Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTUDY - 2018-06-18 REV 7/5/18 CITY OF LIVONIA – CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF STUDY MEETING HELD JUNE 18th, 2018 Meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. by President Toy. Present: Cathy White, Kathleen McIntyre, Brian Meakin, Jim Jolly, Brandon Kritzman, Scott Bahr and Laura Toy. Absent: None. Elected and appointed officials present: Mark Taormina, Director of Planning and Economic Development; Todd Zilincik, City Engineer; Paul Bernier, City Attorney; Susan M. Nash, City Clerk; Lynda Scheel, Treasurer; James Inglis, Director of Housing; Jacob Rushlow, Superintendent of Public Service; Don Rohraff, Director of Public Works; and Mayor Dennis Wright. Councilmember White reminded everyone of the upcoming Spree ’68, starting Tuesday, thth June 19 and running through Sunday, June 24 with the fireworks display at dusk. She stated the list of activities can be found on www.livoniaspree.com. President Toy stated that Councilmember White is the City Council representative on the Spree Committee and that Councilmember McIntyre is the alternate and that many of the Spree workers work most of the year on it and volunteer all of their time and it’s one of the largest events in the State of Michigan. She invited everyone to come and enjoy the Spree, that it is a great family event. President Toy congratulated Mayor Wright and his wife Karen on the arrival of their first grandson, Lucas Michael. She then stated that former Trustee, Paul Kadish, passed away last night. She stated he was an integral part of the community and was well-loved in his service to the community and his politics, having run for State Senate at one time. President Toy congratulated all of the recent graduates from the local schools and wished them much success in the future. AUDIENCE COMMUNICATION: None. NEW BUSINESS: 1. REQUEST TO UPDATE CITY COUNCIL FROM THE SENIOR ALLIANCE: Suzanne M. Radocaj, Executive Assistant, The Senior Alliance, re: Jason Maciejewski, Chief Planning & Information Officer, on their programs. 2 President Toy stated that Jason Maciejewski was not present but that Angie Winton, HR Director for the Senior Alliance, will provide the update on his behalf. A folder of information was provided to Council. Winton stated that once a year they visit each of their thirty-four communities to let them know about their services and also let them know how their local match helps them provide services to their residents. Each community pays a local match to the Senior Alliance, with Livonia matching $8,044, that is noted on the report contained in the blue folders, and those funds help provide many services to our residents, one example being the State Health Insurance Program (SHIP), what used to be known as MMAP, the State of Michigan is now going along with the National Standard of using SHIP as the acronym. She indicated that program helped save 6,649 clients in their service area, over 1.6 million dollars in fiscal year 2017. The SHIP team consists mostly of volunteers who help individuals navigate complex Medicare and Medicaid systems. That is a service available to anybody in the thirty-four southern and western Wayne County communities participating in the Senior Alliance and it is free to anyone enrolling in Medicaid and Medicare. She went on to state that in fiscal year 2017, 937 clients were served from their agency, 472 clients were served in information and assistance from their call center. She indicated that 184 clients were served in their in-home programs which include the My Choice Medicaid waiver, which is a program that helps nursing facility medical eligible individuals to stay in their home. The Nursing Facility Transition Program helps people that are in a nursing facility transition back into the community. And the Care Management and Case Coordination Services provides services to anyone over the age of 60, in-home services such as personal care and homemaking. Thirteen clients were served in their in-house nonemergency transportation program with a total of forty-eight rides. There are five vehicles that provide nonemergency medical transportation outside of what a lot of cities themselves provide. Two hundred and sixty-eight clients were served in nutrition programs which most people know as Meals on Wheels. She stated they operate on a budget of almost 30 million dollars and is very proud to report that only about 4 percent of that is used for administration expense, meaning 96 percent of the money they get goes directly back into services. She thanked the Council for their support and offered to participate in any outreach events that Livonia may hold. She stated they can be contacted through their website at www.thesenioralliance.org and a phone number of 800-815-1112. She stated Councilmember McIntyre is on their Board and many of their committees and thanked her for her participation. 3 Councilmember McIntyre stated it is truly a privilege to serve on the Board and you can see the difference the agency makes in people’s lives. She encouraged everyone to refer people to their Facebook page for inquiries about assistance. She spoke highly about Ms. Minton’s contribution to the Alliance. President Toy thanked Ms. Minton for the update. Meakin offered to receive and file this item for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 2. REQUEST TO WAIVE THE CITY’S NOISE ORDINANCE: Nabil Nouman and Megan Irons, re: for a wedding reception with a DJ and music playing throughout the event on Saturday, August 18, 2018, from 6:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. at 20341 Parker Street. President Toy called the petitioner to the podium. Nabil Nouman and Megan Irons, 20341 Parker Street, came to the podium to present this item to Council. Nouman stated the wedding ceremony will be held at Greenmead and then they are hosting the reception at their home, with 35 or 40 invitees, with music and food. Meakin addressed the 1:00 a.m. end time and asked the Petitioners to adhere strictly to that time. Nouman responded they are leaving for their honeymoon early the next morning so they will most likely end early. Meakin congratulated the couple and wished them well. Meakin offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 3. REQUEST TO WAIVE THE CITY’S NOISE ORDINANCE: Tom Progar, VegMichigan Summer Festival Coordinator, re: in order to hold the third annual summer festival with live bands at Madonna University located at 36600 Schoolcraft on Sunday, August 5, 2018, from 12:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. President Toy called the Petitioner to the podium. Tom Progar, 21522 Green Hill Road, Apartment 134, Farmington Hills, VegMichigan Summer Festival Coordinator, came to the podium to present this request to Council. 4 Mr. Progar stated this is their third annual event, the first two were great successes at Madonna University. VegMichigan is a nonprofit and they partner with Madonna and hold the benefit to promote a vegan diet and the party is held for vegans to come out, listen to bands, and also hopefully interested and veggie curious about a vegan diet to come out and check out great food and a good time. He stated the bands are not loud at all and they end early. Vice President Jolly offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT Vice President Jolly thanked Mr. Progar for bringing the festival to Livonia. 4. REQUEST TO HOLD KIMBERLY OAKS CIVIC ASSOCIATION PICNIC: Venessa Lagerstrom, re: to be held Sunday, August 26, 2018, from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. at St. Rafka Church located on Lyndon and Brookfield, with no rain date requested. President Toy invited the Petitioner to the podium. Venessa Lagerstrom, 14066 Mayfield, Livonia, came to the podium to present this request to Council. She stated that Kimberly Oaks Civic Association received a grant from the City and they are utilizing those funds to hold a neighborhood picnic to get everyone together and unify their Association with the hope that it will lead to future fun events. There will be music, food, and a bounce house. Vice President Jolly offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT Vice President Jolly stated it is good to see the grant money is going to good use. President Toy stated that Vice President Jolly orchestrated the neighborhood grant program along with others on Council as well. Lagerstrom thanked the Council and stated she will send pictures of the event. 5. BLOCK PARTY: Rebecca Wilson, re: to be held Saturday, August 25, 2018, from 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Roycroft, between Levan and Comstock, with a rain date of Sunday, August 26, 2018. President Toy asked if the Petitioner was present. In her absence, Councilmember White stated that the paperwork appeared to be in order and she would offer the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. 5 White offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 6. BLOCK PARTY: Christina Zeoli, re: to be held Saturday, August 4, 2018, from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Summers, from 14074 to 34713 Summers and 14092 and 34708 Summers, with a rain date of Sunday, August 5, 2018. President Toy called the Petitioner to the podium. Christina Zeoli, 14034 Ashurst, Livonia came to the podium to present this request to Council. She stated they are requesting to block off the end of the street and this is the third or fourth year they have held the event, Stoneleigh Village Neighborhood Association. Bahr offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 7. BLOCK PARTY: Steve Luma, re: to be held Saturday, August 4, 2018, from 1:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Lancaster Street, from Hix to Knolson, with a rain date of Sunday, August 5, 2018. President Toy asked if the Petitioner was present. In his absence, Councilmember McIntyre offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda as the paperwork appeared to be in order. McIntyre offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 8. REQUEST TO WAIVE THE CITY’S NOISE ORDINANCE: Kelly Bush and Deborah Bush, re: for a wedding reception with music at their home at 31571 Bobrich on Saturday, August 25, 2018, from 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. President Toy invited the Petitioners to the podium. Kelly Bush and Deborah Bush, 31571 Bobrich, Livonia, came to the podium to present this request to Council. Deborah Bush stated that they are requesting a waiver of the noise ordinance so that they can hold her daughter Kelly’s wedding and reception in their backyard along with the two adjacent neighbors’ yards. There will be a DJ playing music from 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. President Toy asked what kind of music the DJ will be playing and Deborah responded ‘70s and ‘80s music. 6 Vice President Jolly offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 9. COLLECTION OF LIVONIA PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT TAXES FOR THE YEAR 2018: Office of the City Clerk, re: forwarding a communication from Dan Centers, Secretary of the Board of Education, requesting the City to continue to collect one-half of the district’s taxes with the summer tax collection and the remaining one-half with the winter tax collection, commencing July 1, 2018. City Clerk Susan Nash presented this request to Council. At the direction of the Chair, this item will be received and filed for the information of the Council 10. TAX RATE FOR THE SCHOOLCRAFT COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT FOR THE YEAR 2018: Office of the City Clerk, re: forwarding a communication from Dr. Glenn Cerny, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Schoolcraft College, to set the rate of tax to be levied and requesting that it be collected as a summer tax. At the direction of the Chair, this item will be received and filed for the information of the Council. 11. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE (3) JOHN DEERE FIELD RAKES AND (1) UTILITY TRAILER THROUGH THE STATE OF MICHIGAN BID PROCESS: Public Service Division, re: to upgrade equipment assigned to the Parks Maintenance Section, from budgeted funds. Jacob Rushlow, Superintendent of Public Service, presented this request to Council and stated he was appearing on behalf of his fellow superintendents. He stated he was requesting authorization from budgeted funds that were approved for the 2017 Capital Outlay Budget to purchase three John Deer 1200A Ball Diamond Groomers and one utility trailer. The equipment will be used in the Parks Maintenance section. One of the pieces of equipment will be stationed primarily at Ford Field, one at Bicentennial Park and the third one will be used on some of the other outer park diamonds which is why we need the trailer for taking it to the other locations. They will all be used for baseball and softball diamond maintenance work. Through the process they tested several pieces of equipment, these ones were chosen for their attachments for doing the ball diamond grooming. These consist of heavy duty Scarifier plow to deal with some of the wash boring that they get 7 during the process of raking the fields and a drag mat to level the material and a snow plow to push material from the high to the low spots as needed. Arrangements for payments are being done through the State purchasing contract with John Deere Equipment, we are realizing about a 28 percent discount versus what would be a retail purchase with the extended pricing here. In summary, the department is asking City Council to approve the purchase of the three John Deere 1200A Field Rakes and one utility trailer for a total sum amount of $47,109.81 through service Dealer JW Turf, Inc. out of Wixom. White offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 12. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE (1) 2019 FORD F150 4X4 SUPER CAB PICK-UP TRUCK THROUGH THE STATE OF MICHIGAN BID PROCESS: Public Service Division, re: to replace a vehicle assigned to the Forestry Section, from budgeted funds. Jacob Rushlow, Superintendent of Public Service, presented this request to Council. He stated this truck purchase was requested through budget funds from the Capital Outlay for the 2017/2018 budget year. This is a replacement of an existing piece of equipment, that existing vehicle will be disposed of through the auction process. This truck will be used in the Parks Maintenance Section and the purchase will be through the State bid process from Signature Ford of Owosso in the amount of $30,642 for the vehicle and then there’s also outfitting of the truck, snow plow, some packaging, there’s a spray-in bed liner, this is done through Rochester Hills Co-Op Award Agreement, the servicing dealer for the upfitting is Truck & Trailer and the cost for that upfitting is $14,820.00. In summary, the department is asking City Council to approve the purchase of one F150 4X4 Pick-Up Truck, for a total combined amount of $45,462.00 through the two vendors mentioned. Vice President Jolly asked if vehicles purchased with special outfitting, does it come in with the outfitting already finished or do we have to then get it to the vendor who does the outfitting. Rushlow responded he would have to defer to his co-worker for that answer. Don Rohraff, Director of Public Works, responded that when they receive the vehicles they are completely outfitted, the dealership and the outfitter work 8 together to get the truck to them and then the outfitters deliver the finished product to the City. President Toy inquired about what the truck is utilized for and Rohraff responded that this vehicle is for the Forestry Division which falls under the big umbrella of the Parks Department, so they are out there on the front line doing inspection work, tree work, marking the spots for new plantings, identifying trees that need to be removed. McIntyre offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 13. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE (4) 2019 FORD F250 SUPER CAB 4X4 PICK-UP TRUCKS THROUGH THE STATE OF MICHIGAN BID PROCESS: Public Service Division, re: to replace vehicles assigned to the Parks Section, from budgeted funds. Jacob Rushlow, Superintendent of Public Service, presented this request to Council. He stated the purchase of these four F250 Pick-up Trucks are replacements for existing vehicles and those existing vehicles will be disposed of through the auction process. These will be used in the Parks Maintenance Section, these are larger than the previous one discussed, F250 with an eight-foot bed, these will also be purchased through the State bid process from Signature Ford of Owosso in the amount of $112,788.00. They will then go through the upfitting process for plows, light packages for safety, bed liners, all of that through the MI-Deal and the servicing dealer for that will be Cannon Equipment and the cost of that servicing is $62,071.00. Meakin offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda and thanked the department for using the State of Michigan bid process for the vehicles in order to get the best pricing. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 14. REQUEST TO APPROVE WATER SERVICE CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 3 BETWEEN GREAT LAKES WATER AUTHORITY (GLWA) AND CITY OF LIVONIA: Public Service Division, re: to make minor adjustments/corrections to the original signed contract which will be in effect for the next four years until the next contract reopener. (CR 246-15) Jacob Rushlow, Superintendent of Public Service, presented this request to Council. 9 He stated this is Amendment No. 3 to the Water Service Contract between the Great Lakes Water Authority and the City of Livonia, a copy of that was provided in their packets. This amendment is done to the original model contract that was signed back in 2009 which allowed for periodic contract reopeners such as the one before them tonight to evaluate the system demands, how that’s been changing as well as to modify our projected volume and flow values for the next four years. The last amendments to that contract were done back in 2011 and again in 2014, so like I said they are periodic reopener process to look at those numbers. The Public Service Division has been working with GWLA on this model contract reopener which has produced the proposed third amendment before Council tonight. Through the reopener process the department has proposed adjustments to Exhibit B values with respect to the projected annual volume and our peak hour flow rate that’s found in the back of the amendment document. We have proposed these revisions to more accurately reflect the consumption numbers that we’ve been experiencing here in the City over the last three years. It is anticipated that the proposed changes made to the contract values here for the next four year term would have a significant positive impact on the water rates going into at least the next year. The proposed changes would be in effect for four years which would be 2019 through 2022 until the next contract reopener process starts at that time. It is the recommendation of the department that Council proceed to approve the proposed contract amendment as presented and authorize the Clerk and Mayor to execute this amendment. Bahr said he was looking forward to this item because he read the letter three or four times and he is still confused and he needs some clarification on it. We renew these contracts ahead of time and that contract sets, is it a lump sum amount that we’re going to pay for the water based on expected usage or it sets a rate and if I understand correctly what we’re finding in hindsight is that what we estimated we’re going to use more than what we actually use, is that what you’re saying? Rushlow responded that the 2009 contract, the actual meat of the contract, the legal language is a three-year contract. These contract reopeners that are done periodically are really to look at our usage as a community and usage through the GLWA Regional Water System is, how are trends projecting, is water use up or down. In the last few years, we’ve really been seeing a downturn in overall usage, especially here in the City over the last three years, we’ve seen a decrease in our water usage. What we’ve done is to propose to lower some of those values which speaking monetarily there’s an impact to what’s called our revenue requirement that we get from Great Lakes Water Authority saying we’re going to purchase X amount of water over the next four years of that contract cycle on the amendment 10 there’s a number that gets tied to that through their rate that shows what our revenue requirement is to us on an annual basis. So in the lowering of our annual volume and peak hour numbers for flow rates, we anticipate that we will see a positive going into next year’s rate season. Bahr stated that’s good news obviously but typically when you buy something in bulk you get a cheaper rate. How is it by saying we’re going to buy less that our rate goes down as well? I like the result, I’m just not understanding it. Think of it as a consumption charge, so if you’re using 1,000 gallons of water you’ll pay less than if you’re using 10,000 gallons of water. So it’s really a reduction in the amount that you’re consuming overall. Vice President Jolly asked if the Law Department had reviewed the Amendment and Rushlow responded that Mr. Fisher had looked at it and approved it, yes. McIntyre stated that she is not clear how consumption gets reduced and Rushlow responded that it’s a projected consumption and that when GLWA applies revenue requirements to the number that the City provides to them and they agree with, when they’re setting that financial value what they’re going to apply to us for a charge, it’s a projection, and it helps them to project things like power consumption, staff, similar to what we do here on the DPW internally when we’re setting our fixed fee rates for just a typical operations maintenance before even getting to the actual water charges piece of it. So by saying that we’re going to project it to use less water, we’re showing that that in turn applies to less costs to them operationally. McIntyre asked what is driving us to project that we’re using less water? Rushlow stated that they had done an analysis of the last three years of actual water sales and it was quite a bit less than what they had in their contract that was set four years earlier. So by looking at that and saying what did we really do over the last four years and we actually even went a little further back to looking at four and five years ago, too, which was a different time, too, so over the last three years we took that average number and said let’s look at the average for the last four years and then also put in a 10 percent operational buffer. If by chance, we have a really hot dry summer and we use 10 percent more that what we projected, we still have that operational buffer in there to provide us a little cushion if we use a little more. So it’s not that the City’s water usage over the next four years is going to decrease, it’s you’re better able to project our usage and our projection numbers are lower than the other rates that were in place, do I have it? Don Rohraff, Director of Public Works, stated that the reopener is a constant look back every time we have a reopener. So what they’re doing is reflecting what has our trend been over the last four years, ten years, three years, whatever range that 11 it has been is what we’re actually looking at. So we look back, the trend that we’re on is actually falling. So we’re taking the opportunity to lower our numbers to be more in line of where we’ve been and where we think we’re going moving forward in the next year or two, the next four years. And the buffer is in there in case it starts to bounce back up. Like Jacob had said, if it’s a hot, dry summer where we have an increase, we still have that range. Because if we do exceed our contractual numbers then we would be in line to possibly get a penalty. So we don’t want that. Historically we’ve always been very conservative in trying to stay above that number to not get into penalty range, but we’re very comfortable with the numbers we’ve put forth, looking back and doing the analysis, sitting down with Great Lakes Water Authority, they actually come in and they present numbers to us on what they think it would be and we were pretty close, what we had and what they presented to us. McIntyre asked what is driving a decreased water consumption in the City and Rohraff responded money, lack of watering, more water conservation through appliances and dishwashers. Meakin stated that in the old days when they were with the Detroit Water and Sewer Board, if the City lowered their consumption, it cost more money. Now, with these reopeners we can change the price and go down to a lower price for when we’re not using as much money, correct? Rohraff responded through the Chair when the contract was initially engaged back in 2009, there was a five-year window, so they had a reopener after one year to give everybody an idea of how it would go, then it went two years, then it went three years, and then it went on a five-year cycle. He stated a lot of the difference of what has happened since the transition since we formed the Authority is the transparency that’s there and the willingness to sit down and everybody talk about it as a system, all eighty-seven communities that are involved in this. Sales are declining across the board everywhere. So you’ll hear conversations about there’s five water treatment plants, they’re contemplating shutting one of those plants down, trying to right size every community to get to that point to where if they can shut down one of those plants, that’s a lot of expense that’s not getting pushed back out to the Authority and to the communities that are involved in it. So I didn’t answer your question exactly but the opportunity that we have to sit down and work with them as opposed to here’s where you’re at, here’s what the projections are, and it’s an argument going back years saying well, this isn’t when the system was being pegged on a downslide, they always wanted to keep it a little bit higher to keep that going, so I’m trying to answer that question the best I can Meakin stated then it’s a good thing, the Great Lakes Water Authority, and Rohraff responded yes. Meakin said before they were just rammed down our throat and Rohraff said yes, that they actually have three chairs, and that he’s a co-chair, one of six in southeast Michigan that sits down and works with Great Lakes Water Authority along with all the other communities as a Wayne County Representative, 12 so when I say transparency, it’s also the open willingness to be able to sit down and actually know that your voice is being heard. So, yes, to your question it’s much better. Bahr stated he had one last question and that is when they reopen these every three, four, five years, is this typical to see something like this or is it sometimes up, sometimes it’s down as far as when you look at actual versus projected? I like to budget more than I think because I’d rather be surprised in a good way than a bad way, is this an example of that? And do we typically see this? Rohraff responded going back that he was involved with every reopener that the City has had, I didn’t sign the actual model contract, that happened the year before I got here, but every year that we’ve had the opportunity for reopener, we’ve lowered our numbers every year. And again, I think that’s system wide with every community, if they take the time to do the analysis, follow it, trend it, it’s falling. So this is just another step in the process of trying to right size our numbers and make sure what we’re paying is as close with being conservative enough to not fall into a range that could get us into trouble. Bahr commented that it is ironic that this discussion is taking place when Council just voted on water rates earlier tonight. He said he wanted to take this opportunity to comment that Don Rohraff is one of the people in the City who are on the front line and this is exactly the type of thing that I mentioned earlier, and he commended Rohraff for his time in working on this item. Meakin offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 15. REQUEST TO AUTHORIZE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION AND EXPENDITURE: Engineering Division, re: for the 2018 Asphalt Road Paving Program for the DPW Parking Lot Reconstruction Project for an additional $349,322.00 and revise contract total to $2,796,663.55. (Contract 18-A) (CR 109- 18) Todd Zilincik, City Engineer, presented this request to Council. He stated they have an opportunity to take advantage of Nagle Paving who is the asphalt contractor for this year. The maintenance fleet building is in need of repairs around the perimeter of that facility and along the north side of the Roads barn. Taking advantage of funding that was budgeted for this project, it allows them to repair the asphalt barriers around the building as they park vehicles and bring in maintenance vehicles at that location along with the employee parking lot which is in disrepair. He is asking to waive the formal bidding process, increase the amount of $349,322.00 for Contract 18-A and allow Nagle Paving to go ahead and move forward with the improvements as shown on the attached copy of the letter that 13 was given to Council. He stated this is project is a long time overdue and it will provide a parking lot that is save for the employees and also safe for servicing vehicles. Bahr stated he does not question the need for it at all but asked if the budget was underestimated. Zilincik replied that they are using pricing afforded under Contract 18-A by increasing the contract and following the unit prices included in Contract 18-A. He stated that under Contract 18-A, it was approved for 2.47 million and the new contract amount will now be $2,796,663.55 million. McIntyre offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 16. REQUEST TO APPROVE AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CHARTER COUNTY OF WAYNE AND THE CITY OF LIVONIA: Engineering Division, re: for the resurfacing of Inkster Road from Six Mile Road to Seven Mile Road with the proposed City’s participation to be estimated at 4.54% in the amount of $48,297.00. Todd Zilincik, City Engineer, presented this request to Council. Zilincik stated that this is for the resurfacing of Inkster Road from Six Mile to Seven Mile Road in the amount of $48,297.00, of which they are asking for 50% up front for this project. He stated the portion on the other side of Inkster Road will be handled through Wayne County which is in Redford Township. He indicated he will be putting some information on the website, they are anticipating beginning the th project on June 19 and it will go through mid September with this project. He stated the contractor for this project is Cadillac Asphalt who recently did the Plymouth Road from Farmington to Telegraph project and also Farmington Road from Seven to Eight Mile Road. He stated he is looking forward to working with them and Wayne County on this project. White offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 17. REQUEST TO RESCIND COUNCIL RESOLUTION 169-13 WHICH ACCEPTED JURISDICTION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STORM SEWER WITHIN THE PARZ-SAVILLE ROW SITE CONDOMINIUMS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF JOY ROAD, JUST WEST OF WAYNE ROAD; REQUEST TO ADVISE THE WAYNE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES (PERMIT SECTION) THAT THE CITY HAS APPROVED THE STORM SEWER PLANS AND WILL ACCEPT JURISDICTION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STORM SEWER 14 WITHIN SAID PROPERTY; AND REQUEST TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY ENGINEER TO EXECUTE A WAYNE COUNTY PERMIT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY: Engineering Division, re: for the Parz-Saville Row Site Condominiums located in the Southwest ¼ of Section 33 and for Saville Row Homeowners Association to reimburse the City for any such maintenance that may become necessary. Todd Zilincik, City Engineer, presented this request to Council. Zilincik stated at the request of the Law Department, through Mike Fisher, the Engineering Department is asking the City Council to look at the consideration of rescinding Council Resolution #169-13 that was adopted back on June 13, 2013. If the Council accepts it, the costs will pass on to the homeowner’s association and not the developer which was preapproved. He stated there was a revised storm water maintenance agreement signed by Nick Kostoff who is the president of the homeowners association. Judy Coleman,17386 Farmington Road, Livonia, 48152, who represents Brad and Kelly Pinkham who are two of the homeowners and are officers on the homeowners association as well, with their address being 8858 Saville Row and who have concerns about the last line of the agreement which passes the liability and the costs to the homeowners association if there’s something wrong with this storm drain. At one point or another they had requested that it be camera’d because something had been poured into it. The problem is that the relationship with the developer has been toxic and they have gone back and forth on these issues and have not gotten that particular issue resolved. So the continuing concern is if the cost is passed on to them and there is some sort of environmental liability or some huge cost, it’s going to end up back in their laps. They had brought it up to the developer on numerous occasions that they wanted the drain camera’d. She also pointed out that apparently Wayne County never really approved or inspected the drain and doesn’t know what the protocol is on that. The real issue is if there is some sort of environmental liability or really costly repair that needs to be done because of things that were being dumped in this storm sewer, there will be major liability that will fall onto the homeowners association and the homeowners so they are in disagreement with the President of the association for saying they will take over liability for this. Brad Pinkham, 8858 Saville Row, Vice President of the homeowners association, stated that this issue which would pass costs on to the owners of the five homes in the association, stated they witnessed when the house next door was being built that the contractors poured some grout or cement down the sewer. He stated he pointed that out to the developer by email, by phone, by text, and never got a satisfactory reply. He went on to say they subsequently contacted the DEQ who said it needed to be investigated and suggested that a scope be put down. He indicated that he was under the impression that the president of the homeowners 15 association would have to get approval of the rest of the board in order to act on behalf of the association and that was not done. Vice President Jolly appreciates the concerns but feels that their Board needs to make some sort of resolution and determination before this matter is brought to Council. He asked Pinkham if his understanding was correct, that Pinkham stated that the President agreed on behalf of the Board to do something and Pinkham said that was what he did state. Jolly continued on by saying it sounds like that’s an issue through the Board and would have no problem looking at the situation or looking into it further, but doesn’t believe an individual board member has the authority to speak on behalf of the association at this point. Pinkham responded by saying that Kostoff did not have authority to represent the association singularly. Jolly stated that the Board needs to figure this out and come before Council one way or another before asking City Council to act on the matter. Paul Bernier, City Attorney, agreed with Jolly’s statement and indicated he had a discussion with Mr. Zilincik today and talked about this issue and other issues dealing with this development. There may be problems within how the Board isn’t communicating with each other and not following their own internal policies. He continued by stating that if the Board’s internal bylaws call for a majority vote but the President of the association signed off on it and as a City that is what they look as he’s the representative of the Board. Now, I don’t know what their internal bylaws say because it’s not a real concern of the City’s at this point, it may be something that Council wants to take into consideration when making a decision on this, whether or not the citizens or residents are happy with it. But as far as the actual legal, that’s an internal matter for their own Board, their own condo association. Coleman responded that she can see where Bernier is coming from by saying that but the problem in her legal opinion means that the City Council can’t make a decision either way on this because you’ve been presented something by the President saying one thing and you’re being told by the Vice President something else. So either way Council would have to have something proving that the association agreed on this. Vice President Jolly stated he respects Coleman’s opinion but does not agree. He said when the original agreement was made, the president appeared who had apparent authority on behalf of the association which the City took on face value. At this point it only further complicates things to take the Vice President as having that apparent authority as well. He stated he is not comfortable acting on this item and said he thinks they should do something on their side as a Board resolution. 16 Pinkham replied by saying he is not intending to say that he has the authority to override what the President said or that his opinion should be considered but Council believed he was representing everybody but he wasn’t. Coleman stated that she understood that Jolly’s statements were in agreement with what she had stated, that Council couldn’t really do anything either way and that is all they want. Jolly replied by saying if the President appeared as the President of the Association and agreed to something as the President of the Association, there needs to be some kind of action on behalf of the Association to come back and ask to do something else. He stated he doesn’t believe that asking to rescind something at this point is not appropriate and there has to be some type of action or resolution from their Board indicating who speaks on behalf of the Board. Bernier stated at some point in time the responsibility is going to go back on the residents, the condo association, and that it’s not a question of if, it’s a question of when. Unfortunately, this development has had a long story past, and there were a lot of hurt feelings on both sides on this matter and the Law Department had entered into negotiations with both the President and the attorney for the development on this matter. So it should be as simple as who is going to take responsibility of the system we’re talking about now but unfortunately a lot of other items are getting also enmeshed with and intertwined with it. He stated that he knows Mr. Zilincik has a difference of opinion on the scoping and the examining, the flushing out, the jetting of the system, he’s had different suggestions on that and in some respects Mr. Zilincik also wants to make sure the system is operational and he doesn’t have problems with it. Bahr asked through the Chair to Mr. Zilincik, did he understand Mr. Bernier’s statement that said it’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when. Is this type, when we take jurisdiction over something like this when it’s first being developed and then is it typical for any development like this to at some point get passed back? Zilincik responded by saying that Council approved the Wayne County Permit back in 2013, and he was going to forward it down to Wayne County once he got the clean bill of health. Typically they hold a soil erosion bond and once the developer has cleaned and jetted the system making sure there are no other issues other than the sediment there it needs to be taken out or if there’s a cracked pipe that needs to be fixed, that way the residents are protected, then they’re all set, then they can take it over for future maintenance of that facility. Their contention is fourteen years later five to seven houses have been developed, they want to be assured before this agreement goes in place and he’s sure they’ll be happy to take it over and there is a clean bill of health, he can send it down to Wayne County and everybody is happy. But until that point in time he can’t do anything because stuff has been intertwined in trying to get resolution to this, he will do his job and 17 make sure it gets down to Wayne County upon completion and acceptance as required by the developer. Bahr so what is it about this that makes it unclear whether it’s a clean bill of health? Zilincik responded that the developer has, just like the lighting, people don’t want to pay more than 50 bucks for lighting, dragging their feet, Dave Lear, Assistant Engineer, provided information for people to clean the system, it never transpired and it’s back to an argument that it’s not my responsibility, it should be the homeowner’s responsibility. Bahr stated if he understands correctly, from a legal perspective the President speaks for the Association, so that has standing in itself, but it’s really up to we as a Council, he from a legal perspective has to look at it one way and we as a Council can do what we want here, do I understand you correctly that from a legal perspective you see the President having a standing but from a personal perspective as a councilman you kind of want to give it some time for them to sort things out, is that what you’re trying to get across. Jolly responded in the affirmative, stating that when someone presents themselves in the capacity of the President of a Board, the other side of that conversation accepts them as having the apparent authority to agree on behalf of the Board. Whether or not that approval takes place on the Board side or not, I don’t necessarily know that that’s our concern in that instance, I’m not saying any of this is right in terms of the situation that happened at your end. At this point now that they’re asking us to rescind something that the Board apparently had agreed to or the Association apparently had agreed to, I think it’s overly complicated in the grand scheme of things if you do have civil issues out there, it complicates them. And then at the end of the day, the City is rescinding something that was already agreed to by one party and the other party is not here, it’s overly complicated. I’m not saying we’re not going to do anything in the long run with this but I’m just saying on a first pass here at a study meeting tonight, I’m not ready to move forward at all. At a bare minimum, we need further information, I’d like to hear from our Law Department in terms of get a legal opinion of what we’re dealing with, but I’m not ready to act, offer any kind of approval for rescinding something that happened in the past based on the set of facts before us. Bernier stated that he is offering a humble suggestion to the Council, a matter that may be something should be taken up in a closed meeting. There are other agreements, there are different agreements that we were negotiating as a Law Department with the developer and the Association also. There has been since this has been such an ongoing problem there have been on various sides threats of litigation on the matter and I hesitate to discuss the entire settlement agreement on it. That is a matter I think Council should be aware of and I think Mr. Zilincik agrees with that. While it doesn’t affect this ultimate question of who’s going to take responsibility, it is something that Council should also be aware of. 18 Bahr said he thinks he still has the floor technically but that he would offer a resolution to send this matter to a Closed Committee of the Whole Meeting. Meakin asked through the Chair to the Law Department if they can do a Closed Committee of the Whole Meeting that doesn’t involve the lawsuit particular to us. Bernier responded that the City are potential litigants in this matter. We can’t discuss it, while I don’t think we’re legally responsible or allegations that there could be potential litigation against the City of Livonia and this agreement could have an effect on it. Jolly stated that he hopes that he hopes that everybody understands that they are not trying to complicate this more. Pinkham responded that there is obviously things they’re not aware of. Jolly asked Pinkham if he knows that the City could have believed that person had authority to do so and Pinkham responded yes. Jolly stated he doesn’t want to complicate things at this time further. Madam President, at this point I would offer three resolutions, an approving and a denying and a Closed Committee Meeting of the Whole. Bernier suggested to make a motion for the Committee of the Whole and he’ll talk to Mr. Fisher and they will make the request if it’s appropriate to have a closed session. White stated she is in agreement with getting a more detailed opinion on the ability to hold a Closed Committee and keep it as a Committee of the Whole until they get that. Coleman stated that they are not involved in any litigation currently with the City and wanted everyone to know that. Toy summarized that the resolutions on the table were an approval, a denial and a Committee of the Whole, and the Law Department will determine whether that will be closed or not. Bernier stated it may make more sense to offer a Committee of the Whole recommendation first and whether that becomes a closed session or not and then from there they might have a little more direction on where Council wants to proceed on the approval or denial sometime later. 19 Jolly stated to clarify the record that if they were to have a Committee of the Whole Meeting on this matter as has been proposed, that meeting itself could not become a closed meeting. A closed meeting may be suggested out of that meeting. Bernier stated this is something that has been going on for years and that he doesn’t think it’s necessary, although they do want to close the door on this, there is no need to make a decision tonight on it so the Committee of the Whole is a wise choice for Council. Coleman asked for clarification on the direction and President Toy described the possible choices. Kritzman stated that he wanted to make sure that the people at the podium understood that the Committee of the Whole offers them the opportunity to have a little more back and forth dialogue with Council and that obviously there is a lot of history with this particular development that they need to wrap their heads around as well. He further described the make-up of the Committee of the Whole and the benefits of utilizing it in this matter. Bahr offered the resolution to refer this matter to the Committee of the Whole. DIRECTION: 1) APPROVING 2) DENYING 3) COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 18. WAIVER PETITION: Planning Commission, re: Petition 2018-04-02-09 submitted by Allyson Andrews to operate a child day care center (Andrews Angels Academy) on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Purlingbrook and Merriman Roads (30931 Seven Mile Road) in the Northwest ¼ of Section 11. At the direction of the Chair, because the Petitioner was not present at the meeting, this agenda item was moved to the next Study Meeting of Council. 19. WAIVER PETITION: Planning Commission, re: Petition 2018-05-02-11 submitted by CESO, Inc. to renovate the existing Speedway gas station, including demolition of the existing building, construction of a new gas station and the operation of a limited service restaurant (Speedy Café) at the northwest corner of Seven Mile and Newburgh Roads (37416 Seven Mile Road) in the Southeast ¼ of Section 6. Mark Taormina presented this request to Council. He stated that this involves the complete reconstruction of the Speedway Gas Station at the corner of Seven Mile and Newburgh Roads. The gas station currently has a store that is roughly 2,413 square feet in size, that would be removed and replaced with a new store in the same general location that would be about 2,600 square feet and would still remain about 19 feet off the north property 20 line for those of you familiar property line there is the Fountain Plaza that is zoned C-2 located immediately to the north of this property. Office Zones are dental office to the west and some residential homes to the west as well. The new gas station site would include a series of new seven pumps that would run parallel along Seven Mile Road with the capacity to accommodate 28 vehicles, so it would be a substantial increase relative to the number of patrons using the pumps at this location. The Petitioner described to the Planning Commission this would provide much greater efficiency with respect for the use and the operations at this location. This would also represent an increase in the amount of parking available on the site, the Ordinance requires 32 parking spaces, this plan shows for 37 spaces and the slight surplus in parking is also to accommodate the plaza to the north because what this does is add 50 additional feet to the gas station property so currently they have 200 feet of frontage on Seven Mile Road, this would increase it to 250 feet and by doing that it moves some of the parking available to the strip mall to the north but through the cross parking access agreement and a connection via the north, that parking would be available for both uses. As indicated the pumps would be located pretty much parallel to Seven Mile Road, the canopy is fully conforming with respect to its placement on the site and setbacks from both Seven Mile and Newburgh Road, however the height of the canopy is slightly greater than what the Ordinance allows, that being a limitation of 18 feet and the canopy here extends to a height of 21 feet. This is consistent with the existent canopy that will be removed. The resolution indicates that approval of the excess height would have to go back to the Zoning Board of Appeals for approval, however the Council does have the authority to waive that height requirement. One change to the prepared resolution would be that a separate resolution be presented to Council should this move forward that would allow for that increased height. There is a small café, this follows the model throughout much of their sites, offers a small café with seating for 17, those seats are in the interior of the restaurant, the small patio provided in the southeast corner, there is a semi enclosed outdoor sales area so all of the ice machines, the propane exchange machines, those things are now going to be located on the west side of the building under a semi- enclosed or walled in area that is adjacent to the trash enclosure which is at the southwest corner of the building as well. The one issue that does require Zoning Board of Appeals approval is the signage. So the Ordinance allows 100 square feet of signs that can be placed either on the face of the building or on the fascia of the canopy. This plan shows the number of signs both on the building and on the fascia of the canopy totaling about 125 square feet, so that is something that will require Zoning Board of Appeals approval. And with that, Madam Chair, I would be happy to answer any questions. Mandy Gauss, CESO, Inc. 13060 Old US 27, Dewitt, MI 48820, came to the podium. She stated that she appreciates the Council having them at the meeting to look at the site. She indicated that this will be a complete rebuild of the site, so all the underground storage tanks, all the piping, everything will be coming out and all brand new technology will be coming back in. When they do that CESO has its 21 own environmental team that will be there monitoring everything, if anything needs to be remediated at that time they take care of it while it’s opened up. Just to kind of give you an idea, everything from above and below ground will be coming out and all new technology will be going back in. So it definitely will be a nice upgrade to the site. The configuration, you don’t think you’ll get a lot more use, however with the other existing site, it is currently a stacked canopy so the dispensers are actually lined up and down next to each other, so for vehicles to get in and access a lot of times you have to wait for another vehicle to clear or you’re trying to pull around, trying to get in and out, by allowing and having the additional width and going to what’s referred to as a dive-in canopy, it does allow for a lot more maneuvering on site and it also allows for the parking in front of the building. There area again three spaces that are set aside basically for the site to the north so they’re not deficient on parking. So actually 36 is required and they have 37, so there is one additional space as well. The outdoor seating area is over to the east side of the building, that has eight seats, they are permanent tables, they are bolted down, the umbrellas are like a metal umbrella so for maintenance it is clean, they will look nice, they will maintain it and keep it up very nice. And there is also a fence around that area to help protect it from vehicles and try to delineate the outdoor seating area from the parking area. There is the outdoor storage area on the west side of the building, that is going to be screen height wall, it will screen everything that will be within that area will be below the height of that wall, so it will not be visible from Bethany or Seven Mile or Newburgh. There will be access to it along the front between the building and storage area, the sidewalk is open so there is not a wall on this front side but it will be screened by the building so it can be accessed to get ice and propane in that location but without having the visibility of it. Access wise we are removing one of the access drives on Seven Mile Road and also modifying the access drive on Newburgh to be a right in, right out, and that was determined based on a traffic study that was prepared. She stated that storm water, currently there is no storm water on site but there will be an underground detention system and it will be discharging over Seven Mile Road. She welcomed questions from Council. McIntyre stated she means no disrespect, but she wondered what the restaurant will look like as she doesn’t think she has visited a Speedway with a restaurant. Gauss replied that it is newer to Michigan, what it is is a Speedy Café, and she stated there is one across from her office and that she eats there probably two to three times a week. It is super convenient, inexpensive and tastes great. There 22 is no deep fryer, it’s all a convection oven, grill type set-up. You walk up, there’s a touch screen and you custom order what you want. They have breakfast sandwiches, panini’s, pizzas, fries, a variety of stuff. So you touch screen your order, how you want it cooked and what you want on it, you go and get your beverages, you go up and pay and before you get back it’s ready to go. It is actually very fast, convenient and it allows you to customize and it’s not to be in the window for however long. McIntyre thanked her for the explanation. Bahr inquired about the right in, right out on Newburgh and asked how it was different than what it is today. Gauss stated it does sit further north on the site today than it will in the proposed plan and currently she knows it doesn’t 100 percent function from the study that was conducted. Bahr stated he understands moving it closer to the intersection. He then inquired where the air pumps are, saying she stated it was in a walled in section? Gauss responded the walled in area was for the propane and the ice machine and she pointed out where the free air pumps will be located along the curb line. Bahr asked from a parking perspective with the proposed 37 spaces, that is clearly more than what is there today which is 14, and the Speedy Café seats 17, he’s assuming that does not mean 17 cars, but questioned whether that many spaces were needed. Taormina replied that that is to satisfy the Ordinance both for this site and the retail site to the north. So the Ordinance will allow for the easement between to satisfy the parking requirements. Also, if you look at the aerial photograph currently there’s parking that extends, it’s part of the lot, the area behind the store, but nonetheless it was required to satisfy the parking behind the shopping center. The requirements of parking in this case are based on two functions, the retail operation within the convenience store and the seating within the café, so combined that’s what is required. Bahr stated the retail operation is not significantly bigger than today and Gauss responded the existing store is 2,413 square feet and the new one is going to 4,608 square feet. Bahr asked why is it that parking to the north is required and Taormina replied that they purchased the westerly 50 feet and if you look at the aerial photograph right now the Fountain Plaza includes that portion of the property extending all the way to Seven Mile. 23 Toy inquired where they could see one of these Speedy Cafes and Gauss responded there is one on Old 27 just north of 69 and Taormina stated there is one at Plymouth and Farmington. Toy asked if there would outside eating in the winter and Gauss stated no, but there is seating inside for the café. Toy then inquired how far back to that building as it approaches the property where the Brass Mug is at and Taormina responded that the relationship between the two buildings will basically remain the same, the separation between the two. The difference being with the larger building is it will extend a little bit further west and east on the property but the distance between the buildings is the same. Toy asked how will parking be accomplished if you park behind the building and Gauss replied that their parking lot does surround their building, that you could park at any one of the locations and get to the sidewalk to access the building. Meakin asked if the Petitioner had any plans to add alcohol to their store and Gauss replied if anything it would be a beer cave, she knows that recently some of the gas stations have gone to that, however in past discussions there is a liquor store too close that they would not be able to get a license here if she remembers correctly when they discussed it early on. Meakin asked if she would object to put a condition into the approval that there can be no liquor license as well. Bahr offered the approving resolution including Councilmember Meakin’s condition. DIRECTION: APPROVING REGULAR NO LIQUOR LICENSE AUDIENCE COMMUNICATION: None. As there were no further questions or comments, President Toy adjourned the Study Session at 9:45 p.m. on Monday, June 18, 2018. DATED: July 2, 2018 SUSAN M. NASH CITY CLERK