Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2017-01-24 MINUTES OF THE 1,100TH PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, January 24, 2017, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 1,100th 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: Sam Caramagno Glen Long Betsy McCue Carol Smiley Kevin Priddy Peter Ventura Ian Wilshaw Members absent: None Mr. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, and Ms. Margie Watson, Program Supervisor, were also present. Chairman Wilshaw informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and make the final determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City Council for the final determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected. If a petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan approval is denied tonight, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City Council. Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Commission become effective seven (7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning Commission and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their filing. The staff has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions, which the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the proceedings tonight. ITEM #1 PETITION 2016-12-02-25 STATE AUTO SALES Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2016- 12-02-25 submitted by Ed Khalil requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(g) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to operate a used auto dealership with outdoor display of vehicles (State Auto Sales) at 28121 Plymouth Road, located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Inkster Road and Harrison Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36. January 24, 2017 28023 Mr. Taormina: This is a request for a used auto dealership with outdoor display of vehicles located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Inkster and Deering Avenue. The property measures roughly 0.8 acre in size. It includes 150 feet of frontage along Plymouth Road and has a depth of 240 feet. The property is zoned C-2, General Business. The site presently contains a 2,800 square foot commercial building that was the former site of the Penalty Box Bar. To the east is a Quick Oil Change facility, west is a Burger King restaurant, to the north across Plymouth Road is the Plymouth Road Technical Center zoned M-2, General Manufacturing. Lying to the south immediately abutting this property are residential homes that are part of the Thomas Eliot Subdivision, zoned R-1. Used car dealerships are treated as a waiver use under Section 11.03 of the Zoning Ordinance, and are subject to a number of special requirements, including: 1) that no vehicles shall be parked within 20 feet from the front lot line, 2) and the total number of vehicles proposed to be displayed or stored shall be subject to recommendation by the Planning Commission and then approved by the City Council, and 3) outdoor storage of disabled, damaged or unlicensed vehicles is strictly prohibited. The existing building on the property is non- conforming with respect to its setback along Plymouth Road. Typically, buildings are required to be 60 feet from the right-of- way. This building is probably less than 25 feet from the property line, but under this proposal, the front half of the building would be removed in order to comply with the C-2 district 60-foot requirement. The part of the building that would remain would measure roughly 1,798 square feet. The interior of the proposed dealership would be divided into a showroom, office area as well as a service area where vehicles would be repaired and detailed. The service area would have two service bays. Required parking for this use is based on two components of the operation, sales and service. For the sales part, the requirement is one space for every 500 square feet of floor area, and for the service requirement, two spaces for each service bay. Altogether, a total of eight parking spaces are needed for customer and employee parking. The site plan shows a total of 47 parking spaces available on the site, eight of which are identified on the plan as "parking area," and those would be utilized for customers and employees. The remaining 39 spaces would be available for vehicle display, subject to your recommendation and Council approval. All display spaces would be setback 20 feet from Plymouth Road as required. In terms of trash, there is an enclosed dumpster that is shown behind the building along the south edge of the rear parking lot. However, we do not have details on the enclosure materials or dimensions. Moreover, the site plan lacks details on site lighting, and this is something that January 24, 2017 28024 is addressed in the prepared resolution. The minimum requirement for landscaping is 15 percent. The plan shows 33 percent of the total site area as green space, so it would conform. The landscaped areas are shown along Plymouth Road and a large greenbelt area that is about 69 feet in width located between the south edge of the parking lot and the rear property line. Along Plymouth Road, the plan shows three sections of brick piers and fencing, which is consistent with the PRDA's streetscape improvements. Because this commercial zoned property abuts land that is zoned residential, the ordinance requires a masonry screen wall a minimum of five feet in height. Alternatively, the petitioner can seek Council approval to waiver the required wall and instead provide landscaping sufficient to screen the non- residential use from the abutting residential properties. Currently, the uses are separated mostly by a wooden privacy fence that is located along the rear property line. The plan shows trees and other landscaping behind the parking area; however, the plan lacks details in terms of the sizes, quantities, and species of plant materials. In terms of stormwater detention, we do not have any information regarding that. The entire exterior of the building would be remodeled. There is a three to six-foot high stone wainscot along the base of the building. The main part of the building would consist of brick. The upper section along the roofline would be E.I.F.S. The petitioner has suggested that stone could be substituted for the E.I.F.S. Also shown is a decorative cornice that would run along the top of the building. On the west elevation, overhead doors would be installed for access to the service area, and blue fabric awnings would go over the windows. This site would be allowed only one wall sign not to exceed 31 square feet in area. That is based on the frontage of the building. They would also be entitled to a ground sign not to exceed 30 square feet in area and 6 feet in height. The elevation plans show three walls signs, including one along the front of the building as well as one on each side. There are no details with respect to the size of these signs. However, the additional signage will require a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The rendering does not show a sign on the side of the building so that could be a change that was provided by the petitioner. The building is currently vacant and in some state of disrepair and blighted. The Quick Oil Change facility that is located immediately to the east of this site was developed by the petitioner. The brick and stone on this facility are the same materials and colors that he proposes to use on the car dealership property. With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please. January 24, 2017 28025 Mr. Taormina: There are several items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated December 16, 2016, 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 legal description included with the submitted drawings appear to be correct and should be used in conjunction with this petition. The existing parcel is assigned the address of 28121 Plymouth Road. The existing building is currently serviced by public water main, sanitary sewer and storm sewer. Should renovations to the building require alterations to the existing services, drawings will need to be submitted to this department to determine if permits will be required. Also, any work within the Plymouth Road right- of-way, including approach removal and replacement, will require the owner to obtain a permit from the Michigan Department of Transportation." 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 22, 2016, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to operate a used auto dealership with outdoor display of vehicles on property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal."The letter is signed by Keith Bo, Senior Fire Inspector. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated December 22, 2016, 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 17, 2017, 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 23, 2017, 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 sixth letter is from the Finance Department, dated December 20, 2016, 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 correspondence from Don Kleinknecht, dated January 19, 2017, which reads as follows: "Used car lot! Most new and used vehicle lots are lit up like Christmas trees. There's a number of homes on N. Clements January 24, 2017 28026 Circle that could be affected by or having concerns regarding this new illumination. Have a good day." The next letter is from the Plymouth Road Development Authority, dated January 24, 2017, which reads as follows: "On Monday, January 23, 2017, the PRDA Executive Committee met to review the petition submitted by State Auto Sales requesting waiver use approval to operate a used auto dealership at 28121 Plymouth Road. The Committee in made up of the current officers of the Board of Directors of the Plymouth Road Development Authority, including John Hiltz, Chairman; Omar Faris, Vice Chairman; and Greg Meyer, Immediate Past Chair. Representing the Petitioner was Ed Khalil, owner of the property. Overall, the Committee is in support of the project since it will have the effect of enhancing the aesthetic appeal of the corridor. In making this determination, the Committee noted the removal of the blighted conditions that currently exist at the property, the quality of the building materials that will be used in the new construction, as well as the inclusion of the piers, fencing and landscaping that will be done in a manner consistent with the streetscape design guidelines of the Plymouth Road Development Authority. Notwithstanding their support, the Committee identified the following concerns and recommendations: (1) To the extent that the aesthetic appeal of this project largely depends on the operator and the age and condition of the vehicles that will be offered for sale, the Committee is hopeful that the Commission and Council can impose conditions on any approval that will address this issue satisfactorily, including restricting the waiver use and Class B, Used Vehicle Dealer License to this Petitioner only; and (2) Final approval of this project should include more precise and accurate details on the piers/fencing and landscaping, both along the front and rear of the site as well as any missing landscaping on the adjacent site, and site lighting." The letter is signed by Mark Taormina, Planning Director. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Mr. Ventura: Mr. Taormina, I have a copy of an email here from Ruth Ann Brown. Is that not part of the record? Mr. Taormina: That was part of the review incorporated into the discussion of the PRDA correspondence. While I didn't read that, we did provide copies of it. Mr. Ventura: Okay. So it is incorporated in the PRDA report? Mr. Taormina: That is correct. January 24, 2017 28027 Mr. Ventura: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Taormina, thank you for the inclusion of all the photographs of the site in our packet. That was very helpful to visually see the pictures. With that, if the petitioner, please come forward. We will need your name and address for the record please. Ed Khalil, 7817 Oxford, Canton, Michigan 48187. Good evening. I'm here to answer any questions. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Is there anything else that you would like to add to what's already been presented so far this evening? Mr. Khalil: I just love working with the City of Livonia. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for Mr. Khalil? Ms. Smiley: I didn't come across a lighting plan. What kind of lighting are you going to have on this site? Mr. Khalil: We will develop one and submit it to the Planning Department, and make sure that we have their approval on it. I think that's our plan. Ms. Smiley: Okay. And that would be true of landscaping also? Mr. Khalil: Yes, more detailed landscaping and lighting plan. Ms. Smiley: So you want to do a berm or some kind of greenbelt as opposed to putting in a masonry wall in the back? Mr. Khalil: I think I prefer that. Those walls get rusty; they change color. Honestly, if you drive around and look at these walls, they are not that appealing. I prefer to put in Blue Spruce trees, maybe a couple varieties, and those trees with time will grow bigger and become a better screen for privacy. That is my preference and we don't have to go back and dig behind the neighbors'fence and disturb it. That would be my preference. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Finally, we saw your picture with the blue awnings on the building. Those pictures always have a lot of nice landscaping and grass. Is your plan anything like that plan? Mr. Khalil: Absolutely. The landscaping will be like that, and my plan is to completely refresh the landscaping on the other side of the oil change building. It's two years now. It's time to go back even on January 24, 2017 28028 the other one and maybe add a few more trees. It adds to our business. That's what I believe in. Ms. Smiley: Thank you. And I guess this is more to Mark - would we table this or can it go forward with so many things up in the air? Mr. Taormina: Again, that's up to the Planning Commission. We have prepared a resolution that would treat the landscaping and the lighting as callback items, meaning that those items and any other you determine would come back for review within 60 days of City Council approval. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you. Ms. McCue: Mr. Taormina, I know that the PRDA had a question on the more precise and accurate details on the piers and fencing. Didn't we decide that this was pretty detailed based on the PRDA's specifications on the plans? I thought we were somewhat okay with that, and then they have questions, I guess. Mr. Taormina: It mostly involves the actual placement of the improvements. It was noticed yesterday during the review by the PRDA Executive Committee that they are not located on the plan accurately, that they are setback a little further from the sidewalk than what they would normally be. The Committee also wanted to make sure the City had additional information on the elements of the landscaping. I think what they are suggesting is, if the landscaping is going to come back for more detailed review, that should include also additional information on the piers and fencing to make sure that they are consistent with what's been provided next door and across the street. Also, the landscaping element should incorporate that additional information. That was just noted as part of their review that this was more of a conceptual placement of those streetscape improvements and that the final site plan should be more detailed. Ms. McCue: Thank you. Mr. Caramagno: So Mark, the PRDA landscaping would come as no surprise to the petitioner. He developed the property next door. So you're looking for something very similar. Right? Mr. Taormina: That is correct. Mr. Caramagno: He's not walking into something completely unknown to him. He understands what he's done on the neighboring property. January 24, 2017 28029 Mr. Taormina: I would say that's accurate. Correct. Mr. Khalil: If I can just make a comment here.What I put in the plan, meaning that, yes, we will satisfy the fence, the piers, the material, but where we place the piers with the size of it, I went around and measured exactly what's existing on Plymouth Road. I also took pictures of the brick, and I ordered the same brick. So I went through detail to make sure. I'm not going to put something in there and somebody's going to come back and say, that doesn't Mr. Caramagno: I was more concerned that you understand what the standard is going to be so you wouldn't be surprised by that. Mr. Khalil: No. I would love to fully comply. I will come back like Mark recommended. Mr. Caramagno: I have a couple other questions. We talked about the wall in the back and the landscape screen. There is double fencing all along the backyard. There's actually cyclone fence plus a privacy fence back there. Now, at what point do you clean that up or is there an opportunity to clean that up? Mark, any suggestion there? Mr. Taormina: Under normal circumstances, he would work with the property owners to remove all that fencing and replace it with a masonry wall. Mr. Caramagno: Somebody obviously owns that right now, the cyclone and the privacy fencing. It's unlikely that his property owns it. Mr. Taormina: The cyclone fence was installed by either one of the previous owners of the commercial property or the residents, but the wood fence, because there's different fencing along the back property line, was installed by the separate homeowners. There's several properties that abut this commercial property. Sometimes we see the masonry wall go in and they put the fencing right back up for whatever reason. But typically, for him to put in the footing and everything, sometimes they can keep that wood fencing when they do that, but other times they can't. It usually requires them to work with the property owners to have that done right. Mr. Caramagno: Okay. Isn't there a pylon sign on this property for the bar? Mr. Khalil: Yes. There is and I think we're going to remove that. We're going to have to comply with the ordinance for signs. January 24, 2017 28030 Mr. Caramagno: That's got to come down. I don't think that stays under any circumstances. Mr. Taormina: It is not shown on the site plan, so the pylon sign would have to come down. That's correct. He would have to identify that on the plans, which he does not. So it is coming down. Mr. Caramagno: I would think so. There's a couple other things that I noticed. There is an old telephone booth or telephone stand on the northeast corner of the parking lot. Mr. Khalil: Right. Mr. Caramagno: I assuming that comes out of there as well? Mr. Khalil: That whole thing is going to be cleaned out. Absolutely. There will be curbs, walkways. The whole landscape in front is going to be reworked. Mr. Caramagno: Okay. And since you mentioned curbs, there's a lot of busted parking blocks there. Are they just going to disappear? Mr. Khalil: All of these are going to be removed. The asphalt is going to be repaired, seal, striped. You're going to walk in there and you're going to see everything brand new and nice. Mr. Caramagno: It's good to hear that because I went over there and I was impressed by your oil change shop next door. And I told you that I would go down and look at your involvement at LA Trading at Goddard and Dix and I did. Although you've got a lot of cars there, I will say it's a clean operation. Mr. Khalil: Thank you. I developed that site about 10 years ago in Lincoln Park. I actually have the oil change on the corner of London and Dix. Mr. Caramagno: It's a clean operation. I didn't find anything wrong with it. Mr. Khalil: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anyone else wishing to address the petitioner? Mr. Ventura: Mr. Khalil, we have pictures in our I-pads here of your oil change building next door, which is a very attractive building. Is it your intent to represent to us tonight that you will use exactly the same brick and materials in the reconstruction of this building? January 24, 2017 28031 Mr. Khalil: Absolutely. I might even do better. If you look through the original plan that I presented to you four years ago, you will see that what I built is much higher quality. The back of the oil change, the approved plan was actually block. But then I said, you know, I'm going to do the whole thing nice. I enjoy doing that. Mr. Ventura: I agree with you. It's a very attractive building. In the PRDA review in paragraph one, they refer to a Class B Used Vehicle Dealer license. I don't know whether you've seen this or not. Can you explain what that is? What does Class B mean? Mr. Khalil: The way I understand it, it's a retail license. Basically, you're allowed to sell cars at retail on site. So there is, I think, different classes, like a wholesale where you can only store but you cannot sell to the public but you can take to auctions. This is not what we are applying for. We are applying for, basically, we buy the cars, put them on the lot and sell to the general public. That's my understanding of it. Mr. Ventura: So would you have any hardship if our approving motion required that it be a Class B level used car lot? Would that create a hardship for you? Mr. Taormina: If I can respond to that? Mr. Ventura: Sure. Mr. Taormina: The Michigan Department of State issues vehicle licenses according to certain classes. A new vehicle dealer is issued a Class A license. If you're selling used vehicles, the dealer is issued a Class B license. That's just the designation that is provided by the State of Michigan depending on the type of operation that you're going to be conducting. A Class B license is issued to any individual or entity that is in the business of selling used vehicles, whether they're 50 years old or whether they're one-year old. Mr. Ventura: To the public. Mr. Taormina: To the public. That is correct. So the classification doesn't necessarily relate to the quality of the vehicle. It just indicates that it's a license to sell used vehicles. That's all it is. I think the point made by Ms. Brown in her letter back to the PRDA on this issue is that there are many holders of Class A licenses, like the major dealers along Plymouth Road, Tennyson, Bill Brown Ford, and Ralph Thayer, that also have Class B licenses, but because they make their primary business in new vehicle sales, there tends to January 24, 2017 28032 be a much higher quality of used vehicles offered in their used lots. I think that was the distinction that she was indicating in that letter, if that makes sense. Mr. Ventura: It does. Thank you. Just out of curiosity, and this may be a guess for you, but how many cars do you think you'll sell in an average month? What is your goal? Mr. Khalil: I would think that we would, to be able to stay in business, probably have to sell at least 10 cars a month. I mean that's to stay in business. Our target would probably be more than that. I wouldn't make any money on 10 cars a month. It would pay the bills. Ms. Smiley: On that subject, where are you planning on getting these cars and are you going to repair them, buff them out? Previously owned, but have they been wrecked? Mr. Khalil: We buy the cars from the auction, the lease vehicles. Ms. Smiley: Lease vehicles from like Ford and GM? Mr. Khalil: Yes. Basically, we would get those vehicles and clean them up, shampoo and polish them. If there are any minor repairs, we take care of those but we will not, and I will no way, bring junk cars. don't have time for that. I'm not a mechanic. Ms. Smiley: You don't intend to do any of that kind of work. Mr. Khalil: No. We want to buy very decent cars, put our markup on them, clean them up and make sure we get customers back and appreciate their business. That's what we will do and I will not veer from that. I'm not in the business of repairing junk cars or collision or none of that stuff. Ms. Smiley: That's great. Thank you. Ms. McCue: I guess the question here that I think was kind of indicated in Ruth Ann's memo as well, but as we go down Plymouth Road, there are a lot of these car lots and they continue to appear. What is your logic for wanting to add another used car lot to the Plymouth Road area? Mr. Khalil: It is an interesting economy. I have been in the development business. I started young and off and on. The demand is there. Within the last few years, there has been a demand for this type of business. It doesn't mean that five years from now that the January 24, 2017 28033 demand would stay the same, but then it could be a demand for something else. What I view is, in my opinion, the most important thing is the property developed nicely and a business go in there because that enhances the look. It helps business around it. Five years from now if, for example, a new chain of restaurants wants to go in there and there's a demand for it, they will take whatever property they want. On that side of the road, there is that whole retail plaza on the south side between Middlebelt and this property. It's all vacant. And there is another building vacant, the one next to the liquor store. There is a lot of vacancy. This is the use right now most likely has the best demand. Let's put it like this. Ms. McCue: Thank you. Mr. Priddy: Good evening. In order to sell 10 cars, approximately how many vehicles would you think you need there at that location? Mr. Khalil: I was in the retail cell phone business years ago and I found out that and I came to the conclusion that you have to have so much to be able not to tell people you don't have it. So I'm thinking between 40 and 50 is good because you want a small car, maybe you have three big manufactured Ford, GM, Chrysler. You want to have economy class. You want to have mid-size. You want to have some vans and trucks. So I think 40 to 50 is, you know, if I took the classes and divided that, that's the numbers. Mr. Priddy: You talked about refurbishing the cars. Are you going to do all that work on site? Mr. Khalil: No refurbishing. It's basically bring the car, check it. If there's any minor things that need to be taken care of, that's what we will do. That's it. I'm not a mechanic. Believe me. Unless you're a mechanic, you don't want to do that. Unless you have big bays and a full operation, it's just not worth it in my opinion. Mr. Priddy: Gotcha. Do you have another lot that you work with? That other business that you talked about? Mr. Khalil: I have one on Dix as Mr. Caramagno might know, but I don't operate that one. I have somebody that I've known for a long time. Mr. Priddy: So you just have this one? Mr. Khalil: This I would operate myself. Mr. Priddy: Okay. Thank you. January 24, 2017 28034 Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any other questions? Seeing none, is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Seeing no one coming forward, is there anything else that you wanted to finish saying, Mr. Khalil, or are you settled? Mr. Khalil: I thank you very much for the time, and I think you'll be very pleased with the building. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Khalil, I appreciate that. With that, I will look to the Commission for a motion. On a motion by Long, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-08-2017 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on January 24, 2017, on Petition 2016-12-02-25 submitted by Ed Khalil requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Section 11.03(g) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to operate a used auto dealership with outdoor display of vehicles (State Auto Sales) at 28121 Plymouth Road, located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Inkster Road and Harrison Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36, which property is zoned C-2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2016-12-02-25 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Site Plan marked SP-1 dated November 12, 2016, prepared by ECKO Design-Engineering-Construction, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, except as modified below; 2. That the number of vehicles to be displayed outdoors shall be limited to a total of thirty-nine (39) vehicles, and that no vehicle for sale shall be displayed closer than twenty feet (20') from the front lot line; 3. That except for what may be authorized under the Zoning Ordinance as part of a temporary sales event, any type of exterior advertising related to the sale of the vehicles designed to attract the attention of passing motorists, such as promotional flags or streamers, shall be prohibited; 4. That the display of any vehicles on car lifts is strictly prohibited; January 24, 2017 28035 5. That there shall be no outdoor storage of auto parts, equipment, scrap material, waste petroleum products, junked, unlicensed or inoperable vehicles, or other similar items in connection with this operation, and the overhead doors, when not in use for vehicles entering or exiting the service facility, shall be closed at all times; 6. That an exterior photometric lighting plan and a fully detailed landscape plan shall be submitted for approval to the Planning Commission and City Council within sixty(60)days following approval of this petition by the City Council; 7. That the submitted landscape plan may provide for a greenbelt in lieu of a protective wall along the rear property line, provided there will be adequate year-round screening between the commercial use of this property and the adjacent residential properties. In the event a greenbelt is not approved, the Petitioner shall construct a six(6)foot high masonry protective wall in accordance with Section 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance; 8. That the Elevation Plans marked A-1 and A-2 both dated December 12, 2016, prepared by ECKO Design- Engineering-Construction, are hereby approved and shall be adhered to, except that the E.I.F.S. material on the upper part of the building, not including the cornice, shall be replaced with a masonry product, such as limestone, subject to the approval of the Planning and Inspection Departments; 9. That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be concealed from public view on all sides by the parapet walls or separate screening that shall be of a compatible character, material and color to other exterior materials on the building; 10. That the parking lot shall be repaired, resealed and restriped as necessary to the satisfaction of the Engineering and Inspection Departments; 11. That all customer parking spaces shall be 10' x 20' in size, double striped and include signs indicating for customer use only, with adequate provisions for barrier free parking as required by the Inspection Department; 12. 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 January 24, 2017 28036 fiberglass. The trash dumpster area shall be maintained and when not in use closed at all times; 13. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition; 14. That no LED lightband or exposed neon shall be permitted on the site including, but not limited to, the building or around the windows; 15. There shall be no outdoor speakers; 16. That the auto service facility shall consist of two (2) bays or workstations, and all service work shall be limited to vehicles that are on display and being sold at this location. The service operations shall not open to the general public; 17. That only minor repairs and maintenance work on vehicles be conducted at this site, and that repair work shall not include collision repair; and 18. That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time an occupancy permit is applied for. FURTHER, the Planning Commission recommends the approval of a Conditional Agreement limiting this waiver use and the Class B Used Vehicle Dealer license to this user only, with the provision to extend this waiver use approval and Class B license to a new user only upon approval of the new user by the City Council. Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed use complies with all of the general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; and 3. That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. 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. January 24, 2017 28037 Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion? Ms. Smiley: I was wondering about Condition #11. Mr. Long: The wall? Ms. Smiley: Yes. Mr. Long: I would be willing to back that off. Rather than a masonry wall, a barrier that is suitable or agreeable to the Inspection Department and the Planning Department. Mr. Wilshaw: Would you like to make that part of the landscape plan? Mr. Taormina: And that is going to come back so you'll have the opportunity to look at whatever screening he is providing in the form of landscaping. Mr. Long: I would amend my resolution. I will leave it to the Planning Director to sort out the exact wording, but what we want to do is get rid of the masonry wall requirement and put it as part of the landscaping plan that we will approve. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any other comments? Mr. Caramagno: Mr. Chair, just so there is no misunderstanding with the pylon sign, should that be mentioned? Mr. Long: With it not being part of the site plan and we're approving the site plan, correct? Mr. Wilshaw: We're approving only conforming signage. Mr. Taormina: It is only conforming signage. Mr. Long: I think it's covered in Condition #1 and #13. Mr. Taormina: Mr. Chairman, if the maker of the motion might consider an amendment to the last part of the resolution recommending the conditional agreement, that it not only limit the waiver use but also the Class B license holder to this petitioner. Mr. Long: So moved. Ms. Smiley: That's great. January 24, 2017 28038 Mr. Wilshaw: The only thing, Mr. Taormina, I was curious about was Condition #10. We talk about the parking spaces and how they're supposed to be 10 feet by 20 feet for customer parking. Should we also indicate that those be signed so that it's clear that those are customer parking spaces? Mr. Taormina: Yes, we have done in the past. Mr. Wilshaw: Is the maker and seconder okay with that? Mr. Long: I'm okay with that. Ms. Smiley: Yes. Mr. Wilshaw: Any other comments or questions? Mr. Long: Mr. Taormina, we limited the number of display vehicles outside to be 39 and that's based upon the number of available spots. Correct? Mr. Taormina: That is correct. That is what is shown on the plan. Mr. Long: Okay. I'm good. Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. Mind you there are a couple callback items, so we will see you back for the landscaping and photometrics. Mr. Khalil: Thank you very much. ITEM #2 PETITION 2017-01-08-01 WENDY'S Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2017- 01-08-01 submitted by Michigan Management Team, on behalf of Wendy's, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance#543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to remodel the exterior of the existing restaurant at 27526 Grand River Avenue, located on the north side of Grand River Avenue between Inkster Road and Eight Mile Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 1. Mr. Taormina: This is a request to remodel the Wendy's restaurant located at the intersection of Grand River Avenue and Eight Mile Road. The zoning is C-2, General Business. The property is 0.8 acre in size January 24, 2017 28039 with roughly 360 feet of frontage on Grand River and 380 feet of frontage on Eight Mile. The restaurant is about 3,700 square feet in size, and is classified as a full service restaurant in that it has over 30 seats. In fact, there are roughly 54 customer seats currently available in the restaurant, but the proposal will not in any way affect the seating count. The improvements are mostly limited to the upper part of the structure. They involve removing the existing bronze-colored mansard and replacing it with new corrugated metal fascia. The existing building is the classic old Wendy's appearance. They are changing that to a completely new image. The mansard is gone. The corrugated metal fascia will be located on the upper third of the building. In the southeast corner of the building, as well as at the point-of-sale and pickup windows, red E.I.F.S. would replace the existing material. The red areas on the building that are visible on all four sides is an E.I.F.S. material. On the south side of the building where the point-of-sale and pickup windows are located, they've added masonry along the base. Originally the E.I.F.S. went all the way down to grade. They've added four courses of a block material to protect the lower part of the building. Along the top edge of the building, the plans show a prefinished aluminum light box that provides accent lighting at night. The existing brick and exterior tile, which is along the lower half of the building, is going to remain and would be incorporated into the new design. We did receive a revised landscape plan that adds landscaping along the foundation of the building including portions of the front, sides and where the service area is located at the rear. In addition, the new plan shows new plant material going in around the dumpster as well as at the corner of the property. These are all changes that were discussed at the study session. They've incorporated the new landscaping into the plan. In addition, the sign that was originally requested to be moved from the entryway on Eight Mile to the corner of the property is no longer being requested. Also regarding signage, it was in 1997 that this site did receive variances. Where they would only be allowed one or two wall signs, they were permitted to have three wall signs each measuring 33 square feet in area. The variance also allowed for the two ground signs at 30 square feet. The plan shows three new wall signs including one on the front, back and the north elevation facing Eight Mile Road. In addition, there is a second sign that is shown on the front elevation that reads "Quality is Our Recipe."While they may be able to replace the main identification signs on the three sides of the building that currently have those signs, the secondary sign, "Quality is Our Recipe," would actually constitute a fourth sign and that is something that would have to receive approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. With that, Mr. Chair, I'll read out the correspondence. January 24, 2017 28040 Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please. Mr. Taormina: There are six items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated January 16, 2017, 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 restaurant occupies two parcels, one for the main building at 27526 Grand River Avenue, and one for the adjacent parking lot at 27538 Grand River Avenue. The following legal description describes both parcels, and should be used in conjunction with this petition: Lot 1 except the westerly triangle thereof measuring 11.10 feet on the north line and 10.95 feet on the southerly line, also lots 2 thru 12 inclusive and lots 53 and 54, also the adjacent 20' wide vacated alley, Assessor's Plat Livonia, T. 1 S., R. 9 E., City of Livonia as recorded in Liber 64, Page 41, Wayne County Records. The existing building is currently serviced by public water main, sanitary sewer and storm sewer. Should renovations to the building require alterations to the existing services, drawings will need to be submitted to this department to determine if permits will be required. Also, should the owner need to complete work within the Eight Mile Road or Grand River Avenue right-of-ways, permits from the Wayne County Department of Public Services or the Michigan Department of Transportation 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 19, 2017, which reads as follows: "I have reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to remodel the exterior of the existing restaurant on the property located at the above referenced address. I have no objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Keith Bo, Senior Fire Inspector. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated January 17, 2017, 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 17, 2017, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above-referenced petition has been reviewed. (1) The existing dumpster enclosure needs repairing or replacing. (2) A variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals would be required to maintain the excess signage and relocation of pylon sign. (3) The parking lot needs repairing, sealed and restriped. (4) The parking spaces needs double striping and to be 10'x 20'. (5) The landscaping needs restoring on site. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Director of Inspection. The January 24, 2017 28041 fifth letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated October 13, 2016. At the time it was originally reviewed, there were current and delinquent personal property taxes due. They have since been paid. The total amount due at this point $6,350 is for 2016 winter, but those are not due until February 14. So all back taxes have been paid on the property. The letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. The sixth letter is from the Finance Department, dated January 17, 2017, 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. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for the Planning staff? Seeing none, would the petitioner please come forward? We will need your name and address for the record please. Alison Link, 3526 Oakleaf Drive, West Bloomfield, Michigan 48324. Good evening. Mr. Wilshaw: Would you like to add anything to what you've heard presented so far? Ms. Link: No. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for the petitioner? Ms. Smiley: Just a comment. You added a lot of landscaping. We realize what a challenging corner that is. I see you didn't move the dumpster, but I appreciate the landscaping because we talked about moving it this way and that way. Plus the people you're servicing are coming out of the back of your restaurant, so they're not likely to go around to the front and down the block to get the dumpster in. I did have a question, though, about all the signage. What is your plan for the pylon and then for the additional signage on the building? Ms. Link: Sure. Our plans for the pylon signs are to keep them the same height that they are, the correct 15 feet, and to simply update the existing logos. We're going to improve the landscaping around the bases with some planter boxes and greenery. As far as the signage on the building, we're going to update the cameos, the logos, to the new 2017 Wendy's standard and keep them on the three sides of the building that we have. I understand that the "quality is our recipe" sign could require us to apply for another variance, which we would be willing to follow the city requirements if needed. January 24, 2017 28042 Ms. Smiley: So you're keeping what you have. You're just changing Wendy's outfit. Ms. Link: That is correct. Ms. Smiley: Okay. I'm not a fan of pylon signs but I understand they are expensive to remove because the new monuments are much more attractive. Ms. Link: You are correct. The expense is very high. Ms. Smiley: Very prohibitive. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions for the petitioner? Mr. Ventura: In the material that we've been provided, it shows what you would call your corporate standard interior renovation. Is that being done at this restaurant as well? Ms. Link: Yes. Mr. Ventura: Thank you. Ms. Link: You're welcome. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, is there anything else that you'd like to close with? Ms. Link: No, not at this time. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. With that, I will ask for a motion. On a motion by McCue, seconded by Caramagno, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-09-2016 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2017-01-08-01 submitted by Michigan Management Team, on behalf of Wendy's, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance#543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to remodel the exterior of the existing restaurant at 27526 Grand River Avenue, located on the north side of Grand River Avenue between Inkster Road and Eight Mile Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 1, be approved subject to the following conditions: January 24, 2017 28043 1. That the rendered elevation drawing received by the Planning Commission on January 23, 2017, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, except as modified below; 2. That either matching brick or burnished block shall be provided at the base of the pick-up windows in lieu of painted split face CMU; 3. That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be concealed from public view on all sides by either the parapet walls or screening that shall be of a compatible character, material and color to other exterior materials on the building; 4. That the issues as outlined in the correspondence dated January 17, 2017, from the Director of Inspection, including repairing the existing dumpster enclosure, and repairing, resealing and restriping the parking lot, shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department; 5. That the Architectural Site Plan prepared by Shremshock, marked sheet AS1.1 as received by the Planning Commission on January 23, 2017, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, including the installation of all landscaping as shown on the plan, and shall be completed prior to obtaining a full occupancy permit from the Inspection Department; 6. Than any changes that have the effect of increasing the total area of the wall or monument signs beyond what currently exists shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals; 7. Except for the prefinished aluminum light box along the top edge of the parapet that would offer a downcast illumination of the building, no LED light band or exposed neon shall be permitted on this site including, but not limited to, the building or around the windows; 8. 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 9. 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 January 24, 2017 28044 construction is commenced, this approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion? Mr. Taormina: We received these plans subsequent to publishing the report and the resolutions, so we will need to revise the date on Item #1. Item #2 refers to brick or burnished block going on the pickup windows. These new elevation plans show that, but we can keep Item #2 because it fully complies with what they're showing. There is no need for a detailed landscape plan to come back to the Planning Commission for review since that new information was provided. Mr. Wilshaw: With Item #5 regarding the landscape plan, would we just amend the wording on it to say that the landscape plan is approved as presented? Mr. Taormina: Yes. We would have reference to the site and landscape plan that was submitted. We will include that. Mr. Wilshaw: That way it's still in the resolution showing that we're approving those elements. Ms. McCue, are you okay with all those additions? Ms. McCue: I am. Mr. Wilshaw: And Mr. Caramagno? Mr. Caramagno: Yes, I'm good too. 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 2017-01-08-02 MIDDLEBELT PLAZA Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2017- 01-08-02 submitted by Middlebelt Plaza L.P. 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 remodel the exterior of the commercial strip center (Middlebelt Plaza) at 18730-18790 Middlebelt Road, located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Pickford Avenue and Seven Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12. January 24, 2017 28045 Mr. Taormina: This is a request to remodel the exterior of a multi-tenant commercial center, Middlebelt Plaza, located on the east side of Middlebelt Road south of Seven Mile Road. It is on property that is about 2.6 acres in size and contains 430 feet of frontage along Middlebelt and has a depth of just under 270 feet. The building on the property measures about 37,300 square feet in total size. Some of the tenants in the plaza include an animal hospital, jewelry store, uniform shop, and dance studio. All of the storefronts face in the direction of Middlebelt Road. Off-street parking is located between the building and the road right-of-way. The proposal is to remodel the exterior of the building. It involves a majority of the building except for one section, the southerly end of the plaza. The work mostly involves the upper half of the center's primary façade. There is an existing wood fascia that would be replaced with a series of five new wall sections. Each of the sections would raise the height of the parapet by approximately four to six feet, and in place of the wood, the new exterior material would be E.I.F.S. The new vertical wall elements would contain variations in height, as well as width and peak design, projecting above the existing roofline. The south unit, which is currently occupied by a dance studio, is not included as part of the renovations. This part of the structure contains full brick with a blue awning. There is also a number of changes proposed to the site. The petitioner would like to remove several mature trees. A total of 15 locust trees are shown being removed, including two that are along Clarita, 11 that are on Middlebelt Road and two that are in the parking lot adjacent to the building. The replacement landscaping as shown on the plan would include seven crab apple trees, including one on Clarita and then six along Middlebelt Road. There are no other site changes or improvements proposed as part of this petition. The improvements do not affect the lower half of the storefront walls. Those mostly contain brick like the dance studio. So again, we're looking at only the changes to the upper part of the building as well as landscaping. I'll note that the petitioner did submit a response to the Inspection Department's concerns, but I'll read the correspondence out first, if I may. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes. Go ahead. Mr. Taormina: There are six items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated January 13, 2017, 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 parcels are assigned a range of addresses from 18730 Middlebelt Road to 18790 Middlebelt Road. The legal description included January 24, 2017 28046 on sheet C1.0 of the submitted plan set appears to be correct and should be used in conjunction with this petition. The existing building is currently serviced by public water main, sanitary sewer and storm sewer. Should renovations to the building require alterations to the existing services, drawings will need to be submitted to this department to determine if permits will be required. Also, should the owner need to complete work within the Middlebelt Road right-of-way, permits from the Wayne County Department of Public Services will 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 19, 2017, which reads as follows: "I have reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to remodel the exterior of the commercial strip center (Middlebelt Plaza) located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal with the following stipulation: We recommend the installation of a ladder port/ladder receiver from Ladder Tech, L.L.C. or an equivalent on the side or rear of the building." The letter is signed by Keith Bo, Senior Fire Inspector. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated January 17, 2017, 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 17, 2017, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above- referenced petition has been reviewed. (1) The parking lot needs repairing, sealed and striped. (2) The light poles are rusting and need repairing or replacing. (3) The damaged curbs around the landscaping will need repairing. (4) The poured wall on the east side of the building will need repairing or replacing. It is cracked and leaning towards the residential properties. (5) The rear of the building will need scrapping and painting. (6) This plan does not make provision for a dumpster enclosure(s). The Commission and/or Council may wish to address this if the project moves forward. 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 10, 2017, 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. There are current Property Taxes due, payable to the Treasurer's Office by February 14, 2017."The letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. The sixth letter is from the Finance Department, dated January 17, 2017, which reads as follows: "I have reviewed the addresses connected with the above noted petition. As there are no January 24, 2017 28047 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 from the Commissioners? Hearing none, would the petitioner please come forward? We will need your name and address for the record please. Robert Helber, Jr., Middlebelt Plaza L.P., 3773 E. Ellsworth, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anything you would like to add to what you've heard so far? Mr. Helber: Just a couple quick things. One of the things we had talked about at the planning meeting was the removal of some of the trees. I think we've sort of gone back a little bit. After Mr. Taormina's recommendations, I don't think that we want to take all of the trees down. I think there's probably three to four trees, I think at this point in time, that make sense to take down just because they block the view. Two of them are directly up against the side of the building almost up against the façade. So they're pretty difficult. In order to continue with decent visibility, we continually have to take the canopy up and up and they just look bad. So I'd like to replace those two. Then also on the north end of the property, I'd like to remove that one particular tree. I think we can accommodate what we need as far as visibility along the front by doing some additional pruning on the front trees. Really, for me, it's just the three trees that are probably the most important to be removed. Mr. Wilshaw: With that, are there any questions for the petitioner? Mr. Taormina: The petitioner provided correspondence addressing each of the items in the Inspection letter, and it might be helpful if he would go over those items. Mr. Helber: I have it right here. The first item on the list was the parking lot needs repair, sealing and striped. There are some areas that are deteriorating. We would like to make some repairs to those. In May of 2016, we had the parking lot sealed and double striped, and we did a bunch of crack sealing as well. There is no question that the asphalt has some issues in some areas, and I'd like to take care of those, but under no means do we plan on replacing the entire parking lot at this point in time. Number two, the light poles are rusting. Somebody mentioned that a couple of them are January 24, 2017 28048 leaning. The light poles are rusting. I've done some investigation. Overall, they're in pretty good shape. They just need a fresh coat of paint on them, and I think there's no problem with doing that. There was one that's actually leaning a little bit towards the south. I don't think there's any pictures of it there, but the foundation itself is leaning just a little teeny bit, but it can be straightened by adjusting the bolts at the bottom. So we'll go through and make sure all the lights are working and that they look like the rest of the facility should. Item three, the damaged curbs around the landscaping. A lot of that happens during snow removal at this time of year. I walked out there. There were two or three different areas that need replacing. Last year we did about 75 to 100 feet on the facility. It's just sort of a process every year that we go through when snow removal happens, but we'll make sure that the curbs are like they ought to be. Item four, the poured wall on the east side of the building. I think you have some pictures. About 10 or 15 years ago, we were approached by the Inspection Department to make some repairs to these particular walls. We had an engineer that came out and did some drawings for us and we submitted them to the city. The city approved this particular fix at that time. Since then, there's been no movement of the existing walls and we've not had a problem with it at this point in the time. So it would be my intention not necessarily to replace any of those walls at this point in time. At some point in time maybe further down the road when we've had an opportunity to sort of recuperate financially from the façade, maybe some of these items can come back into play, but at this point in time, we need to spend as much money as we possibly can on the façade to attract new tenants. Currently, vacancies in the building are high and it's hard to find tenants. You drive up and down Middlebelt Road and you'll see all kinds of vacancies in a lot of the centers. What we're trying to do is provide a good price point for people without having to break the bank, but we'd like to be able to do all the items. It's just a matter of timing and whether we can do them all right at this particular juncture. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. There's a couple other items on the Inspection report. Do you want to address those? Mr. Helber: Yes. The painting of the rear of the building, that's going to happen in conjunction with the façade improvements. So 100 percent of the building will be painted at the completion of the project. The two ends of the building are brick so there won't be any painting that will occur on either side, but the entire back of the building will be painted in a color that will coincide with what we've done on the front of the building. The dumpster enclosure. Obviously, that's a big item. I hear it every time the other January 24, 2017 28049 individuals that have come through here. At this point in time, we're not planning on doing anything unless there's a recommendation that requires us to do something. One of the problems we have back there is all the employees park back behind the building. The only way that they have access to this is to kind of go in sideways. So it takes up multiple spaces in the back. I don't know if that would change necessarily with a dumpster enclosure or not. I guess that's pretty much it. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you, sir. Are there any additional questions for the petitioner? Mr. Ventura: I note one of the pictures shows the enforcement work you did to the wall, you say quite some time ago. All those bollards need painting. Mr. Helber: Yeah. I agree and the walls need to be power-washed back there too. Mr. Ventura: Great. Thank you. Mr. Caramagno: Sir, you've got a fenced in area on the south side of the property in the back behind maybe the dance studio. Mr. Helber: Yeah. The dumpster enclosure that's there that has some fencing around it? Mr. Caramagno: Yes. What's the story with that? I don't even know if the dumpster is even in the enclosure. Mr. Helber: There is a dumpster inside that. That fenced in enclosure has a dumpster inside of that. Mr. Caramagno: When I was there, there are gates on the side and the gates on the front were all open, and that's just what I recall. But the other thing I recall is, there's slatting. There's screen slatting there. Mr. Helber: There is. That's correct. Mr. Caramagno: If there's three percent of slatting left in that thing, that would be a lot. Mr. Helber: I don't have any problem putting gates on that particular enclosure, then putting slatting in that initial dumpster enclosure there too. January 24, 2017 28050 Mr. Caramagno: My impression was just remove what's left of the slatting because it looks terrible the way it is with just a random slat of wood or plastic or whatever it is. It just needs to get cleaned up a little bit. Mr. Helber: Yeah. I completely understand. Yep. Not a problem. Mr. Caramagno: Okay. Mr. Wilshaw: Do we understand what the purpose of that particular dumpster being in an enclosure is? Is that a special dumpster for some reason? Mr. Helber: That enclosure has been there for as long as I can possible remember. It happened at the time the building was constructed, and there's two sets of dumpsters. One is located behind the dance studio and then there's another one that you saw a little further down to the north, but the one that is enclosed in that sort of what's left of a dumpster enclosure. Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions for the petitioner? Ms. Smiley: So you're going to take down all those trees that are by the street? Mr. Helber: I've just retracted that. I don't necessarily think that I want to take all those trees out at this point in time. I think what we want to do, we want to do some selective cutting. There's one tree in particular on the north side of the property that I'd like to remove, and then there's the two trees up by the front of the building that I would like to remove. They are very mature trees, nice trees. I think it would detract a little bit to remove them all. We would like to do some additional pruning on those. Obviously, I don't want to go out of control, but I definitely would like to get the canopy up a little bit more on those. Ms. Smiley: Okay. So the ones near the building are coming out and then selective ones near the street are coming out, and then you're going to enhance the landscaping near the street. Mr. Helber: One on the northwest corner. We would take that one down, and then whatever we took out of there, we would put a small crab apple or some sort of a flowering type of tree. Ms. Smiley: So do we have an actual landscape plan then, Mark? Mr. Taormina: This one will have to be modified. January 24, 2017 28051 Ms. Smiley: All right. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Are there any other comments you would like to make, sir? Mr. Helber: No. Just obviously, it's important for us to make the facility look a lot nicer. It's long overdue. We spent the last four or five years putting a substantial war chest of money together in order to make this happen at sort of a detriment to a lot of the partners and without any cash flow. So it's important for us to make this nice so that we can attract new people. I would just like you to keep in mind that some of the other items, beyond just the façade improvements and the dumpster enclosures and that type of stuff, we don't have a problem, but we would hope that you would allow us a little bit of time in order to make those improvements. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Seeing no one coming forward, a motion would be in order. On a motion by Ventura, seconded by McCue, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-10-2016 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby { recommend to the City Council that Petition 2017-01-08-02 submitted by Middlebelt Plaza L.P. 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 remodel the exterior of the commercial strip center (Middlebelt Plaza) at 18730-18790 Middlebelt Road, located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Pickford Avenue and Seven Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Exterior Elevation & Wall Sections plan marked Sheet No. A1.0 dated January 5, 2017, prepared by A. Lane Architecture, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2. That the issues as outlined in the correspondence dated January 17, 2017, from the Director of Inspection, including repairs to the parking lot and curbs, repairing and painting any damaged light poles, properly locating and/or screening the trash receptacles, and repairing or replacing sections of the protective wall along the east property line, including painting the bollards, shall be resolved to the satisfaction and within a time frame agreeable to the Inspection Department; January 24, 2017 28052 3. That the Petitioner shall be allowed to remove a total of only three (3) trees, including two (2) located adjacent to the building and one (1) on the north side of the property adjacent to Clarita Ave; 4. That where applicable, the rear and sides of the building shall be scraped and repainted; 5. 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; 6. 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; 7. That unless approved by the proper local authority, any type of exterior advertising, such as promotional flags, streamers or sponsor vehicles designed to attract the attention of passing motorists, shall be prohibited; 8. 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 9. 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? Ms. Smiley: Do you want to put something in there about the back wall and bollards that we want power washed or painted? Mr. Ventura: Sure. Mark, do you want to make that change? Mr. Taormina: Yes. Number two addresses the issues that were in the Inspection letter, and it leaves quite a bit of discretion up to the Inspection Department relative to repairing or replacing sections of the wall and how or whether the trash receptacles should be screened. We can add the painting and the pressure washing of the wall. But on number three, hearing the changes the petitioner suggested this evening, only cutting down three of those trees, I see no need to have a landscape plan come back to this body for January 24, 2017 28053 a review. I think we can change that to just come back to the Planning Department for review and approval if that's acceptable to the maker of the motion. Mr. Wilshaw: Is the maker okay with that? Mr. Ventura: Yes, I'm fine with that provided that a note is made that he's only going to remove the three trees. Mr. Taormina: Correct. Mr. Ventura: Yes, I'm fine with that. Mr. Wilshaw: Do we want to make any clarification as to the issue of the Inspection Department saying that the trash receptacles need to be located and screened? Do we want to provide any direction in terms of that? Mr. Ventura: I'm personally comfortable with leaving it up to the discretion of the inspection Department. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Ms. McCue is okay with that. Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #4 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,099TH Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 1,099th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on January 10, 2017 On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Long, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-11-2017 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 1,099th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on January 10, 2017, are hereby approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Smiley, Long, Priddy, Ventura, Caramagno, Wilshaw NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: McCue January 24, 2017 28054 (ire Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution 9 9 adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 1,100th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on January 24, 2017, as adjourned at 8:25 p.m. CITY PLA 'ING COMMISSION "Sam C. mgno, Secretary ATTEST: Ian Wilshaw, airman