Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2016-01-12 MINUTES OF THE 1,081st PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, January 12, 2016, the City Planning Commission of the City of. Livonia held its 1,081st Public Hearings and Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Ian Wilshaw, Acting, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Glen W. Long Carol A. Smiley Gerald Taylor Ian Wilshaw Members absent: R. Lee Morrow Mr. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, and Ms. Margie Watson, Program Supervisor, were also present. Acting Chairman Wilshaw informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and make the final determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City Council for the final determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected. If a petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan approval is denied tonight, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City Council. Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Commission become effective seven (7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning Commission and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their filing. The staff has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions, which the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the proceedings tonight. Because this is the first meeting that we have a new member, we would like to welcome Glen Long, our newest Planning Commissioner. Thank you for being here, and we look forward to working with you for a long time. ITEM #1 PETITION 2015-12-01-11 AJAMCO INC. Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2015-12- 01-11 submitted by Ajamco Inc. pursuant to Section 23.01 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, requesting to rezone the north one hundred feet (100') of 16825 Middlebelt Road, located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Munger Avenue and Six Mile Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 14, from P (Parking) to C-2 (General Business). January 12, 2016 27356 Mr. Taormina: This is a request to rezone a portion of property that is identified as 16825 Middlebelt Road. The rezoning petition affects the northerly 100 feet of this property. The request is to rezone it from its current classification of Parking to C-2, General Business. This property is on the west side of Middlebelt between Munger and Six Mile Roads. The size of the property is 1.2 acres. It includes 165 feet of frontage along Middlebelt Road by a depth of 257 feet. The current zoning is split-zoned. The northerly portion is zoned P, Parking, and the southerly portion is currently zoned C-2, General Business. The property is currently vacant. This is part of the former site of Moy's Chinese Restaurant and Japanese Steak House. The existing zoning was established in 1970 in connection with a request to expand the restaurant. The parking classification on the property was established for the additional off-street parking that was needed to accommodate the expansion. Looking immediately to the north of this property is the Teacher's Store as well as Paul's Coney & Grill and some multi-tenant retail properties, all zoned C-2. Immediately to the west is the site of the Bethel Baptist Temple and Grace Christian Fellowship religious facilities which are zoned R-U-F. Immediately south of this property, and which was part of the original Moy's site, is a Tim Hortons restaurant. Looking across Middlebelt Road to the east is the site of the Manns-Ferguson Funeral Home which is zoned OS, Office Services, and P, Parking. The area to be rezoned measures roughly 0.82 acres and includes 100 feet of frontage on Middlebelt Road. The purpose of the rezoning is to facilitate the future development of the site with a credit union or a bank that would include drive-thru facilities. Banks and credit unions are treated as a permitted use within the C-2 zoning district. However, the drive-thru facilities will require waiver use approval. A preliminary site plan was submitted with this application. Again, we're not looking at the site plan specifically tonight, but it gives you an idea of how the site might be developed should the rezoning move forward. The plan shows a 2,874 square foot building located roughly in the center of the property. Off-street parking is along the north and south sides of the property, as well as at the rear of the building. A bank or credit union of this size would require approximately 24 parking spaces. This plan shows a total of 30 spaces. A portion of the site extends a little further to the west, and that's a little surplus land that could be utilized either for additional parking, or more than likely, it would be used for storm water control. Drive-up operations are shown on the west side of the building. There are four drive-up service units. Each would be served by a separate traffic lane with sufficient stacking. Direct driveway access to Middlebelt would be provided; however, there would also be January 12, 2016 27357 secondary access provided via a connection to the parking lot on the adjacent property to the south, which is the Tim Hortons restaurant. The landscaping would far exceed what the ordinance requires. This is showing about 44 percent of the site in green space where the ordinance only requires 15 percent. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the Future Land Use Plan which shows General Commercial. With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the one piece of correspondence that we received on this item. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please. Mr. Taormina: There is one item of correspondence from the Engineering Division, dated December 15, 2015, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposed rezoning at this time. The included legal description appears to be correct and should be used in conjunction with this petition. The existing property is assigned an address of 16825 Middlebelt Road. The submitted drawing does not indicate proposed drainage or public utility services, so we are unable to comment on any impacts to the existing systems at this time. The parcel is currently serviced by public sanitary sewer and water main that the owner will be able to access for the proposed building. It should be noted that Wayne County permits will be required for any connections to utilities within the Middlebelt Road right-of-way. The parcel is also serviced by Wayne County storm sewer along the Middlebelt Road right-of-way, as well as a City of Livonia storm sewer along the rear property line. Storm detention and pre-treatment will be required per the Wayne County Storm Water Ordinance, but the organization that issues the permit will depend on which line the owner decides to connect to." The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Mr. Taylor: We're just strictly talking about zoning tonight, right? Mr. Taormina: That is correct. Mr. Taylor: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Is the petitioner here this evening? We will need your name and address for the record please. January 12, 2016 27358 Ali Ajami, Ajamco Inc., 12950 S. Morrow Circle, Dearborn, Michigan 48126. Good evening. I am representing the company Ajamco Inc. Mr. Wilshaw: You've heard the presentation. Is there anything you'd like to add to it? Mr. Ajami: Nothing more to add. You have been very specific and informative. This is exactly what we want. Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for the petitioner? Mr. Taylor: Do we know whether it's a bank or credit union yet? Mr. Ajami: So far, it is a credit union, sir. Mr. Taylor: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions? Sir, just a question for you briefly. The reason that you're choosing to put a credit union or bank on this property as opposed to some other use, do you already have a specific credit union in mind? Mr. Ajami: Not specific. We have been approached by the real estate agent who represents the credit union. Mr. Wilshaw: So you are preparing the site so that they can . . . Mr. Ajami: I don't know the name of the credit union because the agent did not disclose the name. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. So the agent is not in the position to be able to say who is interested in the property at this time? Mr. Ajami: He narrowed it down but he cannot give us the name, maybe because of confidentiality issues. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you. And I do want to comment that because this is a zoning petition, we're not going to go into the details of the site plan, but I do appreciate you providing the plan. It was actually quite detailed from what we typically get with a zoning petition. So thank you. Mr. Ajami: Thank you, too. _ Mr. Wilshaw: If there are no other questions from the Commission, I'll go to the audience. If there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this petition, please come forward? Seeing January 12, 2016 27359 no one coming forward, I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion. On a motion by Taylor, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-01-2016 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on January 12, 2016, on Petition 2015-12-01-11 submitted by Ajamco Inc. pursuant to Section 23.01 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, requesting to rezone the north one hundred feet (100') of 16825 Middlebelt Road, located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Munger Avenue and Six Mile Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 14, from P to C-2, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2015-12-01-11 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding zoning and land uses in the area; 2. That the proposed change of zoning represents a logical extension of existing C-2 zoning that occurs on adjacent properties located both to the north and to the south of the subject property; 3. That the proposed change of zoning would provide for the development of the subject property in a coordinated manner that is consistent with its size and location; 4. That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the developing character of the area; and 5. That the proposed change of zoning is supported by the Future Land Use Plan which recommends General Commercial in this 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. Wilshaw, Acting Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. January 12, 2016 27360 ITEM #2 PETITION 2015-12-02-26 LIVONIA CORP. Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2015- 12-02-26 submitted by Livonia Corp. Tower, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Sections 20.02 and 26.05 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to develop a Planned General Development at 29200 Vassar Avenue, including renovations to the site and building to accommodate offices and other commercial services on the first floor of the building and a total of 112 apartment units on floors 2 thru 8, located on the north side of Vassar Avenue between Middlebelt Road and Parkville Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 1. Mr. Taormina: This is a request to redevelop an existing high rise office building into a mixed use housing complex. This property is located on the north side of Vassar between Middlebelt Road and Parkville Avenue. The current zoning of the property is PO, High Rise Professional Office. The property is approximately 4.47 acres in area. It was originally developed in the early 1970's as Livonia Pavilion East, an eight story office building. Today, the office building is referred to as Livonia Corporate Tower. Access to the site is available from the south off Middlebelt via a public street called Vassar. The building is approximately 120,000 square feet in total size. It's a Class B office building. Today it is mostly empty with only a handful of suites occupied. Except for the ground level of the building and a portion of the fourth floor, the entire building has been gutted. This includes the walls, ceilings, carpet, and other fixtures. Looking immediately to the south across Vassar is Perani's Hockey World, which is zoned C-1, Local business, as well as single family homes that are zoned R-1, One Family Residential. Immediately to the west is a bank, office building as well as an auto repair facility zoned C-1, OS and C-2, respectively. To the north and east are additional residential family homes under the R-1 and R-U-F classifications. The proposal shows that the ground floor would be used primarily for commercial purposes, including office suites for general and medical office purposes. Additionally, the floor plan shows a small café within a space that was similarly occupied several years previously for this purpose. On floors 2 thru 8, the plans call for a mix of both one and two bedroom apartments. Contained within the PO district regulations under Section 26.05 is a provision that allows accessory residential apartments as a waiver use, provided that they do not constitute more than 20 percent of the total floor area of the building. In the case of the proposed Livonia Tower Apartments, seven of the eight floors January 12, 2016 27361 would be utilized for apartments, which constitutes over 85 percent of the building's total floor area. There is, however, a special provision in the ordinance that allows the Council to waive or modify this requirement by means of a separate resolution in which two-thirds of the Council concurs. Thus, such a resolution could waive the 20 percent maximum described in 26.05(a) and allow for a majority of the building to be utilized for apartment purposes. But again, this is something that would ultimately be determined by the Livonia City Council. The site plan indicates that the building would have 16 apartments per story for a total of 112 units. The floor plans show seven unit types, "A" thru "G," that range in size from 361 square feet to approximately 754 square feet. Each residential floor plate measures roughly 80 feet by 181 feet and is arranged similarly with two connecting corridors on either side of the building's core which contains three side-by-side elevator shafts, mechanical, electrical and utility rooms, as well as a staircase at each end. The floor plan shows how the apartment units would be arranged around the outer edge of the building's core, which as I indicated, contains two hallways, one on either side of the building's core, which is the mechanical area, the electrical rooms, the elevator shafts, as well as the stairwells. That is how the building is currently configured except for the apartments. All of the corner units are two-bedrooms, identified as either Unit Type "A" or "C." The other 12 units per floor consist of loft or one-bedroom apartments. Every apartment unit contains a living area, bathroom, kitchen and laundry. The overall project density equates to roughly 25 dwelling units per acre. For comparison purposes, the permitted density of an 8-story building located within an R-8 multiple family district would be somewhere between 24 and 36 dwelling units per acre. In terms of parking for multiple family dwellings, the ordinance requires 2.5 parking spaces per unit. For 112 units, this would amount to a parking requirement of 280 spaces. There is an additional need for 62 spaces for the non-residential uses that would be located on the first floor. So this would bring the total parking requirement to 342 spaces. The site plan currently shows 234 parking spaces, which results in a deficiency of 108 spaces. This deficiency was created intentionally in an effort to reduce the amount of unused surplus parking. The additional spaces could be provided if necessary. One of the things noticeable on the site plan are changes to the area surrounding the building. To provide a more appealing residential character, the existing asphalt parking located along the north and south sides of the building would be replaced with areas that contain sodded lawn as well as various plants and two gazebos. Walkways are shown around the perimeter and also bisecting the common green areas. The plan January 12, 2016 27362 includes landscape islands in the parking lot where none presently exist. One of the things noticeable on the rendered site plan is a dividing line between the parking, which the petitioner believes is necessary to accommodate the apartments, but it shows how the additional parking could be provided if needed. That was one of the issues that came up at the study meeting - the concern relative to whether there were enough parking spaces to accommodate the proposed development. This plan shows how the additional parking could be provided if necessary. Looking at the exterior elevations, the building's outer "skin" provides the primary structural support for the building and cannot be altered to any significant degree. This includes replacing the narrow windows. This would limit the work mostly to cosmetic improvements, such as colors, veneers and accent treatments. The exterior of the first floor would be refaced completely in brick. There are bands of split-face block that run along the tops and bottoms of the windows, and there is a decorative E.I.F.S. cornice that would define the top edge of the first floor. The exterior of the 2nd through 8th floors would be completed repainted. I'll let the architect describe in greater detail what he is proposing, but there are also some changes along the top edge of the building. The appearance of the building is being improved with this proposal, not only with the landscaping around the foundation of the building, the additional landscaping on both the north and south sides of the building, but also the treatments along the lower level, the brick being added on the first level of the building and then probably a decorative E.I.F.S. band being placed along the top, as well as the raised parapet and cornice, all to give the building a more residential appeal. With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence. We do have a number of items. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes. Please go ahead. . Mr. Taormina: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated December 14, 2015, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposed project at this time. The included legal description appears to be correct and should be used in conjunction with this petition. The parcel address of #29200 Vassar Avenue is correct for the subject property. The submitted drawings do not show proposed revisions to the existing public utility leads or private storm sewer in association with the renovations, so we are unable to comment on those items at this time. Under current regulations, the redevelopment of a property would require the owner to January 12, 2016 27363 provide storm water detention and treatment per the Wayne County Storm Water Ordinance. The drawings indicate that there will be a reduction in the impervious area as a result of the renovations, so we will need to review the completed Engineering permit drawings before we will be able to determine what will be required in relation to detention and treatment of storm water. Also, the owner will need to coordinate with the Building department to ensure the proposed cafe conforms to Section 13.42 of the City Ordinances. This Ordinance limits the amount of Fats, Oils and Grease (F.O.G.) which can be discharged to the City sanitary sewer system to 100 milligrams per liter by weight, unless written approval is obtained to exceed this amount. This Ordinance provides information on grease trap/interceptor requirements, and is available on the City of Livonia website at www.ci.livonia.mi.us." The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated December 23, 2015, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to develop a planned residential development on property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal with the following stipulations: (1) Subject building(s) are to be provided with an automatic sprinkler system, and on site hydrants shall be located between 50 feet and 100 feet from the Fire Department connection. (2) Adequate hydrants shall be provided and located with a maximum spacing of 300 feet between hydrants. Most remote hydrant shall flow 1,500 GPM with a residual pressure of 20 PSI. (3) Fire Hydrants and Water Supply shall be required according to 18.3 NFPA 1, 2015. (4) Fire lanes shall be provided for all buildings that are set back more than 150 feet from a public road or exceed 30 feet in height and are set back over 50 feet from a public road. (5) Fire lanes shall be marked with wall or pole mounted signs that have the words. FIRE LANE — NO PARKING painted on both sides (for pole mount), in contrasting colors at a size and spacing approved by the authority having jurisdiction. (6) In regards to NFPA 13, 2013 edition, Fire Department Connections should be of 2 % Detroit Standard Thread. (7) Chapter 11 shall be followed f (8) or Special Structures and High-Rise Buildings, NFPA 101, 2015. (9) Chapter 30, New Apartment Buildings, and Chapter 7, Means of Egress, must be conformed to which includes Emergency Exit Signs, Emergency Lighting, Exit Pathways, Travel Distance, Occupant Load, and Extinguisher Requirements. NFPA 101, 2015. These issues and other code requirements will be addressed during the plan review process." The letter is signed by Daniel Lee, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated December 22, 2015, which January 12, 2016 27364 reads as follows: "I have reviewed the plans in connection with the petition. I have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Joseph Boitos, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated January 7, 2016, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above- referenced petition has been reviewed. (1) The building will be required to be fully fire suppressed to code. (2) The petitioner's proposal is a change in use. This would require that the proposed space must conform to all current 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. (3) Parking spaces shall be 10'x 20'and double striped. (4) Signage has not 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. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Mr. Taylor: Through the Chair to Mr. Taormina. Mark, would you explain exactly how the Planned General Development works? I don't remember us ever having anything like this in Livonia. Mr. Taormina: Well, we do. It was accomplished at the Fountain Park Development at Plymouth and Farmington Roads. But while we did identify this item as falling under that provision of the code, as we inquired in greater detail with the Law Department, it was felt that within the context of the existing PO zoning, this project could move forward as I described it but requires a waiver or modification of the 20 percent limitation on the number of apartments that could be provided within the building. So rather than looking at this as a Planned General Development, in which case you could allow for a mix of uses, we're actually processing this petition through the current waiver use standards provided within the PO High Rise Professional district. Either way, it can get you to the same end point, but it was felt by our Law Department that it may be a little cleaner just to process this under the current zoning and treat this as a waiver to the special requirements that limits the number of apartments that can go in the building. Mr. Taylor: If I may, it's general apartments. It's not senior apartments? Mr. Taormina: I think we're going to hear from the petitioner this evening more about their thoughts on what the target market is going to be. So I think they've taken to heart a lot of the comments that were January 12, 2016 27365 made at the study meeting, and I think they're prepared to address that this evening. Mr. Taylor: I'm not looking forward to subsidized apartments. That's my problem in that area. If it's senior apartments, we have zoning for that, R-9. Mr. Taormina: I think the density allowances under the R-9 would not permit this number of apartments. Mr. Taylor: I'm anxious to hear from the petitioner then. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Mark, just one quick question. Along the lines of Mr. Taylor's question, do we have the option under this Planned General Development, essentially under the waiver use, to restrict the use of the waiver use to senior apartments if that's something that the petitioner is willing to offer? Mr. Taormina: I'd have to explore that with the Law Department, but if you wanted to move that recommendation forward to the City Council, then that would give the Law Department an opportunity to review such a condition to see whether or not it's a reasonable imposition on the granting of the request. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you. With that, is the petitioner here this evening? We will need your name and address for the record please. I'm sure you'd like to add to the presentation made already by our Planning Director. Ghassan Abdelnour, GAV & Associates, Inc., 24001 Orchard Lake Road, Suite 180A, Farmington, Michigan 48336: I'm representing Dr. Labeed Nouri, the owner of the project. I think he'd like to say something. Labeed Nouri, MD, Livonia Corp. Tower L.L.C., 5440 Whitehall Blvd., Oakland Twp., Michigan 48306. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. will leave the mike to my architect. He will probably do a much better job than me. Mr. Abdelnour: Actually, thank you for having us here tonight, and we thank the Planning Department and Mark with the big help he's been helping us with this whole project. I think he did a very good presentation telling everybody what's going on, but I'll get into some details. First, the building will be gutted for this project. Some spaces will be left on the 1st Floor, but from the 2nd Floor to the 8th Floor, it's already gutted. So we're going to be starting the project from scratch. For the building from outside, it's going January 12, 2016 27366 to have a total facelift like you see it on the elevations. The first story and a half at the bottom will be all faced with new split face block and brick colors. Actually, this whole area will be constructed around the existing building, and above it from the 2nd Floor to the 7th Floor will be kind of fixing all of the existing facing and painting it to kind of match with the new design of the building. On the top floor we're putting E.I.F.S. that is matching the color of the brick on the first floor with the stone, and we're doing a parapet E.I.F.S. around the whole building and creating a small tower, maybe potential for a sign location or just to make the building a more residential look. For the site plan, actually we're planning to kind of renovate the site plan and meet all the requirements wherever the civil department would be asking us for it. What Mark was talking about might be requiring some detention, underground detention or whatever. So actually we do have to do the calculation to see if we can meet the requirement. What we're showing on the site right now, we're adding a lot of greenery on the site that actually will help the water issue. We're creating a lot of curb appeal with landscaping and we're creating a garden area with two gazebos for people to walk around to try to give it a residential look. Last time at the meeting we talked about potential —what we showed over here, we said that for every unit, we're planning to have maybe one car and a half per unit because for the study we do elderly apartments, the need of so many cars usually it was not needed. So we showed here that we took one and half cars per apartment, but after the meeting last time, I did a design and we added actually 98 cars in the green area. So if it's needed, we can extend the need for more parking in that area. And this area with extra landscaping will take up to 98 cars. So actually we'll have a good number for this kind of project. But like we thought, we use it for after the project is open maybe a year or two years. If everything is working okay, we'll keep it the way it is. If it's needed, we'll have no problem to add the parking for it. For the project itself, actually now on the side is available almost 500 cars and it's kind of a big parking lot. It looks like a sea of parking. It has no residential feeling and it's always empty. So that's why the idea to kind of go through that process. For the apartment itself, if we go by gross sizes, they're like maybe 413 for the two small ones and the other ones are 760 and 780 if we go by gross. Useable, they're like 367 and we have like 780 and 730. The percentage of apartments in this building, we have like 67 percent of the apartments, they're like one big bedroom with a nice big open space and we have actually 27 percent, they're two bedrooms. And only we have 12 percent for the small like studio type. The idea of the studio type we add them if somebody needs a space. He doesn't need like for the amount January 12, 2016 27367 of the money to pay too much and still like to be in a separate building living in that area. That's why we created these. And actually we have two of them on every floor. So that's kind of the idea for the function. The function, we have a bedroom, we have walk in closets, we have a bathroom, a kitchen, we have a laundry. Actually it will be stacking laundry, up and down, and we do have like a small area for a table, eating area and a sitting area. Most of the units will have all the bedrooms and all the living space looking up to the windows, and with this building, you know, we had issues with the window size because of the structure of the building. It's kind of undoable to make them wider because the walls are all concrete and these are carrying the whole structure of the building. So we're working within what we have, but we're trying to make it also kind of very attractive for a residential look. For the first floor, we talked also last time that the community might need — usually the idea, what's going on with this project, is to have it for elderly apartments. I mean that's what the project started originally, and I thank you. You sent me that report, and we went through it and maybe eventually talk with this company to see what their ideas and if they can help with the project. But yes, you're right. I think the need for elderly apartment over 55, that's kind of what the plan is, but we're keeping an option in the future. If it didn't work, at least we can take part of it, maybe open it to the public. But the project is done for the elderly. On the first floor, the doctor is planning to keep his medical practice there. We did talk about potential having an exercise room, a gym area, cafeteria. So there's a gym and we have actually the doctor's use and we can have like a multipurpose room for everybody to come and meet. So actually, the whole building eventually it will be used and designed for this project. I'd like to take any questions to help through the process. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you for the background. Are there any questions from the Commission? Ms. Smiley: What percentage are you seeing as — first of all, elderly is not 55. Mr. Abdelnour: No, no, no. I'm counting myself. Ms. Smiley: Because I'm past that and I'm not feeling elderly today. But at any rate, what percentage of the apartments are going to be for seniors? Mr. Abdelnour: Actually, the way the project is, it will be the whole building. January 12, 2016 27368 Ms. Smiley: And you're going to have how many two bedrooms? Mr. Abdelnour: Actually, we have 27 percent two bedrooms, and we have 67 percent one bedroom, and we have 12 percent studios. Ms. Smiley: The figure you gave for the size of the apartment, I'm trying to figure . . . Mr. Abdelnour: Most of the apartments are double the size of the studio. Most of them, like between 760 to 750 square feet. The studio, if you go by useable or gross, is like 413 square feet. But actually, it will have a kitchen, it will have open space and a bathroom, and a closet and a laundry area. It also will be the same function. Ms. Smiley: Are you seeing this as subsidized rent or are you expecting people to just pay that rent? Will it be government subsidized? Dr. Nouri: We're expecting people to pay for it but like Ghassan said, we are keeping an open mind for every possible thing in the future to get an option in case one way didn't work. But this plan originally for senior citizen housing to pay for their apartments. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Taylor: Mark, what kind of assurance do we have that if senior housing doesn't work out there, it goes into something else like low income apartments, but with this zoning? Mr. Taormina: That would depend on how Council ultimately decides to condition the approvals relative to the type of housing. Remember, under the Fair Housing Act, they can limit I believe up to 80 percent of the units to persons 55 years of age and older. Aside from that, there cannot be any restrictions, at least on who is eligible to reside within the complex in terms of any income limitations. I don't think that's something that can necessarily be addressed as part of a condition of approval. I think instead what we have to look at is the quality of the development and the fact that it is primarily going to be for senior apartments. When we deal with property that is zoned R- 9, it is restricted to housing for the elderly. But in this case, it would remain a PO district, so it would only be through some understanding, agreement or condition of approval that this would be limited for senior housing. Beyond that, I don't know how or if you could put controls and restrictions in place that would address the issue of income. January 12, 2016 27369 Mr. Taylor: So it would be different than Brashear Towers or McNamara Towers, would you say? Mr. Taormina: Would it be different? Mr. Taylor: Yes. Mr. Taormina: Well, this would be privately operated as I understand it. This would be something that would be completely market rate apartments for seniors, as opposed to some of the other senior housing developments that we have in the community that are operated by the Housing Commission. But that's not what they're talking about here. Again, this would be strictly private, independent apartments like you have at some of the other facilities a little bit further south on Middlebelt Road. A good example being Marycrest Manor. Mr. Taylor: Thank you. Mr. Abdelnour: On this project, the money is coming privately and there's no government help. Mr. Long: Has there been consideration to making the bathrooms more user friendly if it's going to be marketed to seniors? Mr. Abdelnour: Absolutely. Actually, part of the building we're going to have in so many floors, every floor, we're going to have handicap accessible, and all of them they have enough width to kind of maneuver. Even when you do the design and the walls, they will all be prepped to be able to put like bars and everything for handicap. Yes. Mr. Long: Great. Mr. Wilshaw: A couple other questions. What is the expected investment that you're looking to put into this property? Obviously, it's not cheap to completely reconfigure this building. Do you have a rough estimate of what it's going to cost? Mr. Abdelnour: I think after finishing the site and doing the whole building, I think it's going to be between $3 and $4 million. Mr. Wilshaw: Right now, you have essentially the doctor who owns the building and you're the only tenant in the building right now? Dr. Nouri: No, there are more tenants. On the first floor, there's durable Medical Equipment, there's my medical office, there's an January 12, 2016 27370 accounting office. On the fourth floor, there is a TV station which I own too. On the fifth floor, there's a couple offices for home health care and two home health cares, one production company. Mr. Abdelnour: But these are empty. Dr. Nouri: Yes, they are. Mr. Wilshaw: So you've come to the point where you can't find any other use for this building as a commercial office building? Dr. Nouri: It's a huge building. It's like 429,000. Like I tried every single possible solution for this, but it didn't work. I have the Hayman Company been contracted with us for two years to lease offices. Every other time they bring a tenant, take a look and go. So I don't think it will be full very soon. I think the best use for this area with the demand with the homework I did with the assistance of other people, I've been asking for a few months. The senior citizen housing or apartments in general, whether it's senior citizen housing or skilled assistant housing, which is possible too, like one of the options I have. I think this will be the best idea for this building. Otherwise, if I leave it like this, the building will collapse very soon and nobody wants that to happen. It's a nice building. It's a shame to be left like this. Mr. Wilshaw: The practicality of demolishing this building and basically starting over wouldn't be cost effective, would it? Dr. Nouri: It's a very solid building. I think there is no need for demolishing this building. It's a very solid building. The structure of the building is very good, and I don't see any reason to demolish it and start over. Mr. Abdelnour: Actually, to demolish this building is very costly. It's a heavily concrete building. He's going to end up putting more than $1 million to demolish it. Mr. Wilshaw: It will cost you more to demolish it and rebuild than it would be re-purpose it. Mr. Abdelnour: It's better to re-use the existing one and try to come up with apartments because it's mainly like 90 percent empty right now. He's been trying for the last two or three years and nothing is happening. Actually, he has to keep it heated and all the utilities, so the cost every month is going crazy. It's very costly. You have over like $200,000 just to keep it going. That's the idea. He January 12, 2016 27371 doesn't want to lose it and even sell it to another person and have the same issue. So we're trying to come up with a project that helps the community, helps the doctor, and would be good for the city Mr. Wilshaw: Just for the audience's benefit and the petitioner is already aware of this, this is obviously a unique petition we haven't seen typically in the city to take an office building and convert to residential, but it's not completely unique in the Metro Detroit area. There's been a few other developments. There's one in Southfield and some others throughout Southeast Michigan where they've taken essentially a functionally obsolete office buildings and converted them into some residential apartments. There is one particular in Southfield that I pointed the petitioner to, to say you might want to talk to the owner of that building and understand kind of how it works for them, what their successes were, what their problems were, so that they understand what they're getting into because this is obviously not something that is done terribly often but can be done and can be done successfully. At least we've seen it in other communities. So it's just a matter of making sure that you have the correct business plan. Mr. Abdelnour: Absolutely. We're taking in some area schools and transferring them to this kind of projects because sometimes a lot of schools are closing. They are going to charter school or to a different issue. So instead of demolishing the building, try to remodel it and try to use it for a good purpose. Dr. Nouri: In this building, there are so many floors, as Mark said, not almost, they are gutted out. So even if I want to establish a new office, I have to spend money again and do this. So since I've got all open space, it's easy for me to start with the senior citizen apartments instead of put more money on to re-establish the offices and risking the whole thing would not be leased again. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anything else you would like to tell us at this time? Mr. Abdelnour: I think we worked with the City for a long time. We're always doing projects with the City. We think that this project can be good for the city and I think with the plan that the doctor is trying to work with the Planning Department and with all this new work that has been done in the parking lot and the elevation and inside the building, I think will improve this whole area and it will improve the project in general. January 12, 2016 27372 Mr. Taylor: One other question. Do you have a ballpark figure of what they might lease for? Dr. Nouri: Yes. We talked about this. I thought we put like a number of $500 to $700. We even thought about going down unless the market now to try to fill this building. Mr. Taylor: Thank you. Dr. Nouri: I think $500 to $700 will be a reasonable number. Mr. Taylor: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: If there are no other questions from the Commission, we will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against the granting of this petition? Please come to the podium and give us your name and address just like the petitioner. Ammon Murray, 19461 Parkville, Livonia, Michigan 48152. I have had an opportunity to speak to Dr. Labeed. We spoke over the wall when you first bought the place. Remember I had some water going over. Mr. Wilshaw: Sir, if you can point this way, we can hear you better. Mr. Murray: Okay. I was talking to the doctor. I'm sorry. I have a couple concerns but I want to commend him for trying to do something with the building because I live on what would be the northeast corner. I live about a third of the way in. I'm on Parkville. If you're looking at it north there, the long lot that goes along it. So I've spent a lot of time next to this building. I've watched it somewhat deteriorate in 16 years, so I would like to see something done with it. I commend him for what he's trying to do. The fact that he's trying to put apartments in there for senior citizens, my mother lived in something similar to that. It was a 55 years and older good community. If that's what it's going to be, I have no problem with that. What my problem is, is what if that doesn't work and it becomes lower income housing? That's mine and my neighbor's concerns. Another big concern is, I noticed on the paperwork we got, Vassar Avenue, they show it going all the way through. Vassar Avenue right now does not go all the way through. That would present another traffic problem that we deal with all the time. People try to cut in. They think they can miss the light at Middlebelt and Seven Mile and they cut through our neighborhood. If that stays the way it is, I have no problem with that. I like what they're proposing, but I do have January 12, 2016 27373 some concerns. They said they need an additional 108 parking spaces but yet they want to make the east end of that all grass. That seems to be contradictory of what they want to do and what they need to have done. Right now, it's all parking spaces anyways, so what are we getting? Are we getting grass or are we getting the additional parking? My other concern is, they talked about stormwater. I have to have a . . . most people have a sump pump in their house to pump water out. I've got one outside right along the wall line because I talked to neighbors. You've got to understand. We're in the Clarenceville School District. Close knit group of people. They don't move far away. We moved into this. My wife has made some great friends there. I have a neighbor that told me that the parking lot lights where they're at on the north side used to be a ravine. You can actually watch the water come out on the east end underneath the parking lot and out. That's stormwater. That's water that's coming into my house that I have to pump out. Now they said they were going to address that issue. I don't know how they're going to address that issue. I mean it comes up in their parking lot. You can see it. They talked about waste management for the proposed cafeteria. Where are they going to put . . . if they can't put it in the sewer system, are they going to have like oil containers out by my property, out by Parkville, right on the corner by my house where I have to look at that - dumpsters? Because I've dealt with that before too. The Doctor has since moved the dumpsters from the back to the front, which I commend his for but the previous owner wouldn't do that. I addressed the elderly and the low income and the grass area. I think those are my concerns. I would like to see him do something with the building. It needs to be done because the building is deteriorating, and if he's willing to do something with it and make it better, I'm all for him, but we've got to do it in the constraint of us as residents. Mr. Taormina: Mr. Chairman, if I may? Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, Mr. Taormina. Mr. Taormina: Just to put one concern to rest, and that is Vassar Avenue and the fact that the drawing he looked at, which was the public notice that went out, is a parcel map. It shows Vassar Avenue as it exists today in terms of the right-of-way. The right-of-way does go from Middlebelt Road all the way to Parkville Avenue, but the actual improved portion of the road stops well short of that. It goes about 600 feet. So there's another quarter of that distance that is unimproved. The two streets don't connect, Middlebelt and Parkville, and it is not the intention of this January 12, 2016 27374 petitioner to change that in any way. It merely shows that way on the maps because that's how the right-of-way was dedicated originally, but it's improved only for a certain distance and it will remain that way under the current plan. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Do you understand that, Mr. Murray? Mr. Murray: Yes, I do, but I also want to bring to his attention, and I ran into this once before when I lived in Redford Township. Even though it is a right-of-way, if a person . . . I think it's called settlement rights. If a person has taken care of that property over a certain amount of years, they have the right to that property. Now that's not my property. It's not my argument, but I'm just trying to look out for everybody because that person has encroached and kind of like taken over. If they was to come through, they would have to take up a lot of this guy's driveway. But that's his problem, not mine. Mr. Wilshaw: Exactly. Mr. Murray: But there would be other, okay, eminent domain settlement rights. I mean there's a lot of issues that I don't understand. I'm an electrician. Mr. Wilshaw: It's okay. I just wanted to address a couple other points that he made just to give you a sense of understanding. When we talk about parking, the area toward the east end of the property, what they're showing right now is that's going to be a land banked parking area. So they're going to put grass there. They're going to remove a lot of the parking that's currently on the site, try to reduce the sea of concrete that you have there now, and improve it with more landscaping, but what they can do with our ordinance, because they have to have a certain number of allocated or show that they have the potential of having a certain number of parking spaces to meet our ordinance, they will note those parking spots on the map but they will cover it with grass essentially. That's what we call land banking. So it meets our ordinance that they have the appropriate number of parking spots, but they're not going to put them all in at the beginning. They're going to try to have as few parking spots as possible to try to minimize the parking, and then if for some reason they find that they need additional parking, they already have those spaces allocated. They could then start to put more parking in. Mr. Murray: That's all well and done. It's their property. They can do what they want with it, and it would be nice if they did that. Something January 12, 2016 27375 I didn't even think about with that wall, because we do have a block wall that goes along Parkville, goes down my area. Will that block wall still remain? Mr. Wilshaw: Yes. Mr. Murray: Because right now, that wall . . . they had to replace it before the Doctor took over. They had to replace the wall along my side because the snow plowers were just pushing it up, pushing it up and it actually came into my property. We are now, because they don't push it on my property, they're now pushing it onto the Parkville side and you're seeing that wall slowly deteriorate where it's starting to go over. So there's another issue that they're going to have to deal with here pretty soon. Mr. Wilshaw: Right. Anytime when two different zoning areas meet, especially residential and the office or commercial, we always require that there be a wall separating those different zoning areas. So that's why that wall is there. Is not going to go away. And that's something to keep an eye on with the Inspection Department, that if for some chance that wall does start to deteriorate, he has to maintain that wall and keep it in good condition. So if you see it deteriorate or start to crumble or fall or be unstable, please let the Inspection Department know and they'll go take a look at that and try to work with him to make sure that stays in good shape. Mr. Murray: Okay. I was a good neighbor to the owner before. I actually talked to him personally, especially when the wall came down. He was a good neighbor and I'm sure the doctor is going to be a good neighbor. We just got to get things right. Mr. Wilshaw: I understand. Thank you, sir. Anybody else wanting to speak? Please come forward. Larry Elkus, 30833 Northwestern Highway, Suite 204, Farmington Hills, Michigan 48334. I'm a representative of my family who has the Perani's Hockey property. We rent to them. If you could put the slide up that shows the footprint? Thank you. Great. First, the concept of converting this into residential sounds like it's a wonderful idea. We're concerned about the parking. While I don't know if the zoning ordinance says two and half cars for each one or two bedroom unit, and if there's evidence to support that that's way too high a burden, that's okay with me. My concern is that if it is close to being that or if it's two cars, I'm concerned at what point will residents or guests of the doctor's building be parking in our parking lot instead of their parking lot. If what's to be a greenbelt January 12, 2016 27376 becomes the excess parking, effectively that parking is too far away. As we know in the shopping center market efficiency that everyone wants to be as close as possible, it's going to burden our property. So the extent that you can keep that in mind as to where the placement is of where the entrance and exits are and where people are going to be coming, ingress and egress to the facility, I guess my goal is that the parking burden be self- contained within that property. And lastly I guess to the extent that whatever target market the doctor wants in terms of his residences, if that supports a lower parking amount, ratio, if that changes, I certainly want within the record to be a change of parking obligation when it converts over to something that is more dense. That's it. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Elkus. Is there anybody else wishing to speak for or against? Please come forward. Debra Hall, 29105 Vassar, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Hello. My husband and actually own the home directly across from the building on Vassar. We're the very end home. Our driveway actually ends where the street deadends. We have kind of a few concerns. Some of them were already addressed. We do know from talking to residents in that area, a lot of them were not informed about this meeting, even people who can visually see the building from their residence. But one of our big concerns with that not being a through street was the traffic. We were concerned were they going to make Vassar a through street. I actually own part of that property it if were to go to a through street. They were talking about snow removal. Snow removal on my block is hideous. From the businesses that are in front of us as you enter our street, they don't contain their snow on their property. They push it across the street out and it leaves ruts two, three feet deep. I have an SUV. I can get through it. My daughter has a small Vibe. She gets stuck in my street every year. They also bury my driveway because they push all the snow, goes to the end of the street, half of which is my property. I have five, ten foot, depending on how much snow snowbanks, and they'll bury my driveway in the snow and I can't access my home. Donald Hall, 29105 Vassar, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Between them and the City. Ms. Hall: Between them and the City. January 12, 2016 27377 Mr. Hall: When the City finally does come out and actually clear our street, we've already had Perani's push the snow across the street . . . Ms. Hall: To the bank. Mr. Hall: To the bank and over to the pavilion. Ms. Hall: They go back and forth across the street, and it's a nice set of hills that just leads from our house all the way out to the end of the street. Mr. Hall: So that's one issue right there. No one seems to take care of their own stuff. Okay? That's one issue. Ms. Hall: I guarantee if I went and pushed all the snow from my driveway on somebody else's property, they wouldn't appreciate that. And you cannot move with a snow blower or shovel packed icy snow at the end of your driveway that is three feet high. I used to work as a midnight nurse and I would come home and I'd go to my driveway and I can't get in my home. I have like a 60, 80 foot long driveway. The other issue is just turning on and off of Vassar with just the limited traffic from the building across the street and the bank and the hockey shop and our two homes. There's only two homes on that block. It's terrible getting out onto Middlebelt as it is because that's our only access to Middlebelt. The traffic is terrible as it is. Then to make it even worse by adding an extra 100 to 200 cars coming off and on that street, how is it going to accommodate that traffic? Privacy issues. Everybody in these high rise buildings can see directly. These are all single family homes in the area. Everything in that whole area is nothing but single family homes. I'm actually the original owner of our home. We've been there for almost 20 years. And originally they wanted to put a couple of apartments, like about a six unit apartment building in the two pieces of property that are the two . . . Mr. Hall: The two lots that I own and my neighbor owns. Ms. Hall: And my neighbor owns. And it was shut down immediately. They said the street can't handle that kind of traffic. And now you want to put almost 200 cars coming off and on our block on a daily basis, not including the office building. So just being able to get there, and then them being able to see down into everybody's elses what they're doing in their backyard. They will have complete access and view of our property. The decrease in our property value was already mentioned. I mean, I'm sorry, January 12, 2016 27378 $500 to $700 for an apartment is not that much, not in these days. You know, even smaller apartments in Canton, Westland, they're $700, $800, $900. So the price of these apartments are very, very low. And like I said, the density of the amount of people coming off and on the street, between just our two houses, there's 12 children. You're talking about kids that are outside trying to ride their bikes, and on a deadend street they only have one direction to go. They can't access the other neighborhood. Tring to ride their bikes, these people come flying down our street. They literally try to drive through my front yard to get to Parkville because they realize when they get there, it's not a through street, no matter how many signs you put there. And Clarenceville being the school district, if this was like he had talked about, apartments for the elderly, it might not be as bad, but if that doesn't work out, you're talking about adding 100, 150 children to a school district that's getting ready to close. My daughter's spoken to the superintendent of the school and he says within a couple years, Clarenceville probably won't exist. That means Livonia absorbs us. Where else are we going to go? You know? So know you're talking about busses that don't have enough room for students, classes that don't have adequate teachers as it is. They don't have adequate cafeteria facilities in the high school, and we're going to dump more kids into an open school district. So that becomes a problem. And notice that you talked about there being a wall separating the other property on the other side. There is no wall that separates us and we have maintained that grassy area all the way out to the parking lot for practically the entire 20 years that we've lived there. Even when they come to cut the grass, the skip the section in front of my house. They go over beside the wall, they cut it and they leave. So I don't know where all the grassy area would be, but if they leave the grassy area in front of my house, that means I'm going to have people congregating in my front yard. I'm going to have to completely re-landscape my front yard which has sprinkler systems and everything else to keep people from basically using my front yard as their recreational area. And those are my main concerns, like I stated, traffic and what it's going to do to my home and my property value. I am, however, glad to see that they're going to do something with it. I would think, to me, since the complete and total area are large lots with private homes on them, why don't you just break it down and sell it in parcels and have people build homes on it? People that will actually care about the community that they live in, things that would raise my property value, things that would bring I think a much better climate to the area. January 12, 2016 27379 Mr. Hall: It's more accommodating when you have families in that area than 200 families in that area when you're talking maybe six to eight homes added instead of 200, you know. Ms. Hall They really have no investment. The people who move into those apartments, they're not invested in the area. We're invested. I've put two daughters through Clarenceville. I'm now putting three grandsons through Clarenceville. So we are a very close knit community and we would like to see our community made better, not worse by whatever they decide to do. But would ask that you don't put anything across the street from me that you wouldn't want across the street from you. Mr. Wilshaw: Very good. Thank you Ms. Hall and Mr. Hall. Is there anyone else wishing to speak for or against? Scott Grefke, 19444 Parkville, Livonia, Michigan 48152. I'm adjacent to the building. I've been a resident there for 22 years and I'm kind of opposed to the proposal just for the fact with the building what's been going on for the last 22 years I've been there. I police that area next to the wall that I live at for trash. I've called numerous times to have the grass cut and it just goes on for weeks. There is no wall against the Vassar area. It was one of my concerns. If they were going to do this, would they put up a wall there or are they going to put the street all the way through to Parkville? Right now, Parkville is already a drag strip from the shopping malls. People use it to cut through from Seven Mile and then they cut up through St. Martins to Middlebelt. It's one of my big concerns. Low income housing I was worried about. It was mentioned $400, $500 to $700 isn't much for an apartment and also like everybody said, they have no investment in the area there. I like the area but if they bring it in, I mean what's it going to do to my property value? If that happens, I'm moving. Mr. Wilshaw: I understand. Is there anything else you wanted to add? Mr. Grefke: No. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, sir. I appreciate it. Is there anybody else wishing to speak for or against? If not, would the petitioner like to come back and respond to anything or add any additional comments? Mr. Abdelnour: Yes. Thank you for your concern. I can go through some of the concerns that they were talking about. Let's start with the parking lot. The existing parking lot now is 498 parkings. Actually, there's a lot more parking than what we're proposing. If we go with the one and a half parking, we have around like 290 January 12, 2016 27380 parking or 270 parking. But even if we go to meet the requirement by two and a half per unit, we go to 340 parking. So actually we're losing 160 parking from that parking lot. What we're doing at the same time for the water issues, we had one person talking about the water. By adding all this grass and all these islands and the greenery area, that take a lot of the water and stops all the drainage going to the other side of the property. Listening to what the civil engineer was telling us, we have to meet the requirement. If we have to do it, we have to do a study if they need to do underground detention, trying to make it happen, or whatever is needed to meet the requirement of the city. If this building is going to stay office and we're going to lease it, you're going to need 500 cars plus more during the day. Actually, with that zoning you have way less parking, less need for cars. It's going to be for the elderly and maybe somebody visiting on the weekend just to see their mom or dad or what its needed. So actually, the density of parking, that will be the lowest we can get in these kinds of projects. Any work need to be fixed along the wall from the two sides, that's something that we have to do. We're not going to get a permit or a final approval unless everything is fixed according to the Building Department. The issue of the parking on the other side, if we're going to try to use, we have enough parking. I don't think we're planning to go to the neighbors and park over there. We can have signs or close the road. You don't have to do that. Then neighbors from Vassar side, they're asking maybe to see walls. If it's required, we'll do it, but it's better for us to put more landscaping and maybe trees over there to try to make it more good for them for a good view. But we still, we can work with the city. We can do it either way. So actually, we don't have any kind of issues on that part. For the grass, for the snow removal, actually by adding more grass around the parking lot and more greenery area, that makes it easier for the people cleaning the parking lot to put the snow because when you plow it, when you have grass around the parking, it's easy to put your snow there. You don't have to start hitting walls and stuff like that. So actually all this kind of what's been kind of put together on that side, just try to make it easy and more residential look. I know the doctor said that it might be $500 to $700 for rent. Because the cost for this building we said is going to be around $4 maybe $5 million and I think the numbers and it's all financed by him, so he has to do the math and he has to make sure that he's not losing money. He still has to make some money. I think myself, $700 is low. So it's going to be between $700 to $900. It may be in the top area or the two bedrooms can go to $1,000, but that's kind of an idea because the construction cost I think is high. It's a lot of work. Mechanically it's going to be all gutted. Electrically, January 12, 2016 27381 it's all new and the parking and the asphalt and if we do underground detention, there's a lot of extra cost plus all the renovation on the outside. That's going to be a big project. Maybe the doctor would like to say something too. But we're willing to work with the neighbors. We're willing to see what their concerns are and we can work with them. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. I think you addressed a number of the issues that were raised at least. Is it safe to assume that from a construction standpoint, if you go forward with this project that you would start probably by renovating one or two floors, try to lease those out, see how the market is going, and then continue? Mr. Abdelnour: The issue with these kinds of projects, you have to do more at the beginning. So actually the parking will have to be fixed. The outside of the building has to be renovated because it's hard to come back and do that. The only part, you're going to maybe start with three floors at the top and start going down to between the second and the eighth floor, but that doesn't interfere too much with the building because the outside will have to be whatever we're showing on the pictures. Everything has to be approved from the beginning and everything else will be inside to see how the economy is working on that part. Mr. Wilshaw: I didn't see anything in the plan about carports. Is there any consideration for that? Mr. Abdelnour: We did talk about it in the meeting and we did say there that there's a potential we can do the carport on the north side of the property. We can do that line. There's like maybe 28 to 40 cars. We can give options that people can do it. It's hard to put carports in the middle of the parking. It makes it too kind of congested, but we do have the back wall. It's a long wall. It's like maybe 40, 60 cars. There's a potential if it's needed. I think the doctor even talked about it last time that if we can afford it and make it good for the neighbors, especially elderly cleaning snow or something during the morning, that's something in the plan, yes. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Are there any other questions from the Planning Commission? Dr. Nouri: One gentleman talked about the entrance. We have two entrances on the side. We're trying to make it easy access for the building so you don't really have to go to the neighbors or somewhere to park. We're trying to keep it within the properties. January 12, 2016 27382 Ms. Smiley: Are those entrances on the east and west or the north and south? Dr. Nouri: East and west. Ms. Smiley: And you have elevators. Dr. Nouri: We have three elevators in the building. All the ingress requirements is going to be put together for that project. Ms. Smiley: I read through these letters. You have a lot to do. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: I did find the other thing I was going to mention. The trash disposal for the residents that would live in property - would that be handled through your existing dumpsters that you have or would you be putting in additional trash receptacles or compactors or anything? Mr. Abdelnour: Actually, I think the way it's going to be done, we're going to maybe have a chute for all of them to take it to the first floor and somebody will put it in the dumpster. Yes. Mr. Wilshaw: Store internally and then move it to the dumpster? Mr. Abdelnour: Move it to the dumpsters. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. You said that you would be willing to put additional landscaping around the . . . you're showing some trees. Mr. Abdelnour: We're showing full trees over there. We're putting all the trees there on that side. Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. So if there's a need for possibly some arborvitaes or other screening, you could do that as well, right? Mr. Abdelnour: If the neighbors and if this is kind of the plan, yes. We can do that. Actually, we can do some evergreens. Like even in the wintertime, the evergreen will . . . Mr. Wilshaw: Right. Keep some screening for the residents nearby. Yes, I think that's a good idea. All right. Thank you. If there is nothing else from the Commission, we've heard from the audience. We've heard from the petitioner. Thank you very much. A motion would be in order. I'll close the public hearing and a motion would be in order. January 12, 2016 27383 On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Long, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-02-2016 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on January 12, 2016, on Petition 2015-12-02-26 submitted by Livonia Corp. Tower, L.L.C. requesting waiver use approval pursuant to Sections 20.02 and 26.05 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to develop a Planned General Development at 29200 Vassar Avenue, including renovations to the site and building to accommodate offices and other commercial services on the first floor of the building and a total of 112 apartment units on floors 2 thru 8, located on the north side of Vassar Avenue between Middlebelt Road and Parkville Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 1, which property is zoned PO, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2015-12-02-26 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Site Plan marked Sheet SP.101 dated December 2, 2015, as revised, prepared by GAV Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to, except that the site plan shall be revised to show a total of no less than 56 "land banked" parking spaces on the easterly portion of the site; 2. That the accessory residential use for apartments shall be permitted only under the circumstances that the standard set forth in Section 26.05(a) of the Zoning Ordinance, which specifies any such use shall not constitute more than twenty (20%) percent of the total floor area of the building is modified by the City Council to allow for approximately eight-five (85%) percent of the total floor area of the building to be used for such purposes; 3. That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for deficient parking and any conditions related thereto; 4. That the Landscape Plan marked LP-1 dated November 25, 2015, as revised, prepared by Nagy Devlin Land Design, L.L.C., is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 5. That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu of hydroseeding; January 12, 2016 27384 6. 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; 7. That the Elevation Plans marked Sheets A.201 and A.202, both dated December 2, 2015, as revised, prepared by GAV Associates, are hereby approved and shall be adhered to; except that the plans shall be modified to be consistent with the new rendered elevation as received by the Planning Commission on January 12, 2016; 8. 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; 9. That the three walls of the trash dumpster area(s) shall be a minimum seven feet (7') in height, constructed out of building materials that shall complement that of the building and the enclosure gates shall be of solid panel steel construction or durable, long-lasting solid panel fiberglass, and maintained, and when not in use closed at all times; 10. That any restaurant or cafe shall provide disposal of grease waste in accordance with Section 13.20.380 of the City Code of Ordinances; 11. That the issues as outlined in the correspondence dated December 23, 2015, from the Fire Marshal shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the Fire Department; 12. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals; 13. That all light fixtures shall not exceed twenty feet (20') in height and shall be aimed and shielded so as to minimize stray light trespassing across property lines and glaring into adjacent roadways; 14. That no LED lightband or exposed neon shall be permitted on this site including, but not limited to, the building or around the windows; January 12, 2016 27385 15. That this approval is conditioned on the petitioner restricting the use of the property for Housing for the Elderly as defined in Section 2.07 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 16. That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time of application for building permits; and 17. Pursuant to Section 19.10 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, this approval is valid for a period of ONE YEAR ONLY from the date of approval by City Council, and unless a building permit is obtained, this approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. Subject to the preceding conditions, this petition is approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposal is in compliance with all of the special and general waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Sections 20.02 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2. That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area; 3. That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; and 4. That the proposal represents a reasonable and logical development plan for the subject property which adheres to the principles of sound land use planning. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion? Mr. Taormina: I have a couple of items for consideration of the maker of the motion. For Item #7 with respect to the elevation plans, I would make an addendum to that. I notice there's a slight difference between the flat drawings you're looking at here and the rendering. I would pen some language that would say, except that the plan shall be modified so as to be consistent with the rendered elevation view. He's brought the brick up a little bit January 12, 2016 27386 higher on the corners of the building or the masonry, and he's also added the E.I.F.S. on the top. There might actually be a little change to the cornice treatment on the top. So I think this rendering is a more recent depiction of their intentions on how to modify it, so I'd like the other drawings to be changed. What you've seen here this evening is what you prefer to the flat drawings, so I would recommend that. Ms. Smiley: Do we need to change the date? Mr. Taormina: We'll handle that in the approving resolution, but I just wanted to see whether or not you agreed with the changes to that. Ms. Smiley: Yes. Absolutely. Mr. Taormina: Then secondly, if you wanted to consider a condition that the approval would be conditioned on the petitioner restricting the use of the premises for senior apartments and any change that would include rentals to any non-seniors in excess of what the Fair Housing Act would allow would be subject to City Council approval. I know that's been in discussion this evening. It's something that was indicated by the petitioner. It would be their intention to market that initially for senior housing and that type of condition would restrict it initially to senior housing, but it would also open up the door for him to go back to the Council for any consideration to open the leasing to non-seniors. Mr. Taylor: It's a good idea. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Would that be #17? Mr. Taormina: That would probably be an additional condition. That's correct. Mr. Wilshaw: Is that okay with the maker of the motion? Ms. Smiley: Yes. Mr. Wilshaw: And is the second okay with that? Mr. Long Yes. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anything else that we need to talk about? Are there any other questions or comments? Mr. Taylor: Well, Mr. Chairman, only about the snow removal. I'm not quite sure where you're at on it. They are not allowed to push snow into your driveways. If you ever have a problem like that, you January 12, 2016 27387 should call the city. I don't know if you have in the past or not, but you certainly could. The city should have done something about it. Whether they did or not, I don't know but that's against the rules. Unidentified audience members: Inaudible conversation. Mr. Taylor: You have the attention of the owner again. I think they're going to try . . . Mr. Wilshaw: Ma'am, we can't hear you on the tv if you're speaking. Ms. Smiley: You need to go to the microphone. Elizabeth Hall, Hall, 29105 Vassar, Livonia, Michigan 48152. Every year I've had to go out there and either stop the snow plows that he personally provides for his property from pushing snow into our driveway so that I can get out, because like my mother stated earlier, I'm the one who gets stuck. Everybody else on the street has, you know, the nicer four by fours lifted vehicles. No, I have the Vibe that's an inch off the ground. I get stuck. I call the city. stop the snow plows. I'm out there attempting to move the snow so that I can get to and from work to support my three children who go to Clarenceville school district. If this does fall through and does not become a senior citizen and it becomes low income or single family homes, Clarenceville is already overcrowded as it is. My kids are sitting three kids to a bus now. My mom drops them off to school for me so that they don't have to be on a crowded bus. But they have to take the bus home because of conflicts in schedule and my other sister who's in school. Mr. Wilshaw: We're talking about snow removal. Ms. Hall: I'm sorry. I'm frustrated. Mr. Wilshaw: I understand. Ms. Hall: But we call the city every year. I've stopped people for the snow removal and it takes days. It doesn't get handled right away. It's not an issue that is resolved instantly and it doesn't help talking to the plow guys who are out there. They just waive me off and they go and do whatever, and then I'm on the phone with the city and I'm yelling at people for, you know, an hour because they're like, we'll, we didn't do it. And it's like no, you didn't plow our street at all. January 12, 2016 27388 Mr. Wilshaw: Unfortunately, the wheels of government move slowly sometimes, but certainly the Inspection Department would be the right place to contact if someone is plowing onto your property. At least you're doing what you can do. I appreciate that. Mr. Wilshaw, Acting Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. You will have another opportunity to talk to the Council. They are officially the ones that are going to approve or reject this. This is just a recommendation that we provide to them. ITEM #3 PETITION 2015-12-08-20 GROUP 10 MANAGEMENT Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2015- 12-08-20 submitted by Group 10 Management requesting approval of all plans required by Sections 18.47 and 18.58 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to construct a new five-story hotel (Hampton Inn) on part of the property at 28101 Schoolcraft Road, located on the south side of Schoolcraft Road between Inkster and Middlebelt Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 25. Mr. Taormina: This is a request to construct a new five-story hotel on the south side of Schoolcraft between Inkster and Middlebelt Road. This property is 2.22 acres in area. It includes 250 feet of frontage along Schoolcraft Road and has an average depth of 380 feet. Currently the property is vacant. The site is in the process of being rezoned from M-2, General Manufacturing, to C-4-I, High Rise Commercial, in order to support the use of the property with a hotel. The First Reading on the rezoning was given by City Council on December 14, 2015, and the Second Reading and Roll Call, which are the final steps in the rezoning process, are on hold until the site plan is reviewed. So we're looking at tonight's agenda item as if the property was zoned appropriate to the C-4 I district regulations. Immediately to the west of this property is the site of Millennium Park, which includes the Home Depot, and while Costco is not actually a part of Millennium Park, it is right at the southeast corner of Middlebelt and Schoolcraft Roads adjacent to this site. To the east is the Burton Manor banquet facility, to the south are industrial uses that make up part of the City's industrial corridor, and immediately to the north is Schoolcraft Road and the 1-96 expressway. The proposed hotel is sited near the center of the property. It January 12, 2016 27389 includes off-street parking on three sides of the building as well as vehicular access all the way around the structure. The building would be five stories in height. This equates to an overall height of 67 feet as measured from the finish grade to the top of the parapet. The building overall is about 63,000 square feet in size. It would accommodate 110 guest rooms. The overall dimensions of the structure, not including the indoor pool area, are about 62 feet of width to the building to 203 feet of its length. The main entrance and lobby are on the north side of the building closest to Schoolcraft Road. The plan shows a porte-cochere and covered valet area. The enclosed in-ground pool area, which is attached to the east elevation, measures about 2,200 square feet. In terms of the setbacks for five-story buildings in a C-4 district, the minimum required front yard setback is 46 feet. At its closest point, this building would be 48 feet from Schoolcraft Road so it does comply with the front yard setback requirement. The rear and side yard minimum requirement is 50 feet. The building placement meets or exceeds these requirements so it's fully conforming with all the C-4 district regulations as it pertains to building height, setbacks as well as maximum ground coverage. In terms of parking, the ordinance requires a total of 114 parking spaces based on the number of rooms and projected number of employees. This plan shows 119 parking spaces, so there is a slight surplus of parking spaces. There is a service area for refuse collection, a generator enclosure as well as a shed. Those are shown in the southeast part of the site. All of those accessory appurtenances and services would be fully enclosed using masonry walls that would match the building materials of the hotel building. Primary access would come from Schoolcraft Road, although there is secondary means of access that would come from the south via a connection to the existing road network that links Schoolcraft Road to both Millennium Park and the Livonia Corporate Center, which is to the south. Stormwater would be managed, as it's proposed now, within an existing stormwater detention basin which is located adjacent to the site's west property line. It is between the roadway and the property. In terms of the design of the building, the building's exterior includes a combination of brick, split face block as well as E.I.F.S. The first floor of the building consists primarily of split-face block with cast stone accents. Floors two through four would be faced with the darker brown color brick. The fifth floor is primarily E.I.F.S. A simple cornice treatment is shown on the lower part of the building including the porte cochere. At the top of the building, at least at the ends of the building and near the center of the building, the cornice or parapet is more pronounced and decorative. In terms of signage, they are allowed one wall sign. This plan shows January 12, 2016 27390 multiple wall signs on each side of the building. That is something that would require approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. With that, Mr. Chairman, I'll read out the correspondence. Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, it looks like we have some correspondence? Mr. Taormina: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated December 15, 2015, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referenced petition. We have no objections to the proposed project at this time. The legal description included with the submitted drawings appears to be correct and should be used in conjunction with this petition. The parcel address of 28101 Schoolcraft Road is correct for the subject property. The submitted plans do not indicate calculations for any of the proposed utility connections, so we cannot comment on any potential impacts to the existing systems at this time. The existing parcel is currently serviced by public utilities that were installed as part of the overall Livonia Corporate Park Condominium. The owner will need to show calculations for the proposed utility connections and storm water detention showing that the site will not exceed the permitted flows from the original design plans. We will review the proposed systems when plans are submitted to this department for permitting." The letter is signed by David Lear, P.E., Assistant City Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated December 23, 2015, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct a new five-story hotel (Hampton Inn) on part of the property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal with the following stipulations: (1) Subject building(s) are to be provided with an automatic sprinkler system, and on site hydrants shall be located between 50 feet and 100 feet from the Fire Department connection. (2) Adequate hydrants shall be provided and located with a maximum spacing of 300 feet between hydrants. Most remote hydrant shall flow 1,500 GPM with a residual pressure of 20 PSI. (3) Chapter 11 shall be followed for Special Structures and High-Rise Buildings, NFPA 101, 2015. (4) Access around building shall be provided for emergency vehicles with a minimum vertical clearance of thirteen feet six inches, a turning radius of fifty-three feet wall to wall and an inside turning radius of twenty-nine feet six inches. (5) Fire lanes shall be marked with wall or pole mounted signs that have the words: FIRE LANE — NO PARKING painted on both sides (for pole mount), in contrasting colors at a size and January 12, 2016 27391 spacing approved by the authority having jurisdiction. (6) In regards to NFPA 13, 2013 edition, Fire Department Connections should be of 2 X Detroit Standard Thread. (7) These issues and other code requirements will be addressed during the plan review process." The letter is signed by Daniel Lee, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated December 22, 2015, which reads as follows: "I have reviewed the plans in connection with the petitions. I have no objections to the proposals. I do however recommend that `Right Turn Only' signs be posted at the driveway exiting onto eastbound Schoolcraft Road." The letter is signed by Joseph Boitos, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated January 7, 2016, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above-referenced petition has been reviewed. (1) Parking spaces are required to be 10' x 20' in size and double striped. (2) All existing and proposed landscaped areas must have a functioning irrigation system installed. (3) No signage has been reviewed at this time. (4) This review is based on the proposed zoning change from M-2 to C-4. 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. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for the Planning Director? If not, will the petitioner please come forward? We will need your name and address for the record please. Scott M. Bowers, Bowers+Associates, 2400 S. Huron Parkway, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104. Good evening. Kenny Koza, Group 10 Management, 30500 Northwestern Hwy., Suite 525, Farmington Hills, Michigan 48334. Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Is there anything you'd like to add to the presentation? Mr. Bowers: No. I did bring samples of the materials for the exterior of the building. Mr. Wilshaw: That would be excellent to see. Mr. Bowers: I did provide the city with exterior pictures of one similar that we've done for Group 10. Mr. Wilshaw: This is the one in Troy, is it? January 12, 2016 27392 Mr. Bowers: Yes, it is. A very similar flavor. The E.I.F.S. colors are now a little different but the brick and the split face and with the cast stone accents. Again, so what we have is stone at the porte cochere. That would be the bottom masonry on this board. The split face block is the first floor, all the way around the building. It is broken up with a water table accent band and precast accent band. Field brick is a reddish brick. In this case, our building is five stories. This one happens to be four. Two E.I.F.S. colors, if you can go back to the original rendering. All the proud elements on the building will have this darker color E.I.F.S. The base, fifth floor, will be the lighter color. Mr. Wilshaw: Those look a little darker than what we saw on the photo from Troy, correct? Mr. Bowers: Correct. Yes, they're a little richer. Mr. Koza: Just to note, that's nothing that we've done. Hilton had changed the colors. Mr. Bowers: The E.I.F.S. is Hilton. Mr. Wilshaw: It looks like a nice change. Is there any additional questions for the petitioner? Ms. Smiley: When would you anticipate breaking ground? Mr. Bowers: As soon as you approve. Mr. Koza: We would obviously like a spring ground break. That's what we always aim for. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: Is there anybody in the audience that speaking on this? If you want to come up and say a word, that's fine. Ken Haag, Ashley Capital, 2575 Haggerty Road, Canton, Michigan. We currently own the property and the surrounding additional acreage. We're selling it to Group 10 for the development. As we've said before, we find it an ancillary benefit to the property. It doesn't impact us from continuing to market the properties for additional manufacturing and industrial uses, but we find it as a nice amenity that will be an attraction to other users. Mr. Wilshaw: Very good. Thank you. January 12, 2016 27393 Ms. Smiley: It looks like a very nice development. I like where you placed it. It's got easy access on and off to the expressway. It should really work for you. Mr. Bowers: We're excited about this one. It did work out very well. Ms. Smiley: It's a very nice location. And it's a pretty building and you have a pool, I understand. Mr. Bowers: Correct. Ms. Smiley: Indoor or outdoor? Mr. Bowers: Indoor pool. Ms. Smiley: It's a good idea for Michigan. Are there conference rooms there? Mr. Bowers: A small one. Ms. Smiley: Who do you anticipate is your clientele? Mr. Koza: Obviously, there's a million or so square feet of office space within Livonia. Group 10 and Hilton recognized there was actually a void for the Hampton Inn brand in this market. So they actually brought it to our attention to kind of hone in and find a location. That's how we came across this and started to work with Ashley Capital. Obviously, you've got Bosch who is expanding in Plymouth. We expect them to actually start using this facility because it's going to be a new Hampton. They're a very big client of Hilton. Hampton is the number one luxury limited service brand in the world. So for it not to exist in this market, it provided us a great opportunity to seize this moment. On top of it, we look for many things that are going to be amenities to the hotel and to the customers. So when we look for any kind of hotel site, we also look at what is in the market and most people wouldn't realize that the Costco, the Menards, the Walmarts of the world are actually filling our hotel rooms constantly. They have a constant amount of people coming to train current employees, bring in new products, new reps, to represent all sorts of things that they sell, as well as we look for where can our guests go. In this area, we have plenty of new restaurants that popped up before us, which we like. You've got a brand new Applebee's and a few other beautiful restaurants. We have the Leo's, the Panera Bread. We have the Outback Steakhouse right in front of us. There's a lot of beautiful things working for this property. January 12, 2016 27394 Ms. Smiley: Good. Thank you. That was a good commercial too. I really do believe you'll do well. It's a high quality hotel for this area and you've picked an excellent location. Mr. Koza: Thank you. Mr. Wilshaw: I echo your comments, Mrs. Smiley. I think that the site is a multi-use site of both commercial and industrial uses, Ashley Capital's property in the back, and it seems like a hotel would definitely fit into that area. With that, would someone like to make a motion? On a motion by Long, seconded by Taylor, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-03-2016 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2015-12-08-20 submitted by Group 10 Management requesting approval of all plans required by Sections 18.47 and 18.58 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to construct a new five-story hotel (Hampton Inn) on part of the property at 28101 Schoolcraft Road, located on the south side of Schoolcraft Road between Inkster and Middlebelt Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 25, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Site Plan marked Sheet SP1.00 dated September 21, 2015, as revised, prepared by Bowers+Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2. That the Landscape Plan marked L1 dated September 17, 2015, prepared by Deak Planning & Design, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 3. That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu of hydroseeding; 4. 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; 5. That the Exterior Elevations Plan marked Sheets A5.00 dated December 10, 2015, as revised, prepared Bowers+Associates, is hereby approved and shall be January 12, 2016 27395 adhered to, except that burnished block, stone or brick shall be substituted for the split face block material; 6. That all rooftop mechanical equipment visible to the public shall be concealed on all sides by screening that shall be of a compatible character, material and color to other exterior materials on the building; 7. That the three walls of the trash dumpster area(s) shall be a minimum seven feet (7') in height and constructed out of building materials that shall complement that of the building. The enclosure gates shall be of solid panel steel construction or durable, long-lasting solid panel fiberglass. The trash dumpster area shall be maintained at all times, and the enclosure gates shall be closed at all times, except when in use; 8. That all light fixtures shall not exceed twenty feet (20') in height and shall be aimed and shielded so as to minimize stray light trespassing across property lines and glaring into adjacent roadways; 9. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals; 10. That this site shall meet either the City of Livonia or the Wayne County Storm Water Management Ordinance, whichever applies, and shall secure any required permits, including stormwater management permits, wetlands permits and soil erosion and sedimentation control permits, from Wayne County, the City of Livonia, and/or the State of Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment (DNRE); 11. That the issues as outlined in the correspondence dated December 23, 2015, from the Fire Marshal shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the Fire Department; 12. That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time the building permits are applied for; and 13. Pursuant to Section 19.10 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, this approval is valid for a period of ONE YEAR ONLY from the date of approval by City Council, and unless a building permit is obtained, this January 12, 2016 27396 approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. Mr. Wilshaw, Acting Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. Good luck with your project. ITEM #4 MOTION TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING 9309 NEWBURGH Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, a motion to hold a public hearing to determine whether or not to rezone a portion of the property at 9309 Newburgh Road, located on the west side of Newburgh Road between Joy Road and Ann Arbor Trail in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 31, from PL (Public Lands) to R- 1 (One Family Residential). Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Taormina, this is a housekeeping item? Mr. Taormina: Yes. It is just to schedule a public hearing. This will appear on the agenda later this month. On a motion by Taylor, seconded by Long, and unanimously approved, it was #01-04-2016 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 23.01(b) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to rezone property at 9309 Newburgh Road, located on the west side of Newburgh Road between Joy Road and Ann Arbor Trail in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 31, from PL to R-1, such property legally described as follows: The East 134' of that part of the S.E. 1/4 of Section 31, T. 1 S., R. 9 E., City of Livonia, Wayne County, Michigan, described as beginning at a point on the E. line of Section 31 distant S 02 deg 12' E. 379.26 feet from the E. 1/4 corner of Section 31, proceeding thence S. 2 deg 12' E. along said line 163.41 feet; thence W. 1,336.6 feet; thence N. 0 deg 10' 29" W. 163.3 feet; thence E. 1,330.87 feet to the point of beginning, except the E. 1.0 acre thereof. (Part of Parcel 31 JJ 1) FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of such hearing shall be given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shall be a report and recommendation submitted to the City Council. January 12, 2016 27397 Mr. Wilshaw, Acting Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ITEM #5 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,080TH Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 1,080th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on December 15, 2015. On a motion by Smiley, seconded by Wilshaw, and unanimously adopted, it was #01-05-2016 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 1,080th Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on December 15, 2015, are hereby approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Smiley, Wilshaw, Long, Taylor NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Mr. Wilshaw, Acting Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 1,081st Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on January 12, 2016, was adjourned at 8:54 p.m. CI PLANNING COMMISSION Carol A. Smiley, Secreta ATTEST: 416''- Ian Wilshaw, Acting Chairman