HomeMy WebLinkAbout1,248 -August 11, 2026 signedMINUTES OF THE 1,248th PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
On Tuesday, August 11, 2026, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 1,248th Public Hearing and Regular Meetings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000
Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Ian Wilshaw, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7 p.m.
Members present: Wafa Dinaro Patrick Droze David Bongero
Sam Caramagno Peter Ventura Ian Wilshaw
Members absent: Glen Long
Mr. Jacob Uhazie, Assistant Planning Director, Kristoffer Canty, Planner IV, and
Erika Goff, Administrative Assistant, were also present.
Chairman Wilshaw informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda
involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City
Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and make the final
determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning
Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or
vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City
Council for the final determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected. If a
petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan approval is denied tonight, the
petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City
Council. Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Commission become effective
seven (7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning Commission and the
professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their filing. The staff
has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions, which
the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the
proceedings tonight.
ITEM #1 PETITION 2026-06-01-02 Guggenheim Development
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2026-
06-01-02, submitted by Guggenheim Development, LLC,
pursuant to Section 13.15 of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as
amended, requests approval to rezone the property located at
32520 Seven Mile Road from C-1 (Local Business) to C-2
(General Business) to allow for an automotive service center use
on the property at the northwest corner of Seven Mile Road and
Mayfield Avenue in the southwest 1/4 of Section 3.
August 11, 2026
32554
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Mr. Uhazie.
Mr. Uhazie: Thank you, Mr. Chair. As stated, this is a request to rezone the
property from C-1, Local Business, to C-2, General Business. The
petition site is 1.32 acres in size and is currently a vacant lot. The
petitioner has proposed to operate a Jiffy Lube quick service oil
change center, which under section 6.06 of the zoning ordinance,
is treated as a waiver -use. All repairs are required to be carried
out within the enclosed building. Automobile repair shops shall
have direct access to a major thoroughfare, and outdoor storage
of disabled, damaged, or unlicensed vehicles is prohibited. The
surrounding neighborhoods include, to the north, the Canterbury
Park apartment complex zoned NM1. To the south across Seven
Mile is the Pearson Center, zoned C-1. Across, east across
Mayfield is a memory care facility zoned NM3, and to the west is
the commercial retail shopping plaza zoned C-1. The purpose of
the rezoning is to operate automotive service center use on the
property. The concept site plan proposes a 2,944-square-foot
Jiffy Lube located at the front of the property. The setbacks would
be 15 feet from the front, with a side yard setback of over eight
feet, which complies with the zoning ordinance. Access to the site
would be provided via two drive approaches: one connection from
the existing parking lot to the west via an easement, and one
approach from Mayfield Avenue to the east. There is a proposed
dumpster to the northwest of the building at the center of the lot
shown here. The future land use plan for this site identifies it as
Commercial Corridor. Livonia Vision 21 describes appropriate
land uses to include office, general retail, commercial, food
service, townhomes, apartments, and attached and upper story
residential uses. Automotive -oriented uses such as gas stations,
auto repair, or drive -through facilities may be appropriate in
certain instances. With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the
departmental corre§pondence.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Uhazie:
Yes, please.
The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated July 14,
2026, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request,
the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced
petition. We have no objections to the proposed rezoning at this
time, but would like to note the following items: 1. The subject
parcel is assigned the address of #32520 Seven Mile Road. 2.
The existing parcels are currently serviced by public sanitary
sewer, water main, and storm sewer. Proposed utility services
are not shown on the submitted plan, but we do not believe there
August 11, 2026
32555
will be any adverse effects on the existing systems with the
proposed usage. 3. The proposed development will be required
to conform to the current version of the Wayne County Storm
Water Ordinance, including detention. Storm water reviews for
the site may be completed by either City of Livonia or Wayne
County, depending on the outlet chosen for site storm water. 4.
The owner will need to provide copies of the access easement
for the proposed cross- traffic parking access for our records. 5.
If the project is approved, engineering drawings will need to be
submitted to this department and possible Wayne County for
review and permitting." The letter is signed by David W. Lear,
P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The next letter is from the Livonia
Fire & Rescue Division, dated July 16, 2026, which reads as
follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in
connection with a request to construct a commercial building on
the property located at the above referenced address. We have
no objections to this proposal. A further detailed plan review will
take place when this division receives an official plan set." The
letter is signed by Brian Kukla, Fire Marshal. The next letter is
from the Division of Police, dated July 15, 2026, which reads as
follows: " I have reviewed the plans in connection with the petition.
I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by
Brendan Adams, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The next letter is from
the Inspection Department, dated July 27, 2026, which reads as
follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above -referenced Petition
has been reviewed. 1. An enclosure of sufficient height to
completely screen the dumpster is required on three (3) sides of
the waste receptacle, with a solid gate on the fourth side. The
height of the enclosure must be not less than six (6) feet or at
least one (1) foot above the height of the dumpster, whichever is
greater. The enclosure gates shall be of solid panel steel
construction or durable, long-lasting solid fiberglass panel and,
when not in use, closed at all times. The enclosure must be
constructed of the same or compatible material and colors as the
principal building in terms of texture and quality. 2. Exterior
lighting sources shall be designed, constructed, located, and
maintained in a manner that minimizes light trespass onto
neighboring properties and public ways. The light trespass from
a property shall not exceed 0.5-foot-candles at the property line,
measured five (5) feet from the ground. 3. Signage must be
conforming or a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals would
be required. This Department has no further objections to this
Petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Director of
Inspection. The next letter is from the Finance Department, dated
July 22, 2026, which reads as follows: "I have reviewed the
addresses connected with the above noted petition. As there are
Mr. Wilshaw:
Ms. Dinaro:
Mr. Uhazie:
August 11, 2026
32556
no outstanding amounts receivable, general or water and sewer,
I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by
Ermon Sims, Chief Accountant. The next letter is from the
Treasurer's Department, dated July 15, 2026, which reads as
follows: "The owner is current of their property tax." The letter is
signed by Susie Nash, Treasurer. That is the extent of the
correspondence.
Are there any questions for planning staff?
A question on the land use in the Vision 2021. This wouldn't fit
what we're looking for. We are looking for more commercial
corridors. Is that correct?
The future land use identifies it as commercial corridor, but the
description in the master plan says that auto -centric uses like this
are only appropriate in certain instances. So extra care should be
considered if this is an appropriate commercial corridor for heavily
auto -dependent uses.
Ms. Dinaro: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Ms. Dinaro. Any other questions? Mr. Bongero?
Mr. Bongero: Mr. Uhazie, would this site require a privacy wall, concrete or
other?
Mr. Uhazie: It would require some sort of property wall from-- to separate from
the residential.
Mr. Bongero: Okay, that's what I thought. Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Bongero. Any other questions? All right. Before
we get started, I always like to say, just as a reminder to folks,
that this is a rezoning request. We do have a conceptual site plan
that we've seen, and you've heard some communication from
some of the city departments regarding that site plan. However,
our charge today is to look at the zoning from C1 to C2. That's
what we're going to try to focus primarily on. We can't deny or
discount the fact that they have given us the proposed use for this
property. We're going to take that into account. But our mission
for today is to get the zoning taken care of and decision made on
that. If this goes forward with the rezoning request, then a site
plan would be the next step that comes back to us, where we talk
in detail about that site plan and the contents thereof. So, with
that caveat in mind, Is the petitioner here this evening? We will
August 11, 2026
32557
need your name and address for the record please. Good
evening.
Mr. Jahns: Good evening, Reid Jahns. Address 100 Camelot Drive, Fond
du Lac, Wisconsin.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Jahns. What would you like to tell us about this
petition?
Mr. Jahns: Good evening. I'm Reid Jahns, civil engineer, one of the civil
engineers on the project. Happy to field any questions you
certainly have. I guess overall, we do strongly believe that we
will be in full compliance with the C2 district standards as we
move along in this process and go through that site plan review
and everything like that. So we do fully intend to work with you
and make sure we're in compliance for all the various items.
Additionally, I think with this property being 1.32 acres, it does
give us a lot of flexibility in order to meet those regulations,
whether that's increased landscaping or other buffering
methods, to especially, we obviously want to be good neighbors
to the residential areas as well, so that it can be a positive
development for everyone within the neighborhood, not just
certain aspects. I guess, additionally, as you mentioned, with it
being a commercial corridor, we strongly believe that it is a
reasonable and logical path forward for this property to be
developed into this C2 zoning and ultimately into Jiffy Lube
Automotive Service Center. Happy to field any questions or
inquiries you may have. Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Excellent. Well, thank you for your presentation. Do we have any
questions from my colleagues for our petitioner? Mr. Droze.
Mr. Droze:
Mr. Jahns:
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Jahns, I recognize you're a civil
engineer, and I'm not sure if you're familiar with maybe the
history of the site or what the owner is looking for. But relative to
the request to change the zoning, you did mention you know it's
a site that has a lot of space, 1.32 acres in size. I guess if you
have any knowledge of it, what made it difficult to develop a size-
- a site of that size under the C1, and kind of saying, basically
what I'm asking, what is it that requires this site to be a Jiffy Lube,
other some-- versus some other uses that might be a little more
harmonious with the adjacent commercial properties?
I guess with this property specifically, there is... we'll have plenty
of buffer and be able to provide this automotive service center
and be able to be compatible with that neighborhood. I'm not
August 11, 2026
32558
saying that no other business or something wouldn't be able to
go into this site by any means. I'm just trying to create a vision
for you of what it could potentially become as this automotive
service center.
Mr. Droze: Okay, I'm. I think I'm good. Thank you, Mr. Jahns.
Mr. Jahns: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Droze. Any other questions for our petitioner?
Mr. Caramagno: Mr. Chair.
Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Caramagno.
Mr. Caramagno: Sir, has your client looked at any other properties in and
around Livonia for Jiffy Lube? Why, why here?
Mr. Jahns
Certainly. Overall. We, I, do work on these Jiffy Lube projects
throughout the state of Michigan. Had a couple in Lansing last
year, so they are established in this area. Additionally, as far as
the exact real estate search that is primarily driven by
Guggenheim Development on the front end that I do not have
access or conversations specifically regarding these specific
sites within Livonia, but I do know that they do do
comprehensive searches to try and identify properties that
would be a good fit for them and for the community that they're
within.
Mr. Caramagno: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Caramagno. No, any other questions for our
petitioner? I see no other questions from my colleagues. Is there
anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this
item? If so, please feel free to come forward. Good evening, sir.
Mr. Karasinski: Good evening, Jerry Karasinski, 1948 Bainbridge Avenue. This
local property is less than a mile from my house. I do remember
that when Kmart was in the location at Seven and Farmington,
they did have an auto service center. Otherwise, if you look at the
map, this property does not really have very many competitors
within a mile at all of it. So I suspect that that is why the developer
would have chosen this location, when this proposal came about,
I was kind of surprised, but I don't necessarily have an opinion
one way or the other as to whether this rezoning should occur.
That property has been vacant for a long, long time. Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Jahns:
August 11, 2026
32559
Thank you, Mr. Karasinski. Anyone else in the audience wishing
to speak on this item? I don't see anyone else coming forward.
Mr. Jahns, you get the last word. Is there anything else you'd like
to tell us before we make our decision?
Just excited to be a part of your community here and work with
you moving forward to make sure that all the individual items can
be addressed and ensure compliance moving forward.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay.
Mr. Jahns: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you for your comments. Any other questions, comments
from any of my colleagues? Seeing no one coming forward, I will
close the public hearing and ask for a motion.
On a motion by Ventura, seconded by Bongero, and unanimously adopted, it was
#08-48-2026
RESOLVED, That pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on August 11, 2026, on Petition
2026-06-01-02, submitted by Guggenheim Development, LLC,
pursuant to Section 13.15 of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as
amended, requests approval to rezone the property located at
32520 Seven Mile Road from C-1 (Local Business) to C-2
(General Business) to allow for an automotive service center use
on the property at the northwest corner of Seven Mile Road and
Mayfield Avenue in the southwest 1/4 of Section 3, the Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 2026-06-01-02 be denied for the following reasons:
1. That the petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the
proposed change of zoning and the intended use of the
property as an automotive service center would be
compatible to or in harmony with the surrounding residential
neighborhoods.
That the existing C-1 zoning is more consistent with the
established pattern of development and character of the
area.
3. That the proposed change of zoning is inconsistent with
adjacent zoning districts in the area; and
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Wilshaw,
ITEM #2
August 11, 2026
32560
4. That the proposed change of zoning is inconsistent with the
established pattern of development and would adversely
alter the character of the area.
FURTHER RESOLVED, That notice of the above hearing was
given in accordance with the provisions of Section 13.13 and
13.15 of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as amended.
Is there any discussion on this motion to deny? Hearing no
discussion.
Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with a denying resolution.
PETITION 2026-06-02-18 Fogo De Chao
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the second item on the agenda Petition
2026-06-02-18 submitted by Fogo De Chao requesting waiver
use approval under Sections 3.13 and 6.03 of the Livonia Zoning
Ordinance, as amended, to operate an S.D.M. liquor license (sale
of packaged beer and wine for consumption off the premises) in
connection with a full -service restaurant (Fogo De Chao) at
39000 Six Mile Road, located at the northwest corner of Six Mile
Road and Fox Drive in the southwest'/4 of Section 7.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Mr. Uhazie.
Thank you. This is a request to operate an SDM liquor license,
which is the sale of packaged beer and wine for the consumption
off premises, in connection with the full -service restaurant Fogo
de Chao. This is a site that we are pretty familiar with. This is tpart
of the former Comerica redevelopment, and the current zoning is
C-4, High -Rise Commercial. SDM licenses are permitted with a
waiver -use in the C-4 district and set out in that provision is the
separation requirement that treats should be at least 500 feet
from any other established type or, excuse me, similar liquor
license, the separation requirement may be waived by city
council, and they should also be located at least 400 feet from
any church, school, or public or school. There are no
establishments within those buffer areas. With that, Mr.
Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence.
Yes, please.
Mr. Uhazie:
August 11, 2026
32561
The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated July 14,
2026, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request,
the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced
petition. We have no objections to the proposed waiver use at this
time, but would like to note the following items: 1. The subject is
restaurant is assigned the address #39000 Six Mile Road. 2. The
existing parcel is currently serviced by public sanitary sewer and
water main, as well as private storm sewer. There is no mention
of utility revisions with the proposal, so we do not believe there
will be any adverse effects on the existing systems. 3. Should
revisions to the utility services to the building, or any work within
the Six Mile Road right-of-way be required, the owner will need
to submit drawings to This Department and the Wayne County
Department of Public Services for permitting." The letter is signed
by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The next letter
is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated July 16, 2026,
which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan
submitted in connection with a request for a SDM liquor license
for a commercial building on the property located at the above
referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal. A
liquor license inspection of the occupancy will occur as a final
construction inspection when construction is complete. A further
detailed plan review will take place when this division receives an
official plan set." The letter is signed by Brian Kukla, Fire Marshal.
The next letter is from the Division of Police, dated July 15, 2026,
which reads as follows: "1 have reviewed the plans in connection
with the petition. I have no objections to the proposal." The letter
is signed by Brendan Adams, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The next
letter is from the Inspection Department, dated July 27, 2026,
which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above -
referenced Petition has been reviewed. 1. This location is within
1000 feet of another licensed establishment. Council would need
to waive this requirement. This Department has no further
objections to this Petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna,
Director of Inspection. The next letter is from the Finance
Department, dated July 22, 2026, which reads as follows: "1 have
reviewed the addresses connected with the above noted petition.
As there are no outstanding amounts receivable, general or water
and sewer, I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is
signed by Ermon Sims, Chief Accountant. The next letter is from
the Treasurer's Department, dated July 15, 2026, which reads as
follows: "The property owner is current on the property tax" The
letter is signed by Susie Nash, Treasurer. That is the extent of
the correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for planning staff? Mr. Droze.
Mr. Droze:
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Droze:
Mr. Wilshaw:
August 11, 2026
32562
Mr. Chair. I just have a question, Mr. Uhazie. Just thinking about
kind of procedure, we've seen several of these in the last couple
years. Is there anything prohibiting our petitioners to ask for these
at the same time as a site plan that comes through, or is that, do
we have to have them separate?
No, that is how we would typically handle it. And if you remember,
as part of the development agreement, the liquor licenses were
included in that, so they wouldn't have to come back. This
particular site didn't have to come back for the separate waiver,
but that was just the Class C license that was included. The SDM
was not, so that's something they're seeking afterwards, but we're
seeing it a lot more SDM requests. It's become somewhat of a
trend where established restaurants or new businesses are
seeing something as an addition that they want that they weren't
previously pursuing. So going forward, we would have a new
restaurant getting their liquor license, we'd have them apply at
the same time.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Droze. Any other questions for staff? No. Okay.
Is the petitioner here this evening? We will need your name and
address for the record please.
Mr. Howe: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Patrick Howe, J.P. Howe PLLC,
representing Fogo de Chao. Good to be with you again. As stated
by staff, this is a trend. We need waiver -use approval for beer
wine takeout. It's full -service Brazilian steakhouse. They have
over 75 in the country. This is their second one in Michigan. The
other one's in Troy. This is just an accessory use to the dining
experience. If you want to take a bottle of wine to go, this license
is required, and under the ordinance, a waiver is required under
the standard. So, we don't believe this will be-- have any negative
impact on the surrounding area. It fits in with their operation,
which is permitted under the zoning ordinance, and ask for your
approval tonight. Happy to answer any questions.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Ms. Dinaro:
Mr. Howe:
Thank you very much. Any questions? Ms. Dinaro.
Can you walk me through your carding process if somebody's
ordering and what your process is for third -party ordering apps?
Sure, two totally separate processes. So the on -site is usually 40
and under. Anyone's carded. If you appear to be 40 and under.
August 11, 2026
32563
All servers are TIPS, TAM, ServSafe, certified by a state of
Michigan approved course, and it has to be a legitimate
identification that's provided. So it's not, you know. Driver's
license, passport. Those are legitimate out of state licenses, etc.
And it's really no tolerance policy. So you know, one strike and
you're out for a server, but overall, they have an excellent
operating record in the state of Michigan and nationally, and
follow all local laws and ordinances. As far as the to -go process,
that's a third -party facilitator service that they may engage with
DoorDash, GrubHub, etc. Once the sale is completed on site, the
responsibility for carding shifts to that licensee as a separate
service provided by the state, licensed by the state of Michigan,
and they must follow the same procedure. So Fogo de Chao or
others, they engage with third parties, and that third party is
responsible for carding. So with this experience, with this
situation, it's really higher end, you know, on -premises dining
experience. So, I don't think there's really much activity at this
stage for third -party delivery services. It's really an on -site
amenity for a customer.
Ms. Dinaro: Thank you.
Mr. Howe: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Ms. Dinaro. Any other questions for the petitioner?
Mr. Ventura: Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Ventura?
Mr. Ventura: Good evening. Can you tell us whether or not if a customer comes
in and sits down, has a bottle of wine and they don't finish it, can
they then cork that wine and take it with them?
Mr. Howe:
Mr. Ventura:
They can. Yes, as a probably 15-20 years ago, Michigan passed
a cork and go law, and so there's a process under state law in
which the cork has to be reinserted into the bottle at the level of
the glass, and it's either given in a paper bag or some type of bag
to the customer to leave with them to go.
All right, and so the license that you seek tonight would allow
them to purchase a separate unopened bottle and take that as
well.
Mr. Howe: Correct. Yeah, or to go order. You know, if you come in and have
a big catering order or something, like to order six bottles of wine
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Howe:
August 11, 2026
32564
for a community function or something, they can realize that sale
as opposed to picking up the food from the restaurant and then
having to go across the street to buy the wine.
Can you tell us how significant an addition this is to your business.
In other words, what percentage of your clients do you anticipate,
based on your other open restaurants, are actually going to take
advantage of this?
I'd say it's very low, but it's an expectation. So I don't think it'll
really be, you know, a large part at all. But it's the customer's
expectation at this type of restaurant in today's day and age, that
they can purchase a bottle of wine to go.
Mr. Ventura: Great, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Ventura. Any other questions for the petitioner?
Mr. Bongero: Mr. Chair? I've got one.
Mr. Wilshaw: Go ahead, Mr. Bongero.
Mr. Bongero: Sir, can we go back to the carry -out —
Mr. Howe: Sure.
Mr. Bongero: --process? When someone orders a carryout. They order a steak
or whatever you serve, and they want a bottle of wine. Who pays
for that at that time? Does the person ordering it pay for it, or does
the GrubHub person pay for that? How does that work?
Mr. Howe: So, so if you're purchasing it in person, you pay for it there. So
you don't pay for it over the phone, the sale's completed on site.
Mr. Bongero: Right.
Mr. Howe: So that's me going into the restaurant, takeout order. Here's my
credit card to come. The third -party services on your phone. The
credit card information is uploaded to the app, sort of put in limbo.
When the person goes and presents identification that they're or-
- I'm sorry, when the driver goes to pick up the order, the sale is
then completed, and that's completed subject to confirming for
the alcohol that the person receiving it at their home or business
or is. 21, and that they have to take a copy of the driver's license
that's uploaded to a system, and there's a whole process for that.
Mr. Bongero:
August 11, 2026
32565
So, they really don't know until they get to that person's home
whether the person that ordered the bottle of wine is twenty-one.
They don't even know that until they get to the house.
Mr. Howe: Yeah, I mean the product that's regulated cannot be delivered to
anyone under 21 by the service.
Mr. Bongero: What if the GrubHub driver is 18 years old? How does that work?
Mr. Howe: 1 don't know their policy. If it's 18 and up or otherwise, I believe
it's 21 and over. I can't. I don't represent them, but they have to
follow state law. And if they show up to someone's house and
they're not 21, they return the product.
Mr. Bongero: And you have return policy pretty standard. Bring it back and you
refund the money.
Mr. Howe: That's correct.
Mr. Bongero: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Howe: Thank you.
Mr. Bongero: Oh, I've got another question.
Mr. Howe: Yeah.
Mr. Bongero: Do you serve any house brand alcohol? Like there's a wine shop
down the street. They've got their own brand of wine. Do you
serve any house brand or branded Fogo de Chao wine or
anything like that?
Mr. Howe:
I'm not aware of that. I've been involved with those contract or
licensing arrangements. I'm not aware of their own type of house
brand wine. If it is, it's just a naming thing. So on the back of the
bottle, you'll see the manufacturer. On the front of the body, you'll
see the restaurant. It's prohibited for a restaurant to manufacture
wine, actually. So.
Mr. Bongero: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Bongero. Any other questions? Mr. Howe is
definitely an expert in Michigan liquor laws and is always a good
asset for that.
Mr. Howe:
Mr. Wilshaw:
August 11, 2026
32566
Thank you. It's been 20 years, and been in front of you quite a bit,
so I appreciate it's a great relationship.
Certainly. I do have one question that's not directly related to the
alcohol license, but Fogo de Chao's kind of main dining
arrangement is the sort of never-ending supply of food that keeps
coming to you. Put a little flag up at your table, and they come.
And if someone's buying food to go, how do they do that? Do they
just keep putting the flag up, and the Grubhub drivers keep
coming back?
Mr. Howe: You know, I don't think that's available for to go.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay.
Mr. Howe: Is that going up to the buffet one last time for the to go? I don't
think that'll fly. No, it's a huge menu.
Mr. Wilshaw: So one-time shot.
Mr. Howe: Yeah, it's a huge menu. So you know, to go, it's... it keeps on
growing. So you can get anything to go now.
Mr. Wilshaw: That's interesting because this is certainly the kind of dining
model. I don't expect there to be a lot of to -go orders.
Mr. Howe: No.
Mr. Wilshaw: Because it's really, it's sort of an event to go there and eat.
Mr. Howe: It is. It is, and ifs really the larger parties, the catering and that
type of order.
Mr. Wilshaw: That makes sense. Okay, very good. Is there anybody in the
audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? I have one
person. Good evening.
Mr. Biga:
Jim Biga, Livonia, Michigan. With regard to the third party serving,
the Grubhubs and DoorDashes, if I'm not mistaken, with Flemings
and the other steakhouse that I can't remember, Outback, the
restriction was that no third party could be sold because they
weren't checking the fact that the delivery recipient was going to
be twenty-one. So both Fleming's and Outback said they weren't
going to be having liquor sold to those drivers. I don't understand
why all of a sudden we would possibly having this here for this
particular outlet when the other two said they weren't going to be
August 11, 2026
32567
doing it, and that they weren't trusting the fact that somebody
could have false information and trusting an 18 or 21-year-old
driver who isn't trained by the state of Michigan rules and you
know one and out like the servers at the restaurant. I don't think
it's a fair way to trust everybody. And once everybody knows that
they can violate the rules, they'll start ordering. And I think we
have to be very careful about that. So I hope you apply the same
rationale that you used with the other two restaurants with this
particular one. Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Biga. Any other questions or comments? I will
note on that particular subject matter that those were voluntary
limitations that those particular petitioners offered to, that was
their choice. It wasn't necessarily a restriction that we placed
upon them. So I just want to at least note that. Is there anyone
else in the audience wishing to speak on this item? If not, Mr.
Howe, is there anything else you'd like to say?
Mr. Howe:
I would just say, as far as to that comment, I don't think that's...
it's really ordinance hasn't really caught up to that. So we're just
talking about sale beer and wine to go from this restaurant, and
you know, this licensee follows the law to the T, and you know to
that point, the third party facilitators are regulated. They have to
renew their license every year. I've licensed those services in the
past, and they all have to go through the same server training.
So, you know, there could be a perception that it's an 18-year-old
kid, but if they're following the law, they have to take the same
training courses as the on -premise servers. So, thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: All right, thank you, sir. Seeing no one coming forward, I will close
the public hearing and ask for a motion.
On a motion by Bongero, seconded by Dinaro, and unanimously adopted, it was
#08-49-2026
RESOLVED, That pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on August 11, 2026, on Petition
2026-06-02-18 submitted by Fogo De Chao requesting waiver
use approval under Sections 3.13 and 6.03 of the Livonia Zoning
Ordinance, as amended, to operate an S.D.M. liquor license (sale
of packaged beer and wine for consumption off the premises) in
connection with a full -service restaurant (Fogo De Chao) at
39000 Six Mile Road, located at the northwest corner of Six Mile
Road and Fox Drive in the southwest % of Section 7, the Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 2026-06-02-18 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
August 11, 2026
32568
1. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the
proposed use.
2. That the use of a SDM liquor license will complement the existing
use of the subject property and will provide an additional service
to customers; and
Mr. Wilshaw:
3. This waiver approval is limited to this applicant and can only be
transferred to another user with approval by the City Council.
FURTHER RESOLVED, That notice of the above hearing was
given in accordance with the provisions of Section 13.13 of the
Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as amended.
Is there any discussion? Mr. Uhazie, I do have one question. It's
a real minor thing, but I want to just make sure I's are dotted and
Ts are crossed. The agenda says that the address is 38888 Six
Mile, and our approving resolution says 39000 Six Mile. Is there
a reason?
Mr. Uhazie: I believe the addresses were... like that was the part of the overall
address, and now the actual address for the particular restaurant.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, so 39000, which is in the approving resolution, is correct?
Or 38888. I just want to make sure we're giving this to the right
address.
Mr. Bongero: 8888 would seem --
Ms. Dinaro: I think 38
Mr. Ventura: 38888 is Buca di Beppo.
Mr. Uhazie: 39—
Mr. Ventura: In other words, it's 39000.
Mr. Uhazie: 39 Is the correct address.
Mr. Droze: The engineering letter says that too.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, so the agenda was the only thing that had the incorrect
address.
Mr. Uhazie: Yes.
Mr. Wilshaw:
August 11, 2026
32569
Okay. All right. Just want to make sure that we are clarifying and
making sure that this is getting approved to the right place. All
right. That's my only question. Anybody have anything else? If
not, we have a motion to approve again by Bongero, Dinaro. If
the secretary is ready, please call the roll.
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution.
ITEM #3 PETITION 2026-07-02-19 Hands of Time
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda Petition 2026-
07-02-19 submitted by Hands of Time, requesting waiver use
approval pursuant to Section 3.11 and 6.53 of the Livonia Zoning
Ordinance to operate a secondhand store at 19704 Middle Belt
Road located at the northeast corner of Middle Belt Road and St.
Martins Street in the southwest'/ of Section 1.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. This is a waiver -use approval, Mr. Uhazie.
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Uhazie:
Thank you. Yes, this is a request to operate a secondhand retail
establishment within an existing commercial suite. The L-shaped
parcel is located at the northeast corner of Middle Belt and St.
Martins Road. The current zoning is split zoned, so it is zoned C-
2 to the north, and there's the lower sliver, which is C-1. Excuse
me, that it's not presenting for some reason.
Poor people at home have to watch us instead.
I think it's transferring over now. There, there we go. The petition
parcel is just under an acre in size, with 120 feet of frontage. The
existing building is divided into two tenant spaces, with the
northern space being the existing Subway restaurant. The
surrounding uses to the west is a commercial property. To the
south is another split -zoned C-2 and C-1 property. To the north is
zoned C-2, and to the east is RUF. Under Section 6.53 of the
zoning ordinance allows secondhand and consignment uses with
a waiver of use approval in the C-2 district. One of the stipulations
of that section of the ordinance is that there is no outside storage
allowed, and there have been none present on the site. The
proposal is for the Hands of Time to lease and occupy the
southern portion of the building, consisting of about 5,400 square
feet. Parking requirements for this would be one space per 150
feet of square footage. This would require 29 spaces in total. The
site plan shows 38 spaces, two of which are barrier free. Access
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Uhazie:
August 11, 2026
32570
to the site is provided off of Middle Belt Road, and there's a
second access drive to St. Martins around the rear by heading
south through the connecting parcel. There is an existing
dumpster without an enclosure located at the rear of the building.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the departmental
correspondence.
Yes, please.
The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated July 23,
2026, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request,
the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced
petition. We have no objections to the proposed waiver use at this
time, but would like to note the following items: 1. The subject
parcel is assigned the address of #19704 Middlebelt Road. 2. The
existing parcel is currently serviced by public sanitary sewer and
water main, as well as private storm sewer. There is no mention
of utility revisions with the proposal, so we do not believe there
will be any adverse effects on the existing systems based on the
proposed usage. 3. Should revisions to the utility services to the
building, or any work within the Middlebelt Road right-of-way be
required, the owner will need to submit drawings to the Wayne
County Department of Public Services for permitting." The letter
is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The
next letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated July
22, 2026, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the
site plan submitted in connection with the modification and use of
the property located at the above referenced address. Final
official plan set submitted for review shall detail interior of this
occupancy. Shall include but not limited to: Exits, separations
such as walls, any mechanical or electrical rooms, restrooms,
general layout of merchandise so that aisle ways for egress can
be evaluated, is occupancy sprinkled, locations of emergency
lighting, locations of fire extinguishers. A further detailed plan
review will take place when this division receives an official plan
set." The letter is signed by Brian Kukla, Fire Marshal. The next
letter is from the Division of Police, dated July 21, 2026, which
reads as follows: "1 have reviewed the plans in connection with
the petition. I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is
signed by Brendan Adams, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The next
letter is from the Inspection Department, dated July 27, 2026,
which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above -
referenced Petition has been reviewed. 1. The parking lot at the
rear of the building is in disrepair and shall be repaired and/or
replaced where necessary. Parking spaces shall be 10' wide and
20' deep and double -striped. 2. Barrier -Free parking spaces are
August 11, 2026
32571
required to meet the /CC A117.1 -2017 standard. A van
accessible parking space is required as well. The car accessible
parking space shall be a minimum of 8' wide with a 5' hashed
access aisle adjacent to it, and a van accessible space shall be
11' wide with a 5' hashed access aisle adjacent to it. They shall
be properly sized, signed, and striped. This Department has no
further objections to this Petition."The letter is signed by Jerome
Hanna, Director of Inspection. The next letter is from the Finance
Department, dated July 22, 2026, which reads as follows: "1 have
reviewed the addresses connected with the above noted petition.
The following amounts are due to the City of Livonia: Unpaid
water and sewer charges: (Acct#: 030408400-001) $ 244.91
Total Due to City of Livonia $ 244.91" The letter is signed by
Ermon Sims, Chief Accountant. I also have a receipt that shows
that they did pay on July 28, so they are up to date on their bills.
The next letter is from the Treasurer's Department, dated July 21,
2026, which reads as follows: "The owner of the property is
current of the property taxes" The letter is signed by Susie Nash,
Treasurer. That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for planning staff?
Mr. Ventura: Chairman?
Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Ventura.
Mr. Ventura: Mr. Uhazie, this petition comes to us as a result of ordinance
enforcement activity on the part of the inspection department.
Mr. Uhazie: Correct.
Mr. Ventura: This is really a business that's been operating in this location for
a number of years. Is that true?
Mr. Uhazie: I don't know about a number of years, but it has been operating
at this location without knowing that they need to go through the
waiver -use process.
Mr. Ventura: And to your knowledge, has it created any kind of a problem by
being there?
Mr. Uhazie: There have been no issues with inspection. They were out there
for the certificate of occupancy, I believe, not for any violation.
Yeah.
Mr. Ventura: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Bongero:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Bongero:
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Bongero:
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Bongero:
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Bongero:
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Bongero:
Mr. Wilshaw:
August 11, 2026
32572
Thank you, Mr. Ventura. Any other questions for staff?
Mr. Chair.
Sure, Mr. Bongero.
So, Mr. Uhazie, so based on the outcome tonight, like there's no
dumpster enclosure. Is that going to be enforced? Is there going
to be permits pulled? I mean, has there been? Do we know if ifs
been renovated?
Well, the exterior is not being renovated. Nothing on the exterior
is changing.
The inside, you know, whatever.
The inside, they did not provide any. They did not note any major
renovations. The dumpster is something that we could, as a
waiver -use, put that condition on there. Same thing with the
resurfacing of the drive and parking areas.
Okay. Because I went there, I guess I missed a study session. I
go there, and they're already in there. And I was, you know, we
see that once in a while.
Yes, that is something that they've, inspection, especially with
these consignment shops. We've had a number recently that they
seem to be finding that I don't want to say fell through the crack,
but the owner was operating, and they just didn't know they
needed one. It wasn't previously enforced as stringently as it is.
I see a dumpster back there, but I think that's for Subway. From
what I could tell, but there's no enclosure at all.
Correct.
Okay. All right. Thank you. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Bongero. Any other questions for staff? Is the
petitioner here this evening? We will need your name and
address for the record please. Hi, good evening, ma'am.
Ms. Lewis: Hi, Megan Lewis. 19621 Flamingo.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Ms. Lewis:
August 11, 2026
32573
Thank you, Ms. Lewis. What would you like to tell us about your
business?
So yes, we did. We've only been operating since February, very
softly opening, honestly, until inspection told us that we needed
to get a waiver use. It was zoned for retail, so we didn't realize
there was a separation from secondhand and retail because it's
technically still, we're selling retail goods and services, so that's
why we're here. We're here to make sure we go through the
proper channels. The owner of the property is also here regarding
the parking spots and things like that and enclosures. I'm sure he
can answer questions on that. We aren't going to do any
reservations inside yet. We kind of wanted to get through this
process, see how it worked out, and go from there.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, very good. Well, let me see if there's any questions for you
first.
Ms. Lewis: Okay.
Mr. Wilshaw: Since you're up here, any questions for Ms. Lewis about her
business?
Mr. Bongero: Mr. Chair.
Mr. Wilshaw: Sure, Mr. Bongero.
Mr. Bongero: What do you currently do for your trash?
Ms. Lewis: We use the Priority Waste dumpster in the back.
Mr. Bongero: There's like one. Is that you share it with?
Ms. Lewis: I share it with the liquor. He owns the whole complex.
Mr. Bongero: Not Subway. Subway.
Ms. Lewis: No, Subway has their own, and Tacos 22 has their own as well.
Mr. Bongero: Okay, so I see that's an enclosure.
Ms. Lewis: Correct. Yep.
Mr. Bongero: Okay.
Ms. Lewis:
Mr. Bongero:
Ms. Lewis:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Droze:
Ms. Lewis:
Mr. Droze:
Ms. Lewis:
Mr. Droze:
August 11, 2026
32574
And we typically, we don't have too much trash. I mean, once a
week I'm getting trash out for the most part. Obviously, the idea
is to be busier, but we wanted to go through this process before
we did anything major and hired and all that. We're basically, I
own an estate sale company as well, so we are going to take on
consignments for people that can't have sales or a lot of older
folks that only need to get rid of one or two pieces. They're not
fully downsizing. That was a purpose for us to open. We used to
actually operate on Stark Road, but it was a warehouse space. It
wasn't zoned for retail at all, so we couldn't really do anything. It
was more storage, so we wanted to find a place that we could
actually operate because we were getting larger amounts of
people wanting us to help, and we just want to keep stuff at all
landfills as well.
Okay, I understand. Thank you.
You're welcome.
Thank you, Mr. Bongero. Any other questions for this petitioner?
Mr. Droze.
Mr. Chair, thank you. Given that you're open and you mentioned
you're not quite as busy as you want to be.
Right.
But just out of curiosity, there's an estimation of how many
parking spaces you would need. Do you ever feel like you're close
to that? Is it, does it ever get tight there?
No, not really. I've talked with Tacos22 because I feel like a lot of
their customers park over here on our side, and obviously once
we get through this process and moving, and I'm gonna, I want to
do a grand opening and kind of thing like that. Then they would
reinforce the parking, probably some signs that this is parking
only for this shop.
Okay, and where I guess I'm going with my question is if the
parking lot does get restriped or improved as part of this process,
it looks like there are some kind of, I'll say, inefficiencies in the
layout, and so if that gets redone, maybe some of the-- there's
like a space in the far northeast corner that really doesn't seem
all that accessible. So, if you could afford to lose a space or two,
that might help with overall flow.
Ms. Lewis:
Mr. Droze:
Ms. Lewis:
Mr. Droze:
Ms. Lewis:
Mr. Wilshaw:
August 11, 2026
32575
Okay.
but just kind of knowing what you're seeing out there on the
ground is helpful. Thank you.
Yeah, yeah. Right now is, I think we'll be fine. And like Subway,
there's certain times where they're the busiest. Lunchtime,
obviously, and then usually dinner time. And we plan on to
operate Wednesday through Sunday. Tacos is closed on
Sundays, so that'd be kind of cool. We'll have some balance and
parking.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Thank you, Mr. Droze. Any other questions for this petitioner?
Does anybody have any questions for the landlord in regards to
this property?
Mr. Caramagno: Oh yes.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Caramagno:
Mr. Yono:
Mr. Caramagno:
Mr. Yono:
Well, we need to get this gentleman to come up. It sounds like
Mr. Caramagno is going to have the floor.
Well, I got, yeah, certainly got some questions.
Sure.
I mean, I didn't look at this property before our study session, and
there were some comments about your property and how it's how
it's maintained. So I went over there a few days afterwards, and
yeah, they were, they meaning this panel, was absolutely right. It
was an embarrassing -looking.
Yeah, we had a landscaping person who wasn't doing a good job.
So I finally find somebody else, he went back and took care of
everything. And the back, normally I'll take care of it. What was
going on with weeds and try to keep it clean as much as possible.
Mr. Caramagno: Okay, it's....
Mr. Yono:
I try do a little front. Try mixing it up with some flowers, some
mulch, make it look a little better. Where's the sign at.
Mr. Caramagno:
Mr: Yono:
Mr. Caramagno:
Mr. Yono:
Mr. Caramagno:
Mr. Yono:
August 11, 2026
32576
Yeah, yeah, I understand the landscaping and the weeds. But
how does something get this bad in that —
I purchased-
--of those as an owner? How does it get this bad in the city with
you as an owner that the striping's gone, the weeds are grown,
the....
Stripes? I did it. I think was last year. I did it. The seal on stripes.
You striped that last year?
Year was last year or year before, I believe. Normally, this is good
for you know for four years at least. But stripes, I can do. Go back
and do it again. It's not a big deal. I can hire somebody to do it.
Mr. Caramagno: That's certainly going to be part of the equation here. The other
question I've got is, and you may have taken care of some of
these things, but the paddle boat out back and the grass, what's
that? Is there a lake back there I'm missing or something?
Mr. Yono:
Mr. Caramagno:
Mr. Yono:
Mr. Caramagno:
Mr. Yono:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Yono:
Mr. Wilshaw:
I have no idea. I have to look at it. I have no idea.
Yeah, that's what I would suggest. I would suggest you look at
the property a little more and a little more often because --
I'm sorry. You know what? I'm bleeding.
What happened to you?
I think out of my nose. Oh, thank you. Anyway. I'm okay. I could
deal with this. Okay. Thank you.
Do you need to take a break? You'll be all right.
I'll be fine.
Okay.
Mr. Caramagno: Yeah. So, so at the end of the day, sorry that your nose is
bleeding, but this property needs some attention. I think you need
to pay some serious attention to this property. You've got a
tenant, you've got, the building looks full now, and then the other
question I've got is, are you opposed to building a rubbish
enclosure in back?
August 11, 2026
32577
Mr. Yono: I'm sorry?
Mr. Caramagno: Are you opposed to building a rubbish enclosure out back for your
dumpster?
Mr. Yono: I have one. Nobody asked for it. I mean, Subway's been there
forever. There was no closure for it. And the top of next door, I
mean, they just brought their dumpster. And mine, I have it on the
party store. I have the closure for it.
Mr. Caramagno: Well, for this for this property. I'd like to see that, and just telling
you what I'd like to see, whether it goes through or not. I don't
know. And then that pylon sign you have out front, is that utilized,
or is that just a blank pylon sign in front with nothing on it
anymore?
Mr. Yono: What is that? I don't know.
Mr. Wilshaw: It would be the sign that's in the right at the front of the building
on a pole.
Ms. Lewis: The yellow sign?
Mr. Wilshaw: Yeah.
Ms. Lewis: Yeah. So I didn't do anything with that. That's been there.
Mr. Wilshaw: Yeah. Ma'am, if you can come forward, just because we do have
a TV audience that can't hear you. Give your landlord a break too.
Thank you.
Ms. Lewis:
You did go to the doctor today for that. So from what I heard from
inspection is that the tall sign is grandfathered in because it has
been there for so long. But if I wanted to do anything with it, which
I would like to at some point, then we would probably have to get
a new one that's lower because that's your guys's new ordinance
is --
Mr. Caramagno: That's right.
Ms. Lewis:
--six feet off of ground, so obviously we haven't crossed that
bridge yet. But that has always been there way before I was even
around.
August 11, 2026
32578
Mr. Caramagno: Yeah, that's I understand that, but that's something else. It's just
a concern of mine when I see the level of care with this property.
Ms. Lewis: Yeah.
Mr. Caramagno: And I like to see you be successful.
Ms. Lewis: I agree.
Mr. Caramagno: Very successful, but the property doesn't want to attract people
to come there, just looks like hell to be honest with you. So I'm
going to make a few conditions on whatever we do here.
Ms. Lewis: I did add some plants to my front door area and all of my... all the
weeds and all of Subway. We took care of that as well.
Mr. Caramagno: Looking forward to seeing it. Thank you.
Ms. Lewis:
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Droze:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Thank you.
Mr. Chair. One thing I'd like to add: it does look at when the
original building was approved. It does appear that there was a
dumpster enclosure with walls required in the site plan.
So it just slipped through the cracks, I guess. All right, we'll have
to talk about that. Does anybody else have any questions, Mr.
Droze?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. One other thing, just looking at the building
and kind of recognizing that there are some things that may have
changed a little bit over time, it's not evident just looking back
at.... We got about almost 20 years of Google Street View now
to see, but it doesn't look like there's ever been any sort of light
poles in the parking lot. But if you look at the building, you can
definitely tell the LEDs are pretty well trained in going into the
right of way. So that's just something, maybe if as part of the
ordinance inspection, if they can look at that because I know
that's one of the things we try to control if we can, so we're not
flooding the right away with lighting from the top of the buildings.
That is a good observation, and yes, Google Maps is very helpful
for looking at history. Any other questions, comments from my
colleagues? Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to
speak for or against this item? Seeing no one coming forward, I
will close the public hearing and ask for a motion.
August 11, 2026
32579
On a motion by Dinaro, seconded by Caramagno, and unanimously adopted, it
was
#08-50-2026
RESOLVED, That pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on August 11, 2026, on Petition
2026-07-02-19 submitted by Hands of Time, requesting waiver
use approval pursuant to Section 3.11 and 6.53 of the Livonia
Zoning Ordinance to operate a second-hand store at 19704
Middle Belt Road located at the northeast corner of Middle Belt
Road and St. Martins Street in the southwest Y of Section 1, the
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to City Council
that Petition 2026-07-02-19 be approved for the following
reasons or subject to the following conditions:
1. There shall be no outdoor sales, storage, or display of
merchandise; and
2. This waiver approval is limited to this applicant and can only be
transferred to another user with approval by the City Council.
3. That the parking lot shall be repaired, resealed, and restriped as
necessary to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department.
Parking spaces shall be doubled striped at ten feet (10') wide by
twenty feet (20') in length.
4. That the three walls of the trash dumpster area shall be
constructed out of building materials that shall complement that
of the building. The enclosure gates shall be of solid panel steel
construction or durable, long-lasting solid panel fiberglass. The
trash dumpster area shall be maintained and when not in use
closed at all times.
5. That all existing landscaped areas shall be cleaned up, re -
managed and permanently maintained in a healthy condition.
FURTHER RESOLVED, That notice of the above hearing was
given in accordance with the provisions of Section 13.13 of the
Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as amended.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion?
Ms. Dinaro:
August 11, 2026
32580
So I'd like to offer an approving resolution that the request for a
waiver -use to operate a secondhand store at 19704 Middlebelt
Road is hereby approved for the following reasons, subject to City
Council approval and the following conditions: one, there shall be
no outdoor sales, storage, or display of merchandise; two, this
waiver approval is limited to this applicant and can only be
transferred to another user with approval by the city council. And
then we're also going to add the parking lot issues to this, and
then the dumpster enclosure. Is there anything else I missed?
Mr. Caramagno: Do you like the pylon sign?
Ms. Dinaro: I mean, we can add it. I'm indifferent about it.
Mr. Bongero: The sign has subway on it too.
Mr. Caramagno: Doesn't it? Does it have a Subway sign on it?
Mr. Bongero: Yeah, I was just looking at it.
Mr. Caramagno: Okay, maybe not then. It's just, I mean, okay.
Mr. Wilshaw: Yeah, we have opportunities.
Ms. Dinaro: So we're not going to touch that right now.
Mr. Caramagno: Right.
Mr. Wilshaw:
All right. So we have the addition of parking lot repairs, dumpster
enclosure for the dumpster. Anything else from anyone we
missed? Is there support for this motion? All right. This is made
by Dinaro, supported by Caramagno. Any discussion on the
motion? If there's no --
Mr. Ventura: Mr. Chairman, did we add the requirement for the maintenance
of landscaping?
Mr. Wilshaw:
Ms. Dinaro:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Maintenance of landscaping, yes.
Yep, happy to add that.
Sure, supporter's all right with that. So, thank you, Mr. Ventura, is
there anything else? If not, if the secretary is ready, please call
the roll.
August 11, 2026
32581
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution.
ITEM #4 PETITION 2026-01-07-01 City of Livonia Planning
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda Petition 2026-
01-07-01 submitted by the City Planning Commission, requesting
to amend the Livonia Vision 21 Master Plan and adopt Book 5,
Housing Sustainability, pursuant to Michigan Public Act 33 of
2008 (the Michigan Planning Enabling Act), as amended.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Mr. Uhazie.
Mr. Uhazie:
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This proposed amendment would add
Book Five to the Livonia Vision 21 Master Plan. The process was
initiated in 2024 through a $50,000 housing readiness incentive
grant from the Michigan State Housing Development Authority. In
September of 2024, the council approved the grant funding and
retained McKenna to draft the plan amendment. The process was
guided by a steering committee consisting of two council
representatives, two planning commission members,
representatives from the housing commission, including its
director, and one member of the Brownfield Authority. Book Five
is a plan to help address the city's housing needs and adopt the
land use policies that increase housing supply and affordability.
The plan is a required element of the Michigan Planning Enabling
Act, which was amended in 2024 to include housing as a core
provision of the community master plan, similar to the original
Livonia Vision 21 Master Plan process, the creation of the
housing sustainability plan involved community engagement,
including a website, opinion surveys, and open house. The plan
examines Livonia housing community or housing profile using
multiple key metrics, including population trends, age
demographic, employment, household size, income,
homeownership, education, affordability, occupancy, supply, and
demand. The proposed plan includes a housing strategy section
that identifies funding opportunities and priority housing
redevelopment sites. This also includes goals, objectives, and
implementation plan, but we also, as I mentioned, retain
McKenna, and I would think their associate, Mr. Smith, would like
to speak on this as well and provide some more, fill in more of the
blanks.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Uhazie. I do want to note just for folks in our
audience that there is some blood on this podium, so I would just
Mr. Smith:
August 11, 2026
32582
suggest that people use this podium for now, just for safety's
sake. Good evening, Mr. Smith.
Good evening. All right. Thank you again. My name is Donovan
Smith, the project manager for the master plan update or
amendment for the City of Livonia, and I do want to thank Mr.
Uhazie. He did a great overview of the project. So we are here at
the final stage. We did release the plan to the public, where we
solicited comment. I'm sorry, I don't believe we received any
public comment. So what we do have before you is an approving
resolution to adopt the master plan amendment, but if you do
have any direct questions, I'm here to answer those. Otherwise,
you have the resolution with you.
Mr. Wilshaw: All right, thank you, sir.
Mr. Smith: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any questions from any of my colleagues?
Ms. Dinaro: I have a question. How? So we received zero public comment.
How did we? How do we publish it? How do we request public
comment?
Mr. Smith: Did you want to answer that one, or...?
Mr. Uhazie: You could take it.
Mr. Smith: So we released the plan online. I believe we put a copy also in
the library, and then we did send out notices to our regional
communities and agencies, and then it was made available
online.
Ms. Dinaro:
Mr. Smith:
Ms. Dinaro:
Mr. Smith:
What does regional communities and agencies mean?
So, a part of the requirement of the state legislation is that you
notify all of your adjacent-- apologies, all of your adjacent
communities. So, all of your neighboring communities were
notified that you're adopting an amendment to a master plan, as
well as like SEMCOG, MDOT, the kind of regional agencies as
well.
Okay, and we got zero public comment.
I did not receive any comment.
Ms. Dinaro:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Uhazie:
Ms. Dinaro:
Mr. Uhazie:
August 11, 2026
32583
That's really difficult. It's going to be very difficult for me to vote
on this with zero public comment. Because that tells me that no
one has seen it, so I'm, I'm not, I'm not going to, I'm not confident
that this was adequately distributed to our community.
Okay.
Thank you, Ms. Dinaro. Is there any other questions or comments
for Mr. Smith?
Mr. Wilshaw.
Mr. Ventura?
Mr. Smith, just a follow-up question along the lines of Ms. Dinaro.
So you're telling us that no, there was no mailing or any attempt
to notify the citizens of the city, other than these public ways of
the change that you're proposing we adopt here tonight?
That is correct.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chair, I --
Thank you. Mr. Uhazie.
I would like to reiterate that we did go through an extensive public
engagement period prior to it being released. City Council did
approve it for release of public comment, so it has been in front
of city council, and we've had the public -facing website where we
in what, one or two open houses, where we did engage with the
public extensively. It's just that since council has approved it for
an official public comment, we have not received any of that 45-
day statute -required comment period. We were following the
statute and the notifications required under that. But it's not that
we have not engaged with the public from the beginning. It's just
that this final portion, we have not received any additional public
comment.
Can you talk through a little bit more about what public
engagement looked like?
Yes.
August 11, 2026
32584
Mr. Smith:
Ms. Dinaro:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Droze:
And I can also add to that. We did an open house April 25, 2025,
that had about 40 attendees, and that was held next door at the
library. We did also hold a survey, a community survey, that
received 600 responses, and all of those responses are included
in the back of the master plan. So the full result lists are included
in those, and then any comments, you know, where we were able
to apply them into the plan. I'm sorry, we did migrate those into
the document.
Thank you.
Mr. Uhazie. Did you cover everything you needed?
Yes, but they did summarize all the comments we received in the
report from the previous public engagements, and as I mentioned
in the little intro. We did, this is the same exact process that we
in notification requirements that we followed with the original
master plan adoption.
Right, which is that there are situations where we have obviously,
we want to publicly announce these things and we do that through
posting in publications and on the board outside, things like that.
Just Eke any other public meeting or process would follow, the
fact that we didn't receive any comments is not because we didn't
follow the process. It's just that there was no comments received,
or no one felt engaged enough to reply. It's not a situation of
where we send a postcard to every homeowner in the city asking
for their comments. It's, there is a public process that we follow,
though. Although I do certainly understand Ms. Dinaro's concern
about the fact that there's zero comments, that is unusual. So I
have a feeling there will be a few made today, though. So we'll
see what happens, which is good because there's folks here that
want to hopefully get engaged in the process. Does anybody else
on the panel have any questions? Mr. Droze?
Mr. Chair? If I could, I think what we've explained so far is that
there was engagement on the front end that was used to form the
document, and which, I mean that's typical of a planning process:
is you go to the community and present a lot of information and
gather that feedback, and then try to you know collate that into a
plan. But when this came to us back in October, November
timeframe, you know I think we looked at it, and you look at it on
the whole, the whole body of the report, and I think a lot of us had
a lot of questions about it, and then questions about how this
actually gets implemented and brought into our city process, and
so you know, the engagement of the final product I think is
August 11, 2026
32585
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
important too. And you know, the reality is we don't have the
Observer anymore. Media is different, and I think a lot of us are
fairly active with monitoring social media. I personally can't say I
saw it anywhere. So, I do think it's one thing to put a link on a
website. It's another thing to actually push it out to the community
to solicit that feedback. You know, it's different than it was
probably when this plan was generated five or six years ago. So
I think, as Ms.. Dinaro said, it's surprising to not see anything,
especially in this day and age.
Good point. Thank you for those comments. Any other questions,
comments, anyone?
Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Ventura.
Mr. Smith, can you tell us, give us an overview of the kinds of
changes that this Book Five will bring to housing stock in Livonia,
or affect existing housing stock?
Yes. So your original Vision 2021 plan was drafted the end of
2019, early 2020, kind of peak COVID. So, while it is a good plan,
it has 2020 census data as well as demographic and background
data from 2019-2020 American Census Survey. So, one, this
document gives you as current data as we have at the time of
drafting. So, I believe you do have 2025 ACS data in that draft
plan. So, you get an updated data set for the plan. In addition to,
your previous plans did not have the level of housing background
data as this plan does. In November 2021, there was an
amendment to the Planning and Zoning Enabling Act that
required that master plans now have housing sections. So your
previous plan did not have that housing section, so this adds the
new statutory requirement for housing into your master plan.
Additionally, because that was not in your previous plan, it did not
have an implementation and zoning plan specific to housing,
which is what is included in this plan. And then, in addition to, you
have various observations as relates to housing, so your levels
of housing affordability, where that income band is, the updated
value of housing, the income as it relates to housing. So a lot of
very housing -specific data is included in this plan that was not in
your previous. And then, where there are opportunities for
improvement related to housing, this plan identifies those. For
example, your existing deed restricted and affordable housing
developments. So that would be like Newburgh Village, Brashear
Towers, I believe those that offer senior housing or affordable
August 11, 2026
32586
housing. One of the objectives is the plan is to maintain those
because as those were developed 20-plus years ago, those deed
restrictions are expiring. So it identifies that you want to maintain
those affordable housing units as they exist, but it does not say
you need to increase the number of affordable housing units,
more so maintain the ones that you currently have. In addition, it
highlights the need for market rate housing in various forms,
larger housing units based on changing household sizes here in
Livonia, and then the kind of strategy that wraps everything into
one is the priority development sites. So that's Laurel Park, the
Sears site. We looked at those and identified conceptual plans on
how you can use those sites to meet some of the housing goals
here in Livonia, which are to develop market -rate housing where
applicable, but also redevelop those sites to be destinations as
well as mixed -use experiences, and how that can be translated
into improvements and changes to your zoning ordinance to allow
those types of developments. So all of that together comprises
your housing strategy, which is: maintain your existing affordable
units where they are, promote and preserve your existing aging
housing. I forgot to mention your existing housing as it is aging.
Redevelop those priority sites into market -rate and mixed -use
developments, and then update your zoning ordinance to allow
all of those things to take place.
Mr. Ventura: Thank you. However, I was the chairman of the master plan
committee in 2000 when we did it. I also served on the committee
that considered this amendment, this edition, and I didn't hear
anything in your answer that told me how it's going to change
existing housing stock, existing zoning, or more importantly, how
it's going to help provide more affordable housing. When I was on
the committee that considered this amendment, I took the time,
and I happened to be in the real estate business, so I had the
resources to do this. I took the time to look at the housing stock
that exists in the city of Livonia between the eastern and western
boundaries of the city, south of Plymouth Road, and I found that
there was plenty of housing down there available at way under
$300,000. Many of them selling for less than $200,000. I don't
know that it gets more affordable than that. This is existing
housing. These are nice neighborhoods. These are well -
maintained homes. Yes, they're smaller homes, and yes, they're
on smaller lots. But there's no lack of pride of ownership down
there. This is part of our community, and as Mr. Bongero can
testify better than I, you can't replace those houses down there
for an affordable quote -unquote price. You can't build that house
today for the prices that they're being sold for, and so to Ms.
Dinaro's point, I'm not sure what we're accomplishing here. I'm
August 11, 2026
32587
not sure. I'm not sure we're accomplishing anything. We can't,
you know, we can't run around and give people money to go buy
a house at today's market prices, at today's mortgage rates. So
unless we're materially changing or changing in some
fundamental way, our ability to produce housing in this
community at prices that people can afford today, which I'm
certain is a is a economic impossibility, I don't understand what
we're going to approve here. I don't understand why we'd approve
this. And I and I appreciate. I know how hard you've worked on
this. I know how long you've worked on this, but I don't know how
you fix it. A situation that's essentially beyond your control. This
report sounds nice, okay, but I'm not sure that it changes a thing
for a young person or a young family trying to find a home to live
in and to put their family into this community. Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Ventura. Any other comments or questions, Mr.
Smith, or for the rest of our colleagues?
Mr. Caramagno: Mr. Chair, I do have a question. Let's just go. Let's just go back
to the zero feedback. You've done this in other communities,
haven't you?
Mr. Smith: Yes.
Mr. Caramagno: What kind of feedback have you had in the final stage in other
communities?
Mr. Smith:
It is in most plans that I've done during the 45-day public comment
period, where you receive written comment primarily. I don't recall
receiving any written comment. Maybe one or two, but ifs usually
not an opportunity most residents take advantage of. However,
the public hearing, which is this event, is typically where you see
the most response from residents. It is not abnormal, at least from
what I've seen, and I've done a handful of master plans in various
communities. It is not abnormal to not receive written comment
during your 45-day period.
Mr. Caramagno: So this is not different than any other community that you've seen,
as far as the comment back. Is it different from the publication of
the opportunity to speak on it here versus any other community
you've worked in?
Mr. Smith:
I think it's in part what was brought up, just how people use the
internet and access to information. All communities follow the
Planning and Zoning Enabling Act as it relates to master plan
August 11, 2026
32588
adoption. There is not a requirement for a mass mailing outside
of the posted public hearings, the various meetings to get the
information released to the public, and any announcement that
the administration makes that this is going on. That's pretty
standard across.
Mr. Caramagno: Is it possible that this plan is confusing enough, or not detailed
enough, or a wish list enough that people just don't understand it
and can't really follow? But let's just say, like what Pete was
talking about, there's affordable homes in this community from
from A to Z, whether it's young folks, old folks, pricing ranges,
quality of properties, is it really something there that that's going
to make a difference, and force a change? How does this force a
change, or even recommend a change to the community. How
does it do that?
Mr. Smith: Yes. So, if I could just take a half step back.
Mr. Caramagno: Go.
Mr. Smith:
This program or grant was initiated by MSHDA, and MSHDA
maybe four or five years ago they created their statewide housing
plan, and the objective was to address housing affordability,
housing stock, and diversity across the state. And the intention
behind that was to address affordability. It is a multi -pronged
approach. So by addressing supply, you can address
affordability. By addressing diversity and addressing your
housing stock, these various things together can influence the
affordability across the band, across your community. What this
plan does is, it identifies opportunities to address all of those
things in their own respective right. So as it relates to housing
stock, it talks about the current age of housing, the stages of
aging, and how the impacts of aging housing on affordability. As
houses become older, maintenance and other things start to
weigh in, which increase affordability. So one of those strategies
is to address your existing housing stock by developing programs
or policies that identify funds to support aging housing, but then
you also have the other aspects of it where, if you do have aging
housing, you need alternative housing if people want to move
because that house. So there are other opportunities where it was
mentioned, you have existing other homes that may be
affordable, and that is good for that portion of your housing stock.
Then you have other aspects of your housing stock, such as
those affordable units. You want to maintain those because if
those expire, then those residents that are receiving the benefit
of affordable housing have to leave because those existing
August 11, 2026
32589
developments can go to market rate. So those strategies speak
to how to maintain and improve your existing stock to counteract
those challenges that come with those various aspects. When
you look at housing diversity and supply, the plan uses those
conceptual sites at Laurel Park and Sears site to envision ways
to increase the diversity of housing and have mixed -income
housing. So there are other options for affordability that are not
strictly low-income or strictly those very high -end apartments that
may price others out, so it gives you a range of affordability, rather
than saying just build this one series of housing or just build five -
story apartment buildings. There are other housing types that can
address the overall need for affordability as it exists across the
band. So while yes, you do have housing that is available at
250,000. You also have residents that don't make that level of
income that need housing at a different band of the scale, and
then you also have residents at a higher end of the scale where
they may want more expensive housing, but you have a low
supply of that, or you have a higher. So there are various levels
of income that reflect affordability, and the plan. I think the plan
does a successful job of identifying where those bands are and
where the gaps are on your existing housing.
Mr. Caramagno: So how does that make something happen? Do you think the
developers look at this and say, "Hey, look, there's an opportunity
for lower -end homes in Livonia." How do you think this makes
something happen down the road?
Mr. Smith: So the bulk of Livonia is built out.
Mr. Caramagno: What's that?
Mr. Smith: So the bulk of Livonia is built out.
Mr. Caramagno: Of course, it is. Yes.
Mr. Smith:
So your opportunities for new single-family housing are pretty
low. Your opportunities for a lot of infill housing, where there aren't
a lot of vacant infill, you have some, but not, you know, other
communities. Detroit, for example, there's a lot more opportunity
for single-family housing. Where the plan identifies opportunity for
housing is those private redevelopment sites. The challenge and
what the master plan aims to accomplish is by identifying this is
an opportunity, and what the plan has to do is allow zoning to
allow that opportunity to happen. And if you don't identify that you
need a zoning district or you need various adjustments to your
zoning regulation, then the developers that are interested in doing
August 11, 2026
32590
those types of projects, they will go to other communities,
because they don't want to have to go through additional
rezonings, they don't want to have to go through variance
meetings. They want to open a plan and identify that a community
wants to do this type of thing. And in one way or another, it may
vary, but the community identifies. That this is something that will
benefit them, increasing diversity in housing, and these are sites
that have the opportunity to do that. The plan says you need to
adjust and amend your zoning to allow these types of
development. That is the key component of what master plans do
as they relate to planning and zoning. If the planning and zoning
does not allow that, then those sites will continue to be
undeveloped because the zoning is restrictive. So that is the
catalytic opportunity that would allow something to happen. The
plan identifies where you can implement diverse housing types,
and that these are the various improvements to your zoning
ordinance to allow developers to express interest in doing these
things.
Mr. Caramagno: Thank you.
Mr. Smith: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Ventura:
Thank you, Mr. Caramagno. Any other questions or comments.
Mr. Ventura?
Mr. Chairman. Two things that you just mentioned, Mr. Smith. I'd
ask you. So you readily acknowledge that no new construction is
going to qualify for this new cadre of affordable housing.
Not that no new construction could qualify.
No, I'm saying you acknowledge that the economics of the
situation would not allow new construction to become this
affordable housing.
It would be very difficult. Yes.
Close enough.
Yes.
Number two. When we were at one of the meetings on
considering this, the subject of a practice in other states, and I
don't know whether anywhere in this state, was briefly discussed,
and I confess I forgot the term that was applied to it, but it
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
August 11, 2026
32591
basically changed zoning laws so people could rent their garages
to people.
Accessory dwelling units.
Say it again.
Accessory dwelling units. Yes.
Right. Does this proposal include that?
This proposal does. I believe it does include a recommendation
for the consideration of accessory dwelling units as a permitted
use within the zoning ordinance.
So, if this is voted in, someone could wake up one day and find
another family living in the garage next to them.
No, if this is voted in, it simply instructs the planning department,
and they can clarify as needed, that this is an ordinance that
needs to be developed that would go through the planning
commission and ultimately city council. But it does not guarantee
that tomorrow somebody could do that. It just says that as a
community we believe this is something that we should be looking
into, and then planning and zoning will identify the necessary
regulations to implement that.
Mr. Ventura: So you're telling us that it recommends that this happen. That
correct?
Mr. Smith: Yes.
Mr. Ventura: Okay. And to your knowledge, does it require further action on
the part of the city to make it happen?
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
Yes, it requires --
What would that action be?
A formal zoning text amendment. So the same process that you
would undertake for a zoning map amendment, public hearing,
hearings like this, and city council approval, or the development
of any ordinance.
Mr. Ventura: So a change in the zoning law, basically.
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Droze:
August 11, 2026
32592
Yes, correct.
Okay, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And then, if I may add, the ordinance doesn't specify exactly
where, so it doesn't identify that these neighborhoods should
have it, and these neighborhoods don't. That would be flushed
out if it is the desire of this commission during that ordinance
development process.
So you're saying that accessory dwelling units, for one thing,
you're saying that accessory dwelling units would be a
recommendation by this plan, not... for the city to consider. Not...
it's not going to be enacted by this. And secondly, if we go through
the process of enacting that, we could do that for certain zoning
types, perhaps, and not other zoning types based on lot sizes and
other things.
Correct. You have full control over that.
Okay.
And then I would further add what the plan does is it identifies
strategies to address stock diversity and affordability, and a way
to address housing stock is through accessory dwelling units. A
way to address the diversity of housing options is through
accessory dwelling units, and a way to address affordability, if
you have family members that want to stay with you, instead of
them going to an apartment, they could live in an ADU that
addresses affordability. So again, it doesn't say do these things
immediately. It says these are various strategies that you can
implement as a community to address housing stock diversity and
affordability.
Okay. Mr. Droze.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And this question is probably more for Mr.
Uhazie. Just kind of hearing what we're talking about here and
what the request tonight is. You know, going back to the process
and how this was presented to council, and I think recalling some
of the public comment that was made to council at the time is that
it did seem like there was a plan that there would be some public
engagement. Now, from my end, it seems like basically passing
this to council and then letting public engagement happen at the
podiums is probably not overly productive to finalizing a report
and getting a document put together. Which, if we approve the
Mr. Uhazie:
August 11, 2026
32593
resolution and send it that way, I guess that's what would happen,
and maybe that's one way to do it. But I guess is there a... if we
were to deny it tonight, could it go back and then basically I'll say
re -advertise with a more intentional push out to the community to
kind of and I recognize that you guys are under a timeline from a
grant perspective, but it is a master plan and I'm guessing
MSHDA would have some tolerance to additional community
discussion to get it right.
We can certainly request the additional time. That's something
that is available to us. I don't know whether they will grant it.
That's beyond my knowledge scope right now. But one thing I do
want to note with your description is that this would be, if you if
you pass it tonight, it would actually go to council just for receive
and file.
Mr. Droze: Okay.
Mr. Uhazie: They would not be holding a separate public hearing. This is the
public hearing.
Mr. Droze: So this is it.
Mr. Uhazie: Yes. One thing I do want to note is based off some of the
comments that we've heard from the commissioners and
previous engagements we did implement some things. You
asked how it changes the development. It does not directly
change the ordinance in any way. So, like Mr. Smith said, we
would not be automatically allowing any new types of
development. It would give us more background of what is
needed, and based off that, one of the recommendations that we
put on here is tracking, identifying sites that would be ripe for
redevelopment. It would track the timeframes [of] developers
from application to permitting, so that we can find inefficiencies
and essentially increase housing stock by making it cheaper for
the developer, not wasting as much of their time would be the
ultimate goal. Another thing that we looked at would be just
tracking the numbers of the investments and permits by year to
kind of see where we're going and how it's changing over time.
So the big thing that it's recommending as far as direct action
would be identifying ways that we can start tracking information
so that in the future we can use that to streamline the process
and improve development in the future. So we got to have a place
to start from and say, like, here's what we're doing. What's taking
so long? How can we what can we do to remove barriers to the
development process and essentially increase efficiency as a
August 11, 2026
32594
way to reduce the cost. We're not offering grants to the developer,
but what we can possibly do is say here are sites that are ripe for
redevelopment that you'd have an easy time. You still have to go
through the site plan approval process, but it's a site that's been
sitting vacant and the city is open, would likely be open to
development, we can say if it usually costs takes four months for
an approval, and we can get that down to three months. That's
just less cost to the developer. That's where it kind of shaves off
the cost, hopefully. It's not a direct infusion in any way, but it's
looking at what we do as an organization to improve the
outcomes for the community.
Mr. Wilshaw: Yeah, what I'm hearing, Mr. Uhazie, is obviously we're looking to
understand what the action items are, what actionable things
come out of this process, and what I'm hearing you say, and I'm
kind of gathering from Mr. Smith as well, is one of the things that
we could do is in certain areas where we see it being primed for
redevelopment into potential mixed use or residential housing, we
can create a zone of some sort around that through ordinance
that would say, hey, this is if you want to, if a developer wants to
come here in here and purchase this property and do that type of
development, we can fast track that or incentivize that process in
some way to try to encourage that. At the end of the day, we can't
make someone redevelop Laurel Park or Sears or any other
parcel. That's going to be up to that individual property owner that
owns that property currently to decide if they want to sell it, what
they want to sell it for, and who wants to buy it and what they want
to pay for it. So we play a small cog in the wheel, so to speak,
you know, a small piece of the pie, in trying to incentivize
redevelopment, but we're certainly not in control of it. This is all
still private property.
Mr. Uhazie:
Correct. And this document doesn't change the way we control it.
It just makes recommendations of what, from based off of what
we heard and the public engagements that we did conduct. I
should say gathering the information first of all. Just this was not
a portion. Housing was touched upon in the original master plan
process, but it wasn't a focus area. So this again is a lot of just
gathering information to say here's stuff that we didn't do before,
and we, if we were redoing it today, the state of Michigan would
require us to do, and it's giving us a starting point to say now when
you're reviewing something like Donovan had mentioned, like the
need for higher end developments. If we were to receive a petition
for a multifamily development that increased density, but was at
a higher end. You guys could use that information to say, I don't
like apartments of this type typically, but it is something that I now
August 11, 2026
32595
can say we are in need of. We are not saturated for over higher
end apartments. Who's going to buy these? Who's going to rent
these? Who's going to those? Now you can see more informed
decision to say there is a market for those at that cost.
Mr. Wilshaw: I think the one thing that we see when we look at this book, and
obviously, when this was first presented to us, we sort of turned
it on its head and said, hey, we want this looked at again and we
want it modified. And Donovan went back and reworked this very
well. And what we have is a book that still ultimately has a lot of
good data, and it has an excellent set of data in there. If there's
anybody in the community or anybody that's looking to develop in
this community, is looking for housing data, it's a good data set in
this book. That's great, but that doesn't do anything. It's just a
bunch of numbers, and it might help someone in understanding
kind of where the housing stock in this community is, but it's not
actionable in any way. So you know our concern is that we
obviously want actionable things as well. We want to make sure
that this is actually doing something, moving the ball forward, so
to speak. It's not going to move any mountains, I don't sense, it's
an incremental or small movement, but ifs setting that up. The
only thing, what I'm hearing from a lot of my colleagues, and
certainly my feeling is, is I don't want to just be checking a box.
And there's a certain part of this to me that feels like that's kind of
what we're doing. Is the state requires we do this, so we're doing
it, and we check that box and kind of move on. And that's a that's
a waste of money, and ifs not very efficient to do that. It satisfies
the state, I guess, but you know, I'd like this to be a little bit more
substantial than just checking a box, personally. But my question
to you, Mr. Uhazie, is, we're having a lot of discussion about this
tonight. There's going to be, I think, some additional discussion
from folks in our audience who are here because they're probably
here for this item, at least some of them, and that's going to be
wonderful to have that engagement. But I'm feeling a little bit of
trepidation signing off on this at this point from some of my
colleagues. So my question is, what would be the potential
courses of action? Obviously, if this is denied, what does that do
to this process? Because we have to. My understanding is, by
Michigan law, we have to adopt this book at some point.
Mr. Uhazie:
We would have to adopt it if we were redoing the master plan.
This is something that, if it was, it could be denied, and there
wouldn't be any statutory repercussions, is my understanding, but
it's ultimately up to how you would, this body would like to move
it forward. If it was denied, it could be just something that goes
into the scrap heap, and you know, if that's how you guys decide
August 11, 2026
32596
to move forward, you could table it and you request more
changes.
Mr. Wilshaw: Refinement.
Mr. Uhazie: Yeah, or you obviously could approve it, but ultimately it's up to
how you guys want to move forward with this. It was brought as
an opportunity because that grant fund was available, and it does
offer insights that we didn't previously have. But ultimately, if it's
something that this board is not interested in pursuing, that is an
option that you have.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, I appreciate you laying out those options for us. Mr.
Bongero.
Mr. Bongero: Just a comment. You know, no one, we got no response, right?
But do you think a lot of people didn't understand it? Like the issue
that Mr. Ventura brought up about the accessory dwelling. I
mean, knowing that, yeah, it could happen, but the thought of
renting somebody's garage, I think, if people knew that that could
happen in theory, might bring some people out. You know what I
mean?
Mr. Smith: Yeah.
Mr. Bongero: Is that something? You know, maybe they just don't understand
a lot of the language because it isn't really that easy reading.
Mr. Smith: I would say there are a couple things, and I'll start by saying what
this plan does not include, and that might fill the gaps in, because
this is an amendment, a lot of the content that would have
captured what I would assume would be the bulk of the
community is in your first four books. You know, housing is a
small portion of the greater land use plan, the greater parks and
recreation system, transportation. There are other aspects of a
comprehensive master plan that were not addressed because
this is only an amendment. We did not comprehensively open up
your entire plan and redo the entire thing. So, on one hand, now
what this plan kind of requires you to focus on is planning and
zoning and housing, which is a very small niche opportunity in
terms of developing and identifying strategies. And planning and
zoning, while I am a fan and I love it, it's not always the easiest
topic to follow and understand. It's very legal -heavy. A lot of
regulatory policies that define how to do that. So, on one hand,
yes, that is possible. And then I would also add what it does not
include again, because it is not a full comprehensive. It is an
August 11, 2026
32597
Mr. Bongero:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Smith:
amendment for one component, it doesn't have the greater future
land use implementation component of that plan. That
component is still active and well within your first four books, and
because that portion of the plan still functions, this portion focuses
on particularly those opportunity sites, the ones that are not
identified in your first four books. So I guess maybe there are both
sides to that question. While yes, it may have aspects of it that
are difficult to follow, there are individuals such as developers,
which is the target audience of that portion of the plan, that can
look at that plan and identify a lot of information that would allow
them to make a decision if they should look at Livonia to bring
that type of project or if they should go to another place. So I
guess maybe yes and no to that question.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bongero. Any other questions, comments? Mr.
Ventura.
I hate to do this. I got to make another comment, Mr. Don-- or Mr.
Smith.
Yes.
One of the things that we did when we did the new master plan
in 2000 is Livonia has traditionally been a single-family
community.
Correct.
Single-family homes.
Correct.
And it was very much discouraged to build apartments in Livonia,
and consequently, in 2000, when that master plan was done, you
could count the number of apartment developments in this city on
one hand. There were none. Virtually. None of them were large.
Correct.
And the changes that we made in that master plan have produced
a relatively large explosion in apartment construction in this city.
Correct.
August 11, 2026
32598
Mr. Ventura: And we have hundreds of apartments, either planned and
approved, or under construction at this present time. It's a ground
change. It's a groundswell of change to the housing stock in this
community, and to the credit of the developers that have brought
these developments to our community, they've been very
sensitive to the citizens of the community, and they've come to
these meetings and made comments about proposed
developments, and they've responded to them, and have come
forward, and we have approved, and the council has approved
these apartment developments that are consistent with the plans
of the development or of the developer, and acceptable to the
citizens of Livonia. I still don't see how any other zoning category
that we can devise without degrading the housing stock that we're
putting in the city can be possible.
Mr. Smith: So --
Mr. Ventura: Economics, at the end of the day, are going to drive this thing.
And as Mr. Wilshaw pointed out, you can-- the landowners are
the ones that are going to say yes, I'll sell it for this price, and the
developers, which Mr. Bongero can address, they have to deal
with the economic realities of their business. It just doesn't, unless
you're going to build 400-square-foot living-- dwelling units. I don't
know how you do it. There just isn't a way to do it, I can tell you.
And so, again, to my colleagues, we're all looking for something
that we can do that's realistic, and I'm not hearing it. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Smith.
Through the chair. The options presented to you within the toolkit,
the tools available within your toolkit, as relates to the planning
commission, are planning and zoning. And if your planning and
zoning does not have the background and support from your
master plan to make adjustments where needed, particularly
around those, the three conceptual sites, such as the permitted
use table, height requirements, the various regulations that
control development. If the master plan provides the background
that allows for those things to happen via text amendments, that
that is one of your most actionable items within your plan, and
that is its own year -long, two -year -long process in itself to identify
the various regulations to do that. And your master plan is the
document that tells you, you need to do that, and that's only one
of the various tools as it relates to single-family housing. If your
goal is to develop single-family housing, you have to look at the
various funding opportunities that exist to do that. And the plan
Mr. Uhazie:
August 11, 2026
32599
identifies what those funding opportunities are. If you want to do
light tech, that's an option. If you want to do the brownfield
residential housing TIF, that is an option. And the follow-up to
brownfield housing TIFs is to develop a policy. The plan says, I
apologize. The plan says you need to develop a policy. That is
your next actionable step, and the various aspects of the other
challenges I mentioned are those actionable steps. If you want to
preserve those existing affordable housing units, when those
projects come to city council. The plan recommends you either
approve them or you identify policies that guide your decision
making on how to approve those. That is your actionable step as
it relates to the cost of housing. The cost of housing is the cost of
housing, and there is very little cities around the country are able
to do to impact the cost of lumber. COVID doubled the cost of
lumber from 200 to 200 to 400, and then it went back down, and
housing picked up where it could after that. Those aspects you
don't have direct control over, and we know this. But there are
other aspects that you do have control over, and that is where the
plan identifies you can take action, updating your zoning to allow
these types of developments to exist. The master plan, the future
land use plan that currently exists in your Livonia 21 plan, there
are various properties that have not been rezoned to align those
properties to development. That is a recommendation that is
identified into your plan. So that step could be undertaken
immediately. Again, these things prepare the land for
development in alignment with your zoning ordinance, and that is
the strongest tool that the city of Livonia has to encourage
development, to encourage affordability, and all the various
aspects that address affordability across all levels of Livonia, -the
low income all the way to the extremely high income.
And if I can add to that, I think one of the things that is important
with this document is that if a developer does come in with a
multifamily development, this provides more evidence for us to
say, well, that's great. A tower, a tower apartment is great, but we
want to see more small scale, incompatible or compatible with the
neighborhood, and this supports that saying we've looked at this.
These are the priorities. We don't want a tower. We want design
that is, takes the neighborhood into consideration. We want
smaller scale development focusing on if we're going to do
multifamily, it should fit into the neighborhood and be the right
size. It just gives us more leverage in the future to say when we
make those zoning decisions to say this is why we're saying you
can't have a tower apartment, but you could have something that
meets, has a diversity of housing types or something that meets
the needs of the community, still offers multifamily, so you can
Mr. Smith:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Smith:
August 11, 2026
32600
still meet those price restrictions that you have, but it gives us
more reason to, say, pushback. This is why we want those things,
not just to say you can't have it, but here's the reason. That we've
gone to the community. They said they want, they're okay with
smaller scale multifamily maybe, in certain areas, and that's why
we're saying no to this this development.
And if I may, through the chair.
Mr. Smith, go ahead.
If I just may give one more example, we heard through the
engagement and through the steering committee conversations
that there were some developments that were of larger scale than
may be ideal, and there were complaints about those. So any
future development, there was an expression that those be of
smaller scale, more of a relatable character to the community,
rather than these larger scale, multifamily, extremely dense types
of developments. So when we looked at the conceptual plans for
Laurel Park, the Sears site, and then there's a third site. It's a
much smaller parcel. We looked at those and said, how can we
utilize these to accommodate smaller types of development? So
instead of getting one large, seven, eight -story development on
the Sears site, instead, you get much smaller five -unit types of
developments, eight -unit smaller apartments. Again, retail
spaces mixed with apartments on top. So instead of encouraging
or attracting large scale, it says these are the types of housing
that we're interested in developing, and what it further does is
currently majority zoning districts allow either a single type of
building or a single type of development. So in order to
accomplish any of those projects identified on those primary
development sites, there does have to be a, if not a brand new
district, a significant change to one of your existing districts, to
allow one type of development to have mixed retail separate from
that building. You have a five -unit apartment building. Separate
from that, you have a eight -unit. Currently, and Mr. Uhazie can
correct me if I'm wrong. You don't have an exact district that
makes that a easy administrable process, and so if you do want
those types of developments and you do want to increase the
diversity of housing, you need to start to identify what that
ordinance looks like, and this master plan gives that
recommendation, and the entire conceptual plan is the framework
on how you can accomplish that. You just have to develop the
necessary zoning regulations to allow that to happen.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Smith. Mr. Droze, I believe, has the floor next.
Mr. Droze:
August 11, 2026
32601
Just one quick one, and what I, where I think the plan ended up
was a significant improvement. You did make the changes, and
kind of highlighting the Plymouth Road site as an example of kind
of a small-scale walkable neighborhood scale development. 1
think was helpful to kind of show the community that there are
different types of multifamily developments, ones that certainly
are bigger, like was talked about, but much more neighborhood
scale, where it's really just at the end of the street. You might
have some commercial on the ground floor to kind of show those
as opportunities, and I think, I'm one voice of 95,000 plus in
Livonia, so I was fairly happy with where we ended up. But you
know, there was also a lot of metrics in the study and the report
that talked about, I kind of characterize it as almost some red
lights in the cockpit of things that we should be thinking about,
and. I think going back to Ms. Dinaro's comment about the
outreach, I think the community needs to see all that in a
thoughtful way, and because I think, what I think it sets up is for
the community to have the conversation about what do our
commercial quarters look like? Are we okay with having these
vast parking lots that front the mile roads? Could there be
opportunity to do infill there? How would that look? Because that
sets up the conversation when rezoning comes in is whether it's
something we want or not. And then you know to the point about
the development community, they're familiar with this is
something that it's got a chance or this is something that doesn't,
so I think bringing the community back together to talk about that,
because again, going back to your engagement, really the
engagement said that people were pretty happy with the way
things are, and maybe they still are, but I think we have to give
time for that question to be asked, so that's my only suggestion.
I think the plan is probably as good as it's going to get. I mean,
obviously, we'll get some community feedback, but that's the
point, right? I think we got to put it out there and see where people
are at on it.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Droze. I am going to open the floor up for folks in
our audience who wish to speak on this. The reason is we've had
a lot of good dialog here the last hour. It's, this is unusual for us
to have this much dialog on a single subject, but it's I think it's
worthwhile. It gives people a chance to see kind of where we're
at. They see the process. They're seeing the sausage being
made, so to speak, which is a good thing. We need to get
community input. We need to do this process. So I want to give
them an opportunity, the folks who are here, a chance to speak,
and then we'll make our decision from there. So I think that's the
Ms. Calhoun:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Ms. Calhoun:
August 11, 2026
32602
next step that I want to go to, so that we can keep the move.
Because we do have a couple other items on this agenda I want
to get through as well. So I do, I want to be cognizant of
everyone's time and keep the process kind of moving as well. So,
so if my colleagues are okay with that, I'm going to go to the floor.
If there's anyone in this audience wishing to speak on this item.
Feel free to come forward. I do want to say before we get into
public comment that I just want to reiterate that we are here to
speak about Book Five of the master plan. I do realize that there
is a controversy that exists within this community over the Vision
21 Master Plan as a total document. We are not revising or
looking at the existing documents, books one through four. So we
don't need to relitigate that at this point. What's here in the master
plan is already here. We are just adding to it with this Book Five:
Housing. So please restrict your comments to the subject at hand
tonight. Good evening, ma'am.
It's cleaned?
It's all been cleaned. Yes, thank you.
Hi, Betsy Calhoun, Kimberly Oak subdivision. I just like to
comment that I got a look at this document a couple months ago,
and I recall it was a thoughtful and thorough assessment of
existing housing conditions. And as that, as far as that goes, it's
good background. I'm not sure how any community member
could dispute that or would want to. It's a good kind of a history.
What seemed to be the plan were the tables with ideas for
different stakeholders or resources for certain items, and what got
the attention of the Greenleaf Commission on Sustainability, and
we did comment whether or not those comments were
incorporated, was the word "sustainability." And you know, gee,
why didn't they ask us? If you Google sustainability, it pretty much
talks about people, planets, profits. This use of sustainability is
housing. I understand the intent, but it's not how sustainability is
being used today. And there's no mention of what to do with old
buildings, reincorporating them into housing or anything like that.
And there, I think Greenleaf Commission was only listed as a
resource for like one item. And we're like, wait, we could
contribute ideas for four or five of these. So anyway, that's my
comments on sustainability. So it's kind of a strange use of the
word, and I agree that more public engagement would be good. I
don't know that I saw this on the community page. You know, the
Facebook page. Social media is our, ifs our Observer now, and
we need to adjust to the times and figure out how to get the
information out there to people. So, thanks.
August 11, 2026
32603
Mr. Wilshaw: Well, thank you for your comments, Ms. Calhoun. Good evening,
sir.
Mr. Wilson:
Hi, Trevor Wilson, 17538 Hillcrest. I just want to second Ms.
Dinaro's comments on the lack of notice. I'm kind of clued. I try to
follow this stuff. I've been through the Vision, the master plan
meetings. I've been through planning, zoning stuff for the field
outside of Kimberly Oaks, on Merriman. Right. I've been through
city council meetings, and whenever there's anything dealing with
zoning, this room is packed, and the discussion goes on forever.
And there's maybe a dozen people in this room, so I mean I don't
remember seeing it on Facebook. I only saw it because someone
in our neighborhood subgroup posted something because we're
always vigilant of what's going on in the field behind the church
up there. So there's been lack of discussion, lack of notification,
and even sitting through here today, I'm still not sure what Book
Five is, right? I hear someone talking about grants for the city tied
to this. I hear talk of diversity of housing, and then shifts
immediately to apartments. One of the things that I've always
thought has made Livonia special is the amount of single-family
homes, and I've said in front of this council before, and I'll say it
again, single-family homes I think is where it's at. You know, let's
get families in and a chance to own versus paying rent, and let's
get that the ability to lay down roots and get something permanent
for these people than actual apartments. That's one of the things
that I. That's one of the things that drew me here was that it was
single-family homes. I've lived here 11 years now, but I lived here
in the, I went to Stevenson for a bit as well. I grew up in
Farmington. It's kind of the same, similar thing, but the
neighborhood feels right, you know. I'd like to just make just that's
what I'm would like to see. But like I said, we need more
discussion in understanding what the 2021 is and what the grant
is, and what the grant to the city is for, right? So.
Mr. Wilshaw: Sure, thank you, mister. Just you know, the grant is for Mr.
Donovan, Mr. Smith, and his, the work that he's been putting into
this project. Okay, that's what the grant is for is to build this this.
Mr. Wilson:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Wilson:
Okay, so it's not tied to housing developments or anything.
No, it's not like grants to build houses or own houses or....
Yeah because one thing I saw and like one of the thing I was just
found it I just found the link and sitting on my phone here, and it's
like, like they called like 1,400 houses or developments that it was
August 11, 2026
32604
needed, and that would just scream like high density housing to
me, which would be apartments, right? And like I said, I'd like to
see people get the chance to own something versus rent.
Mr. Wilshaw: Definitely. I appreciate it. Thank you.
Mr. Wilson: So thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Yes. Hi. Good evening, sir.
Mr. Johnson: Good evening, and I appreciate the cleanup over here.
Mr. Wilshaw: Certainly.
Mr. Johnson: In book --
Mr. Wilshaw: Sir, can we just get your name? Sorry.
Mr. Johnson: Steve Johnson at 18240 Sunset.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Johnson: In Book Five, the parcel north of Six Mile and east of Merriman
being considered for a change from parks and community to low -
density residential is concerning. First, the property sits next to a
tributary of the Rouge River, which is a federally protected
waterway, along with its watershed. There are strict rules and
permits for building near protected waterways. Key controls
include federal laws like the Clean Water Act, as well as local
buffer zones and state environmental permits. Secondly, it
appears some of the property sits in a floodplain. The creek
snakes both to the north and to the south into the property, in at
least two places. Third, the property enjoins Livonia Public School
property to the south, where a junior high used to sit. Livonia
schools have not stated what their future use of the property will
be. Speculation has been made that it may serve as a parking
and maintenance of their bus fleet. This would not seem in
harmony with property designation for low density residential
abutting it. And finally, the piece of land appears to be too small
in size to accommodate low -density residential housing. After
streets, sidewalks, setbacks, it doesn't appear as if there would
be adequate room for housing to justify the change. If you were
talking about the whole parcel, along with what the Livonia Public
Schools has over there --that 40 acres-- then maybe, maybe, but
this is a relatively and a very small piece of land. For the reasons
stated, I ask that you remove this piece of land. On the list of
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Karasinski:
August 11, 2026
32605
properties being considered in this Vision 21 amendment, thank
you.
Thank you, Mr. Johnson.
Good evening, Jerry Karasinski, 1948 Bainbridge Avenue. So I've
had a chance to review the plan. I wasn't aware that it was posted
on the website. I'd like to echo Commissioner Dinaro's comments
that residents in Livonia did not hear when this final version of the
plan was posted, so therefore 45 days were wasted because we
just didn't know. And until I saw this meeting notice, then I said,
"Oh my goodness!" I just was looking at the plan just as this
meeting was going on. So, to me, the significant pages of this
plan are pages 37, 38, and 39, which is called the Strategic Action
Plan for Housing Goals. There are three major goals: urban
design, housing and neighborhoods, and housing sustainability.
In those goals, there are four high -priority short-term actions, but
they're mixed throughout the list of actions. And one of the
actions, which to me doesn't seem to make sense, is require that
new construction and rehabilitation developments utilize high -
quality building and construction materials. Wouldn't it be more
appropriate to say that we would use the appropriate materials
for the cost of, or the intended price of the building or
development? Requiring high quality puts your price point at a
much higher level. When throughout the entire document, it
shows that basically we have a normal distribution of homes in
Livonia, where the very low -price poor people are underserved,
and the very expensive wealthy people are underserved. Well,
that is the demographic of our community, and it's one that
everyone, I think, to many of the points that were made by all of
the commissioners, anticipate and expect when they look at
moving to Livonia. So, if I were to make any recommendation, if
this plan is to be posted and approved is to review those action
steps, because a lot of the action steps require planning
commission, city staff to do things, and a lot of the things Mr.
Smith pointed out probably should be identified in more detail if
this is truly the strategic plan with basically just goals and
assignments of who might do them and what the relative
importance and timing are, but it does mention the 1,400 homes
and if we need 1,400 homes by 2050, maybe we need to figure
out what kinds of homes those are, and that should probably be
in here instead of just 1,400 homes by 2050. Thank you very
much.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Karasinski. Mr. Biga.
Mr. Biga:
August 11, 2026
32606
Good evening, Jim Biga, Livonia, Michigan. First, before I start, I
know we talked about this upstairs in planning, and I know we've
talked about it here. And I don't remember when it started when
you voted to send this to council, but I know when council had
that room full of people and we had oodles of public comment,
the understanding was there was going to be a public hearing
after the council said, "Okay, let's publish." I don't remember
seeing any public notice that we were going to have a meeting.
Mr. Wilshaw: You're at it.
Mr. Biga:
And I missed that. So if I did miss it, I apologize if I missed it. I
didn't see anything published until I came here and I saw that
something was there, and I asked Mr. Uhazie where it was
published, and it was in the planning department pages. I missed
all that, so I apologize that I wasn't smart enough to figure out
where everything was hidden in the documents where this was.
And I know from public comments and Facebook, which were a
lot of things, as Ms. Calhoun said, everybody reads. There were
a lot of people who wanted to get involved in this Book Five to
have comments to be involved in the meeting and to be there and
were just not there. That said, I just looked through here tonight,
and you know I'm reading here and it says Livonia has
approximately 94,942 housing units. Now, last night I was at the
meeting for the Budget and Finance Committee, and according
to the city assessor, we only have 37,443. Okay, what happened
to the 60,000 homes that we say we have in the plan as of 2024?
What happened to them? Nobody's checked the plan. The plan
also says on page 28, there's all this housing at a certain dollar
value, and I'm looking at it, going, you know, these dollar values
just didn't seem right to me, because I'm looking and looking and
looking. I'm going, "Huh?" So I go back to the document from the
budget department, or the city assessors, and I'm going, "Oh,
that's the SEV value, and those are their values in the number of
homes in the SEV, not the market value." So I don't know where
the document pulled information from, and where they pulled their
data from and what they did, but I really think that we need to go
back and look at the data points that are in this document and
say, hey, where did we pull everything from? You know, where's
the key that said, "Hey, we pulled it from this document, that
document." I'm really nervous as to the data points that we're
saying. I don't see in here, and you know, Mr. Karasinski spent a
little bit more time where he was looking, but I don't see anything
that says recommendations for ADUs. It talks about ADUs. It talks
about different types of housing. It talks about four -unit
apartments and things like that. But it doesn't say, "Hey, we
August 11, 2026
32607
recommend that this would be really good in this kind of a
situation." Now I don't see that there. I also don't see anything
that says, "Is our infrastructure sufficient enough to handle?" You
know, if four homes in a row put ADUs in their garage, what's it
do to the sewer system back there? The water supply. Do we
need to increase something there? I mean, you're going to have
all that extra sewage and water being done there? Is the old
Rosedale sufficient enough to handle that? Is my neighborhood,
I'm up at Six and Seven Mile off of Wayne Road, and is that
sufficient up there? Power wise, I mean everybody complains.
You're at Seven Mile and Middle Belt, and you know DTE just
says, "Hey, it might rain," and all of a sudden the power goes out.
So are people are going to be able to handle all this extra power?
You know there are a lot of issues that aren't addressed that, to
me, have to be said, "Hey, if you're going to do all this stuff, these
things need to be addressed." DTE, Consumers, or whoever, you
know, just to sit there and say, "Hey, you can go out and get a
grant." Maybe somebody can get a grant to be able to be able to
afford something. We also talk about... what do you call it?
Vacancy rates. We have a 7% vacancy rate as of 2023. I look in
All Things Livonia. People are always asking where can they rent
a house in Livonia. If there's a 7% vacancy rate, and there's
always every week one or two people asking where can I rent in
Livonia for a house, and whether it's a family or a single mom with
a couple kids, they're looking for places, either people are asking
for way too much money, or their expectations for what they can
rent don't match. So whatever this plan has needs to say, "This
is the kind of housing stock we have for these things." It shouldn't
just sit there and say, "Oh, this is nice. We have this. We have
that." It needs to really reflect what's available and what's there
now, in the next five years, and you know if we do need 1400
housing units, God help us. I don't know where we're going to put
them.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. Good evening, Ms. Mika.
Ms. Mika:
Hi, Denise Mika, Livonia. Yeah, I hate to ding it, but we've been
to a couple meetings over time, and the documents that support
the meeting should be in that side. And we had to go a couple
different routes to get to this plan, so we only got to look at it once
we got in the room. I still have a problem. Well, number one, we're
a bedroom community. We have apartments going up, and God
help us, the one at Seven and Victor Corporate Park -they've been
moving that dirt for how long, right? And the apartments that are
supposed to be built in the old Wonderland area haven't broken
ground on that, so where's the need for that housing? And I liked
Mr. Wilshaw:
August 11, 2026
32608
how when we with the new Meijer going in at Seven and
Farmington, that you held the builder to a little bit different
standard, saying, "Hey, that's too high of a building, and it's back
on those homes and everything. So you had the power to move
it and do that. So I don't know why we need this document to do
it because I think you guys are doing a great job. The medium
home values over time, Figure 5.11, other parts of the document.
Document 5.8, and they tell us in Table 5.8, they talk about
Canton Township, Northville, Plymouth, and everything. But then,
when it comes to our medium that we, comparing to us that we're
too much, they're comparing us to Detroit, Warren, Dearborn,
CBSA, Michigan. How come we're not compared to the other
cities there in Wayne County too? So we're a lot cheaper than
some of those other neighborhoods. So that's not taken into
account that we're more reasonable. People love to come to
Livonia because it's a bedroom community. It's accessible to a lot
of highways and everything, so I really think this needs to have
more in-depth comment from the citizens, and I think some of it's
got good reference points, but like Mr. Biga pointed out, there's
some, still discrepancies within the document. So, thank you for
your time.
Thank you for your comments. Is there anybody else wishing to
comment on this item? No one else coming forward. Thank you
to all the residents. You will note that I normally have a time limit
on commenting, but I did not enforce that this time because of the
fact that we've had a lot of comments on it, and I want to make
sure that everybody here had a chance to say what they wanted
to say on this item. So I appreciate all that input. I now go back to
my colleagues, and we'll give them an opportunity to ask any
further questions. Mr. Smith is coming forward again. If there's
anything else he would like to assist us with, does any of my
colleagues have any questions for Mr. Smith?
Ms. Dinaro: I have a question.
Mr. Wilshaw: Ms. Dinaro, of course.
Ms. Dinaro: For Jacob. Jacob, if we table this for 30 days, can we open up the
public comment for that time period?
Mr. Uhazie: We certainly could.
Ms. Dinaro: Okay.
August 11, 2026
32609
Mr. Uhazie: We will have to request an extension for the grant, but there's
nothing preventing us from looking for more public feedback.
Ms. Dinaro: Is the terms of the grant, does it... is it supposed to end, like is it
supposed to end soon, or...?
Mr. Uhazie: Yes.
Ms. Dinaro: What are the terms of the grant that were?
Mr. Uhazie: Donovan? Maybe you could remember offhand the details of
what the end date is.
Mr. Smith: Yes, we are in an extension. We intended to bring this one maybe
a few months back, and then there were some things that I had
to get adjusted. So the extension that we are now is till the 30th,
so the end of this month, I believe.
Ms. Dinaro:
Mr. Smith:
Ms. Dinaro:
Mr. Smith:
Ms. Dinaro:
And then the extension is for us to vote on this, get it through city
council, and then we're done?
Correct. So this would be, this public hearing and adoption would
be the last step.
So we would have to ask for another 30-day extension, too.
You could. You could also possibly, if you knew them, but I
understand you may want open public comment. You could adopt
with amendments or with changes, but you may not have all those
at the moment. So I understand if that's not an option you want to
exercise. As Mr. Uhazie indicated, we could extend. You would
have to do a few things if you want to stay within the grant
timelines. You probably have to have another meeting before the
month ends to make final adoption. If you wanted to do that, we
could receive comments between now and the next time you
meet, and then I can provide written responses to all of those and
any changes that would incorporate the document. Again, we just
are within the kind of the last window of, based on that grant.
I would. I mean, I would be more comfortable if we open this up
for at least an additional 30 days for public comment. So if that
means we have to file for a grant extension, I think we need to do
that.
Mr. Smith: Okay.
Mr. Bongero:
Mr. Wilshaw:
August 11, 2026
32610
Excuse me. With that, how, what's going to be the difference?
How are we going to get the people out? What are they going to
do different to get it marketed so we get the people to be here?
You know what I mean. It didn't work this time. What's going to
be different?
I think it would be fair. And the thing that I hear, I've heard sort of
loud and clear at this meeting is, even though we're not required,
we followed the minimums. You know, there's always what the
minimums are, what's required. We followed what was required
to post this publicly, but what I'm hearing is obviously, times have
changed. People aren't looking in the Observer because it doesn't
exist for this type of thing, or they're not looking in the Detroit Law
Review or whatever paper this this has to get published in. They
want to see this on Facebook. You know, they want to. Livonia
has a Facebook page. We could put a post on there that says,
"Here's a comment period for Book Five. Here's a link to Book
Five. Send us your comments."
Mr. Bongero: Yeah, that sounds like something to do.
Mr. Wilshaw: You know, you can go above and beyond --
Mr. Bongero: Yeah.
Mr. Wilshaw: --those minimums. Mr. Uhazie.
Mr. Uhazie: I mean, as mentioned before, we did have public engagement, so
we could just follow what we've done previously. Like I said, we've
had the open house. We did have people attend. It's not that we
haven't had any engagement throughout this process. I would
venture to guess that doing what we did before, -not this with this
particular round, but with the open house and such, would allow
for outreach, adequate outreach, to reach the community. Like I
said, reflecting what we've already done that has been successful
within this process already.
Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Ventura.
Mr. Ventura: Jacob, you're aware that when we did the master plan, we had
charrettes—
Mr. Uhazie: Yes.
Mr. Ventura: --around the city that were publicized, they were on Facebook.
August 11, 2026
32611
Mr. Uhazie: Yes.
Mr. Ventura: And they were in public, in social media, and we did approach the
civic associations around the city to make sure that they
publicized to the residents in their communities that these were
going on, and we had good interaction when we did the master
plan, and I'd suggest, first of all, I agree completely with Ms. Wafa
or Ms. Dinaro. At least 30 days. I feel it should be 45 or 60 days
to get it out there and get the community aware of that this is
going on and give them adequate time to come forward and
engage in the process. I mean, we have a couple gentlemen here
that are here at almost every meeting, and it amazes me to find
out that they're just learning about this because they're pretty
tuned in. And if they're not aware of it, then I'm sure the majority
of citizens of Livonia are not aware of it. I'd recommend we do
charrettes and more time.
Mr. Bongero: More than thirty.
Mr. Ventura: Yeah.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay.
Mr. Ventura: Nearly 30 gets it done.
Mr. Wilshaw: All right. It's good commentary, but we need some action here. I
will close the public hearing and ask for a motion.
Ms. Dinaro: I'm going to make the motion to table this for 45 days.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Okay, and we have a request to table this item for 45 days. With
that, I think the direction is fairly clear to our planning staff that we
would like to get this published and advertised in as many ways
as possible. And do we have support for a tabling motion?
Mr. Ventura: I'll support.
Mr. Wilshaw:
We'II go with Mr. Ventura on that. All right. Tabling motions do not
have a discussion period. This is Dinaro and Ventura for tabling
for 45 days. Secretary, please call the
On a motion by Dinaro, seconded by Ventura, and unanimously adopted, it was
#08-51-2026
RESOLVED, That pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on August 11, 2026, on Petition
2026-01-07-01 submitted by the City Planning Commission,
August 11, 2026
32612
requesting to amend the Livonia Vision 21 Master Plan and adopt
Book 5, Housing Sustainability, pursuant to Michigan Public Act
33 of 2008 (the Michigan Planning Enabling Act), as amended,
the Planning Commission does hereby table this item for 45 days
to allow greater publicity for the item in the community and to
receive further public comment:
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will be tabled for a further 45 days.
ITEM #5 PETITION 2026-06-08-03 Clover Self Storage
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda Petition 2026-
06-08-03 submitted by Contineo Group requesting site plan
approval pursuant of Section 3.16 of the Livonia Zoning
Ordinance, as amended, and amend the Conditional Rezoning —
Statement of Conditions, granted on May 16, 2016 in connection
with rezoning petition 2015-12-01-13, to construct and add two
self -storage buildings to the existing storage facility (Clover Self
Storage) at 28900 Schoolcraft Road located on the north side of
Schoolcraft Road between Cardwell Avenue and Middlebelt
Road in the northwest' of Section 24.
Mr. Uhazie:
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This subject parcel was rezoned to Light
Manufacturing in 2016. Under Section 6.54, self -storage facility is
treated as a permitted use under the M1 district. Section 6.44 of
the zoning ordinance treats storage of recreational vehicles and
equipment as a waiver -use. A waiver was granted in 2016 with
the rezoning, but one of the conditions stated any changes to the
site plan are required to come back to planning to amend the
conditional rezoning. The site is the location of the former Clover
Lanes, which was opened in 1962 and then closed in 2015. The
parcel is about five and a half acres in size with 846 feet along
Schoolcraft Road, by an average depth of about 285 feet. The
former bowling alley building was 57,824 square feet of general
or gross floor area. The self -storage portion of the building utilizes
the same footprint as the old bowling alley. The storage buildings
are two stories in height and have a floor area of about 111,500
square feet. The building contains a small sales office and
conference room, and extending through the center of the lower
level is a 27-foot-wide drive aisle for vehicles to enter via an
electronically controlled overhead door located on the east side
of the building and then exit in the same manner on the west side
of the building. This proposal would add two 12-foot-tall self -
storage buildings to the west of the existing building.
August 11, 2026
32613
Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Uhazie, I hate to interrupt you. It's not shown on our TVs. It is
on the broadcast though.
Mr. Uhazie: Just takes a second to load.
Mr. Wilshaw: Little inside baseball for people don't realize we have TVs that we
can see up here. They probably shut off because all this time...
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Uhazie:
Yes they did actually. There you go.
Alright, thank you. Okay, continue on.
The proposed western building measures approximately 8,100
square feet and 9,000 square feet for the easterly building, with
a combined total area of 17,100 square feet of new self -storage
area. Units within these buildings are designed to accommodate
a range of storage needs, including 36 units at 10 feet by 20 feet,
18 units at 10 feet by 25 feet, and 18 units at 10 by 30 feet. This
would be a total of 72 new units. The construction would comply
with required setbacks. The distance between the proposed
building and the existing building would be just over 36 feet at the
center. Here is where the cars exit from the inside the building.
All of the existing structures would remain unchanged. The area
that is proposed to be modified is currently used for storage of
outdoor recreational vehicles. The original approval did state that
they were allowed to have storage in the west of the existing RV
storage, but the construction would result in a loss of 28 RV
spaces. Since the study session, the petitioner did submit a
photometric plan that shows the north property line does have
over 0.5 foot candles where it meets the residential, and it is
ranging from 0.7-0.8 at some of the measuring spots. These
measurements exceed what the ordinance allows. The petitioner
also provided a truck turning radii diagram showing that trucks
coming from the back of the building would need to encroach
partially onto the parking spaces along the northern edge of the
property. It does identify truck movements for both access to the
western, middle, and eastern drive isles. The petitioner did also
provide color renderings for the elevations. The elevations show
E.I.F.S. siding colored light grange on the upper half, and then a
red brown modular brick on the lower half, with a light stone metal
panel skirt along the parapet. Those are the changes that we
have seen since the study session, With that, Mr. Chairman, I can
read out the departmental correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please.
Mr. Uhazie:
August 11, 2026
32614
The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated July 14,
2026, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request,
the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced
petition. We have no objections to the proposed project at this
time, but would like to note the following items: 1. The subject
parcel is assigned the address of #28900 Schoolcraft Road. 2.
The existing parcel is currently serviced by public sanitary sewer
and water main, as well as private storm sewer. There is no
mention of utility revisions with the proposal, so we do not believe
there will be any adverse effects on the existing systems. 3.
Should revisions to the utility services to the building, or any work
within the Schoolcraft Road right-of-way be required, the owner
will need to submit drawings to this Department and/or MOOT for
permitting.." The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant
City Engineer. The next letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue
Division, dated July 16, 2026, which reads as follows: "This office
has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with the new
construction and use of the property located at the above
referenced address. If gate is motorized, provide a Knox Box with
necessary keys, fobs, keycards, passwords and after hours
contact information for emergency vehicle access. A further
detailed plan review will take place when this division receives an
official plan set." The letter is signed by Brian Kukla, Fire Marshal.
The next letter is from the Division of Police, dated July 15, 2026,
which reads as follows: "1 have reviewed the plans in connection
with the petition. 1 have no objections to the proposal." The letter
is signed by Brendan Adams, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The next
letter is from the Inspection Department, dated July 27, 2026,
which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above -
referenced Petition has been reviewed. 1. Exterior lighting
sources shall be designed, constructed, located, and maintained
in a manner that minimizes light trespass onto neighboring
properties and public ways. The light trespass from a property
shall not exceed 0.5-foot-candles at the property line, measured
five (5) feet from the ground. This Department has no further
objections to this Petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna,
Director of Inspection. The next letter is from the Finance
Department, dated July 22, 2026, which reads as follows: "1 have
reviewed the addresses connected with the above noted petition.
As there are no outstanding amounts receivable, general or water
and sewer, 1 have no objections to the proposal." The letter is
signed by Ermon Sims, Chief Accountant. The next letter is from
the Treasurer's Department, dated July 15, 2026, which reads as
follows: "The owner of the property is current on their property
Mr. Wilshaw:
August 11, 2026
32615
taxes" The letter is signed by Susie Nash, Treasurer. That is the
extent of the correspondence.
That's all. All right. Any questions for staff? Any questions? No
questions. All right. The petitioners in our audience. Good
evening.
Jake Michael, 755 Commerce, Decatur, Georgia. Thank you for having me tonight.
I really appreciate y'all giving me the opportunity. Jacob did a
great job, kind of going over everything that we are looking at
here. As Jacob said, any changes to the additional buildings will
require going before this commission. So, one of the things I
wanted to point out, based off of specific conversations that we
had last time at the study session, I know you specifically asked
to see some truck turns for vehicles with trailers and towing things
behind them. So, the figure that you see up here, the vehicle
driving through the center of the building is a 20 foot truck carrying
a 20 foot boat trailer, and it's able to make that turning maneuver
pretty safely without coming to a full stop or anything like that, and
really cranking the wheels underneath it. So, it should be
hopefully idiot proof. There was another mention at the study
session about lighting. I recognized from Jacob's comments from
the Engineering Department about it's actually 0.5 foot candles at
the property line, and we actually exceed that. So, we'll go and
revise that lighting plan, switch out some fixtures, and make sure
that that's not an issue with light encroaching across the property
line. Other than that, the architectural elevations that we've
provided for you, show that it does match pretty similarly to the
existing storage facility out there, and I think it'll make a great kind
of... blend in with what's out there. So yeah, thank you, and I really
appreciate your time.
Mr. Wilshaw: Well, thank you, Mr. Michael, for your presentation. Let me see if
there's some questions for you. Any questions, Mr. Droze?
Mr. Droze: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just two for you. The first one on the
photometric plan. Saw you have the foot candles. What are you
planning for your lights?
Mr. Michael: Yeah. So, it's three fixtures on each side of the building. So, three
on the west side, three on the east side of each building. So, the
three kind of evenly spaced lighting fixtures.
Mr. Droze: Okay. Anything on the south side?
Mr. Michael: No, nothing on the north or south side.
August 11, 2026
32616
Mr. Droze: Okay, got it. And then the next question: Your turning radii. You
said idiot proof. I'm not sure you're there.
Mr. Michael: There's also bollards all over the place. So on the corners of the
buildings, there are bollards. When you leave that drive aisle,
there are bollards on the aisle there as well. So they'll hit
something before they'll hit the building.
Mr. Droze:
Mr. Michael:
There's a couple spots where you're showing tracking over curbs.
If you look kind of at that... right at that driveway there on the east
side, you're over tracking that, so I guess to just suggest move
the fence or do something to give yourself a little more room. And
then, what's going on with...what are we looking at here at that
driveway? There are three or four different trucks that are
overlapping. You just showing various vehicles leaving.
Yes, so the vehicle that's actually looping around is the fire truck.
That's the fire truck turning radius, and then the vehicle that's
driving through the main building, and then it drives south and
then to the driveway, and that's where it stops. So the vehicle
track kind of shows the stop and end points of each of the
vehicles that are tracking.
Mr. Droze: Okay.
Mr. Michael: They just happen to overlap at the driveway, so it is, yeah, a little
messy there.
Mr. Droze: Okay. Yep. Still feels like you're a little light coming out of the
building, but if you guys feel comfortable with it and you got the
bollards in there, I think that helps. Are they on the corners of the
buildings themselves?
Mr. Michael:
Mr. Droze:
Mr. Michael:
Yes, if you could zoom in on the corners of the building, there
there's two bollards on each of the corners as well. They're called
out more specifically on our site plan.
Okay, and then you have some tracking over the parking spaces
on the north side. I assume if you move that down, it's going to
be okay. That's a fire vehicle.
Yes, that's a fire vehicle, and we're going to... the vehicle tracking
is something that we can clean up and make it show that it is
possible to do without going over there. It's just a bit of a imperfect
science when you're actually making the diagram.
Mr. Droze:
Mr. Michael:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Michael:
Mr. Wilshaw:
August 11, 2026
32617
Alright, if you make it work. I'm good.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Droze. Any other questions? Wow, we covered it
all with one person. Good job, Mr. Droze. Any questions from
anybody? Comments from anybody in the audience? Okay, get
that out of the way. Again, I'll go to my colleagues. Did I miss
anything? Is there any questions, comments? I will admit that I do
share some of Mr. Droze's concerns about the turning radii. I've
been on that site, and its tight when you're going to have those
buildings there, I think, but we'll see how things go. Any other
comments from you, Mr. Michael, before we make our decision?
No, sir.
Alright. Then a motion is in order.
On a motion by Dinaro, seconded by Droze, and unanimously adopted, it was
#08-52-2026
RESOLVED, That the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to City Council that Petition 2026-06-08-03
submitted by Contineo Group requesting site plan approval
pursuant of Section 3.16 of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as
amended, and amend the Conditional Rezoning — Statement of
Conditions, granted on May 16, 2016 in connection with rezoning
petition 2015-12-01-13, to construct and add two self -storage
buildings to the existing storage facility (Clover Self Storage) at
28900 Schoolcraft Road located on the north side of Schoolcraft
Road between Cardwell Avenue and Middlebelt Road in the
northwest Y4 of Section 24., be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1. That the Site Plan marked Sheet C200, prepared by
Contineo Group, dated July 28, 2026, as revised, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to.
2. That the Landscape Plan prepared by Murphy and
Associates, dated April 5, 2016, as revised, is hereby
approved and shall be adhered to, except that additional full-
size deciduous trees shall be planted along the front of the
property subject to approval by the Planning and
Engineering Departments.
August 11, 2026
32618
3. That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu of
hydro -seeding, including all areas within the public road
rig ht-of-way.
That all light fixtures shall not exceed twenty feet (20') in
height and shall be aimed and shielded so as to minimize
stray light trespassing across property lines and glaring into
adjacent roadways.
5. That underground sprinklers are to be provided for all
landscaped and sodded areas and all planted materials
shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Inspection
Department and thereafter permanently maintained in a
healthy condition.
6. That the Exterior Building Elevation Plans marked Sheets
S101 and S102, prepared by Elevate Structures, dated July
31, 2026, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to.
7. That this site shall meet either the City of Livonia or the
Wayne County Storm Water Management Ordinance,
whichever applies, and shall secure any required permits,
including soil erosion and sedimentation control permits.
8. The use of the self -storage facility shall be limited to the
storage of personal and business items only, and no unit
designed or intended for storage purposes shall be used for
operating a business or recreational activity including, but
not limited to, repairs, manufacturing, assembly, personal
service, hobby, retail or office.
9. There shall be no storage of flammable, explosive,
radioactive, hazardous, toxic, or volatile substances within
the self -storage buildings or upon the premises, except that
a propane refill station may be permitted as part of the
concierge island as approved by the Livonia Fire Marshal
and Inspection Department.
10. No overnight occupancy is permitted anywhere on the site,
including the interior storage units or the RV's.
11. That the hours of operation for both the outdoor storage yard
and indoor climate -controlled self -storage facility shall be
limited to 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Uhazie:
August 11, 2026
32619
12. The entire building and property shall have a camera
security system in place and key code access.
13. That unless approved by the proper local authority, any
type of exterior advertising, such as promotional flags,
streamers or sponsor vehicles designed to attract the
attention of passing motorists, shall be prohibited.
14. That the specific plans referenced in this approving
resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department
at the time the building permits are applied for; and
15. Pursuant to Section 13.13 of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance,
this approval is valid for a period of one year only from the
date of approval by City Council, and unless a building
permit is obtained, this approval shall be null and void at the
expiration of said period.
Is there any discussion?
Yes. I just would like to note that we did receive new plans from
the study session to here. So, if it's okay to change the site plan
date. The new date would be July 28, 2026, and then the exterior
building elevations. The new date would be July 31, 2026.
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution.
ITEM #6 PETITION 2026-06-01-01 Optalis Healthcare
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda Petition 2026-
06-01-01 submitted by Optalis Healthcare requesting approval
under Section 13.15 of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as
amended, to rezone the rear twenty-five (25) feet of the properties
at 11687 Camden, 11709 Camden, 11731 Camden, 11741
Camden, and 11755 Camden, from N1 (Neighborhood) to C-1
(Local Business), to provide additional parking spaces for the
Fountain Bleu Health and Rehabilitation Center, located on the
north side of Plymouth Road between Camden and Haller, in the
Southwest'/4 of Section 25.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. This item was tabled at a prior meeting.
Is there a motion to remove this item from the table?
On a motion by Dinaro, seconded by Ventura, and unanimously adopted, it was
#08-53-2026
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Uhazie:
Mr. Wilshaw:
August 11, 2026
32620
RESOLVED, That pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on July 14, 2026, on Petition
2026-06-01-01 submitted by Optalis Healthcare requesting
approval under Section 13.15 of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance,
as amended, to rezone the rear twenty-five (25) feet of the
properties at 11687 Camden, 11709 Camden, 11731 Camden,
11741 Camden, and 11755 Camden, from N1 (Neighborhood) to
C-1 (Local Business), to provide additional parking spaces for the
Fountain Bleu Health and Rehabilitation Center, located on the
north side of Plymouth Road between Camden and Haller, in the
Southwest'/ of Section 25, the City Planning Commission does
hereby remove the item from the table
Mr. Uhazie, is there any updates that you'd like to provide?
The only update is that the petitioner has decided that they would
rather do C-1 instead of P (Parking). Other than that, the designs
are all the same and other changes.
Okay, and all the previous information that was read out in the
prior meeting is still valid.
One update. There was an outstanding bill for water that was
paid, but then the next payment is due. Now finance did say that
it could be in the mail, but as of right now, it's showing that there
is a new outstanding balance. They satisfied the last one. There
is a new one, but the due date has just passed, so that's very
likely that it just hasn't even processed yet.
Okay, just current dues. All right, very good. Thank you. With that,
I think I now go to the petitioner who's in our audience. Feel free
to come to our podium. Good evening, sir.
Maurice Charbonneau, JSN Architecture, 3856 12 Mile Road, Berkeley, Michigan.
We're the architect who's helping the ownership with this request.
The intent was to provide additional parking. Primarily, if you look
at the site, it's primarily because of the location of the main entry,
and its respective position relative to the primary parking on site,
and so that was the intent. So, I'm certainly available if you've got
any questions or comments.
Mr. Wilshaw: Well, thank you, Mr. Charbonneau, for coming tonight and
explaining that to us. Again, like we had on a previous one of our
agenda items, what we're looking at tonight is the zoning for this
property. So that's really the main consideration we're going to
have for tonight. If you get approved for your rezoning, what will
Ms. Dinaro:
August 11, 2026
32621
happen is you'll have to go to City Council, and then you'll come
back and file a site plan, and the site plan will come to us to
actually rule out the details of the parking design that you have.
So, it's kind of a two-step process that that you're in, and this is
step one of that two-step process. So, I just want to set that
expectation. Even though it is parking, it's not the most
complicated thing in the world, but you still have to go through the
process. Any questions from my colleagues?
Is there a reason you're zoning this to C-1 and not parking? And
I'll tell you from my perspective, I really I have no problems with
the parking, and I know it's necessary, but I am very concerned
that this is a residential area, and in the future, zoning this to C-
1, I wouldn't want to see anything other than parking in that area
because it is so close to the residents.
Mr. Charbonneau: The primary reason why we...the C-1 is consistent with the
zoning on the existing parcel right now. As it sits, the existing
parcel, I believe, and Mr. Uhazie can correct me if I'm wrong. I
believe it actually has three zonings on it right now. So, part of
the process, there was a few reasons why we elected not to
pursue the P1. It was never our intention to pursue P1. It was
actually a suggestion made, I think, in one of the preliminary
discussions that we had, and there was some confusion on the
way that the application was filed. That that was why it never
should have been kind of introduced. I mean, we wanted to
maintain that, but one of the primary reasons why is... zoning that
P1 constitutes a kind of a spot zone because there really isn't any
other consistent zoning around. So, in our experience, and also
in our work across many communities, it's something that they
always try to avoid is the notion of a spot zone as something there
that's that just has that. One of the other reasons why is that I
don't think it's consistent with that is there really isn't any way of
accessing it other than through another property. Like there's no,
if we're adjacent to a roadway, even a private roadway, might
have some validity, but in that respect, it didn't seem consistent
with what we wanted. But it's also, I think, the primary reason was
because the parent parcel is primarily C-1, especially as it relates
relative to the adjacency to the neighborhood, the existing
neighborhood. So right now, it's Cl to Ni. So, we're not, you
know, it was for consistency' sake, but it's also we're not
introducing a new zone that's, you know, it still has the same
adjacency, the Cl to Ni.
Ms. Dinaro: Yeah, I mean, I. I understand that, but if the intention is to keep
this a parking lot, I mean, I'm going to tell you I'm not going to be
August 11, 2026
32622
comfortable because of what the future implications mean for this
parcel and what this would mean for the neighbors. There needs
to be space between this facility and the neighbors, and buying
up the residential and turning it into a parking lot is one thing, but
buying up the residential, turning it into a parking lot, and later
developing it into something else, is problematic for the
neighborhood, and it's going to be problematic for the residents.
So, I will not support this. I'm not going to support it. I will support
parking, but I will not support this because of the future
implications.
Charles Dunn, owner of the facility. We also own the houses behind it.
Ms. Dinaro: Yep.
Mr. Dunn:
Ms. Dinaro:
Mr. Dunn:
Ms. Dinaro:
Mr. Dunn:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Ms. Dinaro:
Okay. We're talking about 30 feet of taking away from the yards
of each one of these properties, it's 150 feet of yardage. You only
have to have 90. So, as far as the residents go, with the wall that
we're going to construct, it shouldn't have any effect on that.
Yeah, and I'm okay with what you're what you're proposing today,
but what I'm telling you is I'm not okay with what this means for
the future of that of that site. Like I'm okay with... if you want to
zone this as parking, I am perfectly fine with that, and I'm okay
with your plans. But I will not vote to rezone this because of what
this would mean.
What would it mean, I don't understand.
So, if it is rezoned as commercial, you can build commercial on
on that lot.
Excuse me. It's only 30 feet wide, and it's only 300 feet long, so
you can't build anything on it. So, I don't know where you're
coming from.
Mr. Dunn, we don't want to get into a back and forth between you
and someone. I will let Ms. Dinaro say what she likes to say to
you, but please listen to her.
So, your building may be there in five years, it may not be, and
the implications for the neighbors for whatever the next
development might be, is what we're deciding on today. So, like I
said, if you are willing to zone it for parking, I'm fully in support of
that, but I will not support a commercial zoning because of what
it would mean for maybe after you sell this parcel, maybe while
August 11, 2026
32623
you still own it, I don't want to see this developed into something
else other than what it is right now. And I think...I understand your
need for more parking, and I will support that. But I will not support
it as a zoning of anything else other than parking.
Mr. Dunn: It's your choice.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you for your comments. Anybody else have any other
comments, Mr. Droze?
Mr. Droze:
Mr. Chair, thank you. So procedurally, you're taking the westerly
portion of these properties. Are you planning to do a lot
combination where that property is brought into the larger
commercial space, or is that going to be remain separate
parcels?
Mr. Charbonneau: My understanding was...the intention was to combine the lots,
and but that this was kind of the first procedural step was that it
had to now carry a appropriate zone designation because, as it
sits right now, it's an N1, and so they said, if you want to do that,
the first step is you have to rezone that portion of the site that you
want to absorb into the new parent parcel.
Mr. Droze:
I guess maybe that's a question because you know if you're
rezoning all the way to Camden, then I'm certainly with Ms. Dinaro
that I don't think that makes any sense for that to be commercial.
Is that what would be asked? Which are we being asked to
rezone? Those entire parcels or just the westerly portion?
Mr. Uhazie: Just the highlighted portion, the rear 30 feet of those parcels.
Mr. Droze: Okay, so then the portion on Camden would remain...
Mr. Uhazie: The front portion would be N1. There would still be single family
going up to Camden.
Mr. Droze: Okay, and that is...okay.
Mr. Uhazie: Which is here.
Mr. Droze: So, you would get that zoning changed with approval, of course,
and then the next step would be to do a lot combination to pull
everything together, because I think, you know, if is C-1 or even
P1, having it in one parcel would be ideal I would say, and if you
guys are...if the plan is absolutely that that back 30, I think that
that helps. I think, at least control the concern about commercial
August 11, 2026
32624
on a residential street that doesn't have the infrastructure to
support that.
Mr. Charbonneau: Well, I actually had a question regarding the concerns of being
C-2 in that location versus a P1. I mean, my understanding is you
couldn't develop within. I mean, because of a setback
requirement, you'd always have a buffer there. As a matter of fact,
the usage of parking with a screen wall probably allows you to get
closer to that rear property line than you would otherwise. If, say,
for example, the facility were to go away, and you were to
redevelop the land, you'd still, you know, have that required
setback. I may be incorrect in making that assessment, but that's
kind of one of the ideas. But it was, like I said, it was primarily to
avoid the presence of a spot zone, and also to maintain
consistency with the larger zoning of the parcel, so rather than
introduce a fourth zoning on to it.
Mr. Droze:
I see the benefit of having a single zone over a parcel, or at least
less than four in your case. Okay, that helps with my
understanding. Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Droze. Any other questions or comments?
Mr. Ventura: So, the petitioner owns the homes that are east of this strip of
land you want to rezone.
Mr. Charbonneau: I believe so. Is that correct?.
Mr. Ventura: Who's responsible for maintaining those homes? You are?
Mr. Wilshaw:
Mr. Dunn, do you want to come back up to our microphone? That
way, our TV audience can hear you.We got five people at home
that are watching.
Mr. Dunn: Really?
Mr. Wilshaw: Yeah.
Mr. Dunn: How do I look?
Mr. Wilshaw It's a good angle. Go ahead.
Mr. Ventura: The answer is yes, you're responsible?
Mr. Dunn: Yeah.
Mr. Ventura:
Mr. Dunn:
August 11, 2026
32625
The day I was there, there was quite a range of condition of the
homes. Some of the ones closer to Plymouth Road were in better
shape than the ones further up the street, and there was quite a
range in landscape maintenance and painting of the houses and
all kinds of stuff. What's your Tong -term plan with those houses?
Are they all rendered right now?
To remodel them more, we have one tenant there that's sloppy,
I'll admit, and I've been telling him forever to clean up his yard
and do what he has to do, but you know we'll make him look more
attractive.
Mr. Ventura: So, he's responsible to do it, or you are?
Mr. Dunn:
We cut the lawn. He's supposed to keep the fire pit. You know,
he's not supposed to have a fire pit. His trash should be near the
garage. He's sloppy. He's just a sloppy guy.
Mr. Ventura: I guess I'd like to see the maintenance of those houses improve
significantly.
Mr. Dunn: Really?
Mr. Ventura:
Yeah. I mean, I can't imagine that the people across the street
who are keeping their homes pretty well, like looking at the homes
that are not being maintained, and I understand that's not the
primary business, but it would seem to me to be the neighborly
thing to do would be to take care of your property.
Mr. Dunn: I agree.
Mr. Ventura: To thestandards that everybody else in the neighborhood has.
Just an observation.
Mr. Dunn:
Okay, so I have one comment to tell you. I don't know if you know
this, but the oldest person living in Livonia lives in my facility. You
know how old that person is-110 years old -and we're so proud of
that. We're going to have a little open house and have the mayor
there. The whole idea of doing this parking is because of people
like her sister, that's about 80 years old, has to go in the parking
in the front. So if it's right at the door for her, it'll be much more
convenient. That's the whole purpose of this whole thing.
Mr. Ventura: I understand.
August 11, 2026
32626
Mr. Dunn: Okay, and I appreciate your comments on the house. We'II get it
together.
Mr. Ventura: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: That was good. Thank you. Any other questions for the
petitioner? We're all set. Anyone in the audience wishing to
comment on this, Ms. Calhoun? Welcome back.
Ms. Calhoun:
Mr. Wilshaw:
Hi there. I missed the meeting where this first come up. Sorry, so
I'm maybe not have all the background information, but I'm a little,
I'm still curious and puzzled as to why you would basically
devalue four single residence properties by lopping off property
at the back when it appears that the north lot, the two, the 11755,
is adjacent to that driveway, and is vacant and is also owned by
these folks, you know we shouldn't be denigrating our single
family homes. They may be owner occupied at some point, and
again, it seems like there's a whole lot up here that nobody's
going to want to build a house on. That would seem could be
attractively done as a parking lot, maybe zoned separately as a
parking lot to obviate any you know future issues. But I'm, I just
find that kind of odd because it needs you know, this is a nursing
home, and so it is a home for people. But it's still kind of a
commercial venture, and it needs to exist, you know, cohesively
with the neighbors, and not to damage property values of either
entities. So, thanks.
Thank you for your comments, Ms. Calhoun. Anyone else in the
audience wishing to speak on this item. All right, I'm going to go
back to my colleagues. Actually, I'm going to give the petitioner
the last word. Is there anything else you'd like to say before we
make our decision?
Mr. Charbonneau: I don't. I mean, I guess to speak to that comment, I understand
there is what you know is currently a vacant lot there and develop
that into parking may help to some degree, but it's not as
beneficial as the as far as location and proximity to the entry,
which is what we're trying to achieve with that. And also, the
modification of those lots does not reduce them to below
compliance standard because there is a minimum lot size
standard that we're not even really...we're above that and we're
not even like really close you know. We're not playing games you
know like five feet over it's where and maybe Mr. Uhazie can kind
of speak to that if need be, but as far as how close we are to that.
Mr. Wilshaw:
August 11, 2026
32627
Okay, I appreciate that comment. Thank you. I'm going to go back
to my colleagues now. Is there any questions or comments? If
not, a motion is in order.
On a motion by Bongero, seconded by Ventura, and adopted, it was
#08-54-2026
RESOLVED, That the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2026-06-01-01
submitted by Optalis Healthcare requesting approval under
Section 13.15 of the Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to
rezone the rear twenty-five (25) feet of the properties at 11687
Camden, 11709 Camden, 11731 Camden, 11741 Camden, and
11755 Camden, from N1 (Neighborhood) to C-1 (Local
Business), to provide additional parking spaces for the Fountain
Bleu Health and Rehabilitation Center, located on the north side
of Plymouth Road between Camden and Haller, in the Southwest
'/4 of Section 25, be approved subject to the following conditions:
The proposed portions of properties be rezoned to C-1
(Local Business) to better protect the surrounding
residential character, limit future development potential, and
ensure that the use of the property remains consistent with
the intended purpose of providing additional off-street
parking for the Fountain Bleu Health and Rehabilitation
Center;
2. That the proposed change of zoning to C-1 (Local Business)
would be compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding
zoning and land uses in the area;
3. That the property involved in this request would be in full
compliance with C-1 District regulations;
4. That the proposed change of zoning to C-1 would cause the
zoning of the property to more accurately correspond to the
use and size of the property; and,
The proposed zoning change represents a reasonable and
logical plan for the subject property that adheres to sound
land use planning principles.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion?
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Bongero, Droze, Ventura, Caramagno, Wilshaw
Mr. Wilshaw,
Mr. Wilshaw:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Dinaro
Long
None
August 11, 2026
32628
Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution.
Just to reiterate the process, if you haven't been through this
before, this is for the rezoning of the property to C-1. This is now
going to go to City Council. City Council will do a first and second
reading on this. What then they will do is they won't vote on the
rezoning. They will hold it. Once you get to that second reading
stage, they'll hold the rezoning request, and then you'll start your
site plan request to us, you're going to submit the site plan, which
you already have more or less accomplished. You'll get that to
us. We'll have a site plan approval meeting. We'II go through this
whole process for site plan approval. When that gets approved,
assuming that gets approved, that will then go to council, and
then council will vote on both the rezoning and the site plan,
usually at the same meeting.
Mr. Charbonneau: Okay.
Mr. Wilshaw:
So that's kind of how it works. If that's not clear, you can always
talk to our planning staff, and they'll be happy to explain that to
you. But that was just to let you know how things work.
Mr. Charbonneau: Okay. All right. Thank you very much.
Mr. Wilshaw:
coming tonight.
ITEM #7
Mr. Caramagno,
Good luck. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Thank you for
APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,247th Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting
Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of
the Minutes of the 1,247th Public Hearing and Regular Meeting
held on July 14, 2026.
On a motion by Ventura, seconded by Droze, and unanimously adopted, it was
#08-55-2026
RESOLVED, That the Minutes of 1,247th Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on July 14,
2026, are hereby approved.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Dinaro, Droze, Ventura, Wilshaw
None
Long
Bongero, Caramagno
August 11, 2026
32629
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 1,248th Public
Hearings and Regular Meeting held on August 11, 2026, was adjourned at 10:08
p.m.
ATTEST:
lan Wilshaw, Chairman
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
S'am Caramagno, Secretary