HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2014-06-10MINUTES OF THE 1,056m PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
On Tuesday, June 10, 2014, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 1,056th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall,
33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Lee Morrow, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Members present: Scott P. Bahr Kathleen McIntyre R. Lee Morrow
Carol A. Smiley Gerald Taylor Ian Wilshaw
Members absent: None
Mr. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, and Ms. Margie Watson, Program
Supervisor, were also present.
Chairman Morrow 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 tum, will hold its own public hearing and make the final
determination as to whether a pefifion 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 2014-02-01-01 17108 FARMINGTON
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2014-02-
01-01, submitted by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to
Section 23.01(b) of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543,
as amended, requesting to rezone properly at 17108
Farmington Road, located on the northeast corner of
Farmington Road and Six Mile Road in the Southwest 1/4 of
Section 10, from C-2 (General Business) to G7 (Local
Business).
June 10, 2014
2
Mr. Taormina: This is a request to rezone properly from G2, General
Business, to C-1, Local Business. The property is located at the
northeast corner of Farmington and Six Mile Roads. This
rezoning request follows the approval of a site plan that will
entail demolishing an existing gas station as well as the pumps
and then constructing a new multi -tenant retail building. The
new building would be about 3,600 square feel, one-story in
height and divided into four possible tenant units. The Planning
Commission at the time they enacted the zoning change
suggested that the rezoning occur, and there were a couple of
reasons for this, primarily, the location as well as the size of the
property and the surrounding properties, the size of the building
that's going to be going on the property, the nature of the uses
that would occupy that building as well as the limited amount of
parking available for the development. The C-1 zoning
classification, which is being requested for this property, is more
restrictive. It allows for far fewer uses than the C-2 district. It is
intended to serve local shopping needs and neighborhood
oriented businesses, such as general retail and office uses,
barber shops, appliance stores, clothing stores, florist shops,
office businesses, uses of that nature; whereas the C-2 is
intended to serve the shopping needs of the larger community
and allow for more intensive uses. Those would include gas
stations, new and used car lots, as well as auto and light truck
repair. Another major difference between the two zoning
classifications are the type of restaurants that are allowed. The
G7 would allow carry -out and limited service restaurants. The
C-2 district allows for full service and drive-thru restaurants as
well as restaurants that carry Class C liquor licenses. So the
C-1 prohibits the larger, more intensive food service
establishments from going in. This site certainly would not
accommodate those types of uses. The zoning map shows
that G7 borders the property to the north and to the east, OS
and C-1 zoning is located across the street on Farmington
Road, both in the southeast corner as well as southwest corner.
Directly to the south is the C-1 classification again that is the
Walgreen's drugstore. The property is about 18,000 square feet
in size orjusl under half an acre. Its dimensions are 135 feet by
135 feet. Relative to the setback requirements, they do differ
between the C-1 and the C-2 districts. C-2 requires a setback
of 60 feet and C-1 requires a little bit greater setback of 75 feet.
When we approved the plan for the new building, it will be set
back 60 feel. So this will create a non -conformity along Six Mile
Road. Construction for the building is planned for later this
summer, so we would suggest that the final step of the rezoning
not occur unfit after the permits are issued and construction has
commenced. This would avoid the need to go for a variance.
June 10, 2014
3
The Future Land Use Plan does show this site as General
Commercial, so it supports either the C-1 or the C-2. Thank
you.
Mr. Morrow:
Do we have any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina:
There is one item of correspondence from the Engineering
Division, dated May 19, 2014, which reads as follows: 7n
accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has
reviewed the above referenced planning petition. The legal
description and address for the parcel, 17108 Farmington Road,
appear to be coned and should be used for any future
correspondence regarding this petition. We have no objections
to the proposed rezoning, and any comments regarding the
proposed development were included with our January 29,
2014, letter for the previous Planning Department petition." The
letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Civil Engineer 11. Thank
you.
Mr. Morrow:
Thank you very much. Are there any questions of the Planning
Director?
Mr. Taylor:
Through the Chair to Mr. Taormina, if we ask for this to be
approved, could the Council then give it a first reading and then
wail until the building is built to give it a second reading?
Mr. Taormina:
I think they would at least wait until the permits were issued and
construction had begun. That way they would have that vested
right to proceed in accordance with those permits. They could
give first reading and just hold off on the second reading and roll
call until that time.
Mr. Taylor:
Thankyou.
Mr. Taormina:
We will advise them of that suggestion.
Mr. Morrow:
As Mr. Taormina indicated, this is a petition that was brought by
the Planning Commission, so we are the petitioners. So I'm
going to go to the audience and ask if there is anybody in the
audience that wishes to speak for or against the granting of this
petition? Seeing no one coming forward, I will close the public
hearing and ask for a motion.
On a motion by
Taylor, seconded by Wilshaw, and unanimously adopted, it was
#0633-2014
RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on June 10, 2014, on
June 10, 2014
4
Petition 2014-02-01-01, submitted by the City Planning
Commission, pursuant to Section 23.01(b) of the City of Livonia
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, requesting to rezone
properly at 17108 Farmington Road, located on the northeast
corner of Farmington Road and Six Mile Road in the Southwest
1/4 of Section 10, from C-2 (General Business) to C-1 (Local
Business), the Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 2014-02-01-01 be approved for
the following reasons:
1. That G7 zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the
surrounding zoning districts and land uses in the area;
2. That C-1 zoning would allow the site to be redeveloped
more in line with the recently approved plans;
3. That the proposed change of zoning would more
accurately correspond to the location and size of the
property, the size of the recently approved retail building,
and the site's limited amount of parking; and,
4. That C-1 zoning is consistent with the developing character
of the area.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was
given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an
approving resolution.
ITEM #2 PETITION 2014-05-01-03 20440 HUBBARD
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2014-
05-01-03 submitted by the City Planning Commission, on behalf
of the City of Livonia and McLaren Performance
Technologies/Linamar, pursuant to Council Resolution #140-14,
and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of the City of Livonia Zoning
Ordinance #543, as amended, requesting to rezone property at
20446 Hubbard Road, located on the east side of Hubbard
Road between Eight Mile Road and Norfolk Avenue in the
Northeast 1/4 of Section 3, from R3 (One Family Residential) to
P (Parking).
June 10, 2014
5
Mr. Taormina: Mr. Chairman, if you don't mind, I understand you'll lake up
each item separately, but for the purpose of the presentation, I'd
like to combine this petition with the next petition because they
are closely related.
Mr. Morrow: If we can do that, that makes a lot of sense.
Mr. Taormina: Thank you. This request includes possible zoning changes for
two separate properties. The two related petitions originated by
resolution of the City Council. As you know, McLaren
Performance Technologies was granted site plan approval on
May 7 for the expansion of their sales and engineering offices,
testing and manufacturing facilities that are located on Eight
Mile Road between Farmington and Merriman Roads. The
Council's approving resolution included a condition referring the
question of whether the zoning of the properties at 20446
Hubbard and 20421 Parker should be changed from the current
classification of R-3, One Family Residential, to P, Parking.
McLaren currently owns both properties. The zoning map
shows that the properties are similar in size. They are similarly
situated on opposite sides of the McLaren property. They
include frontage on each of the side streets, Hubbard and
Parker, that form the easttwest boundaries of the project area.
On the west side is 20446 Hubbard. This parcel is on the east
side of the street about 300 feet south of Eight Mile Road. This
parcel contains 110 feet of frontage on Hubbard. It has a depth
of roughly 135 feel, for a total land area of 14,850 square feet or
roughly one-third of an acre. This is an acreage parcel meaning
it is not located within a platted subdivision, and currently there
is a single family residential structure located on the property
that will be removed as part of McLaren's expansion and
redevelopment project. On the east side is 20421 Parker. This
parcel is on the west side of the street, again situated about 300
feel south of Eight Mile Road. The property measures 100 feel
in width so it is slightly less in width than the lot on Hubbard. It
has the same depth, 135 feel with a total area of 13,500 square
feel. Again, it is a little bit less than a third of an acre in total
area. This lot is vacant. There was a structure on it but that was
removed a couple of years ago just prior to McLaren purchasing
the properly. The map shows how the two properties relate to
the surrounding properties. The land owned by McLaren is both
to the north and to the east and west of both subject properties,
and then lying directly to the south of both lots are existing
single family homes, both located along Hubbard Street and
Parker Avenue. The rezoning of one or both of these parcels is
an attempt to seek a possible design altematve that would
provide additional surface parking in exchange for reducing the
June 10, 2014
6
approved parking structure. The submitted concept plan shows
what additional surface parking on each of the parcels might
look like. On Hubbard it shows a total of 37 parking spaces.
Again, I'll just remind everyone this is very conceptual at this
time. The parking lot on the Parker side shows 25 spaces.
Altogether, there are 62 additional surface spaces reflected on
the plan. The parking structure includes two elevated decks,
each with about 50 parking spaces, and when you include the
grade level parking beneath the parking structure, there is a
total of 153 spaces. That is just to give you some sense of what
the comparison is between the additional parking that could be
developed on either one of these two lots versus the parking on
each one of the levels of the structure. With that, I'll read out
the correspondence.
Mr. Morrow: Yes. Just the correspondence on the Hubbard item, and when
we gel to Agenda Item #3, then we'll read out the
correspondence on that item.
Mr. Taormina: Okay. Thank you. There are two items of correspondence.
The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated May 19,
2014, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request,
the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced
planning petition. The parcel has been assigned an address of
20446 Hubbard Road which should be used for any future
correspondence regarding this petition. The legal description
appears to be correct, and should be used in conjunction with
the petition. We have no objections to the proposed rezoning,
although it should be noted that any future paving or
development of the parcel for parking will need to meet the
current storm water management and detention requirements of
the City of Livonia." The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E.,
Civil Engineer 11. Then we have a petition dated June 3, 2014,
addressed to the City of Livonia, copied to the City Council, that
reads: "The purpose of this letter is to inform the Livonia City
Council and any otherinterested parties that all property owners
listed in this letter wish to declare a formal protest regarding the
proposed rezoning Petition 2014-05-01-03 and subsequent
expansion of McLaren Engines on the property located directly
behind the current McLaren site on Eight Mile Road between
Farmington and Merriman Road." That petition is signed by four
individuals who give their addresses as 20414 Hubbard, 20445
Hubbard, 20495 Hubbard and then a second resident at the
same address, 20495 Hubbard. That is the extent of the
correspondence.
June 10, 2014
7
Mr. Morrow: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Taormina. Again, unlike the first item on
the agenda that the Planning Commission brought forward
based on their own action, the next two we are bringing forward
as a result of complying with a resolution by the Livonia City
Council. Just a couple of notes before I go to the audience.
This is a question of zoning. We will try to limit our remarks to
zoning. We can discuss the site plan to a very limited degree,
but the site plan is not up for change. The Commission will be
interested to hear what you have to say about this rezoning
which will help us shape whatever resolution we come up with.
With that, I'm going to open it up. We have both podiums open,
and we appreciate you coming up. Please give us your name
and address and tell us your thoughts. It looks like there's a
number of people. Please queue up when the line goes down
so we can save as much time as we can.
Mike Horton, 20414 Hubbard, Livonia, Michigan 48152. 1 wanted to express to
the Planning Commission that I strongly object to this rezoning.
This is a clear intrusion into the surrounding neighborhood for
use that area was not intended for. There is no precedent
within the City that has parking this deep into a residential
neighborhood. Il would be the equivalent of asking for a parking
lot zoning in my front yard. This would also add up to 275 cars
twice a day to our residential neighborhood. People come to
work and they leave work. That doesn't even include lunch. It
would clearly put an undue hardship on the surrounding
neighbors and no city planner who had any concept of a good
city plan would ever approve.
Mr. Morrow: Thank you very much.
Robert Austin, 20306 Hubbard, Livonia, Michigan 48152. I'm the seventh house
south of Eight Mile. I'm strongly against the rezoning of both of
these properties. My wife works in downtown Detroit where
parking garages are common but single family residential is not.
This is not a good mix for the neighborhood. As Mike said, it's
just going to impede on property values. It's going to impede on
traffic and quality of life. The City of Livonia's motto is "Families
Come First' and I'd like you to keep that in mind when you think
about approving or denying this petition to rezone these
properties. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow: Thank you. Yes, sir.
Ralph Martin, 20336 Hubbard, Livonia, Michigan 48152. 1 object to the parking
rezoning, and I also have concern with their Concept Only Plan.
McLaren has changed their plans several times since 2010, and
June 10, 2014
8
it seems like when we gave them that original parking that we
allowed them to do that, the City Council was happy because
the residents and McLaren got together and came to a
compromise. That was all voided when they didn't complete the
original plan. They never finished the berm. They never put the
trees up and they never put the parking lot in. But four years
later we get hit with a monstrosity which they're going to have to
come next Tuesday to the Zoning Board to check on whether
they can build this building 51 feel high as opposed to 31 feet
high. That will be a monster on the street. The traffic will be a
problem. The property values will go down, and no one in the
City has addressed our concerns. They've been for McLaren
from day one. McLaren was drawing their Slate tax credits from
day one before we ever approved anything, and they're still
continuing to draw their Stale lax credits. There's 61 people
signed the petition before. There's a lot more that are upset
about it now, but the traffic problem, if you were to go to Tim
Horton or Leo's Coney Island in the morning, with their traffic
there, its a mess. This on Hubbard Streetwill be a bigger mess
than that and it's already a problem for everybody. The object of
this addition or expansion for McLaren is to not injure or hurl the
residents financially, quality of life, all those things. Theyre
important. It has hurl them and they don't care. They don't
care. That's a corporation that's based somewhere else.
Theyre working in Livonia but their employees are going to
come from Southfield and wherever else they can get them.
Theyve got less than 12 people that actually live in Livonia that
work for them. So we pay taxes to give them a tax break
through the Stale. We pay taxes to fix their abatement from the
City, and we gel nothing in return for it except our properly
values will go down; our quality of life will go down and our
neighborhood will go down.
Mr. Morrow: Thank you for your thoughts.
Patricia McGrail, 33385 Norfolk, Livonia, Michigan 48152. You guys can tell me
why I live at 33385 Norfolk. The address does not fall in line
with the block, but we'll figure that out later. First of all, I'm
thoroughly disgusted that I am finding out about this so Tale in
the game. I did not know anything about this because I don't
get the Observer. I was not notified by the City of Livonia that
this was going to occur a few blocks from my home. I already
deal with a traffic issue that is astronomical due to the fact that I
have this soccer issue that I've already fought once, and am
continuing to fight over at Webster Elemenlarys park. That
brings me a ton of traffic including these lour busses every
weekend of over 1,000 children, which we fought with the City
June 10, 2014
9
on that one and thank goodness we were able to keep that to a
minimum. Now you guys want to bang in a parking structure
into a residential ...
Mr. Morrow:
Ma'am. We're confining this discussion to the two residenfial
lots tonight. I think we're all familiar with the original site plan.
Ms. McGrail:
Then we still slick with the parking structure.
Mr. Morrow:
If you could. I mean its all right to mention it, but we just don't
want to dwell on it.
Ms. McGrail:
Well, I'm not dwelling.
Mr. Morrow:
Then that's fine.
Ms. McGrail:
You want to take away my livelihood and my neighborhood. I
purchased the home here in Livonia because I chose to, not
because I had to, because you guys sold me, "Families First."
You guys sold me a family community. And now you want to
bring semi -trucks, an astronomical amount of traffic into a
neighborhood that already has a ton of traffic. We already are
inundated with cars, and you want to bring 250 more into my
residence? Why? There is plenty of areas in Livonia where
these folks could relocate. Plenty of areas where they don't
have to take down residential homes, put in parking lots, just a
few hundred feel from other residential homes, drive their semi -
trucks onto my residential street. They're literally going to be
bringing their semi -trucks onto Hubbard and onto Parker, the
same Hubbard where my school bus will drive. So this Planning
Commission thinks that it's okay that we are going to bring 18
wheelers where my school bus is going to go on a daily basis. I
have four children that I already don't feel safe allowing them to
play in the front yard because of the amount of traffic I'm dealing
with. Now I'm going to deal with guys on a 30 minute lunch
racing to the Tam Bell, racing to the McDonald's. No. What
you're going to force me to do is, you're going to force me to sell
my home which is in the top value of that subdivision and move
out. My husband and I have already discussed it. That is the
first thing we will do. We will leave, and a lot of these folks will
too. And when people ask me why did you move from Livonia,
I'll say because Livonia doesn't care about us. Because they
wanted to bring this and the high lax dollars that came with it
before us.
Mr. Morrow:
Thank you. Mark, would her address be in the service area for
the notification?
June 10, 2014
10
Mr. Taormina: I haven't checked it. The property would have to be within 300
feel of the boundaries of either one of these properties in order
for her to gel notice.
Mr. Morrow: To gel a notice. Otherwise, it's the Observer. I think she
indicated that she didn't gel the Observer, and we satisfied the
fad that we didn't fall down in letting them know about R.
Mr. Taormina: That's one of the reasons why the signs were posted on each
one of the properties.
Mr. Morrow: Thank you. Yes, sir.
Jack Roush, Jr., 20009 Mayfield, Livonia, Michigan 48152. I'm not going to
reiterate all the concerns that were brought up, but I do share
them. I strongly object to this whole expansion project. I'm not
anti -business, obviously. My family has a very long history
doing business in Livonia. I think we've had a really strong
partnership but its really disappointing to see over the past 10
years that we've lived in our neighborhood, which we're really
happy to bring our family here. Since living in our house, we
had three children, in addition to the daughter we already had. I
think this whole rezoning project, which includes the two
properties up for discussion tonight, brings up the question of
what is the purpose of residential or commercial zoning. I would
argue that is to protect the sanctity of residential and family
areas. Again, I'm not going to reiterate other concerns that
were brought up, but I think I have a unique perspective. My
family has lens, several buildings in Livonia, several industrial
buildings in Livonia, and I have never, to my recollection, ever
done a project like this where we've encroached on
neighborhoods. We typically haven't ever even had a need to
build new buildings because there are so many available. I'm
struggling not only with the effect of what this is going to have
on our neighborhood, but why this is even necessary. I'm also
concerned about the precedent that this is setting. Not only
have I never seen a project like this with our company, but I've
never seen this in Livonia anywhere. I strongly urge this group
to consider the impact that this will have, because I don't think
its going to be a good one for the citizens. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow: We appreciate your comments. Thank you. We'll slay on this
side.
Melissa Wegener, 20445 Hubbard, Livonia, Michigan 48152. I'm across the
street from the first house they want to sell on Hubbard. The
June 10, 2014
11
Slate of Michigan, the City of Livonia, this is a document that
you have. It says the purpose of these regulations is to protect
the public health, safety and welfare and the development of
permanently wholesome communities in Livonia.
Mr. Morrow:
What is the document you have there?
Ms. Wegener:
Pardon?
Mr. Morrow:
What is that document?
Ms. Wegener:
Slate of Michigan, City of Livonia, regulations governing the
subdivision of land in the City of Livonia, Wayne County,
Michigan, and providing the enforcement thereof.
Mr. Morrow:
Thankyou.
Ms. Wegener:
And this is your statement that you go by. The traffic on
Hubbard, and I don't know if you know, across from where
McLaren is, there are storage sheds there. There is semi traffic
in and out of there all day. They rent those storage sheds, and
they're running businesses out of there. There's a landscape
company, fertilizing and snowplowing. Trucks are down there
24 hours when it snows. There's a window company that has
semis backed in there all the time. There is a guy who's a
pancake distributor. His semi is in there weekly unloading. I
can't get the Ordinance Department to enforce any of this so
I've been looking at it forever. It's a lot of traffic. The schools,
we talked about at the end of the street. That's a County
program. Those busses come from all over Wayne County,
three limes a day — morning, noon and night transporting kids.
So you have that traffic. Those busses for the soccer games —
Saturday morning — they're using Hubbard now because they
know the people on Norfolk are unhappy. Al 730 in the
morning there's big lour busses coming down our street. You
can't tell me there's not going to be additional traffic. There's
supposed to be a traffic study done counting cars. That has not
been done to my knowledge. I know it was asked in some of
these minutes. You also have the problems with the garbage
trucks. The Clarenceville School District is on the other side of
the street. Clarenceville busses ran up and down there. There's
people at the end of the street thaljusl bought a house. They're
appalled. They didn't even know this was going on. They didn't
even know their kids couldn't go to Tyler because the reallor
never told them it was Clarenceville on the other side of the
street. That's neither here nor there but you know, its loo light
to tum trucks in there. I mean the radius your traffic department
June 10, 2014
12
is telling these people to have. They're going to put a sign out
there that says "no left turn." The sergeant who wrote this letter
told me they can't enforce that because the sign is on private
properly. So it's totally useless. So how are you going to slop
traffic when you tell them to make a left hand turn? You're
going to have a buddy system to make sure nobody does it? So
you can't enforce the sign. You're going to have all these
employees. You know, you talk about the comer and getting
the drainage correct. That comer on that property has flooded
for years. We look at stagnant water sifting there all the time.
So that's a problem with that. I would ask that you table this
and study it. I went to the soccer. The guy on the other side of
Parker. There's a big building there. They told us that they had
talked to everybody. I went over there last week and asked him,
I says, anybody from McLaren come and approach you about
selling this property? Its a big empty building. He runs a karate
school in there. He said I would sell in a minute. Who do I talk
lo? They can use this place and they can put a parking deck on
here. All they have to do is walk right across the street to the
building and we won't have to do this whole mess here. He'd be
more than happy to sell the property. Its a big empty vacant
building. It used to be a records storage building. It's just
vacant now. We haven't looked hard enough. We haven't
looked for solutions. Nobody wants to get together and talk
about things. So I hope you guys either table this and you look
further at what's going on and get all the bugs worked out of this
so we have honest answers about what's going on instead of
just hodge podge it here and there. Once you start destroying
neighborhoods it's really sad. At least Royal Oak and Berkley
have enough sense to protect their residents and not put that
parking lot in there that Vinsetta's wanted, that restaurant over
there. At least they had people that understood.
Mr. Morrow: Thankyou.
Mr. Taylor: Through the Chair. Mark, can you clarify what the Council did at
their meeting with the approval of the parking deck? I know that
Mr. Pastor met with some of the residents and thought that
maybe rezoning those properties out on the corners might help,
but it sounds like that's just adding to the problem. But the
Council has approved this already, right?
Mr. Taormina: If I understand your question, it's actually two questions. One
relates to what was approved. What was approved does not
include development of either one of these two lots other than
landscaping that would be used to help shield the development
from the surrounding areas. Nothing has been approved for
June 10, 2014
13
either one of these two lots, but it was the suggestion of the City
Council, or it was part of their approving resolution of the site
plan that granted the approval for the parking structure as well
as the additions to the buildings and modifications elsewhere to
the site, including the landscaping and the slonnwater
development design, that we look at whether or not one or both
of these lots should be rezoned in order to pick up additional
surface parking to the extent that that might lower the structure
and thereby address some of the concerns that were expressed
regarding the parking structure itself. But clearly, as we're
learning tonight, the additional intrusion into the neighborhood
for parking on either one of these lots may not be desired, at
least from the residents' point of view.
Mr. Taylor:
This sounds like we're adding to the problem. We have a Traffic
Commission. I dont know whether anybody has brought it up at
the Council level to offer the two streets to the Traffic
Commission. There's a lot of different signage they can put it.
It has to be enforced, but the Traffic Commission could study
this neighborhood and do a lot of different things about no
commercial vehicles. A lot of those types of signs could go up.
I would urge the Council to do that, and I know we can't make a
resolution telling them to do it, but they can refer it to the Traffic
Commission to deal with the traffic. As far as those lots being
rezoned, I just see that adding to the problem.
Mr. Morrow:
Is that it, Mr. Taylor?
Mr. Taylor:
Yes.
Mr. Morrow:
Thank you very much. We'll continue. Yes, sir.
Michael Brewer, 20045 Hubbard, Livonia, Michigan 48152. I'm down the street
from the proposed project. Right now on the weekends you gel
the busses from out -of -stale for the soccer. Every day about
8:00 in the morning you gel hundreds of cars in from people
dropping their kids off. Now if you gel more vehicles from this
parking structure, they'll be cutting through the neighborhood.
We've got people from the adjacent subdivisions culling through
our neighborhood now. That's adding to the traffic. You gel
more cars from a parking structure. That's going to add more.
I've seen 18 wheelers come down Hubbard and go down
Norfolk because they've got lost or they decided to lake a short
cul and run over to Farmington or go to Merriman. Now an 18
wheeler, that street is not designed for commercial vehicles,
especially a loaded 18 wheeler with its 40 fool or 53 fool. Now if
you put a sign up that states "no commercial vehicles," how are
June 10, 2014
14
they going to gel into their structure? You're going to have to
get into the neighborhood for them to gel their vehicles into their
structure and you're going to have to redo the roads the way it is
now. We just had it asphalted. That was I'm sure for the soccer
field and when Webster look over Tyler Elementary. And that's
what happened. We've got all this traffic now at 8:00 in the
morning and then at 3:00 in the afternoon. Now normal shifts
are either 7:00 or 8:00 in the morning. Eight hours after that it's
4:30, 5:00. You're going to gel slammed again. Now there's
soccer practice every evening down at Tyler field. They use
both streets, Hubbard and Mayfield, and I know people are
going to be culling through for those things. Now if Livonia's
motto is "Families Come First," and there's signs on Five Mile
and Inkster, Families First, you're taking away residential
housing for business. There's plenty of space for business
between Schoolcmft and Plymouth, Middlebell all the way out to
Haggerty. That's your industrial park basically. There's no
residenfial in there. There was a few that were converted to
businesses now. So my thing is, hey, just like the soccer field.
Instead of putling it at Tyler, you had an old school ground that
they lore the school down. You had good access to it from
Merriman Road, but you know, whatever. Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow: Thankyou.
Laura Roush, 20009 Mayfield, Livonia, Michigan 48152. I'm Jack's wife. A lot of
what I had written down has been touched on already. I think in
regard to the traffic, the point that I would like to make is that
there are no sidewalks in our neighborhood, which we don't
want. We like it the way it is. We like the country feel. We enjoy
our neighbors. A lot of us are here tonight and a lot of us are
going to be directly affected even though we do not live right
next door to this building. There are a lot of pedestrians in our
neighborhood, a lot of women pushing their babies around, me
laking my children for bike rides, and we've already been almost
killed several limes. There are four way stops that are not
enforced. People zip right through them. I've almost been hit
by a pickup truck going at least 50 miles an hour without them
even pausing, and one time, in particular, if I had been hit, all
my children were in the car and one baby behind me, a
pedestrian had just crossed the street. She would have been
killed. Who knows what would have happened to me. There
are some serious safely issues, and if you have this, and you
have an entrance going into our neighborhood, these people will
use that to cul through because no one is going to want to make
a left hand turn onto Eight Mile. They're going to be, oh, it's
easier just to cul down to Norfolk. We'll just do a little cul
June 10, 2014
15
around, go this way. You know, cul through, lake a left hand
turn. I mean, cul through even the smaller neighborhood below
us, which I'm sure most those people, if any of them, are even
remotely aware of what's going on here right now. Okay? So
the traffic thing, obviously an issue. There needs to be a traffic
study done, should not be approved without that being done.
The other thing I'd like to bring up, and maybe I'll gel some
groans for this, is McLaren bought those properties before this
was even suggested. Why would they invest in buying those
properties unless they knew for sure that it was going to be
approved? I mean would you go buy something thinking you
could use it if you didn't think you actually could? I mean it
doesn't make any sense, and I think that there has to be
someone who looks into the property on Parker, which was
bought by a builder who was going to build a home, but he
couldn't get the permits. Now I have a corner lot right by my
house. They just knocked down the house and that new home
is already up within a couple weeks. So you tell me why
couldn't he gel his permits to build a home when there was
already a home there? It's residential. Just saying it needs to
be looked at.
Mr. Morrow: I have no idea what McLaren's thought process was, but the
other side of the coin is, and I may be wrong, but I think that
McLaren bought those properties to mitigate the infringement
into the neighborhood. The Council brought up the fact that
they should look at parking. I think they were trying to use that
as a buffer to the neighborhood. I dont say you agree with that
plan, but your thought could be right or the other could be right.
Ms. Roush: Well, the other portion of this is, the area that was designated as
parking in the backyards of these homes, it was done in a good
faith agreement with McLaren that they would do certain things
and gel it done by a certain time, which they didn't do. They
never touched it. Why would they never touch it? Because they
never were planning on doing it in the first place. Now, it is my
understanding with that agreement, if it wasn't done within a
year, that parking area that wasn't residential anymore was to
revert back to residential. So you need to look at whether or not
that area that they have in between those buildings, which you
say is parking now, if it actually is, because in the agreement
that I saw, it said it would revert back to residential. So that also
needs to be looked at. The other things that I wanted to say
was, I just find that this is extremely disrespectful to all these
residents that are going to be affected by this. There is way too
much here. It sets a precedent like my husband said that is
unheard of, and when you start doing this, how many people are
June 10, 2014
16
going to go, you know, I don't like living next to Tim Horton.
Someone should buy my lot and they can expand their
business. They need extra parking over there. Why don't they
buy my house? And then the next guy goes, why don't they buy
my house? And then the next guy next to him says, no, I didn't
want to live next to a parking lot so I'm going to sell my house
really cheap. Now, do we want people buying really cheap
houses in Livonia? What kind of neighbors are going to be
moving into my neighborhood? I don't need to live there
obviously, but I care about these people and you should too,
and you should care about the fad that this is not good for the
neighborhood. I kind of was a little taken back when you said
you didn't feel like this was a neighborhood. This is a
neighborhood regardless of how big our lots are and what you
previously thought about it. We are neighbors and we care
about each other and we care about this happening. It really is
disgusting that these people's homes are going to be harmed
and our properly values are all going to drop because this can
be like a cancer. This can spread in our neighborhood. Maybe
not the actual building, but the fad that nobody is going to want
to live next to it. Nobody is going to want to live on a street with
all this traffic. I know I don't. I've been begging my husband to
move for years and he loves Livonia. But you know what?
When this came about, he said Tel's start looking. Now do you
want us to keep looking? Approve the plan. I don't think its
fair. I don't think it's right, and I think if McLaren wants to build a
bigger building with this parking, but we all know that the
building is going to be huge and that's going to be another
precedent that's going to be broken and this parking structure,
which is going to be noisy — what building is noisy — and then all
the lights. Its ridiculous. I mean we can't do this to people. It's
wrong. It is wrong, and that's not what Livonia stands for like
my husband has said. Thank you very much.
Mr. Morrow: Thank you. Is there anyone else to come forward? We'll do the
Parker side next. You're certainly welcome to comment, but
Hubbard is for now and Parker will be the next one up.
Mr. Taylor: Mr. Chairman, could we possibly hear from McLaren? Is
someone here from McLaren?
Mr. Morrow: He has the option if he cares to. He doesn't have to because
we are the petitioner and he doesn't have to partake if he
doesn'twanllo. Yes, ma'am.
Kathryn Bottaro, 20495 Hubbard Street, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Sorry I'm late.
Is it okay to go now or is somebody else going to go?
June 10, 2014
17
Mr. Morrow: No, there is no one else at the podium
Ms. Boltaro:
I'm the properly directly across from the proposed entranceway
exit way that will be on Hubbard. I find that disgusting. We
were here before. The idea is that there will be an additional
100 cars or so in the parking structure in the community. This
doesn't make sense for that structure. That additional building,
three story building, much closer to my house. Its going to be
an office building. Now lights will be on all night, not just the
exterior lights, the flood lights that are already on my driveway,
but my front door, my front windows, directly across from this. If
I'm not mistaken, its just a 30 fool street into a 30 fool driveway
meaning .... the previous business had tractor trailers on our
lawns all the time. We look it to the City. They look down our
tree limbs. We're going to have tractor trailers on our lawn
again. Our visitors park in front of our house. How are these
people going to gel in and out? We all know about the traffic.
We know about the ... sorry, I just walked through the door so
I'm not really collected, but the idea of having a parking
structure like that in a community like ours, it's just
overwhelmingly big.
Mr. Morrow:
Ma'am, I know you were a little bit Tale, but we're primarily trying
to confine our comments to the zoning for the two residential
lots.
Ms. Boltaro:
Oh, sorry.
Mr. Morrow:
Dont apologize. I know that we went through this at the site
plan. So we know you were concerned about the parking
structure. That's not up for tonight. I dont mind you mentioning
it, but the original site plan is not going to change. I know you
have the one across the street from you and so we know your
thoughts. But I just wanted to make sure primarily just the
parking that would be on that residential lot.
Ms. Bottam: Yeah. Our property is zoned, and I dont know why and I can't
gel anybody from the City to work with me on this and I've
called multiple times. Why we're zoned both industrial and
residential, but we're a home. We have a garden. This
community is a community of family. We're houses. So the
point is, about rezoning, I don't understand how that went
through at all. I have no idea how the company bought a
properly and is getting permission to rezone it. It just doesn't
make sense to me. Again, this just isn't making any sense at
all. So, yeah, if I had to vole, my husband who is at work right
June 10, 2014
is
now said, if we had to vole, we certainly wouldn't have voted to
approve for that residential property to be rezoned to industrial.
Its definitely going to affect us in multiple ways. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow: Thank you very much, and you have a beautiful little baby there.
Is there anyone else before I close the public hearing? We can
call 0 the Hubbard side. With that, I'm going to close the public
hearing and ask for a motion.
On a motion by Taylor, seconded by Bahr, and unanimously adopted, it was
#06-34-2014 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on June 10, 2014, on
Petition 2014-05-01-03 submitted by the City Planning
Commission, on behalf of the City of Livonia and McLaren
Performance Technologies/Linamar, pursuant to Council
Resolution #140-14, and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of the
City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, requesting
to rezone property at 20446 Hubbard Road, located on the east
side of Hubbard Road between Eight Mile Road and Norfolk
Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 3, from R-3 (One Family
Residential) to P (Parking), the Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2014-05-01-
03 be denied for the following reasons:
1. That the proposed rezoning is not needed to serve
McLaren Performance Technologies/Linamar, the
neighborhood or community;
2. That the anticipated use would unduly tax and conflict with
the established and normal traffic flow of the area;
3. That the existing mining is more consistent with the
established pattern of development and character of the
adjacent properties; and
4. That P (Parking) zoning is not supported by the Future
Land Use Plan which recommends Low Density
Residential.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was
given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
Mr. Morrow: Is there any discussion?
June 10, 2014
19
Mr. Wilshaw: I think it's fair to give at least my opinion as we vole on this item
because the City Council asked us to come back and look at the
zoning of these two properties and if it would be appropriate to
rezone these from residential to parking with the concept of
lowering the parking deck by one story to then spread the
parking out onto these two parcels. So the City Council is
looking for our opinion and our guidance, and therefore I'm
going to give it, which is that, as I look at this plan and this
proposal, I see a lot of negatives. We have the issue of
slormwaler management. As you put more concrete in on a
piece of property, the water has to go somewhere. You need to
plan that out. The more concrete we put on this particular site
of McLaren, the stormwater management issues arise. We
have issues with lighting and noise, which would encroach
closer to the residents who live surrounding this parcel. As you
move cars closer to the roadways themselves, you'll have
reduced landscaping because rezoning this parcel and putting a
parking lot in would reduce the landscaping on that lot.
McLaren's intent, if this is not rezoned, is to heavily landscape
those parcels to serve as buffers for the parking garage. I think
that's a smarter thing to do for the residents that are in the area,
and frankly, there has been no need demonstrated on the part
of McLaren at this point to rezone these parcels. They have
adequate parking as their plan shows and to add additional
parking to that site, I don't believe is necessary at this time. We
try to look for the least intensive uses of zoning in our
community. Residential is the least intensive use of any zoning
that exists in our collection of zoning that we can choose from.
Parking will be the least intensive use of a commercial or
industrial type use, but residential is frankly the lead intensive
use, which is what it currently is and I believe its properly
zoned. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow: Any other commissioner? Did you say something, Mr. Bahr?
Mr. Bahr: No, but I'll say ditto to everything Mr. Wilshaw said.
Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted. We will forward this to the City Council
saying that the Commission recommends that this zoning
request be denied. Based on what I'm hearing tonight, that
could be the good news, but the bad news is that you're going
to have to fight this out again at the Council level, who will
ultimately make the final determination as to whether the zoning
goes through from there.
June 10, 2014
20
ITEM #3 PETMON 2014-05-01-04 20421 PARKER
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2014-
05-01-04 submitted by the City Planning Commission, on behalf
of the City of Livonia and McLaren Performance
Technologies/Linamar, pursuant to Council Resolution #140-14,
and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of the City of Livonia Zoning
Ordinance #543, as amended, requesting to rezone property at
20421 Parker Avenue, located on the west side of Parker
Avenue between Eight Mile Road and Norfolk Avenue in the
Northeast 1/4 of Section 3, from R-3 (One Family Residential) to
P (Parking).
Mr. Morrow: If the Commission has no objection, I think you've already
explained the location. Just read in any correspondence and
then we'll go to the audience.
Mr. Taormina: There are two items of correspondence. The first item is from
the Engineering Division, dated May 19, 2014, which reads as
follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering
Division has reviewed the above referenced planning petition.
The parcel has been assigned an address of 20421 Parker
Avenue which should be used for any future correspondence
regarding this petition. The legal description appears to be
comect, although due to the way the description is written, it
cannot be verified without having a Professional Surveyor
retrace the boundary in the field. We have no objections to the
proposed rezoning, although it should be noted that any future
paving or development of the parcel for parking will need to
meet the current storm water management and detention
requirements of the City of Livonia." This Department has no
further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by David
Lear, Civil Engineer 11. We have a similar petition dated June 3,
2014, addressed to the City of Livonia, copied to the City
Council, which reads as follows: "The purpose of this letter is to
inform the Livonia City Council and any other interested parties
that all property owners listed in this letter wish to declare a
formal protest regarding the proposed rezoning Petition 2014-
05-01-03 (I believe they meant 04) and subsequent expansion
of McLaren Engines on the property located directly behind the
current McLaren site on Eight Mile Road between Farmington
and Merriman Road." That petition is signed by two individuals
who give their addresses as 20420 Parker and 20400 Parker.
That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. Morrow: Thank you. I don't know if we mentioned it before, but these
protest petitions do not affect the City Planning Commission.
June 10, 2014
21
The City Council, it affects their vole. Without further ado, I'm
going to go to the audience.
Mr. Bahr:
Could I just ask a question before we go to the audience?
Mr. Morrow:
Sure.
Mr. Bahr:
Through the Chair to Mark, a comment was made on the last
petition that they would need to come again before Council.
With us denying this petition, doesn't it require an appeal to
Council? Does this even move on to Council?
Mr. Taormina:
The zoning process is automatic. Regardless of our
recommendation, it will go to Council.
Mr. Bahr:
Regardless of what we do here. Okay.
Mr. Taormina:
That's correct.
Mr. Bahr:
Thanks for clarifying that. And then this has been said many
limes tonight but seeing we have more comments here, I just
want to state one more time that this is about the zoning of
these properties. So it's not about height of buildings; its not
about parking decks. It's about rezoning these properties from
residential to parking. I know it's been said several times, but I
think it behooves us to say it one more time because we're
getting a lot of comments about things that frankly are outside
the realm of this petition.
Mr. Morrow:
We are on a new petition, so it's appropriate.
Ms. McIntyre:
I'm sorry. I also just want to clarify one other thing. I think in
our previous case we discussed that these were not
subdivisions, they were acreage. And I want to be just real
clear that no one said here or feels that this isn't a
neighborhood. This isn't a subdivision, and subdivision is a
term of zoning. We certainly appreciate and understand that
this is a neighborhood. I think maybe there was some
misinterpretation when we said these were acreage lots and not
a subdivision. We certainly all see this as a neighborhood.
That's just a technical term.
Mr. Morrow:
It is a neighborhood.
Ms. McIntyre:
Exactly.
Mr. Morrow:
Regardless ofwhatwe call it.
June 10, 2014
22
Ms.
McIntyre:
Exactly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Mr.
Morrow:
Please
give us your name and
address for the record.
Craig Rickle, 20325 Parker, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Thats the reason I bought
it, for acreage. On your [Instructions for Completing] Application
for Variance, you got, "When you ask for a zoning variance, you
are asking permission to do something which violates the
zoning ordinance. So you need to explain why the law should
not apply to you." Well, that's money, but then, "The Board
must also decide that the variance would be fair to the people
who are protected by the Zoning Ordinance, such as your
neighbors." We're not being protected. We are being
overlooked 100 percent. Nobody cares what we say. The votes
go by. Why theyre so special that they can't obey the law but
we have to obey. So I want to build a two-story garage. My
neighbors are okay with it, but I'll gel knocked down. I mean
there's special things going on here. "You need to explain to the
Board why it is fair to your neighbors to allow this variance, as
well as the reason the variance would be consistent with the
spin( of the Zoning Ordinance."
Mr. Morrow: Well, sir, lel me just gel in here. I'm not sure what you mean by
variance. We're talking about zoning.
Mr. Rickles Okay. Even mining. What I'm interested in is what was
happening in 2010. 1 wasn't here for that, but I know the code is
for one year. So that parking needs to be rezoned again,
because that's back to residential. So that's not considered
parking. They haven't done anything to finish it. I'm living with
a million mosquitos now because I have a retention pond with
stagnant water just silting there. I mean we're right behind d,
and we got to deal with and they never completed what the
original agreement was. I know if I got a building permit or a
permit out, its good for one year. If I dont, I got to go reissue a
permit. So I don't know if a permit has been reissued again to
keep that as parking because that should revert back to
residential. I don't know why you're shaking your head. I mean
I know my codes and that. It goes back. So, I dont know. Do
what you want.
Mr. Taylor: Mark, do you want to explain that about zoning?
Mr. Morrow: I think it might be in the site plan as opposed to the zoning
June 10, 2014
23
Mr. Taormina:
It pertains to the site plan and the rezoning of the other property.
Its not really germane directly to these petitions this evening.
Those would be addressed by the City Council.
Mr. Morrow:
You can bring that up at the City Council. It would be up to
them if they want to consider that.
Steve Halchigian, 21420 Parker, Livonia, Michigan 48152. I'm against this
proposal on this empty lot on Parker. An April 1 st meeting of the
City Planning, I remember Ms. Smiley remarking that she
wouldn't want a large flat area for parking such as asphalt or
cement, and if this had gone through or if this will go through,
this is exactly what we'll be having. And I remember back last
winter when Gary Crone was in charge of McLaren, he and the
maintenance supervisor, Tom Bonnet, was out there, and my
neighbor and I approached them and they had said that they
had just purchased this property. When I asked them what their
plans were, Gary told me that they were going to make a picnic
area for the employees and that's where that stood. On March
3131, we had an informational meeting on the fifth floor of the
City Hall with the Mayor and I asked Mr. Taormina what was the
plans for that empty lot on Parker, and he replied, proposed
parking. On April 21n, we had a neighborhood meeting at
McLaren with Mr. Scott Maxwell, and we looked at some maps.
And the map that showed the Parker lot said to be seeded.
When I asked about will there be any parking on that spot, they
would not answer. We also had another meeting on May 2nd at
McLaren. This time with Michael VanDuren, Vice President of
Corporate Development. We looked at another map and there
was no parking indicated on that Parker empty lot. And he even
told me, personally, there would be no parking on that lot.
Mr. Morrow:
Okay. Sir, could I interject something here before we go
forward? McLaren is not asking for this to be parking. The City
Council is asking that it be considered for parking.
Mr. Halchigian:
Which is my next point.
Mr. Morrow:
Okay. So I just wanted to make sure that we weren't saying that
McLaren was bringing this petition forward. Go ahead.
Mr. Halchigian:
On May T^ at the City Council meeting, Councilman John
Pastor, to all of our surprise and my understanding to much of
the surprise of the City Council, he designed this parking on
Hubbard and Parker, and he had said that the neighbors wanted
this. I tried. I have not found a neighbor that wants this.
June 10, 2014
24
Mr. Morrow: Well, I don't want to dwell on that because I wasn't there, but he
did introduce the plan to look at R. I knowthal.
Mr. Halchigian: The parking structure is one thing, and I know we don't want to
speak of that right now.
Mr. Morrow: I'm just saying, as far as ....
Mr. Halchigian: But the rezoning of this property on Parker, I'm against that.
And another thing, if they do make that parking, then there's a
row of trees that divide the current residential lot to where the
structure would be. They would all have to be cleared so they
can make the parking lot. If those trees were left there, that
would help hide some of the structure if and when that goes up.
But I would like to see no rezoning on that Parker property.
Thankyou.
Mr. Morrow: Yes, Mr. Taylor.
Mr. Taylor: I certainly don't agree with Mr. Pastor, but in defense of him, I
think what his idea was to drop down the parking complex so
that they could park on the outside edges and give the residents
a chance to look at that. I think that's what he was thinking
about. I don't agree with him, but that's what he did. I also want
to urge all of you people to go to a Council Meeting to urge them
to refer this to the Traffic Commission so they can make a traffic
study of what's going on. If they can help you there, they will.
To a certain point they can help you, but some of this is through
the schools, through Parks and Recreation I'm hearing. I have
a soccer field behind my home and they park in the street and
its there for a couple hours and then they go away. But I sit on
my back deck and watch them play soccer. So its great.
Mr. Morrow: Thank you, Mr. Taylor.
Nabil Nouman, 20341 Parker, Livonia, Michigan 48152. 1 want to tryto talk about
the two parking lots, but just as Mr. Wilshaw said and Mr.
Taylor, it really is a result of trying to bring the three level
parking deck to two levels. So it's difficult not to talk about that
in the process. Starting off, I really want to say I have no beef
with McLaren. Theyre a business. They're trying to do what's
best for them. My beef is really with the City of Livonia so far.
Mr. Pastor, during that meeting, dropped a bomb on us during
the City Council meeting, and really I believe it was more of
lactic to draw the attention away from the three level parking
structure, and he clearly said it. He sat there and he said its
June 10, 2014
25
either three or two, and he basically flat out waived every
neighbor's concern. He completely ignored it.
Mr. Morrow: Well, yeah. I think we get that message.
Mr. Nouman: Yep. And I'm going to voice really a concern here. Why is the
City of Livonia so adamant on pleasing McLaren? It raises a lot
of questions. It doesn't smell right. I have no information to
suggest any foul play or anything. I'm not going to accuse
anyone, but there's definitely going to be some questions asked.
McLaren, they want to do what's best them. The City of Livonia
should be doing what's best for the city and the neighbors.
Right now we know the City of Livonia is actually one of the
better financially stable cites in the area. So the City doesn't
need McLaren, but us as neighbors, we need our values, we
need our homes. We need the purpose for what we bought our
homes to be there. And right now, its not there due to whether
its the Planning Commission voting for that three level parking
structure to agree to it or the City Council agreeing to that three
level parking structure or the Mayor or anyone involved. The
main question is why. I haven't heard one single answer. Why
is that important to the City? Why is that important to the
neighborhood and who is that benefitting other than McLaren
and the big question mark. Possibly, city officials. There's
going to be some investigation. I would not rest, along with the
rest of the neighbors, to find out who is benefifting from this.
For a City Councilman to come up and act more of a salesman
and try to pitch us on either two or three, that's not looking out
for the neighbors. That's not looking for the city. That's special
interests. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow: Thankyou
James Brossard, 20391 Parker, Livonia, Michigan 48152. I'm right next to the
empty lot that McLaren has acquired. I too am against parking
against my house, my home, my wife also. Now, I remember at
the last meeting, McLaren gave a presentation and put it on the
slide screen and showed just a two level structure with no
parking on either Hubbard or Parker, but shortly after that,
Councilman Pastor, it floored me what he had to say that there's
going to be parking on Parker or Hubbard or both. I just couldn't
believe he said that, and it upset me greatly, especially after
McLaren said there's going to be a two level structure with no
parking on Hubbard or Parker. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow: Like Mr. Taylor said, I think Councilman Pastor had been
listening to the neighbors for input about the parking deck, and
June 10, 2014
26
at least in my opinion, he came up with the idea that if the
neighbors don't object, if we rezone these two parcels to
parking, maybe we can lower the parking deck. I'm not saying
he was trying to push it, but I think he was impressed with what
he was hearing and he was offering an idea of maybe if the
neighbors went along with it, they could do that. That's one
reason we're doing this rezoning tonight to gel the input from
the neighbors to see if that was a good idea or a bad idea as it
relates to what the neighbors were thinking, and I think we're
getting that tonight — what the neighbors think. I don't see any
motive other than trying to maybe come up with an alternate
that would be more in line to lessen the impact in the
neighborhood. So I don't mean to interrupt you, but I don't want
to beat up Councilman Pastor. I don't think there's an ulterior
motive there. I think he was just trying to see if there was any
way to mitigate it in a different direction. So excuse, the
interruption. Go ahead, sir.
Mr. Brossard:
That's just the way it came across. It upset me greatly. It really
did.
Mr. Morrow:
That's why I wanted to speak.
Mr. Brossard:
It sounded like an ultimatum, like I would have no choice in this
matter. It just floored me. Thank you very much.
Mr. Morrow:
Il was just simply a trial balloon. That's all it was.
Laura Roush,
20009 Mayfield, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Just a couple points.
I'm not going to be loo long. First of all, I appreciate you trying
to defend Pastor and what he was saying, but I think that a lot of
us have other reason to believe there is some other motives
there. Just put it on the record. I realize that has nothing to do
with this particular lot. With this particular lot, I think and from
what I'm hearing from the Council you're not going to rezone
this to usage beyond residential, which is great. I think if you
did that, the concern here is that even if they said we're going to
plant landscaping there, we're going to use that lot to block it for
you guys, that's not going to happen because it didn't happen
when they promised it before. A company that has promised
something before and has not completed that promise, they
won't do it again. So if you keep it residential, we know they
can't put parking on that lot. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow:
You bring that thought to the City Council when it gets to City
Council and see what they say to that.
June 10, 2014
27
Ms.Roush:
About what?
Mr. Morrow:
Developing the lot with landscaping.
Ms. Roush:
Well, like I said, if we keep @ residential, they can't put parking
there. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow:
That's right. Yes, sir.
Dean Wagner,
20445 Hubbard, Livonia, Michigan 48152. I've lived in this area
since 1982. What's next? Every time we come down here from
McLaren, what's next? Maybe a casino in the back parking lot?
I don't know. It just seems the City gives them anything they
want. Why? You drive into the City. It says Livonia puts
families first. I dont see that. I definitely do not want any of this
traffic. It's a pain. Saturday morning I come home from work at
6:30, there's lour busses going down the street. I can't even
turn down my street, lel alone try and gel out of my driveway to
go back to work. So we're dead set against this. I mean
McLaren has their right to do what they want on Eight Mile, but
keep them out of our neighborhood. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow:
Thank you very much. Yes, sir.
Scott Maxwell,
McLaren Performance Technologies, 32233 Eight Mile, Livonia,
Michigan 48152. 1
just want to make a point of clarification.
There's a little bit of
a terminology concern about how many
levels are on the garage. Always from the beginning, there had
been three levels: one ground level, and two elevated levels.
Maybe it's my fault. We may have inadvertently said two levels,
meaning two elevated levels. The alternative that Councilman
Pastor proposed would be also considered two levels, one
ground, one elevated. So when Jim was discussing that it was
two levels, someone may have said that with the three level
garage, referring to two elevated levels. So its always been
three total levels.
Mr. Morrow:
Yes. I think that's clear now. With the parking in the residential
area, you might be able to remove one level of parking.
Mr. Maxwell:
That is correct. With Pastor's proposal and making those two
lots parking and turning them into surface parking, it would be
one ground level and one elevated.
Mr. Morrow:
I think it would be important to refresh our memory if it were to
be ground level plus two levels, I believe it was 18 feet.
June 10, 2014
28
Mr. Maxwell:
Eighteen feet at the lire level, with three or four feet of guarding
to keep the lights out and the poles.
Mr. Morrow:
Okay. Thank you. Yes, sir.
Mike Horton, 20414 Hubbard, Livonia, Michigan 48152. 1 just want to quickly say
that the whole Pastor thing, I spoke to John Pastor prior to this
plan coming out and he at one point during the conversation, we
were actually out in the area theyre trying to rezone now, and
he said, what can we do to make you guys happy? And I said,
well, I want you to hold McLaren to their original agreement,
which would be
just a ground level parking lot. And he said,
well, that's not what
I'm talking about. And I said, well, I would
be for anything that didn't involve a three story parking garage.
And then minutes before the Council meeting, that's what he
came back with. In no way did I ever mean to lead him to
believe that a stretched out
parking lot was something that
would be okay. I would also like
to respond to the gentleman
from McLaren. He staled that this has always been a three
story parking structure. In fact, it has not always been a three
story parking structure.
Mr. Morrow:
Well, he's talking about the current site plan.
Mr. Horton:
Yeah, as am 1.
Mr. Morrow:
Not the prior history.
Mr. Horton:
Well, it's all the same thing. You can't make that distinction.
Originally, this was a ground level parking structure and that's
what they agreed to.
Mr. Morrow:
Parking lot.
Mr. Horton:
Parking lot, correct. It wasn't always a three story structure.
We rolled over on this based on a ground level parking lot. So
that is not correct information. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow:
Thankyou. Yes, sir.
Mr. Maxwell:
It has to be clear in talking about the garage, that was three
levels. Yes, there was a 2010 surface parking. That's not what
I was talking about.
Mr. Morrow:
We realize that.
June 10, 2014
29
Patricia McGrail, 33385 Norfolk, Livonia, Michigan 48152. This is it, I swear.
Maybe he can help clarify me, because this is where I gel lost.
Like I said, I was brought into this just a couple weeks ago. I'm
right at Norfolk, one block in off of Farmington. We were not
notified, like I said, by the City of this project. My address is a
little weird as you notice, its 33385. First time I called 911 my
ambulance was actually dispatched to Six Mile and Middlebell.
So my address doesn't fall correct.
Mr.
Morrow:
Mark, did you say 300 feet?
Mr.
Taormina:
Yes. It sounds like she's beyond that.
Mr.
Morrow:
If you are beyond 300 feel of the ...
Ms.
McGrail:
I am well beyond 300 feet.
Mr.
Morrow:
Well, then that's why you didn't gel a direct notice. Otherwise it
mind because they were going to use it as parking, but not as
would have to be posted at City Hall.
Ms.
McGrail:
My question is, how did the 2010 agreement ...
Mr.
Morrow:
Please talk to the Commission.
Ms. McGrail:
How did that 2010 single lot agreement go from a single lot
agreement to a three story agreement? I just dont understand
how it happened.
Mr. Morrow:
It was brought up at the site plan review that they were going to
build the parking structure. That's how it was introduced.
Ms. McGrail:
So they changed their minds?
Mr. Morrow:
Well, I guess in a large sense you could say they changed their
mind because they were going to use it as parking, but not as
just a parking lot. They were going to a parking structure.
Ms. McGrail:
I understand, what the structural change was, but what was the
purpose?
Mr. Bahr:
Mr. Chair, I was just going to say again, this is outside the
purview of the rezoning petition tonight. We're back into the site
plan.
Mr. Morrow:
Yes, well, I understand that, buljust so she understands that ...
Ms. McGrail:
I've lived here since 2009 and I'm just trying to catch up.
June 10, 2014
30
Mr. Morrow:
But a new plan was brought forward and that's where it
changed. It had to go through the approval process to gel that
structure.
Ms. McGrail:
So even though ....
Mr. Morrow:
Is that structure subject to the Zoning Board of Appeals? I just
wanted to be sure. That's where at the site plan review and
acceptance, that's where it changed.
Ms. McGrail:
Okay. I just wanted to make sure that I did understand correctly
that even though when the original deal was made between the
citizens and McLaren ...
Mr. Morrow:
They got their zoning but it was never developed. When the
new plan came forward, that's introducing the parking structure
and the parking zoning. That's the history.
Ms. McGrail:
So the residents did do the fight thing and agree to a deal that
they did gel back-doored on. I just wanted to make sure I
understood that correct.
Mr. Morrow:
Those are your words, not mine. Anyone else? Seeing none,
I'm going to close the public hearing, and ask for a motion.
On a motion by Bahr, seconded by Wilshaw, and unanimously adopted, it was
#0635-2014
RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been
held by the City Planning Commission on June 10, 2014, on
Petition 2014-05-01-04 submitted by the City Planning
Commission, on behalf of the City of Livonia and McLaren
Performance Technologies/Linamar, pursuant to Council
Resolution #140-14, and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of the
City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, requesting
to rezone property at 20421 Parker Avenue, located on the west
side of Parker Avenue between Eight Mile Road and Norfolk
Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 3, from R-3 (One Family
Residential) to P (Parking), the Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2014-05-01-
04 be denied for the following reasons:
1. That the proposed rezoning is not needed to serve
McLaren Performance Technologies/Linamar, the
neighborhood or community;
June 10, 2014
31
2. That the anticipated use would unduly tax and conflict with
the established and normal traffic flow of the area;
3. That the existing zoning is more consistent with the
established pattern of development and character of the
adjacent properties; and
4. That P (Parking) zoning is not supported by the Future
Land Use Plan which recommends Low Density
Residential.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was
given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
Mr. Morrow: Is there any discussion?
Mr. Wilshaw: I just want to address one comment that we heard from both of
these petitions, which was regarding the fact that if the properly
was not developed, that zoning would revert back to its original
form, which I think was already addressed but I just want to
reiterate the fact that site plans that we have presented to us
always have a condition that they are null and void after one
year if no permits are pulled, but zoning decisions made by the
City are permanent. So when property was rezoned to Parking,
in the past, even though that wasn't used for parking, that
zoning remains Parking. And that's typical. I've never seen
anything in this community where there's a condition upon
zoning that it reverts back to its previous form if its not used for
that purpose. So I just wanted to point that out. Thank you.
Mr. Morrow: I appreciate you bringing that forward. It would take another
petition to change the zoning. It doesn't automatically revert
back. Thank you very much.
Ms. McIntyre: Just one additional comment. What does revert back, in
addition to site plans being invalid, and this is before this role
and before I was on the Zoning Board, it was confusing to me
as well. Variances, which are granted by the Zoning Board of
Appeals, those are good for a year, or not usually even a year,
three months or six months, but those are almost always
conditioned that if you don't act on your variance within a certain
period of time, those do revert back. So I think that's confusing.
Mr. Morrow: That's good information. Is there anybody else for discussion?
Seeing none, roll call.
June 10, 2014
32
Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted. As I said on the last petition, this will be
sent back to the City Council advising that we don't think the
rezoning is appropriate. They will hold their own hearing. You
will have a chance to address it with them, who will make the
final determination as to the zoning. We appreciate your
coming out tonight and thank you for your input and for your
behaviorloo.
ITEM #4 PETITION 2014-05-08-09 FAITH BIBLE CHURCH
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Pefition 2014-
05-08-09 submitted by Faith Bible Church requesting approval
of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the City of Livonia
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, in connection with a
proposal to construct an addition to the church at 34541 Five
Mile Road, located on the south side of Five Mile Road between
Farmington Road and Fairlane Avenue in the Northwest 114 of
Section 21.
Mr. Taormina: This is a request to construct an addition to Faith Bible Church
which is at the southeast comer of Five Mile and Fairlane
Roads. The properly is about three acres in size. It includes
323 feel of frontage on Five Mile Road and about 425 feel of
frontage on Fairlane. The zoning is R-3, one family residential.
The existing church contains two floors. It is a bi-level design
and it is about 10,000 square feel altogether. The main
entrance faces Fairlane Avenue and the west half of the site
between the church and Faidane contains a U-shaped drive that
serves primarily as a drop-off and pickup area. Just south of
this U-shaped driveway is the main church parking lot. The
existing church building is a rectangular shaped, two-story
building. The main entrance to the church is currently along the
west side of the building. Access is provided by three different
drive approaches along Fairlane. There is no access from Five
Mile Road. The original church on the property was approved
back in 1958. Since the expansion will not affect the seating in
the main sanctuary, this petition is being treated as a permitted
use and it is subject only to site plan review. The proposed
addition and new entrance would be constructed on the west
side of the building. So what we're looking at tonight in this
shaded area on the plan is really a new entry vestibule for the
church. Currently, due to the split level nature of the building
and the fact that the main floor of the church is raised several
feet above the surrounding grade, people must enter the church
June 10, 2014
33
either by using a set of outside steps or alternatively they can
use a wooden barrier -free ramp. This new entrance would
enclose the entryway. It would be constructed at grade level so
there would be no need for any exterior stairs or ramp inside
that entry portion of the building or the vestibule. The people
can use a set of stairs or be protected from the weather or they
could use a newly installed lift in order to access the church's
main assembly area. That addition is about 1,700 square feel,
so it would bring the total area up to about 11,750 square feel.
Some renderings were provided showing what the addition
would look like. This is a view looking from the southwest and
maybe northwest towards the main entry. These are the flat
elevation views of the same space. You can see the existing
building and how it's divided into two levels. With that, Mr.
Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence.
Mr. Morrow: Please
Mr. Taormina: There are four items of conespondence. The first dem is from
the Engineering Division, dated May 29, 2014, which reads as
follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering
Division has reviewed the above referenced planning petition.
We have no objections to the petition at this time. The proposed
plan indicates that project will consist of constructing a new
building entrance as well as minor paving additions to the
existing parking lot The proposed work does not influence
public utilities and will not occur within City rights-of-way,
therefore no Engineering Department will be required. The
parcel is assigned an address of 34541 Five Mile Road which
should be used for any correspondence relating to this project.
No legal description has been provided with the petition,
therefore the following legal description should be used. Lots 3
thru 9 inclusive of On Subdivision as recorded in Liber 67, Page
24, Wayne County Records. The existing structure is currently
serviced by public utilities, which are to remain in place. Should
changes to the existing utility leads be needed, the owner will
need to submit plans to the Engineering Department to
determine if permits will be required. Any storm water discharge
from downspouts are to be directed onto open ground as shown
on the proposed plans, and not connected to the existing public
storm sewer." The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Civil
Engineer II. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue
Division, dated May 30, 2014, which reads as follows: "This
office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a
request to construct an addition to the church on property
located at the above referenced address. We have no
objections to this proposal." The letter is signed by Daniel Lee,
June 10, 2014
34
Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police,
dated May 27, 2014, 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 Joseph Boilos, Sergeant,
Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection
Department, dated June 10, 2014, which reads as follows:
"Pursuant to your request, the above -referenced petition has
been reviewed. The following is noted. (1) The proposed
addition must conform to all cunent barrier free codes, building
codes and all mechanical codes and standards. This will be
addressed further at time of plan review if this project moves
forward. (2) No signage has been reviewed at this time. This
Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter
is signed by Jerome Hanna, Assistant Director of Inspection.
That is the extent of the correspondence.
Mr. Morrow:
Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Seeing none,
would the pefitioner come forward? You've heard the
presentation. We will need your name and address for the
record please, and you can add to what you've heard.
Tim Terhune,
Senior Pastor, Faith Bible Church, 34541 Five Mile Road, Livonia,
Michigan 48154. Our architect, William Jarrall.
Bill Jarratt, Jarratt
Architecture, 108 N. Lafayette, South Lyon, Michigan 48178.
Mr. Morrow:
Is there anything you'd like to add to what you've heard so far?
You might have the architect tell us a little bit about what the
building materials are.
Mr. Jarrall:
We have a couple color pictures if you want to look at them.
Mr. Morrow:
If you will hold @ right by the podium, they will be able to pick
up on the television.
Mr. Jarrall:
The way we designed this, like you said, its a new entrance for
the building and it allows the stairway to the split level and
everything to be on the inside, but we're also adding a banner
free lift inside there. The space also acts as a gathering area.
Newer churches these days they don't really, the older
fashioned church usually had the fellowship hall down in the
basement and so forth, and I believe that's what we have now.
But the idea, nobody ever goes down there. They all gather
outside of the sanctuary, so the idea was to create a new look
for the building that would be a larger vestibule, but it also
becomes a big gathering area for the church when people come
and go from the church. Plus the pastor and the congregation
June 10, 2014
35
wanted to create a fresh look for the church because the
existing church was built back in the '50's and its kind of a more
plain look and they wanted to try to do something to contrast it
to give the whole church a better appearance and a fresh look.
So that was the idea with this. Eventually, they were thinking
they'd probably build something over there, a larger sanctuary
where this would become the center between where the existing
might slay as the classrooms and that kind of thing, and this
would be a larger sanctuary or multipurpose larger space at one
point. So the idea here is this is going to be like a central
location where you can go to the existing and then the new
addition in the future. We have some brick here that will
somewhat match the existing brick of the building. These will be
like concrete round columns in here. Then we have some metal
and a combination of things. The roof itself would be just
asphalt shingles, more of a traditional look. Here there's lots of
glass. This would be the elevation on Five Mile where we have
lots of glass and it really creates a dynamic look and something
that would attract some attention and has the look of a church.
This would be all out of aluminum and so forth. On the west
side we're using some E.I.F.S. in there. The only reason we're
using it in that area is, because like I said, this would be an area
that expands later. So we've designed that wall so it will be
easier to punch holes into and so forth in the future so we didn't
want to make it all brick at this point. We still did provide some
brick along the base to be everything together. But it's going to
have a real rich look and it will be into the church nicely, and I
think it will be a great asset to the community.
Mr. Morrow: Thank you very much. Anything else? Any questions from the
Commission?
Ms. McIntyre: Do you have some plans too to maybe resurface your parking
lot? I walk a lot along Faidane and it looks like the parking lot
could use some resurfacing.
Mr. Terhune: We did some refurbishing of it a bit this past fall. We repaired
some areas.
Ms. McIntyre: Okay.
Mr. Terhune: To try to buy a little more time, and then when necessary,
probably have to mill and do an oveday or something like that,
but in the fall, we patched the worst areas, did an overlay. We
did remove and replace the entire driveway. We do have one
drive that goes from the main parking lot to Five Mile, and that
entire driveway from the main parking lot to Five Mile, or to the
June 10, 2014
36
sidewalk, was removed and totally replaced with new base to it
and also a little bit of expansion of the parking area was done at
that time with some diagonal parking along that behind the
church and on the east side.
Ms. McIntyre:
Okay.
Mr. Terhune:
Then we seal coated and reslriped everything in the original,
and hopefully can get a few more years wear out of it.
Ms. McIntyre:
I understand those are expensive projects, and I probably
haven't seen it in the daylight hours without snow on it, but
thank you very much.
Ms. Smiley:
This is phase one. When are you looking to do phase two, the
expansion?
Mr. Terhune:
When the Lord provides a humongous benefactor. This is more
kind of a two year project, at least as far as the fundraising that
did. We want to hopefully start construction this year on this
and do phase one. Then we have another year or so to receive
the pledges to pay that off. I wouldn't anticipate anything
happening beyond that for probably five years or more. That is
a hope and dream, but also with the new entryway, it also gives
us a Iitfle bit of flexibility of some things we can do to our
existing building to make that more usable. If we decided to go
that route we would, we talked with Bill about possibly being
able to change the roof and have cathedral ceilings in our
existing sanctuary and continue to gel some more life out of that
as even a possible option. But with the new addition, phase one
as we call it, it may never go beyond that, but we would like to.
We would like to have a multipurpose room, kind of a small
gymnasium that would be available for use by the community as
well as the church, but I dont foresee that happening for at least
probably five years.
Ms. Smiley:
Thank you. I wish you well, and it's a very attractive addition to
your church.
Mr. Terhune:
If you've driven by and have seen what's there now, it wouldn't
take much to gel more attractive.
Mr. Morrow:
The good news is that you've got a good plan.
Ms. Smiley:
Maybe you should call it retro instead of dated. Thank you very
much.
ITEM #5 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,055T"Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the
Minutes of the 1,055^ Public Hearings and Regular Meeting
held on May 27, 2014.
On a motion by Taylor, seconded by Wilshaw, and adopted, ilwas
June 10, 2014
37
Mr. Morrow:
Any other questions of the petitioner? Is there anybody in the
audience that wishes to speak for or against the granting of this
petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion would be in
order.
On a motion by McIntyre, seconded by Bahr, and unanimously adopted, it was
#0636-2014
RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2014-05-08-09
submitted by Faith Bible Church requesting approval of all plans
required by Section 18.58 of the City of Livonia Zoning
Ordinance #543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to
construct an addition to the church at 34541 Five Mile Road,
located on the south side of Five Mile Road between
Farmington Road and Fairlane Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of
Section 21, be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. That the Site Plan marked At dated May 22, 2014,
prepared by Jarrett Architecture is hereby approved and
shall be adhered to;
2. That the Building Elevation Plan marked A2 dated May 22,
2014, prepared by Jarraft Architecture is hereby approved
and shall be adhered to;
3. That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be concealed
from public view on all sides by screening that shall be of a
compatible character, material and color to other exterior
materials on the building; and
4. That the specific plans referenced in this approving
resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department
at the time of application for building permits.
Mr. Morrow,
Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an
approving resolution.
ITEM #5 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,055T"Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the
Minutes of the 1,055^ Public Hearings and Regular Meeting
held on May 27, 2014.
On a motion by Taylor, seconded by Wilshaw, and adopted, ilwas
June 10, 2014
38
#0637-2014 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 1,055th Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on May 27,
2014, are hereby approved.
A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following
AYES:
Taylor, Wilshaw, Bahr, Taylor, Morrow
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
McIntyre
Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
ITEM #6 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 406t^ Special Meeting
Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the
Minutes of the 406th Special Regular Meeting held on June 3,
2014.
On a motion by Bahr, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was
#0638-2014 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 4061 Special Regular Meeting
held by the Planning Commission on June 3, 2014, are hereby
approved.
A roll call vole on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES:
Bahr, Smiley, McIntyre, Wilshaw, Taylor, Morrow
NAYS:
None
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing
resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 1,056th Public
Hearings and Regular Meeting held on June 10, 2014, was adjourned at 8:41
p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Carol A. Smiley, Secretary
ATTEST:
R. Lee Morrow, Chairman