Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPRDA MINUTES 2000-01-20 MINUTES OF THE 106TH REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLYMOUTH ROAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA The 106th Regular Meeting of the Plymouth Road Development Authority of the City of Livonia, Michigan was called to order at 3:10 p.m., Thursday, January 20, 2000 in the 4th Floor Conference Room at City Hall. Members Present: Mayor Jack E. Kirksey Mr.Michael Polsinelli,Chairman Mr. Jerry Wordhouse,Vice Chairman Mr. Scott Grace Mr.Dennis Kujawa Ms. Toni Mette Mr.Bill Pike Mr.Raby Mr. Duane Wolfgang Members Absent: Mr.Marvin Walkon Mr. Stan Anderson Mr.Lowell Peterson Mr. Rod Crider Others Present : Mr.John J.Nagy,Director,P.R.D.A. Mrs. JoAnn Marshall,BRI Mr. Scott Reinholt,BRI Mr.Ralph Williams Ms. Susan Annibal, Secretary 1. Roll was called. 2. Adoption of the January 6,2000 Minutes: On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted,it was #2000-61 RESOLVED,that the Minutes of the 105th Regular Meeting held by the Plymouth Road Development Authority on January 6,2000 are approved. Mr.Polsinelli, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 3. Comments from Chairman: None. 4. Beckett & Raeder — Construction Progress: JoAnn Marshall reported that Holophane had assumed responsibility for the banner arm problem and will have a date certain to replace them by the end of the month. A letter will be sent to them stating our expectation to have these installed fully by March 1st. All existing banner arms have been taken down. Holophane would install the new banner arms and the Spring banners with the banner company. Hopefully, Holophane would pay that expense. Winter banners will be replaced now with Spring banners. These new banner arms would be of steel construction. Since the seasonal banners would now be changed by merely unscrewing the fmial on the decorative pole rather than removing the entire banner arm, there would be little probability of rust. That portion of the pole and banner arm would be sealed off. The poles are painted, so we won't have rust. We're under a 5-year r-^ . 2 warranty, starting now. The subject of drainage at the Good Times Bar was addressed and the tibe fact that we are waiting for easement on the property, the amount of which was $21,000.00. It will tie into the structure located within the Saturn Printing parking lot. There is a catch basin there. It is not a public easement. It's a distance of approximately 120 `, depending on the angle that it's put in. We are on line to get the maintenance bids out in two weeks. Next, the topic of bus plazas was discussed. There would be 39 bus stops with four (4) locations for bus plazas. These aren't used all day long, so it made sense to leave the SMART sign on the lawn in place. First, we will be placing these from Inkster to Middlebelt. (On Mr. Reinholt's presentation, green dots indicated plazas; red dots indicated remaining plazas; yellow dots indicated bus shelters). In all, there would be six(6) plazas. These would be included in the bid. If everyone is comfortable, we'd just add this to the contract. The shelters would need SMART's approval. We need another style for the shelter, other than the signature SMART provided. The Chairman recalled that SMART had given us the option to go with a shelter without advertising, paying for it ourselves. This would be a line item on the bid. At Ward's, it was hoped to get the bus stop out of the parking lot and out onto the road (Jim Lamphere). If a shelter structure has been decided upon, perhaps we could get started on the brick work and necessary construction/installation around the structure at the bus stop. BRI is hoping that the bid package could be out for all six (6) plazas (shelter, trash container, landscaping and brick work) which could be guesstimated to accommodate 10-12 people. This project initially would be just to Merriman. The goal was for Plymouth Road to look nice with the stops, 40 of them. BRI was asked to bring back to the Board illustrations and particulars for steel shelters, as well as some illustrated pieces. (Previously, BRI had provided cost figures for three different shelters, two of which were deemed too costly.) The Director was asked to check on recently provided information and cost for waste receptacles and benches, etc. Some issues would be shared with SMART, i.e., transportation matters, ADA, etc. A reference was made to Kansas City bus stops, where the stop is before the curb and also provided handicap accessibility, which is a good ides to incorporate in our plan. A summary would be sent to SMART, to the attention of Linda Binford. Discussion followed regarding wisest placement for the bus stops. The Chairman asked for an answer on the four(4) major ones at the next P.R.D.A. meeting(February 3, 2000). We need Wayne County approval on the plazas,to which they gave no opposition. However,the County wants the City of Livonia to hold them harmless in the usage of these plazas. Therefore, we will have to go to the City Council for a resolution for responsibility in connection with the plazas. Also, regarding maintenance of the plaza area, residents living on the corner adjacent to the plaza would maintain the area 6' back of the sidewalk; we will maintain the area 6' out to the curb. This area would be State right-of-way; most rights-of-way go back of the sidewalk now. It will be recommended to the Council that we sign a hold harmless agreement conditioned on the fact that we will assume responsibility for these shelters. Another cost to be considered was insurance, to be funded by the P.R.D.A., within the auspices of the City's insurance. We really should look into maintaining the plazas ourselves to reduce the risk liability factor. We will have a Summer maintenance contract for 2000. Could we find out what it would cost for the winter months and snow removal of the plazas? Wayne County maintains Plymouth Road. A maintenance contractor could go to the sites after a storm and maintain the plazas. Another question was whether or not to have the Law office look at this for recommendations on getting a contract and leverage for coverage to be prepared? Depending on the contract, DPW could bid on it and generate some revenues for the City. A fixture was needed on top of the mast arm on the decorative pole, a cobra-head over the signals, and a fixture we have looked at. It is a little more elegant for our situation. The County, who maintains the traffic signals in the major (re intersections,won't let us put anything up because we don't meet the basic IAS standards. They say the union won't allow it because they will not know if it was done up to code, if it was damaged in a winter storm. The next step was not known, because we don't meet the criteria for 4 3 intersections. Edison didn't want to do this, and the County wouldn't allow it because it is their fhir traffic signal. It wasn't known what our next step or option should be; we had no answer. It's either part of the contract or not. Vicky Holland is the Traffic Engineer for the County. One alternative could be to put a separate system up that is strictly ours at each major intersection. What if we maintained those fixtures? DPW is here in the City. Since we own the decorative poles and maintain them, why not the traffic signals as well? The point is the liability issue at the intersections because our lighting is lower than IAS standards. It was recommended that this fixture go up as soon as possible at Middlebelt and Farmington,not at Harrison,the reason being the width of the intersection. If all else fails, we could put a light up there. Wayne County Commissioner, Lyn Bankes and Russ Gronevelt were two contact sources on the matter, as well as Mike Duggan. If we assume responsibility for the approaches, we can make a bigger deal of it. 5. Reports from Committees: Public Relations: None. Mr. Anderson is absent. Vacant Buildings: Nothing to report. Construction Committee: Nothing to report. Inspection: Nothing to report. Development Assistance Committee: A revised Development Assistance Committee report was provided to members of the Board. Outstanding issues therein have been resolved and summarized since the last meeting and report. The idea is to put together this program and accept it as far as this group is concerned. Next, it would be sent to the City's Law and Finance Departments for review to make sure funds are available. At that point, we will do some further work and use some other model programs to bring together the actual paper work that we are needing and the sign. A fair amount of this work has to be done before it's solidly in place. This was just for approval of the concept. Two requests had been received, Ward's and Peregrine. There is nothing on the table that the Board has to answer nor did we go retro with this. Anyone who comes in the door will be handled under this projection or we will look at something on an interim basis. Commercial Lawnmower is a potential recipient of an allocation, as was the Legacy Restaurant. With the right caveats and conditions, this is where we're at: We will consider you under "these kinds" of conditions. Legacy will potentially be coming back. If the Board wishes, they could issue grants and long-term liability; but we can't go ahead on loans until we legally have more on this. We could put it in the newsletter and,also,have the Observer representative, Larry O'Connor, here or have Mike Slater or John Nagy do an interview. Other than Law and Finance,we could run it by the Council for a"needs to know,"when we get to that final point. They have always been apprised of any new concept. In looking to the Law Department for review, it would seem less onerous if everybody is saying it looks good and then go to Council and we know what we're doing. The Mayor feels that we need to touch base with the legal and financial departments for support from the City, and then, the Council will know that it has been reviewed by the Law Department and Finance Department. Once this is firm,we have set limits on how each individual can access the program. But,are they going to let us put a $100,000.00 or $500,000.00 limit on this? We can control that here at this Board. The topic of L environmental clean-up was raised and the fact that Ford Motor Company (where?) has paid for this to the 3rd and 4th landowners. There could be a need for additional language as to how these grants are given conditions under which they are covered; it could be construed that we are 4 L participating in environmental clean-up and might not be done correctly. Another important thought was that in the case of all applicants language should include the availability of funds. The interpretation of that is to be clear as to the maximum amount, and we'll give 50% of that amount. In demolition cases, we'll give up to the maximum of $40,000.00 on an $80,000.00 project. With regard to loans, the subject of interest rate was discussed — from a 5% flat rate versus the prime rate or prime less something, perhaps 2%to 3% lower than prime. Considering that this could be advertised in an informational brochure, a prime less determined percentage wouldn't become obsolete. In polling the Board members on the matter, the consensus was a fixed 5%. The program would be submitted this way for the legal and financial departmental reviews;then,we'd see what they have to say. The word"maximum"for building demolitions is $40,000.00 and should be reflected in line items 2 and 3 of the application. Landscaping and site improvements were included. Pertaining to the verbiage of phases was addressed, arriving at the conclusion that the word "phase" for the various phases of a project was to be eliminated. The maximum amount for environmental remediation would remain $15,000.00. A motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. Raby, seconded by Mr. Wolfgang, and unanimously approved, it was: #2000-62 RESOLVED,that the Plymouth Road Development Authority does hereby approve and adopt the Development Assistance Committee report, as revised,to be dated January 20, 2000 and the report is to be submitted to both the Law Department and Finance Department for their review. (11, Mr. Polsinelli,Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The above action was termed a "giant step" that the Board has taken. The Committee was commended on a job well done and far beyond initial expectations. Mike Slater has already looked at the report. It was recommended that Mike Fisher of the Law Department would be asked for the review and commentary of this report. The subject of interest earned from bond issue in that the interest is used as a "feed for other dollars." As for the interest we get from loans was a question for the Law Department. We have to coordinate the development of a brochure based on all the information we have. We can use the printer's services for a flyer they would send out. If we maintain a professional approach like we have with everything else, we'll be ahead. The brochure could include an application requesting information on the program, bulleting various points of interest. 6. Director's Report: Mr.Nagy reported that Roush is moving into the Peregrine property. Roush is involved in several diverse operations throughout Livonia, including retro-fitting for all car makers, the creation and manufacture of race cars and other concepts. They will be occupying 500,000 square feet, with parking for 400 to 500 employees and providing parking expansion that will include spaces in front of the building. They are a tenant and will be leasing part of the building there. Steve Schafer (Phoenix Land Development) is interested in developing a Walgreen's Drug Store on the N.E. corner of Plymouth and Middlebelt, a 266' x 270' parcel plus the right-of-way to Walgreen's and will be incorporating our plaza in the site plan. The old Comerica building there is being torn down. Ashley Capitol has signed a contract with Technicolor Video for Millenium Park. At Shelden Center, the Rite Aid will remain with the thir addition of a pharmacy window, which will be coming before the Planning Commission sometime in February. In response to an inquiry on the status of the George Burns property and proposed development by Phoenix Land Development,the Board was informed that this site was 5 still tied up with wetlands. It was requested that an updated Plymouth Road Development thow Authority member listing, including phone and FAX numbers,be included with the February 3rd mailing of agenda/minutes packets to each Board member. 7. Polling of Board Members Mr. Raby: Passed. Mr. Peterson: Passed. Mr. Pike: Passed. Mayor Kirksey: Passed. Mr. Grace: Passed. Mrs.Mette: Passed. Mr. Wordhouse: Passed. Mention was made of the Board's plan to meet at one of the Plymouth Road business places on a monthly or bi-monthly basis. Legacy Restaurant was mentioned. Mr. Nagy will attend to the details of place and date. (kw 10. Adjournment: On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted,the 106th Regular Meeting held by the Plymouth Road Development Authority on January 20, 2000 was adjourned at 4:40p.m. The next meeting of the Plymouth Road Development Authority will be held on January 20, 2000. 1 Susan Annibal, Secretary 1