know? Mr. Wilshaw: I don't know that. Mr. Taormina: That is yet to be determined. The Engineering Division indicates there is no direct sanitary service provided to this site, so that's something they are going to have to resolve probably through an extension of an easement on an adjacent property. Mr. Klinebriel: So to resolve it you're saying go into the neighborhood? January 15, 2019 28887 Mr. Taormina: I don't know, sir, where the connection would occur. Maybe that's something the engineer can address. He's here. Mr. Klinebriel: Because we don't want to overtax it now. It's bad enough as it is. Is there a water main there available on site there? Mr. Taormina: Water is available to the site. That is correct. Mr. Klinebriel: And where is that at? Mr. Taormina: Again, I'm going to refer that to the project engineer. Mr. Wilshaw: They do have an engineer. We'll have him come forward and address those questions for you. Mr. Klinebriel: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Anyone else in the audience wishing to speak? Good evening, ma'am. Cathleen Lewis, 8913 Laurel, Livonia, Michigan. Good evening. I've been a resident since about '91. I want to go on record as objecting to this. I think the reason why, well, I know the reason why. Because there is a lot of activity already at this intersection, and it's kind of like when you're a resident, you live with it. You see it every day. I don't know what your data shows or whatnot, but there's a lot of activity there. I'm concerned because also if we're talking about trying to get the residents' approval, I don't see any pictures of berms or I don't see what that would look like at all. So I can't picture it and it causes me to wonder is this a really caring kind of structure taking under consideration the residents. So I'm skeptical of that because I'm not seeing anything. But the main thing is, the accidents that could happen on that corner. My master bedroom backs up to Wayne Road at 8913, and I can hear accidents at that corner when it happens. It's gotten a little better but still with the additional residents and the new homes that are being built along Ann Arbor Trail, it's just adding to the congestion there. I don't know what would happen with an emergency vehicle all of a sudden having to intersect with something that's already so busy. In fact, my daughter, about three years ago, there was coming down Joy Road to Wayne Road, there was an ambulance that ran through there that didn't have their lights on, and it caused a three or four car accident. My daughter got bumped and pushed aside. She didn't get hurt. So it truly is a busy site and it just seems like we're trying to fit something into something that it doesn't seem to quite fit to me. We've turned it this way. We've January 15, 2019 28888 turned it that way. We don't have answers for dumpsters, for water, for sewage. So that's why I have that concern. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Ms. Lewis. I appreciate your comments. Good evening, ma'am. Julianne Strong, 8891 Laurel, Livonia, Michigan. Good evening. I just want to go on record as objecting for all of the above reasons. I'm not going to repeat it all, but basically, the same. Mr. Wilshaw: I appreciate you coming. I will say even though your comments are short, it doesn't lessen the impact of them. We do appreciate your conciseness. Deborah Dani, 34647 Dover Avenue, Livonia, Michigan. I have a couple questions. Whatever happened to the idea of using the other lot that is adjacent to this one? Mr. Wilshaw: The same petitioner came forward for that other lot. The Planning Commission gave a denial of recommendation for using that lot. The petitioner has then decided to go back and look at this lot, and given that its zoning is different, is now bringing that petition to us. That was their choice based on our recommendation. Ms. Dani: It has also gone from a one-story facility to a two-story? Is that correct? Mr. Wilshaw: I believe the plan had changed to fit on the new lot. There are some changes. Ms. Dani: Okay. So all of the houses that would be along the back or to the east of that property are now going to have a second story that looks down into their yard to the back of their house and not much privacy. I think that's a big concern along with all the other things that the other residents have mentioned. There's over a dozen of us here. I think it shows that we're standing in unity that we really don't want this to happen. I believe one of our main concerns is that our property values are going to plummet. They're just going to tank right out. Do you want to live by a nursing home? I don't. Mr. Wilshaw: I appreciate that. Ms. Dani: So I go on record as I don't agree. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Ms. Dani. Good evening, sir. January 15, 2019 28889 Tim Godin, 34623 Dover Avenue, Livonia, Michigan. Good evening. We're Tim and Beth Godin. We're just east of the new site that you're talking about. I think we both want to just officially go on record as well. We're against it. We'd rather not see it. I do get it. You need nursing homes somewhere and whether it's different types of businesses or this, I understand there's always going to be certain residents that don't want it in their neighborhood so to speak. So I do get that. With that though, I still do have a lot of concerns like some of these people. I hate to hear neighbors talking about moving just because of this. Is it an over-reaction or not? I don't know. Home values, yeah, they're probably bound to go down. I do realize it's zoned commercial, of course. So we never expected houses there. I guess we just always hoped whatever was put there was something that maybe would be less intrusive, less lights, less noise. Would still love if that was an option for some other type of business, of course. I also wonder whether it seems funny or not, there's no relation between the old site and this site, but we do have brothers of course and the brother owes back taxes. Now this place is moving there. I know they say he's not related or involved with this business, but boy if he was, it certainly wouldn't make sense to give them the chance to build another site if they already owe back taxes. I'll just throw it out there as my personal comment as well. Beth, I don't know if you have anything to add. Beth Godin, 34623 Dover Avenue, Livonia, Michigan. I missed the first meeting and I don't understand why they can't just rebuild on the site that they're on. Mr. Wilshaw: You mean the site south of this? Ms. Godin: Yeah, where St. Jude is right now. Mr. Wilshaw: This is a different entity. Even though there may be some familial relationship between some of the owners, the reality is this is a different . . . Ms. Godin: They're just buying the beds. Mr. Wilshaw: They're simple buying the licenses. It's not the same business. Ms. Godin: Okay. I'm just worried that's going to become another eyesore like Nankin Mills. Mr. Wilshaw: That's something we're concerned about as well. January 15, 2019 28890 Joseph Roose, 15608 Hidden Lane, Livonia, Michigan. Good evening. I feel for the residents of this proposed development because I back up to Marycrest. Just a couple things I haven't heard mentioned that I'd like to bring up to the Commission that are irritants to the residents. The location of the auxiliary generator I haven't heard mentioned. I think according to the State laws that the nursing homes must abide by, they have to test it frequently and for long periods of time. That's irritating depending on where it's located. Exterior wall lighting, having flood lights that shine out away from the building, especially at the close proximity that it sounds like it will be on this development, that is major daily . . . every night you look out your window you see those lights shining in your yard. Another thing about parking, I heard it was mentioned that there is enough parking spaces. Perhaps on a Monday through Friday basis, but weekend and holidays are a big time at nursing homes for family and friends to come visit. If there's not enough parking there, they're going to be parking in the neighborhoods and walking over to the facility to visit and that's going to happen every weekend, especially during the good weather. That's all I have to add. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Roose. I appreciate your comments. Mr. Plascencia: I just have one question, and that is, for this gentleman here . . . Mr. Wilshaw: Ask the question to us. Mr. Plascencia: The last meeting that we were at you had asked him about what they were going to do with St. Jude on Ann Arbor Trail and Stark. He said that they had to move here because the State of Michigan would not grant them certain, I don't know if it was licenses or whatever he had called it, that's why they couldn't do it. That's exactly what he said. Then you asked him what are they going to do with the old facility, and he says, I guess we'll have to tear it down. That's exactly what he said. I just don't . . . so, I'm pretty sure that there's a real reason why they want to get out of there and move over to this. They're pushing, pushing to get it into this one spot for some reason. I just don't get it. Like I said, I don't think it's going to work. I'm worried about the entrances trying to come off of Ann Arbor Trail. If you were there and taken videos of it, you'd see how bad that is. And that's a deterrent. That's a pretty big problem. That's all I got. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. We will ask that question. Just so you know, I know that one aspect that was discussed at the last meeting was that in transferring the licenses, I believe the State requires that they be moved to a facility that's within a certain radius of the old January 15, 2019 28891 facility. It's required that they be somewhere in the general area. We'll get to that detail in a moment. Ma'am. Ms. Korasiak, 8918 Laurel, Livonia, Michigan. I just want to put on record that I am against those plans. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you so much. Jacqieline Thomas, 34590 Dover Avenue, Livonia, Michigan. I just want on the record also. I oppose this decision for all the reasons that my neighbors have mentioned. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Ms. Thomas. We have another gentleman coming forward. James Seruga, 34365 Dover Avenue, Livonia, Michigan. I'd just like to go on record as well that I'm opposed to the plan for basically all the reasons that have been discussed so far. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Seruga. Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak? Mr. Seruga, I believe you were the last one. With that, I believe we've taken care of audience communication at this point. Thank you all for coming forward and speaking your mind and asking questions. We're going to go back to our petitioner and a number of questions and issues have been raised. I believe you've been taking notes. We're going to ask you to try to touch on some of these items. Mr. Mali: Thank you and thank you to the residents for the comments. I think just the first thing and what this Commission knows and the engineer can talk about is, the property is of course zoned commercial. We are not here to ask, and I think the difference with when we were here a few months ago, is we were asking to actually change the zoning on a residential parcel. I think that maybe needs to be clarified, but of course there could be a lot of other permitted high density uses for this property, fast food restaurant, office building, medical office, so on and so forth. I just say that. It could be a gas station, from a 7-11 to whatever it's going to be and whatever could be approved, but the comment was asked, how long has this been zoned commercial. I think when we looked at it, I think it's at least 20 years that this has been zoned commercial. We're here just to ask for a waiver of the use, not of the zoning, and for this particular project, the engineer behind me can talk a little bit about the traffic. We did do a study there and he does have comparative analysis compared to the amount of traffic that would be generated from this facility as opposed to a fast food restaurant or grocery store or gas station, January 15, 2019 28892 and it is considerably less. Not just marginally less, but it's considerably less traffic and considerably less busy. And of course all of those uses, if it was a restaurant or something like that, it would generate exponentially more garbage, traffic, noise, lighting and so on and so forth. What we're trying to do there, this still is a residential facility. It is people that are living in the facility. So it is not like a hospital where people are coming in and out. The employees that go there are, I'm going to say 9 to 5, but they're shift workers so they're there on a shift basis. It's not like there's a continuous turn of people. Yes, there is traffic for visitors at the end of the day, but I would also point out that the facility that is on Ann Arbor Trail, which is I believe, maybe a quarter of a mile. I think it's three-tenths of a mile, is closing so there's not an increase in traffic or density to this road and to this area. Sixty- four bed facility there; 64 bed facility here. There were some questions about why are we here. I think you touched on it, Mr. Chairman, is that we're not specifically trying to pin it on this site. It's that the transfer and the sale of the bed licenses is governed exclusively by the State of Michigan. It's through a certificate of need process. The State of Michigan will not allow a rebuild/replacement at an existing site, so they will not allow an existing license nursing facility, and this applies to other sorts of facilities, to close down operations and to rebuild. In years past, that has been permissible, so there have been projects. We even in this group have done a project where we have bought an old dilapidated convalescent center and we have closed it down completely and built a new facility on the existing site, and that is no longer permitted and we don't believe it's going to be permitted any time in the foreseeable future. That is what forced this development group to find another location, and I think you keyed in on it. The area of transfer, thinking of a nursing home bed license much like a liquor license, it has to be within a proximate area and what they refer to at the State of Michigan is within a planning area. So we are in the northwest Wayne County planning district, so the beds have to be moved within that area. We have looked at a variety of different sites in Livonia, out of Livonia and as you know, even looking at the site that was immediately to the south of this property. What's appealing about this particular site is because it is zoned commercial, so it does have the proper zoning. It's within the proximate distance of the existing site. So we do not believe that there is going to be - in fact we're assured that there will not be an increase in traffic or congestion within the proximate area here because the prior business is closing. I know that the waste was a big question, and it's going to be handled, of course, how the commission wants and we will look to put the proper enclosures in and the architect has that in there. We already talked about the turning radius and January 15, 2019 28893 I know the architect will address those issues. As far as the HVAC, again, I'll defer to the architect to address those that came up with the noise from the HVAC. These are all covered units. They will be within the roof tops areas. The comment about a second story, I believe that the second story is permitted in this zoning for C-2, so we're not asking for any type of variance by going to the second floor. We hope, and I think looking at the design, as we are using again the highest grade materials. It is a residential feel looking building. That's why we did the half-brick and then the composite planks, the composite shake to make it look and feel and give it a residential texture. I think that addresses most of the questions for me. I can certainly stay by to answer more from the Commission, but maybe I'll let Jason speak. \ Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Good evening, sir. Jason Van Ryn, Nederveld, 3037 Miller Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48103. Good evening. We are the civil engineers and landscapers for this project. Just to touch on some of the questions regarding the site constraints. This parcel is set up very well to be developed for C- 2. All the needed utility services are available. Water service is provided off of Wayne Road. There's already an existing service lead to the site. There's actually a 10-inch sanitary sewer stub to the site that actually drains to Ann Arbor Trail, so there's adequate capacity there. As far as storm water goes, we are certainly familiar with the Wayne County requirements. We are going to meet those requirements. We have to basically control the release rate to match the pre-existing condition, the undeveloped conditions. We don't have that system designed yet. It may be above ground. It may be underground. We're kind of waiting to see how this orientation of the building works out, but there are adequate outlets for that storm sewer. There's a couple different options. We could outlet it to Wayne Road. We could outlet it to Ann Arbor Trail, but we're certainly going to design that system to be compliant with the City and the County's code for storm water. As far as the traffic goes,just to add to what Roger said, based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers, they publish a trip generation manual that kind of gives you some guidelines on peak trips. Usually these sites, and when you're talking about traffic you're really concerned about the peak trips. The PM peak trip for a use like we're proposing here is in the neighborhood of 12. Twelve peak PM trips. If we were going to propose a grocery store or a restaurant or a drugstore, it could be several hundred. So I feel like as far as a traffic concern, this use is probably one of the most minimal uses you're going to get for commercial, C-2 zoning. Just a couple other quick things on the January 15, 2019 28894 site, and if I'm forgetting something, I'll come back and answer the questions, but any lights that we're proposing in the parking areas will be shielded so that they're not going to be shining out into the neighbors' yards. We're going to have to provide a photometric plan that shows how many foot candles we're projecting to the ground. We're not allow to project light out past our property line. So we're going to shield those lights to try to limit any exposure to the neighbors. Is there anything I'm forgetting? Mr. Wilshaw: I think you're covering most of it. Ms. Smiley: The auxiliary generator. Mr. Van Ryn: I'm going to let the architect answer that. One other quick thing is, what we'll do with the dumpster enclosure . . . we have the ability to run Auto Turn Software. We'll run Auto Turn Software to make sure that the garbage truck can access the dumpster and deliveries as well. But yeah, you're probably right with your analysis. We're going to have to add some kind of a turnaround to back out so it can pull out directly to Wayne Road. Mr. Wilshaw: That may have to be west of the building or something like that. Let's see if there's anything else. Since you did mention that you were involved in the landscaping aspect of this, now, we don't have a fully detailed landscaping plan. If this petition does move forward, we would require that a fully detailed landscaping plan be brought to us before you commence any building. You had some landscape plans designed for your previous design of the building. Just talk to us about the types of landscaping that you would do, especially in terms of buffering from the residential areas. Mr. Van Ryn: Certainly. If we re-orientate the building, we will definitely reproduce an updated landscape plan. I think and I apologize, I'm not a landscape architect. Our firm did design this. Maybe I'll have them come with us to the next meeting, but as far as buffering from the neighbors, if we were able to move the building farther to the west, we have met with the Fire Marshal and discussed access around the building. That was something that they asked us to provide. If we were able to move the building farther to the west, that would give us room to plant evergreen-type trees, things like that, to just help provide additional shielding. I think the one thing that the five-foot high wall does is acts more ... and some of the neighbors said they wouldn't be able to see that because their fence is higher than that. Well, actually, that wall will do a nice job reflecting sound, and then if you partner that January 15, 2019 28895 with some evergreen trees that would grow higher, I think it would be a nice combination of blocking sound and the visual of the building, softening it anyway. That's about all I can offer on that. Mr. Wilshaw: I don't know if you were involved in the design. It's probably more for the architect, but do you know if there is any plan for any wall packs or flood lighting on the east side of the building? You will have to come forward, Mr. Tosch. We're asking about lighting on the building. Is there any plans for wall packs or any flood lighting that would shine? Mr. Tosch: We might be using wall packs. Any exit door would have to have a light, but that would probably be overhead. On the rendering it shows that. But all the other lights, we held the light pole to 15 feet. And again, as Jason indicated, photometrics would not allow light to shine on any adjacent property at all. It will all be internal. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Good. And we also had asked about the generator. How would you handle a generator for this property? Mr. Tosch: The generator is required for emergency power. That is a requirement by the State for this type of use, but it would be concealed. It would be buffered with an impervious wall around it. They do make generators that don't have the real loud noise coming from them. They are reduced in design purposes. Mr. Wilshaw: Do you show the generator on the plans right now? Mr. Tosch: We can't show that on the plan. It's not on the plan right now because it wasn't an absolute requirement. But we can provide that along with a revised landscape plan, and it would be a combination of a hard buffer wall around the generator plus landscaping. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Mr. Tosch: We're also concerned about the noise for the residents too. In this facility, that's as much of a problem as it is for the adjoining neighbors. We've got to keep both sides working together. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Do we have any other questions for the petitioner, either the architect or the engineer? No. All right. Thank you, sir. Mr. Mali, do you have any final words? Mr. Mali: I do not. January 15, 2019 28896 Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Anything from the Planning Commission? Ms. Smiley: I'm wondering if they may need some more time to go with Option Two, move it down, gets some landscaping. They did answer a lot of the questions, but I'd like to see that auxiliary generator and where it's going to be and what kind of an enclosure that would have. Mr. Wilshaw: So you're saying you would like to see these plans more complete before you move forward? Ms. Smiley: Yes. Mr. Wilshaw: All right. Any other comments from the Commission? Mr. Bongero: I agree with Carol. I think there's a lot of issues pulling the building over to the west, how that's going to affect the wall and possibly landscaping between that and the neighbors, dumpster turnaround, the generator. I think there's a lot of open issues that we should probably be able to see to properly vote on this petition. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Bongero. I will close the public hearing at this time, and a motion would be in order. Ms. Smiley: I like to move that we table it. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Bongero, and adopted, it was #01-03-2019 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on January 15, 2019, on Petition 2018-12-02-23 submitted by Livonia Healthcare Real Estate, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(n) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to construct and operate a nursing and physical rehabilitation facility at 8834 Wayne Road, located on the southeast corner of Wayne Road and Ann Arbor Trail in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 33, which property is zoned C-2, the Planning Commission does hereby table this item to the meeting of February 19, 2019. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Smiley, Bongero, McCue, Caramagno, Wilshaw NAYS: Long ABSENT: Ventura ABSTAIN: Long January 15, 2019 28897 Mr. Wilshaw: The item has been tabled. I assume you want this tabled to the next available meeting? Mr. Taormina: Mr. Chair, the next meeting is going to be a little difficult. I'll leave it up to the Commission. We have the Master Plan scheduled, a public hearing, as well other items. Ideally, this would appear on the February 19 voting meeting, but if it's the Commission's desire, it could be scheduled for January 29. Ms. Smiley: I'm okay with February 19. Mr. Wilshaw: It sounds like there's no objections to February 19. I think we can do that to accommodate the schedule. We will see you guys back here on February 12 for the study meeting and February 19 for the regular meeting. Thank you to the residents who have come and spoke on this item. The item has been tabled and will be raised again on February 19 if you would like to come again and see that or you can watch on TV, either way is perfectly fine: When items are tabled and they are brought back, we will discuss only new changes. The communication from the audience would be a little bit more limited. Obviously, we don't need to hear everything all over again, but if there is any new information, we will certainly listen. Thank you for coming and we will see you guys in a few weeks. Mr. Mali, if you can get material samples together for that meeting, you may as well bring them. Thank you. ITEM #4 PETITION 2018-12-02-24 KIRK'S AUTO CARE Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2018- 12-02-24 submitted by KAC Livonia, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(m) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to construct an addition, increase the number of service bays and renovate the exterior of the existing automobile and truck repair facility (Kirk's Auto Care) at 31390 Plymouth Road, located on the northeast corner of Plymouth and Merriman Roads in the Southwest' of Section 26. Mr. Taormina: This is a request to expand Kirk's Auto Repair which is at the northeast corner of Plymouth and Merriman Roads. The zoning of this property is C-2, General Business. The size of the property is 14,400 square feet, about one-third of an acre, with 90 feet of frontage on Plymouth Road and 160 feet of frontage on Merriman Road. Per Section 11.03(m), automobile and light truck repair facilities require waiver use approval in a C-2 district. Approval of January 15, 2019 28898 the original auto repair business at this location, which was called Livonia Brake Center, occurred in 1977. The proposed expansion involves adding service bays to the existing facility. Looking at the site and the surrounding area, immediately to the north are two non-conforming residential structures that are zoned C-2. Further to the north fronting on Merriman are industrial buildings zoned M-1. Along Plymouth Road there are several commercial and office businesses zoned C-2, as well as across the street. The existing building, which was built as a gas station, is about 1,790 square feet. It's positioned near the middle of the site abutting the east property line. It currently operates with three service bays, and vehicle access is achieved via overhead doors that are located both on the north and south sides of the building. Much of the site is hard surfaced with parking available in the front, behind and along the Merriman side of the building. There is a small shed about 12 feet by 24 feet located in the northeast corner of the property. There are two driveways that service this site, one on Merriman and one on Plymouth Road. The proposed site plan shows the one-story addition on the north side of the building. It would be about 1,500 square feet so it nearly doubles the size of the existing building. It would be 18 feet in height, which is four feet taller than the existing structure. The setback from Merriman Road would be 60 feet, and where it abuts the east property line, it would have zero setback. This is allowed where certain building and fire codes are complied with. Even though the addition meets the C-2 district minimum setback requirements, because the existing building is only approximately 25 feet from the right-of-way of Merriman Road, adding onto the non-conforming building will require a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Again, the proposal is to add three service bays. Each bay would be accessible by means of an overhead door that would face west towards Merriman Road. The exterior finish of the building would consist of burnished ground faced block. The existing building includes standard painted block, but it is our understanding that it would be resurfaced with block that would match that of the addition. There's also another material called Rain Screen Siding. It's a composite material that would be located on portions of the building's façade. In terms of parking, the ordinance requires two spaces per work station plus one per employee. Including the addition, the facility would have six work stations with four employees. This would require 16 parking spaces. The site plan is showing 14 available parking spots, so there would be a deficiency that would require Zoning Board of Appeals' approval. Regarding parking, you'll note from this plan there would be five 90-degree spaces provided along the north property line, three parallel spaces along the west property line adjacent to Merriman Road, four perpendicular January 15, 2019 28899 spaces along the south property line adjacent to Plymouth Road, and then some additional parallel spaces along the east property line. The dumpster is shown in the northwest corner next to the sidewalk on Merriman Road with the doors facing south. This is something that was discussed at the study session. In terms of landscaping, it's very limited on this site. It is confined to the easement areas along Plymouth and Merriman Roads that are part of the PRDA streetscape improvements. The building is allowed two wall signs, but we do not have details on all the signage. One thing we will note is that there is a nonconforming pylon sign located on the property. Typically, when we see expansions of this nature, those nonconformities are addressed with the removal of them. With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please. Mr. Taormina: There are several items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated December 21, 2018, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced waiver use petition. We have no objections to the proposed project at this time. The existing parcel is assigned the address of #31390 Plymouth Road. The legal description provided with the petition appears to be correct and should be used in conjunction with his petition. The existing building is currently serviced by public sanitary, storm and water main. The information submitted does not indicate any new connections to the existing utility services, so it appears that there will not be any additional impacts to the existing systems at this time. Should alterations to the existing services be required, the owner will need to provide plans to this Department to determine if permits will be required. We do request that the owner be required to install a pre-treatment device in the existing catch basin within the parking lot to filter out oils and fluids before they can enter the storm system. Should the owner do any work within the Middlebelt Road or Plymouth Road right-of-way's, they will need to contact the Wayne County Department of Public Service or The Michigan Department of Transportation, respectively, for any permits that may be required."The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated December 27, 2018, 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 address. We have no objections to this proposal."The letter is signed by Keith Bo, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated December 20, January 15, 2019 28900 2018, 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 Brian Leigh, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated January 9, 2019, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above-referenced petition has been reviewed. (1) A variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals would be required for the deficient number of parking spaces. (2) A variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals would be required for adding to an existing nonconforming building. This Department has no further objections to this petition."The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Director of Inspection. The fifth letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated December 20, 2018, 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 taxes due, but not outstanding. Therefore, I have no objections to the proposal."The letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. The sixth letter is from the Finance Department, dated December 26, 2018, 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, I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Coline Coleman, Chief Accountant. Next are three items of correspondence from neighboring property owners. The next letter is from 4 Evergreen Properties, L.L.C., dated January 10, 2019, which reads as follows: "I have lots of thoughts on this project so I'll only bring up my main concerns. Doubling the square footage on this property, which is non- conforming, is a concern. Not enough parking spaces to accommodate employees now. I'm happy that they are doing well at this location, but the parking lot is full every day. They do not have enough parking available for the business they have now. Doubling the building size is just going to make the parking worse. This property is non-conforming and already has the maximum square footage for its size. There are residents directly to the north, and there will be no barriers or privacy walls. The traffic already overbearing and this will congest it even more." The letter is signed by Chris George, Supervisor, 30303 Plymouth Road. Next is a letter from 4 Evergreen Properties, L.L.C., Wine Barrell and American Steel, dated January 10, 2019, which reads as follows: "My name is Mark George and I am one of the owners of 4EGP. I have been in Livonia since 1972. I am all for growth but after reviewing this project, I have many concerns as you can see from the properties above. I like my City of Livonia and I am always interested in bringing additional business to our fine city. However, I would like it done in a neat, organized and should be compliant with our ordinances. Doubling the square footage on January 15, 2019 28901 this property, which is non-conforming, is a concern. Parking, privacy walls, waste water issues and traffic congestion. The one big issue that concerns me is the parking. The property has a hard time today with the parking situation. Increasing the building size will make the parking worse. It will bring many more customers. You have more employees and more customers coming to a business that has already outgrown its size. Not to mention again that the property is non-conforming."The letter is signed by Mark George, Owner, 30303 Plymouth Road. Lastly is letter from 4 Evergreen Properties, L.L.C.,Wine Barrel, and American Steel, dated January 10, 2019, which reads as follows: "My name is Richard George and I am the majority and principle owner/operator and managing partner of the properties and businesses listed above. [11680 and 11700 Merriman Road; 31250, 30835, 30830, 30303 and 30805 Plymouth Road]. I have been in Livonia since 1969. As you can see, I'm very interested in the wonderful City of Livonia. After reviewing the project, unfortunately, I have nothing favorable to say about it. After discussing this project with all of my partners, managers, supervisors and employees, we all feel this is overbuilding a piece of land that is already overbuilt. My main concern is the waste water. For the last 20 years, I have had to repair and maintain, at a cost of approximately $20,000.00, the sewer lines for Kirk's, C&C Underwriters, Metro Detroit Roofing and myself. This system is very old and delicate. I don't know how much longer it will last before it fails. This is a private sewer, and a major concern. This business is its present form does not have enough parking. Increase the customer base and add additional employees, and now your parking is even more congested. This property is non-conforming and additional square feet would not do it justice. A few other issues are privacy walls and traffic congestion. I do have a suggestion that may resolve these problems in just one meeting between Kirk's, the City of Livonia and myself. The property at 30805 Plymouth Road may be an alternative. I would be happy to discuss this proposal with all involved." The letter is signed by Richard George, Owner/Operator/Managing Partner, 30303 Plymouth Road. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Mr. Bongero: Mark, Mr. Richard George states there is a private sewer. What would that be, a septic or what is it? Mr. Taormina: No, it's a sanitary sewer that services Kirk's and the two properties to the east and to the north. It runs from the northeast corner of this property, along the north property line of the January 15, 2019 28902 adjacent parcel due east to the next property line, which is the rear of the two residential properties, and then north to where it intercepts a public sewer. That sanitary line, L-shaped in this case, is not located within a public easement. So it is not a public sewer. It services five properties, and according to Mr. George, there have been problems in the past that he has had to correct. His concern is the addition would increase the burden on that system. It's one of the reasons why he objects to the proposal. Mr. Bongero: So each of these people that tie into that section of sewer, really, in theory, should be responsible for the maintenance jointly. Right? Mr. Taormina: If it was a public system, they would be responsible for maintaining the sanitary leads and any problems with the main would be addressed by the City, but that's not the case here. It's a private system. Where the problem occurs is the other entities are the owners of most of that sewer system, and they bear the responsibility in most cases when there's a problem. The problem occurs on his property. That's why he's got to fix it. Mr. Bongero: I can see where that would be an issue forever. How do you ever come together? Mr. Taormina: It would require properly dedicating that sanitary to the City via public utility easements after testing the system and making sure that it meets the City's standards. Mr. Bongero: Thank you. Ms. Smiley: The George's own and operate the place but they don't want to expand it? Mr. Taormina: No. That's not correct. This is separately owned property that we're considering tonight. The George's own the adjacent properties to the north and two parcels to the east. I'll let Mr. George clarify that if I'm mistaken. Mr. Wilshaw: I think, in part, he owns some of the sewer that accesses this site. The petitioner is here. Please come forward. We will need your name and address for the record please. Christopher Lee, KAC Livonia L.L.C., 90 Lawrence Street, Detroit, Michigan 48202. The proposal is basically to increase service bays, but also be able to increase the speed at which we get cars in and out and get cars on and off the property. Yes, parking is currently tight, but we're not proposing to actually take up any of our current January 15, 2019 28903 parking spaces with the new addition, which is basically the space that is the old shed that's been on the property for decades. We really want to be able to obviously, one, increase speed of service to our customers, but also make this corner look better. The existing building itself is old. It's a painted facade. We've got the shed on the property. It's seen better days as far physical appearance goes, and we really would like to update it, bring it into the 21st Century, but we can't really do that without being able to increase the number of bays so we can get cars in and out more quickly. The other thing that we would be proposing to do is, of these three additional bays, one of them would be an alignment bay so that any car that was going into that bay would generally have been worked on in one of the other bays already. If it had suspension work done it, then it would aligned on that bay afterwards. As far as the number of actual main service bays, it would just be an increase of two. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Is there any questions for our petitioner? Mr. Bongero: Do you have an oil separator? Mr. Lee: Yes. Mr. Bongero: Are you adding another one into this new addition? Mr. Lee: Yeah, we would likely so as to not overtax the first one. Yeah. Mr. Bongero: So you have a service that sucks it out. Mr. Lee: Yes, we have an oil recycling company that comes and picks up our old bulk waste oil, waste oil filters and sucks out that separator. Mr. Bongero: Thank you. Ms. McCue: I believe in the study session we had discussed the RV in the back. Mr. Lee: Yes. Ms. McCue: Can you explain just in a little bit more detail and again for the public, what your game plan is, whether that will be there still and what the new addition will do for you. Mr. Lee: Sure. One of the issues that we have with our current space is the lack of office space. We do have a small office in the front that's the customer facing office. It's where customers come in. January 15, 2019 28904 They're checked in and out, but we don't have any additional space for employee meetings and things of that nature. We do have a temporary small RV out in the back that we've been utilizing for those purposes. Obviously, that would be something that we're trying to incorporate as well into this addition so that we can have some more non-production space on site as well, and of course eliminate that RV as well as the shed. Ms. McCue: Thank you. Mr. Caramagno: We discussed at the study session about the outdoor storage of tires. Mr. Lee: Yes. Mr. Caramagno: I think you said you were going to store them indoors. Mr. Lee: Correct. Mr. Caramagno: I'm looking at this 10-foot gap between the proposed new building and what will be your north property line. What's going to be stored there? Mr. Lee: Maybe a small number of used tires, but ideally, we're trying to, because we're going to have extra height in the new building, being able to put tire storage in there whether that be new or used. We're also working with our tire recyclers to be able to come on a regular basis, on a weekly or bi-weekly basis, in order to be able to get those tires off the property as soon as possible. Mr. Caramagno: But that doesn't seem to be the plan today, currently. When I looked at those tires behind that shed, there had to be 150 tires there. Mr. Lee: We don't try to get them that high. Currently, the processor that we work with will take a minimum of 60. So we usually do try to get them out of there when they hit that number. Right now, we're trying to work with another couple of them to be able to come in on a more frequent basis. That requires more cost on our part, of course, That's basically why they want to have a minimum number because it costs them a certain amount of money, but we're more than willing to pay more money per tire to recycle them if we can get them off the property more quickly. Mr. Caramagno: I see as part of the potential approval, and I don't see it here now, I think there's not an allowance of storing anything outdoors any i January 15, 2019 28905 longer. What would be your plan for the tires if you couldn't store anything outside any longer? Mr. Lee: With the additional height, we would just . . . like I said, I think I said at the study meeting as well, we're really not stocking very many new tires any more because we do have vendors that can get them to us multiple times a day. So those racks on the inside, if there was no more outdoor storage, they would simply be stored on the racks inside the new addition. Mr. Caramagno: I see that there's certainly some friction between you and the neighbor, and I'm sure used tires between your property and his is the visual that won't be real good either. So that's why I'm asking those questions. That's all I've got for now. Thanks. Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Caramagno, I believe it's Condition 8 in our approving resolution that addresses that issue. Are there any other questions for our petitioner? Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Richard George, 4 Evergreen Properties, L.L.C., 30303 Plymouth Road, Livonia, Michigan 48150. First,we're the owners/operators of Wine Barrel Plus, American Steel Motorcycles, and Evergreen Properties. The property locations that are owned by our companies are 11680 Merriman, 11700 Merriman Road; 31250 Plymouth Road, 30835 Plymouth Road, 30830 Plymouth Road, 30303 Plymouth Road and 30805 Plymouth Road. For the record, I've been here since 1969, probably more than you guys are old. I love the City. That should be reflected by the kind of investments I made here. So I've been here in this room quite a bit. I've talked to many of the people who have come through this building, and I have tried my best to comply with all that's been asked of me. In my opinion, there's been quite a bit. So now I look at this project and I look first at the water problem that I've had, and what I see and what I've done is, I've gone to your water department and they told me many times when I've had problems, they said, well, you repair it. It's yours. We have no easements. We can't come on your property. One time I had to dig it up. We had to go 10 feet down into the clay and replace it. We went back to the water department.We told them what we did. Sorry, we can't reimburse you. I am the lowest piece of property there. So anytime there's a backflow and there is always a backflow and my neighbors never see it because they never, ever have a problem. Their line can backup forever and all they need is a little pinhole for water to go through and it plugs up my lines, and I'm constantly replacing them. Another time I went in and put a cleanout. I can tell you we replaced two heaters at 31250 Plymouth Road January 15, 2019 28906 Let me make very of the backup. clear that that system is very old. Flushing one more toilet, bringing two more new customers to flush toilets, is going to be a burden on that property. It's a very old line. It's clay, and it is riddled with roots. So I'm not going to be happy to maintain for everybody here, and I don't even know if they know that I'm maintaining their system. The other crazy thing is that there is money being collected for maintenance, and happily it's going to the City, but they're not helping me maintain. Other things that concern me, and I have nothing against the petitioner, nothing at all. Had the petitioner come to me, and he did not before he did this, I would have been happy to try to sit down and work with him. I've actually met him before. A couple other things that I really want the Planning Commission to consider, if you are going to add additional building space to this property, which is non-conforming, you're going to load this corner up with more people. Now, not even for a second would I believe that I can add more bays and not have more cars come through this lot. That's absolutely ludicrous. You're adding three more bays. If you were to go to that property now, there is no way. I mean their lot is full all the time, so putting more building on there, there's going to be more customers going through, which I'm happy for the petitioner for that, but maybe this location is not the place to do it. The traffic, even in this picture here, I mean it's always horrendous. And he's open during the maximum peak hours of traffic. If you're coming from the north, trying to turn into this space, there's going to be a ton, and it always is, a ton of almost crashes, almost stopping traffic in two, three directions when a car stops in the middle of the ongoing traffic from the south to the north on Merriman Road. Also the same thing on Plymouth Road. So that's something I hope that the Planning Commission considers. The parking spaces now are deficient. I don't understand how we could build more building on a property that's deficient. If you have three more bays, you're obviously going to have at least one more employee. So if you have four employees, employees don't come two in a car; they come one in a car. You have to park those people. They're there all day. They can have people who bring their car in the morning, they're there all day. How could this possibly accommodate the amount of cars that are going to be going through this lot? I can't see it. I'm a business owner here in Livonia. When I had to get permission from the Council and Planning, I had to provide parking spaces beyond what I needed. These are deficient. Without going on, I hope that you consider the fact that there's not enough sewer, there's not enough parking, and aesthetically, yes, it's going to make it look better but there's no way that's it's going to help that corner's traffic and the amount of accidents. One other thing is that they're proposing a dumpster right at the January 15, 2019 28907 sidewalk. My god, right at the sidewalk. If you're going to do that, let me bring a petition and put my dumpster at the sidewalk on Plymouth Road. I just don't understand this petition, and if you're considering approving it, I sure would like to work with everybody involved to see if we can't make this better, if that's the case. But I do oppose it, and so do all the property owners that are in my company and the people who work with me who submitted the letters. Do you have any questions for me? Mr. Wilshaw: Any questions for Mr. George? Mr. Caramagno: Mr. George, do you have any parking solutions for him on your neighboring properties? El Mr. George: I do. 9 Mr. Caramagno: Have you talked to him about it? Mr. George: He hasn't come to me. Mr. Caramagno: Thank you. I Mr. George: I put that in the letter, by the way. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. George. I appreciate your comments. Is there anybody else in the audience? I don't see any. Mr. Lee, we like to always give the petitioner the last word. If you would like to say anything else, you're welcome to come forward and speak. We may have some additional questions for you, too. Mr. Lee: I do know Mr. George. We have met in the past, and I was unaware of his objections to this. Yes, regrettably, I should have discussed some of these things with him prior. I didn't know that. As far as I knew, the properties that he has that are directly adjacent to our property are the two residential structures to the north. I was actually unaware of the existing sewer issues. We as a whole as a business don't go through a ton of water. I mean we do when we occasionally clean the floors or we have two bathrooms on site. That's pretty much it. We do have to have our own drains cleaned out from time to time, but I was unaware of the private sewer issue. As far as the parking issues, even if we do have more cars coming through the site, again, our ability to get through them more quickly will definitely be improved with these extra bays as well as having additional places to park the vehicles at night. As far as our current load, we currently work at about eight or nine cars a day. And so scheduling and getting them in, yes, our lot is full, but again, the cars come in, they go January 15, 2019 28908 out. I mean if you look at our lot on the weekends, it's mostly empty. We do a very good job of getting cars in, getting cars out. We don't have dead cars lying around. It's not a mini junk yard or anything like that. So we are very cognizant of those issues. Mr. Wilshaw: What would your peak number of employees be at any given time? Mr. Lee: Currently as it is, we're at four. Obviously, there's potential to add to that in the future, but we wouldn't do that right off the bat. At this point, what we're working with is overcrowding as far as equipment and employees within the space that we have, and it would just really being able to spread out and breathe a little bit more. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Are there any questions for the petitioner? Mr. Long: Mr. Lee, with this expansion if it's approved, you're not adding any more bathrooms, sinks, anything like that, are you, in the new bays? Mr. Lee: Not in the new bays, no. Mr. Long: The dumpster. We talked about this at the study meeting as well. Is there another place for the dumpster? Mr. Lee: The problem with the dumpster is the access for the truck to be able to get in and access it without having to back out onto Merriman or Plymouth. That really is the straightest shot for us right now. We are proposing to build an enclosure around it of the same material, either in the burnished block or the Rain Screen, with doors on the front, of course. What we put in the dumpster is not, we're not a restaurant. We're not putting food in the dumpster or anything like that. It's mostly crushed up cardboard boxes and things of that nature. Of course, any of the oil filters and whatnot are kept separately and recycled. Mr. Long: Understanding that there may not be another place, if the dumpster were to go someplace else, that area where the dumpster is planned right now, what would that become? That would just be more parking, correct? I mean you would take parking somewhere else. So you would have a car that you're working on, theoretically, parked there instead of . . . Mr. Lee: We did run the scenarios with the dumpster as far as being able to put it in different spots. The problem is just, again, with the size January 15, 2019 28909 of typical garbage truck being able to get in and get a straight shot at the dumpster. There's not really anywhere else on the site. Mr. Long: Thank you. Ms. Smiley: Have you looked at any alternative sites because your business is growing? Mr. Lee: We have actually begun . . . we have in the past looked at some alternative sites, including one of Mr. George's sites. That is a possibility. We would prefer to stay on the corner because we have been Kirk's Auto Care for 10 plus years and we were the Brake Center before that. We've got customers that have been coming to us for a very long time. There are limited places to move and, of course, given as dense as Livonia is and as many repair shops there are in other areas, moving too far before you're no longer convenient for a lot of your existing customers. Ms. Smiley: Thank you. you own the, or at least you're the owner of your Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Lee, business owns the property currently? Mr. Lee: Not currently, no. Mr. Wilshaw: It's leased? Mr. Lee: Yes. Mr. Caramagno: I want to circle back on this dumpster. I don't care for it next to the road over there on the sidewalk. I just don't care for it there at all. I know you can put these dumpsters on wheels, and I don't know any reason why it couldn't be rolled back along the north side of the building by parking lot spot one, and then rolled out on service day and then where the dumpster is, there's minimal landscape there. I think we talked about there probably should be some landscaping here to brighten this thing up a little bit rather than park a perhaps broken down car right next to the sidewalk. I just don't care for that. Mr. Wilshaw: On the northwest corner of the property. Mr. Lee: The architect is here currently if he could speak to that. Mr. Caramagno: Good. January 15, 2019 28910 John Harmala, Harmala Architecture, 1629 Beachmont, Keego Harbor, Michigan. We did look at a lot of options. This is the easiest place to keep it for a truck to come in daily. One of the things that I did look at is moving the dumpster further to the east and trying to conceal it. I didn't think about it rolling in and out on service day, but there's the potential to add a little bit of landscaping and still have a parking spot up there so we would get up to 15 spots instead of 16 spots, which is where we're at. We would just have to kind of figure out how to get that dumpster over by the north end and then roll it. One thing that Chris and I did talk about was that his trash use is really kind of minimal and that he could potentially use a smaller dumpster than what we show there now. We could maybe squeeze it and add a couple of trees and still get a 10-foot parking space in that northwest corner. I did have a scenario that was similar to that. The reason that we didn't do it was that I was thinking the dumpster was always by the building and the truck would have to come in there, but if you have a small enough dumpster for cardboard and things that he has, he can potentially have one of his guys roll it out if he was agreeable to that. It's a really challenging site as you know, and it would be nice to move it away from the street. Since I'm up here, there were a couple other things. We don't have a civil engineer here, and we haven't got into the detail of looking at the sanitary system. We're not adding any bathrooms. We're not adding anything significant to the sanitary system, but hearing what I heard tonight, I would assume that Chris and I would sit down with our civil engineer and we would probably want to look at that entire system with Mr. George because it does sound like that problem is not going away, whether or not this addition goes forward, and it needs to be looked at. So this might actually be an opportune time because of the project that we've got here, to look at a holistic solution to that problem. I've had that problem. I've run into that before. It's not going to go away until it's fixed correctly. That would be something else I would suggest. Chris talked about the parking. The building really is where parking isn't, and if you look at it now, we have about the same amount of parking spaces as he does on the spot now. It's configured very similarly to the existing lot. If his operations will work like Chris is suggesting, then the turnover will be quicker and the one thing that we tried to look at with the alignment bay, was a bay that's not really ... he's only adding two bays and not three bays. He might have some relief for keeping cars internally if cars have to stay overnight or other things. But I think that would be a management thing that he could work through with the City and Mr. George to be a good neighbor. So, just some thoughts. January 15, 2019 28911 Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for the architect? Anyone else I the audience wishing to speak for or against this item? Mr. George, I'll let you come up so our television audience can hear you. Mr. George: I listened to their answers, good answers, but there's some things that concern me, like they talk about the alignment bay and they make known that if a car is already there, they're working on it in another bay, then they move it there trying to allocate a parking space there. Well, people come in all the time just for alignments. Just because it's an alignment bay doesn't mean it's a parking space. When you add more building space, there's more business. And just like in weather, they take the 100-year worst results. Let me say it like this because this just doesn't make sense to me. You want to add three more bays. That means you're going to bring three more cars when you're totally full. So let's look at totally full. Three and three is six. You've got six cars there. You're going to have a minimum of five, because you've got six bays. So let's say four. So now you've got six, you've got four, you've got ten. Where are the customers going to park and how about the guy that comes in the morning and he couldn't pick up his car that evening? I don't think that this is logical. I'm trying to find the logic. Take my business. It's a retail cigar and home brew store and liquor store. People come, they go. It's 5, 10, 15 even 30 minutes in the home brew. Let's say it's an hour. They turn around all the time. In this situation, you might have a car there for two days, and it's not usual. Ask me. I have a lot of cars. I take it to the service department that morning. I can't pick it up that night. I go pick it up the next night. I don't know if there's logic being used here when taking a corner site where there's nothing but traffic and overloading it. It sounds to me like we're trying to put a 10-foot box in a one foot space.Water, if you have just more people on there flushing toilets, you're going to bring more water. He doesn't do anything but have more people on the property. Are you going to flush more toilets? Yes, you are. Are you going to put a bigger burden on the system that already can't handle that water? On my property, I use the least amount of water there. One is an office space. The other two are homes that are in the back. It's just not feasible, and I would be happy to sit down and talk with them. I've already talked to the water department. We are already working with them to try to solve this problem. I've already talked to them to see if we can relocate the present system. I just don't want the entire burden to be on myself. I don't feel that's fair. I mean you're talking about changing a system that could cost up towards maybe $50,000 - $100,000. There are no lines in Plymouth Road. You have to go out to the back. So you're going to dig 12, 14, 15 feet down and bring it down the road. Do I have to explain underground to the Planning Commission? No. January 15, 2019 28912 This plan just does not make any sense any way you look at it. And I'm sorry to be a lot of hot air here, but we can do a lot better here in Livonia. I've seen a lot better, and I'm just totally against this present situation. I think he needs to go back to the drawing board, and I hope the Planning Commission hears my words. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. George. With that, I think we can close the public hearing and a motion would be in order. Mr. Caramagno: Good points were brought up a couple different ways. We've got a couple open items that I don't think were resolved. Mr. Wilshaw: I think we need to get a motion and then we can get some discussion going here, unless the motion is to table. Mr. Bongero: I motion to table. On a motion by Bongero, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was { #01-04-2019 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on January 15, 2019, on Petition 2018-12-02-24 submitted by KAC Livonia, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(m) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to construct an addition, increase the number of service bays and renovate the exterior of the existing automobile and truck repair facility (Kirk's Auto Care) at 31390 Plymouth Road, located on the northeast corner of Plymouth and Merriman Roads in the Southwest '/4 of Section 26, which property is zoned C-2, the Planning Commission does hereby table this item. Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The item has been tabled. Mr. Taormina, are we looking at the 19th of February? Mr. Taormina: I would rather not specify a date. I think that I'll allow the petitioner, and maybe Mr. George, to converse about some options to see if there's any avenue there and then they can notify me when they want to return. Mr. Wilshaw: I think that sounds very reasonable. We'll leave that open ended on the date. We'll give the petitioner the guidance to talk to Mr. George and see what you can work out and when you're ready to come back to us, just contact the Planning Department and we'll get that scheduled. That way, we're giving you as much time as you need to work on that. January 15, 2019 28913 ITEM #5 PETITION 2018-12-03-02 TRINITY HEALTH VACATE EASEMENT 1A Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2018- 12-03-02 submitted by Trinity Health Senior Communities, pursuant to Council Resolution #420-18 and Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine whether or not to vacate the existing water main easement 1A within the Marycrest Senior Housing and Healthcare Campus at 15475 Middlebelt Road, located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Five Mile Road and Puritan Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14. Mr. Wilshaw: We have four items on our agenda for vacating a water main easement at the same location. They are identified as 1A, 1B, 2A and 2B. Mr. Taormina, do you want to speak to these as a group? Mr. Taormina: Yes, I'll just address all of them in the presentation. This is a request on behalf of Trinity Health, owners of Marycrest Senior Housing. The facility is on the west side of Middlebelt between Five Mile and Puritan. There are four different segments of water main easement located on this property which are no longer needed to service the development. A new loop system was constructed, and the existing system was removed. The easement remains and since those are no longer necessary, it's recommended by the Engineering Department that these four segments be vacated. The Law Department wanted these all in separate petitions. There is no one objecting to the vacating of the easements. In terms of correspondence, there are no objections coming from any of the Departments and nothing new to add relative to this. You have all the correspondence in your packet. Mr. Wilshaw: There are letters from the Engineer, Finance and Treasurer with no objections. Mr. Taormina: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated December 21, 2018, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced vacating petition. We have no objections to the proposed vacating, as the existing water main has been relocated, and new easements have been obtained. The legal descriptions included with the petition appear to be correct and should be used in conjunction with the proposed vacating. The address of #15475 Middlebelt Road has been assigned to the southerly parcel (parcel #1), and the address of #15495 Middlebelt Road has been assigned to the northerly January 15, 2019 28914 parcel (parcel #2)."The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated December 12, 2018, 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. The third letter is from the Finance Department, dated December 26, 2018, 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 for 15475 Middlebelt. 15495 Middlebelt does not have a water and sewer account, and has never been billed for general receivables." The letter is signed by Coline Coleman, Chief Accountant. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Taormina: You also have in your packets the original correspondence that initiated this item, dated October 9, 2018, from the Engineering Division to the Livonia City Council wherein the Engineering Division requests that the City proceed with the vacating of these easements and provides a basic description therein. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Ms. Smiley: This is something we initiated? Mr. Taormina: Yes, the Engineering Division initiated it, and Trinity Health submitted correspondence to that effect as well. I believe that was all at the suggestion of the Engineering Division. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Our lone audience member is here to speak. Thank you for waiting this long. Joseph Roose, 15608 Hidden Lane, Livonia, Michigan. It was worth the wait. My property backs up to Marycrest. The verbiage in here for these petitions is little above my paygrade, so I am just here to be assured, hopefully, that there was no more work involved or this was not opening the opportunity for them to do additional digging and water management. I'm already getting a bit of a problem in the back of my property where they've graded their new construction. They raised their dirt level up about three feet and then angled it down into my yard. So I'll be catching all the spring storms from Marycrest now in my yard. However, that's a different issue. I just wanted to understand what was taking place here by vacating these easements. January 15, 2019 28915 Mr. Wilshaw: I'm going to give you a tremendous about of credit for coming tonight and waiting almost three hours to have your question answered. I think it says a lot about your concern. I appreciate that. We'll let Mr. Taormina answer the general idea of what a vacating and a water easement is. I'm sure he can explain it. Mr. Taormina: This is a legal description that encompasses what used to be the underground utilities that serviced the old Marycrest building. With the redevelopment of the campus, new utilities and new easements were created, and as part of the development, they removed the infrastructure that was in these older easements. The infrastructure is gone, but the recorded legal descriptions for those easements still exist. They want to remove that encumbrance from the property by going through this process and removing the easements. The term vacating means to remove the easements. It's really just the legal descriptions that exist. I don't believe, sir, and I'll verify this with our Engineering Division, but I'm 95 percent certain that this does not entail any additional work and this doesn't trigger any additional work. If there is some remaining items that need to be taken care of, I'm not aware of those. Again, this is just a housekeeping matter and doesn't involve any more construction activity. Mr. Roose: Okay. Thank you for that. Mr. Taormina: If you would like to contact either me or the Engineering Division, we can verify that. Mr. Roose: All right. Thank you very much. Mr. Wilshaw: Hopefully, that answers your questions. Thank you. With that, there is no one else in the audience. I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Long, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-05-2019 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on January 15, 2019, on Petition 2018-12-03-02 submitted by Trinity Health Senior Communities, pursuant to Council Resolution #420-18 and Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine whether or not to vacate the existing water main easement 1A within the Marycrest Senior Housing and Healthcare Campus at 15475 Middlebelt Road, located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Five Mile Road and Puritan Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14, January 15, 2019 28916 which property is zoned OS and R-9, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2019- 12-03-02 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That no objections have been received in connection with this request; and 2. The easement is no longer needed to serve the development as a new looped water main has been installed in its place. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code of Ordinance, as amended. 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 #6 PETITION 2018-12-03-03 TRINITY HEALTH VACATE EASEMENT 1B Mr. ,Carama noSecretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2018- 9 rY 12-03-03 submitted by Trinity Health Senior Communities, pursuant to Council Resolution #421-18 and Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine whether or not to vacate the existing water main easement 1B within the Marycrest Senior Housing and Healthcare Campus at 15475 Middlebelt Road, located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Five Mile Road and Puritan Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14. Mr. Wilshaw: We have four items on our agenda. All are for the same location, and they are vacating a water main easement, named 1A, 1 B, 2A and 2B. Mr. Taormina, do you want to speak to these as a group? Mr. Taormina: Yes, I'll just address all of them in the presentation. This is a request on behalf of Trinity Health, owners of the Marycrest Senior Housing. The facility is on the west side of Middlebelt between Five Mile and Puritan. There are four different segments of water main easement located on this property which are no longer needed to service the development. A new loop system was constructed, and the existing system was removed. The easement remains and since those are no longer necessary, it's recommended by the Engineering Department that these four segments be vacated. The Law Department wanted these all in separate petitions. There is no one objecting to the vacating of January 15, 2019 28917 the easements. In terms of correspondence, there are no objections coming from any of the Departments and nothing new to add relative to this. You have all the correspondence in your packet. Mr. Wilshaw: There are letters from the Engineer, Finance and Treasurer with no objections. Mr. Taormina: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated December 21, 2018, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced vacating petition. We have no objections to the proposed vacating, as the existing water main has been relocated, and new easements have been obtained. The legal descriptions included with the petition appear to be correct and should be used in conjunction with the proposed vacating. The address of #15475 Middlebelt Road has been assigned to the southerly parcel (parcel #1), and the address of #15495 Middlebelt Road has been assigned to the northerly parcel (parcel #2)."The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated December 12, 2018, 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. The third letter is from the Finance Department, dated December 26, 2018, 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 for 15475 Middlebelt. 15495 Middlebelt does not have a water and sewer account, and has never been billed for general receivables." The letter is signed by Coline Coleman, Chief Accountant. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Taormina: You also have in your packets the original correspondence that initiated this item, dated October 9, 2018, from the Engineering Division to the Livonia City Council wherein the Engineering Division requests that the City proceed with the vacating of these easements and provides a basic description therein. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Ms. Smiley: This is something we initiated? January 15, 2019 28918 Mr. Taormina: Yes, the Engineering Division initiated it, and Trinity Health submitted correspondence to that effect as well. I believe that was all at the suggestion of the Engineering Division. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Our lone audience member is here to speak. Thank you for waiting this long. Joseph Roose, 15608 Hidden Lane, Livonia, Michigan. It was worth the wait. My property backs up to Marycrest. The verbiage in here for these petitions is little above my paygrade, so I am just here to be assured, hopefully, that there was no more work involved or this was not opening the opportunity for them to do additional digging and water management. I'm already getting a bit of a problem in the back of my property where they've graded their new construction. They've raised their dirt level up about three feet and then angled it down into my yard. So I'll be catching all the spring storms from Marycrest now in my yard. However, that's a different issue. I just wanted to understand what was taking place here by vacating these easements. Mr. Wilshaw: I'm going to give you a tremendous about of credit for coming tonight and waiting almost three hours to have your question answered. I think it says a lot about your concern. I appreciate that. We'll let Mr. Taormina answer the general idea of what a vacating and a water easement is. I'm sure he can explain it. Mr. Taormina: This is a legal description that encompasses what used to be the underground utilities that serviced the old Marycrest building. With the redevelopment of the campus, new utilities and new easements were created, and as part of the development, they removed the infrastructure that was in these older easements. The infrastructure is gone, but the recorded legal descriptions for those easements still exist. They want to remove that encumbrance from the property by going through this process and removing the easements. The term vacating means to remove those easements. It's really just the legal descriptions that exist. I don't believe, sir, and I'll verify this with our Engineering Division, but I'm 95 percent certain that this does not entail any additional work and this doesn't trigger any additional work. If there is some remaining items that need to be taken care of, I'm not aware of those. Again, this is just a housekeeping matter and doesn't involve any more construction activity. Mr. Roose: Okay. Thank you for that. January 15, 2019 28919 Mr. Taormina: If you would like to contact either me or the Engineering Division, we can verify that. Mr. Roose: All right. Thank you very much. Mr. Wilshaw: Hopefully, that answers your questions. Thank you. With that, there is no one else in the audience. I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Long, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-06-2019 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on January 15, 2019, on Petition 2018-12-03-03 submitted by Trinity Health Senior Communities, pursuant to Council Resolution #421-18 and Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine whether or not to vacate the existing water main easement 1B within the Marycrest Senior Housing and Healthcare Campus at 15475 Middlebelt Road, located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Five Mile Road and Puritan Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14, which property is zoned OS and R-9, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2018- 12-03-03 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That no objections have been received in connection with this request; and 2. The easement is no longer needed to serve the development as a new looped water main has been installed in its place. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code of Ordinance, as amended. 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 #7 PETITION 2018-12-03-04 TRINITY HEALTH VACATE EASEMENT 2A Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2018- 12-03-04 submitted by Trinity Health Senior Communities, pursuant to Council Resolution #422-18 and Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, January 15, 2019 28920 to determine whether or not to vacate the existing water main easement 2A within the Marycrest Senior Housing and Healthcare Campus at 15495 Middlebelt Road, located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Five Mile Road and Puritan Avenue in the Southeast % of Section 14. Mr. Wilshaw: We have four items on our agenda. All are for the same location, and they are vacating a water main easement, named 1A, 1B, 2A and 2B. Mr. Taormina, do you want to speak to these as a group? Mr. Taormina: Yes, I'll just address all of them in the presentation. This is a request on behalf of Trinity Health, owners of the Marycrest Senior Housing. The facility is on the west side of Middlebelt between Five Mile and Puritan. There are four different segments of water main easement located on this property which are no longer needed to service the development. A new loop system was constructed, and the existing system was removed. The easement remains and since those are no longer necessary, it's recommended by the Engineering Department that these four segments be vacated. The Law Department wanted these all in separate petitions. There is no one objecting to the vacating of the easements. In terms of correspondence, there are no objections coming from any of the Departments and nothing new to add relative to this. You have all the correspondence in your packet. Mr. Wilshaw: There are letters from the Engineer, Finance and Treasurer with no objections. Mr. Taormina: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated December 21, 2018, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced vacating petition. We have no objections to the proposed vacating, as the existing water main has been relocated, and new easements have been obtained. The legal descriptions included with the petition appear to be correct and should be used in conjunction with the proposed vacating. The address of #15475 Middlebelt Road has been assigned to the southerly parcel (parcel #1), and the address of #15495 Middlebelt Road has been assigned to the northerly parcel (parcel #2)."The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated December 12, 2018, 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 January 15, 2019 28921 signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. The third letter is from the Finance Department, dated December 26, 2018, 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 for 15475 Middlebelt. 15495 Middlebelt does not have a water and sewer account, and has never been billed for general receivables." The letter is signed by Coline Coleman, Chief Accountant. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Taormina: You also have in your packets the original correspondence that initiated this item, dated October 9, 2018, from the Engineering Division to the Livonia City Council wherein the Engineering Division requests that the City proceed with the vacating of these easements and provides a basic description therein. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Ms. Smiley: This is something we initiated? Mr. Taormina: Yes, the Engineering Division initiated it, and Trinity Health submitted correspondence to that effect as well. I believe that was all at the suggestion of the Engineering Division. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Our lone audience member is here to speak. Thank you for waiting this long. Joseph Roose, 15608 Hidden Lane, Livonia, Michigan. It was worth the wait. My property backs up to Marycrest. The verbiage in here for these petitions is little above my paygrade, so I am just here to be assured, hopefully, that there was no more work involved or this was not opening the opportunity for them to do additional digging and water management. I'm already getting a bit of a problem in the back of my property where they've graded their new construction. They've raised their dirt level up about three feet and then angled it down into my yard. So I'll be catching all the spring storms from Marycrest now in my yard. However, that's a different issue. I just wanted to understand what was taking place here by vacating these easements. Mr. Wilshaw: I'm going to give you a tremendous about of credit for coming tonight and waiting almost three hours to have your question answered. I think it says a lot about your concern. I appreciate that. We'll let Mr. Taormina answer the general idea of what a vacating and a water easement is. I'm sure he can explain it. January 15, 2019 28922 Mr. Taormina: This is a legal description that encompasses what used to be the underground utilities that serviced the old Marycrest building. With the redevelopment of the campus, new utilities and new easements were created, and as part of the development, they removed the infrastructure that was in these older easements. The infrastructure is gone, but the recorded legal descriptions for those easements still exist. They want to remove that encumbrance from the property by going through this process and removing the easements. The term vacating means to remove those easements. It's really just the legal descriptions that exist. I don't believe, sir, and I'll verify this with our Engineering Division, but I'm 95 percent certain that this does not entail any additional work and this doesn't trigger any additional work. If there is some remaining items that need to be taken care of, I'm not aware of those. Again, this is just a housekeeping matter and doesn't involve any more construction activity. Mr. Roose: Okay. Thank you for that. Mr. Taormina: If you would like to contact either me or the Engineering Division, we can verify that. Mr. Roose: All right. Thank you very much. Mr. Wilshaw: Hopefully, that answers your questions. Thank you. With that, there is no one else in the audience. I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Long, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-07-2019 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on January 15, 2018, on Petition 2018-12-03-04 submitted by Trinity Health Senior Communities, pursuant to Council Resolution #422-18 and Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine whether or not to vacate the existing water main easement 2A within the Marycrest Senior Housing and Healthcare Campus at 15495 Middlebelt Road, located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Five Mile Road and Puritan Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14, which property is zoned OS and R-9, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2018- 12-03-04 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That no objections have been received in connection with this request; and January 15, 2019 28923 2. The easement is no longer needed to serve the development as a new looped water main has been installed in its place. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code of Ordinance, as amended. 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 #8 PETITION 2018-12-03-05 TRINITY HEALTH VACATE EASEMENT 2B Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2018- 12-03-05 submitted by Trinity Health Senior Communities, pursuant to Council Resolution #423-18 and Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine whether or not to vacate the existing water main easement 2B within the Marycrest Senior Housing and Healthcare Campus at 15495 Middlebelt Road, located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Five Mile Road and Puritan Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14. Mr. Wilshaw: We have four items on our agenda. All are for the same location, and they are vacating a water main easement, named 1A, 1B, 2A and 2B. Mr. Taormina, do you want to speak to these as a group? Mr. Taormina: Yes, I'll just address all of them in the presentation. This is a request on behalf of Trinity Health, owners of the Marycrest Senior Housing. The facility is on the west side of Middlebelt between Five Mile and Puritan. There are four different segments of water main easement located on this property which are no longer needed to service the development. A new loop system was constructed, and the existing system was removed. The easement remains and since those are no longer necessary, it's recommended by the Engineering Department that these four segments be vacated. The Law Department wanted these all in separate petitions. There is no one objecting to the vacating of the easements. In terms of correspondence, there are no objections coming from any of the Departments and nothing new to add relative to this. You have all the correspondence in your packet. Mr. Wilshaw: There are letters from the Engineer, Finance and Treasurer with no objections. January 15, 2019 28924 Mr. Taormina: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated December 21, 2018, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced vacating petition. We have no objections to the proposed vacating, as the existing water main has been relocated, and new easements have been obtained. The legal descriptions included with the petition appear to be correct and should be used in conjunction with the proposed vacating. The address of #15475 Middlebelt Road has been assigned to the southerly parcel (parcel #1), and the address of #15495 Middlebelt Road has been assigned to the northerly parcel (parcel #2)."The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated December 12, 2018, 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. The third letter is from the Finance Department, dated December 26, 2018, 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 for 15475 Middlebelt. 15495 Middlebelt does not have a water and sewer account, and has never been billed for general receivables." The letter is signed by Coline Coleman, Chief Accountant. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Taormina: You also have in your packets the original correspondence that initiated this item, dated October 9, 2018, from the Engineering Division to the Livonia City Council wherein the Engineering Division requests that the City proceed with the vacating of these easements and provides a basic description therein. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director'? Ms. Smiley: This is something we initiated? Mr. Taormina: Yes, the Engineering Division initiated it, and Trinity Health submitted correspondence to that effect as well. I believe that was all at the suggestion of the Engineering Division. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Our lone audience member is here to speak. Thank you for waiting this long. January 15, 2019 28925 Joseph Roose, 15608 Hidden Lane, Livonia, Michigan. It was worth the wait. My property backs up to Marycrest. The verbiage in here for these petitions is little above my paygrade, so I am just here to be assured, hopefully, that there was no more work involved or this was not opening the opportunity for them to do additional digging and water management. I'm already getting a bit of a problem in the back of my property where they've graded their new construction. They've raised their dirt level up about three feet and then angled it down into my yard. So I'll be catching all the spring storms from Marycrest now in my yard. However, that's a different issue. I just wanted to understand what was taking place here by vacating these easements. Mr. Wilshaw: I'm going to give you a tremendous about of credit for coming tonight and waiting almost three hours to have your question answered. I think it says a lot about your concern. I appreciate that. We'll let Mr. Taormina answer the general idea of what a vacating and a water easement is. I'm sure he can explain it. Mr. Taormina: This is a legal description that encompasses what used to be the underground utilities that serviced the old Marycrest building. With the redevelopment of the campus, new utilities and new easements were created, and as part of the development, they removed the infrastructure that was in these older easements. The infrastructure is gone, but the recorded legal descriptions for those easements still exist. They want to remove that encumbrance from the property by going through this process and removing the easements. The term vacating means to remove those easements. It's really just the legal descriptions that exist. I don't believe, sir, and I'll verify this with our Engineering Division, but I'm 95 percent certain that this does not entail any additional work and this doesn't trigger any additional work. If there is some remaining items that need to be taken care of, I'm not aware of those. Again, this is just a housekeeping matter and doesn't involve any more construction activity. Mr. Roose: Okay. Thank you for that. Mr. Taormina: If you would like to contact either me or the Engineering Division, we can verify that. Mr. Roose: All right. Thank you very much. Mr. Wilshaw: Hopefully, that answers your questions. Thank you. With that, there is no one else in the audience. I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion. January 15, 2019 28926 On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Long, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-08-2019 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on January 15, 2019, on Petition 2018-12-03-05 submitted by Trinity Health Senior Communities, pursuant to Council Resolution #423-18 and Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine whether or not to vacate the existing water main easement 2B within the Marycrest Senior Housing and Healthcare Campus at 15495 Middlebelt Road, located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Five Mile Road and Puritan Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14, which property is zoned OS and R-9, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2018- 12-03-05 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That no objections have been received in connection with this request; and 2. The easement is no longer needed to serve the development as a new looped water main has been installed in its place. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code of Ordinance, as amended. 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 #9 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,134TH Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 1,134th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on December 11, 2018. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by McCue, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-09-2019 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 1,134th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on December 11, 2018, are hereby approved. January 15, 2019 28927 A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Smiley, McCue, Bongero, Caramagno, Wilshaw NAYS: None ABSENT: Ventura ABSTAIN: Long Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 1,135th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on January 15, 201 • was adjourned at 9:47 p.m. CITY P r NING COMMISSION Sam Ca amagno, Secretary ATTEST: Ian Wilshaw, Chairman