Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 2001-04-2418491 MINUTES OF TBE 823'a REGULARMEETING GELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, April 24, 2001, the City Planning Co®ission of the City of Livonia held its 823`a Regular Meeting in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. James C. McCaw, Chairman, called the meeting to order A 7:30 p.m. Members present: James C. McCaw Robert Alanskas H G. Shane William LaPme Dan Piemecchi Elaine Koons Members absent: None Messrs. Mark Taormina, Planning Director, AI Nowak, Planner IV, Scott Miller, Planner II and Bill Poppenger, Planner I were also present Chartmnn McCann informed the audience that if a petition on toniglifs agenda involves a rezoning request this Commission makes areconamendation to the City Council who, in tum, will hold its own public hearing and will make the final deterioration as to whether a petition is approved or denied. The Plavaiing Commission holds the only public hearing on a request for preliminary plat and/or vacating petition. The Coamtission's recommendation is forwarded to the City Council for the final determination as to whether a plat is accepted or rejected. If a petition requesting a waiver of use or site plan is denied tonight the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision, in writing, to the City Council. Resolutions adopted by the City Planning Cormnissim become effective seven (7) days after die date of adoption. the Planning Commission and the professional staff have reviewed each of these petitions upon thein filing The staff has fumished the Conmtission with both approving and denying resolutions, which the Com®ssum may, or may not use depending on the oufcome of the proceedings tonight We will begin with the Miscellaneous Site Plans for om agenda ITEM #1 PETITION 91-07-08-13 American Tower Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the firs[ item on the agenda is Petition 91-07-08-13 by American Tower requesting approval to expand its leased compound area previously approved for the installation of new wireless communication equipment at property located at 17217 Middlebelt Road in the S.E. 1/4 of Section 11. Mr. Miller: This site is located on the west side ofMiddlebelt between Six Mile and Curtis. On August 6, 1991, Detroit Cellular Telephone Company received Site Plan Approval to locate a cellular tower and an equipment building in a defined area in the backyard of the Phillips Phnnbing & Heating business. The existing rwnopole is 125 ft in height and is located in a 50 ft by 79 ft fenced in area at the extreme westerly edge of the property. The petitioner is requesting approval b expand the area that the tower now sets in. The proposed area would measure 18492 20 ft by 30 ft. and expand off the southeast comer of the existing fenced in area In a letter that was subrutfed with the site plan it is explained that "the proposed project is a proactiveeffort to accommodate for anticipated future demandfor wireless communication carriers'. The Site Plan does not show what this area would be used for or what would be located within it It is presumed that this expanded area would be fenced in a similar fashion as roe existing lease area In reference to this petition, on April 6, 2001 the Planning Commission received a cmrespondence from the Inspection Department The letter indicated `that behind the main building a outside storage of old rusting plumbing parts, most ofrvkich look unusable or at best inpoor repay". The Zoning Board of Appeals has no record of this site receiving a variance for outside storage. At the April 10, 2001 Study Meeting the Planning Commission discussed tabling this kin until to entire site was cleaned up. This budding, because it is occupied by a plumbing shop, is required to provide only 5 parking spaces. If this building were to be utilized by a general retail type use, then the parking requirement would increase to 17 spaces. The area in frond of the building cannot be used for parking because of its depth. Vehicles parked there would have to back over the sidewalk, which is prohibited. Mr. McCann: Is there arty corespondeme7 Mr. Taormina There are four items ofcwrespoodence. The fust itean is from the Engineering Division, dated March 23, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your requert, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referencedpetition. We have no objections to the proposal at tha tone We bust that tha will provideyou with the wformation requested" The leiter is signed by David Lear, PE, Civil Engineer. The second lett is from to Division of Police, dated March 28, 2001, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed the proposed site plan for the expansion ofthe location already approvedf s, a monopole andeq ipment shed We have no objections to the proposal as submitted" The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Bureau. The thud leiter is from the Livonia Fire & Rescue Division, dated March 29, 2001, which reads as follows: "This office has reviewed the site plan submitted in connection with the property located at the above referenced address. We have no objections to this proposal with the fallowing stipulations. (1) Access for emergencyegm]pmentshaIIbeprorided." TheleNcris signed by James B. Corcoran, Fre Marshal. The north letter is from the Inspection Department, dated April 6, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of March 20, 2001, the above referenced petition has been reviewed The following is noted: (1) There appears to be three (3) equipment arrays on the tower, but we have permits for only two (2). (2) The area indicated as grass behind the main building on the site is achrally outside storage ofold, rusting plumbing parts, most ofwhich look unusable or at best in poor repair. Ratio has deteriorated pallets and woodpiles stored outside. (3) The main building site has a six (6) foot barbed wire fence around it, which is not allowed today. (4) The main building in addition to barbed wire has a chain tink fence on the north side, which has "shits"in it to provide screening, which is also not allowed today. (5) The address given on site is 17217Middlebelt Our records show it as 17213 Middlebelt This Department will issue a violation to 18493 Stephen D. Bake ofAmerican Tower Corporation far the i??egal lhvd array. This Departinenl has no firther objection to this petition." The legis signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director ofInspectim Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this evening? Stephen Baker, 29585 Costello Drive, New Hudson, Michigan, 48165. I think the best use of my time is to address each of the five points for the site alterations. Fust of all, in terms of the three arrays on the tower and the permuting being secured for two of them, this issue is currently being resolved in currespomdence with the Building Department and the Planning Department as well. We are currently pursing a bolding permit for the third camer, which is Verizon Wireless. This issue is being resolved currently and the bolding pemutwill be filed later this week. The second issue is regarding the material in the rear of the property, which is in the vicinity of our proposed expansion area The landowner is with us tonight, Ms. Alice Phillips, and perhaps she can address some specific questions if you have them but in short, she and her staff are in the process of cleaning up the materials that are in that vicinity. She is currently addressing that The third item was the barbed woe. The tower was originally approved in the early 90's: I think 1991 or 1992. It was my belief that the barbed wive was permitted at that time. That is why the barbed where exists around the tower facility itself and I believe it exists around the larger parcel itself We are willing to not provide barbel wive on the proposed new fence in order to meet the current provision and if needed, to take off the existing barbel wive on the existing fencing around the tower facility itself. the fourb itemwas regarding the slating. There is no slating on the tower compound itself. The slating that is on site, is around the fencing that surounds the rem ofthe property, the rear of the plumbing business itself. The landowner is currently working to remove that and has removed some of it It is limited to a very small area and is willing to remove the remainder of A over the next week or so, as time provides. The last issue was the address issue and this is simply just a miscommunication. Each carrier that is on that site has their own unique address in order for billing for utilities and so forth There wasjust some clarifications that I provided m the City in a letter dated April 18, 2001, regarding each of these issues but with regard to this specific issue, the 17217 address pertains to Verizon Wireless and the 17213 address, which the City has an record, is assigned to AT&T Wireless, who reconstructed the existing tower on site. I will address arty further questions. Mr. Alansais: What do you plan to do with the expansion? Mr. Baker: This is a proactive measure on our part There are three carriers on the tower currently and we've gotten additional requests from carvers to utilize the facility. We are not going to place equipment in this area immediately, however, we are expanding the area to accommodate the carvers that will be coming in there in the coming months. In this sense, our goal is to tnoy parallel the City's goals in that we are attempting to mrmintize the proliferation of towers, in the general sense, by maximizing the usage of this individual facility. This is a proactive effort to accommodate future collocators on the site. 18494 Mr. Alanskas: If you, down the road, need more space, would you want to come back for more space again? Mr. Baker: Potentially, but we've looked at the space requixmrems, what's an site, and the egmpmem demands and potential collocatc s and we feel the 20' X 30' expansion would accommodate the collocamrs that would come to the site. Mr. Alanskas: So you only want to use the me side, not across the entire lot line? I was there last week and they said they wand to go 20 fret across the entire property, the width of the property. Mr. Baker: The expansion area is 20 feet to the east and extending from the southerly property line, there is a 20' X 30' expansion area and it is completely contained on this property. Mr. Alanskas: Just an the me side? Mr. Baker: Yes. Mr. Alanskas: I have a question for the owner of the property. Mr. McCann: Let's wait for that Did you have a question for Mark? Mrs. Koros: I realize I am asking you a question regarding the Inspection Deparment and you may not be able to answer it It says there was a violation for the thud array. Why wamnYviolations issued for the parts and the fence? Mr. Taormina : I really camot respond to that other than to say that the situation that exists out there maybe be a pre-existing, nonconforming situation and whether they actually constitute a violation, I'm not sure ifthat has been detarnmed, at this point. Mr. LaPme: I was wondering why you didnt buy the whole 79 feet so webe got the property sgoaredoff. Idmtflmkyoureallya Nvmd[ha butIbehi ewhatymu dis that is all you really need and you don't want to take anymore. Mr. Baker: Comct Mr. LaPme: The area you want to expand is only 30' X 20', because you are only going to build two small buildings for the equipment that has to go in there to hook into thetower. Cmltbatbewco odawdmtbe50'X79'pieeeofpropey. For msbnce, in the back where you have grass, is there any way you can put a Mud] building back there. Ymbe got all this concrete. Isn't there arty way you can put a snA building there instead of cutting this off? Mr. Baker: From the appearances of it, it would appear that, yes, you could tit additional colbmatms in the existing compmmd. However, there are two complications to that First of all, for the lastcouple of months, Sprint bas recently collocated an 18495 this site and they now have cabinets on site rather than a small budding. They utilize cabinets and they now occupy that grass area on the north side of the compound In tams ofthe concrete area that you are speaking of, the driveway, which is paved, that is reserved by Verizon. Verizon initially bolt this structure back in the early 90's and subsequent to that American Tower is now in management ofthis. We sublease the property from Venzom That area is reserved for their space and their potential future expansion. To answer you question, no, we cavil utilize the existing space on the north because of Sprint and on the east side of the compound is Venzon's reservation of that space. Mr. LaPine: I am a little confused now. Verizm owas the tower! Mr. Baker: That is correct Mr. LaPme: Are they going to be one of the firms that are going to expand? Mr. Baker: No. They are on the existing tower. Ther shelf is on site. Mr. LaPine: Wbat do they need all that concrete area for! Mr. Baker That is their reserved area for future potential use. Mr. LaPine: If we can only get two more commamications on this tower, then I dont understand why they can't utilize that If they cant expand anymore than the five and they can only have two more, we've got three there now, there seems to be space there to handle it Mr. Baker: It is a conlracNal legal issue. If we were able to utilize that space for additional collocakrrs, we would but we are not allowed to. Mr. LaPine: But you work for them, do you not? You are operating A for them? Mr. Baker: In essence. Mr. LaPine: Cant you go back to them and say, "Look, we cant get this expansion unless we can use that area?" Mr. Baker: Part of our agreement to lease this and other sites that we have leased from them is that they retain their original space. That is part of their original space for potential future equipment Mr. LaPine: O.K. Thankyou. Mr. Alanskas: If you did not get this approval, what would your company do? Mr. Baker: Our company would continue to operate this facility, however, the carvers that would be potentially uhh mg this facility would be before you for additional towers. They need their antennas up in the air and if they cant collocate on this 18496 structure, they would be seeking another means to place antemas above the ground Mr.Alanskas: Thankyoa Mr. Pierceccbi: You had stated earlier that this facility that you are proposing to put in there is not for amediak use. Mr. Baker: That is correct Americo Tower would notplace arty equipment in that area We are just the tower operator. The carriers themselves would be the ones placing equipment to that area We are snnply mwmg the fence out to accommodate thein egwpmmt in the fudme. Mr. Piercecclui The reason that I mention that sir is because that site is not in the best interest of our City. Have you looked at it? Mr. Baker: Yes, Ihave. Mr. Piercecchi: It is outside storage. It is stuff that has been in there for a hundred years, figurmvely speaking. It is not maintained m my type of development m that area. I think it would be a mistake without first clearing that Iwmtedwbring that up to the petitioner. I dont really object to putting expansions on the tower but the site to me is the essential thing here. Mr. McCann: Is the owner of the property here this evening Mr. Baker: Just in closing before fuming it over to her, I am seeking your support with the proposal that is before you for proposed alterations, it is in the best interest of the City. Alice Phillips, 14705 Flamingo, Livonia Mr. Alanskas: When I was there last week, I spoke with the young lady and the gentleman with the beard and they said they thought that they had, from years ago, a variance from the ZBA, where you could have outside storage. I checked the records and there is nothing that says where you are allowed to have outside storage, period. Ms. Phillips: I waml aware of that Mr. Alayskas: No. I can understand with the business that you have, people come in and want to buy a purple seat or pink whatever and you have to perm over all this porcelain and it doeml belong back there. Ms. Phillips: Ijust assumed it was O%. No owe has evertold us we couldnY do it Mr. Alayskas: But no one told you that you could, did the}? Ms. Phillips: No. 18497 Mr. A]anskas: Where can you put all of that material and get it out of that yard? Ms. Phillips: We cant We coal have the room fn it inside. Mr.Alanskas: Mark, wouldnithey haveto go through the ZBA to try to gettoget avanance for outside stooge? Mr. Tocantins If they were proposing to enlarge that area, they would certainly have to go through thatprocess. But the condition at this site is something that was taking place prim to when the ordinance regulation went auto effectproltibiting outside storage then, no, they would not have to go through that process. Necessarily, they could continue to operate in the same manner that they were at the time the ordinance was put inky effect Mr. McCann: Ms. Phillips, how long have you been at that location? Ms. Phillips: Ibir y seven years. Prim to that, my husband's brother owned it and he was there probably ten years prior kr that Mr. McCam: So fmtp seven years. Mr. Alanskas: I have only been in your store once and I have never been back there. If it weren't fn this petition l wouldvl know that you have that back there. You can't seeit from the road. I was just wondering ifyou could tryto clean it up somewhat? Ms. Phillips: We do try but we have so many things that are antiquated and people come in because they need a pink color, or green color, that you coal get anywhere else and that is why we keep Hose things. But it is very difficult when you have Port much to keep it well organized Mr. Alanskas. My thought is, nowyon aregoing to possibly lose a20' X 30' section of that backyard that you are uswg. Where are you going to put what you had in that section? Ms. P'f iiiltips: Probably closer to our building Wedonlhave any room inside. Mr. Alanskas: I understand that what you vend is a good cleanup. Ms. Phillips: I guess. Mr. Alanskas: Thank you. Mr. Shane: The obvious solution kr this is to expand you building. I am assuming that would be possible for the size of area that you have. Have you ever given that any thought? 18498 Ms. Phillips: No we haven't Would it be possible for us to have another building where we could store things? Mr. Shane: Mythoughtwould be tojustadd to the building thatyou have sufficientto be able to store those things that you have inside. I think you have enough site to do that Ms. Phillips: I think we do. We probably could. We do vend more stooge space. Mr. Shane: That is the obvious solutionforyoa PAs. Phillips: We would have to go through the Planning Commission to do that right? Mr. Sbane: Right Mr. McCann: So what can we do to improve the site, create more storage for you? Ms. Phillips: Would we be permitted to enlarge our building Mr. McCain: I believe we discussed tltis. Is diere sufficient land? They are grandfathered in now with the parking and everything else. Mr. Taormina: Any expansion of the budding would require some additional parking and from the plan that I am looking at there appears to be about 75 to 80 feet between the rem of the building wbere it exists today and where American Tower proposes to expand their lease area That would provide some additional area for bidding expansion. Mr. McCann: There would be enough property to do something Ms. Phillips: I do think we have ample property. I don'tthink that will be a problem In other words, you are telling me we cannot store outside anymore? Mr. McCain: Part of the problem that we have here tonight is that you are amending your site plan and if you do that you are no longer grandfathered in. Is that correct? You may be but we have the opportunity to force you to end the outside storage if you want to expand the cell tower area You have been grandfathered in so you can continue to operate the way you are without changing it but if you want to change A, then the City Council may say, notjust us, OK. that is fine if you want to expand that but you've got to clean up some of the outside storage or take cue of some of the problems. There hasn't been a decision by the Planning Commission as to what type of recommendation to make to the City Council yet as w whether or not to continue the outside storage or not We are trying to get your feeling as to the likelihood that you would consider budding an outbuilding back there, a storage budding, with shelving of some type so you can get organized and store more or whether that is not economically feasible for you now. 18499 Ms. Phillips: It is not feasible now. If we clean up the yard, would that satisfy you? That is what we imand to do. I know it doesnY look good and we are going to do it We are going to clean it up. I am short on personnel. I dont have a lot of men Mr. McCann: Iundersbvd. We are trying to work with you tonighton and get the feeling of how things are gomg for you Are there any other questions from the Commissioners? If not I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no ane, a motion is in order. Mr. Piercerchi: I move to table this item until the entiresite is cleaned up and put m order. On a mot m by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mrs. Koons and unanimously approved it was #4642001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Cormmssion does hereby recommend that Petition 91-07-08-13 by American Tower requesting approval to expand its leased compound area previously approved for the installation of new wireless communication equipment at property located A 17217 Middlebelt Road in the S.P. 1/4 of Section 11 be tabled to May 22, 2001. Mr. McCa n How much time would you need to get that backyard in shape? It is springtime now, to do what you can to make it look a little nicer? Ms. Phillips: Could I have a month? Mr. McCain: Yonmay wamto askthe gentleman bebmdvou fromthe cellulartower company that they are not going to be going out looking for a new location They own that tower so I guess they are kind of waiting for a month So that is fine. Mr. Costello: If Ms. Phillips says that she can clean the site up in a month, we certainly would like to be on the next Plam ng Commission agenda rather than pushing it art for two months. Mr. McCann: The next regular Meeting will be on May 22,2001,# you think you could clean itupbythen. That gives ymjust about four weeks. Ms. Phillips: I think so. Mrs. Koros: May I make a request to the sta&? Mr. Taormina, A our next study session could we have available to us or mailed to us, the 1990 proposal that brought in the original cell tower! Mr. McCain: Thatwmld bebeneficial and any conditions. Thenextregularmeehngwillbe May 22, 2001. We will be reviewing and voting on it We will meet the week before to discuss it among ourselves but that is the target date wben we will be voting an it Mr.Alaoskas: Avdwewillbeco®ngouttotakealmkatit 18500 Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted ITEM #2 PETITION 2001-03-05-14 Leo Soave Mr. Piencecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-08-14 by Leo Soave, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the Zo ang Ordinance in cormechon with a proposal to rmshucit a condominium development on property located on the north side of Joy Road between Newburgh Road and Wayne Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 32. Mr. Miller: This site is located on the north side of Joy between Newburgh and Wayne. The petitioner is requesting approval to construct a condominium development on property that is south of Churchill High School and east of the new Walgreens Drug Store, which is located on the northeast comer ofJov Road and Newburgh Road. The proposed development would consist of two (2) bindings, containing six (6) units. The site plan shows that one of the buildings would be made up of units 1 through 4 and would be located along the rear or north property line. These attached condominiums would face Joy Road The required rear yard setback for a structure in an RC zoning district is 5011 Units I through 4 would only have a rear yard of 25 ft Therefore, a variance for deficient rear yard setback would be required from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The other bidding, coadam ng Poe renaming two condominiums, would be situated along Poe west property line. These units would face east At the units would be one-story in height and 1,250 sq. ft in size. According to the floor plan, each unit would have two bedrooms. The condominiums would be similar in appearance and would have an attached two -car garage projecting off their find elevations. Access to the site would be by a single drive off Joy Road that would broaden out to each condomirman's driveway. Five surplus parking spaces would offer the residents additional guest parking. Parking required is 2VVmes for each unit with 2 bedrooms, 2Vx 6 units requires 15 spaces. Parking providedis 29 spaces. The site plan shows that thereis a 90 ft wide Detroit Edison lmnsrission line easement that alts across the site diagonally from Bre southwest comer to the northeast comer. This easement separates the proposed condominium development from tree residential has that front off Joy Road. Because the proposed development is residential, there is no requrernent on the percentage of landscaping required. Theordmance states that the site shall be fully landscaped with appropriate materials as reviewed and recommended by the Planning Commission and approved by City Council. The submitted landscape plan shows that the site would be about 65% landscaped Even though a majority, of the landscaping is in the fork of grass, the plan does propose a wide variety of other plant matarial throughout the site. The bidding elevation plans do not call out the proposed budding mffienals for the units other Poan a notation under the f7mt elevation caption that slates `brick from elevation only, 4/4 horizontal vinyl siding" Ibis notation would seemto mean that only the front of the units, including the garage, would be brick and the sides and rear, including the chimney, would be vinyl siding. No color rendering has been subrutted at Pois true. 18501 Mr. McCann Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: Therearethreeiterssofoorrespondeuce. Thefirstiteinofeccrespordevceis from the Division of Police, dated March 23, 2001, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed the proposed plans in connection with a request to construct condominiums on Joy Roadeast of Newburgh A stop sign u requredat the driveway ofthe complex for exiting vehicles. It a our recommendation that a sidewalk also be constructed along Joy Road the length ofthe proposed development We have no other recommendations regarding this proposes" The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant, Traffic Brureau The second letter is ban the Engineering Division, dated March 26, 2001, which reads as f rlows: 'Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referencedpeotlon. We have no objections to the proposal at this time We would like to point out that the developer will need to receive approval from the Debrolt Edison Company toplace the access drive and parking within the easement areas. The development will also need to meet the requirements of the Wayne County Storm Water Management Ordinance. We trust that the will provide you with the information request." The letter is sieved by David Lear, RE, Civil Engineer. The third letter is from the Inspection Departnent, dated April 16, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request ofMarch 20, 2001, the above referencedpewhon has been reviewed The following a noted: (2) This petition will require the following zoning variances from the Zoning Board ofAppeake (a) Deficient rear yard setback Twenty fine feetproposed, 50 feet required, deft lent 25 feet (b) Deficient, a required 1200 square foot common recreation area (2) Parking meets the minimum as long as at least 3 spaces are allowed on the Detroit Edison easement (3) The plans are not clear ifthe exterior is essentialty maintenance free. This item should be clarified to the Commission and Council's satisfaction. Thu Department has no further objection to this petition." The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director oflnspection. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. McCann: Is the petitioner here this eventual Leo Soave, 34822 Pembroke, Livonia These are going to have a fill basement and they are going to sell for about $175,000 and I'll answer your questions. Mr. McCain: I was looking at the color rendering of the red brick Where are you going to find fire engine red brick? Mr. Soave: This isjust a conceptual drawing and we'll have itwhatever color you choose. Mr. McCain: It is not really going to be bright red brick? Mr. Soave: No sir. It is going to be an earth tone color. I dont know why they did it this way but I didnR pick that color. Mr. McCain: Are there arty questions ban the Commissioners? 18502 Mr. Piercecclui Looking at that elevation, don't you think it would be a great ehprovement to do that whole fast floor all the way across those windows instead ofjust the wainscot? Mr. Soave: If you think this is going to make this project go, it is no problem We'l do it that way. The reason we started this way, this is not northwest Livonia where nest door it is commercial. We are nest door to commercial. We are nest to Churchill High School and we are on the comer of Joy and Newburgh. That is why we are doing it this way. Mr. Pieucecchi: Maybe it is because we want to keep you in the habit of doing it O.K.? Mr. McCain: I think itis a good point though. Burt I do think for maintenance and 20 yeas from now, the brickjust stands up. It isjust prov n around the City audit looks richer and makes the comer look nicer. Mr. Soave: I can't argue that logic. It makes a lot of sense. Mrs. Koms: Mr. Soave, have you talked to Detroit Edison A all abort using their easement for their drive? Mr. Soave: I spoke to them about six or seven mordhs ago and they said we can pave under there but there can be no buildings. Mrs. Koms: What about parking? Mr. Soave: We talked abort it but I can'trecal. I have to talk to them again. Mrs. Koros: Thanks. Mr. LaPine: Are the chimneys going to be brick? Mr. Soave: If you think they should be brick yes sir. Mr. LaPine: I think they should be brick. Mr. Soave: OK Then we will make them brick Mr. LaPine: Doyen own the three lot mthe north side, the three separnalots? Ifyougo back to the original plan, you will see what I am talking about Mr. Soave: Yes sir. I own the three lots. Mr. LaPine: But you are not building on those lots right now! Mr. Soave: I don't have any plans to build on them as of yet No sin. Mr. LaPine: Eventually you ane going to be building single family homes there, I hope? 18503 Mr. Soave: Yes sir. Mr. LaPme: Thank you. Mr. McCann: If there are no further questions, I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to speak for or agamstthis petition? Seeingnoone wishing to speak, a motion is an order. On a motion by Mrs. Koms, seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimously approved it was #465-2001 RESOLVED that, Poe City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to Poe City Council that Petition 2001-03-08-14 by Leo Soave, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to construct a condominium development on property located on the north side of Joy Road between Newburgh Road and Wayne Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 32 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the Site Planmarked Sheet S-1 dated February 14, 2001 prepared by Architecturally Speaking, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2) That [be Landscape Plmdated AprilM, 2001, as revised, prepared by Archib�tun lly Speaking, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 3) That all disturbed lawn areas sball be sodded in lieu ofbydrosced'ng; 4) That underground sprinklers are to be provided for all landscaped and sodded areas and all planted materials shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Inspection Department and thereafter permanently maummored in a healthy condition; 5) That the Exterior Building Elevation Plans as received by the Planing Conntission an March 13, 2001, are hereby approved and shall be adhered In, except for the fact that the first floor of each building shall be conshnv;Rd out of brick an all fom sides and that the chimneys will be brick; 6) That the brick used in the construction shall be frill face 4 -inch brick, no exceptions; 7) That this approval is subject to the petitioner being granted a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for deficient rear yard setback and my conditions related thereto; 8) That the Enhance Marker Applic ation, as shown an the approved Landscape Plan. is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 9) That the brick used in the cons ruction of the Entrance Marker shall be the same brick used in the construction of the condominiums: 18504 10) That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection Deparment at the time the building pens s are applied for, and 11) That a sidewalk shall be installed along the length of Joy Road, as required by the Engineering Division. Mr. McCann, Chaimua, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ITEM #3 PETITION 2001-03-08-15 Livonia Ville Condominiums Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced, the next item on the agenda is Petition 2001-03-08-15 Livonia Villa Coodoahmiums, submitted by The Smacola Companies requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to construct a condominium development nn property located at 9204 Middlebelt Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 36. Mr. Miller: Ibis site is located on the east side of Middlebelt between Joy and Grmdon. On September 15, 1999, Investico Development Corporation received Site Plan Approval to develop a condominnun development on this site. The project was never started and the one-year approval grace period expired. To be able to start this project, all plans have to be re -approved by the Planning Commission and City CounciL The Smacola Company is requestrng approval ta construct the same condonnnium developm® thatwas previously approved. The submitted Site Plan shows that the development would consist of seven buildings containing a total oftwenty-seven(27) units. Five of the buildings, containing between 6 and 4 units apiece, would be located on the large section ofthepropertythatisnortbofthe Midd Phmshipcenter. Thesebuildings would comprise twenty-five of the units. Each condominium would be two - stories in height and have two bedrooms. On the tad of the site that is located behind the strip center and 7 -Eleven Store would be two buildings each containing a single condom' unit. These would also be two -stories in height and have two bedrooms. Access b the site would be achieved by single east/west drive offMiddhbelt Road that would have two branches that would extend offnorth/south to provide a sheet to each of the condominium's driveways. Thirteen surplus parking spaces would offer the residents additional guestparking. Parking required is 2VVaces for each unit with2 bedrooms, 2Vx 27 units, which equates to 67 spaces. Parking provided is 67 spaces. Because the proposed development is residential, there is an requirement nn the percentage of landscaping required. The ordinance starts that the site shall be filly landscaped witlh appropriate materials as reviewed and reconnm®led by the Planning Cmnmissio r and approved by City Canard - The Landscape Plan shows the development would be screened from Middlebelt Road by a large 3 It. high landscaped earth berm Both sides of the berm would be planted with deciduous type trees. A roll of sunlar trees would be planted along the east property line to help screen this site from the adjacent residential neighbors. Even though a majority of the landscaping is in the firm 18505 of gross, the plan does propose a wide variety of other plant material HvaghaIIthesite. The Elevation Plans show that the new buildings would be constructed mainly out of brick on all feu sides, with only the second floor of the front elevations being vinyl siding. Each unit would have a small walkout balcony area off their second floor bedroom. To provide some privacy for the back porch area of the attached condominiums, the rmddle units would have a 7 It. high brick wall extended off their rear elevations. Mr. McCain: Is there any correspondence? Mr. Taormina: Therearethree items ideorrespondence. The fnstletts is from the Engineering Division, dated Mach 28, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request, the Engineering Division has reviewed the above referencedpention. The Engmeering Divuionhmmobjectwm othe proposal at this time. We trust that this will provide you with the information requested" The letter is signed by David Lea, PE., Civil Engineer. The second letter is from the Inspection Department, dated April 16, 2001, which reads as follows: "Pursuant to your request of March 26, 2001, the above referenced pehhon has been reviewed The following a noted: (1) We believe the address to be 9024 Middlebelt Road, not 9204. (2) Condition 10 ofthe original approval (a Zoning Variance for deficient yard setbacks) would sh11 apply and a new variance most be obtained (3) Ifnothing else has changed, this Deparbnent would have no further objections to Mispreviously approved petition" The letter is signed by Alex Bishop, Assistant Director of Inspection. The third letter is from the Division of Police, dated April 16, 2001, which reads as follows: "We have reviewed the plmu regardmg the proposal to construct a condominium development at 9204 Mddlebelt Road We have an objections to the plan as submitted. A stop sign will be required for the exit to M ldlebelC" The letter is signed by Wesley McKee, Sergeant Traffic Bureau. That is the extent of the correspondence. Mr. McCam: Is the petitioner here this evening? Mak Gazlay, 7083 Cedarbank Drive, Wes[ Bloomfield, Michigan 48324. Mr. McCam: Have you reviewed this plan with the County under the new water retention requirememts? Mr. Gazlay: Our discussions with Mr. Hill were that this is going to dram through Livonia Dann No. 1 and it will not apply. Mr. McCam: Very good. Mr. Gazlay: Throughout this process we have obtained some permitting from the Engineering Depa tramt Itis just the Building Department that didnY get processed through. We are waling with the Engineering Department at this time on this. IF;itIL1 Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Ccmnrissione s? Hearing none, webe sat through this and have spent quite a bit of time on this project a couple of years ago and I think all the Coumussioners were here and remember it I guess I will go to the audience. Is there anybody in the audience who wishes to speak for or against this petition? Seeing no one wishing to speak, a motion is in order. On a motion by Mr. LaPme, seconded by Mr. Shane and u mmannously approved it was #4-66-2001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Cormnission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2001-03-08-15 Livonia Villa ^- "urns, submitted by The Smacola Companies requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of the Zoning Ordinance in connection with a proposal to construct a condominiuma development on property located at 9204 Middlebelt Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 36 be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the Site Planmarked Sheet 2 dated 1224/98 prepared by Del -Tec, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 2) That the Landscape Plan marked Sheet D`l dated 923/99, as revised, prepared by The Building Design Croup, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 3) That all disturbed lawn areas shall be sodded in lieu ofbydroseedivg; 4) That underground sprinklers are to be provided for all landscaped and sodded areas and all planted nderials shall be installed to Bre satisfaction of the Inspection Departrnent and thereafter permanently maturated ed in a healthy condition; 5) That the Exterior Budding Elevation Plans marked Shed A-3 and A-4 both dated 9/23/99, as revised, prepared by The Building Design Croup, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 6) That the brick wed in the construction shall be full face 4 inch brick no exceptions; 7) That the Entrance Marker Application, as submitted to the Planning Commission on April 24, 2001, is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 8) The brick used in the construction of the Entrance Marker shall be the same brick used in the construction of the condommiumms; 9) That shee[lighting shall be installed consisting of 100 -watt high pressure sodium lights on 18 ft high Hallbrook poles with underground wiring; 10) That the specific plans referenced in this approving resolution shall be submitted to the Inspection DeparhnerR at the time the building permits are applied for. 18507 Mr. McCann: Is thereany discussion? Mr. Alanskas: Mark are those dates for that siteplan 17124/98, should they be updated? Mr.Tacrmine: Wewill double checkthatbutI believeitwas a revision of the landscapeplan that luck place at the City Council leveL We'llverifythat Scottisindicating that those dates are accurate. Mr. McCann, Chan=, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted It will go on to City Conrad with an approving recoaunendation. ITEM #4 PETITION 2001 -03 -GB -02 Pulice Office Buildings Mr. Pietcecchi, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is petition 2001 -03 -GB -02 Police Office Buddngs requesting approval to substitute a greenbelt for the protective wall as outlined in Section 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance for property located A 32110 Five Mile Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 15. Mr. Miller: Ibis site is located on the northwest comer of Five Mile and Hubbard The applicant is requesting approval to substitute a greenbelt in lieu of the protective wall that is required between an office zoned property and a residential zoned property. The applicarat is requesting that the existing landscaped greenbelts along the west property line and part of the south property line be accepted as an appropriate substitution. The Ailice office complex is made up oftwa separate office buildings. One building faces Five Mile Road and is located close to the intersection of Five Mile Road and Hubbard Road The other building sets back on Hubbard Road and is separated from the first budding by a parking lot This office building faces Hubbard Road. The best way to describe the layout of this property is w say it is shaped like a backwards 'U. It funis the entire length of Five Mile Road between Hubbard Road and Fairfield Avenue and extends north up Hubbard Road about 300E The applicant is requesting that the existing grembelts that run along the back of the property be considered instead of the protective wall. The site plan shows that the existing greenbelt that ams along the south property line, parallel to Five Mile Road, is 15 If wide. Ibis area is planted with a mw ofatature evergreen trees. The greenbelt tbat r ns up along the west property line is approximately 25 If wide and is pleaded with a imist re of evergreens and deciduous trees. Because the greenbelt along the north property line that is next to the office building that fronts off Hubbard Road is not at least 10 If in width, it cannot be considered as an appropriate substitution for a wall. In a letter that accompanied the Site plan, the applicant explains that they believe "the existing greenbelts provide an adequate buffer between the office buildings and the art acentresidences". The letter also states that "the comtrwhon of theprotective wall would probably necessitate the removaloftrees _ . Mr. McCann: Is there any correspondence? 18508 Mr. Taormina: There is no correspondence. Mr. McCann: Is Poe petitioner here this evenin. Rhett Hartley, 417 Eureka Road, Wyandotte, Michigan 48192. I represent the owner, Hubbard - Five, LL.0 Mr. McCann: Are there any questions from the Commissioners? Mr. Alans nts: In regards to the greenbek how do you maintain this? Mr. Hartley: There is grass to be cut and the trees that we trim Mr. Alanskas: Ib you have a company that does that for you? Mr. Hartley: Yes. We have a landscaping company that does that Mr. Alanskas: Is itdoneweekly? Mr. Hartley I'mnot sure how often they come out Mr. Alanskas: You know, with Poese greenbelts, if they are approved, we have no way to police them to make sure that they are taken care of. My cmcem, as a Commissioner, is how are they going to be maintained? Like you say, you door know if they come out once a week. I hope they would int the grass every week Mr. Hartley: The owner is also a real estate company. We also manage the property and in fact, I am the inspector. I come out and look at it Mr. Alanskas: Howoften? Mr. Buckley: At leas[ once a month. Mr. Alanskas: Thank you Mr. McCann: Have you been out and looked A this greenbelt? Mr. Hartley: Yes. Mr. McCann: In cedam areas itis pretty tlun. Mr. Hartley: There are some gaps as far as trees. Mr. McCann: I can'ttell from the plan wbether your intent is that is whatis existing there or whether you are planning on filling in some of those gaps. 18509 Mr. Hartley: We hadn'tplanned on filling many gaps. If you look, I submitted some pictures. I don't know if you had a chance to see those. Mr. McCann: I have seen the pichres. My office is also across the street so I drive by it every day. Mr. Hartley: The site lines, which is whatI was looking at, there is that garage that pretty rich blocks the view fiom the largest gap which is that one behind the building which faces Five Mile Road. Other gaps might be in the northwest comer therewhich is a good space oflawn and there isjust the comer of the budding. Mr. McCain: My concern is for the neighbors because they have the opportunity to have wall if dny waut it and it is fm noise. I think the building has been maintained fairly well over the years and there is not a lot of traffic but that can change as well. Mr. LaPine: When I went out and looked at this I wasn't impressed with the greenery but at this particular time and because of the winter, and you know I am pretty much always in favor of walls, but would prefer to wait a couple of months until all the foliage has grown in there and gives us a better idea of how much of a barrier we have back there. I don't think it is imperative that you have this right away. This way it gives us a couple of months when all the foliage is in and we can pretty much see where the bare spots are. Thank you Mr. Shane: If there are any aborting residential neighbors here, I would be interested to see what their views are. Mr. Mccaun Are there any neighbors m anybody in the audience that would wish to speak for m against this petition? Seeing no one, is there anything else you would like to say9 Mr. Hartley: Them is the question if a protective wall were to be put up, it mightnecessitate the removal of some trees. Mr. McCain: That is a concern. Mrs. Koros: I also live in the area and I can attest that the maintenance is quite good. However, I question your theory on the bare spats covered by a garage. I also would like to wait and see what bare spats there are and maybe do some work an that Mr. McCain: Was that a tabling motion? Mrs. Koros: Yes. On a motion by Mrs. Koons seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimously approved it was 18510 #467-2001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend the Petition 2001 -03 -GB -02 Pulice Office Buildng requesting approval to substihIIe a greenbelt for the protective wall as outlined in Section 18.45 of the Zoning Ordinance for property located at 32410 Five Mile Road in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 15 be tabled to July 10, 2001. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted We'll see you on Julv 10, 2001. This concludes the Miscellaneous Site Plan portion of our agenda. We will now proceed with the Pending Item section of our agenda. These items have been discussed at length in prior meeting therefore, there will only be limited discussion tonight Audienceparticipation will require unanimous consent from the Conamissiot. ITEM#5 PETITION 2001-01-01-01 Adele Avulio Mr. Pietcecchi, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is Petition 2001-01-01-01 by Adele Avom requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Gary Lane and Favlane Court in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 4 from RUFB to R 3. On a motion by Mr. Pierourchit , seconded by Mr. Sbane and unanimously approved it was #468-2001 RESOLVED that, the Planning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition 2001-01-01-01 by Adele Avoho requesting to rezone property located on the with side of Seven Mile Road between Gary Lane and Fairlane Court in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 4 from RUF to R 3 be taken from the table Mr. McCaw, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Is there anything new since the last meeting, Mr. Taormina? Mr. Taormina: There is no correspondence, however, the Citv did receive a revised plan from the petitioner showing the unprovemerds to be made to the existing residence in response w some of the concerns that were expressed by the Planning Commission at the original meeting regarding how that building is presently oriented to the south towards Seven Mile and if the rezo mg is approved and the lots are developed both to the north and to the south, how would this house blend with the neighborhood How would it reorient towards Gary Lane? In fact, she has some additional adornment ent showing what eprovemevts would be made to the residence and I would defer to the petitioner to describe those more frilly. Mr. McCain: Scott, did you have other drawing on the reverse of that? Mr. Miller: We have side views. Mr. McCaw: We had the front view at the last moreting but I dont think we had the side views. These are the side views that we are looking at now? 18511 Mr. Miller: Yes. Mr. McCann That is of the existing home as A is now or as A would be? Mr. Miller: Ithink this is of the house to the north Mr. Taormina: I think you have to flip that around. Mr. Miller: I think this is the house that she would like to build at the north Mr. McCann: So that is not her house. Mr. Miller: This is her house where she would be adding an addition to the front She has the garage in the back and now the garage would be towards the front. Mr. McCain: We had that at the public hearing and we discussed it at that time. Mr. Taormina, this is a rezoning petition before us, correct? Mr. Taormina: That is correct. Mr. McCain: And as such, we don'treally have any control over the design of the house. That would be the time of at the lot split where they could enforce the revisions to the home. Right now she could decide to never reorient the home. If we change the zoning, get the lot split then go ahead and build two new homes. In terms of enforcement, would they be able to require the reorienting of the home at the lot split process? Mr. Taormina: Not necessarily, simply because depending nn how she would go about splitting the property if she proposed simply to divide either the north half or the north part or the south part separately, it would not require any further review by the City to terms of either the City planning Commission or the City Council. It could be handled administratively. Mr. McCain: If she did A one at a time, she would be allowed two different splits at different times, fist the north half and then the south half! Mr. Taormina: Yes. That is correct As long as they fully comply with the ordinance. A plan bas been submitted before us that does show compliance with the ordinance with respect to the lot dimensions and area fm the two proposed sites as well as the existing sit. Mr. McCann: We really have no way of enforcng the reorientation of the home or any other part of this project Mr. Shave: the worse that could happen is that she simply redirects her driveway. She could leave her garage where A is and redirect her driveway west. Mr. McCain: It is still physically possible. The front facing the side of another home. 18512 Mr. Shane: I understand what you are trying to accomplish but we really dont have anyway to enforce her to do that except to take her word that she is going to do that. Mr. McCann: Has there been any contact, Mr. Taormina, regarding the trees in the backyard Mr. McCain: or preserving them as some type of barrier between the two homes? Mr. Taormina: I am not aware of any further discussions. Mr. McCann: This is a rezoning and she is not coming before us on a Condominium Act or Mr. McCain: anything else. I am going to ask the petitioner to come up. Adele. Avolio, 34750 W. Seven Mile Road, Livonia Mr. McCain: Have you got any new information for the Planning Comuussion? Mrs. Avolio: I tanned all ofthe plans over to Mr. Poppenger. I believe that each one ofyou, and I have gone by the rules, I will accept whatever comes to me. Mr. McCann Have you had any more discussions wrth your next door neighbor regarding the trees? Mrs. Avolio: The trees are beautifiil. I dool see any reason wby, they belong to me, I dolt have arty reason to cut them down That is what they are afraid of, I think. Mr. McCain: But you are going to sell them to somebody else who could cut them down. Mrs. Avolio: Right now I have not sold to anybody. I am not ready for it Mr. McCain: You are going to leave the trees up in your backyard, no matter what, even if you sell the other two homes, is what you are saying? Mrs. Avolio: It takes so much money to plant the trees and wait for themto grow. I dont see any reason, me or somebody else will cut the trees down. They most be out of Poen unnd Mr. McCain: Believe me, we've had developers come in and plant trees in the backyard just to separate the homes from a street and the neighbor comes in and says, "No, I donklikebeesmmyyard.° lheywillcutdownaUlhebmndnewtrees. Mrs. Avolio: The trees, where they are now, they are not m the middle of the yard. Mr. McCain: These were behind then yard I am saying, what you lave, other people dont That is oro concern Mrs. Avolio: I am sure everybody likes trees. Mr. McCain: I thought so too before I took this job. 18513 Mr. LaPine: Did youjust remove a tree off the island? Mrs. Avolio: They were almond trees. I was supposed to take them away two years ago but I didn't have the money. The almond frees hada disease. I did remove itnow before they go very bad and the weather will knock them down somehow and damage somebody's house. Mr. McCann: I believe there are some people in the audience who would like to speak Is there any objection from the Commissioners? Hearing none, come on down and give us your name and address. Jamie Coobatis, 34730 Seven Mile Road, Livonia. My house and Adele's house are side by side. the trees border in between both of the homes, to the west ofmy house and to the east of her home. I have pictures here showing the tree line and basically all Bre trees on my property. When I moved in. I had a country like setting in the City. Basically what is happening now is Seven Mile Road was widened Trees in the front of the home were cut down. I planted another 13 trees in frort of the home for a noise barrier. The home was originally on five acres and on that five acres there was a nursery, which I have a little land on that also. The trees were removed because they sold the property to the subdivision behind us, which half of these people live right behind us. The trees were picked up and moved to the tree line. When it was staked and surveyed you can see that half of them or better are over the line by three or four inches. The other ones are on my side, also. So, these trees are about 30 years old, plus. There areAustrian Pines, Scotch Pines, Blue Spmce and like Adele says, "Maybe she wool cat them down because she likes the trees." But she doesn't understand that when she sells the property she has no control over that This borders my house. This cuts down the noise on Seven Mile Road and it is a windbreak for my home. Some ofthe trees also were picked up off the property and were planted in the people's homes behind us. I was under the impression when I moved in there that the trees thin were existing there were part of my property. Adele led me to befieve that they were my trees, too. Ihere is a tree that I had cut down. It was a Cottonwood, to the lune of $1,500 out of that tree line because it was shuck by fighting and there was no help from Adele as far as that goes because she didn'trealize that the tree line is like tree inches on each side of thin border. I anjust wondering if somebody comes in and wants to put a fence up, can there be a variance where they can't plant within ten feet of the trees because the lots are plenty deep? Mr. McCann: You are only impeding 3"to 6" onto her property, corned? Mr. Coobatis: Yes, if that. If you look at the stake line, they are all staggered pretty much right on down the line. Mr. McCann: Even afoot or two fret wouldn't make a difference. You've had no discussions with her about buying or selling since the last meeting Mr. Coobatis: She is definitely going to pat either way. It is notgoing to matterto the people buying the house. It is 165 feet deep. The lot sizes that you ere 18514 mcommending for that particular area are 80' R 120'. These lots are going to be 165 fed deep. Where does that put the new homes? Does that put the new homes right on Gary Lane or can they move them back m be in line with all the other homes on Gary Lane or would they be right in line? Mr. McCann: That would be the ideal situation Mrs. Avolio, you understand yam neighbor's concem about the trees? Mrs. Avolio: Yes, I do. Mr. McCain: You want to keep the trees? Mrs. Avolio: I want to keep the trees. I love the trees. Mr. McCain: But if you sell the two los? Mrs. Avolio: I caul control somebody else. Mr. McCain: If you sold off the back three feet to your neighbor, then you know the trees will stay. Mrs. Avolio: I am sorry but I cant I promised my husband before he died, the property work] wmainjust the way it is. Mr. McCain: Thatis vkAI am saying. Ifyon sell himthree feet itis going to shay the same. If you sell to somebody else, you dont know that A will stay the same. Mrs.Avolio: Why dont we do that then? I'll buy three feet from him so he wool have any problem with the trees. Mr. McCann: That is defeating the propose. Is there anybody else in the audience wishing to speak on this? We did hear from everybody at the public hearing so we are looking for new information. Mrs. Koons: Can I ask a question? The bees are on the lot live. The budding would never be on the to line. Mr. McCann: Right Mrs. Koons: We arejust assuming that nobody would ever cut trees down on a to line but there would never be a need to cut them down. Mr. McCann: No. There is no need to cut them down It isjust changing a piece ofRUF piece of property to a R-3 and the neighbofs concern is that there is a nice property division with the trees there and he world like to maintain that and if the developer sells off the two lots, there is no guarantee and we coal condition ammg Mrs. Koons: O.K. 18515 Laveme Mohr, 19160 Laurel. My propertypst touches the Avolio property, my f ince does and the rest of my backyard does border the freed lot that is in question. I have lived in this house for 17 years. We belt the home. We were aware it had been a nursery that had been behind us and we selected that lot because of the trees. The trees really serve more than a barrier. The property that faces Seven Mile has been neglected for at least 15 years. I don'trecall when the neighbors that are there now purchased that land but what they have done to that particular piece of property is amazing It is beautiful. The trees are beautiful. The grass is beautiful. I think it is a lot that Livonia can be proud of There are 125 acres sitting facing Seven Mile and then the Avolio property next to it The trees really do need to be preserved Jamie has taken care of those trees. He was under the impression that they were his. I thought they were his. I also have a free in that back comer on the lot line. Unfommately, it is a cottonwood But I would highly recommend that the trees stay. It would be a travesty to out them down. They are beautiful. Thank you. Mr. McCann: I don't see anybody. I am going to close the hearing Ib you have any last commeNs Mrs. Avolio? Mrs. Avolio: Yes. He gives me so much trouble now. Why when he bought the house, didn't he have it surveyed, so then they would know what belonged to him and wind belonged to me? Now, because I have the survey, the stake is on his side. All the trees are mine and only one tree is his. Those frees are going to stay there. Mr. McCann When he bought the property, he boughtit next to an RUE home. Heknew there would only be one home next to him. Now you warn to put in three homes next to him So,therefore, he needs to maintain the barrier of the trees. Mrs. Avolio: If they were smart, they could buy a house on a comer too of instead being in the middle. I took all the trouble on the comer and I know how hard I worked. Everybody knows. I took good care of my property so it would look good for everybody. I am nota young woman buil do my best I krve allunry neighbors, everyone of them. I want to please everybody. Mr. McCain: I understand. Mrs. Avolio: Idon't like it wben they do things to put me in ajam Nobody knows what is going to happento myope of us today, tomorrow, who knows. We have to Eve for today and let go for tomorrow. Mr. Alaaskas: Ifyou say you try to get along with your neighbors, would ithurtyou m sell him one or two feet so that those trees in his mind would stay there and he would be happy and you would possibly get this approval and you would be happy? Mrs. Avolio: I'm sorry but I can't. 18516 Mr. LaPme: Is there a reason why you want these lots split? You coal take care of the property anymore? Mrs. Avolio: Exactly. I passed 70 and I am not getting any younger. It is hard for me. I am not a lazy person to let the property go. I care about the property. Mr. LaPine: Then the next statement you made was that you are not going to sell these lots right away. Mrs. Avolio: No, not right away. Mr. LaPine: Well then what is the reason why you are doing A this way? Alfiedo Baldass m. 20260 Shadyside, Livonia. (Inaudible) She is complaining because she lost the right lane because she was able to drive in the right lane before somebody hither in the back She complained that she got the road Everybody gets the road sometime and she says the bigger truck came up behind her she got only has the single lane to go in and out right in the middle of the road. She does not have the right lane like she used to be because they used the 32 feet and make the mad wide and when she put in the single the truck came up behind her she is afraid The only reason I told her to come in to the City and do something about it because you have the other street, you can make an entrance on the other street and nobody could kill you. That is why I gave her the idea. Now she has to change the number of the house to go on in the other street because she is afraid She is getting old and she is afraid of the traffic. What do you have to do? She has had it for sale for 10 years and nobody wanted to buy. The only thing was I told her to tum the house the other way, explain to those on the street and keep the one that you want and the others put them up for sale. That is the only way. She is not trying to make the neighborhood look bad or traffic on one sbxA I know (inaudible). The property is hers. You coal force her to sell. You cool force her to do anything. If you go around to the neighbors and say (inaudible). Mr. McCain: I doral think that is the case, sir. Nobody is trying to hold anybody up. Mr. Baldassarra:The trees can remain there forever and nobody talks. We dual ask for anything. We don't ask for anything illegal. We want to follow the City ordinance. EveryPomg will be done in order and nobody will do anything wrong. Mr. McCann: O.K. A motion is in order. Mr. Baldassar m You ve got to talk to the neighbors and see what they wart to do, if they warn Z work things out because you cannot count on the City to fill you what is wrong We all have problems but we work things out Mrs. Avolio: Pm sure if God gives me health, I am going to build a house on Poe back myself and remodel where I am now. Nobody is going to build a big house over there 18517 and those trees are going to stay, believe me. Why are they so crazy? they've got so many trees over there. Mr. McCain: A motion is in order. Mr. Piercecchi: Mr. Chaimvw, we all warn those trees to stay. We want them to live for 100 years but unfortunately we arem terntary we have no nghtto be is We cannot condition zo mg. On a motion by Mr. Piercecchi, seconded by Mr. LaPine and approved it was RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Commission on April 3, 2001, on Petition 2001-01-01-01 by Adele Avolio requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Gary Lane and Fairlane Court in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 4 from RUF to R-3, the Planning Cormnission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 2001-01-01-01 be approved for the following reasons: 1. That the proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding zoning districts and uses in the area; 2. ILatthe proposed change of zoning is consistentwith the developing character of the area; 3. That the proposed zoning district will provide for residential lot sizes wbich will compliment the existing residential development m the area; and 4. That the proposed change of zoning represents an extension of an existing zo mg district ocaming immediately to the north and west of the subject property. Mr. McCann: Is there any discussion? Mr. Shane: I am going to vote against this resolution and the reason I am is because of the petitioners statement that she has no intention ofulilizing the property at this time and I feel that when the time comes and she does intend to use e, that she come back before us and request the rezo mg then. Mr. McCann: Is there any other discussion? Hearing none, I have a cormnent I am going to have to vote against it because I don't think A is in harmony with the neighbors. I think it is dehacting fromthe existing neighbors. I don't think it hunts; the R-3 next toit Ithink it will have a detrimental effect w the RUF to the east Iherefore, I have to vote against R It is not in harmony with the existing zoning to its sides. Please call the roll. A roll call was taken with the fdlowmg result: AYES: Piercecchi, LaPine NAYS: Shane, Alanskas, Koons, McCann 18518 ABSENT: Now Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion the motion fails. Is there an alternate motion? On a motion by Mr. Shane, seconded by Mr. Alawkas and approved it was #469-2001 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held by the City Planning Comoussion on April 3, 2001, on Petition 2001-01-01-01 by Adele Avcho requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Gary Lane and Fairlme Court in the S.W. 1/4 of Section 4 from RUE to R-3, the Planning Coumtission does hereby recommend to the City Council dig Petition 2001-01-01-01 be denied for the following reasons: 1. TLatthe proposed rezoning is not compatible with the surmundmg zoning districts and uses m the area; 2. That there is no current use proposed for the sites to be split off if the zoning is approved; 3. Ihat the way the hoose is oriented now was mean to be that way and to utilize the Seven Mile Road as its frontage. Mr. McCain: Before we vote on it just a point of clarification. Mr.Taormina,canshenot A roll call vote was taken with the following result AYES: Shane, Alanskas, Koons, Piemecchi, McCain NAYS: LaPwe ABSENT: Now FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above bearing was given m accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted The petition has been denied Since A is a zoning change, it will automatically go to ZBA to get a driveway off of Grill Road? Mr. Taormina: I am not sure that she would need to, go before the Zoning Board to modify her driveway. Weil check into that but I am not aware that she will need to go to the ZBA for that Mr. McCann: That she can enter and exit right now as it is off of Gary Lane. Mr. Taormina: It wouldnI change her address. Mr. McCain: That would work If there is no further discussion, will the Secretary please dl Poe roll? A roll call vote was taken with the following result AYES: Shane, Alanskas, Koons, Piemecchi, McCain NAYS: LaPwe ABSENT: Now FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above bearing was given m accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted The petition has been denied Since A is a zoning change, it will automatically 18519 ITEM #6 Motion to Hold a Public Hearing (Dousing for the Elderly Districts) Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is Motion to Hold a Public Hearing to determine whether or not to sound Section 29.04, uses permitted in the R-9, housing for the elderly districts. Mr. Mc Cam: Is there a motion? On a motion by Mr. LaPme, seconded by Mr. Shane and unanimously approved, it was #470-2001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, Pursuant to Section 23.01 (b) of Ordinance 4543, 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 amend Section 29.04, of Article = of the Zoning Ordinance, uses permitted in the R-9, housing for the elderly districts. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of such hearing be given as promiled an Section 23.05 of Ordinance 4543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shat be a report and recommendation submitted to the City Cound. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is tamed and the foregoing resolution adopted ITEM #7 Approval of Minutes 384' Special Meeting Mr. Piercerchi, Secretary, announced the nest item m the agenda is Approval of the Manes of the 384" Special Meeting held on February 20, 2001. On a motion by Mrs. Koons, seconded by Mr. Alahskas and approved, it was #471-2001 RESOLVED that, the Minutes of the 384a Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on February 20, 2001, are hereby approved. go to City Council but with the dmymg recommendation. They will send you a notice of when A is going to be heard again. Mr. Alanskas: The process will start all over again. Mrs. Avolio: Do I have to be there? Mr. McCann: Yes. Mrs. Avolio: I cant My daughter is going to have a baby in California. She doesn't have anybody there. Mr. McCann: You can let the City Council know that you are going to be out of town and they will adjoum A until you are ready. ITEM #6 Motion to Hold a Public Hearing (Dousing for the Elderly Districts) Mr. Piemecchi, Secretary, announced the nest item on the agenda is Motion to Hold a Public Hearing to determine whether or not to sound Section 29.04, uses permitted in the R-9, housing for the elderly districts. Mr. Mc Cam: Is there a motion? On a motion by Mr. LaPme, seconded by Mr. Shane and unanimously approved, it was #470-2001 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, Pursuant to Section 23.01 (b) of Ordinance 4543, 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 amend Section 29.04, of Article = of the Zoning Ordinance, uses permitted in the R-9, housing for the elderly districts. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of such hearing be given as promiled an Section 23.05 of Ordinance 4543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shat be a report and recommendation submitted to the City Cound. Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is tamed and the foregoing resolution adopted ITEM #7 Approval of Minutes 384' Special Meeting Mr. Piercerchi, Secretary, announced the nest item m the agenda is Approval of the Manes of the 384" Special Meeting held on February 20, 2001. On a motion by Mrs. Koons, seconded by Mr. Alahskas and approved, it was #471-2001 RESOLVED that, the Minutes of the 384a Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on February 20, 2001, are hereby approved. 18520 Aroll callvolewas tal® with the following result AYES: LaPine, Sbane, Alanskas, Koons, McCam, Piercecchi NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Mr. McCain, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted ITEM #S Approval of Minutes 820" Public Hearings & Regular Meeting Mr. Piercecvhi,. Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Approval of the Minutes of the 820" Public Hearings and Regular Meeting held on February 27,200 1. On a motion by Mr. Sbane, seconded by Mrs. Koons and unanimously approved, it was #472-2001 RESOLVED that, the Minutes of the 820" Public Hea ags and Regular Meeting held by the City Plar mrg Commesinn on February 27,200 1, are hereby approved. A roll call vote was tal® with the following result AYES: LaPine, Koons, Shane, Alanskas, McCam, Piercecchi NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Mr. McCain, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution adopted ITEM #9 Approval of Minutes 821't Regular Meeting Mr. Piercecchi,. Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Approval of the Minutes of the 821' Regula Meeting held on March 20,200 1. On a motive by Mrs. Koons, seconded by Mr. Almakas and unanimously approved, it was #473-2001 RESOLVED that, Poe Minds ofthe 821" Regula Meeting hell by the City Planning Commission on March 20, 2001, are hereby approved Aroll callvom was tal® with the following result AYES: IaPi ne, Koons, Shane, Alanekas, McCann NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Piercecchi 18521 Mr. McCann, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted On a motion duly made, seconded and umaunmusly adopted the 82P Regular Meeting held on April 24, 2001, was adj owned at 8:53 PM. R6 .""W $0101.. IJ Dan Piercecchi, Secretary ATTEST: James C. McCann, Chairman /rw