Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1996-01-30 14678 MINUTES OF THE 718th REGULAR MEETING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, January 30, 1996, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 718th Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Jack Engebretson, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Members present: Jack Engebretson William LaPine Robert Alanskas Patricia Blomberg James C. McCann Daniel Piercecchi R. Lee Morrow Members absent: None Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Ass't. Planning Director; and Scott Miller, Planner I, were also present. Mr. Engebretson informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and decide the question. If a petition involves a waiver of use request and the request is denied, the petitioner has ten days in `�. which to appeal the decision to the City Council; otherwise the petition is terminated. The Planning Commission holds the only public hearing on a preliminary plat and/or a vacating petition. Planning Commission resolutions become effective seven days after the resolutions are adopted. The Planning Commission has reviewed the petitions upon their filing and have been furnished by the staff with approving and denying resolutions. The Commission may use them or not use them depending upon the outcome of the hearing tonight. Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 95-10-1-25 by Oakwood Healthcare System requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Bethany Road and Victor Parkway in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 6 from RUFC to P.O. Mr. Engebretson: This item was tabled at a previous meeting. We need a motion to remove it from the table. On a motion duly made by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mr. Alanskas and unanimously approved, it was #1-15-96 RESOLVED that, Petition 95-10-1-25 by Oakwood Healthcare System requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road 14679 between Bethany road and Victor Parkway in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 6 from RUFC to P.O., be taken from the table. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Engebretson: Now we have an item before us to deal with this issue that had been tabled for further consideration. Mr. Nagy do you have any new or additional information to report at this time? Mr. Nagy: Since our initial public hearing, we have one letter addressed to the Planning Commission dated January 30, 1996 referencing subject petition and reading: As I am unable to attend the meeting tonight regarding this petition, I am writing to express my disapproval of this project. With a 50,000 sq. ft. Providence facility of the same nature soon to open on the south side of Newburgh, to have an Oakwood bldg. directly across the street is ludicrous. This was signed by Barbara Phillips of 19235 Bethany. Other than that we have had two phone calls that my staff has recorded, both in opposition, one is dated January 26 from Elaine Judd who called to state her and her husband are opposed to the rezoning petition. The other is from Stella Archutowski of 37590 Northland, who stated she was opposed to this rezoning petition. Mr. Engebretson: Thank you Mr. Nagy. Is the petitioner with us this evening? First of all I would like to offer you the opportunity to make any remarks that you feel are appropriate. I know that we went through the public hearing process, and it was felt at that time that it was necessary because of the magnitude of what was being proposed to fully understand and absorb the proposal. We just needed additional time to take it into consideration, and I think it is only fair that we give you an opportunity also to make whatever remarks you feel are appropriate that may have developed between that hearing and now, so I will give you the floor. David Ippel: Thank you. I am Vice President for Ambulatory Care and Community Health for Oakwood Healthcare System. In addition to the comments that I made at the last meeting, I would just like to offer some additional comments in support of the petition. The services that we are developing at this site are based on needs which we have evaluated and determined to be worth pursuing in the Livonia area. The Oakwood Healthcare System has, as its entire service area, the entire Western Wayne and downriver areas as well as Ypsilanti and Washtenaw County. The service area that we have is continuing to expand. The Livonia area is of importance to the Oakwood System 14680 because a lot of our patients come from Livonia and they are currently traveling to Dearborn. As you well know, a lot of the individuals in Livonia have moved to this area from the Dearborn area. They still maintain affiliation with physicians in that area. As our patients are aging we find that developing primary care services in a location convenient for our patients is more appropriate, more adequate to meet their needs in terms of the access issue. We have a number of patients, probably about 12% of our patient population in our system comes from the Livonia area, and that is a system that incorporates six hospitals and 1900 beds. Our closest locations, at this time, for primary care services are in the Canton/Plymouth area, Westland and Redford, and Livonia is an extremely important part as we are following to meet our patient needs in the community. In addition, we have among our own employee group, over 700 individuals who call the radius of this location home, and 700 employees out of 8,000 employees in the Oakwood system is a substantial number. This is also our effort and our attempt to meet their personal health care needs close to home. I would like to just suggest that the rationale for the health care facility in this area, the facilities are currently available to the population here through the St. Mary/Beaumont connection, the Providence connection, they are meeting a certain group's of population needs, but there is another segment of the population that is looking for services outside of those groupings and the Oakwood Healthcare System is here to meet those needs. That was the additional comment I wanted to :N"' make. If there are any other questions on the facility or the programs, I would be happy to answer them. Mr. Alanskas: You say you have one in Westland? Mr. Ippel: Yes. Mr. Alanskas: How large is that facility? Mr. Ippel: There are two facilities in Westland. There is one at 15,000 sq. ft., which is closer to Michigan Avenue. There is another one being constructed in the north Westland area, which would be approximately 15,000 sq. ft. as well. Mr. Alanskas: How about Canton? Mr. Ippel: The Canton center is about 45,000 sq. ft. Mr. LaPine: The closest one to this location is Westland. Is that correct? Mr. Ippel: Correct. 14681 Mr. LaPine: From what mile radius do you normally draw from for one of these facilities? Mr. Ippel: For the primary care services, which are family practice, internal medicine, pediatrics, about five miles. Mr. LaPine: So if this is five miles, from this location it will take almost all of Livonia to the east, which is Inkster Road; it will take to the south as far as Warren Avenue approximately; to the west probably to Northville. You don't have any other facilities east of here? Mr. Ippel: Not directly east of here. Mr. LaPine: In the remarks we got from the staff here, you say you are going to build a 50,000 sq. ft. area, three stories, with the possibility of future expansion of 27,000 sq. ft. Is that correct? Mr. Ippel: The land that we are acquiring, that we would like to have rezoned, has the capacity for that additional expansion. Mr. LaPine: What I am saying, right now you are building the 50,000 sq. ft. with the possibility if you needed another 27,000 sq. ft. of the amount of land you are buying, that 27,000 sq. ft. is available for future expansion. Is that correct? Mr. Ippel: That is correct. Mr. LaPine: It also states that for that 50,000 sq. ft. you are going to have 925 parking spaces with the possibility if you do the expansion you would have another 337 spaces, which gives us approximately 1200 parking spaces, and your access is going to be from the Parkway. Is that correct? Mr. Ippel: There is access from both Seven Mile Road and the Parkway. Mr. LaPine: Have you taken into consideration the amount of traffic that this is going to bring into your facility, plus the Providence one across the street, plus along the Parkway to get into the Incredible Universe, a new building going in there, 184,000 sq. ft. building that is going to have 900 parking spaces, which leads me to believe we could have the possibility of 1800, and 500 more across the street, 2300 cars coming and going into those three facilities in less than a half mile. To me that is going to cause big traffic problems, and I am wondering have you taken that under consideration? 14682 Mr. Ippel: Yes, and I appreciate that question very much. We honestly, in our Nowexperience in primary care, have never had the number of spaces that are required here in Livonia, and we have never had that number filled at any one time at any of our centers. At our Canton center with 45,000 sq. ft. we are running approximately 350 to 400 cars a day, so we really are not talking honestly having that many more cars coming into this facility as well, so the 900 spaces, although that is meeting the intent of the mandate in Livonia, we find it to be something that we really don't feel in any way we are ever going to reach that number. Mr. LaPine: I guess that creates a problem with me, the amount of traffic we are going to be generating in that very short distance. You are going to have people turning right off Seven Mile Road going to your facility off Seven. We are going to have them turning right and left going into Providence, plus all the traffic going into two restaurants, plus the office plaza, plus the 184,000 sq. ft. Incredible Universe. To me that is going to cause a tremendous impact on that intersection. Mr. Ippel: We anticipate, as I said at the last meeting, about 400 cars per day, and that is spread over ten hours, so you may have 20 cars, you may have 60 cars during an hour. That will give you some idea of the extent of what we consider the traffic to be going in and out of those three entrances. Mr. Piercecchi: I appreciate these questions regarding Oakwood Healthcare System but the issue here, in my opinion, is not Oakwood Healthcare but whether it is in the best interest of Livonia to rezone this property from RUFC to P.O. If this land is rezoned, bidders can make their intentions known and who knows who could occupy that. It is fine to ask these questions because they are the petitioner but the real question is it in the best interests of Livonia to rezone that property from RUFC to P.O. Mr. Engebretson: You are absolutely right Mr. Piercecchi. This is a zoning issue and as most of you who watch these meetings periodically understand that we do spend some time trying to have some understanding of the intended use, but as you point out that doesn't necessarily insure that will be the ultimate use, but we are starting to stray pretty far from the zoning issue, but I think it is certainly proper to give the petitioner an opportunity to address the issues and we are glad he was able to do so. Mr. Nagy, before Mayor Bennett left office, as you know, he addressed a letter to the Planning Commission and recommended against this zoning proposal based on the fact there is an abundance of undeveloped office zoning that already exists in that office park, etc. I am 14683 wondering if Mayor Kirksey has expressed any views relative to this proposal, either in writing or otherwise? Mr. Nagy: No he has not. I did tell you that both the Mayor and I have met with the petitioner. We have reviewed the matter. We have evaluated the proposed site plan as well as the zoning request, and heard the comments, but the Mayor did not render an opinion either for or against. He just simply heard the matter out and said the matter was properly before the Planning Commission and would trust that the Planning Commission would make the appropriate recommendation. Mr. Engebretson:Thank you very much. Did anyone else have any comments or questions? Mr. Morrow: Mr. Chairman I have some comments. Through the ensuing weeks since we tabled this I have had a chance to visit the site a number of times and my view is the best use for this property would be in low density residential, and I don't say that against Oakwood because I am aware of Oakwood. They certainly are a good healthcare provider, but this particular site, when we looked at the Master Plan and felt it should be office use, that golden corridor was beginning to flourish a number of years back, but since then a lot of the things that were zoned office have begun to downsize being we have a surplus of office. Since then we have had a lot of healthcare, like this gentleman brings forward, develop "tow in that particular area. I think I indicated at the public hearing that one of the things where we are best served with zoning is office uses in that area, and rather than rezone it to office services, it should fall to residential, whether it necessarily should be zoned RUF, but some low density type of thing. As one Commissioner, after giving it a lot of thought based on what is developing in that area, what has gone on in the past and what is the present day, again, nothing against Oakwood Healthcare System, I just feel it is better served in a residential classification. That is primarily my comments. Mr. LaPine: I agree with Mr. Morrow one hundred percent. I only brought up the parking issue because of the fact I think that is one of the reasons why we do not want any high rises or any more OS in that area. Maybe I would change my mind if it was something with a lot less density because of the parking and I think residential would cause us less problems because of the parking. Secondly, going up Northland Road Sunday afternoon I checked out this site again, and we have a number of new homes going in back there and substantially sized homes, and I think maybe that is our best route to go as a residential classification. 14684 Mr. Engebretson: Well that is what this public hearing process is all about, to get the various issues out, and as Mr. Piercecchi rightly pointed out, we really ,` need to stick with the zoning issue. That is what is before us, and I think it is time to call the question and ask for a motion. On a motion duly made by Mr. McCann, seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimously approved, it was #1-16-96 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on November 28, 1995 on Petition 95-10-1-25 by Oakwood Healthcare System requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Bethany Road and Victor Parkway in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 6 from RUFC to P.O., the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 95-10- 1-25 be denied for the following reasons: 1) That the proposed change of zoning to a high-rise office zoning classification will be incompatible with the adjacent residential uses in the area; 2) That the proposed change of zoning will provide an opportunity for the location of uses on the subject land which may be wholly or partially tax exempt; 3) That the proposed change of zoning will overburden the area with additional vehicular traffic to the extent that it will be detrimental to the normal traffic in the area; and 4) That there is ample property in the area currently zoned in a high-rise office classification which could be utilized by this petitioner. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance#543, as amended. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is a motion by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution#838-95, to hold a public hearing on the question of whether certain property located in that part of Dohany Subdivision lying west of Lathers Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 12, should be rezoned from RUF to a more appropriate zoning classification, such as R-1. 14685 Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, could you please comment on the evolution of this proposal? Mr. Nagy: Recently, as a result of a planned subdivision where property was in the subject area and the zoning change that occurred therewith, the Council became aware that an adjoining development in the area had lot sizes that were similar in nature and therefore they felt that the existing zoning of the neighboring area should be re-evaluated and in light of that see if there was a more appropriate zoning classification for subject property. Mr. Morrow: Will this be a public hearing just based on the westerly portion of Lathers? Mr. Nagy: We are going to expand the area and make it the entire Dohany Subdivision. Mr. Morrow: Can we expand the area? Mr. Nagy: We can, and if the Council, in their wisdom, chooses to consider something less than what we advertise, it is their decision, but we can give them the option. Mr. Morrow: When we site checked it, it just makes sense that the whole subdivision 'vow should go R-1. Mr. Nagy: We are going to advertise the larger area. Mr. Morrow: That is what I wanted to hear that you are going to advertise the larger area and they can downsize it if they see fit. Mr. Engebretson: The motion then is to set a public hearing. On a motion duly made by Mr. McCann, seconded by Mrs. Blomberg and unanimously approved, it was #1-17-96 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution#838-95, and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to rezone all of Dohany Subdivision located in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 12 from RUF to R-1. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of such hearing be given as provided in Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of 14686 Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shall be a report and recommendation submitted to the City Council. r.. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is a motion by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #872-95, to hold a public hearing on the question of whether the C-2 parcel which is located immediately west of the property addressed in Petition 95-7-1-14 on the south side of Five Mile Road between Hubbard Road and Fairfield in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 22 should be rezoned from C-2 to a more appropriate zoning classification. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, again, that was kind of mysterious. Would you clarify that issue? Mr. Nagy: This too is pursuant to a Council resolution. The Planning Commission, on their own motion, had earlier initiated a rezoning petition to consider rezoning the property at the southwest corner of Five Mile and Hubbard Road, principally the site of the closed Triple A office building, which has been closed for a number of years, to consider the rezoning of that property from a commercial classification to an office classification consistent with the Future Land Use Plan and *i'" established use of the property. In addition to that there was an adjoining property to the west, which is the subject of this Council resolution. It is also an office usage. It is used for legal office purposes, and the Council in their resolution has asked the Planning Commission also to consider rezoning that adjoining property to an office classification consistent with the recommendation in connection with the Triple A building. Mr. Engebretson: What is the status of the Triple A building? Mr. Nagy: It has had first and second reading and had a roll call vote and is about to be published in the City paper, which with that it will be complete. Mr. Engebretson: We need a motion to set a public hearing. On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. McCann and unanimously approved, it was #1-18-96 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #872-95, and pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, does hereby 14687 establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to rezone a portion of a parcel located on the southeast corner of Five Mile Road and Fairfield Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 22 from C-2 to OS. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of such hearing be given as provided in Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shall be a report and recommendation submitted to the City Council. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 96-1-8-1 by Merritt McCallum Cieslak Architects requesting approval for all plans required by Section 18.58 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to construct an addition to the church located at 32765 Lyndon Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 22. Mr. Miller: This is Lyndon Avenue. To the east you have Brookfield Road. One half a mile to the north you have Five Mile Road, and to the west you have Farmington Road. This is St. Maurice Catholic Church. They would like to build a 6,730 sq. ft. addition to the front of their existing classrooms and assembly building. This new addition would be used as the main body of the church whereas the existing church area would be converted into a parish hall. Parking on the site for this, they are required to have 153 parking spaces, the site plan shows 239 spaces so they meet the parking requirement. They also will plant new landscaping in the front yard adjacent to the new addition with the existing landscaping remaining the same. Building elevations show that the new addition will match the building and building materials, which is mostly brick with some highlighting of split-face block. There is one main difference in that the existing building has a flat roof and the new addition will have a peaked asphalt shingle roof. That is the main difference but other than that it should look as one building when completed. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Nagy, any comments? Mr. Nagy: We have no new correspondence. Mr. Engebretson: Then we will go to the petitioner. Bob Wertenberger: I am an architect for Merritt McCallum Cieslak located in Farmington, Michigan. We are architects for the project. I have some 14688 colored drawings here. Just to reiterate on what the planner has just spoken on. I will start with the site plan briefly. Currently the existing building extends within 100 feet of the right-of-way at Lyndon. We Saw would propose to remove a small portion of that and add it to the actual body of the church. What is currently used as worship space now would then become parish hall and classrooms for Sunday School. There would be no change to the rectory, and no change to the parking area. There is currently landscaping to the west of the property. There are some existing trees. We will be supplementing that with some landscaping, mainly in front of the church and some at the new entry. We have a new entry canopy here just south of the worship space. (He presented the elevation plans) We would try with the new building to match the existing brick, which is a reddish color, and to give the building some height to make it appear more as a church building we have raised it with laminated wood beams inside, given it a pitched roof covered with asphalt shingles as was mentioned before. There are some accent bands at the base. I also have some samples of those materials. Mr. Alanskas: I see you are building this 30 feet high and the setback is 50 feet, which is not that high, but how tall is that cross? Mr. Wertenberger: The cross is 60 feet. Mr. Alanskas: John, how high can he go for the size of a cross? Mr. Nagy: Church crosses are exempt from height restrictions. Mr. Morrow: The first entryway into your new church service area, where is that? Mr. Wertenberger: There is an existing entry that is shown here. (He pointed this out on the plan) We will be adding a new entry canopy. Mr. Morrow: The new section would not have a new entryway? You would still be coming from off the side? There is no traffic entering? Mr. Wertenberger: Our nearest side walk to the street would be right here. Mr. Morrow: And that is existing now? Mr. Wertenberger: Well it is about 30 feet north of the existing one. Mr. Morrow: It will not be a part of your new worship area? 14689 Mr. Wertenberger: No it would not extend out in front of the church on the Lyndon Avenue side. �.. Mr. Morrow: And this is not an expansion. It is just a new worship area. Mr. Wertenberger: No additional seating. In fact, we plan on taking the same pews, and just moving them into the new church. Mr. LaPine: When I was out there checking it out, I am just trying to get it in my mind if I have this figured right, the new addition, the way I paced it off, looks like it is going to go out as far as your existing sign is now? Mr. Wertenberger: Approximately. That sign will have to be removed. Mr. LaPine: I understand that. Then from that point to the sidewalk, is that where the 50 foot setback is from the sidewalk or is the 50 foot setback from the street? Mr. Wertenberger: It would be about a foot south of the sidewalk. Mr. LaPine: The two large trees that are in front of the sign, I assume they will stay. Then there are some big shrubs there that I know will come down. Will the two big trees stay? Mr. Wertenberger: If they are right next to the sign, they will have to come down. Mr. LaPine: No they are further up closer to the sidewalk. Mr. Wertenberger: Then they would remain. Mr. LaPine: The only other question I have, you say you are not going to add any other additional seating or anything like that. Once you move the sanctuary into the new area, what is the old area going to be used for? Mr. Wertenberger: That will be used as a parish hall, a gathering place before and after church. We will have some flexible folding partitions that they can section that off for Sunday school classes, reading, things of that nature. Mr. LaPine: I guess what I am getting at, if you are going to use that for additional classrooms, that has to leave me to believe you are hoping to get additional members which means more people coming into church but you are telling me that is not going to happen. 14690 Mr. Wertenberger: The plan right now is there will be no expansion in the number of seats. Mrs. Blomberg: John, I wondered what the height would be of a regular colonial? Mr. Nagy: 26 to 28 feet to the ridge. Mrs. Blomberg: So this isn't that much higher than a colonial. Mr. Morrow: Along that line, I noticed there was a house opposite that church that has some solar panels that probably get up in that 30 foot range that added to the house. I think it is certainly compatible to the area. I know there is some single family to the west, but they are well screened by a row of very, very tall pines, so it seems like it would be compatible to the neighborhood. (Mr. Wertenberger presented samples of the building materials to the Commission) Mr. Piercecchi: In regards to your landscaping, are those going to be pine-type trees, needle trees or deciduous trees? Mr. Wertenberger: No they will be deciduous trees. Mr. Piercecchi: How close will they come to the sidewalk? Mr. Wertenberger: Approximately 25 to 30 feet. Mr. Engebretson: It looks like you have done a very, very thorough job and it looks like it is going to be quite a magnificent facility. On a motion duly made by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously approved, it was #1-19-96 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 96-1-8-1 by Merritt McCallum Cieslak Architects requesting approval for all plans required by Section 18.58 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to construct an addition to the church located at 32765 Lyndon Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 22, subject to the following conditions: 1) That the Site Plan marked Sheet A-1 dated January 12, 1996 prepared by Merritt McCallum Cieslak, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 14691 2) That the landscaping, as shown on the Floor Plan marked Sheet A- 2 dated January 12, 1996, as revised, and described on the above approved Site Plan, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2) That underground sprinklers are to be provided for all new landscaped areas and all planted materials shall be installed prior to final inspection and to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition; 4) That the Building Elevation Plan marked Sheet A-3 dated January 12, 1996 prepared by Merritt McCallum Cieslak, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 5) That the building materials of the new addition shall match the building materials of the existing church so that upon completion the entire structure will look like it was constructed at one time. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Alanskas, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Sign Permit Application by John Dinan requesting approval for signage for the office building located at 37751 Pembroke Street in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 6. Mr. Miller: This site is located on the south side of Pembroke between Victor Parkway and Newburgh Road. This is John Dinan's new office building. He is proposing a 30 sq. ft. identification ground sign. The site is allowed a 30 sq. ft. identification sign so it is a conforming sign. It will be located in the east drive, on the right hand side as you drive in, in the landscaped area in the parking lot. Mr. Engebretson: Mr. Miller it is a conforming sign in all respects? Mr. Miller: Yes it is. Mr. Engebretson: Is Coldwell Banker going to be the sole occupant of that building or are they going to be the signature occupant. Mr. Miller: I think at the meeting he said they would take over one third of the building. Mr. Engebretson: I understand that the petitioner was excused from coming to this meeting because he had a conforming sign so with that comment, I guess a motion would be in order. 14692 On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mrs. Blomberg and unanimously approved, it was `"' #1-20-96 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the Sign Permit Application by John Dinan requesting approval for signage for the office building located at 37751 Pembroke Street in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 6, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the Sign Package by John Dinan, received by the Planning Commission on January 18, 1996, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2) That the sign shall identify a business center (i.e., Caldwell Banker Building) and not individual tenants as outlined in the correspondence from the Inspection Department dated January 24, 1996. 3) That the sign shall be blue and white. Mr. Engebretson, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 718th Regular Meeting 'taw held on January 30, 1996 was adjourned at 8:10 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ti"4/ Robert Alanskas, Secretary Jack Engebr tson, Chairman Jg