Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2008-09-09MINUTES OF THE 969th REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, September 9, 2008, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 969" Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. John Walsh, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Deborah McDermott R. Lee Morrow Lynda Scheel Ashley Vartoogian Carol A. Smiley Ian Wilshaw John Walsh Members absent: None Messrs. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, and Scott Miller, Planner III, were also present. Chairman Walsh informed the audience that if a petition on tonighfs agenda involves a rezoning request, bis Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in tum, 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 ofthe proceedings tonight. ITEM #1 PETITION 2008-08-08-09 BOB EVANS Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2008-08- 08-09 submitted by Bob Evans Farms, Inc. requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to remodel the exterior of the existing restaurant (Bob Evans) at 13911 Middlebell Road, located at the northwest comer of Schoolcraft Road and Middlebelt Road in the Southeast % of Section 23. September 9, 2008 24971 Mr. Miller: On February 27, 2008 this site received site plan approval (CR #80-08) to demolish the existing restaurant and reconstruct a new restaurant slightly north of the existing building. The petitioner is now requesting to forgo the previous approval and instead remodel the existing restaurant. Bob Evans Restaurant is located at the northwest comer of SchoolcraR Road and Middlebelt Road. The subject property measures 290 feel along Middlebelt Road by 178 feel along SchoolcmR Road. Directly to the north is the Wine Palace Party Store. To the west, fronting on SchoolcmR Road is a cell phone outlet store. To the east, across Middlebelt Road, is the Olive Garden Restaurant and a vacant building that was formerly a Chi -Chi's Restaurant. The architectural look of this Bob Evans Restaurant would basically stay the same; only the exterior building materials would change. According to the submitted elevation plans, the existing battens, siding and plywood that currently cover the exterior of the existing restaurant would be removed. In their place, all four sides of the building would be covered with a thin - brick material. One primary focal change to the exterior would take place to the east elevation of the building. The east elevation is the front facade and faces Middlebelt Road. The existing columns and balusters that decorate the roof of the existing porch would be removed. A new standing seam metal roof would be installed in its place. Supporting the new slanted porch roof would be brick columns. The existing shingled roofs, decorative cornice and wood trim that currently accent the building would remain. The existing windows and trim would also remain and only be repainted. That is the extent of the proposal. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated September 4, 2008, which reads as fol lows: At your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above petition. We have no objections to the proposed petition. There are no additional right-of-way requirements. Since this is a building exterior remodeling project only, we have no comments at this time. The address of 13911 Middlebelt Road is correct" The letter is signed by Robert J. Schron, P.E., on behalf of the City. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated September 3, 2008, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to remodel the exterior of the existing restaurant located at the above - referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Ead Fester, Senior Fire Inspector. The September 9, 2008 24972 third letter is from the Division of Police, dated September 5, 2008, which reads as follows: We have reviewed the plans in connection with Bob Evans Restaurant located at 13911 Middlebett. We have no objections or recommendations to the plans as submitted." The letter is signed by David W. Sludl, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated September 5, 2008, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of August 28, 2008, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) The petitioner shows a thin brick veneer to be used on exterior walls. The Commission and or Council may wish to clarify this proposal. (2) No signage has been reviewed. However, the existing noncronforming pylon sign would be allowed to be refaced. The Commission and/or Council may wish to review the pylon sign. (3) All parking spaces are required to be 10' by 20' and double striped. (4) A landscape plan was not provided. Planning or Council may wish to address this to their satisfaction. (5) All landscaped areas should be irrigated and if already irrigated, tested to show proper operation. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Senior Building Inspector. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Seeing none, we will go to the pefitioner. Sir, if you're going to show us a few things, I would suggest that you come over to this side where we will have a tripod for you. Mr. Miller will give you a hand with that. If we could start with your name and address please. Dan Havener, Bob Evans Farms, Inc., 3776 S. High Street, Columbus, Ohio 43207. I'm the Director of Engineering for Bob Evans corporate offices in Columbus, Ohio. I'm here this evening to represent to the Commission our proposal for re -facing — re-imaging is how we term it — the existing restaurant on Middlebell Road. Basically, again, we are a publidy held company and we have a responsibility to our shareholders. Al this time with the downtown of the economy, we've already achieved the approval to move ahead with the demolition of the existing building, our executive committee decided to sit back and re-evaluate our direction at that time. It was decided then to go in this direction. When the numbers came back positive, it made pore sense than tearing down the building and rebuilding. Again, what we're proposing to do is an easy wall, thin brick system. I have a sample over here to the right. Basically, what that is, it includes taking off the existing siding, board and battens, putting up a Tyvek material wrap, moisture banner, and then applying the metal panel that you see there that has the tabs that holds September9, 2008 24973 the brick in place. What you do is you basically take the thin brick, apply an adhesive to the back, place it within the tabs that are provided. After the bricks are set, you come back in with the mortar, fill it in, basically make it look like back. We are also proposing to refinish the trim around the lop. If you notice, the current picture, it has a lot of scalloping and dental work about the lop. To bring it more in to date, what we're looking at doing is creating more of a clean line to the design. We're going back over the existing wood trim and fiberglass trim with a metal panel. It's an aluminum panel, pre -finished. Basically, the same color; it's a putty color as the existing trim. That's how we end up coming up with, if you notice in the rendering, the cleaner look along the lop and along the pediment here also on the bottom, of course. We're presenting a building that we just remodeled similarly to what we're proposing to do here in Livonia. This building we just finished about a month ago and R's in the Columbus, Ohio, market. We're very happy with the results. We didn't have to have any major issues with the installation of the material. Really, the material you have is relied upon the installer. The material is only going to be as good as the installer that you have. As long as you have a good installer, which we will be sure that we do have here also, you end up with a very nice product as you can see here at the bottom. I'd be more than happy to answer any questions. I do have a sample of the brick color that we are proposing to use on the building, which is very indicative of what you see here in the photos basically. We also have a sample of the standing seam metal roof and the putty color that is proposed for the trim also. So that would be our color combination for the building, which, again, is very indicative of what you see here in the photos. With that, I'll answer any questions you might have. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Ms. Smiley? Ms. Smiley: Yes, Mark, what about that thin brick? We've been around and around about this stuff. Mr. Taormina: This is the identical application that was considered for two projects, both of which were approved within the year. One is the site just north of this, which is the party store, the Wine Palace. And then the second was the jewelry store that will be connected to the Buffalo Wild Wings on the south side of Six Mile west of Newburgh. Ms. Smiley: And both those were approved? September 9, 2008 24974 Mr. Taormina: Both of those were approved. Neither one has been built out yet though. In fad, I visited the site today of the Wine Palace and they are about a week away from installing the thin back material. Ms. Smiley: I happened to be by the Wine Palace today and I noticed they hadn't done it either. Okay. I have a question. That one like roof over the entranceway is red. Are the other like roofs over the other awning or whatever sections, those are not red. Mr. Havener: These here? Ms. Smiley: Yes. Mr. Havener: Those are shingled roofs basically, and the shingled roofs would remain as they are. The only change that we're making to the roof system at all is right at the entrance point where we're tatting off the rail and the flat roof and presenting the new image with the seam metal roof with brick columns. The brick columns would also be made of full brick. Ms. Smiley: Oh, good. Mr. Havener: They wouldn't be the thin brick, but full brick to match. Ms. Smiley: And you didn't want to go with something closer in color to the other shingle part? You like that red? Mr. Havener: Basically, we wanted to maintain a little bit of a corporate image. I mean, as you know, Bob Evans is known as the - I mean the red building originally was our billboard. And really I think to add a little bit of interest with color to the building itself, if everything was just the same color, you wouldn't have any definition. Its a major part of the design, and it adds a little bit to the overall design of the building itself. I also want to point out that at the same fime we're doing this exterior, we will be doing the interior also. Ms. Smiley: Remodeling or .... Mr. Havener: It will be a complete remodel of the interior also. Ms. Smiley: Okay. And then I have one more question that's about that big sign out by the street, that pylon. Mr. Havener: Yes. September 9, 2008 24975 Ms. Smiley: Are we going to keep that, resurface that, or what are you thinking of? Mr. Havener: Our intention was to go ahead and maintain it with re -facing it at this point. Ms. Smiley: We're trying to get away from those pylons. Mr. Havener: Uh huh. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Walsh: Are there any additional questions? Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Havener, when we saw this originally, there was a number of landscape changes that we had talked about as part of your full site plan. This one doesn't seem to have any of that. Are you scraping all landscape changes or are you going to continue on with those changes that you originally proposed? Mr. Havener: We'd be more than happy to entertain addifional landscaping as suggested by the Planning Commission. That's something that we would do. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Is your parking, as I recall, was a little tight but you fell that you could sacrifice some parking for additional landscaping. Is that still the case? Mr. Havener: Yes, I believe so. I'd have to take a look at the parking, but I think even with the rebuild, we were losing spaces here. We aren't proposing to lose any. So if we had to, I'm sure the availability is there if we need to add a couple line or whatever we need to do. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Now, in addition to the pylon sign that Ms. Smiley referenced, you're also looking to put another sign on the building that's curenlly not there. Is there a need or reason why you need to have an additional sign on the building that's not currently on your building? Mr. Havener: To be honest with you, I'm not sure which ... is this the sign you're referencing here? Mr. Wilshaw: Yes. Mr. Havener: I would say if that was a sticking point that's something we wouldn't necessary need to adhere to, but it's just something September 9, 2008 24976 whenever you have two different frontages, we like to have a sign on both frontages. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. I understand. The roof, you're obviously going to leave it shingled. Are you going to re -shingle it or what's the condition of the roof? Is ilfne right now the way it is? Mr. Havener: That I don't know for sure. Until we get up there and start looking at it and evaluating it, there's a good chance it could all be replaced. I'm not sure how long the shingles have been there to be honest with you, but whatever we replace it with will be similar to what's on there on. It will be a dimensional shingle, probably a weathered wood -type appearance. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. I like the color scheme that you're presenting to us. I certainly prefer the tonal site plan that you provided before with a new building. It was very attractive, but I understand there's economic reasons why that's not possible right now, and this is not a bad alternative. I will tell you though just to kind of lel you know where I stand. My slicking points lend to be the extra sign. I'd like to see the pylon sign lowered or altered in some way if that's possible. I would like an enhancement of the existing landscaping that you have at the site currently. It certainly can always use more and that helps make your building more attractive as well. And then, of course, I do have concern about the thin brick because we have not approved it for an entire building yet. We've approved it for some detail elements in small quantities to see how it shapes out over the next few years here, and we haven't really had an entire building manufactured with that material yet. So I'm cautious. Mr. Havener: We'd love to be your lest. We'll be sure it's done right, believe me. As you know, Bob Evans has been there for 20 whatever years, 18 - 20 years, and we plan on being there for another 18 - 20 years. So we're going to do it right and make sure it's not going to fall apart on us. We don't want anything that we're ashamed of orlhe city's going to be ashamed of. Mr. Wilshaw: If the Chair would indulge me one more question, is there a reason why you're using the thin back material? My understanding is from other people that have talked about it, is that cost -wise it's almostthe same as a full brick? Mr. Havener: It can be depending on the installers and how familiar they are with the system. That's what we've run into and the construction. Bob Evans is, I don't know if you're familiar with the Mimi's concept, but we bought this company out of California and they had a lot of thin back application on that September 9, 2008 24977 building. We have found that the cost range drastically and it just really depends on the installers and how familiar they are with the system. We've gotten some people out there that aren't familiar with it and, of course, when you're not familiar with it, the costs go way up. We found that people that are familiar with it tend to keep it within reason and it's not as bad as what it could be. Mr. Wilshaw: So is that the reason you're doing this - for cost or for some structural reason? Mr. Havener: Mainly, well, it's a combination. We'd love to go with full brick, but again, the building itself doesn't lend itself to that. We don't have a ledger; we dont have the things to support the brick on the existing building. So therefore to get the look that we want to achieve, which all Bob Evans RBstaurents that we're building today are all back. So we're trying to convert all the red stores now over to the brick image. So that's our goal right now. Mr.Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Are there any additional questions or comments? Ms. Vartoogian: Have you considered any other alternatives besides the thin brick? Mr. Havener: We've gone to siding materials in the past. I don't know if you're familiar with the Werzalit or the Hardi-Plank materials. Hardi- Plank is a cementicous type siding material. Werzalit is a wood composite material that's very densely pressed wood particles with glues to laminate it together and heat applied. Both of those materials we've teed on our existing restaurants and weren't happy with the performance. The finishes tend to fade and deteriorate over time. It's a continuing maintenance problem. But with brick, as you know, it's a material that stays looking just as it does the first day you put it up. You power wash it occasionally and wash the dirt off of it. You really don't get any fading or bad appearance over the years. Ms. Vartoogian: Okay. I just have one other question about the pylon sign. You said you were going to be re -facing that. Mr. Havener: Possibly, it if needs it. I mean I dont know if its going to need re -facing, but if it does need re -facing, that would be the extent of what we would be proposing to do to it. Ms. Vartoogian: Okay. Thank you. September9, 2008 24978 Mr. Morrow: Mr. Chairman, justfollowing up on the thin brick, as Mr. Wilshaw had indicated that we've approved two of the thin brick concepts but it's more of an architectural enhancement. I guess the bottom line on this question is, can the building be built with four -inch brick? And I say that for one reason. I have sal on this commission for a lot of years and we've approved a lot of petitions, and we always say full face four inch brick. So I guess the question is, can the building be built out with four -inch brick? Mr. Havener: I'm not going to say it can't be. I'm sure anything can be done. Its just a matter of economics and, of course, coming up with a design that works and is going to be stable over the years. Basically, what you could do, I would assume, is dig down to the existing footer and add to it and bring everything up from the ground. But again, it's just getting into pretty substantial numbers above and beyond what we necessarily have to to achieve what we're trying to do. So, anything can be done for the right amount of money. I'm not sure what the additional costs would be for that. We didn't really look into that extensively so I can't give you a definitive answer as to cost differences. Mr. Morrow: Okay. Thank you. And one other question. Reviewing the signage again. Now, cored me if I'm wrong, but I'm reading our notes here and it says that the permitted sign is one wall sign on the frontage of the building and one wall sign, you know, that would be 67 square feet, and then one wall sign, not to exceed 33 square feet, and one ground sign. Well, we don't have a ground sign as far as this petition. You're asking for the pylon sign. So I note that you're proposing two wall signs at 45 square feel. I'm wondering, one seems to be less than what is allowed and one seems to be more. Is this correct, Mr. Chairman? Mr. Walsh: That's how I read it. Mr. Taormina? Mr. Taormina: Yes. Mr. Morrow: So he's not asking for any sign he's not a nlified to. Mr. Taormina: He's not asking for an excessive number of signs. As you pointed out, one is larger than what the ordinance would permit and certainly the pylon sign is an excess both in height and possibly area, although I'm not sure what the area of that sign is. Mr. Morrow: That would be, for all intents and purposes, grandfathered in under... September 9, 2008 24979 Mr. Taormina: That could be allowed to remain subject to ... Mr. Morrow: If they decide to change the face, then they'd have to gel approval I suspect from Inspection? Mr. Taormina: That's correct. Mr. Morrow: Thank you, Mr. Chairnan. Mr. Walsh: Are there any additional questions or comments? Thank you, sir. We appreciate you being here this evening. Mr. Havener: Thank you. Mr. Walsh: I think we only have one other petitioner in the audience. No comments on this item from the audience, so a motion would be in order. Mr. Taormina: If I might ask the petitioner, Mr. Havener, just a quick question relative to the site improvements? Were you also going to look at improvements including the dumpster? I know on the previous plan you looked at relocating the refuse area and screening that propedy and putting on new gates. Is that also something that you would consider as part of this site development plan? I think the other issue may have involved site lighting, but now that you're not moving the restaurant, I don't know if the existing light standards are adequate or if you propose changing those out to meet any new standards. Mr. Havener: I'm not sure what the existing light fixture is, to answer your question. If they are the old sports lighters, which I'm not sure if they have the ability to angle up. I'll look at them when I leave here, but we're going with direct down lights. Its a metal halide fixture in lieu of high pressure sodium which we used to use in the past. I'll have to check to see what's here, but if its the old style light, we would probably go back in there and at least replace the heads. To answer the question about the trash enclosure, the trash enclosure would be redone to match the building. So we would use the same materials so it blended with the building. So yes, the existing walls would come down and then be rebuilt with thin brick or possibly full brick for the trash enclosure actually. Mr. Taormina: Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Al this point, a motion would be in order. September 9, 2008 24980 Mr. Wilshaw: I hate to do this because I know it cuts off conversation, but just due to the nature that we have a number of questions about the site plan beyond the building itself, landscaping and other parts of the plan, to give the petitioner an opportunity to put it all together in one solid package to us, I'm going to propose a tabling resolution that would allow him to consolidate the various requests thatwe've had into a complete package. On a motion by Wilshaw, seconded by Morrow, and adopted, itwas #09-77-2008 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition 2008-08-08-09 submitted by Bob Evans Farms, Inc. requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to remodel the exlenor of the existing restaurant (Bob Evans) at 13911 Middlebelt Road, located at the northwest corner of Schoolcratt Road and Middlebelt Road in the Southeast %of Section 23, be tabled. A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Wilshaw, Morrow, McDermott, Scheel, Smiley, Walsh NAYES: Varloogian ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. What I'm going to ask you to do if you will work with our Planning Department and they'll gel you on our next study session as quickly as possible. ITEM #2 PETITION 2007-08-0844 ROCKY ZEBARI Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2007- 08-08-14 submitted by Rocky Zeban, on behalf of Livonia Plaza, requesting approval of a landscape plan as required by CR #500-07 in connection with a proposal to renovate the exlenor of the commercial building located at 19618 Middlebelt Road, on property located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Sl. Martin Avenue and Bretton Road in the Southwest % of Section 1. Mr. Miller: On October 10, 2007, the petitioner received site plan approval to renovate the exterior of the Livonia Plaza, which is a commercial strip center located on the east side of Middlebelt September 9, 2008 24981 Road between St. Martin Avenue and Bretton Road. As part of the approval it was conditioned that a fully detailed landscape plan shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Commission and City Council, and that is what is before you tonight. This item was tabled at the July 8, 2008, Regular Meeting to allow the petitioner to revise his landscape plan. He originally had three Flowering Dogwood Trees along the Sl. Martins Avenue right-of-way. He has eliminated those trees. There are existing Crabapple trees in this area and he feel they are significant. He is putting three Fringe Trees along the Middlebelt Road right-of-way instead of four Flowering Dogwood Trees. He has also included annual flowers to be planted within the landscape areas near the intersection of Middlebell Road and St. Martins Avenue. I've colored the plan to show where the flowers would be. He also has some yews screening the patio area near the building. That is the extent of the proposed landscape plan. Mr. Walsh: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: I do not believe there is any correspondence in connection with this item. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. Morrow: I think when this came before us, I think we had asked for the landscape plan to come back and that the petitioner get some input from the staff. So I'd like to ask the staff if that took place. Mr. Taormina: There has been recent discussion with the petitioner, Scott and myself on this. We don't feel that the Fringe Trees that he's showing on the plan are appropriate for the site. In fact, we'd like to see those substituted with a different type of tree, a large growing deciduous tree, and we've suggested certain species, such as Little Leaf Lyndon, Sweet Gum, or possibly Ginko. The petitioner appears willing to make that change. So as long as the areas are irigated and maintained and those plant species are changed to the ones recommended by staff, we don't have a problem. We're not sure that some of those yews that he's showing along the front are going to survive the way theyve been planted. There's probably some changes he can make to the design on how those are installed, but as it relates to the more significant area of landscaping along the rights-of-way, those are the changes we would recommend and the petitioner seems willing to accept that. Mr. Morrow: Thank you. September 9, 2008 24982 Mr. Walsh: Are there any additonal questions or comments? Seeing none, we will go to Mr. Zebari. Good evening. Rocky Zebari, 37731 Stableview, Farmington Hills, Michigan. Good evening. Mr. Walsh: Are there any questions for Mr. Zeban? Mr. Morrow: Were you able to hear our Planning Director, Mark Taormina, with his comments? Mr. Zeban: Yes. Mr. Morrow: Do you concur with what he recommended? Mr. Zeban: Yes. Mr. Morrow: So we can look forward to incorporate what he said without having to repeal it? Mr. Zeban: Yes. Mr. Morrow: I don't know if we have to enter that into the record as far as the detail. Mr. Taormina: We would handle that. Mr. Morrow: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Walsh: Are there any additional questions or comments? Mr. Zebari, thank you for being here tonight. There's no additional questions. Mr. Zebari: Thank you very much. Mr. Walsh: Al this point, a motion would be in order. On a motion by Morrow, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, 8 was #09-78-2008 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2007-08-08-14 submitted by Rocky Zeban, on behalf of Livonia Plaza, requesting approval of a landscape plan as required by Council Resolution #500-07, in connection with a proposal to renovate the exterior of the commercial building located at 19618 Middlebell Road, on property located on the east side of Middlebell Road between Sl. Martin Avenue and Bretton Road in the Southwest I/ of Section 1, be approved subject to the following conditions: September 9, 2008 24983 1. That the Landscape Plan marked Sheet SPA dated August 25, 2008, as revised, prepared by DAZ Architectural Design, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, except that the Fringe Trees as shown on the plan shall be substituted with a minimum of four full size deciduous trees as approved by the Planning Staff; 2. That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu of hydroseeding; 3. 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; and 4. That all other conditions imposed by Council Resolution #500-07, which granted approval for the renovation of the exterior of the Livonia Plaza, shall remain in effect to the extent that they are not in conflict with the foregoing conditions. Mr. Walsh: Is there any discussion? Mr. Taormina: As it relates to the change that was discussed, we could append language to the end of Item #1 that would read, except that the Fringe Trees as shown on the plan shall be substituted with a minimum of four full size deciduous trees as approved by the Planning Staff. Mr. Walsh: Is that acceptable to the maker? Mr. Morrow: Absolutely. Ms. Smiley: Absolutely. Mr. Walsh: It stands as amended. Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. September 9, 2008 24984 ITEM#3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 9681h Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 966r Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on Augusl26, 2008. On a motion by McDermott, seconded by Scheel, and unanimously adopted, 8 was #09-79-2008 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 968" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on August 26, 2008, are hereby approved. A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: McDermott, Scheel, Morrow, Varioogian, Wilshaw, Smiley, Walsh NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Mr. Walsh, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 969" Regular Meeting held on September 9, 2008, was adjourned at 7:34 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Carol A. Smiley, Secretary ATTEST: John Walsh, Chairman