Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2019-01-29MINUTES OF THE 1,136th PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, January 29, 2019, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 1,136t" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. ]an Wilshaw, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present: David Bongero Sam Caramagno Glen Long Betsy McCue Carol Smiley Peter Ventura Ian Wilshaw Members absent: None 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. Mr. Wilshaw: 1 do want to start with a bit of sad news for the community. On January 20, John Nagy, our former City Planner, passed away. He started his career back in the 1960's with the City of Livonia and retired in 1999 after 30 plus years working for our City. He then continued on as Director of the Plymouth Road Development Authority for a many years. He was well known in the City, very well liked and a very smart and witty guy. He will be missed. If there is anybody else who would like to say anything, we'll do that and then have a moment of silence. Mr. Taormina: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to recognize John as being a good friend and consummate professional. There's not a day goes by that I don't read a file or view a plan that John was involved in. He was January 29, 2019 28929 here, as you indicated, for 30 plus years as the Planning Director. He was a talented landscape architect. He was a scratch golfer. He was a devoted man in all respects to his family and to his position here in the City of Livonia. He will be sorely missed. Thank you. Mr. Ventura: I echo what Mr. Taormina has said about Mr. Nagy. He was an exemplary public servant, and the style and the manner in which he fulfilled his responsibilities here in the City of Livonia was a good example for all of us because he was fair minded. He greeted every petition with an open mind. He treated everybody with the gentility and a fairness that I think was, backed in those days when he started out, a little bit unique. The mark that he has left on our community is indelible. As Mark said, you can't go anywhere in this community without seeing the fine hand of John Nagy at work. So I think it fitting, Mr. Chairman, that we remember him. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: And you are correct, Mr. Ventura. Mr. Nagy served this community really through its primary development time. He had a chance to work on just about every aspect of development that's happened in this City coming from a farm community to a built --up suburban community. He certainly touched the City in many, many ways. With that, we'll have a minute of silence for John Nagy. Thank you. ITEM #1 PETITION 2018-09-07-01 MASTER PLAN Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2018- 09-07-01 submitted by the City Planning Commission and the Master Plan Steering Committee requesting approval to hold a public hearing and thereafter adopt Livonia Vision 21 as the City of Livonia's Comprehensive Master Plan pursuant to Michigan Public Act 33 of 2008 (the Michigan Planning Enabling Act), as amended. Mr. Wilshaw: We have Mr. Lippens here. I believe you have a presentation for us. Mr. Paul Lippens, McKenna & Associates. I do have a brief presentation. Good evening, Planning Commissioners. It's my pleasure to be back with you this evening at the ending stages of the 63-day public comment period on the draft Master Plan. if you recall, the Planning Commission made a motion to recommend Council start that 63-day review period back in October. We have wrapped it up now. City Council did start the period and we January 29, 2019 28930 completed it in early January. Now we're back to let you know how it went, a quick wrap-up tonight. I'm going to talk a bit about the Master Plan process, summarize some of the comments that were received on-line during that 63-day comment period, and cover basically some of the larger big picture items in the Master Plan. We did talk in more detail when I last was here about some of the plan elements and talk a little bit about the priority projects outlined in the Master Plan. We started the Master Plan just over a year ago. We kicked it off in November, 2017, and spent most of 2018 working with the Steering Committee that included some Planning Commissioners, some Council members and many local residents. The highlight of the process was the public charette which took place in April of last year and featured a number of group design opportunities, as well as an open house at the library. Everything that we did in person was also replicated on-line. We did a fair amount of on-line outreach as well. Where we are now is at the end of the process where we've collected a lot of comments. We crafted a plan that is consistent with the comments that we've heard, with the policy objectives, with what we've heard from the Steering Committee, from the Planning Commission and City Council. We've got a document that really can be the guiding force for the City moving forward. This graphic shows the basic planning process. We started with analysis. We went through and updated a demographic profile of this City to make sure that, indeed, the types of things we were hearing were important were supported from a data prospective. We did outreach to understand what the community wanted, how they want to develop in terms of land use, transportation, health, sustainability and developed goals and objectives based around the feedback we got. We also developed a series of alternatives. One of the things we did in this Plan was focus on what types of things could be done with catalyst sites. There are a few places in the City that residents are really looking to for some transformative change. We evaluated the possibilities for those sites. Then we worked with the Steering Committee to formulate a consensus on the plan recommendations. The important thing about this graphic is that it points out that while we're looking to adopt the Plan tonight, the State of Michigan does require that cities relook at their Master Plan every five years. So this is part of an ongoing process. The Plan that we're recommending adopting this evening can be used as a visioning document. It can be used to support land use decisions, zoning decisions, but it also is the responsibility of the Planning Commission to continue working with residents to implement the Plan, and then periodically to review and update it should economic conditions change, should residents' desires change, should their be any big developments in respect to the City's business owners or January 29, 2019 28931 schools. The Vision 21 Plan is really setting the community up for a near term success but also a long-term vision for the future. What kind of comments did we get during the 63-day review period? We were accepting comments on line, and I forwarded to the Planning Commission in a memo the entirety of all the comments that were received. But I wanted to highlight many of the things that we heard that are also echoed in the public engagement we conducted during the planning process, which we covered in depth the last time I was here. But I would say that most of these comments were very supportive of biking, walking, transportation infrastructure, which we need. Those are very consistent with what we hear from residents when we talk to them about the future vision for Livonia. They were also very supportive of the idea of creating, not just one downtown or central place, but that there are many opportunities for more walkable sites and investment in redevelopment of some of Livonia's key commercial areas. Those 1 think were some of the key big picture items that this Master Plan really works to develop. I think that's it's important to acknowledge that oftentimes things that are said that may be more critical of the Plan are also supported from a policy perspective. So the Plan does create an opportunity to work on some of these other items that were listed in those comments that seem more like a critique of what was. There was a resident that said they were disappointed not to see more attention on the western Plymouth Road corridor. We know and the Steering Committee spend a lot of time talking about Plymouth Road and chose to focus on the east, but the idea was this Master Plan could really start with the east and be used as a framework for continuing to look at Plymouth Road. There was a lot of thought put into choosing the three study areas that we looked at as places that could be models for the rest of the community. There were comments about traffic and feeling like the highways divide the city. If you read the Plan, there are references to adopting the Bike Walk Livonia Plan, which talks a lot about bridging the highways or bridging the City through the highways, and the plans and the transportation section are also supportive of these recommendations. I feel like the Plan does go a long way to address connecting Livonia's neighborhoods as well. I'll comment here about really fixing the roads and it mentions Merriman Road, and of course that's a county road. The Plan does talk about the importance of coordination with multiple jurisdictions and helping Livonia residents to coordinate and express their priorities to the County. So I wanted to highlight some of these things to let you know that even though sometimes people are critical of the Plans, we know that this Plan helps move forward multiple objectives. What we're doing is creating a policy document that does create priorities, does create goals, but also January 29, 2019 28932 becomes a framework for the future development of the City, and continually addressing the community's concerns as they come up. What are some of the key points? I'm going to briefly cove this, but the Plan is divided into four books. The first book is called "Livonia Starts Now." That is where we present the demographic analysis and a little bit of where the City is today. Book Two is the "Land Development" and that outlines how the City can grow, and it really contains land use policies and the Future Land Use Map. Book Three is "Systems Development, How Do We Get There." That book contains recommendations for infrastructure as well as the transportation system. Book Four, "Strategic Development, How Do We Secure Livonia's Future," contains an in depth action plan for who would be leading the charge to implement the goals and objectives of the Plan but also highlights some priority projects to work on over the next three years. The Future Land Use Plan, I think from the Planning Commission's perspective, is probably the part of the Plan that you'll identify most with. It's the part of the Plan that presents the longterm land development vision for the City and is most related to the site planning process and the implementation of city zoning. As I mentioned prior, we did talk a little bit more in depth about this last fall, but I think the major change in the Future Land Use Plan is the creation of mixed development centers and the City Center with the idea that there are several nodes or primary commercial intersections around the City which are not only primed for being redeveloped for commercial, but also housing that would be associated with that commercial area. Then of course, City Center is envisioned as being continued to be developed as the downtown for the City. We did look at planning for special planning areas. This included a concept plan for City Center, the redevelopment of this campus to not only site a new City Hall and city facilities but also reuse parts of the city campus for housing and commercial development. It's worth stating that this is really a concept plan, a vision plan and the Plan also recommends further study on this as well. We looked at the former Livonia Mall site for infill. There's a lot of underutilized parking fields at that site, and we know that there's some transitioning commercial uses there that could be put to a productive use. We thought a lot about the Plymouth Road corridor and the Steering Committee recommended we focus on the eastern part of the corridor as a way to be a model for not only the redevelopment of the Plymouth Road corridor but other similar corridors in the City. It envisions design guidelines for redeveloping those corridors. So three priority projects. What do we see as the near -term priorities to help implement the Master Plan? The first thing is to do a comprehensive zoning update which was always envisioned as Phase 2 of the Master Plan project. We were authorized this month by City council to January 29, 2019 28933 begin that work so we look forward to working with the Planning Commission and City Council on developing zoning modifications to help implement the Master Plan. We've also recommended doing a City Center development plan, a real feasibility study for programming and implementing City Center downtown -type development. We do think that the Plymouth Road corridor warrants further study, as was mentioned in some of the comments we received. Another comment we received this time, the Livonia Bike Loop was the near -term recommendation for implementing a better biking system and the Bike Walk Livonia plan, and we have recommended that be a three-year priority for the City. There was some interest expressed in the public engagement at looking broader at transit and mobility. I think this relates to the connection of the City across the interchanges as well. Of course, continuing to update the Capital Improvements Plan and continuing to update the City's infrastructure plan are important for the future. Tonight, we are holding a public hearing. The public hearing is required by the State of Michigan's Planning and Enabling Act. Prior to considering adoption of a plan, you open a public hearing, take any comments from residents who have had time to read the Plan or even have general comments about what they'd like to see in the future in the City, and then procedurally, you could entertain a motion to adopt, you could entertain a motion to adopt with comments so if you have specific comment's you'd like to change that's possible, or you could provide us direction to come back or to address things in a broader sense. That's my presentation, and I can take additional questions after the public hearing as well. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Lippens. Is there any comments from the Commission? Mr. Caramagno: Paul, I've got a question. Early on we talked about the surrounding communities being involved. Was there much interaction with the surrounding communities during this process? Mr. Lippens: What is required in the process by the State of Michigan is, at the beginning of the planning process, we send out a notice to surrounding communities that the City is entering the planning process, and ask them to send us a response about how and when they'd like to comment. Then we get to the start of the 63- day review period, we post the plan, distribute the plan, and sometimes you receive comments from surrounding communities, sometimes you don't. We did not get specific comments from any surrounding communities on the draft plan, but we did as part of the study evaluate surrounding communities, January 29, 2019 28934 and we did a comparative analysis from a demographic perspective not only to the surrounding communities but to some of Livonia's peer communities. That was considered as part of developing the recommendations. Mr. Caramagno: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions for Mr. Lippens? Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak on this item. Seeing no one coming forward, I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion. On a motion by Ventura, seconded by Caramagno, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-10-2019 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on January 29, 2019, on Petition 2018-09-07-01 submitted by the City Planning Commission and the Master Plan Steering Committee requesting approval to hold a public hearing and thereafter adopt Livonia Vision 21 as the City of Livonia's Comprehensive Master Plan pursuant to Michigan Public Act 33 of 2008 (the Michigan Planning Enabling Act), as amended, the Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 2018-09-07-01 for the following reasons: 1. That preparation of the Comprehensive Master Plan (LIVONIA VISION 21) is supported by the extensive public outreach and engagement conducted by the City and the Livonia Vision 21 Steering Committee, 2. The proposed changes bring the Comprehensive Master Plan (LIVONIA VISION 21) into compliance with the requirements of the Michigan Planning Enabling Act; and 3. The goals and vision as presented in the Comprehensive Master Plan (LIVONIA VISION 21) are consistent with the current vision of the City. Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council for a receive and file. January 29, 2019 28935 ITEM #2 PETITION 2018-12-08-09 MIU HOLDINGS Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2018- 12-08-09 submitted by MIU Holdings, L.L.C. requesting approval of all plans required by Sections 18.47 and 18.58 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance ##543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to redevelop the office building at 33014 Five Mile Road, including renovating the exterior of the existing building and substituting the required masonry screen wall along the north and west sides of the property with a greenbelt and plantings, located on the north side of Five Mile Road between Hubbard and Farmington Roads in the Southwest'/ of Section 15. Mr. Taormina: This is a request to renovate the office building at 33014 Five Mile Road located on the north side of Five Mile Road between Shadyside and Woodring Avenues. This property is about 0.44 acres in area. It has 115 feet of frontage along Five Mile and a depth of roughly 175 feet on Woodring. The south half of the property is zoned C-2 (General Business) whereas the north half is zoned P (Parking). Looking at the surrounding area, immediately to the north and west of the subject property, are residential homes zoned R-1. To the west along Five Mile Road and to the east are commercial properties. Directly across Five Mile Road is the Civic Center area. Michigan Institute of Urology is proposing to move from its current location, which is within a multi -tenant building located on Farmington Road at Lyndon to the new location, which it now owns. The subject site was originally developed as a Michigan National Bank. It's important to note that in 1973, a section of Woodring Avenue as it abuts the site was vacated pursuant to Ordinance 1116. Even though this small section of Woodring directly north of Five Mile is privately owned, it is paved and it effectively functions as a public right-of- way allowing for through traffic. Looking at the aerial photograph, you'll notice how the parcel boundary extends to the centerline of Woodring and reflects the fact that that portion of Woodring is vacated and is retained by the owners; however, there was a full - width easement established at the time the street was vacated allowing for public use and public purposes and, therefore, it continues to function as a public thoroughfare. The existing building is about 7,400 square feet in gross floor area and is two - stories in height. There are about 29 parking spaces currently available on the site. There are some on the east side of the building but most of the parking is provided in the lot immediately to the north. The plans include completely renovating the first floor which would be devoted primarily to procedure and examination rooms, a laboratory and other support services. There is a waiting area, restrooms, reception and checkout, as January 29, 2019 28936 well as several doctor offices. The upper part of the building is limited primarily to a breakroom, storage room and a couple of offices. The upper level would not be available to patients as there is no elevator proposed. The useable area of the building in total would be about 4,600 square feet. The exterior modifications to the building would include removal of the existing mansard roof and painting the existing brick. There would be stone veneer placed along the base of the building, and wood fascia would be provided on the lower level of the building. There is a limestone sill that runs along the beltline of the building as well as tile that would be placed at both of the entryways, one on the south side of the building facing Five Mile Road and then another on the north side, which is the main patient entrance as that is directly accessible to the main parking lot. There is an E.I.F.S, screen for mechanical equipment and the cornice above is also E.I.F.S. As you look at the rear of the building, you'll see the same type of treatments along the rear of the building including painted brick and the canopies would be added to the main entrance. In terms of parking, of the 4,600 square feet of useable floor area in the building, about 1,200 square feet would be devoted to procedure and exam rooms. That parks at a ratio of one space for every 110 square feet of useable area. The remaining 3,400 square feet of useable floor area would be treated as general office and that parks at a ratio of one space for every 200 square feet. Altogether, no less than 28 parking spaces are needed to satisfy the ordinance. The site plan provides a total of 39 spaces, so it does comply with the ordinance minimum. All of the spaces are required to be a minimum of 10 feet in width. This is something that was indicated at the study session, and we will need confirmation that the changes were made to plan as we don't have dimensions. The dumpster is shown in the northwest corner of the site and would be screened with enclosure walls that would be 6 feet 10 inches in height. Lastly, with respect to the screening and landscaping, the ordinance requires a minimum five-foot high masonry screen wall wherever commercial zoning abuts residential zoning. This applies to the north as well as to a portion of the west property line. Along the west property line, the plan indicates that there would be a new fence or wall that would be five to seven feet in height, and along the north property line where there are a couple of mature trees that lie either very close or right on the property line, the petitioner is indicating a greenbelt in lieu of the required masonry screen wall. That greenbelt must be a minimum of 10 feet in width. They plan to retain the existing vegetation as well as provide additional plants, mostly junipers and burning bushes. That is something that the Planning Commission can consider, or you can modify the plan to require a masonry screen wall. The City Council would make the ultimate January 29, 2019 28937 decision as to what would be approved along the north property line. We don't have any information on signage so I cannot report on that right now. With that, I can read out the 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 petition. We have no objections to the proposed project at this time. The existing parcel is assigned the address of #33014 Five Mile 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. The proposed paving improvements shown on the submitted drawings, specifically the proposed turn -around and closure of the roadway, do not meet the standards of this Department and will need to be altered prior to obtaining Engineering permits. The owner has been in contact regarding this matter, and we will be able to give a full engineering review once revised plans have been submitted. Should the owner do any work within the Five Mile Road right-of-way, they will need to contact the Wayne County Department of Public Works for any permits that may be required. " The letter is signed by David 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 redevelop the office building including (1) renovating the exterior of the existing building; (2) closing off Woodring Avenue to the thru traffic, and (3) substituting the required masonry screen wall along the north and west sides of the property with a greenbelt and plantings 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 13, 2018, which reads as follows: "1 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. A cross access and parking agreement should be in place with the property located to the east. This Department has no further January 29, 2019 28938 objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Director of Inspection. The next letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated January 21, 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, there are taxes due but not outstanding; therefore, 1 have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. The next letter is from the Finance Department, dated December 12, 2018, which reads as follows: "1 have reviewed the addresses connected with the above noted petition. As there are no outstanding amounts receivable, general or water and sewer, I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Coline Coleman, Chief Accountant. I'd like to point out, Mr. Chair, that the Engineering letter was drafted at the time when the original plan showed the closure of Woodring Avenue. That has since been modified. It will remain open. So the comment relative to non-compliance with the design standards for that road closure no longer apply. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for our staff? I don't see any. The petitioner is here. Would you please come forward? We will need your name and address for the record please. Robert Bush, Rochester Hills, Michigan. Mr. Wilshaw: What would you like to add to what you've heard so far? Mr. Bush: I don't really have anything to add. I think it was described pretty much the way that we understand it by Mark, and we're good with that. Do you have any questions for us? Otherwise, we're pretty satisfied. Mr. Wilshaw: Did you bring a material sample board? Mr. Bush: No. I did not. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Ms. Smiley: Good evening. 1 was looking at these pictures that you had of the back of the building. On that one, is that the main entrance, that door? Mr. Bush: Correct. Ms. Smiley: Okay. And then there's another door to the left. Mr. Bush: That's an employee entrance. January 29, 2019 28939 Ms. Smiley: These both seem to be up, like with the curb, and then up. If you had a wheelchair, how would you get over that? Is there some kind of ramp? Mr. Bush: Mark is the architect on the project. He can answer that. I'm not sure if there's a ramp. Mark Alphonsi, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. The rendering is more for the material palette. We definitely will have a handicap ramp. Ms. Smiley: Okay. And you'll definitely have materials for Council so they can see? The pictures are great, but I'm a real visual person. I like to actually see the colors. They're showing a blue sky here in Livonia. That threw me off. Mr. Alphonsi: They do have a description on there and the rendering does show the color palette. What exactly will you require? What are you looking for? Mr. Bush: Are you looking for a design board? Ms. Smiley: Yes. They usually do a sample board to show what the brick will look like, what the stone looks like, the real colors. That would be great. Mr. Alphonsi: I just did want to point out one thing. We did update the site plan reducing that parking, removing one parking space and making it 10 foot. So we do have an acceptable dimension for the parking spaces. So that area that has the three actually was four before, so we got three 10400t wide parking spaces. I know, Mark, you had mentioned that earlier. Mr. Bush: So that will take us to a total of 38. Ms. Smiley: That's great. Thank you. Mr. Ventura: I note that you call out a wood band around the lower level. Is that actually wood that's going to require maintenance or is it a synthetic product? Mr. Alphonsi: There are two different materials we're exploring. There's one that looks like wood that is actually an aluminum product that has like an actual veneer on it. The other one is just like a painted faux. The one that has a painted faux finish is aluminum. It doesn't require any maintenance. It's really nice, and it's not like right there where you can touch. January 29, 2019 28940 Mr. Ventura: And you'll submit that material specification to the Planning Department? Mr. Bush: I think we have to make a couple more decisions internally and make the final decision on the colors. It's pretty much there. When do you need that board, for next week? Mr. Ventura: I believe it would be an advantage to have it when you go before City Council in a couple weeks. Mr. Bush: Okay. Mr. Ventura: Mr. Taormina mentioned that you do not have an elevator serving the second floor. So you're really precluded from having any patient care on the second floor. Is that true? Mr. Bush: There will be no patients upstairs. It's more of a break area. There's a break area on the first floor and a break area on the second floor. It's just for overflow. It's storage. It probably won't be used for much of anything, but we need to finish it out. Mr. Ventura: Thank you. Ms. Smiley: Back on the employee entrance, there's a big cement slab in front of the employee door. What that's big cement slab about? Mr. Alphonsi: It just didn't seem like there's enough room to plant out there. It seemed like it was going to be a little small. It's just more for people coming from the side and walking across, having a clear area. That's why. All that is a raised area so it's not parking. It's more pedestrian, but it's more for people walking by it. Ms. Smiley: Oh. So it's kind of like a sidewalk? Mr. Alphonsi: Yeah. That's all it is. Mr. Bush: That's exactly what it is. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Bongero: Mark, do they meet the required size for the greenbelt? Weren't we talking nine feet, not ten? Mr. Taormina: They are indicating 10 feet now. So they've either measured to confirm that the existing landscaped area meets the 10 foot January 29, 2019 28941 requirement, or they have proposed to sawcut a portion of the existing parking lot in order to get to 10 feet. Mr. Alphonsi: The dimension is kind of muddied in the landscape plan. Mr. Taormina: It's very concealed, but that says 10 feet right there. So they are showing 10 feet. Again, I don't know if that exists or if they have to modify the existing pavement in order to achieve that. Maybe they can answer that. Mr. Alphonsi: I did check the dimension and it looks like they're short by just a little bit, I think just under a foot. It tapers as you go from east to the west. So the west we were just over 10 feet, to the east we were just under. It follows we'll just bring it to make sure we maintain the 10 foot and we're going to confirm that with the civil engineer so when he updates his plan, that will show that it's 10 foot and if we have to cut it back, we'll cut it back. Mr. Bongero: Thank you. Mr. Caramagno: What do you have for lighting on this property? I know we have limits on light poles, but where are they at and is there any exterior lighting on the building? Mr. Alphonsi: Yeah. I don't know if you have the full construction plans. Mr. Taormina: I don't have it as part of the slide show presentation. Mr. Alphonsi: Okay. Can I bring this to you? It shows the photometrics on it. Mr. Caramagno: Sure. Why not? Mr. Alphonsi: We have some lights here. Mr. Caramagno: Not on the building? These will be poles? Mr. Alphonsi: Yes. Mr. Caramagno: Just three poles? Mr. Alphonsi: There's three back here. We're going to have to update it but pretty much it's going to be the same thing. Mr. Caramagno: So there's no plans for any box lights on the building to throw light way out? They're going to come down. January 29, 2019 28942 Mr. Alphonsi: We're going to have a couple like here by the entrance, probably one here too. Mr. Caramagno: Good. Thank you. Ms. Smiley: How are we going to put that in the minutes? Mr. Taormina: If you could summarize the discussion. Mr. Caramagno: He's got basically three poles along the north side of the building close to the building, not right on the property line. That's was kind of my concern. If he was going to be illuminating the neighbors at all and that wasn't the case. He's got a couple of building lights by the doors, something you'd probably see at any building, nothing with big illumination. Mr. Alphonsi: Can you pull up the site plan? I can point it out for clarification. Where the handicap parking spaces are and to the right, that's basically where the poles were located. So it's away from the neighbors. The Building Department has the construction documents to show that. Mr. Taormina: We should have a condition that addresses the light fixtures. Mr. Wilshaw: That would make the most sense to indicate the height of the poles and that they should be shielded to not stray onto adjacent property. We'll add that to our motion. Any other questions or comments for our petitioners? Mr. Bongero: Are you planning on doing a generator in the future? Mr. Bush: That's a good question. It hasn't been discussed. I'm not sure. I don't think so at this time. We don't have anything that would really require it. There's no procedure that would be affected if the power went out. Mr. Bongero: Okay. Just placement would concern me, like where's it going for the neighbors. 1 guess that would have to be addressed when they pull a permit. Right, Mark? Mr. Taormina: Correct. Mr. Alphonse Probably the only place we could, if we ever wanted to, would be on the roof and make sure it's properly screened. Mr. Bongero: Thank you. January 29, 2019 28943 Ms. Smiley: In one of those letters, Mark, didn't they say they needed some kind of a cross parking agreement with the neighboring people? Mr. Taormina: I believe that letter from the Inspection Department referencing the need for a cross parking access agreement was for the original plan that had the closure of the road. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Then what are we doing about Woodring? Mr. Taormina: It's going to remain open in its current configuration. Do you mean in terms of paving it? Ms. Smiley: Yes. Mr. Taormina: The prepared resolution addresses the paving of the road as it exists on this property. There's not much we can do beyond that as far as requiring the paving. Ms. Smiley: Okay. There were two options. One on the north side of the parking lot. Mr. Taormina: Let me explain what options you have available relative to screening. The ordinance calls for a masonry screen wall between the commercial and the residential, minimum 5 feet to 7 feet in height. The Planning Commission and the City Council can approve a greenbelt in lieu of the required wall, but any greenbelt has to be at least 10 feet in width and has to be sufficiently planted. Alternatively, the petitioner could obtain authorization from one or both of the neighbors to install a fence temporarily along the property line, again, subject to your approval. We've provided you with two options relative to the screening. Condition #4 addresses the requirement for a wall along the west side of the property with the possibility of the fence as they've indicated, but only if they receive a zoning variance or if the abutting neighbor approves it. Otherwise, they have to build a wall on the west property line. Condition #5, which provides an option for the north property line, would allow for the greenbelt no less than 10 feet in width, in combination with a site obscuring fence. You could either include or exclude that portion dealing with the fence. The other option associated with the north property line would be simply to require the masonry wall. Again, that could be substituted with a fence only if it's approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals or the owner to the north agrees. I've given you a couple options of how to address the screening. 1 thought it would be important to hear from the neighbors on this item first. January 29, 2019 28944 Mr. Alphonsi: If I could interject here, one thing we really liked about putting the vegetation there is those mature oak trees. To put the wall in, we'd have to take those down and I'd rather maintain something like that. Mr. Bush: Or if we put the fence or the wall, the trees would have to come down. So we were trying to leave them intact and establish the greenbelt there and do an extensive planting as a shield. Mr. Wilshaw: We have three options before us. We can do a landscape barrier, - we can do landscape with fence, or we can do some landscaping and a masonry wall. So we'll find out where that lands when we get to that step of our process. Mr. Ventura: I'm looking at the upper right-hand corner of the plan that's not on the screen right now, but calls out the plantings. It says landscape schedule. Are those the plantings that you're planning on putting on this north line? Mr. Alphonsi: Yes. Mr, Ventura: How many of those are deciduous and how many are evergreen? Mr. Alphonsi: The junipers are evergreens. The rest is a low bush or flowering plant. Mr. Ventura: I'm not looking at it. It says Redspire Pear, emerald and gold, weeping cherry and rhododendron. Are you looking at a different schedule than I am? Mr. Taormina: if I may, the one thing we point out in our Staff Report is that there's a mismatch between the landscape plan and the schedule. The numbers don't match on the schedule to those shown on the plan. Mr. Alphonsi: That's a mistake on my part. I didn't realize that. Quantities were not updated in the schedule. That's incorrect. Mr. Ventura: I guess my point is that this is primarily deciduous, and in the fall the leaves go away and you have no screen. Mr. Alphonsi: The intent for that is across the back, the junipers, and then in front, it was kind of like acting as a green backing to do like a colorful bush or flowering rhododendron in front. Mr. Ventura: I guess I'd be concerned, Mr. Taormina, that the Planning Department make sure that if we use the option that allows the January 29, 2019 28945 greenbelt, that there are sufficient trees that provide a screen year round as opposed to .. . Mr. Bush: We're very much open to that. I don't know that this has to be the final solution here. The type of planting we could definitely negotiate or would take recommendations and provide something a little bit more clear. Mr. Alphonsi: We followed kind of what was in your standards and what was acceptable for the screening, but we definitely want to work with you on this. Mr. Ventura: Great. Thank you. Mr. Bush: I think we could possibly provide that with the finishes as well at the same time. Mr. Ventura: Thank you. Ms. McCue: This may be more for Mr. Taormina, but in the resolution that I'm looking at, we have Option A and Option B for the fence and greenbelt. Did we not say that we also had the option of just doing the 10-foot greenbelt along the north? Mr. Taormina: Option A, I've underlined that part that indicates in combination with the site obscuring fence, that you could omit that language and what you'd be left with is the option of providing just the greenbelt. Ms. McCue: Again, with that clarification of what Mr. Ventura said, on the details. Okay. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against the granting of this petition? Please come forward to the podium. Bryan Lynch, 15341 Woodring, Livonia, Michigan. I live right behind it. I've lived at the house for almost 25 years, and I've been cleaning up that parking lot for probably 20, easy. Mike McGowan from the sporting store right next store could verify that. I want a wall, and I want a wall just like the one at the bank at the corner, something like that, because there's riff Taff in there because the business has been closed for probably 10 years. I want a wall for sure. If they want to put shrubs on their side, that's fine, but l want like a six, seven foot wall like they have at the bank. That's all I have to say. January 29, 2019 28946 Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Lynch. Thank you for coming. Anyone else in the audience wishing to speak? Kristal Greniuk, Dental Smiles of Livonia, 33044 Five Mile, Livonia Michigan. I am a couple doors down with my husband. I am Dental Smiles of Livonia is my business. I'm happy that it's getting redeveloped finally because it is an eyesore. I was just wanting to get information. That's why we came tonight. I'm glad that there's enough parking because I currently have an issue where people will park in my lot in order to go to McGowan Sport Shop that's there. That's just a given because they were in my building at one point. I've owned it for 19 years now. I'm more concerned about what's going to happen with the shrubbery and everything on the west side. The other gentleman spoke of the north side. Because right now the trees there are not kept up and it's an eyesore and it's currently a chain link fence. I'll just follow through and see what the decision is on the borders because it will be visible from my parking lot and my area. But something that's easily maintained would be helpful because, like I said the current greenery or trees there, more like a twiggy bush right now. I'll go and trim them myself, because they hang over on my lot. But I'm just glad that we've got a new neighbor and we welcome you to Livonia. So thank you for letting us speak. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience wising to speak? I don't see anyone else coming forward. The petitioner has the opportunity to come back and speak if there's anything else they would like to add. They say they are okay. With that, a motion would be in order. On a motion by Ventura, seconded by Caramagno, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-11-2019 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2018-12-08--09 submitted by MIU Holdings, L.L.C. requesting approval of all plans required by Sections 18.47 and 18.58 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to redevelop the office building at 33014 Five Mile Road, including renovating the exterior of the existing building and substituting the required masonry screen wall along the north and west sides of the property with a greenbelt and plantings, located on the north side of Five Mile Road between Hubbard and Farmington Roads in the Southwest '/ of Section 15, be approved subject to the following conditions: January 29, 2019 28947 1. That the Site Plan marked Sketch No. 07 dated January 23, 2019 prepared by ABD Architects, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, except that the Landscape Schedule shall be revised to match the number of plantings shown on the Site Plan; 2. That the vacated portion of Woodring Avenue adjacent to Lot 51 of Brightmoor Home Acres Subdivision extending north from the north right-of-way line of Five Mile Road for approximately 105 feet, shall be improved in accordance with the recommendations of the City of Livonia Engineering Division; 3. That all parking areas shall be repaired, resealed and restriped to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department, and all parking spaces shall be doubled -striped and have a minimum width of ten (10) feet; 4. That along the west side of the parking lot where the site borders the residential district, the Petitioner shall construct a minimum five (5) foot high masonry screen wall, except that a sight -obscuring fence may be substituted for the masonry wall under one of the following circumstances: a) approval is granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals, or b) the abutting property owner agrees in writing pursuant to Section 18.45(e)(2)(f); 5. That along the north side of the parking lot where the site borders the residential district, the Petitioner shall construct a minimum five (5) foot high masonry screen wall in which case the amount of landscaping in this area may be reduced subject to the approval of the Planning Department. A sight - obscuring fence may be substituted for the masonry wall under one of the following circumstances: a) approval is granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals, or b) the abutting property owner agrees in writing pursuant to Section 18.45(e)(2)(f); 5, That Sketch No. SK-08 dated January 23, 2019, prepared by ABD Architects together with the color renderings date - stamped January 25, 2019, are hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 7. That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be concealed from public view on all sides by screening that shall be of a compatible character, material and color to other exterior materials on the building; January 29, 2019 28948 8. That the three walls of the trash dumpster area shall be constructed out of building materials that shall complement that of the building. The enclosure gates shall be of solid panel steel construction or durable, long-lasting solid panel fiberglass. The trash dumpster area shall always be maintained and when not in use the gates shall be kept fully closed; 9. That all light fixtures shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in height and shall be aimed and shielded to minimize stray light trespassing across property lines and glaring into adjacent roadways; 10. 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; 11. That no LED light band or exposed neon shall be permitted on this site including, but not limited to, the building or around the windows; 12. That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time the building permits are applied for; and 13. Pursuant to Section 19.10 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, this approval is valid for a period of one year only from the date of approval by City Council, and unless a building permit is obtained, this approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion? Mr. Ventura: Mr. Caramagno, would you like to amplify Condition #9. Mr. Caramagno: I think Mark wanted to see a revision or some plans for the lighting. Right, Mark? Mr. Taormina: Yes. We'll have to confirm that it meets these standards. Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. I want to think the petitioners for their work with us on this. There were a lot of study meetings and work put into this. I wish them success with their project. January 29, 2019 28949 ITEM #3 PETITION 2019-01-08-01 18TH STREET Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2019- 01-08-01 submitted by 18t" Street Development, L.L.C. requesting approval of all plans required by Sections 18.47 and 18.58 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to construct a professional/medical office building at 39000 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between the 1-275196 Expressway and Haggerty Road in the Southwest Y4 of Section 6. Mr. Taormina: This is a request to construct a new professional/medical office building located on a 35-acre parcel that is on the north side of Seven Mile just west of the 1-275196 Expressway. The site presently contains a 290,000 square foot building that is occupied by A123 Systems. It was announced last year that A123 will be vacating the site and moving to Novi, Michigan. The new buyer, a healthcare provider, intends to repurpose the site for use as an Outpatient Care Center. The project involves constructing a new 161,000 square foot medical/professional office building at the north end of the property and then repurposing the existing building as a warehouse for other support services connected to the user's needs. The subject property is in the process of being rezoned from M-1 (Light Manufacturing) to PO-1 (Professional Office). The City Council gave First Reading to the rezoning on December IT and Second Reading and Roll Call, the final steps in the rezoning process, are on hold pending a review of the site plan. The Professional Office District allows all permitted and waiver uses as specified in the Office Services zoning district, which includes professional, medical and general offices. Buildings classified as Zone I are required to be over two -stories in height with a maximum height of six stories. Immediately to the north of the subject site is an oil well operated by West Bay Oil Exploration. To the west is the Pentagon Centre Entertainment Campus. To the south across Seven Mile is the Seven Mile Crossing office complex and Schoolcraft College. Immediately to the east is the 1-275196 Expressway. The proposal is to develop a new 4-112 story building that measures 161,659 square feet. It is positioned at the north end of the property where the grade rises several feet above the rest of the site. At its closest point, the new building would be set back from the highway approximately 262 feet. New parking would be created on the north and east sides of the building. The project would improve site access by rerouting CBS Fox Drive and creating a new "loop" service road that would traverse the eastern boundary of the site and then connect to Seven Mile Road via the signalized intersection that is located across from Sauk Drive at Schoolcraft January 29, 2019 28950 College and which also ties into the main north/south access road that runs through the Pentagon Centre Entertainment Campus. The plan shows that a portion of the loop road connects to what is identified as Chippewa Street and runs along the east side of the property adjacent to the highway and then circles around the new building and continues west where it would tie into the existing road network that is located at the Pentagon Center. The new road would also extend across the northerly part of the adjacent property that contains the historical Orson Everitt House which is currently used as a professional law office. The impact to the historical property would involve either demolishing or relocating an outbuilding located behind the main house. Even though the original carriage house that once sat in the same location as the current outbuilding was demolished, because the entire site is designated as an historical resource, removing or relocating this structure will require review by the City's Historical Preservation Commission. Let me just clarify. The site plan includes the adjacent parcel to the west. It's a separate parcel. It's a law office. It contains an historical building. Actually, the entire site is designated as an historical resource. The main house, which is identified on this plan, is about 1,660 square feet and it is not impacted by the development of this new road. There is garage or outbuilding on the backside of the property that would either be relocated or demolished. That structure is not part of the original Orson Everitt House from what we can tell. It was reconstructed in the 1980's, but nonetheless, because the entire site is designated as an historical resource, it is something that is going to require the review the City's Historical Preservation Commission. Due to the site's topography, the lowest level of the proposed office building, which is identified on the plans as Level 00, would be accessible from the south side, but it is below the established finish grade on the north side. Level 00 is a partial floor that totals about 21,200 square feet in gross floor area The floor above (Level 01) would have ground level access on the north side where the main entrance is located and that level totals about 36,300 square feet. There are three levels above that. Levels 02, 03 and 04 would all have the same gross floor area, about 34,700 square feet. Added together, it would be about 161,659 square feet. If you're wondering why it is identified as 4- 1/2 story building, it's because that lower level is only partial. Included with the site plan is a detailed parking analysis that breaks down the required parking for each subcategory of use within the building. According to the calculations, a total of 233 parking spaces are needed to support the square footage of the new building that would be dedicated to medical. For the portion of the building that would be used as general office, a total of 295 spaces are needed. There are also calculations for "Building January 29, 2019 28951 Support & Amenity." For the existing building, the Petitioner estimates a need for 70 parking spaces to support its use as a warehouse. The total projected need for both buildings, based on the Petitioner's calculations, is 615 parking spaces. The site plan shows a total of 716 spaces. However, parking required by code is 734 space, resulting in a deficiency of 18 spaces. Due to the significant grade changes on this property, there would be a need for an 18-foot retaining wall along the north property line. Similar situations exist along the east side of the property where the grade drops and there is a steep slope adjacent to the highway. Here too there is a need for a retaining wall. In addition, on the north end of the property, there is a service area on the west side as well as a parking lot on the east side. Because these are raised above the adjacent road that runs along the south side, retaining walls are needed in those areas as well. There's quite a bit of work needed to address the topography of this site. Landscaping constitutes about 22 percent of the total site area. This exceeds the ordinance minimum of 15 percent. A fully detailed landscape plan was provided with the application. All pole -mounted lighting would be limited to a height of 20 feet, which complies with the City's Outdoor Lighting Policy for commercial properties. With respect to storm water, this is still being developed. Meetings are scheduled with the Engineering Division to determine how that will be handled. This site contains a significant amount of wetlands as well as existing stormwater detention areas. It is hoped that the majority of the stormwater from the new development will be accommodated within those existing systems. Lastly, with respect to the exterior of the building, it is envisioned that the exterior of the building would contain a combination of insulated metal and concrete panels along with spandrel glass, the details of which are still pending. This is something that is addressed by the petitioner in a letter that was provided to the Planning Commission, a commitment to come back to the Commission with fully detailed plans should the project move forward. The signage is also not complete at this point, and all the mechanical units would be screened by materials that would be placed on the roof. With that, I would be happy to read out the correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please. Mr. Taormina: There are several items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated January 16, 2019, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposed project at this time. The existing parcel is assigned the address of #39000 Seven Mile Road. The legal January 29, 2019 28952 description provided with the petition appears to be correct and should be used in conjunction with his petition. The existing site is currently serviced by public sanitary and water main that can be extended to the proposed building. Storm sewer detention will need to be provided for any new impervious areas. The submitted drawings do not indicate any proposed utility extensions, so we will review those items when full engineering drawings are submitted to this department. The proposed paving improvements shown on the submitted drawings, indicate the new road will tie into the existing exit from the Pentagon Centre Development. Prior to any construction, the owner will need to provide access agreements from the other property owners or revise the proposed roadway to use their existing approach. If the new layout is approved, the owner will be required to remove the two existing approaches from Seven Mile Road and replace any missing or damaged sidewalk along the frontage. Any work within the Seven Mile Road fight -of -way will require a permit from the Wayne County Department of Public Services. Also, right-of-way permits may be required from the Michigan Department of Transportation depending on the access and grading required to install the proposed walls and landscaping." The letter is signed by David Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated January 29, 2019, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a professional/medical office building on property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal with the following stipulations: (1) Subjectbuilding(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 (north side of building). (2) Adequate hydrants shall be provided and located with spacing consistent with the use group. (Please add location to be determined at the pre -construction meeting.) (3) A fire access road shall be provided with not less than 20 feet of unobstructed width and have a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance in accordance to 18.2.3.4.1.1 and 18.2.3.4.1.2 of NFPA 1, 2015. (4) Fire lanes shall be marked with wall or pole mounted signs that have the words: FIRE LANE -- NO PARKING painted on both sides (for pole mount) or single sided (for wall mount) in contrasting colors at a size and spacing approved by the Authority Having Jurisdiction. (5) Fire Department Access shall be maintained in accordance with Chapter 18, Fire Department Access and Water Supply, NFPA 1, 2016 (6) Commercial kitchen Hood and Duct fire suppression shall be a UL 300 system and comply with NFPA 96 (if a system is installed.) (7) Knox Box installation is required for Fire Department access. (8) CO2 January 29, 2019 28983 detection required for beverage distribution systems and coolers (if installed). If tank/tanks are 100 lbs. or greater. (Per 2015 IFC 5307.1)"The letter is signed by Keith Bo, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated January 17, 2019, which reads as follows: "i have reviewed the plans in connection with the petition. 1 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 29, 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) Signage has not been reviewed at this time. 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 January 15, 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, there are no outstanding amounts receivable for taxes. Therefore, 1 have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. The sixth letter is from the Finance Department, dated January 15, 2019, 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. We received an email addressed to Tom Kelly, 18t" Street Development, Vice President of Real Estate Development, dated January 29, 2019, which reads as follows: "This letter presents the summary Traffic Impact Study (TIS) prepared for the proposed development in the City of Livonia, Michigan. The project site is located in the northwest quadrant of the Seven Mile Road and 1-275 southbound ramp intersection. The proposed development will consist of 130,000 square feet of warehouse, 105,452 square feet of medical office building, 49,015 square feet of clinic and 7,192 square feet of emergency room. Site access for the development is currently provided via one access point to Seven Mile Road and one access point to Haggerty Road. A trip generation analysis was performed to determine the number of trips generate during the AM and PM peak hours. The proposed development will generate the following net new peak hour trips. In Year 2020, a total of 238 AM (177 inbound, 61 outbound) and 306 PM (95 inbound, 211 outbound) peak hour trips. Based on the TIS, the traffic operations in the study area in the existing and background (without the proposed development) experienced high delays and queuing situations which requires improvements and mitigations. The traffic operations in the future conditions January 29, 2019 28954 (with the proposed development) are similar to background conditions with minimal increases to the delay in the study area. According to the TIS, the future traffic operations at the site driveways were found deficient with the trips generated by the proposed development. The TIS concluded that a traffic signal would improve the deficiency at the site driveway on Haggerty Road, while the site driveway on Seven Mile Road (stop - controlled) will remain deficient due to the lack of improvement options. Therefore, the TIS analyzed an alternative to provide access for the development site to Seven Mile Road through a connection to Chippewa Street (signalized). The results of this alternative analysis indicate that the Chippewa Street connection will be the best option to access the site from Seven Mile Road with some improvements to the traffic signal at the intersection of Seen Mile Road and Chippewa Street. This summary is based on the findings of the TIS. Any questions related to this memorandum should be addressed to Fleis & VandenBrink Engineering." The email was submitted by Mohamed Aguib, Traffic Engineer, Fleis & Vandenbrink. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Do we have any questions for our Planning staff? I don't see any. Our petitioner is here tonight. Please come forward. We will need your name and address for the record please. Tom Kelly, 18th Street Development, L.L.C., 1621 18th Street, Suite 250, Denver, Colorado 80202. Good evening, Commissioners. It's a pleasure to have the opportunity to stand in front of you once again. I appreciate your support and consideration through all of this to date. Aligned with Mr. Taormina's summary, l don't want to be repetitive, but perhaps a little context would help as to clarifying our request for the conditional rezoning. We are under certain time constraints with the acquisition of this property. To buy the 35 acres is a significant investment, and our capital is not comfortable being at risk without having assurance that we had the zoning in place to be able to develop what we have put in front of the Commission. What we are comfortable with, and what we are respectfully requesting, is a conditional rezoning that gives us the zoning that will allow us to move forward with the PO-1, but allow us the time to be able to provide further details with getting the connection to Seven Mile Road, to be able to further our building plans to the level of detail that you would like to see that we're just not quite there yet. What we're requesting is 120 days post conditional rezoning. Within that time frame, we come back and we submit a site plan knowing that we are not going to be able to get building permits or any approvals to move forward without the full satisfaction from the City of Livonia with respect January 29, 2019 28955 to our building plans and overall development. That's what we're asking for your consideration and that's kind of the constraints that we're operating under that's resulted in this request. Other than that, several of my associates and I are here to answer any of your questions that you may have, but that's the extent of what I came prepared to say. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Kelly. Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Ms. Smiley: Good evening. 1 appreciate what you're saying with your constraints because it is unusual for us to approve something without a site plan, but I understand where you're coming from. As one Commissioner, I don't have a problem with this. I sure hope you didn't come from Colorado to warm up. Mr. Kelly: No. I came fully prepared. Ms. Smiley: Well, Michigan is usually very warm, and I think you'll find our Commission to be very warm. Thank you. Mr. Ventura: Mr. Kelly, this looks like a find development and we're excited to have it in the city. As Ms. Smiley indicated, it's unusual for us to do this in this method, and we know you're constrained about revealing who's going to be in this building, but please tell us how many new jobs this development will bring to the city. Mr. Kelly: Great question. I'm not prepared to give you accurate data on that. Mr. Ventura: Ballpark. Mr. Kelly: If we're looking at 160,000 plus square feet, it's going to be a significant amount of not just the jobs, but the benefit of providing health care to the community. I'm looking back at my associates. Does anybody have any estimate from a job perspective? It's something I'd love to be able to follow-up with you on, some accurate data. Mr. Ventura: Can you give us an idea of the wage range that these people will benefit from? These are not all entry level positions I would assume. Mr. Kelly: No. Everything from nurse practitioners to physicians. So it's going to be on average well above $80,000 in terms of the employment. January 29, 2019 28956 Mr. Ventura: Is it fair to say that this is not the relocation of an existing facility in town? Mr. Kelly: No, it's not. It's a creation of a new facility. Mr. Ventura: Thank you, Mr. Kelly. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against the granting of this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion would be in order. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by McCue, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-12-2019 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2019-01-08-01 submitted by 18#h Street Development, L.L.C. requesting approval of all plans required by Sections 18.47 and 18.58 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to construct a professional/medical office building at 39000 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between the 1-275196 Expressway and Haggerty Road in the Southwest Y4 of Section 6, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Overall Site Plan identified as Sheet No. C2.10 dated January 11, 2019 prepared by HKS Architects, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, 2. That the OPCC Site Plan marked Sheet No. C2.20 dated January 11, 2019 prepared by HKS Architects, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, 3. That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for any deficient parking, 4. That the Landscape Plans marked Sheet No's. L1.10, L1.20 & L1.30, all dated January 11, 2019 prepared by HKS Architects, are hereby approved and shall be adhered to, 5. That all disturbed lawn areas, except for those with steep side slopes, shall be sodded in lieu of hydro -seeding and properly irrigated; 6. That pursuant to Section 18.58(c)(2) of Ordinance No. 543, as amended, within 120 days from the date of approval of the site plan by City Council, the Petitioner shall submit January 29, 2019 28957 detailed building elevation plans for review and approval by both the Planning Commission and City Council; 7. That all trash containers shall be properly screened from view with masonry enclosure walls constructed, and the enclosure gates shall be of solid panel steel construction or durable, long-lasting solid panel fiberglass; 8. That this site shall meet either the City of Livonia or the Wayne County Storm Water Management Ordinance, whichever applies, and shall secure any required permits, including storm water management permits, wetlands permits and soil erosion and sedimentation control permits, from Wayne County, the City of Livonia, and/or the State of Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment (DNRE); 9. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission, City Council and Zoning Board of Appeals; 10. That all light fixtures shall not exceed twenty feet (20') in height and shall be aimed and shielded to minimize stray light trespassing across property lines and glaring into adjacent roadways; 11. That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time the building permits are applied for; and 12. Pursuant to Section 19.10 of Ordinance No. 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 the City Council, and unless a building permit is obtained and construction is commenced, this approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving recommendation. ITEM #4 PETITION 2017-09-02-12 TISEO ARCHTECTS (Outdoor Storage - Recreational Equipment) January 29, 2019 28958 Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2017- 09-02-12 submitted by Tiseo Architects, Inc. requesting a one- year extension of the plans in connection with a proposal to develop and operate an outdoor storage yard for recreational equipment at 12350 Merriman Road, located on the east side of Merriman Road between Plymouth Road and the CSX railroad right-of-way in the Southwest % of Section 26. Mr. Wilshaw: We have seen this item and discussed it at length at a previous meeting. What we're looking for tonight is an extension of that. Mr. Taormina, I don't think you need to give a full presentation. Is there any additional information you want to provide? Mr. Taormina: It was a little over a year ago that the City Council approved the development of this site. It involves two petitions. This petition which deals with the outdoor storage of recreational equipment, and the other petition, which is next on the agenda, deals with the outside storage of contractor's equipment. The site plan reflects each of those uses. One issue that we looked at in great detail was how to separate the storage of the recreational vehicles, the campers, trailers, snowmobiles, etc., from the contractors' equipment and other activities. Tiseo Architects developed a plan in conjunction with the Planning Commission that would separate the access, enclose each one of them separately, provide sufficient security and other issues related to stormwater management. We have no objection at this time to the extension being granted for a period of one year for both of these items. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Any questions of our Planning staff? Seeing none, the petitioner's representative is here, Mr. Tiseo. Benedetto Tiseo, Tiseo Architects, Inc., 19815 Farmington Road, Livonia, Michigan 48152. As stated, I'm here to ask for a one-year extension so that the owner can get his financing in order and start construction sometime in the summer. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for the petitioner? Mr. Long: Mr. Tiseo, is it true that there's been some enhancements to it? There's now a plan for people to be on site? Could you talk about that a little bit? Mr. Tiseo: Yes. I talked to the owner a few weeks ago. His intention now is to have an onsite office as well, a small office but it should be occupied most of the time. January 29, 2019 28959 Mr. Long: Great. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions or comments? There is nobody in the audience. A motion would be in order. On a motion by McCue, seconded by Bongero, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-13-2019 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2017-09-02-12 submitted by Tiseo Architects, Inc. requesting a one-year extension of the plans in connection with a proposal to develop and operate an outdoor storage yard for recreational equipment at 12350 Merriman Road, located on the east side of Merriman Road between Plymouth Road and the CSX railroad right-of-way in the Southwest 1/ of Section 26, be approved for the following reasons: 1. That the request for a one-year extension of waiver use approval by Tiseo Architects, Inc., on behalf of Moore Outside Storage, in a letter dated January 7, 2019, is hereby approved; and 2. That all conditions imposed by Council Resolutions #413-17 and #414-17 in connection with Petition 2017-09-02-12, which permitted the development and operation of an outdoor storage yard for recreational equipment at 12350 Merriman Road, shall remain in effect to the extent that they are not in conflict with the foregoing condition. Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go onto City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #5 PETITION 2017-09-02-13 TISEO ARCHTECTS (Outdoor Storage - Trade Contractors) Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2017- 09-02-13 submitted by Tiseo Architects, Inc. requesting a one- year extension of the plans in connection with a proposal to develop and operate an outdoor storage yard for special trade contractors at 12350 Merriman Road, located on the east side of Merriman Road between Plymouth Road and the CSX Railroad right-of-way in the Southwest'/ of Section 26. Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Taormina also provided background information on this. Mr. Tiseo already spoke to this issue. Are there any comments or January 29, 2019 25960 questions? There is no one in the audience. A motion would be in order. On a motion by Long, seconded by McCue, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-14-2019 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2017-09-02-13 submitted by Tiseo Architects, Inc. requesting a one-year extension of the plans in connection with a proposal to develop and operate an outdoor storage yard for special trade contractors at 12350 Merriman Road, located on the east side of Merriman Road between Plymouth Road and the CSX Railroad right-of-way in the Southwest'/ of Section 26, be approved for the following reasons: That the request for a one-year extension of waiver use approval by Tiseo Architects, Inc., on behalf of Moore Outside Storage, in a letter dated January 7, 2019, is hereby approved; and 2. That all conditions imposed by Council Resolutions #415-17 and #416-17 in connection with Petition 2017-09-02-13, which permitted the development and operation of an outdoor storage yard for special trade contractors at 12350 Merriman Road, shall remain in effect to the extent that they are not in conflict with the foregoing condition. 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 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,135T" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 1,135t" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on January 15, 2019. On a motion by Long, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-15-2019 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 1,135t" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on January 15, 2019, are hereby approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: January 29, 2019 28961 AYES: Long, Smiley, Bongero, McCue, Caramagno, Wilshaw NAYS.- None ABSENT: None ABSTAK Ventura Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 1,136th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on January 29, 2019, was adjourned at 8,-38 RN ATTEST: Ian Wilshaw, Chairman