Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1961-11-07 3315 MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING AND THE 137TH SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, November 7, 1961 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held a public hearing and the 137th Special Meeting at the Livonia City Hall, 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Charles W. Walker, Chairman, called the public hearing to order at approximately 8:00 p.m. Members present: W. E. Okerstrom, James Watson, Jr. , Robert L. Angevine, Leonard K. Kane, Arthur C. Samuels, James Cameron and Charles W. Walker Members absent: Dennis Anderson and Robert L. Greene Mr. David R. McCullough, City Planner was present with approximately 100 interested persons in the audience. Mr. McCullough: The first item on the agenda is Petition Z-529 by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to City Council's Res. #715-61 to determine whether or not to rezone property located on the east side of Middlebelt Road approximately 220 ft. south of Meadowlark Street in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 24 from R-lA to C-i. There is no correspondence. A Mr. E. Romano is present who will represent the grouppresent tonight objecting to the proposed rezoning. Mr. Gordon from Gordon-Begin Investment Company was also present. He is the owner of the property in Petition Z-529. Mr. Gordon informed the commission that the Gordon- Begin Investment Company plan on having an office type building on the property in the petition. They would prefer the professional type tenants but this was not going to be compulsory. It would be a brick building consisting of one or possibly two-stories. Mr. Gordon continued by stating that they had had a petition before the commission and council a while back which was denied and that this was a compromise, so to speak. He stated that an area on the west side of Middlebelt had just recently been rezoned to commercial. It was ascertained that this property was part of the proposed Lawr-E1 Subdivision and that it contained two streets which presently were shown as running into Middle- belt Road. Mr. Watson asked whether these two streets would go through if the re- zoning is granted and the office building is constructed. Mr. Gordon stated that one of the streets, Morningale would go through but not the other, called Kenway. This one would probably be made into a cul-de-sac. He stated that if the rezoning was granted, it would require some additional engineering on the subdivision plat. Mr. Watson stated that the map submitted was not up to date. There were no houses shown on Meadowlark but on examining the area he noticed quite a few. Hr. Charles Forrest, Assistant City Attorney arrived at 8:10 p.m. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak. 1[10 Mr. E. Romano stated he was speaking for himself and his neighbors and they were all very much opposed to this proposed rezoning. They wish to request that this petition be denied the same as previous petitions for rezoning in this area. They felt that the builder purchased this land and developed it knowing full well that the zoning was residential. Mr. Romano continued by stating that at the time they purchased 3316 their homes they were guaranteed by everyone that the area south of Meadowlark down to 1[40 200 ft. north of Schoolcraft was zoned for residential and nothing but residential would be built in this area. Mr. Samuels asked if Gordon-Begin were the builders of their homes. and how many homes did they develop. It was determined that there were approximately 200 homes in the Compton Village and that Gordon-Begin were the developers of this subdivision. Mr. Kenneth Young, 28635 Jacquelyn stated he had spoken at the last meeting in connection with rezoning certain property along Middlebelt and represented the whole community in objecting to the rezoning. He stated he wished to object to this present rezoning and he concurred with Mr. Romano. .. His personal investment in his home was $27,000. At the time he purchased it, the advertisement in relation to his area,stated it would be an area of $30,000 homes. At the present time there is an advertisement stating that homes can be bought for $14,500 with $5.00 down. We feel this is an encroachment upon the good faith that we bought our homes. Weare only asking that since you saw fit to deny the previous requests for rezoning that you also deny this petition to- night. Mr. Harrison M. Mercer, 29339 Meadowlark stated he was one of the newest additions to the community and that his home would be only 121 ft. from this proposed commercial zone. He wished to object to anything like a gas station, pizzeria or drive-in being built in this area. Mr. Dick Hillis, 29214 Meadowlark, stated he was a member of the Board of Directors for the Compton Village Civic Association, and that they strongly support everything that has been said tonight. Mr. Walker: I would like a show of hands of those in the audience who are objecting to this petition. There were fifteen bands raised in protest. Mr. McCullough: Mr. Gordon, do you have any other property z ned commercial? Mr. Gordon: Yes, about an acre along Schoolcraft Road. Mr. McCullough: Why not use this? Mr. Gordon: We have land on Middlebelt Road that is zoned residential. We rezoned it when we first acquired it. Since we acquired this land, Middlebelt Road has been made into a four lane highway. We have trouble selling these lots for residential use on Middlebelt Road. We tried to rezone an area on the corner of Lyndon and Middlebelt. We have an invest- ment in that property. We own it, we pay taxes on it and we can not use it for the purpose we originally zoned it for. We think we have created a pretty nice community. We have tried to satis- fy most of the people. We have as large an interest in this as the individual. We do not want to hurt their investment or ours. We want to use some of the land on Middlebelt. We do not feel it will hurt them. I would like, if it is possible, to present more definite plans. I will be glad to do this with some reasonable assurance that we can work out something so that they will find something less to object about. I would like some sort of a compromise. To deny this petition is to deny my right to use the property. It will be an office building, not a pizzeria or a drive-in of any sort. 3317 Mr. Walker: If you want it for an office building or for professional use, why didn't you ask for PS instead of C-1? Mr. Gordon: Our other petition was for PS - for the property on Lyndon and Middlebelt. It was denied. This petition asks for C-1 because commercial was granted exactly across the street •which will make it less desirable for us to use it for residential purposes. I presume that PS would be satisfactory, but C-1 was asked for because of the commercial across the street. Mr. Walker: I can understand why the people object to the C-i zone. There are quite a number of uses that are allowed under this zone that could be objectionable. Mr. D. Hillis: Mr. Gordon stated that they are unable to use the lots adjacent to Middlebelt, but there is a house on Meadowlark and Middlebelt which is sold. Mr. Gordon: On Oakview and Jacquelyn I can not sell these homes. Mr. Seymour Gordon, 29270 Meadowlark: I am one of the first tenants of Compton Village. I will not repeat what has been said but this has been a series of broken promises by the builder. We do not object too strenuously to the $14,500 homes because they are adhering to the Livonia City code, however, Mr. Gordon mentioned that he has more invested than we have. This is true, but there is a difference because Mr. Gordon is looking 11[40 forward to making a profit. We just want to stay where we are. We don't want tolose anymore than we have already. Mr. Mercer: Since I moved in about 62 homes have been signed up - of the smaller homes. The lot next to me was vacant on the corner. They had four offers to sell but they turned them down. Mr. Gordon: That is totally inaccurate. Believe me, we have not turned down any offers on this lot. These people are afraid of something going to materially affect their land. Whatever is put up on that property will not depreciate their property, if anything it will enhance it. Mr. Walker: On behalf of the Commission I would like to say that it is difficult to say whether there is a need for this type of zoning in this particular area. The Commission has to determine if there is a need for this type of zoning and if it will harm the community it is located in. It is obligated to look out for the peace and tranquility of the home owners and also the health, welfare and safety of these people. These are the facts to be considered in granting or denying this petition. It should be brought out that a lot of this discussion tonight will not be used in determining our decision. I want to set this straight for the record. There is a definite code of ethics and there will be definite reasons for making our decision. 1[90 Mr. Angevine: How many lots face on Middlebelt Road? Mr. Gordon: They don't face Middlebelt Road, they side on it. There are seven other than those in the petition. Mr. Angevine: What do you propose to do with the others? 3318 Mr. Gordon: Keep them as they are. Mr. Walker: Gentlemen, you have heard both sides to this petition, the floor is open for a motion if you care to act upon it tonight. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Watson, supported by Mr. Angevine, it was #11-192.61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Petition Z-529 as submitted by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to City Council's Resolution #715-61 to determine whether or not to rezone certain property in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 24 from R-LA to C-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-529 be denied for the following reasons: (a) the existing commercial located at the Northeast corner of Schoolcraft and Middlebelt Roads is bounded by 500 feet of R-3 which acts as a transition zone between the existing commercial and the residential to the north. If this petition were granted it would nullify this transition and commence an area of strip type commercial zoning along Middlebelt; (b) this petitioner has sold a number of lots in this area which side to Middlebelt. If others are unsaleable, he might be permitted to replat the lots treating them as other similar lots were treated in Belle Mar Subdivision across Middlebelt Road; (c) the subject land faces existing housing on the west side of Middlebelt Road; FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonia City Post under date of October 18, 1961 and notice of which hearing was sent to The Detroit Edison Co. , Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. , Michigan Bell Telephone Co. , The Consumers Power Co. , City Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Samuels, Cameron, Angevine, Watson, Kane, Okerstrom and Walker NAYS: None Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition M-233 by Jack Shenkman asking permission to have a private educational institution on property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Osmus and Auburndale in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 3. There is no correspondence. Mr. Isadore Goldstein was present on behalf of the United Hebrew Schools. Mr. Goldstein: Mr. Shenkman in making this petition was not representing 1[40 himself but filed it in behalf of the United Hebrew Schools. We propose a school to provide religious education for the Hebrew children. The hours of instructions would be from 4:00 to 8:00 p.m. There would be about 200 to 250 children. Some of these children would be bused. The building contem- plated would be approximately 50 or 60 ft. by 100 or 120 ft. with 8 class- rooms, a small auditorium and wash rooms. Mr. McCullough: Would there be any outside recreational activities? 3319 Mr. Goldstein: There would be no time for outdoor recreation. These children go to school all day and then they come to this school for one or two hour sessions. With the exception of the local neighborhood children, there will be no children from the school playing outside. Classes will be held on Monday through Thursday and on Sunday mornings. Mr. Goldstein presented a picture of the last school built which is located on Seven Mile Road and Bentler in Detroit. He felt that any school built here would be an asset to the community. Mr. McCullough: Are you aware of the set back along this area? It was explained that that the houses to the east of this area are all set back about 300 ft. from the center of the road. Mr. Goldstein stated there was no -objection to a deep set back. Mr. Samuels: You say that this is strictly for the religious training of these children, would this building ever be used for anything else? Mr. Goldstein: The Livonia Jewish Congregation has a sign across the street stating their houm fig services. They now have a working relationship with Claranceville High School whereby they hold their school sessions at the high school. We would expect that until the synagogue is built that they would be using this building for religious services on Friday and Saturday and evening services during the week. We do not allow cards in any Hebrew school. Mr. Samuels: What about the one located on the corner of Curtis and Wyoming in Detroit? Mr. Goldstein: This is a Jewish Community Center. We have no control over it and have no relationship with it. Mr. Samuels: You can safely say it will not be used for anything but religious instructions? Mr. Goldstin: Yes, this is our primary purpose. Mr. Okerstrom: I understand this is a residential area. For the protection of the homes at the rear of this proposed school I think there should be some sort of screening, such as a wall. Mr. Walker: You do fence your schools in, is that not so? Mr. Goldstein: This is a standard procedure with us. Mr. Walker: Mr. McCullough and I went to see the last school that was built. The entire lot was black topped. In my own opinion the area is certainly adequate in size. The one we went to see was built adjacent to a residential section and it did not seem to harm it. Mr. McCullough asked the audience if they would prefer some other type of screening than a wall. They stated they object to the school being built there because Camus and Auburndale were the entrances to their subdivision. Mr. Walker: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak? 3320 Mrs. C. Tilgren, 19215 Hardy submitted two petitions objecting to the proposed school. One had a total of 28 names, the other, 50 names. The following persons were present and objected to the proposed school. Mr. Howard Schweppe, 19246 Osmus, Mr. Ken. Nicholson, 19200 Auburndale, Mrs. Barbara S. Murphy, 19229 Hardy, Mr. Wm. Schebbeck, 19184 Osmus, Mr. Louis McReynolds, 19176 Auburndale, Mrs.B. Billes, 19224 Aurburndale, Mr. R. Showers, 19196 Osmus and Dr. Fred J. Kellman, 19196 Aurburndale. Their main objections were (1) the traffic which will increase be- cause of the buses and (2.) they fit the school will devaluate their property. Mr. Watson: Have you the property under option, Mr. Goldstein? And does this type of school come under state regulations as to size? Mr. Goldstein: Yes, we have it under option and we must conform to state regulations. Mr. Cameron: How much property do you own on the west side of Osmus? Mr. Goldstein: We don't own any property on the west side of Osmus. The Livonia Jewish Congregation owns that. Mr. Sol. Bienenseld, 29623 Iranscrest, acting attorney for the LIvonia Jewish Con- gregation was present and stated that they were the owners of the property on the west side of Osmus. They were in favor of having the Hebrew school on the east side. They were also in hopes of erecting a synagogue in the very near future on their own property. He continued by stating that at the present they were holding services ILOin a converted farm house. They did not wish to object to the erection of the Hebrew school. It was entirely separate from their church. It was brought out that some of the persons in the audience thought that this was a rezoning in order to allow the school. It was pointed out that this was not a re- zoning petition, that churches and schools were allowed in residential sections upon the approval of the City Planning Commission. Mr. Walker asked a show of hands of those present who objected to the proposed school. There were approximately thirty hands raised. Mr. McCullough asked Mr. Goldstein if, in view of the objections expressed tonight, he would be willing to see if a site could be located elsewhere in Livonia until the Planning Commission has had a study session on this item to consider the statements made tonight. He stated he would try. Mr. McReynolds asked if this was approved for a school, is it possible to also rezone the other frontage along Seven Mile Road for a restaurant or grocery store. Mr. Walker answered by stating that this present petition was not a hearing for a rezoning. It was only a hearing the appxovv9l of the erection of a school. As for the other property along Seen Mile Road, the owners of these parcels would have to come before the Planning Commission on another petition and at that time ask for a rezoning. If the Planning Commission approves this present petition, this property could only be used for that specific use as stated in the ition. It could not be 1[10 used for anything commercial. Mr. Walker continued by stating that this item would be taken under advisement. In '— the meantime the petitioner can determine if it is possible to locate the school elsswhere. Mr. Walker suggested that one of the persons in the audience leave their name with the secretary and she would notify that person as to when this item would be on the agenda for a decision. • 3321 ILThe question was asked why didn't everyone in the subdivision get a notice. Mr. Walker stated that the Planning Commission was only compelled to notify those within 500 ft. of the area in the petition. Mr. Harleth Acker, 19161 Osmus ask if schools pay taxes on their property. Mr. Mc- Cullough answered that they didn't. Mr. Kane stated he would like to make one statement in regards to the traffic question. He did not think that it would be necessary to use Osmus or Aurburndale because of the large amount of frontage along Seven Mile Road. He felt that this frontage could be used for the ingress and egress and that the safety factor could be solved. Mrs. Billes asked if they could be guaranteed a light on each of the streets to help the situation. Hhe was informed that this could have to be taken care of by the Traffic Commission and approved by the State. Mr. Walker stated that the Chair would take this item under advisement and that the secretary will notify the person,who will represent those present tonight, as to when the next meeting on this item will be held Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-528 by Charles Allen on behalf of Wm. Mangold and M. J. Mangold for a change of zoning on property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road approximately 350 ft. East of Middlebelt Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 1. 1[: Mr. Charles Allen, Sr. , and Mr. Charles Allen, Jr. , were present on behalf of the g petitioner. Mr. Allen, Jr. , explained the area to be rezoned. He stated that the westerly 80 ft. of Lot #418 was already zoned C-2. They are requesting the remainder of Lot 418 and all of Lot 417 be rezoned to C-2 in order to develop this area into a shopping center. Mr. Allen, Jr. , continued by stating that they did not feel that the shopping center would effect the three homes on Parkville. There will be no buildings along the property line and the parking will be in front of the shopping center along Seven Mile Road. There will be a protective wall as required by the ordinance. He also stated that the present corner business is not owned by their client. Mr. Walker wanted to know if they had something definite for this area or was it being zoned for future use. retail Mr. Allen, Jr. , stated they had a tenant and that the shopping center would be/service stores. The drain would run in front of the shopping center and would have to be covered. This has been discussed with Engineering and it will be done according to their specifications. Mr. Walker asked if it was possible to include the corner commercial property in this proposed development. Mr. C. Allen, Sr. , stated that to date the owner of the corner property could not afford to sell it because of tax reasons. It is under ILdiscussion to see if something could be worked out. Mr. Walker: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak? Mr. Ed.Meink: I would like to know just what they are going to build. And, 19127 Parkville) also, will they put up a wall between my property and the commercial area? Mr. Charles Allen, Jr. : We are compelled to do so as required by the ordinance. 3322 ILMr. Meink: I would not object to this if a wall is put up. Mr. Thomas J. Phelps: I would like to know how far back they will be coming with 29231 Vassar) buildings. Mr. Meink and Mr. Phelps examined the area plan for the proposed rezoning. They stated they did not object to the proposed change. Mr. Walker: Do you feel that you need the C-2 - why not C-1? Mr. Allen, Sr. : You ca."t have a shopping center in a C-1 zone. Mr. Watson: Is there any possibility of rerouting the drain instead of covering it? Mr. Allen, Jr. ; We would like to relocate it if we could. Mr. McCullough: Ordinarily we like to put a lesser use between commercial and residential. Is there any possibility that you could use PS zone on the lot on the east side which would be between commercial and residential? Mr. Allen, Sr. : I don't think this would serve our purpose. Mr. Okerstrom: I can not see why C-1 couldn't be used. 11[: Mr. McCullough: If the shopping center materializes on the northwest corner of Seven Mile and Middlebelt Roads, it's possible you wouldn't be able to get a C-2 tenant; you would probably only attract C-1 tenants. Mr. Allen, Jr. : We feel that we can get a substantial business in that area. Mr. Walker: Because of the northwest corner of Seven Mile and Middlebelt Roads, it may be that we should make a study on this before we anything further. It seems to me in all fairness to everyone we should determine just how much commercial this area can support. There is also a petition on tonight's agenda to further increase the C-2 on the northwest corner. Mr. Allen, Sr. : What can it be used for if not commercial? Mr. Walker: We have run across people who want large parcels for PS. That is one use. Mr. Allen, Sr. : At the present time I feel that we have too much PS that is not being used. We are hopeful to use the entire corner as a shopping center. Part of the property is presently zoned for C-2. I have no doubt that this whole area will be one development. Mr. Watson: We should possibly investigate to see if the community can stand additional commercial at this time. I suggest we hold it up for at least a study session. Mr. Samuels: Is the study session going to center around C-1, or C-2, or whether or not it should be commercial at all? Mr. Walker: It would be C-1 and C-2 and it will also be determined if it is logical to increase the commercial in that area. This item will be taken under advisement. 3323 Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-530 by the City Planning Commission on their own motion to determine whether or not to rezone property located on the northwest corner of Middlebelt Road and Seven Mile Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 2 from RUFB and R-1A to C-2. The owner of this area is going to announce very soon what tenant will be on this site. Mr. McCullough explained briefly that part of the original area was sold to the City by the developer at a very nominal price for use as a library. Another large portion directly north and west of the library has been sold to the Catholic Diocese for a catholic church site. At the present time the developer has no development plan for the area. Mr. Walker: Could the owner come before this commission with his plan? Mr. McCullough: I will call him and request this. Mr. Walker: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak? A representative from the Northeast Civic Association was present and stated they had no objection to either Petition Z-528 or Z-530. Mr. Walker: This item will be taken under advisement. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Angevine, supported by Mr. Watson, it was #11-193-61 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the Public Hearing held on Tuesday, November 7, 1961 at approximately 10:05 p.m. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Samuels, Cameron, Angevine, Watson, Kane, Okerstrom and Walker NAYS: None Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the public hearing is adjourned. Mr. Walker called a recess at approximately 10:07 p.m. :: * * * s; .. ,. Mr. Walker, Chairman, called the 137th Special Meeting to order at approximately 10:15 p.m. with all those present now who were present at the time recess was called. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a request from the Lightstone Development Company for a year's extension on the Dover Courts Subdivision located on the north side of Joy Road between Hix and Eckles Road in the IL: Southwest 1/4 of Section 31. Preliminary approval granted 11/10/59; extension granted 1/10/61. 136th Special Meeting 10/24/61, item taken under advisement. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Cameron, it was #11-194-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a request from the Lightstone Development Ccmpany for a year's extension on Dover Courts Subdivision located in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 31, the City Planning Commission 3324 does hereby grant said request, subject, however, to all conditions prevailing on the preliminary approval. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Samuels, Cameron, Angevine, Watson, Kane and Walker NAYS: None NOT VOTING: Okerstrom Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and theforegoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition V-61 by H. Smith and L. Hotchkiss who are asking that the east 130 ft. of the east/west running along the northern boundary of Lots 164 through 170 in the Westmore Subdivision in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3 be vacated. Public Hearing 10/17/61 item taken under advisement. Mr. McCullough informed the commission that the property owner who objected to the east 130 ft. of said alley being vacated without vacating the westerly portion, is petitioning to have the west portion also vacated. He suggested that this item be taken under advisement until such time that the petition has had a public hearing. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a letter from the Industrial Development Cotunissicn requesting the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing to determine whether or not to rezone certain 1[: property in the Newburgh Estates Subdivision in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 30 from RUFB to M-2. It was determined at the study session held on Tuesday, October 24, 1961 that the property in question has deed restrictions which prohibit the property being used for anything but residential. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Kane, it was #11-195-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a request from the Industrial Commission requesting the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing to determine whether or not to rezone certain property in the Newburgh Estates Subdivision in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 30 from RUFB to M-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby remove this item from the agenda for the reason that the land in question has deed restrictions upon it. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Samuels, Cameron, Angevine, Watson, Kane, Okerstrom and Walker NAYS: None Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is IL: adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Angevine and unanimously adopted, it was #11-196-61 RESOLVED, that pursuant to the report and recommendation of the Bureau of Inspection dated October 24, 1961, the City Planning Commission does herein authorize the release of the bond dated May 11, 1960 in the amount of $5,000.00 by the Hartford Accident 3325 1[40 and Indemnity Company posted with the city in connection with topsoil removal operations performed under Permit No. 65 (Application TA-64) issued to A. K. Miller, Inc. ; it appearing from the above report that all ordinance provisions and rules and regulations have been complied with; and the City Clerk is herein authorized to do all things necessary to the full performance of this resolution. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Angevine and unanimously adopted, it was #11-197-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the report and recommendation of the Bureau of Inspection dated October 24, 1961, the City Planning Commission does herein authorize the release of the bond dated October 24, 1960 in the amount of $6,000.00 by the Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company of Hartford, Connecticut posted with the city in connection with topsoil removal operations performed under Permit No. 74, (Application TA-76) issed to A. K. Miller, Inc. , it appearing from the above report that all ordinance provisions and rules and regulations have been complied with; and the City Clerk is herein authorized to do all things necessary to the full performance of this resolution. Irip Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Watson, supported by Mr. Kane and unanimously adopted, it was #11-198-61 RESOLVED THAT, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the minutes for the meetings held on October 3, October 17 and October 24, 1961 except for that member who was not present, he abstain from voting. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a resolution to adopt deed restrictions on Lyndon Meadows #4 and #5 as prepared by the Law Department. It was determined that the commission members would take a copy of these deed restrictions with them in order to study them before taking any action. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Angevine and unanimously adopted, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the 137th Special Meeting held on Tuesday, November 7, 1961 at approximately 10:30 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION (if 02' /11/ 1,811 Ea. ATTEST D: W. E. Okerstrom, Secretary 6cra2 41) Char es W. Walker, Chairman