Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2014-10-07MINUTES OF THE 1,062"D REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, October 7, 2014, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 1,062nd Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Lee Morrow, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Scott Bahr R. Lee Morrow Carol A. Smiley Gerald Taylor Members absent: Kathleen McIntyre, Ian Wilshaw Mr. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, was also present. Chairman Morrow informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in tum, will hold its own public hearing and make the final determination as to whether a pefifion is approved or denied. The Planning Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or vacating petition. The Commission's recommendation is forwarded to the City Council for the final delenninafion 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 wnting, 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 fling. The staff has furnished the Commission with both approving and denying resolutions, which the Commission may, or may not, use depending on the outcome of the proceedings tonight. ITEM#1 PETITION 2014-09-08-11 AUTUMNWOOD Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 2014-09- 08-11 submitted by Aulumnwood of Livonia requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to construct additions to the nursing home at 14900 Middlebelt Road, located on the east side of Middlebell Road between Lyndon Avenue and Five Mile Road in the Northwest 114 of Section 24. October 7, 2014 26577 Mr. Taormina: This is a request to construct additions to an existing nursing home, Aulumnwood of Livonia, which is on Middlebell Road just south of Jamison Avenue. The zoning map shows the location of the property in relationship to other surrounding properties and zoning. The site is zoned OS, Office Services. The property is roughly 2.85 acres in area. It includes 330 feel of frontage on Middlebell Road and about 475 feel of frontage along Jamison. The existing facility is two stories in height. It contains roughly 42,000 square feet of floor space and has 142 beds altogether. Located immediately to the south of the properly is the American Montessori Academy that is zoned RIF. Also to the south are the Trinity Park Apartments. To the east is Sl. Genevieve Catholic Churoh. To the north across Jamison Avenue are single family homes. West across Middlebell Road are homes as well. This facility was constructed originally in 1967. The aerial photograph shows where the building is placed on the property. It is more or less centrally located on the site. The request this evening involves the construction of two relatively small additions to the south portion of the facility. I will be referring to these as the southeast addition, which is the one to the right, and then the south addition, which is the one located more in the middle of site between those two wings. You can see how the building is cross shaped. The first addition in the southeast corner is actually an extension of that wing that extends southward. This addition would be two stories in height. It would add four two-bedroom units to the upper level and four two-bedroom units to the lower level. Again, mostly all of the patient rooms within the current facility are two and three bedrooms. There is a lot of interior work being done within the facility. They will be converting all of the two and three bedroom units on the lower level to one bedroom units with the exception of four two-bedroom units, a little bit larger in size, that are being added to the southeast addition. On the upper level, they'll be adding another four two-bedroom units. Altogether, they have 142 beds. When they are done with all of the conversion work within the existing facility and with the addition to the southeast corner, it will still result in a net reduction in the total number of beds. They will go from 142 beds down to 130. They are within their density limitations as prescribed in the OS district regulations. The south addition is about 2,800 square feel in total space and is a single story addition that would house the building's new physical and occupational therapy services. Once the two additions are completed, that will increase the total floor area of the facility to about 49,520 square feet and that includes both levels. Another aspect of the proposal is, with the one addition there is a detached garage that interferes with the southeast addition. So they are going to relocate that structure to the southeast comer of the property. The new October 7, 2014 26578 storage garage would be constructed in the corner of the properly in an area that is currently being used for parking and is part of their asphalt parking lot. Additional landscaping is going to be added along both the south side and east side of the properly to improve some of the screening along the areas where the additions are being constructed. I'll let the architect go over the details with respect to the building materials, but it primarily consists of brick. There are some E.I.F.S. panels that would be included in the construction. Most of the design includes peaked roofs, and it is intended to match the exterior appearance of the existing building. Parking for the facility is adequate. It does meet the ordinance, and as I mentioned, they are going to be doing additional landscaping. With that Mr. Chairman, I can read out the correspondence. Mr. Morrow: If you would do that please Mr. Taormina: There are four items of correspondence. The first item is from the Engineering Division, dated September 16, 2014, which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above -referenced planning petition. The existing parcel is assigned an address of 14900 Middlebelt Road, which should be used for any future correspondence regarding the proposed project. The legal description provided with the petition appears to be correct and is acceptable to this department. The petitioner does not indicate any new utilities connections for the proposed additions on the submitted drawings, so we are unable to comment on any impacts the proposed project may cause to the existing systems. It should be noted that the existing building is currently serviced by a sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer, so we are assuming that any new services for the proposed additions will be extended from the existing building. Should the owner wish to provide new utility connections to the proposed additions, plans should be submitted to this department for review and permitting. Although we do not have any objections to the proposed project at this time, the following items will need to be addressed during the permitting phase: (1) The proposed development will need to meet the current Wayne County storm water ordinance, including detention for any new impervious areas. (2) The owner will need to provide this office with detailed grading plans for existing and proposed conditions. (3) Best management practices for soil erosion and sedimentation control will be required including silt fencing and inlet protection. (4) Any construction within the Middlebelt Road right -0f --way will require permits from the Wayne County Department of Public Service." The letter is signed by David Lear, P.E., Civil Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue October 7, 2014 26579 Division, dated September 18, 2014, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to construct additions to the nursing home on property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal with the following stipulations: (1) Nursing homes shall be protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance to 13.3.2.10.1 NFPA 101, 2009. (2) Providing that all details in regards to Existing Health Care Occupancies are followed and inspected prior to tenant use, this department has no objections to this petltbon."The letter is signed by Daniel Lee, Fire Marshal. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated September 10, 2014, 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 Joseph Boilos, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated October 7, 2014, 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, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Morrow: Thank you, Mr. Taormina. Any questions of the Planning Director? Seeing none, we'll go directly to the petitioner. If he would come forward and give his name and address for the record please. At Paas, Architect, AWP, 2392 Grant Drive, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108. I'm the architect representing Autumnwood. We're happy with all of the reports that we've received and would be willing to address any questions the Commission may have at this point. Mr. Morrow: All right. We'll see if the Commission has any questions of you. Thank you, sir. Mr. Paas: Thank you. Mr. Morrow: Any questions of the petitioner? Ms. Smiley: Is this primarily being done to make it single bedrooms? Mr. Paas: Correct. Yes. Ms. Smiley: And then add some amenities? Mr. Paas: As it was pointed out, we're actually reducing the total number of beds from 14210130, and by converting the entire lower level to single beds, which is now what the market basically October 7, 2014 26580 demands, these rooms were originally, when the building was built, it was all two and three bedrooms. Then it was converted to two bedrooms. So now we're going to one bedroom on the first floor and only doubles on the second floor, even though there was some existing triples on the second floor al this point. So this is in accordance with what the market demands. Also, all the first floor rooms will have individual showers, which is again in keeping with the way nursing homes are being constructed these days. So that's the addition. Currently, therapy is located on the second floor, but primarily the therapy patients will be housed on the first floor. That's why we're putting a single story addifion out at the back which will house the therapy services so those patients will move directly from their f rst floor bedrooms into that area. Ms. Smiley: Are you seeing an increase or decrease in staff? Mr. Paas: We're losing 12 beds out of the 142. 1 suspect that the staff will not change significantly one way or the other. Therapy services are currently being provided. It's not a new service. It's simply being relocated from the second floor to the ground floor. So I don't think there will be a significant increase or decrease in staffing. Ms. Smiley: Okay. I have one Iasi question. Is this primarily independent Irving, assisted living, skilled nursing? Mr. Paas: This is skilled nursing. Ms. Smiley: Skilled nursing only? Mr. Paas: Skilled nursing as licensed by the State of Michigan. Obviously all these plans will also need to be submitted to the State Health Department, the Stale Fire Marshal for their review. The building is fully sprinkled. The additions will also be fully sprinkled. The ufilifies will extend from the existing utilities inside in the building so there will be no new utility connections. There's no new impervious surface proposed as part of this. The paving will remain as is. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Morrow: Anyone else? Mr. Taylor: One question. Sir, the one bedroom facilities, will they have their own bath? October 7, 2014 26581 Mr. Paas: The majority of them will have a private bath. Some of the smaller rooms that were in the original building, each quarter we had large rooms on one side, small rooms on the other side. The small rooms were originally doubles. The larger rooms were originally triples. In both cases, those are going to go to singles now. The larger rooms that were originally triples will have their own individual baths serving just one room. The smaller rooms, which were originally doubles, will have one bed in each room and they will have a combined bath with shower that will serve two rooms. Mr. Taylor: From what we've heard lately, it seems like the trend of nursing homes is to go to single bed units. Mr. Paas: Correct. Mr. Taylor: And I guess that holds true with what you're saying. Mr. Paas: Exactly. Its market driven and a demand. That's what the demand is and obviously particularly rehabilitation patients have more choices. They shop around. Their families shop around looking for the place to stay. So you have to have something that appeals to that market. Mr. Taylor: Thankyou. Mr. Paas: Thankyou. Mr. Morrow: Anyone else? Just one question. I'm sure the additions are going to look like the current ones. Mr. Paas: Correct. Mr. Morrow: Now how does it relate to building materials? Will it be the same building materials that are on the other? Mr. Paas: Yes. We were the architects for the latest renovation which was done I think in 2004, 2005, when we put the peaked roofs on and actually built what is now the front entrance, portico and that sort of thing. The brick will match. The window types will match on the existing portion, and for the single story, again, we'll use the same brick. We'll have the peak roofs there which will hide the mechanical equipment on the roof of that section. It is designed to be seamless. You won't see it as a different addition. It is going to blend in with the rest of the building. Mr. Morrow: Okay. Thank you. Mrs. Smiley asked about the garage. What are you going to do with that? October 7, 2014 26582 Mr. Paas: It will mostly be brick veneered on the exterior and have a sloped roof on it. Mr. Morrow: Will 0 be a new one? Mr. Paas: Yes,a new one. Mr. Morrow: To match the architecture? Mr. Paas: Its in a much better location because there is space available for a truck to stand and load and unload, where the current location, when the truck is there it blocks parking access for one lane of parking. So moving to this location will functionally be much better for the parking lot and the loading and unloading. The garage is basically used not for vehicles but for storage of excess materials of beds that are not currently being used, other bulk materials that are purchased and don't need to be stored in a heated environment are stored in the garage. There's no vehicles in the garage per se. It's a garage in a sense but its a storeroom. Mr. Morrow: Okay. I think that does it as far as the questions. I'm going to go to the audience now. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against the granting of this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion would be in order. Mr. Bahr: I have to say this one more time while I have a chance to because I move in a week and a half. This is right in my neighborhood, and I do go by there all the time. I've seen the improvements theyve done over the last 10 years and seen it go from Middlebell Nursing Home to Autumnwood and seen it well maintained. I'm just excited about this. It's just another example of a business that's apparently doing well in Livonia and an expansion and further beautification of this site. So thank you. With that, I'd like to bring forth an approving resolution. On a motion by Bahr, seconded by Taylor, and unanimously adopted, it was #1034-2014 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2014-09-08-11 submitted by Aulumnwood of Livonia requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the City of Livonia Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, in connection with a proposal to construct additions to the nursing home at 14900 Middlebelt Road, located on the east side of Middlebell Road between Lyndon Avenue and Five Mile Road in the Northwest 114 of Section 24, be approved subject to the following conditions: October 7, 2014 26583 1. That the Site Plan marked SPA dated September 5, 2014 prepared by AWP is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2. That the added landscape materials shown on the approved Site Plan shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition; 3. That the Building Elevations shown on the Cover Sheet dated September 5, 2014 prepared by AWP is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 4. That all rooftop mechanical equipment shall be concealed from public view on all sides by screening that shall be of a compatible character, material and color to other exterior materials on the building; 5. That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time of application for building permits; and 6. Pursuant to Section 19.10 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, this approval is valid for a period of one year only from the date of approval by City Council, and unless a building permit is obtained, this approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. Mr. Morrow: Is there any discussion? Mr. Taormina: A question maybe back to the petitioner. I apologize for doing this after he sat down, but he had mentioned that the garage was going to be brick veneer, but I believe the elevation plans show a CMU. I just want verification if it's going to be brick veneer. In that case, I think we'll want to specify that in the resolution, unless you're satisfied with some other exterior material. They are showing block on the elevation plans. If he could just confirm that. Mr. Morrow: I see he's going through his plans so we'll give him a chance to check the material on the garage. Mr. Paas: I apologize. It does show block, painted a sort of yellow brick color. We would like to keep that as CMU on the garage. It is screened with landscaping on the exterior on two sides where it faces the neighbors. October 7, 2014 26584 Mr. Taormina: Can he clarify that at the microphone. Mr. Morrow: My mistake. I should have had him at the mic. Would you just repeat yourself now for the record please? Mr. Paas: The Planning Director is correct that the drawings do show CMU for the garage and I misspoke. I would like to keep that as CMU. The exterior walls are screened with landscaping on the two sides that face the fences in that corner. So I don't think the neighbors will be adversely affected. They are going to be arborvitae, pretty much a continuous hedging along there and basically the front of it will be mostly a garage door so there is very little material that will be visible on the exterior. So we would like to keep that CMU. Mr. Morrow: Thank you very much. Thank you for the clarification, Mr. Taormina. Mr. Paas: Thankyou. Mr. Morrow: Anydiscussion? Mr. Bahr: I have a question. I just want to make sure I understand. Through the Chair to Mr. Taormina, CMU is that like a block? Mr. Taormina: It would just be a painted block, little larger units. It won't be your standard face brick like we're used to seeing. The building is going to have face brick, but the garage, which is in the corner, will be block. But as the architect indicated, there will be landscaping around the perimeter of the garage as it faces south and east towards the adjoining properties. It really won't be that visible. So if you're satisfied, I am as well. I just wanted that on the record. Mr. Bahr: But it will be painted the same color as the rest of the building? Thais the intent? Mr. Taormina: Yes. Mr. Bahr: Okay. Mr. Morrow: So now we have the plans matching the resolution. Mr. Taormina: Thais correct. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an October 7, 2014 26585 approving resolution. Good luck on the project. I look forward to seeing it when it's all done. ITEM #2 PETITION 2014-09-08-13 BRASHEAR TOWER Ms. Smiley, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 2014- 09-08-13 submitted by UPR Land Company requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to remodel the exterior of the nine - story independent senior housing facility, known as William W. Brashear Tower, at 17841 N. Laurel Park Drive, located on the west side of N. Laurel Park Drive between Six Mile Road and University Drive in the Southeast 114 of Section 7. Mr. Taormina: As was indicated, this is a request to remodel the exterior of Brashear Towers, which is a nine -story independent senior housing facility located on North Laurel Park Drive. The zoning of this property is R-9, Housing for the Elderly. This facility was constructed sometime around 1980 and is about 168,000 square feet in total size. It contains 196 units altogether. The aerial photograph shows the location of the properly and the surrounding area with multiple family housing to the north and primarily office to the south and west, as well to the east, including Laurel Park Mall. This is a photograph of the existing exterior of the building. What we're looking at today is just exterior remodeling. The existing facade consists of cement asbestos panels. As the architect described to us at the study session, they are having maintenance problems with the material that is on the building currently. Water penetration between the blocks is creating a problem. So to solve this, they are looking at a new system, a skin if you will, that would go over the existing cement asbestos panels and that skin would consist of a metal sheathing, insulated metal panels that would be fixed to the exterior of the exisfing building using a steel framing system that would be lied into the superstructure. This is actually an example in Detroit that the architect visited and sent us photographs of that building. It has a similar type of construction on the building. In this case, it's a red or maroon color. They are going to use a combination of green and white or tan for Brashear Towers. These are vertical panels that range in size anywhere from about 30 to 36 inches in width and up to almost 20 feet in length. So they will span two floors. I'll the let the architect described that in greater detail. He has a sample of one of the panels which you saw at the study meeting but he will show you again. They are joined by longue and groove with a special gasket between them to prevent the weather from penetrating. He has provided us with several examples of the October 7, 2014 26586 application in other buildings. The rendering shows what the building will look like upon completion with the color scheme. There is alternating vertical towers with the green color panel and then intermittent usage of the tan color panel. I'll let him show you the examples of the panels. With that Mr. Chairman, I can go to the corespondence. Mr. Morrow: Please. Mr. Taormina: There are four items of corespondence. The first dem is from the Engineering Division, dated September 19, 2014, which reads as follows: 9n accordance with your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above-referenced petition. The address of 17841 Laurel Park Drive North is appropriate for the existing building and should be used for all Future matters regarding this petition. The legal description provided with the petition contains emors and should not be used. The following description adequately describes the property, and should be used in connection with this petition: Part of the SE X of Section 7, T.1S., R.9E. described as commencing at the SE Comer of Section 7 and proceeding N 0009'10" E, 1933.01 feet along the east line of said Section 7, said point being distant S 0009'10" W, 700.39 feet from the East''/. Comer of Section 7, thence S 8958'00" W, 995.01 feet, thence 418.88 feet along a curve to the left, radius 600 feet, central angle of 4000'00" and a chord bearing and distance of S 6957'60" W, 410.42 feet, thence N 4002'00" W, 43.00 feet to the point of beginning, thence proceeding 175.78 feet along a non-tangential curve to the left, radius 643 feet, central angle of 1539'48" and a chord bearing and distance of S 4208'17" W, 175.24 feet, thence N 5702'00" W, 87.77 feet, thence S 8958'00" W, 487.37 feet, thence N 0002'00" W, 349.50 feet, thence N 8958'00" E, 454.23 feet, thence S 4002'00" E, 349.10 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 4.734 acres. We have no objections to the proposed project at this time. The proposed improvements consist of renovations to the exterior of the existing building, and does not involve renovations to any of the existing public service leads within the road right-of-way. Should the owner need to relocate any of the public service leads to the building, plans will need to be submitted to this department to determine whether Engineering Division permits will be required." The letter is signed by David Lear, P.E., Civil Engineer. The second letter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated October 3, 2014, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with a request to remodel the exterior of the nine-story independent senior living facility located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal" The letter is signed by October 7, 2014 26587 Keith Bo, Fire Inspector. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated September 26, 2014, which reads as follows: 9 have reviewed the plans in connection with the petition. 1 have no objections to the proposal." The letter is signed by Joseph Boilos, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The fourth letter is from the Inspection Department, dated October 7, 2014, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the above -referenced petition has been reviewed. The following is noted. Structural engineering documents and material approval reports shall be submitted to us for review at the time of our plan review if this project moves forward. This Department has no further objections to this petition." The letter is signed by Jerome Hanna, Assistant Director of Inspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. Morrow: Are there any questions of the Planning Director? Seeing none, we will go right to the petitioner and ask him to come forward and give his name and address for the record. Lonny Zimmerman, AIA, Vice President, Siegal Tuomaala Associates Architects and Planners, Inc., 29200 Northwestern Highway, Suite 160, Southfield, Michigan 48034. I'm the architect and here tonight also is Tony Benedetto. He's the site manager for William H. Breashear. Tower. Mr. Morrow: You've heard the presentation by the Planning Director. We'll give you the floor to add or detract from what you've heard so far. Mr. Zimmerman: I think Mr. Taormina's description was as complete as I could give to it. I brought a sample of the panel. We're going to use a two inch panel with metal. Mr. Morrow: Excuse me, sir. Could you bring that up by podium so that the TV audience can see it as you're talking about it? I hope it's not so heavy that it becomes a burden. Mr. Zimmerman: No, it's not heavy. That's one of the nice things about it. Mr. Morrow: Okay. Good. Mr. Zimmerman: This is a two inch insulated metal panel. It's got metal both front and back. This is the gray color which is light and this is the green color. This is the texture of the panel. Its got a stippled texture to it and the panels, as Mr. Taormina indicated, are 30 or 36 inches wide typically, and theyve got a vertical longue and groove joint. You can see the edge of it right over here, which will be gasgeled and at the horizontal joint, its going to be October 7, 2014 26588 flashed. We intend to attach it to a structural system which will attach it every second floor. The building has a concrete structure system, and we have a structural engineer on board who has indicated, after analyzing it, that the building structure system can easily take the weight of the additional system. Mr. Morrow: You can have Mr. Benedetto set that down. Its served its purpose. Thank you. Mr. Zimmerman: The two inches of insulation gives us some extra roughly R value of 10 to the insulation for this panel, which will be in addition to the insulation that is within the building. As it was indicated, the building was built in 1980. We were the original architects for the building. That was in the era when cement asbestos panels were in use. The panels were thin and jointed, and over the years the maintenance on the sealing joints has become pretty difficult for the owner. It's been the same ownership right from the beginning, and its been difficult for them to maintain that. They intend to maintain their ownership of the building into the distant future so they said we want to fix this building up pennanenfly to eliminate any leakage, and after evaluating various panel systems and various alternatives, it was decided to keep the original panels in place, to actually go into each unit with an exterior wall and remove the drywall and make sure that the panel structure is sound that's there, and then to apply a foam insulation to the back of the panels to further insulate the existing panel, and then attach the new structural system basically like a skeleton to the outside, but not to the panels but to the structure of the building like I said, so the existing panels will stay as they are and then we'll have a new structural system attaching the new panels to the building that will not use the existing system at all. The system's design will be what is called a min barrier system which means that it will keep the water out and that really is how we're approaching the building. The shape of the building, the shape of the projections in the building are not going to be changed. We are going to be most likely changing the windows in the building but the primary forth of the building is not going to be altered in any way. The panels will stop slightly above the ground so they don't really come in contact with the earth. You'll see a horizontal joint every two floors and that is basically the way the building is going to look, the way you see it there right now. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Morrow: Are there any questions? Mr. Taylor: Let me see if I followed you correctly. You're going to attach these panels to the panels that are there now. October 7, 2014 26589 Mr. Zimmerman: No, not exactly. We are putting a new exterior steel structural system over the panels that are there now. The structural system will be attached only to the concrete floor beams. So the concrete floor beams will support the structural system, and then the new panels will be supported on the new steel system. So basically the existing system and the new system are independent. Mr. Taylor: So you don't have to worry about the old ones falling off and laking these with them? Mr. Zimmerman: Absolutely not. And as I mentioned in part, what's going to happen at the same time is, in the interior of the building, we're going to be examining the existing panels and taking care of any structural needs that are required there. Mr. Taylor: Is this a fairly new material or how long has it been proven to be durable? Mr. Zimmerman: You know, I can't tell how long its been in existence. All I know is that the company has been around for quite a while. The building that Mr. Taormina showed the photograph of is just one in Detroit that is being done now. It actually was done, finished about a year ago. It's right on the riverfront and it's taller than our building. I think its about a 16 -story building, and the same system, or a similar system from the same company is being used at the AT&T Southfield campus. So it's the same company. But Century as a company has been around a long time. We've used them for panels on manyjobs in the past. Mr. Taylor: So it runs all the way to the ground. Correct? Mr. Zimmerman: Just above the ground. Say six inches above the ground. Mr. Taylor: How durable is it for say somebody with a lawnmower cutting the grass? Can it be dented? Mr. Zimmerman: It shouldn't dent. It's not like it's a hollow panel. It's actually a solid panel. The solid insulation that you can see the edge of gives it durability as compared with a hollow panel. I think that it could probably take a lot more than a stone thrown from a lawnmower and not have any damage to it. Mr. Taylor: So you say Mr. Lambert still owns this building. Mr. Zimmerman: Yes. October 7, 2014 26590 Mr. Taylor: Well, I applaud him for bringing it up to dale. That's good news. Theyve been around for quite a while. So thank you. Ms. Smiley: Yes. I like the Spartan colors, but I was trying to understand the windows. You said 2.5 inches and then there's steel behind that so the window would be in like 3 or 4 inches? Mr. Zimmerman: The windows will be essentially in the same place as you see them now. What's happening is that they will be set back from the panel face because right now the new panels will be roughly 3.5 or 4 inches out from where they are now. But the windows will be in basically the same place they are now, but they will be set back by a few more inches from the face of the panel because they are going to stay in the same place. Ms. Smiley: Okay, and thalshouldn't affect the lighting? Mr. Zimmerman: Its not going to impact the lighting - just a few inches. Ms. Smiley: These are for independent living apartments for seniors. Is that what this is? Mr. Zimmerman: Yes. Its all independent. Ms. Smiley: And you're still debating on whether the windows will open? Mr. Benedetto: All the actions for the windows are still on the table. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Mr. Benedetto: Nonfunctioning, functioning, normally, maybe a combination of both because each apartment has at least two windows. So we're still looking at different variations and that hasn't been finally decided yet. Ms. Smiley: Is it unusual for the windows to be in that far on a building? I guess so. Mr. Zimmerman: Its not unusual at all. I mean if you think about typical brick construction, you've got oftentimes a brick sill, and the brick still is roughly four or five inches by the time you take the gap and there's the window sitting at the face of that. So really it's very common. Mr. Taormina just put this one up. Ms. Smiley: Oh. Okay. Mr. Zimmerman: This shows you how they did it. This was a concrete block building and they put their system over the concrete block. October 7, 2014 26591 Ms. Smiley: The steel and then this system? Mr. Zimmerman: I don't know exactly if they have steel. They might have gone directly to the block. Their situation was a little bit different, but the idea of the windows actually are pretty close in terms of the inset of the windows. That's probably how we're going to be. Ms. Smiley: One more question. Do you happen to know what that building on Jefferson is? Mr. Zimmerman: What it is? It's a HUD. Is it a senior building? Mr. Benedetto: I believe its public housing. Mr. Zimmerman: It is public housing, yeah. Ms. Smiley: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Morrow: Are there anyquestions forlhe petitioner? Seeing none, is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak for or against the granting of this petition? Seeing no one coming forward, a motion would be in order.0 On a motion by Taylor, seconded by Bahr, and unanimously adopted, it was #1035-2014 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2014-09-08-13 submitted by UPR Land Company requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to remodel the exterior of the nine - story independent senior housing facility, known as William W. Brashear Tower, at 17841 N. Laurel Park Drive, located on the west side of N. Laurel Park Drive between Six Mile Road and University Drive in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Elevation and Details Plan marked PA dated September 26, 2014 prepared by Siegal/Tuomaala Associates, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2. That only conforming signage is approved with this petition, and any additional signage shall be separately submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals; 3. That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Department at the time the building permits are applied for; and, October 7, 2014 26592 4. Pursuant to Section 19.10 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, this approval is valid for a period of one year only from the date of approval by City Council, and unless a building permit is obtained, this approval shall be null and void at the expiration of said period. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. It will go on to City Council with an approving resolution. I just want to add that I live on North Laurel Park Drive, and I go by there all the time, and I look forward to seeing this come to fruition. Thank you very much. ITEM #3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1,061't Public Hearings and Regular Meeting Ms. Scheel, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda, Approval of the Minutes of the 1,061't Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on September 23, 2014. On a motion by Taylor, seconded by Smiley, and adopted, it was #1036-2014 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of 1,061 Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held by the Planning Commission on September 23, 2014, are hereby approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Smiley, Taylor, Morrow NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Bahr ABSENT: McIntyre, Wilshaw Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Taylor: Mr. Chairman, there is someone at the podium. First unidentified person: We're not on the agenda but we have an objection of a situation that's within our subdivision, and we want to know if we can have some direction from you as far as how to handle the situation. Its in regards to Sarah Estates. October 7, 2014 26593 Mr. Taylor: What's the question, because you may be before the wrong body? First unidentified person: The question is, they're trying to build three homes in the subdivision where we're at. They're trying to build them on top of wetlands and theyre protected. So we're trying to, and we've already given a petition here to the City and also with the MDEQ. We're trying to figure out exactly what we can do in orderlo... Mr. Morrow: Lel me do this. Would you have any idea, Mr. Taormina? Mr. Taormina: At this point in time, the matter is before the MDEQ for evaluation. So I would suggest to the speaker and the other residents that they follow up with the MDEQ. If they receive notice from the MDEQ relative to the review of this matter, then they should follow up with them at this point because they would decide whether to allow any construction in the wetlands. The type of project, the land division that is proposed there, may or may not have to come before this body. That has yet to be determined. There is a good chance that this body won't see the request. That would be something that would rest with the MDEQ with respect to whether or not any wetlands, if there are wetlands discovered on the property and they are going to be impacted, and that's something the MDEQ decides on. Mr. Morrow: So If I'm following you, it's before the MDEQ. Mr. Taormina: That is correct. Mr. Morrow: If they make a decision that its a welland, then I think that's a final determination. Mr. Taormina: Well, then there would be a permit request if there's a request to alter those wetlands. There's a couple steps in that process. One, evaluate whether or not they are wetlands or regulated wetlands; secondly, is there impact to the wetlands, or would there be impact, and whether or not a permit would be issued to allow for that impact. So all those things I think are under view by the MDEQ. Mr. Morrow: Then if it goes forward from there, then maybe the City would be involved, but up until that time ... Mr. Taormina: That is correct. Second unidentified person: But I believe the city has been involved. Correct? I mean, hasn't work been done relative to sewers and streets? October 7, 2014 26594 The problem, sir, is that we're playing from behind here. There hasn't been a lot of transparency. Our subdivision is completed and done. There's two open lots which still can be built on. Essentially, what they're trying to do is blast into a wetland and force residential development in the area. Mr. Morrow: I understand what you're saying. In other words, the Planning Commission would not be involved in that. Mr. Taormina: Actually they should contact the Engineering Department with respect to any permitting that is being reviewed right now by the City for the extension of any utilities into that area because I think all of that is on hold pending the review by the MDEQ. First unidentified person: Right. Mr. Taormina: So nothing will happen by the City unfit that determination is made. So we're basically waiting to hear from the MDEQ. Second unidentified person: But once more, the sensitivity is, is we're reacting because we're not getting notification. So its by accident we're learning that the City had done engineering studies. Mr. Morrow: In other words, I'm assuming the lots exist there now. Its whether or not you can build on them. Second unidentified person: There is no lots. It's a forest with a pond. First unidentified person: And its actually connected to a pond. It's like the filtering for the whole surrounding our neighborhood. Mr. Morrow: I got the picture but I wish we could help you out tonight, but we're just the wrong body. Second unidentified person: We're just trying to do discovery and play a little bit of catchup, Sir. Mr. Morrow: You can go to the City Council. They have before and after every meeting, you can address whatever you want to. Have you been to the City Council? Second unidentified person: We have not. Mr. Morrow: Well, before every meeting and after every meeting, they allow residents to address them. Second unidentified person: Well, you've been most helpful. Thank you very much. October 7, 2014 26595 Mr. Morrow: Theyre kind of over the picture; we're very narrowly focused. Mr. Taormina: I'd be happy to talk to these folks. If you want to call the Planning Department early next week, I'll be able to explain the situation in greater detail. Second unidenfif ed person: Ok. Thank you for your time. Mr. Morrow: I wish we could have been more help. First unidentified person: No, you were very helpful. Ms. Smiley: I'm sorry you sat through the whole meeting. Although it's nice to have an audience. Thank you for coming. First unidentified person: We're just trying to gel some answers so we appreciate anything you can give. Mr. Morrow: We were officially adjourned at 7:43. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 1,061't Regular Meeting held on October 7, 2014, was adjourned at 7:43 p.m. ATTEST: R. Lee Morrow, Chairman CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Carol A. Smiley, Secretary