Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTUDY - 2016-01-11 CITY OF LIVONIA – CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF STUDY MEETING HELD JANUARY 11, 2016 Meeting was called to order at 8:19 p.m. by President McIntyre. Present: Maureen Miller Brosnan, Jim Jolly, Cathy White, Scott Bahr, Brian Meakin, Brandon Kritzman, and Kathleen McIntyre. Absent: None. Elected and appointed officials present: Susan Nash, City Clerk; Mark Taormina, Director of Economic Development and Planning; Todd Zilincik, City Engineer; and Don Knapp, City Attorney. President McIntyre welcomed new Councilmember Jim Jolly. Vice-President Kritzman, Council Delegate on Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG). He reported on the work he is doing on SEMCOG’s Economic Development Task Force and highlighted their draft compilation report. AUDIENCE COMMUNICATION: None. NEW BUSINESS: 1. REQUEST TO WAIVE SIDEWALK REQUIREMENT: Tina Pieczarka of Timothy Patrick Homes, re: for the newly constructed home at 14341 Henry Ruff. Rob and Jenny Bird, 14341 Henry Ruff, homeowners, presented their request to Council. Mr. Bird said on the west side of the street there are no sidewalks and said they are seeking a waiver of the sidewalk requirement. Brosnan indicated they received a letter from the Public Services Department, Division of Engineering, recommending the sidewalks be installed. Todd Zilincik, City Engineer, said it the recommendation of the Engineering Division that the request for a waiver be denied and that installation of sidewalk along the frontage of the property be required due to the potential for additional homes to be built along the west side of Henry Ruff. He said the bike study that was done last year indicated this area as a potential area for connection. Brosnan said it is not often they deny these requests but in light of this information she feels it is important to recognize the findings of the bike study and to do what is in the best interest of the entire community. Brosnan offered the denying resolution for the Regular Agenda. Vice-President Kritzman asked through the Chair to Zilincik if the City owned the property necessary to connect or if it is owned by the church in the area. Zilincik 2 said he would have to investigate that further and report back to Council. Vice- President Kritzman asked for an explanation of how this ties into the connectivity of the bike path. Zilincik said that Lyndon and Schoolcraft have been identified as potential arterial paths but said that they were looking at the overall area along that corridor for potential connectivity points. Vice-President Kritzman said while he understands the potential, he said it is not currently part of any plan. He said that he is familiar with the area and said there are several deep lots, some that have had the rear portion of their property sold off. His concern is if they require this homeowner to put the sidewalk in that it will just create a patchwork look. He said this neighborhood has more of a RUF appeal to it and disagrees with the request to deny the waiver. He said they can still reserve the right to require the sidewalk in the future should the need arise. Vice-President Kritzman offered the approving resolution for the Regular Agenda. Bahr said originally he was in support of denying this request. However, after listening to the discussion he said he is leaning now more toward approving the request. He said in the future if it is needed they could always require them through the Special Assessment process. He feels that may be many years in the future. Meakin asked through the Chair to the Law Department if they could require a bond for the sidewalk and stipulate that if a second house is built on that side of the street then the sidewalks would be installed utilizing the bond money. Don Knapp, City Attorney, said that is a possibility but that would also require keep track of the bond and that could be for many years. He said the idea of including the language in the resolution that the City reserves the right to require the sidewalk in the future is to preserve the City’s right to require the sidewalk. DIRECTION: 1) DENYING REGULAR 2) APPROVING 2. COLLECTION OF LIVONIA PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT TAXES FOR THE YEAR 2016: Office of the City Clerk, re: forwarding a communication from the Secretary of the Board of Education requesting the City to continue to collect one- half of their district’s taxes with the summer tax collection and the remaining one- half with their winter tax collection, commencing July 1, 2016. Susan Nash, City Clerk, presented the request to Council. She stated that this is an annual housekeeping type item that is to be received and filed for the information of the City Council. Meakin offered the resolution to receive and file this item for the Consent Agenda 3 DIRECTION: RECEIVE & FILE CONSENT Kritzman stepped down from the podium at 8:41 p.m. to avoid any perceived conflict of interest on the following item. 3. VACATING REQUEST: John Wright, Executive Director of Facilities Management, Schoolcraft College, re: for the existing on-site public sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and water main easements at their property located at 39201 Seven Mile Road. (Petition 2015-12-03-02) John Wright, Executive Director of Facilities Management, Schoolcraft College, presented the request to Council. He said they have completed their renovations of the Jeffress Center and said per the request of the City the College wishes to vacate the existing on-site public sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and water main easements. Todd Zilincik, City Engineer, indicated that the College wishes to vacate the existing on-site public sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and water main easements. It is understood that by doing so, the utilities shall become “private” and that the College shall be responsible for their maintenance and operation. Mark Taormina, Director of Planning and Economic Development, pointed out that this vacating request is scheduled for a Planning Commission Public Hearing on January 26, 2016 and this will come back to Council. Brosnan offered the resolution referring the matter to the Planning Commission for its report and recommendation for the Regular Agenda DIRECTION: REFER TO PLANNING REGULAR COMMISSION FOR ITS REPORT & RECOMMENDATION Kritzman returned to the podium at 8:43 p.m. 4. REQUEST TO APPROVE LOCATION AND SCHEDULE OF DATES AND TIMES FOR THE 2016 BOARD OF REVIEW MEETINGS, AS WELL AS COMPENSATION RATES FOR MEMBERS: Department of Assessment, re: per the requirements of State of Michigan Statue MCL 211.30. Linda Gosselin, Assessor, stated that the City Charter requires that the Council adopt the Board of Review schedule and meeting place as well as compensation for Board members. She stated this is their annual request for approval. White offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 4 5. AWARD OF BID: Water and Sewer Board, re: supply the Public Service Division (Water Maintenance Section) with water main repair clamps for a period of two years. Tom Wilson, Supervisor, Water & Sewer Department, presented the request to Council. The Public Service division has taken bids for water main repair clamps in accordance with the requirements of the Finance Ordinance and the budget for the Water Maintenance Section. Specifications were prepared by the Division, and an advertisement for bids was placed in the September 27, 2015 edition of the Livonia Observer. The Finance Director's office posted the bid documents on the Michigan Inter-Governmental Trade Network (MITN) website. The bids were received and opened in the presence of the Bid Committee at 2:00 p.m. on October 13, 2015. A tabulation of all bids received has been provided to Council for its review. It is the recommendation of the Public Service Division that the low bid of ETNA Supply, 529 32nd Street SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49548, which meets specifications, be accepted to supply the Public Service Division (Water Maintenance Section) with water main repair clamps at the unit prices bid for an amount not to exceed $120,000.00 for the two year period of the contract. Brosnan offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 6. REQUEST TO ADVISE THE WAYNE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES (PERMIT SECTION) THAT THE CITY HAS APPROVED THE STORM SEWER PLANS AND WILL ACCEPT JURISDICTION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE STORM SEWER WITHIN THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF FARMINGTON ROAD, SOUTH OF EIGHT MILE ROAD, AND REQUEST TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY ENGINEER TO EXECUTE A WAYNE COUNTY PERMIT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. Engineering Division, re: for the development of Michigan Schools & Government Credit Union at 20595 Farmington Road, located in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 4, to reimburse the City for any such maintenance that may become necessary. Todd Zilincik, City Engineer, presented the request to Council. In connection with the development of the property located on the west side of Farmington Road, south of Eight Mile Road, the Wayne County Department of Public Services has requested that the City take jurisdiction and control of the entire on-site storm sewer collection system to be constructed by the owner of the property at their expense. A representative of the City must also be designated to execute the County permit in connection with this storm sewer construction. The Engineering Division has reviewed this matter and recommends that the following actions be taken: 5 1. Advise the Wayne County Department of Public Services (Permit Section) that the City of Livonia has approved the storm sewer plans and further, that the City will accept jurisdiction and maintenance (at no expense to the County) of the storm sewer within the property located on the west side Farmington Road, south of Eight Mile Road in the N.E. ¼ of Section 4. In reference to this storm sewer system, this office has received the maintenance agreement from the owner, Michigan Schools & Government Credit Union, 40400 Garfield Road, Clinton Township, Michigan 48038 requiring them to reimburse the City for any such maintenance that may become necessary. 2. Authorize the City Engineer to execute a Wayne County permit on behalf of the City of Livonia in connection with the above storm sewer construction. 3. Authorize the Mayor to execute the maintenance agreement on behalf of the City. Meakin offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 7. WAIVER PETITION: Planning Commission, re: Petition 2015-10-02-23, submitted by Panera Bread, L.L.C., to add a drive-up window facility to an existing full service restaurant located within the Millennium Park Retail Center on the south side of Schoolcraft Road between Middlebelt Road and Inkster Road (28551 Schoolcraft Road) in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 25. Mark Taormina, Director of Planning and Economic Development, presented the request to Council. This is a request to add a drive-up window facility at an existing Panera Bread restaurant located at Millennium Park. In 2000, the City granted waiver use approval to construct and operate this full service restaurant. Panera occupies a 4,200 square foot unit which is at the north end of a multi-tenant retail building that is located just north of the Home Depot and south of Schoolcraft Road. The maximum seating capacity of the restaurant was approved at 156, and this includes 129 interior seats as well as 27 outside patio seats. Other tenants that are within this retail complex include Leo's Coney Island, a Wing Stop restaurant, Weight Watchers as well as a Great Clips. The proposal to add the drive-up window will be on the north side of the restaurant where there is an existing aisleway between the building and Schoolcraft Road. The traffic lane serving the drive-up would commence on the east side, which is the rear of this building, and then loop around to the north side. In order to facilitate the drive-up operation, a small addition would be constructed to the building. This addition is about 350 square feet and it would be located on the north side of the restaurant. The addition includes a kitchen that would be used primarily for preparing and delivering the drive-up orders. Creating the drive-thru lane behind the building will require relocating the existing dumpsters to the other side of the parking lot. The drive-up lane would be offset about 16 feet off the back wall of the building, and 6 the unused section of pavement would be cross-hatched to help direct traffic flow. There is some landscaping that is presently located on the north side of the building that would be removed to accommodate the turning radius and provide an area for the menu board and ordering station. The plan does show sufficient stacking room in the traffic lane serving the drive-up, and the existing drive aisle would serve as a bypass lane. The existing parking spaces along the east side of the property would be restriped in a diagonal pattern. Currently, the spaces are at a 90 degree angle offset from the drive aisle. The reconfigured parking arrangement would reduce the number of parking spaces by approximately seven. However, the overall parking is adequate to meet the needs of the restaurant as well as the shopping center. The addition would be constructed out of materials that would complement and match the existing building. These include primarily brick, split-face block and E.I.F.S. Some additional changes to the plan that they looked at in the study session include relocation of the dumpsters, additional landscaping, screening of the dumpster areas, as well as the addition of four parallel parking spaces that would provide patrons of the drive-up whose orders are delayed an opportunity to park and wait for those orders to be sent to the vehicles. Meakin asked Taormina if the Fire Department signed off on this. Taormina indicated their response should be included in the background information provided to Council. Meakin was concerned about access for emergency vehicles. Taormina said they are preserving the bypass drive aisle lane. Matt Diffin, Diffin-Umlor & Associates, 53115 Grand River, New Hudson, Michigan 48165. They are the civil engineering consultant representing Panera Bread. They've made the changes that everyone discussed. They worked with staff and worked out the few issues that they did have. They are excited to move forward with this project. Kritzman expressed some concerns with regard to a discrepancy in the materials being shown on the renderings being shown on the overhead projector and what is on the plans. Diffin said he would be glad to provide new drawings to Council prior to the voting meeting to better illustrate the materials being utilized. Bahr offered the approving resolution for the Regular Agenda DIRECTION: APPROVING REGULAR 8. SITE PLAN PETITION: Planning Commission, re: Petition 2015-10-08-17, submitted by Jonna Realty Ventures, on behalf of Haggerty Marketplace, to construct a multi-tenant retail building and obtain preliminary approval for two restaurant pads on property located at on the east side of Haggerty Road between Seven Mile and Eight Mile Roads (19700 and 19750 Haggerty Road) in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 6. 7 Mark Taormina, Director of Planning and Economic Development, presented the request to Council. This is a request to develop a new shopping and dining complex called Haggerty Marketplace. The site is located just south of the Costco Warehouse on Haggerty Road between Seven Mile and Eight Mile Roads. It consists of two parcels that total 10.86 acres in size with 543 feet along Haggerty Road and a depth of 871 feet. The subject properties are in the process of being rezoned from R-E, Research-Engineering, to C-2, General Business. First Reading on the rezoning was given on November 16, 2011, and the Second Reading and Roll Call, the final steps in the rezoning process, are on-hold pending a review of the site plan. This is the site is the former Haggerty Tech Center developed in the mid-1980's consisting of three "flexstyle" buildings that totaled over 150,000 square feet in size. The easterly building, which is about 51,000 square feet, will likely remain as part of the new development. The south building has been fully demolished and the north building has been partially demolished. The future use of what remains of the existing buildings are not known at this time and are not part of this petition. Any substantive changes to the exterior of these buildings or changes of uses will require separate approvals. The plans that we're reviewing this evening show three new buildings: one multi-tenant retail building and two restaurants, all of which would be constructed along the front third of the site. At this time, plans are preliminary with respect to the arrangement and location of the restaurants. The petitioner would like to commence the site work needed to establish the building pads for each of the restaurant buildings, including underground utilities, grading, curbs, road access, and parking. Once the users are identified, more detailed plans would be submitted for review. The site plan shows two restaurants side-by-side in the southwest corner of the property. Access would be provided by means of a single curb cut and driveway located midway along the site's frontage on Haggerty Road, similar to where the current driveway is located. The restaurants are labeled "Restaurant #1" and "Restaurant #2" and measure 7,792 square feet and 8,085 square feet, respectively. The building setbacks, which include the area between the building and the right-of- way with landscaping, four rows of parking and two drive aisles, would be no less than 140 feet from Haggerty Road. Parking for the restaurants is based on the overall number of customer seats, computed at a ratio of 1 space for every 2 interior seats, 1 space for every three seats in the outdoor dining patio and the employees. According to the Petitioner's estimates, both restaurants will require a combined total of 242 parking spaces which includes 404 interior seats, 30 patio and 30 employees. The total number of spaces shown in front of and behind the restaurants, south of the main drive aisle, totals 258. In terms of the retail building, this multi-tenant retail building is one-story in height and 16,400 square feet in size. The building is shown divided into six units. An outdoor patio is shown along the building's south elevation, indicating a future full service restaurant in the end cap space. Parking would be available in the front yard between the building and Haggerty with additional parking available on the south side of the building. Required parking for the retail building is based on 1 space for every 150 square feet of useable floor area where less than 15 percent of the gross floor area is devoted to restaurant users. However, they anticipate for this particular building 8 more than 15 percent of the space will be used for restaurants and therefore the parking will have to be computed on a ratio of 1 space for every 125 square feet. When they include that parking requirements, it requires a total of 105 parking spaces. Combined, the restaurant at 242 and the retail building at 105, there would be a need for a least 347 parking spaces. The site plan shows 344 parking spaces available, which is a slight deficiency. However, they feel that the deficiency is probably underestimated considering what the total number of customer seats and employees is likely to be once plans for the restaurants are developed. Thus, it's likely that variances will eventually be needed once they know more about the restaurants. All spaces shown are 10 feet in width. In terms of the landscaping plan, this is a change from what wash shown at the Planning Commission study session. They asked the petitioner to step it up basically in terms of the amount of landscaping provided. This plan reflects that. It includes many more trees and shrubs dispersed throughout the site. Fifteen percent of the land area as required by the ordinance would be landscaped, so we're happy to see the changes as submitted. Changes were also made to the building elevations of the retail building. The exterior finish of the building is face brick. It will include concrete masonry units as well as "cementitious" panels. The face brick and the cement panels are shown extending above the windows to the building's roofline. The building's fa9ade facing would be divided into three sections: the two end sections, which are basically the face brick, separated by a middle section that would consist of these cementitious panels. They also see some changes to the rear of the building. Instead of a painted block material, it would be an integrated block material or stained block material across that portion of the building that is immediately adjacent to the industrial building to the south. The southeast corner of the building will be wrapped with the same brick that is going to be used along the front and the sides, so it really improves the appearance of the building and gives it a four-sided architecture as opposed to just the three-sided architecture that they saw under the original plan. In terms of stormwater, that would be handled offsite on property that is located immediately to the east of the subject property. Those plans are still being developed. They are not looking at signage as part of this phase of the project. Taormina noted that the petitioner has modified the plan with respect to the dumpsters. One of the issues pointed out at the study session was the lack of trash containers. He has added two enclosures on the north side of the retail building to handle the additional needs for that area and additional information was provided on site lighting. Taormina said the Planning Commission is recommending approval with stipulations. Meakin asked Taormina what exactly they would be approving with this request. He said this is quite a large development and said he would like to get a big picture idea of what is going on with the entire property. Taormina said they would be considering this evening is the retail building as well as the general layout of the restaurant pads. The details of those buildings would have to come back to Council to Planning and Council. Taormina said they have done this in the past, he said College Park for example. 9 Meakin said he is also concerned with the additional egresses that Taormina had mentioned. Meakin said his concern would be with traffic congestion. Taormina said unfortunately the aerial photograph he has doesn’t show some changes that have been made to the site. Specifically it doesn’t show the Costco gas station and the drive along the gas station. He indicated they plan to connect to the adjacent property where the AMC theatre is located. Kritzman said he would make a point to visit the site this week. He asked Taormina about the condition of the building that was partially demolished. Whether it is was recovered or if there is a temporary covering. Taormina said based on conversations he has had with Mr. Jonna it is more likely than not that the remainder of that building will also be demolished. Kritzman said he finds the plans to be a little plain and said it lacks character. Brosnan asked Taormina if there is any additional rezoning on the site in the works or if what is on file for Phase 2 of the redevelopment of the site. Taormina replied indicating the request for rezoning would be for the entire site from R-E, Research- Engineering, to C-2, General Business. Taormina said it is more than likely that what Council is looking at shown as Phase 2 would be utilized partially for retail purposes. He said the C-2 district is broad enough to allow for offices. Brosnan said this is a very important area that many residents gravitate to for shopping and entertainment. She said it is important to have a visual picture of what is being proposed. She said she is anxious to hear more from the developer on what they intend to do with the site. She added that she concurs with Kritzman’s comments that is lacking character and there is room for improvement with the proposed Frank Jonna, Jonna Realty Ventures, 39533 Woodward Avenue, Suite 150, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan 48304 addressed Council. He said the two restaurant pads are place holders. He added that they are close to signing deals with two restaurants. They’re going to drive the ship but want to know where they’ll be positioned on the site. He said with regard to the retail, he said there is an interest in some food uses, some mercantile, even a bank with a drive-thru has shown some interest. He said they added landscaping to the rear of the center to give it more appeal and deter the storage of any unsightly crates. He said it is a sleek look with noble materials. He said they want it to be appealing and are certain open to discussion. Jonna said the opportunity Council has is driven by parking. He said they’ve looked at every use under the sun for this property for the past six years. He answered a previous question indicating there is a temporary wall on the partially demolished building and said they are studying right now tearing that building down and looking at more traditional retail style building. He said from a master plan perspective he said he would be glad to provide some updated conceptual drawings. Meakin said this is a pristine piece of property and said this site plan is missing the wow factor that Council would like to see. He said unless it is known what is going 10 in Phase 2, which he feels is the important section that faces I-275, it is difficult to proceed with the approving of plans for the remainder of the site. Jonna said it is interesting that Meakin brought up the whole working from the back forward, he said that is what they said too. They need someone in the rear of the property because the front would be easy to develop. He said that is why they partially demolished the building, to give businesses the ability to visualize the possibility of a new building there. He said they are open to the idea of perhaps office or medical in the rear and retail in the front, like the new development at the 7 Mile and Haggerty area on the Northville side. The University of Michigan Health Center with restaurants and retail on the outside. He said the fact that they have two restaurants interested in investing millions of dollars to develop new restaurants on the site is a huge improvement to site and investment in the community. He said the market is there and it complements the area and provides options to the customers. He said considering it will be a higher priced retail area it will attract more desirable businesses to the area. Bahr said he is also concerned about the appearance of the building and said even though it is not precisely at the corner of the entrance to the City, it kind of is, because Costco and Target are far back from the road. He said he would really like to see this building pop out and be more aesthetically pleasing. He referred to the College Park development and said he likes how they have the parking up front but not directly off Haggerty Road. Bahr asked Jonna if they could consider something like that. Jonna said that most of their proposed tenants crave Haggerty Road frontage. Haggerty Road frontage has received a lot of attention. He said if you were to compare businesses that have Haggerty Road frontage to those along Haggerty Road that do not have direct access from Haggerty Road it would probably show that those to do have direct access are more successful. It is extremely valuable. Kritzman said he likes how the site is set up. Also, expanding on Mr. Jonna’s description earlier of the proposed building being industrial and sleek. Kritzman said he is fine with that too but said it is lacking in character and excitement. Kritzman said one thing that stood out when he looked at the plan was where someone would stand if it were raining. He said that may sound simple but eventually someone is going to want to put something out there and then they’re going to have a little canvas awning erected on the outside of this building. He said with what has been presented he is just not too excited yet. He said he believes they can get there but would love to see the materials that they are talking about as well. He said the rendering gives it a charcoal gray appearance. He would like to see more details. Kritzman said he doesn’t think the drawings depict what Jonna is describing. Kritzman offered both an approving resolution and a resolution referring the matter to the Committee of the Whole for the Regular Agenda 11 DIRECTION: 1) APPROVING REGULAR 2) REFER TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 9. SITE PLAN PETITION: Planning Commission, re: Petition 2015-11-08-18, submitted by Sheldon Center, L.L.C., to renovate and expand the existing commercial shopping center (Shelden Park Village) including remodel the exterior façade of the existing shopping center building, reconfigure the layout of the parking lot, construct a freestanding full service restaurant, and obtain preliminary approval for two (2) future commercial buildings, located at the southeast corner of Plymouth and Farmington Roads (33111 thru 33251 Plymouth Road) in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 34. Mark Taormina, Director of Planning and Economic Development, presented the request to Council. This is a request to renovate and expand an existing shopping center complex that is known as Sheldon Center. The property is 10.94 acres in size and includes 640 feet of frontage along Plymouth and 666 feet of frontage on Farmington Road. The zoning of the entire property is C-2, General Business. The site presently contains two multi-tenant retail buildings. The main shopping center building, which faces Plymouth Road, is about 79,000 square feet, and that is divided currently into several large tenant spaces including a Rite Aid, Larry's Foodland, Chris Furniture, a Dollar General and a Bingo Hall. There is a smaller second building on the property which faces Farmington Road and that's about 9,600 square feet in total floor area. Looking at the site plan, the larger retail building is at an angle on the property to Plymouth Road. The smaller rectangular area represents the smaller retail building. Upon completion, the rebranded name of the shopping center will be "Shelden Park Village." The initial phase involves building a new exterior facade on both the main shopping center building as well as the smaller retail building along Farmington Road. Changes involve the entire storefront elevation facing north, plus the two side elevations, east and west on the large building, as well the entire storefront elevation facing west and side elevations, north and south, on the smaller building. The design includes a symmetrical combination of facade elements with varying heights and shapes. There is one non-symmetrical component and that would be the grocery store, which would contain its own unique storefront and would represent the highest point along the facade. The critical aspect, not only to the investment pro forma and equal to that of the façade renovation in terms of the project's impact from a design perspective, is the planned construction of three freestanding commercial buildings. These three buildings would be located in front of the shopping center along Plymouth Road. The buildings include a known tenant, Jimmy John's, plus two speculative retail building pads with users that have not yet been identified. In C-2 zoning, full service restaurants require waiver use approval. Next he discussed Jimmy John's. There are three buildings on the top part shown on the plan. The one furthest to the right, which is east, is the proposed Jimmy John's. This is a one-story building about 1,800 square feet in size. The restaurant would have 55 seats, including 43 interior seats and 12 outdoor patio seats. It would not 12 have direct access to Plymouth Road. Instead, ingress and egress would rely on the existing driveway approaches. The design features an outdoor dining patio on the front of the building and drive-up window facilities that would be located on the east side of the building. The traffic lane serving the drive-up window would commence on the south side of the building and then loop around to the east side. The plan includes sufficient stacking room as well as a bypass lane. The primary exterior building material would be brick. Cast stone would be used below the storefront windows along the base of the building extending across a portion of the building's front and side elevations. The top of the building would have a decorative E.I.F.S. cornice and fascia to match the cast stone on the bottom of the building. Additional architectural treatments include a prefinished metal wall coping, two bands of brick soldier course, as well as canvas canopies above the windows. The proposed concrete outdoor patio area measures approximately 10 feet by 59 feet and would accommodate three tables and 12 customer seats. The patio would be enclosed by black aluminum railings as well as balusters. The plan shows the dumpster enclosure located behind the building near the southwest corner of the restaurant. The enclosure walls would be 6 feet in height and would be constructed out of the same brick material used on the building. The two westerly outparcel buildings are identified on the site plan as "Future Buildings." The pads represent only approximate locations and footprints of these structures. Once the users are identified, more detailed plans would be submitted for site plan review. The building pads are shown approximately 110 feet apart and are separated by parking and maneuvering aisles. A drive-up facility is shown only as a potential for the middle building pad, as this feature would first require waiver use approval. Neither future building pad would have direct access to Farmington or Plymouth Roads. The approximate footprint areas of the westerly building is 1,500 square feet, whereas the easterly building is 2,475 square feet. Another major part of the redevelopment includes reconfiguring the shopping center's parking and circulation pattern. The existing angled parking spaces would be replaced with 90 degree parking, and bisecting the parking lot is a curvilinear drive aisle that would connect the main driveway off Plymouth Road to the drive aisle that runs along the front of the shopping center. Parking and cross access is provided on both sides of this drive aisle without interfering with the planned drive- up operations of either the Jimmy John's or the middle outparcel building. The existing curb-cuts, one on Plymouth Road, two off of Farmington, and one off Van Court, would remain the same as they are today. So there would be no additional curb cuts on any of the main roads. In terms of parking, the submitted site plan shows a total of 539 parking spaces. The required parking for group commercial centers having more than four establishments is based on either of the following: 1 parking space for every 125 square feet of useable floor space where 15 percent or more of the gross floor area is devoted to places of assembly, or alternatively, 1 space for every 150 square feet where 15 percent or less of the gross floor area is devoted to places of assembly. So what distinguishes the two is primarily the amount of restaurant space within the shopping center. If it tips over that 15 percent threshold, they require parking at a ratio of 1 space for every 125 square feet of useable floor area. If it falls below that, then the parking is based on the 13 ratio of 1:150. The current shopping center contains a total of 88,880 square feet of floor area. The bingo parlor, which is considered a place of assembly for the purpose of computing parking, is 8,400 square feet, and represents about 9.45 percent of the total gross floor area. If added the three outparcel buildings (5,800 square feet), this brings the total floor area to 94,680 square feet. Applying the 1:150 parking ratio results in 505 total required parking spaces, and would limit the amount of restaurant and assembly space to only 14,202 square feet, which is identical to both the bingo parlor and the three outparcel buildings. So the parking on this site does work with the additional retail space, provided that no more than 15 percent of the floor area is devoted to restaurant or assembly uses. When they apply the 1:125 ratio, the amount of parking increases to 606 spaces, and unfortunately, this site would be deficient by 67 spaces. Additional landscaping would be provided throughout the parking lot islands and drive aisles as well as and along the perimeter of the site. Along the perimeter, portions of Farmington and Plymouth Road that is where the maintain the PRDA streetscape improvements The PRDA Executive Committee has reviewed and endorsed this plan, subject to maintaining and enhancing the streetscape improvements along the major roads. In terms of site lighting, the plan includes all new LED light fixtures. The pole height is shown at 25 feet. One of the changes you'll see on this plan from the previous plan is additional lights in the area to the east of the bingo hall to help facilitate parking there. They have not reviewed this plan in terms of signage. That is something that would be addressed at a future date. In terms of more details, He’s isolated portions of the shopping center to give Council a sense of what the new shopping center will look like. This is actually the north elevation, or the main shopping center, as it faces towards Plymouth Road. This would be the west end of the building and this is what the Rite Aid would look like after completion of the improvements. It will have peaked roof elements, a reverse gable on a portion of the roof and asphalt shingles. The lease space immediately to the left of that is a slightly different design. It has a flat parapet design with an E.I.F.S. cornice. Again, Council can see the varying shapes that are provided along the facade. On the far easterly side would be the bingo parlor. Council can also see where Chris Furniture is located and then the highest point along the facade would be the grocery store, and that rises to a height of about 40 feet overall. The side elevations, east and west along the main shopping center building, contain similar architectural improvements. A floor plan was provided to give a better understanding of where the separate units are located. This is looking at the smaller retail building facing Farmington Road. There is a symmetrical pattern between the ends of the building and then taller elements in the center, with full treatments of brick and facade improvements. Taormina said the Planning Commission is recommending approval with stipulations. Brosnan said she appreciates the proposed plans. She said this has been a long time coming. She is very excited about this proposed redevelopment of this shopping center. It is going to be a huge improvement to the area. 14 Meakin also commended the petitioner and architect on this plan. He said he appreciates that they listened to everything they asked for when they originally came before Council. Meakin offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda. Josh Grenadier, Sheldon Center, L.L.C., 24255 W. 13 Mile Road, Bingham Farms, Michigan 48025. He thanked Council for he nice comments. He said they’re excited to move forward with this project. DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT 10. WAIVER PETITION: Planning Commission, re: Petition 2015-11-02-25, submitted by Sheldon Center, L.L.C., to construct and operate a freestanding full service restaurant with drive-up window facilities (Jimmy John’s) at Shelden Park Village, located at the southeast corner of Plymouth and Farmington Roads (33111 thru 33251 Plymouth Road) in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 34. Meakin offered the approving resolution for the Consent Agenda DIRECTION: APPROVING CONSENT AUDIENCE COMMUNICATION: None. As there were no further questions or comments, President McIntyre adjourned the Study Session at 10:02 p.m. on Monday, January 11, 2016. DATED: January 19, 2016 SUSAN M. NASH CITY CLERK