Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2017-06-27 MINUTES OF THE 1,107th PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, June 27, 2017, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 1,107th 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 Carol Smiley Peter Ventura Ian Wilshaw Members absent: Betsy McCue, Kevin Priddy 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 2017-06-02-08 BISHOP ESTATES Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2017- 06-02-08 submitted by Soave/Oro Construction, L.L.C. requesting special waiver use approval pursuant to Sections 20.01 and 20.02A of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to develop a Planned Residential Development under the Single Family Clustering option (Bishop Estates) at 28200 Lyndon Avenue, located on the north side of Lyndon Avenue between Inkster Road and Harrison Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 24. June 27, 2017 28177 Mr. Taormina: This is a request to develop a Planned Residential Development under the single family clustering option. This is the site of the former CB Swim Club located on the north side of Lyndon just east of Harrison. Earlier this year, the owner had requested that a portion of the same site be developed as a site condominium consisting of three detached single family homes. The three units were shown in the southeast corner of the site with frontage on Lyndon. The balance of the site, approximately two acres, was not part of the project and was being reserved for future residential development. On May 9, the Planning Commission denied that request based on concerns that developing only a portion of the property would be a detriment, not only to the site but also the surrounding area. This site is about 2.7 acres in size. It has 346 feet of frontage on Lyndon and an average depth of roughly 340 feet. The site contains the former swimming pool, clubhouse and parking lot. All features are no longer in use and would be removed prior to the construction of the new development. At the rear of the property, the site is undeveloped and maintained primarily as an open field. Last fall the site was rezoned from RUF to R-2, One Family Residential. Under conventional standards, the R-2 zoning district requires that each single family lot measure 70 feet in width by 120 feet in depth for a total area of 8,400 square feet. To the north, east and west of this site are all residential homes that are under the R-2 zoning, the same zoning classification. Immediately to the south across Lyndon is Livonia Public School property. In terms of the clustering option, unlike the previous design, the proposal today would encompass all 2.7 acres of the property. It is being proposed as a single family cluster. Clustering is a development option available in any R-1 to R-4 district subject to special waiver use approval. It basically allows flexible design standards to encourage more efficient use of land. Clustering helps preserve open space; it helps promote development on sites that might be difficult due to environmental features or the site configuration or maybe that might be encumbered by easements or other features that would be impossible or impractical to remove or relocate. The Planning Commission makes the determination as to whether or not the site qualifies for clustering. This option allows for either attached or detached single family dwellings. The density is restricted to what would normally be allowed for the applicable zoning district. In this case, the R-2 zoning allows a maximum of 3.5 units per acres. Thus, the subject 2.71 acre site is allowed a maximum of nine homes subject to compliance with all other codes and ordinances. Bishop Estates would consist of a total of nine units in the form of attached condominiums. There are four separate buildings. Three would contain two units attached and one would contain three attached units. Each unit would be June 27, 2017 28178 similar in size and appearance, would measure about 1,400 square feet and would contain a two-car attached garage. All units are single story. Where a proposed single family cluster development abuts existing single family homes, the two must be separated by either providing open space or recreation space immediately abutting the existing homes or providing significant topographic features, landscaping or a combination of both immediately abutting the single family homes. This site is bordered by single family homes to the north, the west and the east. The plan attempts to buffer the perimeter of the site with landscaping and/or open space. Along the east side, the proposed cluster homes are setback roughly 100 feet from the property line. Within this open space area is the site's storm water detention system which would consist of two surface basins; one that would serve as a fore bay and the other a holding pond. On the north side of the development, the two closest homes, one on the east side of the proposed drive and the other on the west side of the drive, are setback approximately 60 and 80 feet, respectively. This area would be left as an open grassy area, although it is recommended that additional trees be planted at the north end of the proposed road. The closest home on the west side is 40 feet from the property, and this area would contain a variety of deciduous plant materials including spruce, pine and fir trees as well as arborvitae bushes. Access would be provided from a single road that would extend north from Lyndon a distance of approximately 280 feet. All nine units would face and have access off the new street. None of the homes would have direct access from Lyndon. Bishop Lane would terminate at the north end and form a branch-style turnaround. So there is no cul- de-sac. It's basically just a T-turnaround. The minimum required separation between groups of attached buildings in a single family cluster is 12 feet. In this case, the plan is showing 15 feet. The setback adjacent to Lyndon is 25 feet and is consistent with the adjacent homes along Lyndon, both to the east and west. The stormwater will be handled by means of a fore bay and detention basin that would be located on the east side of the property. The intent is that both the fore bay and the detention basin would be dry most of the time. During moderate and heavy rainfalls, both basins would receive incoming stormwater from the development and then slowly release that water back into the storm system. The landscaping plan shows a variety of plantings along Lyndon Street as well as the 15-foot easement along the west side of the property. Street trees would also be planted in front of each unit along Bishop Lane. The plan does not indicate any information relevant to signage. However, residential subdivisions are allowed one identification sign measuring no more than 20 square feet in area and 5 feet in height, and must be located at June 27, 2017 28179 least 10 feet from any right-of-way line. With that, Mr. Chairman, I have several items of correspondence that I'd like to read into the record. Mr. Wilshaw: Please. Mr. Taormina: There are several items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated June 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 petition at this time. The existing property is assigned an address of 28200 Lyndon Avenue. The legal description included appears to be correct and should be used in conjunction with this petition. The parcel is currently serviced by public water main, storm and sanitary sewers. The submitted drawings indicate that the owner is intending to extend the utilities into the property to service the proposed buildings. The drawings do not indicate if these sanitary sewer and water main are to be public or privately owned, and whether easements will be needed for future maintenance. Also, we would like to request that the owner dedicate a storm sewer easement across the property where the existing storm sewer is located. It appears that when the CB Estates Condominiums were developed, an easement was not obtained for the storm sewer outlet across the petitioner's property. We would like to obtain the easement now in an attempt to maintain continuity of the storm system. Since the petition does not contain calculations for the proposed utilities, we cannot comment on the impacts to the existing systems, although it does not appear that they will be negatively affected by the development. The owner will need to submit full engineering drawings to this Department for all proposed utility extensions prior to any permits being issued. The proposed roadway is indicated as being a privately-owned 24-foot wide asphalt pavement with concrete curb and gutters. Typically, our minimum width for roadway would be 27 feet, but since the roadway will be privately-owned, as long as the emergency service providers are comfortable with the layout, we have no objections."The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated June 8, 2017, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to develop a Planned Residential Development under the Single Family Clustering option 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 June 19, 2017, which reads as follows: 'I have reviewed the plans in connection with June 27, 2017 28180 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 Finance Department, dated June 6, 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. We also received an email communication from Donald L. Kleinknecht, 16434 Parklane Street, Livonia, Michigan, dated June 22, 2017, which reads as follows: "If the developer is serious about this project, they would have removed the pool and filled in the hole knowing that it would take a number of years for the ground to settle before it can be built on. Like I mentioned in a past email, I get a little nervous when I read 'on a portion of.' This property consists of 2.71 acres. What acreage will be used for the single family homes?If it's less than .9 acre for each home, what will the remaining property be used for?" That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Seeing none, is the petitioner here? Mr. Duggan, we will need your name and address for the record please. Brian Duggan, 14315 Denne, Livonia, Michigan 48154. Good evening. I'm here to represent Michael Soave. As usual, Mark did a great job so I'm here to answer any questions from you. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions for the petitioner? Ms. Smiley: What do the retention ponds look like?Will there be water in them all the time? Mr. Duggan: No. There should not be water in them all the time according to his report. They are there for a mass flood and then they'll fill that up before everything goes into the storm sewers. It's like a bowl, grass and rocks, and then it will have a storm sewer so when the water gets so high, it would gradually go down. Ms. Smiley: Okay. For like mosquitos and stuff, there's not standing water? Mr. Duggan: Usually not standing water, no. Ms. Smiley: Okay. There will be additional landscaping around the other side towards . . . Mr. Duggan: We have been asked to put some more up around the end of the road so headlights don't go into the residences behind. June 27, 2017 28181 Ms. Smiley: Okay. Good. And that's a private road so you will do the snow removal? Mr. Duggan: Yes, it is a private road so it would be done by the association. Ms. Smiley: Okay. And you saw the letter about the easement for storm sewers from the Engineering Department. They want an easement. Mr. Duggan: I'm sure that Mr. Soave does not have a problem with that. To get the permits from the Engineering Department, they will require that. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Ventura: Mr. Duggan, on the site plan it is shown that a significant portion of the site in the northeast corner undeveloped. At our study session, we discussed the fact that there's a significant grade separation between the yards of the homes that abut that and the elevation that the new homes would be built at. So it's difficult to do anything there, if not impossible. You told us that is going to be planted and maintained. Can you describe how you're going to plant and maintain that vacant portion? Mr. Duggan: If you've seen the landscape plan, he is planning on putting in an assortment of trees, obviously grass, sod, down there to stop any erosion going through. Other than that, it will be more of an open field barrier, but there won't be any development or anything going on there after that. Mr. Ventura: How will it be maintained? Mr. Duggan: There will be an association. This will be a cluster condo, so there will be an association and they will hire maintenance services. Mr. Ventura: Will there be somebody that cuts it on a regular basis? Mr. Duggan: Correct. Mr. Ventura: Thank you. Ms. Smiley: These attached condos look familiar to me. Did you build some in Northville? June 27, 2017 28182 Mr. Duggan: I actually don't know where he built those at. I thought they would be more similar to what we did over behind the library, but this is what he's proposing. Ms. Smiley: Because they are attractive and I have friends that live in Northville and they look very similar. Mr. Duggan: It's possible. And they are good looking condos. Ms. Smiley: Do you have an idea of the square footage? Mr. Duggan: The plan originally I think was around 1,400 square feet. Ms. Smiley: Okay. And then any kind of price range? Mr. Duggan: At this point, no. Ms. Smiley: As far as houses in the neighborhood, I was just wondering if . . Mr. Duggan: Well, if I had to guess at what I want to market it for, somewhere around the $250,000 to $300,000 price range, but he's got to calculate all his costs and everything. But it will be in the mid- twos, maybe low threes. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Great. Thank you. Mr. Duggan: And since I work on commission, hopefully it will be $400,000 or $500,000. Mr. Caramagno: Brian, can you tell us a little bit about the building materials on these buildings?What are they going to be built out of? Is it going to be brick, all siding? What's it going to look like? Mr. Duggan: I think it's going to be semi-brick fronting and then vinyl sidings on the side. I'm not sure if he's going to do a roll out. I doubt it. He has not done that in the last five developments he did. So it would just be vinyl on the sides and brick on the front. I'll defer to Mark. Mr. Taormina: I had a conversation with the builder today regarding that same question, Mr. Caramagno. The fronts of the units will be 100 percent brick. The first floor would be all brick around. The exception would be the gables on the sides and the rears of the buildings where he could elect to use either vinyl siding or a hardy plank type of material. But the first floor wrapping around all the units would be entirely brick. According to the developer, that is June 27, 2017 !, 28183 his intent. And that is why in the prepared resolution we provide for a minimum of 80 percent brick. Mr. Caramagno: I've got another question. Mark, can you go back one screen? On this picture, the road looks like it's got a kink in it coming off of Lyndon, and what we have here shows a straight shot. Mr. Taormina: I apologize if the plan that was submitted to you shows the road as straight. If you recall at the study session, we had asked the petitioner to see whether the development could be shifted a little bit further to the east. The constraint there is the location of an existing utility pole. If you look carefully at this plan, you'll see the utility pole. While the road was shifted about five feet further to the east, the approach couldn't move, and that's the reason why you see the slight bend in the road. It is due to the location of the pole and the overhead utility line, but he was able to move both the majority of the road as well as the homes five feet further to the east gaining a little bit more separation between the homes to the west and the homes in this development. Mr. Caramagno: Thank you. Mr. Long: You have the three two-unit clusters and then there's the one three-unit cluster. Is the floor plan on the middle unit the same as other ones? Mr. Duggan: Yes, they should be the same. Mr. Long: Do you anticipate any problems selling the middle unit in a situation like that? Mr. Duggan: Well, obviously everybody likes the end unit, but no, I don't see a problem. Mr. Long: Thank you. Mr. Ventura: Mr. Duggan, in the correspondence from Mr. Kleinknecht, he asserts that it's going to take years for the ground to settle after the removal of the pool. Can you address that? Mr. Duggan: Actually, I always thought the same thing too, but that's not the case. The City Engineering and the engineering that Mr. Soave will hire will make sure he does not have to do that. He'll just have to put in proper footings, maybe expand the footings out a little bit larger and a little bit wider, but it can be built on the way it is right now. June 27, 2017 28184 Mr. Ventura: According to the City Engineer? Mr. Duggan: Correct. And the Building Department. Ms. Smiley: Do you have a time line because the way the property looks right now is a little sad? Mr. Duggan: Well, my time line was last year. As soon as we get approval with all the bodies, he'll start. Ms. Smiley: So he could start this year? Mr. Duggan: Hopefully, yes. Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions? Seeing none, thank you, Mr. Duggan. We'll go to the audience now. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Please come forward. We'll ask for your name and address for the record please. Richard Matacznski, 27928 Bentley, Livonia, Michigan. Right now, I'm against this proposal. I live basically right around the corner from it and my property value just started going up. I want to know what the future property values hold and Perrinville Schools has been sitting empty for years now. Is there going to be a plan for them to put any kind of cluster there? I don't want my property value to drop because it starts dropping, the neighborhood starts going downhill, you know. You're saying it's single family ranch-style home, right? Single floor and about 1,400 square feet. Is that the max or is that starting at 1,400 square feet and maybe going up to 2,000? Mr. Wilshaw: It's the minimum, and according to our approving resolution that was prepared, we would set that as a minimum amount. It allows them to get a little bit bigger, but realistically given the size of the lots and of course the setbacks and everything else, it doesn't allow for them to do anything too crazy. They might say it's 1,450 square feet or something like that, but it's going to be within that range. Mr. Matacznski: I agree something should be put there because it's sat dormant for it seems like forever. But putting a condo complex in there, not in the middle of a subdivision. That's how I feel. Mr. Wilshaw: Well, thank you. Thank you for your thoughts. Next person. Hello, sir. We'll ask your name and address as well. June 27, 2017 28185 Patrick Robinet, 28149 Oakley, Livonia, Michigan. Sure. My property backs right up to the swim club right on the corner. I'd like you to look at a couple pictures. Mr. Wilshaw: I'll give you second to get back to the microphone. Mr. Robinet: These are pictures of the current condition of the swim club. As you can see, there's trees growing through the pool. There's 55 gallon drums floating in the pool. There's ducks living in the pool. They've done nothing to improve the site. They've been letting this fester. It's a mosquito hazard. Why would we feel that the retention pond is going to be treated any different for starters, which is the first time we've heard about the retention pond. We've contacted the DNR about this because the City of Livonia's inspection people have not done anything. The DNR is very concerned about this situation. You've got nesting animals living there. You've got all kinds of problems in this facility. The fencing is falling down. As you can see, they've not secured the property. The lock on the gate is hanging there and not locked. The door on the building is open. Numerous people have had to call the police because there's children going into the place, on the roof of the facility. They're doing all sorts of things back there, smoking, drinking, whatever. They've not been good stewards. Part of your job is to protect the interests of the public as well as weigh that against the city's direction for what they want to do. We've seen nothing from these people showing that they're going to be good stewards, that they're going to help facilitate a proper and safe environment for people. I would suggest that you tell them that they're not going to get approval on this for 60 days and they have 60 days to clean this up to show that they're actually considering doing something about this. All the neighbors in the area are very concerned. We all have children. We all have pets. There's a rat problem in our area. You wouldn't believe the number of rats that are living in there. Like I said, if you look at here, there's trees growing up through the steps of the swim club. At the nine foot end of the pool, there's algae and stuff growing to the surface. If you look at the children's wading pool in the pictures, you literally could walk on the pool with the debris and everything that's on there. This didn't just happen. It's been happening. They've done nothing to help improve the facility, and my backyard would back right up to where that utility pond is going to be. And I have no faith that they will do anything. They've not done anything to clean this up. They've not even pumped the water out. Why would I anticipate that they're going to have a pond . . . the whole thing on all four sides drops four to six feet into that area. So water is going to pool terribly and we all feel that it's detrimental to the neighborhood. It's detrimental to the June 27, 2017 28186 children, and it's really not a good use of the space because it's just not workable the way they have it planned. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. Just to address the issue of the maintenance, this particular owner purchased the property from the private ownership of CB Swim Club sometime ago, and obviously there's continued maintenance . . . Mr. Robinet: Was it before the winter when they purchased it? We've talked to the people who ran the swim club. They regularly pumped it out while it was empty, while it was not being utilized. These people have done nothing and have no concern for the people in the neighborhood. Mr. Wilshaw: I understand. The issue of the retention pond, just to explain, that's a requirement that the County has for any new developments, be it commercial developments, residential. The subdivision I live in has three retention ponds in it. That's just the way development is done these days, and it's required to manage the outflow of storm water into the storm water system. That pond will be designed to be essentially a dry pond when there is no rain. Mr. Robinet: You can see this pool is nine feet and it's about 7 feet deep. If you're telling us the retention pond is going to be dug out and the sewer is going to be at a higher level so that eventually if it gets above a certain point it drains out, it's looking like nothing is going to drain out of this facility. Mr. Wilshaw: The description of that wasn't terribly good. That's for the engineers to design, but realize that the maintenance of the retention pond is going to be the responsibility of the association, which is going to be the homeowners who live there, not the developer. Mr. Robinet: Right now we're looking at a facility that's just in shambles. The fences are down. If some child wandered in here and fell in, you'd never find them again. Mr. Wilshaw: Correct. Mr. Robinet: There would be some problem there. They've not been good stewards like I've said. They've not done anything to secure the property. The fence is unlocked. The lock is hanging there as you can see in the pictures. The building is open. They've done nothing to secure it. It's an attractive nuisance for all the neighbors. It's right across from Perrinville School where it used June 27, 2017 28187 to be. I don't know if they're going to develop that again, which would be a problem with this driveway going right out where the school crossing is where the busses would be coming and going. It just doesn't show that they've done anything or had any concern for the neighborhood. It's your duty to look out for the interests of the public, me and probably 99 percent of the people here are going to tell you the same thing. This is just a mess and it's not something that we feel that they're going to do anything in the best interests of the public for because they've not done it so far. They've demonstrated their lack of concern. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you for expressing your feelings, and we'll definitely take that into consideration as we decide what to do with this particular proposal. So thank you. I appreciate that. Carol Phillips, 28319 Oakley, Livonia, Michigan. My backyard is up in that left northwest corner there. A few things. One, I realize that with the last hearing that it went from rural to the R-2 zoning. Most of us had no problem with that because the rest of the neighborhoods around there are all R-2 zoning and that kind of goes with what's already there. I've never known a neighborhood to increase in property values when condo units come in. If he thinks he going to get$250,000 to $300,000 for a condo that is only 1,400 square feet, he's going to be sorely disappointed. That is not something that fits in that area. If it was to stay with R-2, how many residences could we get on that with the R-2 zoning because right now it's at 9 with the clustering. How many would it fit with R-2? Does anybody know how much? Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Taormina, under conventional R-2 zoning, do you know what the density would be? Is it around 8 or 9? Mr. Taormina: Around 8 or 9, yes. We've shown how a plan with 8 units could work on the property. Some of the topographic features complicate the development and what the impact to the site would be as well as some of the . . . Ms. Phillips: So you'd be able to fit the 8 units . . . . Mr. Taormina: I'm sorry. I'm speaking. Ms. Phillips: I'm sorry. Mr. Taormina: And some of the easements that exist on the property also would create difficulties with a conventional style plan. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Taormina. Ma'am? June 27, 2017 28188 Ms. Phillips: So that would be 8 units plus the basin would have to be in there as well? Mr. Wilshaw: The basin definitely has to be in there, so yes. Potentially, you could have 8 units under conventional zoning just in conceptual design, but as the Planning Director pointed out, there's a number of topographic issues. There's grade issues and easements which would restrict certain areas of the development from being developed, such as the northwest corner up by your lot. Ms. Phillips: Right. So really theoretically you couldn't get 8 on there with the easements, with the basins and all of that. I just feel like, nothing personal, but they're getting greedy. They're just wanting to put more on the property now they've gotten the okay for the R-2, and now they want to change it and go for more. Why didn't they just approach us when they came and went right for the clustering because they knew they'd get permission for the R-2 zoning and then they'd go for more and they're getting greedy. That's not what's in the neighborhood. That's not what the neighborhood wants, and it's not good for our property values. Anytime you add condos into a community, your property values are going to go down. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, ma'am. Hello, sir. David Currier, 28183 Oakley, Livonia, Michigan. Good evening. We're directly behind which would be the current parking lot for the CB Swim Club, our southern property line. I'm glad to see it moving forward. A lot of the blame, I feel, goes back to the city for the delay on this and the maintenance of the facility. As previously stated, we had maintenance issues when it was CB once they stopped as a swim club and sat vacant as they were determining what to do with it. They were slightly better with the maintenance but not a whole lot. The maintenance has gone down some. The city has not responded to most of our phone calls. Even last week or the week before, I was 10 minutes on hold with the enforcement department trying to find someone to talk to, to get something moving. The current pool is probably three-quarters full. So some of it is on the developer, a big chunk of that is on the city. I ask that you take that back to your commissions and your bosses at the city and communicate that. I'm glad to see something going forward. It's been sitting vacant. We got to do something with it. If nothing more and I don't know if this is possible for the city at least to require the owner to raze the property, demolish what's there, level it off until something can be determined. They'll take care of the storm water issue, all the standing water, hopefully June 27, 2017 28189 most of the rats will run away. We'll find them in our backyard and our trash cans. We'll deal with them and that. There is the concern that, yeah, right now the old Adams Elementary/Perrinville school sits vacant too. But the school district is trying to determine what to do with that property. They've done a good job in maintaining it. The condos, we have the senior housing facilities a block and half down the street. don't have a big issue with that. I'd like to see it developed. As you stated, there's no way you're going to develop the back end, the north edge of this property. The elevation drop is too much. So thank you. Peter McCoy, 28235 Oakley, Livonia, Michigan. We're directly behind the property there. My point is, the property was rezoned based on a plan of eight homes and now there's a change. So I think that's a little bit of a bait and switch. I don't think that's correct. I also feel like the property values, I totally agree with some of the other sentiments here that property values will go down with a condo complex type look in our sub. We have a home neighborhood set up.We should maintain that look, and I think that would be best for everybody. Thank you. Tina McCoy, 28235 Oakley, Livonia, Michigan. There's a couple important things here I think. First of all, our neighborhood is generally, it's all single family homes. I think changing it to a cluster-style where there's two and then you're saying three families together, that's to me is almost like identical as doing a condominium setup. Condos are going to bring the property values down. They always do. I have concerns when it's a three family with that middle complex. Those are going to be very hard and very difficult to sell. That will also reduce the price which may change some of the values in our neighborhood. Another concern I have is in our backyard, we have the storm drain. I question how they're going to handle that. Is it going to be where they're going to start digging up in our backyards to connect to that drain? And how is that going to affect our yard? Mr. Wilshaw: Generally what happens is each developer has to maintain the storm water and the sewers within their own property. They don't Mrs. McCoy: They don't run in and connect to what's already there? Mr. Wilshaw: They would have to connect to the mains that are off property, but generally, they're not going to go into your area. Mrs. McCoy: You're sure about that'? They're not going to go into our property? June 27, 2017 28190 Mr. Wilshaw: I'm not sure about that. That's for engineering to decide. I'm not an engineer. Mrs. McCoy: Still, they could say, okay, well there's no way of attaching to it so we need to get into your yard, and we're going to start taking the backhoe, and they're going to start digging in our backyard. We already have a fence up. We have landscaping with large arborvitaes. They've been there for over 10 years. Those are big, big trees. We have a fence line. I would also want to know how they are going to differentiate between the two developments. Are we going to still have a fence there or are they going to just leave it open? Many of us have pets. We want fences there. And I don't want just to see an old wooden fence put up. Mr. Wilshaw: I understand. Mrs. McCoy: Another thing is the elevation. That property that we are sitting on at one time used to be swamp property. So there is a high water table there. We have to watch even in our yard, our home area, we have to make sure the sump pump is running at all times, especially when there's a lot of water, rain coming down. It runs continuously. How is that with all this building, how are they going to, are they going to raise it up so it's going to start flowing back into our yard? So we're going to have a problem there. Another thing is with the swim club itself. It's deteriorated beyond belief. It's disgusting. That is a horrid eyesore. My family comes in from Trenton and surrounding area. They're going what in the world is going on here? At least when the owners were there from CB, mean it didn't look great, but at least the water was dredged out of that pool on a relative annual basis. That water, I don't know if you've looked at it. It's black. It's terrible. It's sitting stagnant. We've had a lot of rain. Soon the temperatures are going to start rising. We're going to have problems with all kinds of bugs. This last year, this year, we had to pull out our garden this year because of the rat situation. My husband was putting in large rat traps. We have never in all of our years. We moved here in 1997. We've been here this long. We've never had problems with rats, ever. Now we're going to start having this issue. I can only imagine when you guys start tearing those buildings down what's going to come flying out of there. And that is a disgrace to let that sit that long. There is no excuse for that. Mr. Wilshaw: I understand. Mrs. McCoy: So that's what I have to say. And also, my concern is also the time line. I mean I understand that we're still going back and forth June 27, 2017 28191 with this, but I would like to see the people that own this property, like Mr. Robinet, I would like to see the property flattened out. I'd like to see that pool pulled out of there now while we're working out what it's going to be, the property. I'd like to see single family homes. That's what's all around there. It's all homes. The only place that you'll see any kind of multi structure is where the senior citizens facility. Livonia is built on single family homes. When you start putting in condos and apartments, it changes the whole landscape as far as it being a family friendly environment. That's it. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mrs. McCoy. Barbara Smith, 27817 Lyndon, Livonia, Michigan. I'm at the corner of Cardwell. My reason for coming here this evening is obviously property values. Everything that everyone else has said, I completely agree with. We pay the taxes. We live in Livonia. This is our direct neighborhood. I think putting nine or eight additional residences there is too many in one small spot. Just like everyone else has said, everyone has a yard and they have backyard and a front yard, and like so many others have said, our property values are finally starting to go up. We're finally starting to get back where we were before '08. I mean, you're just going to come in there and just start tearing things apart and changing the landscape of the neighborhood. Obviously, it's a pretty decent neighborhood. I don't think that anything good is going to come out of putting 8 homes. I know that something does need to be done there and maybe put a few homes there, but I mean just like everyone said, I mean it's been an eyesore for years. I mean, you know, I wasn't living here when it was open, but I have lived here for eight years and I've never seen anybody there doing anything. The people that live like next door trying to keep people out, I'm sure. They park their cars there. But I mean something needs to be done but I don't think that's the answer. I really don't. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you. Good evening. Belinda Eleson, 28154 Lyndon, Livonia, Michigan. Hi. I am the lucky resident that gets to live next door to this mess. I've been here at least three different times stating my concerns that I have about this property. And I agree with everyone here that has made the comment, it is a disaster to say the least. It is blight. It is dangerous. It's an accident waiting to happen. I'm amazed that someone has not gotten hurt yet. And the fact that we have all called Livonia countless times registering our complaints, our concerns to drain that pool. It's three quarters full. As you saw the pictures, that's just a glimpse at how bad it is around there. Not June 27, 2017 28192 to mention the fence line that is next to my house that you can't see because it is like a jungle from the trees that started as saplings that they allowed to grow through my fence. I also get to be the lucky keeper of all the rats because the rats have built their homes on the side of the fence that goes out to the parking lot. We have a major rat infestation problem. My next door neighbors who live east of me, they have two cats and they have captured at least, and I am not exaggerating, 150 rats. Those cats have brought them in the house and brought these rats of all different sizes. We're not talking little guys. These are big guys. We can't have gardens. We can't feed the birds. We can't do anything. The rabbits I used to see, they're gone. I haven't seen not one rabbit since this has been going on. So I agree that this does fall on the city and also the developer. When CB closed down, gradually over time the owners at the time started neglecting the property, little by little, and then it got to the point where they weren't emptying the pool. And we would have to call and call and call and finally they would empty the pool. But it took a lot of persistence on our part, and this would go on all summer. So you can't sit out in your yard. You can't barbeque. You can't have friends or family over because you're too embarrassed to how disgusting this property looks, and it's just been going on way too long. I agree we need to have something done with that property. I'm not sure really how I feel about these condos, and I agree that I'm really concerned about our tax values, our property values, and the fact that our property is just starting to come back. It's just starting to go back where it should be. I'm really concerned that these condos may just put an end to that. And also about having condos and apartments possibly in Livonia. You know I moved from Westland, which is like apartment central, to Livonia to get away from that because Livonia is supposed to be families first. That's what the sign says. And that we have good, safe, clean neighborhoods. I'm really concerned about this. I agree that we need to have something done. I'm not sure if this is the route to go. I'm really concerned to know about this retaining wall and this pond that you're talking about putting on the east side of the property that's going to abut up to mine because now I get to look at just a god-awful looking piece of property. I don't want to have a pond that's going to have mosquitoes and attract whatever else it may bring. Mr. Wilshaw: I understand. Ms. Eleson: Thank you. Kim Ledingham, 14520 Garden, Livonia, Michigan. I'm not directly connected to the property but I'm in Compton Village. I just have a couple June 27, 2017 28193 questions, one of which, I'm not real familiar with condominium complexes, but I hear the gentleman mentioning about the HOA fees will take care of the maintenance and so forth there. Would that include snow removal in the winter, and how much revenue can nine families generate to handle all of that maintenance, and who oversees the formation of the HOA? Will the builder and the developer oversee that so that it is definitely in place to keep the property maintained in the way that they are presenting it will be? So there's a concern. The second concern, question, that I have is we've heard a little bit about the Perrinville property. I don't really know too much of what is in the works for that. I've heard different things. So my concern there is, are we setting a precedent with allowing directly across the street a clustering of homes on a 2.7 acre piece of property, then going across the street and, if that property is going to be developed into residential as well, how much can fit on that property because that's a much larger parcel of property, and what are we looking at then?What's that going to look like in our neighborhood? So those are my two concerns that I would just like to bring up. I don't know if there's an answer for it right now, but Mr. Wilshaw: I can speak a little bit to it because I am familiar with condominium law. Regarding your question about the condominium, under Michigan condominium law, the developer will be required to establish the homeowners association, and the developer will be representative of the homeowner association during the phase in which the homes are being sold. And there's a percentage at which a certain number of homes are sold, that then means that homeowners will have to start getting onto the homeowners association and taking over that so once the developer is done developing and selling all those homes, then it's left to the homeowners that live there to run the association, to be the board. The dues for the association will be determined based on the services they need to provide such as the lawn cutting of the property, the snow blowing because it is a private road so they will have to plow it themselves. The city won't do that. So they will have to set the dues to an appropriate amount to allow those things to happen. Of course, I don't know what that's going to be but it could be $100 a month, it could be $50 a month, it could be $1,000 a month. It just depends on whatever services that that association needs to provide. Just like a non-profit essentially. They'll set it to collect enough money to be able to do the services that they need to do for that property. As far as Perrinville goes, that's not in front of us today, and we're not the school board so we don't know what the school board's intentions are for that property. However, just to let you know that this is zoned R-2 and we are bound by the terms of R-2 zoning for this particular June 27, 2017 28194 property. The clustering option is only used when there are hardships or topographic issues, other things that don't allow traditional development on that property. In this particular development, this particular piece of property does have a steep grade issue that makes a significant portion of it undevelopable. So that's why we're exploring the option of clustering at this time. If the Perrinville or any other piece of property were to become available to be developed as residential, it would again be normally done under traditional zoning. The clustering option would only come in if the developer and the Planning Commission can establish that there's some sort of reason that we would need to enact that. Typically, we use the clustering option very sparingly, and it's used to allow for sometimes shorter setbacks of property lines because, again, we're trying to balance development versus use of the property. In this case, it's allowing for us to consider units that are attached to each other, but that's what the option of clustering allows us to do. It's used sparingly so I wouldn't necessarily assume that if Perrinville were to change at some point in the future, that that would immediately become a clustering option. That would have to be explored at that time. We have no idea what's going on over there. Ms. Ledingham: Again, my concern is the precedent is being set with this piece of property. And then back to the HOA, does the developer, is he bound to reveal to the homeowners as they're buying that they will be entering into this homeowners association? Mr. Wilshaw: Oh, yes. Ms. Ledingham: And then who polices it so to speak once they're in their homes. I mean if they're on their own, nine families could say we like it just the way it is. I mean I guess that's just a concern that I'm throwing out. Mr. Wilshaw: Right. There's a lot of legal elements that are involved with condominium law and with homeowner associations and deed restrictions and all those things. That's part of what we're looking at today, some of the things that we've talked about in terms of making sure the houses have 80 percent brick would actually go into those deed restrictions so that bounds the developer and the homeowners to having those things, where in a normal platted subdivision, we don't necessarily have as much control. So condominiums actually offer for a greater control and most developments that have been built in the city throughout the whole city in the last several years have been done under condominium law even though they are single family homes. They look like normal homes. They're actually condominiums. June 27, 2017 28195 Ms. Ledingham: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Hello, sir. Arthur Mumaw, 14601 Lyons, Livonia, Michigan. Hi there. I'm about two properties behind that to the east of that pool. One of the things that I'm looking at is there's a brand new building on Harrison and it's just northwest of Oakley. It's $307,000 just sold. There are six houses to the west of this pool that the pool sold and they're somewhere around $300,000 each. Somehow the prices of those homes backed up to this piece of property, which is probably never going to be in that same category unless you reduce the number of buildings and put proper square footage on it. They're not compatible. They're really not compatible. And they're not compatible with the 99 Roskelly homes in that other section. So you're wedging in something that you really better take a look at. In addition, my sump pump never stops running. I've had five pumps in there already. We've been there 23 years, and this water situation, I have ponding in my backyard all the time. So I'm afraid that this place is going to flood and you're going to have more problems with that. So that basin that you're talking about is not going to work. That's all I got. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you, sir. Ms. Smith: There was one thing I forgot. I'm sorry. Mr. Wilshaw: Just remind us of your name and address. Ms. Smith: I'm on the corner. So another concern which some of us were kind of speaking about is what if they don't sell these because they're not going to sell them for $250,000. They're probably not going to sell them for $200,000. So at some point they're not going to sell them. They're going to need to get some money going. So then we're going to get renters in there which obviously we've seen renters in our immediately area. I know I had some renter neighbors, and let me tell you, they don't take care of their home like I do. They don't cut their grass like I do. They don't do anything like I do because I own the home. So when you have renters, you have bigger issues. So that's a huge concern because you're never going to get $250,000 for eight, nine condos that are jammed up together around a subdivision. You're just not. And again, the property values. I mean you have to think about the people that live in the area. June 27, 2017 28196 Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Ms. Smith. Is there anybody else in the audience wishing to speak for or against this item? We have one more coming down then we'll cut it off. Mr. McCoy: So I hear the comment about the grade being brought up a lot that's a challenge for the property and it's interesting. Well, I just don't agree that it wasn't brought up when the rezoning was happening at that time. The plan was to have approximately eight homes on this property. That was the plan for getting the site rezoned, and now we're hearing all about this challenge with the grade being brought up. I don't think that's fair that this challenge wasn't addressed at the rezoning discussions or that possibly in the future there would be a clustering that might come down. There might have been a whole different discussion at the rezoning meetings. Also, I'd like to know why you couldn't do backfill in the area. I mean I think the developer should have put money into the job to do a lot of backfill for the grade. Mr. Wilshaw: Just to address the issue of the zoning, Mr. McCoy, it's something that we make very clear every time we have zoning proposals before us is that when we look at the rezoning of a piece of property, we strictly look at the rezoning of the property. Any plans that are presented for the use of that property would be conceptual only and are not binding to the developer or the Commission or anyone else for that matter. We are not allowed to consider the plan and the zoning as a single entity, which is why we always state when we do rezonings that we need to separate that and look at the zoning that's presented to us. Is it appropriate for that area strictly. And then the site plan is something that comes to us later, which is what we're looking at now today. Mr. McCoy: Yeah, but was this an afterthought? I mean after the developer wanted to buy this property, all of a sudden, uh oh, I've got a big problem with this grade issue. I've got to really push the cluster idea to make this work. That's not right, and I totally agree. I totally want to make a statement again. I do think this is going to lower our property values to have this type of development in that neighborhood. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. Ms. Eleson: I'm back. I live next door to the property. After sitting here listening to everyone and their comments, and I had said when I was up here initially that I was not sure how I felt about having the cluster units in there. After hearing all the comments, I am opposed just to go on record to say that. The sign that's out there, when it was June 27, 2017 28197 first posted out there, it said eight single lot homes were going to be put up and now this idea with the clustering and the condos coming in, again, I reiterate, the property values are going to fall. I don't see realistically how you're going to sell these especially at the price that was mentioned. That's not a reality, and what if you don't sell them all like one other person had mentioned?Who is going to take care of the maintenance of the property then? can't see three or four people are going to split an enormous amount of money to maintain that property. It's going to be a money pit like it already is. The other question I guess I have to ask each one of you, would you want this in your area, in your neighborhood?Would you want to have this assuming you all live in single family homes? Would you want to have condos sitting right next to you, a much lower priced home sitting next to you? It's something to consider. I guess one other comment I have to say too, there is a swim club on Newburgh Road between Five and Six Mile. It's pristine, like CB used to be when it was still owned. I wonder if that happened to that swim club would it have been allowed to get in the shape that CB is in now. Because I have concerns because I feel like because we are in the south end of Livonia, we're like the forgotten neighborhoods. I really feel like we're slighted. Anyways, that's all I have to say. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there one more person wishing to speak? Go ahead, ma'am. Daniela Tuohey, 14562 Harrison, Livonia, Michigan. So my backyard is directly facing the area there. I'm new to this. We're new to the area, five years, young family. I have two young kids so that was always an eyesore definitely for us. We were always in hope that something was going to be done like we tell family and friends, or maybe maybe, and then came about and we got really excited when we heard about the eight single family homes going up. I even told my parents because we came from Dearborn Heights, you know, it's time to sell your house, downgrade, come live near me. You know, you can maybe buy a home right behind me. But this is again, my first time here and listening to all this and definitely not a fan of condominiums behind me. Again, especially hearing about the value going down and everything, and that's not something my family would be looking for either and I'm just very disappointed in what I'm hearing today. So again, it's my first time here listening to this, but again, being a younger family in the neighborhood, it's just something that I moved to Livonia hearing great things and I just would not like that either. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you for your comments and welcome to Livonia. With that, there's no one else in the audience wishing to speak, so I'm going to ask the petitioner to please come forward. He's heard a June 27, 2017 28198 number of comments from residents today. There's a few questions that have been asked. Is there anything that you would like to add, Mr. Duggan? Mr. Duggan: Yes. I jotted down some notes. As this body knows, Mr. Soave didn't come to that site. The City went to Mr. Soave and said can you do anything with this site, and at that point, that's when he purchased it to build some single family homes or cluster or whatever, but he wasn't a developer searching for the property to develop it. He wanted to take care of what the city asked him to do. I've been selling real estate for over 30 years. Condos don't really bring values down. We sold the ones over there by the Civic Center. They sold for $250,000 to $325,000 in a mixed neighborhood still and the value of the neighborhood stood fine, and that's right over where our ex-mayor lived. One of the reasons why, as you know, it changed from more of a single family to a cluster is because engineering looked at it more and put more requirements on it. Mr. Soave did not know at the time when he was asked to purchase this property, so therefore the cost relations. All the water, stormwater, as you mentioned before, will be contained to the site property. That's what the engineer's job is to do and they do make sure that's it done. Every grade will be shot and it will all be tapered back to the site property. Livonia is an aging city. There's a high demand for condos in Livonia, so I do not see a problem selling. The citizens of Livonia, they want to stay in the city and they want to downsize. So I think they'll sell for the price I said, and I think they'll sell quick. As you mentioned before, the master deed dictates the homeowner association and the brick and all that stuff. If there is any renters, somebody is going to own that association. Somebody is going to buy it to rent it, and then they still have to pay their dues. So the yard and everything should still be maintained. Once again, I just want to stress, condos don't bring the value of homes down. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Duggan. Are there any questions for the petitioner? I'm going to let you speak just very briefly. We're trying to close the audience communication. Ms. Phillips: Okay. Back to the developer. I mean nobody twisted his arm to buy this property. Mr. Wilshaw: Ma'am, you'll need to speak to us. Ms. Phillips: Oh. Well, nobody twisted Soave's arm to buy this property. I mean Livonia gave him, asked him, gave him business, so I don't feel sorry for the man for purchasing the property. They've owned June 27, 2017 28199 it for quite a while and have done squat with it. So they haven't proved themselves to us one iota. And if he thinks he's going to get $250,000 for a 1,400 square foot condo, he's got another thing coming when there's homes that are over 2,000 plus square feet with four bedrooms in the area selling for that. So I don't know where he's coming up with these numbers. They don't match with the smaller homes that are 1,300 to 1,500 to 1,800 square feet and his numbers don't even come close to matching what's in the area. So he needs to check with a realtor a little bit more and get a realistic vision of what a condo can go for in that area, and it's going to be low, which means lower income people are going to be moving into our area and that is not something that we care for. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, ma'am. I'll go ahead and close the public hearing at this time, and ask the Commission if they have any comments or would like to make a motion? Is there anyone on the Commission that would like to make a motion? Mr. Ventura: Can I direct a question to Mr. Duggan? Mr. Wilshaw: You can. Mr. Ventura: Mr. Duggan, how long have you owned the property? Mr. Duggan: I think we purchased it sometime last year. I don't remember the date. Mr. Ventura: So you've owned it for a year? Mr. Duggan: It's possible. I did not sell it to him, but it's possible. Mr. Ventura: So something more than six months and something less than a year'? Mr. Duggan: Sounds reasonable. Mr. Ventura: Are you aware of any efforts that the purchaser has made to respond to the concerns that the folks have raised here this evening in terms of maintenance of the property and so forth? Mr. Duggan: I don't know if he even knew those concerns, but I will pass everything on to him. Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Ventura, the city's tax records show that it was purchased in October of 2016. June 27, 2017 28200 Mr. Ventura: Thank you. So he's owned it for eight months. Mr. Duggan: Time flies when you're having fun. Mr. Ventura: Mr. Duggan, you're a realtor, are you not? Mr. Duggan: Yes. Mr. Ventura: Can you tell us about property values in that neighborhood? Mr. Duggan: Like everywhere in Livonia, property values are going up. There are houses in there from 1,200 square feet to the newer ones on Oakley Drive and the ones that Roskelly did, almost up to 2,400 square feet, selling anywhere between, now, I would say probably $190,000 for the old Buckinghams to maybe $260,000 for the other ones. We sold one on Santa Anita abutting up to Suburban Door, I mean, right there, and we got $269,000 for it. I sold a 1,500 square feet ranch on that same street for $230,000. The ones that we came in front of this panel for on Farmington Road, we sold two of them on Farmington Road, 1,200 square feet houses and we got $220,000 for them. So I think our prices are a good price range that it's going to go. I certainly hope so, but we're certainly not going to sell it for $100,000. It costs more than that to build. Mr. Ventura: Thank you. Ms. Smiley: Who is your target group for these condos? Mr. Duggan: Seniors. Ms. Smiley: Over 55 is what I understood, right? Mr. Duggan: Well, yes. Seniors that want to downsize, correct. We're not going to put it in the bylaws over 55, but the seniors. Ms. Smiley: I'm looking at your master plan here and there's one and two bedrooms. It looks very similar to the condos that are across from the post office on Newburgh Road. I think the road is actually Pembroke. They are two stories. These are all one story. But they have a similar floor plan where they have a den, bedroom, a big master bedroom, nice bath and then they have a den, bedroom, and another bath, so they're two bathroom, two bedrooms. Do these have basements. Mr. Duggan: Yes. June 27, 2017 28201 Ms. Smiley: Okay. That was my question. Well, I guess I'm a senior but . . . Mr. Duggan: Well, you know, when you said 55, I'm actually going to be 59 in about two weeks. I didn't want to classify myself as senior, but I guess 55 is a senior. Ms. Smiley: I'm over that, but I'm just saying four out of my five best friends are in similar situations, and two of them moved to Northville, but one is in Livonia in those condos right across from the post office and those seem to be maintaining their price. Mr. Duggan: They are. Yes. Ms. Smiley: At Seven and Newburgh. Mr. Duggan: At Seven and Newburgh and also the village too. Ms. Smiley: Do they not back up into subdivisions? There are homes behind them right? Mr. Duggan: There are homes behind them but more of a country setting road. Yes. Ms. Smiley: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions for the petitioner's representative? Mr. Duggan: I should add one more thing. If the value of the homes are going up now as I'm hearing with an eyesore, imagine how much more it will go up once you get rid of that stuff and you have a condo or houses in there. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Duggan. Mr. Caramagno: I have a question for Mr. Duggan. There was some discussion about the fence that surrounds the property. That fence is owned by the property or by the residents that abut it? Mr. Duggan: It depends on who put the fence up. If it was put up many years ago by the swim club, then it might belong to the swim club but nobody's fence is right on the property line. Then I think by law it's common law and it's owned by both sides. Mr. Caramagno: So the intention for the project here would be to leave the fence? Mr. Duggan: Yes. June 27, 2017 28202 Mr. Caramagno: As is. Mr. Duggan: Correct. There is no reason to even go up that way, and I'm guessing, because I'm not the Engineering Department, but I'm assume that the storm sewers will be going into Lyndon, not the back of peoples' properties because obviously the elevation is higher. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Duggan. With that, again, I'm going to ask the Commission if there are any comments or if a motion would like to be made. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Ventura, and unanimously adopted, it was #06-36-2017 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on June 27, 2017, on Petition 2017-06-02-08 submitted by Soave/Oro Construction, L.L.C. requesting special waiver use approval pursuant to Sections 20.01 and 20.02A of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to develop a Planned Residential Development under the Single Family Clustering option (Bishop Estates) at 28200 Lyndon Avenue, located on the north side of Lyndon Avenue between Inkster Road and Harrison Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 24, which property is zoned R-2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2017-06-02-08 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Master Deed and bylaws complies with the requirements of the Subdivision Control Ordinance, Title 16, Chapter 16.04-16.40 of the Livonia Code of Ordinance, and Article XX, Section 20.01-20.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, except for the fact the following shall be incorporated: - that each condominium unit shall be brick or stone, on all four(4) sides, and the total amount of brick or stone shall not be less than 80%; - that the minimum floor area for each dwelling shall not be less than 1,400 square feet; - that all exterior chimneys shall be brick; 2. That the Site Plan identified as Sheet 1 dated June 14, 2017, as revised, prepared by Arpee/Donnan, Inc., is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; June 27, 2017 28203 3. That the Landscape Plan identified as Sheet 2 dated June 14, 2017, as revised, prepared by Arpee/Donnan, Inc., is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, except that additional trees and shrubs shall be planted around the detention system and at the north end of Bishop Lane, subject to the approval of the Planning Department; 4. That streetlights and sidewalks shall be installed throughout the development to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department; 5. In the event of a conflict between the provisions set forth in the Master Deed and bylaws and the requirements set forth in the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance No. 543, as amended, the Zoning Ordinance requirements shall prevail and petitioner shall comply with the Zoning Ordinance requirements; 6. That the petitioner shall include language in the Master Deed and bylaws or a separate recordable instrument wherein the condominium association shall reimburse the City of Livonia for any maintenance or repair costs incurred for the storm water detention/retention and outlet facilities; 7. That only a conforming entrance marker is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals; 8. That the petitioner shall secure the necessary storm water management permits from the City of Livonia Engineering Division; 9. That all required cash deposits, certified checks, irrevocable bank letters of credit and/or surety bonds which shall be established by the City Engineer pursuant to Article XVIII of Ordinance No. 543, Section 18.66 of the ordinance, shall be deposited with the City prior to the issuance of engineering permits for this site condominium development; and 10. Pursuant to Section 19.10 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, this approval is valid for a period of ONE YEAR ONLY from the date of approval by City Council, and unless a building permit is obtained, this approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. June 27, 2017 28204 FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #2 PETITION 2017-04-03-01 LESKO VACATING Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2017- 04-03-01 submitted by Andres and Shelley Lesko, pursuant to Council Resolution #199-17 and Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine whether or not to vacate an existing public utility easement at 31694 Curtis Avenue, located on the north side of Curtis Avenue between Merriman Road and Mayfield Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 10. Mr. Taormina: Just very briefly, the petitioner apologizes that he was unable to make this evening's meeting. He did apprise the Commission of that at our study session where we did have a rather lengthy discussion about this proposal. It really is just to simply vacate a utility easement that exists in the rear yard of this house located on the north side of Curtis Avenue between Merriman Road and Mayfield Avenue. The reason for vacating the easement is for a planned expansion of the house. This is a 14 foot utility easement that was platted as part of the subdivision back in 1947. The utilities and, in particular, the overhead electric lines that serve this area are located in the front yard. The Engineering Department states that the city has no public utilities that will be impacted by the vacation, and DTE does not have an objection to the vacation as well. We have informed all of the other utility companies, including Consumers Energy, and no one is objecting to this vacating request. So with that Mr. Chairman, I'll be happy to read out the correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please. Mr. Taormina: There are three items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated June 5, 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 utility easement vacation at this time. The existing parcel is assigned the address of 31694 Curtis Avenue. The attached legal description appears to be correct for the parcel, and should be used in conjunction with this petition. June 27, 2017 28205 The owner has been in contact with this department regarding the vacation of the utility easement, and we have no public utilities that will be impacted by the vacation. We have also discussed the proposed vacation with DTE Energy, and they have no opposition to the proposal. The existing overhead lines were placed on the lot outside of the platted easement, and as such, the easement as platted is no longer needed."The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated June 2, 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 third letter is from the Finance Department, dated June 6, 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 of the Planning Director? If not, I will also note that the petitioner was at our study meeting and stated that he would not be able to make our meeting tonight. We did discuss that with him, given that we normally ask the petitioner to be at our voting meetings. The consensus was that due to the fact that this is a non-controversial proposal that we probably could hear it without his presence tonight. If there is any reason that the Commission feels that they want his presence here, a tabling motion would always be in order. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? Seeing no one coming forward, I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion. Is there anyone on the Commission who would like to speak on this item? If not, a motion would be in order. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Caramagno, and unanimously adopted, it was #06-37-2017 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on June 27, 2017, on Petition 2017-04-03-01 submitted by Andres and Shelley Lesko, pursuant to Council Resolution #199-17 and Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine whether or not to vacate an existing public utility easement at 31694 Curtis Avenue, located on the north side of Curtis Avenue between Merriman Road and Mayfield Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 10, the Planning Commission does June 27, 2017 28206 hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2017-04-03- 01 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That the Engineering Division has no objections to the vacating of the specified portion of the subject easement; 2. That there are no electric service lines within the subject easement and the overhead electric lines serving this area are in the front yard; and 3. That the portion of the easement area proposed to be vacated can be more advantageously utilized by the property owner if unencumbered by the easement. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances, as amended. Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. ITEM #3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,106TH Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 1,106th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on June 6, 2017. On a motion by Caramagno, seconded by Long, and unanimously adopted, it was #06-38-2017 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 1,106th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on June 6, 2017, are hereby approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Caramagno, Long, Smiley, Ventura, Wilshaw NAYS: None ABSENT: McCue, Priddy ABSTAIN: None Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. June 27, 2017 28207 ITEM #4 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 409th Special Meeting Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 409th Special Regular Meeting held on June 13, 2017. On a motion by Caramagno, seconded by Ventura, and unanimously adopted, it was #06-39-2017 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 409th Special Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on June 13, 2017, are hereby approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Caramagno, Ventura, Long, Smiley, Wilshaw NAYS: None ABSENT: McCue, Priddy ABSTAIN: None Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously ado, :d, the 1,107th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on June 27, 2017, w. . djourned at 8:23 p.m. CITY PLA ING COMMISSION AILIIIIIMIL—.....mmem..- Sam Car: magno, Secretary ATTEST: Y- Ian Wilshaw, Chairman