Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-10-05 CITY OF LIVONIA — CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF STUDY MEETING HELD OCTOBER 5, 2020 Meeting was called to order via Zoom remote technology at 8:20 p.m. by President Kathleen McIntyre. Present: Laura Toy, Scott Bahr, Cathy White, Brandon McCullough, Rob Donovic, Jim Jolly, and Kathleen McIntyre. Absent: None. Councilmember Toy led the meeting in the Invocation. Elected and appointed officials present: Mark Taormina, Director of Planning and Economic Development; Todd Zilincik, City Engineer; Paul Bernier, City Attorney; Susan Nash, City Clerk; Casey O'Neil, Director of Information Systems; Ted Davis, Superintendent of Parks and Recreation; and Doug Moore, Assistant Director of Public Works President McIntyre announced there is New Data on Agenda Item No 6. Councilmember Jolly wished his son a happy first day of kindergarten. President McIntyre wished all Livonia Public School students good luck on their return to the classroom. AUDIENCE COMMUNICATION None heard. NEW BUSINESS 1. BLOCK PARTY: Christina Engler, re: to be held Saturday, October 31, 2020, from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Wisconsin Street, between Hubbard and Colorado, with no rain date requested. The applicant not being presented, Councilmember Jolly stated that it looks like all of the paperwork is in order and he then offered an approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. Vice President Bahr indicated that the request should be worded as between Hubbard and Ohio Street, not Hubbard and Colorado. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 2. AWARD OF CONTRACT: Department of Public Works, re: for the 2021-2022 Right- of-Way Section Street Tree Trimming/Emergency Response and Emergency Removal Program, with a two-year possible extension, from budgeted funds. Doug Moore, Assistant Director of Public Works, presented this request to Council. He stated that the Department is asking Council to consider a tree trimming contract with Boom Development who does business as Sod Solutions. It's a two- 2 year contract with a possible two year extension based on our wishes. Boom Development has been doing the tree trimming contract for us since 2013 and before that they did a couple right-of-way removals, tree removal programs, and a park tree removal program. We had a pre-bid meeting for the tree trim contract on September 9th. We had two contractors come to the meeting. The bid opening was done via Zoom on September 16th and we had two bids. Sod Solutions bid was based on the section trimming for the sections that we had in the two years of the program but we are asking Council to approve $360,000.00 a year because we cannot quantify numbers real well for our call-in tree trim requests that we get from residents, nor the emergency response when you have storms that roll through or trees that need to be taken down because of emergency situations. Based on the last several years we feel that $360,000.00 is enough funds to do the work each year that we've done the past many years. Councilmember White stated there was a gentleman that came to the Regular Meeting with a concern about trees that block stop signs and yield signs and that sort of thing, that present some kind of a traffic hazard and he was not real pleased with the fact that the obligation is on the homeowner to contact the Department of Public Works to get that tree trimmed. So the question was raised in the meeting does your department ever go out and proactively try to deal with these situations before a homeowner needs to call, so if you see, your staff sees issues would you just take care of that on your own initiative? Moore replied that the Councilmember McCullough had a conversation about this last week because he raised the question from a friend of his. And the picture that came in was a sign that would have been visible had they gone about another 10- feet. We do take care of trees that obstruct any sign that's in the right-of-way, whether it be a stop sign, a yield sign, any kind of informational signs if they are on a Livonia maintained road. The County is responsible for main roads. If we have crews that are out and see something, we've had our crews call and say hey, there's a sign that's obstructed, come out and take care of it. We take complaints from residents for it and we either send our crew out or we will send the contracted services crews out to take care of it. Sometimes it's private trees that do that, in most instances if we don't have time to do it we'd ask Ordinance to make contact with the residents to clear the sign. If not, we will go out and clear the sign. We do not leave it up to homeowners to take care of it, if we know about them we will go out and take care of them. The issue with 320 miles of City roads and many, many, many signs is it's not something that is normally seen every day, we do depend on help do them. If somebody sees something we would appreciate the phone calls to come in. Councilmember White thanked Moore for the explanation. Councilmember Toy asked if the allocation is a new means of handling the contract and Moore replied he is not sure but that he knows in the past they have tried to quantify these numbers better and he thinks this year, based on the last few years, 3 they've asked for a little bit more money because it seems like every year these requests come in, this year especially because a lot of people are home, they're looking out their windows, there's tree issues, we've been able to do a lot more work, and the extra funds are helpful to do the work that we simply need to get done. Councilmember Toy commended Moore and his department for doing a terrific job for picking up the debris that we all have from our yards, etc., and she then offered an approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 3. REQUEST TO APPROVE CONTRACT WITH TIVITY HEALTH: Parks and Recreation; re: to provide Silver Sneaker memberships at the Jack E. Kirksey Recreation Center for eligible senior participants. Ted Davis, Superintendent of Parks and Recreation, presented this request to Council. He stated the Parks and Recreation Commission is asking Council's approval to enter into an agreement with Tivity Health. They are the exclusive provider of the Silver Sneaker membership, this has been a popular program previously with the YMCA, there's a number of local facilities in the area, but with the Y's closure, it seemed like a highlighted need for our offering it in the future. This is a reimbursement program based upon your medical insurance provider. We are reimbursed $2.50 per visit with a cap of $20.00 per month for each individual, again, based on their attendance at the facility. There's no out of pocket expense for us, there's no out-of-pocket expense for the Silver Sneakers participating. We're asking that Council agree to this membership, Law has already reviewed this and it is acceptable to them, and I'd be happy to answer any questions Council may have. Councilmember Jolly congratulated Davis on always going the extra mile to make these relationships and these partnerships work and he then offered an approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Toy asked if there was an age category for Silver Sneakers and Davis replied he believes the age is 62. President McIntyre asked Davis for an update on the reopening of the Rec Center. Davis stated that everything pretty much at the Rec Center is reopened. They have expanded the fit hub nicely into the former gymnastics space. If you haven't been there, the Rec Center looks significantly different than it did last time they were open in March. The lobby is effectively empty. The fit hub is spread out. There is 10-feet of space between equipment. When you enter you are greeted in with a touchless thermometer actually that scans your temperature and really is so much overkill this piece of equipment, so technologically advanced. They are still operating under strict capacity limits throughout the entire facility, right now they 4 are at 250 maximum at one given time. They have not approached that yet. To the best of his knowledge they have not exceeded 400 people in a day visiting the Rec Center yet. President McIntyre asked Davis what the full capacity was pre-Covid and Davis replied that their full Fire Marshal building capacity is 3,000 but a lot of that is not what we call usable space, you're including the viewing area for the lap pool, you're including the lobby area, you're including every classroom. So, again, our total building capacity is 3,000. President McIntyre asked if it was still open to members only and Davis replied they are still keeping that to members only at this time. They are continuing to look at it, they want to see what happens when we get a cold snap here and what our numbers look like before we open this up to nonmembers of the facility. And it's simply because we don't want to have to go back and forth on something. Once we allow nonmembers in, we don't want to have to go back and say we had too many people so now we need to go back and go in a different direction, I don't think it's fair for anyone. So, as much as it pains us all to not allow nonmembers in, that's probably our best decision at this point in time. President McIntyre asked if there were any occurrences of people presenting with a fever and not allowed to enter and Davis replied no, to his knowledge they have not had any participants come in and scan a fever and be denied entry. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 4. REQUEST TO BECOME A CERTIFIED GOVERNMENT (CLG) THROUGH THE MICHIGAN STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE (MSHPO): Historic Preservation Commission; re: to promote historic preservation and qualify the City of Livonia to apply to MSHPO for grants set aside exclusively for CLGs. Ted Davis, Superintendent of Parks and Recreation, presented this request to Council. He stated he will try his best to keep it simple here, this motion simply gives the City of Livonia access to additional grant funding is the simplest, easiest way to put this. It is again a designation outlined by the Michigan State Historical Preservation Office, it simply shows the City's commitment to preserving our historical facilities which I think we have consistently done and Greenmead is a fine example of that. This comes to us really from the Historic Preservation Commission's interest in this and again, this does give us access to additional grant money in promoting and preserving our historic property. Councilmember Toy asked Davis if there were any strings attached to this and Davis replied there is not, it is simply confirmed our already confirmed and might I say our ordinances already state this, that we are following best practices with regard to historic preservation. 5 Toy then offered an approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 5. WAIVER PETITION: Planning Commission, re: Petition 2020-07-02-06, submitted by Ed Buison, re: to operate a limited service restaurant with drive-up window facilities (Biggby Coffee)within the Livonia Crossroads retail center, located on the southeast corner of Middlebelt and Plymouth Road (11502 Middlebelt Road) in the Northwest '/4 of Section 36. Mark Taormina, Director of Planning and Economic Development, presented this request to Council. He stated this is the Livonia Crossroads Shopping Center located at the southeast corner of Middlebelt and Plymouth Road, it's a multi- tenant shopping complex, about 23,000 square feet in overall size. The unit that is being considered this evening is here in the northeast corner of the shopping center complex. That would be a Biggby's Coffee that would occupy roughly 1,700 square feet. It would serve as a limited service restaurant by its definition, it would contain a total of 24 interior seats. There are no plans for any outdoor seating. But what the Planning Commission spent a considerable amount of time going over this with the Petitioner and the owner of the shopping center was the inclusion of a drive-up window facility. Because this small is built to accommodate a drive- up facility, a number of changes had to be made or will have to made in order to accommodate this aspect of the petition. So, the way traffic would circulate around the site would be around the south and around the east side of the building. This is effectively an alleyway that is behind the shopping complex used mostly for deliveries as well as access to the trash enclosure. But with some modifications the Petitioner is hoping to have enough space in order to accommodate the drive- up as well as the bypass lane so there will be ample room for stacking of vehicles along the east side of the building. There will be an order window located generally here on the east elevation of the building and then the pick-up window would be located further north right at the edge of the building here and exit to Plymouth Road. What's difficult to tell from this drawing is the complete reiteration of the parking facility. If you go back to the aerial photograph you'll see how the parking is arranged today, really not conducive to facilitating traffic to the drive aisles, to serve as the lanes to go to the drive-up facility. So what they would do is reorient all of the parking spaces, add landscape islands in several locations within the site. And then along the east side of the building they would make a number of changes. The utility meters would be moved to inside the building. The doors that access along the back of the unit would either be relocated or removed or windows added so that it would minimize the chance of any interference with the cars that are driving along the back here. The dumpster area would be shifted slightly closer to the building, it would have a full enclosure and time to pick-up would be limited so as not to interfere with the hours of operation of the other businesses and in particular the drive-up operation. A mirror would also be added, a couple of mirrors so it would face, there's a building around this corner, as well as there would be directional signs, small directional signs place at three locations within the parking 6 lot in order to direct motorists to the drive-up lanes. A full detailed landscape plan was provided with the application that was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and here's a cross-sectional view so you get a sense of what the distance is between the building and the drive-up would be, this is on the left-hand side here, and then the adjoining building to the east which is roughly 24-feet away. You can see the separation between the actual drive-thru lane and the bypass lane. So this comes to you with an approving recommendation by the Planning Commission and I'll be happy to answer any questions. Councilmember McCullough stated that the first time he looked at this plan and he knows planning kind of did the same thing, the use of having a drive-thru, it's kind of unique and I'm all for unique development sites but I had to take a double look and I know planning took a double look and had multiple study sessions. For anybody that's familiar with the property, the Family Buggy used to be in there next to the Play It Again Sports and just seeing the enhancements that are proposed on the site plan, and some of the safety concerns that have been addressed to the drive-thru, I think that this update might help the site, especially with I know Disc Replay is in there, I absolutely love Biggby Coffee. So, after further review, I think that the overall site enhancements they are bringing along with the site plan, forget things from an economic perspective for this site, so if there are no objections I'd be happy to offer an approving resolution for Consent. Councilmember Donovic stated he frequents this shopping center often and in its current form, the unit that's being proposed for the Biggby Coffee is vacant and if it's not vacant, there's multiple different businesses that come and go throughout there. I think Biggby Coffee would be a great idea right there, there used to be across the street, that was ran by a corporate office, this would be ran by a local resident, my understanding, and this individual also owns one down the street and I really believe there's something to be said about being a local owner as opposed to a large chain. I think that the enhancement to the parking lot is a huge condition. I think that's a great win for the actual site itself and the customers, if you've been there recently, the parking lot is not functional the way that the parking pads are situated. It's just very difficult, confusing to park in there. We're talking about adding a bunch of trees and it looks like some curb there to kind of separate the parking lots and islands. The only thing I want to know is when you're making that left turn, this may be a question for Mr. Taormina or the Petitioner that I believe is with us, the building to the east, in its current form, it's open, there's no separation of the parking lot. Is there going to any curb added along there to separate the two parking lots in the bottom right corner where you start to make that left turn or is that just going to be open and just add some yellow striped lines to kind of help guide people to the left as opposed to going straight into the parking to the southern part of the building, I believe it's a mattress warehouse right now. Taormina stated in this particular case that stays open because there is a cross access agreement between the two properties, and, in fact, the garbage disposal truck relies on access from that property to get access to the trash enclosure. I 7 see Mike Houbba, the owner, as well as Ed Buison, the franchisee are both available to provide additional information on that subject. Donovic then asked about the eastern most part of the building where the drive- thru proposal would be, will that wall be repainted? I mean, looking at it, it's very old and doesn't look very good, so I'm hoping that that could be something that the Petitioner takes into consideration for the beautification of the building to make sure that they paint that they paint that outer most wall so that the drive-thru patrons have a better experience. Mike Houbba, Taylor Investments, 9018 Telegraph Road, Taylor, Michigan, 48180 stated that in regard to the question that Mr. Taormina answered about cross access, that's necessary to remain open and also we have an easement agreement for the cross access between both properties. And to answer the second question Councilmember Donovic had, absolutely they are looking into either painting that brick wall or some sort of power wash that would bring out the natural color of the brick because it is a solid core brick all the way through. Ed Buison, Petitioner, stated that Mr. Taormina did an excellent job as always in explaining their plans and then Mike, the owner, addressed the south wall. The whole goal is to redefine the property because that is really one of the highest profile intersections in the City. Just a little bit about myself, first, thank you, Councilman Donovic for your service, we really appreciate the commitment you have to still serving the City even when called to duty, we really appreciate that. For myself, I grew up in Livonia, I went to Livonia Public Schools. I just Biggby's, one, because it was a Michigan company to join in the franchisees. And when we looked for locations, my first inclination was to go back to the City that helped giving me, who made me who I was, given the success I was able to do. That's why we do have that first store on Ann Arbor Road and Newburgh, we've been there about six years now. My whole thing is to give back to the City like I said, in an area where we support the Livonia Public Schools, of course Churchill High School is right across the street, Schoolcraft, Madonna University, I'm part of the Chamber of Commerce, I'm on the Board of Directors for the credit union, Community Alliance Credit Union, we've worked with the Livonia Lyons Club to help with St. Mary's food donation during the pandemic, Healthy Livonia, things like that and those are all things I try to do to be an asset to the City because I believe that every bit of their — part of their mission and why their purpose should be to support the community that they exist in. So that's why as there was a Biggby before on Plymouth and Middlebelt, it was run down, the owner didn't take care of it so which is why it declined. I see this as an opportunity to be able to, one, provide a Biggby Coffee products and service in that east side of the City, and also continue my work to support the City and organizations on the east side of the City. As we have that first Biggby Coffee, it does not have a drive-thru, as I'm sure most of you are aware, this pandemic has taken its toll on all small business, especially the food and retail. I know we really felt the pressure of not being able to have a drive-thru. So as we look at this second location inside Livonia, we made it a point to try it as 8 a pilot, and we really appreciate everybody on the Planning staff and the Planning Commission working with us and giving us a recommendations to address the safety concerns so that we can operate a safe drive-thru in this property. Hopefully, we can address the concerns and hopefully look forward to getting approval to open up. Vice President Bahr stated that Taormina had talked about the dumpster moving and asked him to elaborate on that a little bit, you talked about it moving closer to the building and can you just talk about the orientation of that and the access to that? Taormina replied that the dumpster is going to remain in the same general location and orientation that it is today, the Petitioner is just going to provide as small of a footprint and as close the building as possible in order to gain as much room along the back of the building. But the gates would face due east as I indicated. The trucks would come in from along the adjacent property, pick up the dumpster from this location, and then more than likely exit back out and go north to Plymouth Road. So that would be the general direction of traffic flow and the location of that dumpster. But it's really in that same location as it is today. Bahr then said the other question he has is about the doors in the back there, those doors, you said something about replacing some of those with windows; did I hear that correctly? Taormina replied yes, if you'll closely at the notes here, they indicate that the doors would have windows and in discussing with some other options available, I think what the Petitioner is going to do is work with the adjoining tenants to see what their property might be, to move the door in this particular—they would change the unit to the south which actually has two doors and the thought would be is that they don't need two doors, they would remove at least one of those or maybe both of them and then optionally place that in a way that doesn't interfere at all, that is coming out as you can see here is a southerly direction as opposed to an easterly direction. So those are the types of changes and here is one where the door, the existing door since they don't have the option of really relocating it, providing a window so that the visibility is improved. Bahr asked if there door would still be there with the addition of a window? Taormina replied in that case, yes. Bahr said first and foremost he loves the proposal from the standpoint of he does think that this is a boom for that shopping center. We've seen this with a number of developments in the past where a lot of times the other tenants in a shopping center like that are the ones at our meetings telling us please approve this because they want the extra eyeballs that it brings having a drive-thru there and so he absolutely thinks this is a good thing for the economic vitality of that corner. He 9 came into this wanting to see this work and he studied it over the weekend and was actually a pretty hard no on this but the more he studied it and reviewing the Planning Commission minutes, he'd like to applaud them again for all the work they did with this and he has to say he thinks all of his concerns actually have been met at this point. This is a testament to a lot of hard work, not only from the Planning Commission's part, but also the Petitioner and his willingness to work with the City to make this successful. When Councilman McCullough offered this for Consent I was going to object just because it seems like a major enough decision with its own variables that it doesn't strike me as a Consent type thing, but I'll be honest I intend to support it so I won't object to that and kudos to everybody involved with it and I look forward to this hopefully being really successful. Councilmember Jolly stated as he looked at this he is in agreement with the vast majority of things that have been shared here today by his colleagues, the sentiment of the Petitioners and of course City Council and Mr. Taormina, but his question is has anybody at all reached out to the people who live on Elmira Street, the three yards in particular that back up to this is my first question, Mark, can you tell me that? Taormina replied that with the waiver petition notices would have been sent to all of the property owners within 300 feet which would have included the residents along Elmira that abut this property. Jolly asked if any feedback or response came as a result of that and Taormina stated he is not aware of any, he would have to doublecheck the file but he knows he cannot recall any participation from any of the residents and he doesn't believe any correspondence was received on this item as well. Jolly said with that being the case and obviously this is a commercial property, it's been a commercial property forever, he's concerned for these three homeowners, especially they have an alley next to their house now that probably gets little to no traffic and we're talking about potentially putting in a drive-thru window that's going to have a pretty steady amount of traffic and for that reason alone I'm going to object to the Consent Agenda. I'm not necessarily indicating that I would be against the ultimate approval of this but I would like an opportunity to kind of reach out to those residents on Elmira there to see if they know what's going on and see if they are okay with that. I just think potentially you're going to cause — I mean one of these houses here, the first house on Elmira off Middlebelt, I mean that can't be 15-feet from where this drive-thru is going to be basically, so I'd like that opportunity, thank you. Councilmember Donovic stated he would like to add a thank you to the owner of the building and you add that on here as well, he loves to see the partnership between the owner of the building and the tenant bringing in a business. As you talk about Covid and impacts of business, we have a vacant building right here, a 10 vacant unit and as we all know that there are a lot of vacant units in buildings up and down Plymouth Road primarily situated in the Middlebelt to Inkster Road area and I'd love to see this building that now has the potential to be revamped and come to life and have more customers there. I do understand Councilman's Jolly sentiment about the neighbors to the south being impacted by more vehicle traffic and that is a concern but there is a large cement wall there, this commercia property has been here for twenty, thirty years and I don't necessarily think cars are going to be doing an excess speed down this little alleyway to get through the drive-thru but nonetheless thank you to the Petitioners for trying to revitalize a portion of the building that really needs it, especially we talk about the vacant building across the street, with the Walgreen's being vacant and next to the Office Depot and what not, I think this is a great opportunity for more future businesses to come this way and fill those vacant buildings. Vice President Bahr stated he wants to address one thing and he thinks Councilman Jolly is wise to put this on the Regular for the reasons he stated. I did receive one piece of correspondence from a resident that backs up to this, I don't know if we all got that or not, I was just trying to look through my email to try to find it and I wasn't finding it so I don't remember the exact nature of his concern but Councilman Jolly asked the question and just in case that resident is watching, I did receive it and I did consider it. I think though that and as Councilman Donovic said with this being zoned commercial right up against residential, it follows our ordinance with a barrier there. Again, Plymouth Road is a major commercial corridor, it's not like this is out of character with that and it's not changing the character of what anyone who bought a home on Elmira would have expected, especially when you look at the other types of businesses that are along here and especially to the east. You know, just quickly scanning it there's another fast food restaurant with a drive-thru right up against the wall, there's a Jax Car Wash over there, there's a number of businesses so while I can understand someone's concerns and I think it's right to put this on Regular so residents have a chance to voice those concerns when we vote on this. I don't think this is inconsistent with the character of the area and what anybody would have expected when they bought a home there. Councilmember Toy stated those are all good points but one that stands out as the Petitioner will know, we have to be very cognizant of neighbors that are already there and while they want to fill up these buildings and do all those wonderful things on Plymouth Road, and you are doing them by bringing this to us, I'd love to see some outdoor seating, I would love to also know if you contacted the neighbors since you're the Petitioner putting it in or you thought about it perhaps. And then lastly, I need to know about your speakers because in past times, no offense,we've had some questions about the speakers and maybe they're controlled better now and they probably are but I just wondered if Mr. Taormina can answer that. But I'd love to see some outdoor seating in here as well and I'd like my answer to the neighbors as well. I think Jolly brings up a good point in that regard as well. 11 Buison replied they would definitely love outdoor seating but there's not really any space, maybe on the sidewalk we could put a couple tables. I guess our focus is really just is the biggest portion if to be able operate the drive-thru but we would love to look at doing outdoor seating. From what we heard from other —well, just Biggby's in general, outdoor seating is not something where it's used all the time especially if you're sitting outside you're looking at Plymouth Road, there's a lot of traffic, it's not like peaceful, so I mean it's something to look at. To address the question of the neighbors, no, I have not tried to reach out to the houses just south of it. I will say though I don't want to disturb anybody as it goes to noise, I used to live off of Inkster and Schoolcraft so I know well what living off a busy street is like. I went into that residence knowing that there's going to be noise because there's a freeway right there or maybe there's a building next to it. I guess with the drive- thru speakers, I don't have a drive-thru right now so I couldn't comment very accurately as to how loud or how soft they are. I'm sure it's a lot better considering what we're bringing. The other thing there is that south concrete wall that's 6-feet high and the order station is 100 feet from that wall. You'll see it on the plans, it's in the corner of the building just south of the Disc Replay. And you know the other thing is our normal operation is closed by 9:00 p.m. so we wouldn't be disturbing people sleeping. Toy replied that it's not that we're against it but when we go out in the community people ask us and I just want to be ready to have those answers, sir. Buison replied they're good points and he appreciates that and we can try to do what we can to minimize the noise if that's something that comes up. Houbba stated he doesn't think they mentioned that they are repaving the alley, a fresh coat of asphalt. Currently it's in dire condition, I'm not sure you've driven the site. But to address the housing issue behind us, we're open to suggestions. Working with the Planning Commission we've done so much already, possibly maybe adding some speed bumps to avoid cars driving fast. By the way, I do love outdoor seating as well if it's done properly and if there's a way we can do it to make it look nice, I'm sure we would love to do it, I would love to do it and I know Ed is just as ambitious as I am for opening his business here. But we also want a thriving business. Currently we have that vacancy, and it's been vacant for a couple years now and pretty much a shopping center is only as good as its tenants. And when I met Ed, I owe it to mostly him to bringing it this far. Although we are willing to make it work as far as improvements, enhancement of the building and we're looking for the future as well, we're not just stopping here. As better the tenant base gets, the building will get better under our ownership. Councilmember Jolly stated he is not at all trying to put pressure or difficulty on the Petitioners here with regard to this request, ultimately I think it could be a good thing. I just want to have the opportunity to reach out to residents to make sure we hear from them sooner as opposed to later. I've heard a lot of details and I think we all have tonight, I just want this last opportunity to go out and get a little 12 bit more information before we vote on it. I wish them well and I understand why they're doing this. President McIntyre stated she had one more question. So you mentioned that the reason that the former Biggby's location that was adjacent to this or across Middlebelt closed because it was poorly run and rundown. There was also a Biggby at one time at the corner of Plymouth and Farmington, the plaza where Las Palapas is and that also closed. So I'm just curious, and I call those two closures and I don't think they happened especially close in time proximity, but I was wondering what was going on with Biggby that they would have two locations close within a relatively short period of time. Buison replied that the one that was on Plymouth and Middlebelt which is now a Smoothie King, the one I know that that particular business owner was not involved in his business even before I came into the Biggby system six years ago. The other thing is as any business owner, if they're not directly involved in their business, the business suffers, customer service goes down and as a result customers avoid that location because of the lack of service. The other thing is I know for a fact that that rent in that plaza for that particular Biggby location was in excess of$6,000 a month, that's a lot for any business to support, let alone a small business like a Biggby. So that was one of the things that was there, you're concerned about when I first had conversations with Mike on this property, what type of rent and the rent that he was looking for to be able to get Biggby's set up in there. And he recognizes we're a small business as well and he really just wants a good tenant that's going to last and so they went with Biggby, he believes that that's a good choice. In regard to the Biggby on Plymouth and Farmington, I do know that that location closed I want to say about four years ago and that particular owner just wanted out. He was in the system almost ten years, I believe, he had the first in Wayne County and he just had enough and he just decided to shut his door and there's nothing against the company or business financials to my knowledge, he just closed it. President McIntyre said she just wanted to make sure she heard something right, because this is a waiver use all of the properties within 300 feet were sent a letter, right, aren't those registered letters from the Clerk's office? Taormina replied they came from Planning, yes. McIntyre asked if they were registered letter and Taormina replied they are mailed out through standard US mail. McIntyre stated that they all are sensitive to friends and neighbors even those who live adjacent to properties that are zoned commercial, all of the homeowners were notified by mail of this change and I will recheck my email, I know Vice President Bahr said he had a letter from a homeowner, I don't recall seeing anything but I 13 will go back and check but I do think it's good to put this on the Consent Agenda. But certainly the first three houses were notified, right, Mark? Taormina replied it would certainly touch all of those houses and beyond. He stated he wants to clarify that the notification was not a requirement for this meeting but it was for the Planning Commission. McIntyre asked if there was any objection and Taormina replied there was no objection that he is aware of, in fact, the properties that were notified are highlighted in yellow. She then reiterated her comments about Buison's engagement with the community is appreciated. She stated they all like the businesses in the community, both small and large, and they all contribute to a vibrant community and the people on the east side of the City will be very happy should this get approved to have a similarly civic minded and community engaged business partner. DIRECTION: APPROVING REGULAR 6. WAIVER PETITION: Planning Commission, re: Petition 2020-08-02-07 submitted by Matthew Petrocy, on behalf of Mt. Hope Memorial Gardens Cemetery, re: to construct a mausoleum in the cemetery located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Six Mile Road and Pickford Avenue (17840 Middlebelt Road) in the Southwest '/4 of Section 12. Mark Taormina, Director of Planning and Economic Development, presented this request to Council. He stated this is a request for construction of a mausoleum at Mt. Hope Memorial Gardens which is a large cemetery located east of Middlebelt Road and north of Six Mile Road. While cemeteries are treated as a waiver use and even though Mt. Hope has been in existence for quite a long time, the additional crypts do constitute an expansion of that particular use and is the reason why this is before you as a waiver use. In fact, it's the same process that was followed in 2006 when the City approved a 3,500 square foot mausoleum generally located in this area that's highlighted yellow on the screen. And then in 2016 you approved an addition to that same mausoleum of about 2,100 square feet. So what the Petitioner proposes this evening is a mausoleum that would be located just to the east of this existing structure, about 35 feet away. The new building would contain of combination of crypts and niches that would occupy a space of about 1,100 square feet of wall, it would have a height of about 21.5 feet. This is a side profile of the building, it's a combination of granite and brick and other types of masonry materials. These are obviously structures that are significantly engineered and last centuries if not longer and the Planning Commission reviewed and approved this. The only issue that came up with the surrounding neighborhood is the condition of the site maintained here in the southeast corner. For years this area has been used to deposit soils and other landscape materials so it's rather unsightly at least from the vantage point of the adjoining property to the east which is also a cemetery. The caretaker or owner representing somebody 14 from that did show up at the Planning Commission meeting and cited the concern here and so the Planning Commission, you'll read in the resolution, has a stipulation whereby the Petitioner would present to you this evening a plan and a timeline for restoring that area and so they provided a letter, I think that was the New Data that you referenced earlier, Madam President, where the Petitioner indicates that beginning this fall and carrying through to the spring they will perform restoration measures, they will remove the soil and then revegetate the ground area with seed and mulch. So that is the plan. I will note this that while the letter indicates a general intent and timeline and doesn't provide any real specificity in terms of timelines which is what the Planning Commission had asked for so I would just request as part of any approving resolution we at least place specific dates on compliance with these measures. Councilmember McCullough asked through the Chair to Mr. Taormina, that everything looks in line as the Planning Commission did their due diligence, is there any chance just to wrap that area that needs to be restored into the soil erosion permit? Taormina replied that's a great question and he's going to defer to Mr. Zilincik. Zilincik replied that if they want to they can apply for a soil erosion control permit and we can take a bond based on the acreage and then also during typically the timeframe of the soil erosion in the year and then they can renew it, however, Mark had stated I think a timeframe should be specified, typically usually you restore it in September, mid October, for vegetation turf establishment or first thing in the spring and typically by the end of June you should have turf establishment so I would specify that maybe by late June or early July it should be completed but again, that's just my advice and also require a soil erosion control permit for this and in the future if it continues to be an issue. McCullough thanked Zilincik for his reply and then indicated he would like to offer an approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Jolly stated that Zoom meetings are great technology but they are wearing on all of us. He then asked if the Petitioner was present. Taormina replied that the Petitioner this evening is being represented by Matt Petrocy who is with us and Mitch O'Connor as well. Jolly said if they are listening, hopefully he can direct my questions to them. Cemeteries, I believe, are not for-profit businesses, I believe it's a State statute that cemeteries have to have trust funds or funds put aside in some regard to maintain the property. With the expansion of cemeteries with the addition of mausoleums and the ability to put people's loved ones in them, are the trust funds or the funds set aside for this particular cemetery in good standing, are they in good place; can you comment on that, please? 15 Matt Petrocy replied that he could probably correct a few of the comments, he's not sure he can speak to the actual trust funds, I'm not in charge of those. I'm the Director of Operations for Midwest Memorial Group who owns Mt. Hope Cemetery. Yes, the trust funds are regulated by the State of Michigan, as far as I'm aware, yes, the trust funds are accurate and in good standing. However, Mt. Hope Cemeteries being not-for-profit, that's not correct, these are for-profit cemeteries, the ones that we have, Mt. Hope specifically. The building project, however, the fund that that is in is called a preconstruction where we have the ability to pre-sell the mausoleum project. And then we have agreed that four years from the first date of sale to produce the building. Jolly stated that he appreciated the clarification that they are a for-profit business, and said he would like to put this on the Regular Agenda, not because he's opposed to it, but he thinks we have quite a bit of land in our City here that is taken up by cemetery space and he thinks he's read quite a few articles that these cemeteries in other places have not been cared for or planned for the future properly and ultimately became eyesores. Not that I expect that to happen here, but I would like some additional information in regard to the money that's being set aside for the long term financial care and maintenance of this property; can you get that for us? Petrocy responded by asking what is it exactly that you want to see? Jolly replied he wants to make sure that the money is being put aside that are being required under the State statute are being put aside. So that when all the sites and the plots are sold here there's still money to take care of the maintenance of the property. Petrocy replied sure and Jolly asked that he send that to the Council office. Councilmember Toy asked the Petitioner how long has he owned this particular cemetery and Petrocy replied that Parklawn has owned this cemetery for three or four years. He went on to state that Parklawn is a large entity that owns cemeteries throughout the United States and Canada. Toy then stated that Councilmember Jolly's statements are very well intended, that when she was in the legislature there were a lot of situations that weren't exactly good but they had to do some real laws on so she's familiar with some of that unfortunately, so it's helpful to have that information. Your cemetery has a long history which I won't go into, my father was a Livonia police officer and there was an investigation in here many, many years ago, not to say you are part of that, I don't mean to say that. It's just that we want to make sure out I's are dotted and T's crossed. She thanked him for building in our community. City Engineer Zilincik asked for confirmation if Council is going to require a soil erosion and also a timeframe for a turf establishment for that back property along 16 the east edge as part of the approval for the Regular Meeting, he wants to confirm if soil erosion is required and it should also take a bond, and two, a date for turf establishment on that property itself. Councilmember McCullough indicated that he would like to add a soil erosion bond, permit to this project and that he would also like to add that the turf be established by August of 2021. Zilincik replied that by the end of August that should give ample time for the developer to take care of that issue. Petrocy replied that he has a soil erosion permit for this build project, does he have to apply for another one or are we just going to modify the one we have? Zilincik replied that the one they have is for the build itself because they disturbed that area, but based on the information that the Planning Director brought tonight, there should be a separate one again as information to the Planning Commission, a date and a separate soil erosion control permit based on the acreage that's been disturbed over there so we can take a bond and be all in accordance. Petrocy clarified by asking if he should put together another soil erosion plan and turn that in for that area and Zilincik replied based upon that disturbed area, the area that you've been using for spoils, you should be putting a silt fence up, you should be using silt fence in areas to correct that area until turf establishment has been taken care of, but yes, that's correct, show us your area of disturbance, we'll calculate the fees and work with you to get that permit issued. DIRECTION: APPROVING REGULAR 7. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF LIVONIA AND GROWTH WORKS, INC: Department of Law, re: to provide improved services for the Youth Assistance Diversion Program, providing a savings to the City, funding to be provided by the State of Michigan (MDHHS Child Care Fund) and Wayne County millage funds administered by the Conference of Western Wayne. Paul Bernier, City Attorney, presented this request to Council. He stated as Council is aware with the recent reorganization of the Community Resources Department, we were taking a look at different ways to save money and to give competitive services to our constituents and to our residents. One of the programs we looked at was our Youth Assistance Program, I had a conversation with the Chief of Canton Township Police Department, who uses the exact same program and they had nothing but rave reviews about going through with this program. The thought process was that we wanted to go through a program with Growth Works. The court partners with Growth Works for a lot of the people that we deal with there and it's like an actual outreach. What we're asking for is a Memorandum of 17 Understanding between the City of Livonia and Growth Works so we can have our youth who we're trying to divert away from the criminal justice system into some sort of a program so hopefully we don't see them again on that. So we're asking for a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Livonia and Growth Works. Councilmember Jolly offered an approving resolution for the Consent Agenda, this seems like a no-brainer. Councilmember Toy stated that Growth Works does an excellentjob and has much success out of this program and from she remembers the City has had it for many, many years as well, if she's not mistaken and they serve us very well. Councilmember Donovic stated he would like to reiterate his support for the City's Police Department. Like Councilmember Toy said, we've already had a program like this available to our youth for many years now, but helping youth that may have made a bad choice, made a mistake, avoid the justice system and take advantage of the opportunities of a second chance is a huge thing. And I love to see our Police Department and Administration doing forward thinking and the Law Department trying to work with our youth and make them productive members of society for the future. So this is an awesome idea and he is looking forward to the success of this program being brought to the youth of Livonia. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT AUDIENCE COMMUNICATION None heard. As there were no further questions or comments, President McIntyre adjourned the Study Session at 9:41 p.m. on Monday, October 5, 2020. For the 1,907t" Regular Meeting of October 19, 2020 DATED: October 8, 2020 SUSAN M. NASH, CITY CLERK