HomeMy WebLinkAbout1,158 - August 18, 2020MINUTES OF THE 1,158rh PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REGULAR MEETING
HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
On Tuesday, August 18,
2020, the City Planning Commission of
the City
of Livonia
held its 1,158th Public
Hearings and Regular Meeting via Zoom
Meeting
Software,
Mr. Ian Wilshaw, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Members present: David Bongero Sam Caramagno Glen Long
Betsy McCue Carol Smiley Peter Ventura
Ian Wilshaw
Members absent: None
Mr. Mark
Taormina,
Planning Director, Scott Miller, Planner IV,
Stephanie Reece,
Program
Supervisor,
and Debra
Walter,
Clerk
-Typist
were also
present.
Chairman Wilshaw informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda
involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City
Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and make the final
determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Planning
Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or
vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City
Council for the final determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected. If a
petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan approval is denied tonight, the
petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City
Council. Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Commission become effective
seven (7) days after the date of adoption. The Planning Commission and the
professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon their filing. The staff
has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions, which
the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the
proceedings tonight.
ITEM #1 PETITION 2020-07-01-03 LEO SOAVE BUILDING
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2020-
07-01-03 submitted by Leo Soave Building Company, Inc.
pursuant to Section 23.01 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance
#543, as amended, requesting to rezone the property at 37855
Lyndon Avenue (former Webster Elementary School site) located
on the south side of Lyndon Avenue between Newburgh and Hix
Roads in the Southeast'/4 of Section 19 from PL (Public Lands)
to R-1 (One Family Residential).
August 19, 2020
29658
Mr. Taormina: This is a request to rezone the former Webster Elementary
School property from PL (Public Land) to R-1 (One -Family
Residential). This is a 9.3-acre site. It is on the south side of
Lyndon and is north of Mason and between Nola and Blue Skies.
On the zoning map it shows the location of the property in
relationship to the surrounding area. The proposed rezoning and
the subsequent residential development that would involve this
site, would involve the entire property. It is currently owned by
Livonia Public Schools. LPS is in the process of selling the land
to the petitioner. You will notice that there are existing single-
family lots that border the property to the east and to the west
with addresses on Blue Skies and Nola, respectively. The site is
surrounded by R-1 zoning. All of the lots in the area measure 60'
x 120% as well as 7, 200 square feet, which is the minimum
required for R-1 zoning. Conceptual plans were presented with
the application. The plan shows a total of 31 lots. As you can
see here, the design includes a cul-de-sac street extending north
from Mason and providing access to lots 1 to 21. Lots 22 and 23
are in the southwest corner of the property and they would have
direct access from Mason Ave. These lots are adjacent to a small
open space park. At the north end you will see lots 24 through
31 all have frontage directly on Lyndon Ave. Some other features
of the plan include the storm water detention basin along the west
side of the site, as well as the second larger open space area
located in the northwest corner. The street would have a right-
of-way width of 60 feet and the cul-de-sac would be 120 feet in
diameter. As far as future land use maps, it does show it as parks
and community, which reflects the current ownership as well as
the former use of the site as a school. This petition is one of three
involving former school properties. The other two are Adams,
which is located on the south side of Lyndon between Harrison
and Inkster, and Wilson which is located on the northwest corner
of Harrison and West Chicago. With that, Mr. Chairman, I can
read out the departmental correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please.
Mr. Taormina: The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated August 10,
2020, 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 parcel is assigned the address of #37855 Lyndon
Avenue. The legal description submitted by the owner appears to
be correct but we would like to suggest using the following
August 197 2020
29659
simplified legal description instead. That part of the East '/= of
Section 19, Town 1 South, Range 9 East, City of Livonia, Wayne
County, Michigan, described as beginning at a point distant S
89056'25" E, 643.85 feet from the center corner of said Section
19 and proceeding thence N 00'18'40" W, 100.00 feet to the
centerline of Lyndon Avenue; thence along said Lyndon Avenue
centerline S 83'59'10" E, 481.93 feet; thence S 00'18'40" E,
882.91 feet to the centerline of Mason Avenue; thence along said
Mason Avenue centerline S 89'41'20" W, 479.00 feet; thence N
0001840" W, 836.03 feet to the Point of Beginning, except the
northerly 30 feet, also except the southerly 30 feet. The proposed
development is currently serviced by public water main, sanitary
and storm sewers, which will need to be extended to service any
new residences. The submitted drawing does not indicate any
utility connections, so we do not have any knowledge of impacts
to the existing systems at this time. The owner has been in
contact with this office regarding the project, and is aware of the
Engineering Department requirements. It should be noted that
should the project move forward the proposed construction will
be required to meet the Wayne County Stormwater Ordinance,
including detention requirements. A full review of the proposed
development will be completed when plans are submitted for
permitting."The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant
City Engineer. The next letter is from the Finance Department,
dated August 10, 2020, which reads as follows: '7 have reviewed
the addresses connected with the above noted petition. As there
are no outstanding amounts receivable, general or water and
sewer, I have no objections to the proposal. " The letter is signed
by Connie Kumpula, Chief Accountant. The next letter is from
the Treasurer's Department, dated August 7, 2020, which reads
as follows: `in accordance with your request, the Treasurer's
Office has reviewed the address connected with the above noted
petition. At this time, there are no outstanding amounts receivable
for taxes. Therefore, I have no objections to the proposal." The
letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director?
Or. Ventura: Did I understand you to say that this is part of a three -parcel sale
to this developer?
Or. Taormina: Not to this developer. There are two buyers of the three sites. I
believe this petitioner, or a close affiliate is involved in one of the
other two sites. The Wilson site. There is a second developer
with an interest in purchasing the Adams site.
Or. Ventura: We can anticipate seeing those before too long?
August 19, 2020
29660
Mr, Taormina: The one plan has been submitted. That is something you will see
in the next couple weeks, that is correct. For Adams.
Mr. Ventura: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Ventura. Any other questions for our planning
staff? I don't see any other questions for Mr. Taormina. Our
petitioner is in the audience.
Rico Soave, 37771 Seven Mile Road, Livonia, MI, 48152, nothing in addition to
Mark's presentation other than to reiterate that we are asking for
R-1 (Single-family). I believe we are surrounded by R-1's (Single
family) and I do also believe the Master Plan indicates R-1 as
well. Other than that, I would be happy to answer any questions
for the Commission tonight.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Soave, for being here tonight and for your
introduction. I just want to remind both the Commission and the
folks in the audience that this is a rezoning request. Our focus
tonight is to look at the zoning and if it is the proper fit for this
area. We will not have a lot of discussion in regard to the site
plan. That is a step that would come later once the zoning has
been moved along to Council. We see a conceptual site plan, but
that is not necessarily going to be the final product. Any
questions for our petitioner from the Commission? I don't see
any questions from the commissioners at this time. Is there
anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against this
item? Please use the raised hand feature. We do have a few
folks that are connected by phone. If you are connected by
phone, you will need to dial *9 to raise your hand by telephone.
We do have a couple folks with their hands up, so we are going
to go to them and give them an opportunity to speak for or
against. We are going to start with Victoria. We are not hearing
anything from Victoria. What we are going to do is we are going
to move on to the next person and we will circle back and see if
Victoria has her audio issues sorted out. The next person is Jo
Roe.
Jo Roe, What type of homes are you thinking about building at this location and
the price range of them?
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, the type of homes and price range. I hear that question.
We will ask the petitioner that question and see what their
intention is to give you an answer on that. Do you have any other
questions or comments that you would like to include?
August 197 2020
29661
Ms. Roe: The builder, it will only be one builder in this one here by Webster
school, correct?
Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, that is the intention.
Ms. Roe: Okay, has he built other home in our area?
Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Soave, his company, has built home throughout this city.
When we give him an opportunity to speak again, he can maybe
give more information about his background as a builder. He is
well known in this city for building, especially for these things we
call in -fill type properties. Smaller properties that are being filled
in like this with a dozen or two dozen homes. He has also done
some larger sub -divisions as well.
Ms. Roe: Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you for coming tonight. We will get those questions
answered for you. We have one more person asking to speak
here, so let me give them an opportunity to speak. This is a
telephone person that has called in. You can dial *6 to unmute.
The phone number ends in 5387. Good evening.
Victoria, I called in. You can hear me now. Do I need to give you my address
also?
Mr. Wilshaw: If you would like, please.
Victoria, 14436 Nola, Livonia, MI, I live right behind the old Webster property. If I
could just say a couple of words. I am going to start off by saying
I am opposed to building houses on this property. I have lived in
Livonia my whole life. I did go to the old Webster school. When
they decided to tear down the Webster school, they regraded it
to be a green space. Over the last 12 years it has evolved into a
most beautiful green space for our neighborhood. The property
at that point has been used, as you know, for Livonia's school
soccer tournaments and Radio Field Day last year. It garnered
about 150 visitors. It was their best year yet with people coming
from all over. People use this field every day. They use it to walk
their dogs. It brings families to come sit under the trees. People
come from all over the city to walk their dogs in this field. In our
beautiful green space. The property... if I can back up for one
minute, the green space has pulled many homes in the sub. I
have spoke to quite a few people who have told me that this is
one of the reasons why they bought in Castle Gardens. It is a
natural environmental asset. It is a home to wildlife. It is a natural
resource for water retention. I just...I am just stating a few things
August 19, 2020
29662
that are my views. Reasons not to privatize the property...it
would put us through three years plus of construction with trucks
coming up Lyndon and Mason. Those are our main
thoroughfares and tying up our roads coming to our homes.
Creating construction dust in our homes for that period of time.
The green space really serves as a core to the neighborhood and
preserving it would be a real asset to the neighborhood. No
offense to the builder. I am sure he thinks we will be okay, but
this has a special place and it has a special place in our hearts. I
really encourage each and every one of you to come visit the
property early in the morning when the sun is rising. That is when
it is most beautiful. You can hear rare birds and squirrels and
during this pandemic especially it has been an important place to
relax and enjoy mother nature.
Mr. Wilshaw: Excellent. Thank you for your comments, Victoria. I appreciate
the fact that you were able to call in and make those comments.
Just so you know, the decision to sell this property and rezone it
from Public Land to any sort of private zoning for residential or
otherwise, was ultimately the decision of the School Board to sell
the property.
Victoria: I understand that.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, good. I just wanted to make sure you were aware of that.
Victoria: Oh yeah, I was aware of that.
Mr. Wilshaw: Great, thank you. Thank you for your comments. We will take
them into consideration, and we will be talking again to the
petitioner after each of our audience members has had a chance
to speak so he can respond to those comments.
Victoria: Thank you, I appreciate the time to speak.
Or. Wilshaw: Hang around and you can see how this concludes. I am going to
put you back on mute and go to the next person. Thank you for
coming. Is there anyone else wishing to speak for or against this
item? I don't see anyone else new. Jo has asked to speak one
more time. I will give her another chance. Let me unmute her.
Jo Roe: No, I am sorry. I had lowered my hand. I didn't raise it. Thank
you though.
Or. Wilshaw: Your all set? Great. Thank you I think everyone has had a
chance to speak in our audience. If there is no one else wishing
to speak, I am going to go back to Mr. Soave.
August 19, 2020
29663
Mr. Soave: Yes.
Mr, Wilshaw: You did hear some questions asked of our audience specifically
regards to the type of home you are planning on putting there and
the pricing. If you could enlighten us on those things.
Mr. Soave: Yeah, absolutely. As the Commission is well aware, we are
second generation builders and developers. I couldn't put a
number on how many homes either one of our family members
built throughout Livonia in the past 30 years, but this sub -division
we are expecting for pricing to start around $300,000 mark. It will
mirror the same type of product we put a mile and a half north on
Heritage Square development, which is on Newburgh just south
of Six Mile. That was a 50 lot sub -division which should be
completed by the end of the calendar year 2020. It will be a
similar same type of product. Pricing will be similar as well. If
any of the audience or the public want to see the product, we are
anticipating it will be very very close to what we did in the past
two years at Heritage Square community.
Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Soave, in speaking of Heritage Square being a comparable
property, can you give us some idea of how long it has taken to
sell those properties and how they have done given the current
economy?
Mr. Soave: I think this November will be two-year anniversary mark where
the infrastructure and the roadways were installed. Two years to
implement a development and build close to 50 single-family
homes I think is really quite remarkable. We are hoping for the
same type of turn around given the current economic conditions
and this proposed development at Webster is approximately 31
units as opposed to 50. We are anticipating less than a two-year
turnaround time from development to the completion of all 31
single-family homes.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, very good. Thank you. Any questions for our petitioner
from the Commission? I see no questions from the Commission.
Is there any other comments, Mr. Soave, that you would like to
make before we make our decision?
Mr. Soave: No. I appreciate your time tonight and I will still be around for the
remainder of the evening in case something else should come up
in regard to this petition.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, great.
Thank
you, very
much. We will close the Public
Hearing and
a motion
would be
in order.
August 19, 2020
29664
Ms. Smiley: Has the City of Livonia expressed any interest in buying this
property and turning it into a park?
Mr. Taormina: Would you repeat the question?
Ms. Smiley: Yes. Has the city expressed any interest in purchasing this piece
of property and turning it into a public park? That they would have
and maintain?
Mr. Taormina: No.
Ms. Smiley: That was
my understanding.
The
city is
not interested in buying
any more
property or parks at
this
time.
Is that right?
Mr. Taormina: I can't answer the question. Whether there is interest anywhere
in the city, but there has been non expressed by the Parks
Director or the Administration or Council that I am aware of.
Ms. Smiley: Thank you.
On a motion by Smiley, seconded by McCue, and unanimously adopted, it was
#08-35-2020 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on August 18, 2020 on. Petition
2020-07-01-03 submitted by Leo Soave Building Company, Inc,
pursuant to Section 23.01 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance
#543, as amended, requesting to rezone the property at 37855
Lyndon Avenue (former Webster Elementary School site) located
on the south side of Lyndon Avenue between Newburgh and Hix
Roads in the Southeast'/4 of Section 19 from PL (Public Lands)
to R-1 (One Family Residential) the Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2020-07-01-
03 be approved for the following reasons:
1. That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in
harmony with the surrounding residential uses and zoning
districts in the area.
2. That the proposed change of zoning will provide for asingle-
family residential development similar in density to what
exists in the neighboring area.
3. That the proposed change of zoning is consistent with the
existing character of the area.
August 19, 2020
29665
4. That the proposed zoning change does not obstruct the
goals, policies, and objectives of the Future Land Use Plan,
and
5. That the proposed change of zoning of the subject property
represents a reasonable and logical zoning transformation
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 23.05 of
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
Mr. Wilshaw: For the people in our audience with interest in this item, please
continue to keep an eye on this as it goes to City Council. We
only give a recommendation to the Council. They ultimately will
make the decision on this zoning. If they choose to move forward
with it, there will also be a site plan that will be coming before us
as well with the details of the homes and the layout of the
property. If you are interested in continuing to watch this as it
comes back so you can be involved and comment on it. Thank
you so much for coming tonight.
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the
motion is carried and
the foregoing
resolution
adopted.
It will
go on
to City
Council
with
an approving
resolution.
ITEM #2 PETITION 2020-07-03-03 HAGGERY SQUARE
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2020-
07-03-03 submitted by Stonefield Engineering &Design, on
behalf of Haggerty Square, L.L.C. and Haggerty Residential.
L.L.C., pursuant to Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of
Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine
whether or not to vacate a section of the existing public utility
easement at 19700 and 19750 Haggerty Road, located on the
east side of Haggerty Road, between Seven Mile and Eight Mile
Roads in the Southwest'/4 of Section 6
Mr. Taormina: This involves a vacating petition at Haggerty Square, which is a
mixed -use development located on Haggerty Road between
Seven and Eight -Mile Roads. This project includes a
combination of both commercial retail as well as multi -family. The
retail portion is completed. The apartment phase is currently
under construction. This utility easement, which is 43 feet wide,
runs along the north property line. It is located on a strip of
property that previously contained Phillips Road. That road was
vacated in 1995, but there was a full width easement retained
August 19, 2020
29666
within the former right-of-way to accommodate utilities.
Currently, the only utility that occupies a portion of the easement
is DTE. They have an overhead line that is in the north 20 feet of
the easement. Since the easement is 43 feet wide, the petitioner
would like to vacate the southerly 23 feet. That would allow DTE
to maintain its facilities in the north 20 feet and allow the petitioner
to construct garages as part of the approved development. The
Engineering Department has no objections to this request. We
are required to hold a public hearing by the Code of Ordinances.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, please.
Mr. Taormina: The first letter is from the Engineering Department, dated June
26, 2020, which reads as follows: " Pursuant to the May 27, 2020
request from Stonefield Engineering & Design, on behalf of the
owners, Haggerty Square, LLC and Haggerty Residential, LLC,
the Law Department has approved the request as to form and the
Engineering Division has reviewed the utilities located on the
property in question and found that the request for the partial
vacation of the public utility easement is warranted. In order to
proceed, the Engineering Division respectfully requests that the
City Council do all things necessary for the vacation of the south
23 feet of the following public utility easement (vacated Philips
Road right-of-way previously recorded in Uber 22962, page 282,
Wayne County Records) A map with the original easement to be
vacated is attached. The letter is signed by Todd Zilincik, City
Engineer. The next letter is from the Finance Department, dated
August 10, 2020, which reads as follows: '7 have reviewed the
addresses connected with the above noted petition. As there are
no outstanding amounts receivable, general or water and sewer,
/ have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by
Connie Kumpula, Chief Accountant. The next letter is from the
Treasurer's Department, dated August 10, 2020, which reads as
follows: `In accordance with your request, the Treasurer's Office
has reviewed the name and addresses connected with the above
noted petition. At this time there are taxes due, but they are not
delinquent, therefore / have no objections to the proposal." The
letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. That is the extent of
the correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Do we have a petitioner here with us tonight on this? I think we
might. Let me give Mr. Williams a chance to speak. Good
evening.
August 19, 2020
29667
Eric Williams, Stonefield Engineering & Design, 607 Shelby Street, Detroit, MI, I
think Mark explained it perfectly. It is just a minor housekeeping
item that unfortunately we were held up trying to get this worked
out with DTE. They have since granted their approval. So, we
come back before you guys for final step. Happy to answer any
questions and I do appreciate your time.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you for being here, Mr. Williams. Do we have any
questions of the petitioner or the planning staff on this item? I
don't see any questions on this item. Is there anybody in the
audience that wishes to speak for or against this item? If you do,
please use the raised hand feature. Seeing no one coming
forward, I will close the public hearing and ask for a motion.
On a motion by McCue, seconded by Bongero, and unanimously adopted, it was
#08-38-2020 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on August 18, 2020, on Petition
2020-07-03-03 submitted by Stonefield Engineering & Design, on
behalf of Haggerty Square, L.L.C. and Haggerty Residential.
L.L.C., pursuant to Section 12.08 of the Livonia Code of
Ordinances of the City of Livonia, as amended, to determine
whether or not to vacate a section of the existing public utility
easement at 19700 and 19750 Haggerty Road, located on the
east side of Haggerty Road, between Seven Mile and Eight Mile
Roads in the Southwest % of Section 6, the Planning Commission
does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2020-
07-03-03-03 be approved for the following reasons:
That this part of the easement is no longer needed for public
utility purposes.
That the easement area being vacated will allow the
developer of Haggerty Square to complete the project as
approved, including the construction of garages which the
easement currently interferes with, and
No reporting City department or public utility has objected to
the proposed vacating.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was
given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion?
August 191 2020
29668
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the
motion
is carried and
the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go onto
City
Council with
an approving resolution.
ITEM #3 PETITION 2020-07-06-01 MEDICAL MARIJUANA
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2020
07-06-01 submitted by the City Planning Commission, pursuant
to Council Resolution #170-20, and Section 23.01(a) of the
Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to determine whether or
not to amend Sections 2.10 of Article II, 4.12 of Article IV, 5.15 of
Article V, and 16.02 of Article XVI, to define "caregiver grow
facility' and regulate the zoning districts where medical marijuana
facilities can operate.
Mr. Taormina: The referenced text amendments would establish regulations for
medical marijuana caregiver grow operations. Currently, no local
ordinances are in place to govern where these facilities can
operate. Livonia, like most communities, relies solely on state
laws and more specifically, the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act
(MMMA) of 2008. As a result, primary caregivers have been
allowed to establish operations inside homes within the city's
single-family residential zoning districts. Under the authority of
the MMMA and depending on the number of patients being cared
for by a registered primary giver, the legal grow limit can be up to
72 plants. This includes 12 plants per patient with up to 5 patients
per caregiver plus another 12 plants for the caregiver. However,
in a recent ruling, the Michigan Supreme Court confirmed local
municipalities authority to regulate caregiver and patient plant
cultivation under the MMMA. The Court's decision means that
local governments may regulate medical marijuana cultivation by
MMMA-licensed caregivers and patients through zoning and
other regulatory ordinances, provided that they do not prohibit or
penalize the cultivation of medical marijuana or impose
regulations that are unreasonable or contradict the MMMA
standards. The language amendments, as prepared by the Law
Department, will do the following: 1) Provide a definition for
caregiver grow facilities under Section 2A 0; 2) Prohibit caregiver
grow facilities in all R-1 through R-5 single-family residential
zoning districts under Section 4.12; 3) Prohibit caregiver grow
facilities in all Rural Urban Farming (RUF) districts under Section
5.15; and 4) Allow caregiver grow facilities as a permitted use in
all M-1 (Light Manufacturing) zoning districts under Section
16.02. Livonia currently has multiple caregiver grow facilities
located within its industrial districts. In buildings where more than
one caregiver operates, the Inspection Department requires that
August 19, 2020
29669
each caregiver grow facility be in a locked unit with separate
access, separate address, and separate metering. The City does
not track caregiver grow operations in residential dwellings.
Larger grow operations inside homes can become a nuisance
and be dangerous since the City is not usually called for
inspections involving changes to mechanical systems. In fact,
recently, a home in Livonia was destroyed by fire due to an
electrical fire caused by improper wiring associated with a grow
operation. To the question at the study meeting regarding non -
conformities, the Law Department is advising that caregiver grow
operations that are in existence at the time this or any other
zoning ordinance is passed prohibiting the use in residential
districts will be in fact grandfathered and be considered a valid
non -conforming use, and hence, allowed to continue. There is
one item of correspondence from our Inspection Department,
dated August 10, 2020 that reads as follows: "Pursuant to your
request, the above referenced Petition has been reviewed. This
Department has no objections to this Petition." That letter is
signed by Jerome Hanna, Director of Inspection. If there are any
questions, I would be happy to answer them.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. This is a petition that was generated by the City
Council. It is the city's own petition, so we do not have a petitioner
her. Are there any questions of the Planning Director?
Or. Ventura: Can you tell us what constitutes a caregiver?
Or. Taormina: What constitutes a caregiver? They would have to be properly
licensed and registered in Michigan.
Or, Ventura: If someone is licensed through the State of Michigan, is the city
aware of that?
Mr. Taormina: No. We are not aware of all licensed caregivers.
Mr. Ventura: Is there a way for us to become aware or require them to register
with the city?
Or,
Taormina: That is a great question. It really is something that the Law
Department is investigating currently as part of this question of
establishing valid non -conforming use status to any pre-existing
caregiver grow operations in homes. One way of doing that
would be through some sort of registration process, allowing a
certain time, either post -adoption of the ordinance or prior to the
adoption of an ordinance prohibiting use in residential districts, to
allow those caregiver operations currently in existence to register
with the City so that we would have those on file in the event that
August 19, 2020
29670
there are any questions later as to whether or not they are
considered a valid non -conforming use or illegal under the terms
of the ordinance. That is kind of a long answer to your question,
but it is something that our Law Department is going to be looking
at as this petition moves forward for review by City Council,
Mr. Ventura: That is a good answer, Mr. Taormina. One last question. Are
there any plans, on the side of the city, once the grandfathered
growing facilities are identified, to inspect them to see if they
conform and are safe?
Mr. Taormina: In homes, I am not aware of any plans. Certainly, inspections are
done as part of any commercial operation that seeks a permit and
a zoning compliance status with the city. That process is and has
been underway for a couple of years now as it relates to our
industrial district operations, but not that I am aware of in the
residential. Once a registration is done, whether there would be
any inspections or not, I can't say. I suspect that there would not
be.
Mr. Ventura: Finally,
I am
assuming
that when
we say
in
a home, it would
include
in an
outbuilding
or garage
or shed
on
the property?
Mr. Taormina: I am not familiar enough with the MMMA rules and regulations as
it pertains to the lawful conduct of these caregiver grow
operations. I know that they have to be in a locked facility, but if
that allows them to be in outbuildings, I am not aware. I suspect
they can be, but it still has to meet all of the other rules and
requirements including security and not being accessible to
anyone other than the homeowner or caregiver.
Mr. Ventura: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Ms. Smiley, I think we have some other questions as well.
Ms. Smiley: My question is, if somebody has one of these facilities and they
have a license or the permission to grow one, if they decide they
want to get out of the business for some reason, do they have to
go through anything to hand it over to the second owner? You
know how we put a waiver or something... when it is a waiver -use
they have to inform people they have to meet all the regulations?
Or.
Taormina: I am going to assume that you are speaking only to an operation
in an industrial area. Could it be transferred from one caregiver
to another? I see no reason why that couldn't happen. That is
not being done under the auspice of the City and the zoning
process. What that might require, if it is a change in ownership
August 19, 2020
29671
or a change in tenancy, would be a new zoning compliance permit
being issued. It depends on the individual circumstances in terms
of what would be required as far as notification to the City and
any follow-up inspections and if there have been any changes
with the operation itself.
Ms. Smiley: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. I think Ms. McCue...
Ms. McCue: I just want to clarify
something.
Right now, we
said there is no
inspection process
at all for
anybody that is
designated as
growing for medical
needs in
their houses or
in their homes,
correct? There is no
inspection
protocol?
Mr. Taormina: That is correct. But, if a homeowner wants to make mechanical
changes, whether it is plumbing or electrical, then he/she is
obligated under the building code to obtain a permit.
Ms. McCue: Like any other business.
Mr. Taormina: Is that being done? I can't answerthat. Probably not to the extent
that it should be done for these types of operations. This is one
of the reasons we have had issues and problems like the recent
fire damage.
Ms. McCue: Correct if I am not understanding. To move this forward this
would actually just give us better checks and balances within the
City as far as inspections and typical business protocols that we
would use with all other businesses within the city.
Mr. Taormina: Really, it won't change much as it relates to operations as they
exist in the industrial district. It memorializes it to the extent that
it makes caregiver grow facilities a permitted use, which currently
doesn't
exist
at
least in
writing within
our zoning
ordinance. But,
the city
has,
up
to this
point, allowed
caregiver
grow operations
to locate anywhere as a result of the interpretation of the statute.
With the recent court ruling, however, communities now have the
authority to regulate where these facilities can locate. We are
taking advantage of the court decision and our authority under
zoning rules to establish these regulations. It doesn't change it
as it relates to the industrial aspect, but it certainly will for
residential by prohibiting them all together is residential districts.
Ms. McCue: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions for our planning staff?
August 19, 2020
29672
Mr. Caramagno: In a manufacturing zoned area, is there a limit to how many plants
you can have per caregiver? And can multiple caregivers lease
a space in a large sectioned off building?
Mr. Taormina: That is what we are seeing. To answer the first part of your
question, there is a limit. An individual caregiver is restricted to
the number I referenced earlier - 72 plants. However, that doesn't
prohibit multiple caregivers from leasing units in an industrial
building where you would effectively have several caregivers, a
consortium of care givers if you will, operating in separate locked
units within a large industrial building. We are seeing that. There
are some buildings that have six to eight caregivers per building.
There are others where just one caregiver is operating in a small
unit within the industrial district. It varies. There is a limit and
they can group together under a single roof.
Mr. Caramagno: Is there a square
footage
allotment they
have to have per
caregiver, or can it
look like
a forest inside a
building?
Mr. Taormina: There is no minimum standard that I am aware of. but certain
codes would govern aisle widths and clearances. There are, in
some cases, fire suppression requirements depending on the
size of the building. Usually these things are dictated by other
codes. Not any that I am aware of that are specific to the
cultivation of plants. There are other health and safety codes that
come into play that have to be met. Put it this way: A plant starts
out as a seedling and by the time it is mature it is a certain size
that has to be accounted for in terms of some of these issues, like
heights and aisleway widths and that sort of thing, while not
interfering with other systems in the building.
Mr. Caramagno: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions for our planning staff?
Mr. Bongero: As I understand it then, if this gets passed, anything as of now
would be grandfathered in its place, right? Going forward it would
be pushed to M-1.
Mr. Taormina: Yeah, so that is basically correct. Theoretically you are right.
Everything that is in existence would continue or could continue
and then M-1 and M-2 would continue to see caregiver grow
operations. It would be treated as a permitted use. They would
come and go within those two zoning districts.
August 19, 2020
29673
Mr. Bongero: Have they discussed what they would do to deter someone from
bootlegging a facility in and they get caught? What kind of
penalties are in place? Is that something you are aware of or
know about?
Mr. Taormina: You are talking about residential?
Mr. Bongero: Yeah.
Mr. Taormina: Quite frankly, I am not sure of the penalties of the zoning
ordinance and which ones are criminal and otherwise civil. Yes,
it would fall under our zoning ordinance. The penalty section of
the zoning ordinance.
Mr. Bongero: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Bongero. I believe Ms. Smiley has another
question.
Ms. Smiley: If this goes through, how long before this...for example, the
phrase that was put in there about the "grow facilities are limited
to single use building" so they don't contaminate the whole
building for everyone else. When would this go into effect?
Mr. Taormina: What you just referenced was one of the conditions in the
prepared resolution and this was an issue that was discussed at
the study meeting. The question was whether or not we should
be allowing these facilities in multi -tenant buildings. We put
language in the prepared resolution that would restrict them to
single -use buildings only. I think that was recommended by the
Planning Commission. These would go into effect once the
ordinance's second reading... as you know, Council has to hold a
public hearing on this. Regardless of whatever language they
would create at the end, there has to be a first reading on the
ordinance amendment followed by a second reading and a roll
call vote. Once that is done, the ordinance becomes effective
upon publication of the minutes approving the roll call vote. It
could be two months from now. It could be four months from now.
It depends on how quickly Council moves through this process.
As.
Smiley: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions for our staff?
Mr. Ventura: We are using the word single -use and I think we change the term
to single -tenant. A permitted use is anything that is permitted in
an M-1 zoning district. That doesn't restrict it to a single -tenant
August 19, 2020
29674
building. I think our resolution should say single tenant building
occupied by a single tenant so that somebody can't come along
and say well there are 10 units here and they are all the same
use. They are all M-1. That would tighten up the
recommendation to the Council to limit it to individual buildings,
freestanding buildings with a single tenant. Secondly, I am
concerned about your inclusion of M-2 properties. In the
industrial section of town, M-2 properties under our current
zoning, allow outdoor activities which would mean that if
somebody is growing in an M-2 zoning district, they could be
growing outside. There are, according to the industrial real estate
business, far too few M-2 zoned properties that allow outdoor
storage, outdoor uses of any kind, and if we start putting
marijuana in these buildings and these guys start growing
outside, that is going to soak up even more of a scarce product.
Finally, in our study session we talked about what happens to the
marijuana grown by medical growers that their patients don't use
or don't consume. There was some discussion about the fact that
it was then permissible under state law or under some ruling that
it went to recreational use. You could grow with abandon for
medical use and you couldn't see it there, you were all of the
sudden a supplier to recreational marijuana. I wonder if anything
has happened since our study session to clarify that situation.
Mr. Taormina: Yes. All good questions. I will take them all one at a time. The
first suggestion I think is a great one and so we will work on the
language. I am assuming that any resolution approving this
would make that recommendation. Secondly, as far as outdoor
growing, I believe that is prohibited under statute. All of these
activities have to occur within an enclosed building under the
MMMA. I am not aware that the statute allows any outdoor grow
operations. We can certainly verify that. The fact that the M-2 is
included in that is because it is automatic that any permitted use
or waiver -use in an M-1 zoning automatically carries over and is
treated as a permitted use within the M-2 district. Again, I don't
believe outdoor grow operations are allowed under state law.
Lastly, still an unanswered question...I did some digging in the
week between our meetings and interestingly the sales of both
adult recreational and medical marijuana in the last couple
months has gone from about one or two million dollar per week
industry to an almost 12 to 14 million dollar per week industry in
the state of Michigan. This includes both facets. In my
conversations with some people, they don't believe it is
something that it is being allowed, as far as any surplus from
caregiver grow operations going directly to the adult recreational
use market. The thought is that there is just such an increasing
demand, even on the medical side, that it is the reason we are
August 19, 2020
29675
seeing so many of these grow operations. That is not to say that
there isn't some black market. We don't know that answer. We
are not aware of any conduit that the LARA has made available
from one market to the other. We still have some research to do
on that. Hopefully that answers your question. It is somewhat
befuddling because here at the city we are faced with a recent
push or demand for space. We get calls every week about a
possibility of opening a building in the industrial district and even
commercial district. We are seeing several applications come in
for buildings in the industrial district. We had quite a lengthy
discussion on this last week. That hasn't slowed. Much of it is
driven by the sheer demand.
Mr. Ventura: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. It is a good thing to let the folks in our audience know
that we did have a healthy discussion about this last week. One
of the elements that came out of that discussion was, that in our
prepared resolution that Mr. Ventura has helped to further refine
in terms that we have a lot of different users in the industrial
zoned areas, and different types of users in these properties and
we also have some recreational athletic uses that we have started
to allow in these zonings, such as dance studios and
gymnasiums. Our concern is that we don't want to have those
facilities impacted in any way by these caregivers grow facilities
being next door in a shared building where odors and other issues
may bleed over from one tenant to another. I think we have
further refined this proposed ordinance change and I think for the
better to protect the other users in these industrial zoning
buildings. Do we have any other questions for our planning staff
at this point? If not, is there anybody in the audience that wishes
to speak for or against this item? If so, please click raise hand
and if you are connected by telephone you can use *9 to use the
raise hand feature. This is a public hearing and we like to make
sure we give anyone in the audience a chance to speak on these
items. I don't see anyone raising their hand on this item. I will go
back to the commission for one last round if there are any
questions or comments of Mr. Taormina or our planning staff, you
are more than welcome to do so. If not, I will close the public
hearing and a motion would be in order.
On a motion by Smiley, seconded by McCue, and unanimously adopted, it was
#08-37-2020 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
by the City Planning Commission on August 18, 2020, on Petition
2020-07-06-01 submitted by the City Planning Commission,
pursuant to Council Resolution #170-20, and Section 23,01(a) of
August 19, 2020
29676
the Livonia Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to determine
whether or not to amend Sections 2.10 of Article 11, 4.12 of Article
IV, 5.15 of Article V, and 16.02 of Article XVI, to define "caregiver
grow facility' and regulate the zoning districts where medical
marijuana facilities can operate is hereby approved subject to
City Council approval for the following reasons and
recommendations:
1. The proposed language amendments establish reasonable
regulations that will govern where marijuana caregiver grow
operations can operate in the City of Livonia.
2. The proposed amendments impose regulations that are
consistent with state law.
3. The proposed amendments are in the best interests of the
safety and welfare of the community.
4. That City Council consider adding language to Section
16.02 that:
a) restricts Caregiver Grow Facilities to single tenant
freestanding industrial buildings to minimize nuisance
odors caused by these types of business operations.
b) imposes a separation requirement from certain types
of sensitive land uses, including schools, parks, and
indoor recreational uses.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion?
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman,
declared the
motion
is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to
City Council
with an
approving resolution.
ITEM #4 PETITION 2020-07-08-05 BELAGGIO HOMES
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2020-
07-08-05 submitted by Belaggio Homes Inc. requesting approval
of the Master Deed, Bylaws and site plan pursuant to Section
18.62 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended,
to develop a site condominium (Livonia Manor 3) consisting of
four (4) single-family homes on the northern 300.62 feet of the
property at 31670 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of
August 19, 2020
29677
Seven Mile Road between Merriman Road and Osmus Avenue
in the Southeast'/4 of Section 3.
Mr. Taormina: This is a request for the approval of a Master Deed and By -Laws
and Site Plan for a site condominium consisting of four single-
family homes. It is located on the north side of Seven Mile
between Shrewsbury and Canterbury Streets. As you can see
from the map, this property is in the process of being rezoned
from RUF to R-1 (One Family Single Residential). Council gave
first reading to the rezoning on July 20,2020 and the second
reading and roll call, which are the final steps in the rezoning
process, are on hold pending a review of this site plan. R-1
zoning requires a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. For the
lot width, the minimum is 60 feet, and for lot depth, the minimum
is 120 feet. Abutting the site to the east is the Livonia Manor I
and to the west is Livonia Manor 11. Both are site condominiums
built by the same developer. Bridge street, as you can see,
serves both developments ending on each side of the subject
property. The proposed plan would allow for the continuation of
the Bridge Street through the site, forming connections at both
ends and a single horseshoe shaped road linking all three site
condominium developments. The extension of Bridge Street
would have a width of 50 feet which matches the existing right-
of-way. Two lots would be developed on the north side of Bridge
and two on the south side for a total of four. All four lots would
meet the minimum size requirements of the R-1 zoning district.
Existing public water main, sanitary, and storm sewers are
available to serve the new development. The building and use
restrictions outlined in the submitted Master Deed and By -Laws
for Livonia Manor III are consistent with the building and use
restrictions contained in the Master Deed and By -Laws for both
Livonia Manor I and Livonia Manor ll. These include minimum
percentage of brick and other design standards as well as
minimum house sizes and other use restrictions pertaining to the
garages, outbuildings, and other lot improvements. With that, Mr.
Chairman, I can read out the departmental correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Please.
Mr. Taormina: The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated July 20,
2020, 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. The legal
description submitted by the owner appears to be correct, and
should be used for the subject parcel should the request be
approved. The parcel is assigned the address of #31670 Seven
August 19, 2020
29678
Mile Road, although the area of the proposed site condominium
will need to be split from the overall parcel should the project be
approved. The submitted drawing indicates proposed utility
connections, but does not give any specific design data, so we
do not have any knowledge of impacts to the existing systems at
this time. The ownerhas been in contact with this office regarding
the project, and is aware of the Engineering Department
requirements. This Department will conduct a full review of the
project once Engineering drawings are submitted for permitting.
It should be noted that should the project move forward the
proposed construction will be required to meet the Wayne County
Stormwater Ordinance, including detention requirements, and
permits may be needed from the Wayne County Department of
Public Services for any work within the Seven Mile Road right-of-
way."The letter is signed by David W. Lear, P.E., Assistant City
Engineer. The next letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue
Division, dated July 23, 2020, which reads as follows: "This office
has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request
to construct a commercial building on property located at the
above referenced address. We have no objections to this
proposal." The letter is signed by Greg Thomas, Fire Marshal.
The next letter is from the Division of Police, dated July 29, 2020,
which reads as follows: `7 have reviewed the plans in connection
with the petition. 1 have no objections to the proposal. " The letter
is signed by Scott Sczepanski, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The
next letter is from the Inspection Department, dated August 10,
2020, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the
above -referenced petition has been reviewed. This Department
has no objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome
Hanna, Director of Inspection. The next letter is from the
Treasurer's Department, dated July 29, 2020, which reads as
follows: "In accordance with your request, the Treasurer's Office
has reviewed the name and addresses connected with the above
noted petition. At this time there are taxes due, but they are not
delinquent, therefore 1 have no objections to the proposal." The
letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. The next letter is from
the Finance Department, dated July 21, 2020, which reads as
follows: "1 have reviewed the address connected with the above
noted petition. The following amounts are due to the City of
Livonia: Unpaid water and sewer charges (7/21/20): $478.87".
The letter is signed by Connie Kumpula, Chief Accountant. The
last letter is from the Assessing Department, dated July 21, 2020,
which reads as follows: "The proposed site plans for Livonia
Manor 3 Condominiums occupy a portion of Parcel number 012-
99 - 0008 -000 with address 31670 Seven Mile Road. This parcel
currently has a residential home on it and a rear structure that
falls within the boundaries of the newly proposed development
August 19, 2020
29679
according to the aerial map. A Lot Split should be initiated in order
to split off the northerly 300.62 feet of the parcel". The letter is
signed by Kathie Siterlet That is the extent of the
correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions of the Planning Director?
Ms. Smiley: Who owns the unpaid water bill? Who does that belong to?
Mr. Taormina: I am going to defer that question to the petitioner.
Ms. Smiley: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, we will get an answer to that in a few moments. Any other
questions for our planning staff? If there are no other questions
for the planning staff, the petitioner is in the audience I believe.
We will welcome Mr. Soave again.
(Inaudible)
Mr. Wilshaw: Mr. Soave, your having some audio issues. We hear you but you
are quite muffled.
Mr. Soave: (Muffled) Is that any better?
Mr. Wilshaw: No, it is not. We are hearing some weird echoes and feedback.
Mr. Soave: (Muffled) Is that any better?
Mr. Wilshaw: You may want to try reconnecting your audio.
Mr. Soave: How about now?
Mr. Wilshaw: A little better, but...
(Muffled)
Mr. Soave: How about now?
Mr. Wilshaw: Still pretty bad.
Mr. Soave: (Muffled) I don't know what to tell you (inaudible)
Mr. Wilshaw: You may want to
try
phoning into the
meeting if you can't get your
audio sorted out
so
that we can hear
you clearly.
Mr. Soave: (Muffled) (Inaudible)
August 19, 2020
29680
Mr. Wilshaw: It is going to be difficult to proceed if we can't have a
conversation. We will give Mr. Soave a minute to work on his
audio issues. Are there any questions from the commission at
this point for Mr. Taormina? Alright, Mr. Soave has been muted
and I believe he is going to try and dial in. That way we can hear
him clearly.
Mr. Taormina: Mr. Chairman, I have sent a message to Mr. Soave and hopefully
he will reconnect.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, great.
Mr. Taormina: I apologize.
Mr. Wilshaw: It's okay. We are trying to make this technology work. Has Mr.
Soave been reconnected at this point? I am not sure if I see him
or not. Let me try this connection here.
Mr. Soave: Can you guys hear me okay?
Mr. Wilshaw: We hear you now.
Mr. Soave: Okay. Where did we leave off during this technical difficulty?
Mr. Wilshaw: Your loud and clear now, so you may as well just start over.
Mr. Soave: Oh, unpaid water bills. What was the date of that
correspondence? That was paid last week and that was no fault
of our own. That was the tenant. We made a phone call and he
promptly paid that last week. Can you identify the date of that
correspondence? With the unpaid water and sewer for that
property?
Mr. Taormina: July 21, 2020
Mr. Soave: Yeah, so that has since been paid.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you for letting us know that. Anything else you would like
to tell us about your site plan for these four homes?
Mr. Soave: The plain is pretty straight forward. Single-family R-1 lots with... )
am not sure if Mark showed any of the elevations of homes that
are proposed to put on there. They are similar homes that we
have built in the past two years in the city and very similar size,
elevation, and brick requirements as Livonia Manor I and Livonia
Manor II, which we also built homes in there as well.
August 19, 2020
29681
Mr. Wilshaw: As you speak, he is showing those.
Mr. Soave: Okay, great. I mean it is only our units so it should be a quick
turnaround from the inception of the development to the
completion. We are anticipating a 12-month turnaround time for
all four units.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, Mr. Soave, during our study session for the rezoning we
heard some questions from the audience at that time and some
of those folks are with us again this evening. We will give them
another chance to speak, but some of their questions were
around the fencing and how that is going to be handled, and
mailboxes, and other connections to the properties either to the
east or west. Can you speak to that a little bit?
Mr. Soave: Well, the connection will be a thoroughfare. A public road.
Anyone can access it from Livonia Manor I or Livonia Manor II
which is outside of our control. Mailboxes... there are four houses
there ... the best solution... you can put a cluster box with two
boxes on one side of the street and that resolves any issues
there. Mailbox issues usually happen at the back end not the
front end. I am not concerned about four mailboxes.
Fencing... some of the fencing there needs to be replaced and we
will replace that along the development with black chain link fence
once we get started and completed with the homes.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, and I think one of the other questions that some of the
residents had was about the association. This is going to be a
separate association from either Livonia Manor I or Livonia Manor
II. correct?
Mr. Soave: That is absolutely correct. It will be a freestanding sub -division
with virtually no common areas. There should be no adverse
effect or impact financially upon the existing neighbors and
communities. Actually, about a week ago we had one of the
homeowners... I think it was Livonia Manor I... a person came into
the office and was very nervous. The trees were in the process
of falling on his home. So, we sent a representative over there to
assess the situation and let him know that those trees will be
coming down shortly. I know that some people want to see the
trees remain and other neighbors adjacent are worried about
some old trees there being removed, so once this development
gets started we can start clearing out some of the trees in the
affected areas.
August 19, 2020
29682
Or. Wilshaw: Very
good. Thank you.
Mr.
Soave. Do we have any questions
from
the commission for
Mr.
Soave?
Mr. Bongero: This is going to have its own association?
Mr. Soave: That is correct.
Mr. Bongero: So, they will have fees or whatever. Yearly fees that pay for snow
removal and things like that?
Mr. Soave: Correct. It is a public road so that will be taken care of through
their taxes. The dues will be very nominal as there are not too
many shared areas in this four -unit development. To answer your
question, yes.
Mr. Bongero: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions for our petitioner? I don't' see any questions
for our petitioner at this time. Is there anybody in the audience
that wishes to speak for or against this item? If you would like to,
please click raise hand in the Zoom application or if you are
connected by phone dial *9. We do have our first raised hand.
This is going to be a phoned in caller with the phone number
ending in 4838. Please dial *6 to unmute. You can introduce
yourself.
David Mobus, 19142 Shrewsbury, Livonia, MI, my backyard will back up to the
yard of one of (inaudible)...
Mr. Wilshaw: Mr....you're on mute there. There you go.
Mr. Mobus: There we go. We will back up to one of the new houses on the
SOUL h side. My first question is if this site plan is passed, will this
still go before City Council for final approval?
Mr. Wilshaw: Yes. We are a recommending body. Any decision we make is
simply a recommendation to Council. They make the ultimate
decision.
Mr. Mobus: Okay. Because everybody we have discussed and talked within
Livonia Manor I and II that this affects. We are totally against this.
There is multiple reasons. Both sub -divisions have young
children playing. We have a lot of young kids. Putting a through
street in here is going to cause nothing but problems with people
speeding through and using it as a turnaround. I know you guys
can't control that, but in a way you can by not passing this.
Second, we have a ton of wildlife in the area that is going to be
August 19, 2020
29683
torn out. I had seven deer back there yesterday. Its kind
of ... nobody is listening to residents. We had a petition that went
through to stop this. Nobody listened to us. We are getting lip
service, but we aren't getting what the residents, the taxpayers,
are asking for. I understand that he wants to build four homes,
but what are four homes when he is already building how many
hundreds throughout the rest of the city. It is not going to be good
rapport with the neighbors. We had one couple that just moved
in on Bridge Street because it was a dead-end street. It was
quiet. Now they are finding out that it isn't going to be. It is just
that nobody is listening to the residents.
Mr. Wilshaw: We hear you Mr. Mobus and I do believe Mr. Taormina can clarify
that your petition that the community filed has been received.
That will be a valid protest petition for the City Council to make
their decision. Is that correct Mr. Taormina?
Mr. Taormina: That is correct.
Mr. Mobus: Okay. I do have a couple other questions. If this does go through,
with the retention basin we have on Livonia Manor 11, are they
going to be tied into retention basis for storm drains or are they
going to have their own?
Mr. Wilshaw: We will ask the petitioner and get you an answer on that. That is
a good question.
Mr. Mobus: Second, as far as fencing, precedent has already been set with
the home on the northeast corner of Shrewsbury St. that the
building paid for his privacy fence because they ended up building
the last home on Shrewsbury that they weren't supposed to build
initially. He got them to pay for a privacy fence for that reason.
So, precedent has already been set with that as far as the
fencing.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay.
Mr. Mobus: With our by-laws for this, for us, for Livonia Manor II, if the fence
stays the way it is the fencing is allowed. If it is torn out and
something new is put in chain link fence is not allowed according
to our by-laws.
Mr. Wilshaw: Right. I understand that each of the associations has a different
set of rules in regard to fencing.
Mr. Mobus: As far as the
mailboxes go, it
was also
discussed about
putting
them over by
ours in Livonia
Manor II.
If they are going
to put
August 19, 2020
29684
them in front of their homes and have the boxes, fine, as long as
they are paying for it. This whole thing is just kind of disturbing
to the neighborhood because nobody wants this.
Mr. Wilshaw: Right. I appreciate your questions. As far as the mailboxes go,
we did ask about that and those will remain on the property of
that development. Most likely because it is only four homes and
they won't have a large cluster box, but they will have either single
mailboxes for those four homes or double mailboxes on the one
side of the street.
Mr. Mobus: I have one last thing. We were told at the City Council meeting
that this was planned for Bridge Street to connect 15 years ago
when this was first in inception. I don't understand how it could
have been a plan 15 years ago when neither the city nor the
builder, any builder, owned that land that they want to go through
now. I don't understand how it could have been planned a that
point. If that is the leg they are standing on, there isn't much to
stand on based on not owning the property. I understand that it
has been sold since then but you retro back to 15 years when
they didn't own the property or anybody owned the property that
is involved. Using that as a standard to say yeah, we are going
to go through, and it was planned 15 years ago.
Mr. Wilshaw: I understand your point. I can't speak for whoever said whatever
they said.
Mr. Mobus: That was the President and the Vice -President of your City
Council. I was told that because I didn't do my due diligence
when we had our home built and looking into it I didn't do my due
diligence so it was my fault. That is what I was told by the
President.
Mr. Wilshaw: I'll leave that conversation between you and them.
Mr. Mobus: I figured you would.
Mr. Wilshaw: I am not going to speak for anyone else. I do appreciate your
questions and comments, Mr. Mobus. We will try to get you an
answer on that retention basin question you asked.
Mr. Mobus: If this does go through tonight, when would the soonest for the
City Council?
Mr, Wilshaw: If this is
approved, it
will have
to
go to City Council after our
minutes
are approved
which will
be
after our next regular meeting
August 19, 2020
29685
and
it
can then be placed
on their agenda. Mr. Taormina can give
you
a
better answer, but
it is usually several weeks before...
Mr. MobUS: Okay, so probably two to three weeks?
Mr. Wilshaw: Right. I think that is correct.
Mr. Mobus: Okay, well I appreciate your time.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Mobus, for dialing in tonight and you can continue
to stay on if you would like and we will see if anyone else in the
audience is wishing to speak for or against this item. Please click
raise hand if that is the case. We do have one other person. Mrs.
Johnson. You can unmute yourself and welcome to our meeting.
Julia Johnson, Livonia Manor II, can everyone hear me?
Mr. Wilshaw: We hear you just fine.
Ms. Johnson: Thank you for hosting the meeting first of all. I am also a resident
in Livonia Manor II. 1 just wanted to add a couple other thoughts.
I am also against this movement. Several of the neighbors had
issues, warranty issues, with their houses when they moved in
that were left unaddressed by the builders, which was pretty
concerning. I don't know if the city feels like it is in the city's best
interest to continue encouraging or perpetuating this builders I
guess expansion and I guess a question that kind of comes up in
my mind with that is if there is any damage to any of the houses
or the streets or the yards during construction, who is accountable
for that?
Mr. Wilshaw: The accountability is handled through bonds that the builder has
to place when they start the project. There are a number of
performance bonds for sewers, roads, and other items. If there
is damage, those are usually handled out of those by the
Inspection and Engineering departments.
Ms. Johnson: Okay, so it is not handled by Belaggio?
Mr. Wilshaw: The builder, Belaggio, would have to post those bonds with the
city and then if there is any reason or any claims made against
those bonds, those are done that way. If there is nothing, then
those bonds are released at the end of the project.
Ms. Johnson: Okay.
I guess
I am just bringing that up
because there was a
signed
contract
when we bought these houses
that they would be
back in
a year
to address any concerns.
That never happened
August 19, 2020
29686
for several of us. I guess, what is preventing them from doing
that again.
Mr. Wilshaw: I can relate to that. I live in a development thA..l built my own
house and it is very common to see issues arise with between
homeowners and developers toward the ends of projects. It is a
common issue. I feel for you on that one. We can talk to the
developer or the petitioner when we get him back on the line here
and ask him how he is going to provide some of those
guarantees.
Ms. Johnson: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Ms. Johnson. Feel free to stay on and listen if you
would like. Is there anyone else in our audience wishing to speak
for or against this item? If so, please click raise hand. I don't see
anyone else. I am going to go back to Mr. Soave and give him
an opportunity to unmute himself. You heard the question
regarding the retention basins and how you are going to handle
storm water and then also insure there is no damage to the
existing properties to the east or west.
Mr. Soave: The storm water will be handled onsite will not be connecting to
the underground detentions in Livonia Manor II, Mr. Chairman,
you had it perfectly correct. The Engineering Department does
require significant amounts of money for performance bonds
before anything starts on the project. Nothing is returned until
they do a final inspection of the completion. So, they inspect it
prior to and then they do a final inspection afterwards.
Mr. Wilshaw: Then in regard
to the warranty on the
home.
Are you offering a
warranty to the
homeowners and how
do you
handle that?
Mr. Soave: Of course. I think there were two or three builders in both of those
communities. You can't throw every builder into the same pot
and say that none of them are negligent in fulfilling any of their
obligations. We have an absolutely stellar reputation with our
homebuyers. Granted, you can't have 100%. There are always
a few...I am not going to say bad apples, but sometimes in this
business you can't please everybody. Anyone who is in business
for themselves understands that wholeheartedly. We have a very
good reputation. We can have a plethora of homeowners come
forward to attest to that reputation if anyone should call upon that.
Or.
Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you.
August 19, 2020
29687
Mr. Soave: There is a standard 12-month warranty to answer your question
in brief.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay. Thank you. Do we have any additional questions for our
petitioner from the commission? I don't see any other questions.
Mr. Soave, we will give you the last word. Is there anything else
you would like to say before we make our decision?
Or. Soave: Nothing more. I appreciate your time and the commission's time
this evening.
Or. Wilshaw: Thank you for coming and for sorting out those audio issues we
had at the beginning of this item. If there is no other questions, I
will go to the commission and look for a motion.
Or. Caramagno: I have a question for Mr. Soave. Was there ever a time where
you considered selling this property to the neighborhood?
Mr. Soave: No. The question was never brought up. We purchased this
property, and anyone can verify this with the city, in October
2019. Your realtor can search the history of how long this
property was on the market prior to us acquiring it. It was
available to everyone else, just like it was available to us. There
is no underhanded or kind of clandestine to purchase this
property. It was on the market for quite some time until we
stumbled upon it for sale.
Mr. Caramagno: So, anyone could have bought this land and procured it as
forested land and had it just the way it sits today, but that is not
the case. You bought the land.
Mr. Soave: Correct.
Anyone
can
verify
that to see when
the property was
listed for
sale and
then
when
it eventually was
sold.
Mr. Caramagno: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Caramagno. Any other questions? Again, I see
no other questions. A motion would be in order then.
On a motion by McCue, seconded by Smiley, and unanimously adopted, it was
#08-38-2020 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to City Council that Petition 2020-07-08-05
submitted by Belaggio Homes Inc. requesting approval of the
Master Deed, Bylaws and site plan pursuant to Section 18.62 of
the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, to
develop a site condominium (Livonia Manor 3) consisting of four
August 19, 2020
29688
(4) single-family homes on the northern 300.62 feet of the
property at 31670 Seven Mile Road, located on the north side of
Seven Mile Road between Merriman Road and Osmus Avenue
in the Southeast '/4 of Section 3, be approved subject to the
following conditions:
1. That the Site an identified as Sheet 1 dated July 20, 2020,
prepared by Arpee/Donnan, Inc., is hereby approved and
shall be adhered to.
2. That the condominium Master Deed and Bylaws comply with
the requirements of the Subdivision Control Ordinance, Title
16, Chapter 16.04-16.40 of the Livonia Code of Ordinance,
and Article XX, Section 20.01-20.06 of Zoning Ordinance
#543.
3. That the brick used in the construction of each condominium
unit shall be full face four -inch (4") brick.
4. In the event of a conflict between the provisions set forth in
the Master Deed and bylaws, and the requirements set forth
in the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance No. 543, as
amended, the Zoning Ordinance requirements shall prevail
and petitioner shall comply with the Zoning Ordinance
requirements.
5. That the petitioner shall include language in the Master
Deed and bylaws or a separate recordable instrument
wherein the condominium association shall reimburse the
City of Livonia for any maintenance or repair costs incurred
for the storm water detention/retention and outlet facilities,
and giving the City of Livonia the right to impose liens on
each lot owner's property pro rata and place said charges
on their real estate tax bills in the event said charges are not
paid by the condominium association (or each lot owner)
within thirty (30) days of billing for the City of Livonia.
6. That all required cash deposits, certified checks, irrevocable
bank letters of credit and/or surety bonds which shall be
established by the City Engineer pursuant to Article XVIII of
Ordinance No. 543, Section 18,66 of the ordinance, shall be
deposited with the City prior to the issuance of engineering
permits for this site condominium development; and
7. 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
August 19, 2020
29689
Council, and unless a building permit is obtained, this
approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said
period.
Mr. Wllshaw: Is there any discussion?
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go onto City Council with an approving resolution.
ITEM #5 PETITION 2019-04-02-05 PIANO SHOE
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2019-
04-02-05 submitted by PianoShoe Properties L.L.C. requesting a
one-year extension of all plans in connection with a proposal to
utilize a Micro Brewer license, including redeveloping the site,
expanding the parking lot and modifying the exterior fagade of the
existing building, in connection with the operation of a brew pub
at 27717 and 27719 Seven Mile Road, located on the south side
of Seven Mile Road between Inkster Road and Harrison Avenue
in the Northeast % of Section 12
Mr. Taormina: This is an extension that involves a site plan and waiver -use that
was approved last year for PianoShoe Brewery. As you can see
from the zoning map, the property is located at the southeast
corner or Deering and Seven Mile. The small building on the
property was scheduled to be completely renovated into a brew
pub. The operation and site plan included a new parking lot and
an outdoor biergarten. We spent considerable time reviewing this
petition. It was approved by the Planning Commission, as well
as Council. The petitioner, in a letter, explains that due to the
pandemic operations were halted from early March 2020 to just
recently. This extension will allow them the time to get qualified
contractors and obtain building permits. There are no major
changes or changes affecting the plans. It is strictly an extension
of what was previously approved.
Or,
Wilshaw: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Taormina: The first letter is from the Inspection Department, dated August
10, 2020, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the
above referenced Petition has been reviewed. This Department
has no objections to this Petition." The next letter is from the
Treasurer's Department, dated July 9, 2020, which reads as
follows: V have reviewed the address connected with the above
noted petition. As there are no outstanding amounts receivable
(general or water and sewer), 1 have no objections to the
August 19, 2020
29690
proposal."The letter is signed by Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. The
next letter is from the Finance Department, dated July 81 2020,
which reads as follows: "1 have reviewed the address connected
with the above noted petition. As there are no outstanding
amounts receivable (general or water and sewer), I have no
objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Connie
Kumpula, Chief Accountant. That is the extent of the
correspondence.
Mr. Wilshaw: Are there any questions for the planning department? If not, Mr.
Schumacher I believe is in the audience this evening. He is one
of the petitioners.
Andrew Schumacher, I have nothing more to add other than the clause for granting
Coppersmith Brewing LLC to be added for utilizing that
microbrew license for Michigan License Liquor Control
Commission to grease the skids on getting allocated for this
address.
Mr. Wilshaw: Yes, we do have in our...the language of our approving resolution
we do have both property names listed so that will be part of that,
assuming that it goes forward.
Mr. Schumacher: Great. Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank
you for reminding us
of
that
just in case. Any questions
for our
petitioner that is with
us
this
evening?
Mr. Bongero: When do you anticipate getting building permits?
Mr. Schumacher: We are approximately three to four weeks out from getting
permits.
Mr. Bongero: Okay. I think you were anticipating being done by Spring of next
year. Summer.
Mr. Schumacher: Yes. That is our anticipated timeline.
Mr. Bongero: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Bongero.
Any other questions for our petitioner?
Is there anybody in
the
audience that wishes to speak
for or
against this petition?
Please use the raise hand feature.
I don't
see any hands going
up.
Mr. Schumacher, I think we have
heard
what we need to for
this
item. Is there anything else you
would
like to add before we
make
our decision?
August 19, 2020
29691
Mr. Schumacher: Nothing at this time. Thank you for your time.
Mr. Wilshaw: If there are no other questions or comments, a motion would be
in order.
On a motion by Bongero, seconded by Ventura, and unanimously adopted, it was
#08-39-2020 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2019-04-02-05
submitted by PianoShoe Properties L.L.C. requesting a one-year
extension of all plans in connection with a proposal to utilize a
Micro Brewer license, including redeveloping the site, expanding
the parking lot and modifying the exterior fagade of the existing
building, in connection with the operation of a brew pub at 27717
and 27719 Seven Mile Road, located on the south side of Seven
Mile Road between Inkster Road and Harrison Avenue in the
Northeast '% of Section 12, be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1. That the request for aone-year extension of waiver use
approval by PianoShoe Properties, L.L.C./Coppersmith
Brewery L.LC., in a letter dated July 1, 2020, is hereby
approved.
2. That all conditions imposed by Council Resolution #243-19
in connection with Petition 2019-04-02-05, which permitted
the utilization of a Micro Brewer license in connection with
the operation of a brew pub, including redeveloping the site,
expanding the parking lot and modifying the exterior fagade
of the existing building at 27717 and 27719 Seven Mile
Road, shall remain in effect to the extent that they are not in
conflict with the foregoing condition, and
3. That all conditions imposed by Council Resolution #244-19
in connection with Petition 2019-04-02-05, which waived the
separation requirement as set forth in Sections 10.030)(2)
and 19.06(1), shall remain in effect to the extent that they
are not in conflict with the foregoing conditions.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion?
Or. Schumacher: I would like to confirm that it is Coppersmith Brewing and not
Coopersmith Brewing.
Or, Bongero: Oh, I am sorry. Yeah. I can read.
Or. Schumacher: That's okay. Coopersmith is in Colorado.
August 19, 2020
29692
Mr, Bongero: Sorry about that.
Mr. Wilshaw: We have Coppersmith. Very good. English is not always our
good suit in the commission. Any other questions or comments
before we take a roll call on this item?
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution.
ITEM #5 PETITION 2019-05-02-08 MISSION POINT
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2019-
05-02-08 submitted by Livonia Healthcare Real Estate, L.L.C.
requesting a one-year extension of all plans in connection with a
proposal to demolish the existing nursing home (St. Jude), and
construct a new building in its place for the purpose of operating
a nursing and physical rehabilitation facility (Mission Point
Livonia) at 34350 Ann Arbor Trail, located on the north side of
Ann Arbor Trail between Joy Road and Stark Road in the
Southeast /4 of Section 33
Mr. Taormina: This is a request for a one-year extension involving the
redevelopment of the former St. Jude Nursing home located on
Ann Arbor Trail. Council granted the approval of the waiver -use
on August 26, 2019. The development replaces the old building
with a two-story building that is about 44,000 square feet in size
and with same number of licensed beds in the facility-64. The
petitioner indicates in a letter to the Planning Commission that
due to COVID-19, the project has been delayed. They are still
eager to move forward with the project, with a goal of starting
construction in the Spring of 2021. 1 will point out that a significant
issue that remains unresolved is the payment of late taxes and
fees. If you would allow me, I will read the correspondence on
these issues.
Mr. Wilshaw: Sure
Mr. Taormina: The first item is from the Treasurer's Department, dated July 20,
2020, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request,
the Treasurer's Office has reviewed the address and names
connected with the above noted petition. At this time there are no
delinquent Personal Property Taxes due. However, there are
delinquent Real Property Taxes due to the Wayne County
Treasurer on the above -mentioned property associated with St.
Jude Nursing Center, Inc., currently operating at 34350 Ann
Arbor Trail. It is my understanding that these taxes will be paid to
August 19, 2020
29693
the Wayne County Treasurer through an agreement reached
through the bankruptcy process with St. Jude Nursing Center,
Inc. 1 would like to have processes put in place to ensure that
these, as well as the total taxes for 2019 are paid timely. NEW —
The REAL PROPERTY Taxes for 2020 are due, and the taxes
for 2019 are still NOT PAID; as well as the many years that are
part of the several bankruptcy filings. Total amount due for real
property taxes is $403,598.39 (see attached). Therefore, as the
2019 property taxes were not paid timely (and prior to COVID) l
am not in favor of extending anything." The letter is signed by
Lynda Scheel, Treasurer. The next letter is from the Finance
Department, dated July 21, 2020, which reads as follows: " I have
reviewed the address connected with the above noted petition.
The following amounts are due to the City of Livonia: Unpaid
water and sewer charges (7/21/20): $3,794.75" The letter is
signed by Connie Kumpula, Chief Accountant. I will point out that
Council Resolution #294-19 dated August 26, 2019 approving the
subject development does require that all taxes due and payable
regarding the subject real and personal property shall be paid in
full prior to the issuance of any building or demolition permit in
connection with the referenced waiver -use approval. With that, I
am happy to answer any questions.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Are there any questions for our planning staff?
Ms. Smiley: Am I understanding this is about $408,000 that they are due
before they can start building?
Mr. Taormina: That is correct.
Ms. Smiley: I would definitely call that significant. If they go into bankruptcy,
do they not have to pay those?
Mr. Taormina: I am going to let the petitioner explain what is happening.
Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Okay, we
will
reserve that
question for
the petitioner. Any other
questions
for
our planning
staff before we go to the petitioner?
Mr. Ventura: Following up on Ms. Smiley's question, if we extend this for the
petitioner tonight and he does go into bankruptcy and were to sell
the property, would the approval that we grant tonight transfer?
Mr. Taormina: I would have to go back and take a look at the language of the
resolution if there was any limitation on the transfer of the waiver
to other users. Normally, it is transferable, but there are times
August 19, 2020
29694
when the City Council imposes a limit on that transfer and
requires that it go through their approval first before there is a new
operator of the waiver. I don't know, Mr. Ventura, I apologize.
Mr. Ventura: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: an you. Any other questions for our planning staff?
Mr. Bongero: I don't know if it matters or not, but how long have the taxes been
owed to get to that amount?
Mr. Taormina: I can only go by the Treasurer's letter and she says many years
and it has been a part of many bankruptcy filings. Let me see, it
would appear from the attachment to her letter that it goes as far
back as 2010.
Mr. Bongero: So,
they
basically
just don't
pay
taxes. Why
do we hear cases
like
this?
I am not
trying to
be a
wise guy; I am
just saying...
Mr. Taormina: Why do we hear cases like this? It is to further the development.
This is clearly a piece of property that we want to see redeveloped
and I think if you go back, and Mr. Mali is going to tell us, that
there was an agreement in place and have every intention of
paying these taxes. Certainly, the development can't happen
until such time as that takes place. What the holdup has been,
quite frankly I couldn't tell you.
Mr. Bongero: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Any other questions of our planning staff before we go to the
petitioner? If there are no more questions, we have Mr. Mali and
Mr. Van Ryn here this evening. I am going to allow both to
unmute themselves if they wish.
Roger Mali, Livonia Healthcare Real Estate, can everyone hear me?
Mr. Wilshaw: We hear you.
Mr. Mali: Before we get into the delay issues on the project, just to go back
to the tax issues. As we remember, we dealt with this extensively
and the questions came up with bankruptcy. This property is in
bankruptcy right now. That is how the taxes are being paid. We
as the petitioner are buying the property, the land, and are paying
the $403,000 to the City of Livonia as part of this development
and part of the purchase price. So, I think .... just to refresh, we
hashed this issue out before a year ago when we went through
the process to get the approval with the Commission and again
August 191 2020
29695
with City Council. So, the former St. Jude Nursing Center was in
bankruptcy or is still in bankruptcy with an approved bankruptcy
pIan, The facility is now closed completely. The residents are
moved out of there and the agreement with the... as part of the
bankruptcy plan and the agreement with the city is for Livonia
Healthcare Real Estate as the petitioner to pay the delinquent
property taxes, the $403,000 in connection with this
development. I guess as a preliminary matter because I know,.I I
think he jumped off with one of the other commissioners had
asked ya know why do we do this and I think that was part of it.
A part of a larger bankruptcy plan to clean up the taxes and also
to redevelop this property and bring a first class... Class A product
and a new design model to this particular site. That issue is not
new with this extension and we did deal with that extensively last
year when we got the approval. The other part is, in the approval
is a condition with the resolution that specifies that no building or
demolition permit can be granted until such time that the taxes
are being paid ... just as a preliminary matter. As a second matter,
I know the letter about the delinquent water bill of $3,794...I know
you will need confirmation, but I can confirm ... I think it was a
condition even put on the agenda, so that has been paid. The
$3,794 we did pay that, and that amount was taken care of. That
is just the background on the taxes, the bankruptcy, and maybe
that answers the question of what happens if it is in bankruptcy.
Is already is and we are buying it out of the bankruptcy. As far as
the delays, it is really all about the COVID and the pandemic. We
have been working with the development's team, the lender, the
architect, the engineer. I think you all have seen the simple plans.
We have put a lot of work into the project. As of the middle of
February, it has been essentially pencils down in the skilled
nursing business. There has really been no work going on,
certainly since the end of February and then the executive orders
came in so we have really lost three or four months and it is just
now in July that we have been able to pick up this project. We
are back fully engaged. I think it is just a circumstance of the
industry and the business. Because of the toll that COVID has
had on skilled nursing and on nursing homes, there hasn't been
resources either from the facility or from the lenders, construction,
lenders, everything to focus on this, but we are back. I think
Jason is on the phone too, so of course he can answer any of the
engineering questions. We do have a plan to continue with this
development. We have a lot of positive feedback, positive
momentum with the builders and with the architect and with the
planners. We are moving forward, and we like the project and
hopefully that answers the questions. I would be happy to answer
anything else.
August 19, 2020
29696
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Mali. Mr. Van Ryn is also on. If you would like to
say anything you are more than welcome to.
Jason Van Ryn, Nederveld Engineers, thank you for hearing us this evening. I am
just here to answer questions specifically about the site plan that
you have and that you need a refresher on. I am happy to go
over that with you. Thanks.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you. Any questions for our petitioner?
Mr. Ventura: How large is the site?
Mr. Van Ryn: So, the site area is 1.59 acres.
Mr. Ventura: You're going to demolish the building this year, so you basically
paying the taxes plus something else to acquire this. Is that
correct?
Mr. Mali: Correct, yes.
Mr. Ventura: Do the delinquent taxes appear on the title work? You don't own
this property now, right?
Mr. Mali: No, we do not own this property right now. The taxes definitely
appear on the title work. They are a lien on the property. As well,
the bankruptcy plan which also encumbers the property ... I don't
know if demand is the right word, but obligates that the taxes are
being paid as part of the sale.
Mr. Ventura: You can't get clear title until you pay the taxes?
Mr. Malki; Correct.
Mr. Ventura: Thank you.
Mr. Wilshaw: Thank you, Mr. Ventura. Any other questions for our petitioners?
There is no one else in audience, so there is no one to go to there.
If there are no other questions of our petitioner, then I will look for
a motion.
On a motion by Long, seconded by McCue, and unanimously adopted, it was
#0840-2020 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 2019-05-02-08
submitted by Livonia Healthcare Real Estate, L.L.C. requesting a
one-year extension of all plans in connection with a proposal to
demolish the existing nursing home (St. Jude), and construct a
August 197 2020
29697
new building in its place for the purpose of operating a nursing
and physical rehabilitation facility (Mission Point Livonia) at
34350 Ann Arbor Trail, located on the north side of Ann Arbor
Trail between Joy Road and Stark Road in the Southeast '/4 of
Section 33, be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. That the request for a one-year extension of the waiver use
approval by Jason Van Ryn, Project Engineer, Nederveld,
Inc., on behalf of Livonia Healthcare Real Estate, L.L.C., in
a letter dated July 8, 2020, is hereby approved.
2. That all conditions imposed by Council Resolution #294-19
in connection with Petition 2019-05-02-08 shall remain in
effect to the extent that they are not in conflict with the
foregoing condition, and
3. That all delinquent water and sewer charges and taxes due
and payable regarding the subject real and personal
property shall be paid in full prior to issuance of any building
or demolition permit in connection with the referenced
waiver use approval.
Mr. Wilshaw: Is there any discussion?
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution.
ITEM #6 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,1571h Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting
Mr. Caramagno, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of
the Minutes of the 1,157" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting
held on July 14, 2020.
On a motion by Long, seconded by McCue ,and unanimously adopted, it was
#0841-2020 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 1,157th Public Hearings and
Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on July 14,
2020, are hereby approved.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Long, McCue, Smiley, Bongero, Ventura,
Caramagno, Wilshaw
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
August 19, 2020
29698
ABSTAIN: None
Mr. Wilshaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 1,158th Public
Hearings and Regular Meeting held on August 18, 2020, was adjourned at 9:04
p. m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
I ,((1�W
Sam Caramagno, Secretary
ATTEST:
Ian Wilshaw, Chairman