Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1962-11-27 1 3594 MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING AND THE 1LM 144TH REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, November 27, 1962 the City Planning Commission of the City of -Livonia held a public hearing and the 144th Regular Meeting at the Livonia City Hall, 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Members present: Milton Ingold, Edward Milligan, Dennis Anderson, W. E. Okerstrom, Robert L. Angevine and Charles W. Walker. Members ibsent : Donald Schubeck and James Cameron Mr. David R. McCullough, City Planner and Mr. Charles Forrest, Assistant City Attorney were present along with approximately 150 interested persons in the audience. Pttor to the meeting a movie was shown to those present with relation to industrial planning in a city. This was presented by the Industrial Commission of the City of Livonia. Mr. Charles W. Walker called the Public Hearing to order at approximately 8:15 p.m. Mr. McCullough: The first item on the agenda is Petition Z-575 by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to rezone property located approximately 100 ft. south of Schoolcraft Road and approximately L 900 ft. West of Middlebelt Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 26 from RUFB, C-2 and P to M-1. Mr. H. F. Campbell from the H. F. Campbell Company, Inc. , was present to speak on behalf of Mr. Paul Zuckerman, owner of property in question in Petition Z-575. Mr. McCullough asked Mr. Campbell to explain their reason for requesting the setback to be moved up to within 100 ft. of Schoolcraft. What experiences had they had trying to get plants for this property? Mr. Campbell stated they have been building in thirty states about the country. They have developed four industrial subdivisions and are currently building one in Ohio. He felt .-Livonia had a very good location for industry. The area lying south of Schoolcraft presently consists of a 300 ft. greenbelt or RUFB area from Schoolcraft to the area zoned at the rear for industry. The current 300 ft. greenbelt is larger and deeper than industry can afford because of the cost of maintaining the greenbelt. The industries that Livonia wants in this area would be the kind that would want to maintain the front area. It is much better to have a front lawn area well maintained than a great depth that is poorly maintained. The cost of industrial land will not and cannot allow the developer to bLild in this area unless it has a more reasonable setback. In their experience other communities do all they can to attract industry into their area. Some of them go to the extent to provide all of the public utilities to attract industries in order to lower their tax base. The initial building that the Velvet Peanut Butter Company wants to erect is 100' x 300' which they hope to build 100 ft. South of Schoolcraft without any parking in the first 100 ft. The parking is slated for the side and at the rear. The exterior will be of face brick ' IL and porcelain with anodized aluminum. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone present representing the Chamber of Commerce on this item? There was no one from the Chamber of Commerce but Mr. E. Lachman, a member of the Industrial Development Commission was present and stated it was just as importa: 3595 Ir . to pick the right kind of industries for this community as it was to have the right kind of subdivisions. The Industrial Commission is very much concerned with the tax base. The number of residents have gone way up compared to the number of industrial plants. Livonia has the best area for industries to come into and the Industrial Commission is trying to bring in the proper kind of industries for the benefit of all who live here. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak? Mr. Frank Doyle, 29572 Schoolcraft, stated he lived across Schoolcraft directly opposite of the Detroit Edison Station. He felt that the zoning should be left as it is. Mr. Harry Bugeja, President of the Lyndon Meadows Civic Association, stated their reasons for objecting to the rezoning. They felt the setback presently existing should be maintained. Koroger Company on Middlebelt has a much larger setbsck and the 300 ft. existing on Schoolcraft Road should not be reduced. They also objected to the odors. which will be present if this company is allowed to build on this property. Mr. Walker stated there were ordinances to control a certain amount of obnoxious odors, noise and smoke. Mr. Campbell stated plants such as the Kroger Company are able to have setbacks of a greater depth due to the large amount of property they have to build upon. In this case, the amount of property available does not warrant a plant such as the Kroger Company. This company needs the property for actual use. There is to be an eighty (80) ft. side yard on the west side of the property and in this 80 ft. there will also be a greenbelt. Mr. Campbell felt that no one building an industrial plant would build in this area if they had to maintain the 300 ft. setback. It discourages them. Mr. Bugeja felt that since it would cost quite a bit to bring up the spur from the railroad to service this plant, wouldn't this offset any additional cost of maintaining the 300 ft. setback? Mr. Campbell stated it was not desirable to have factory parking in front of the property and he was sure that the neighbors across the street would not enjoy a parking lot in front of the building as much as they would a nicely landscaped area. Mr. Bugeja asked if the same effect could be had with the building setback 150 ft.? Mr. Campbell stated this property could not be developed with a setback that deep. Mr. Walker asked Mr. Bugeja if the Civic Association has given any indication of a compromise as to the setback? Mr. Bugeja felt that something could be worked out. They wouldn't want to deny any industry the right to come in. Mr. EdwitlLachman stated it should be remembered that there was an expressway planned for Schoolcraft. Mr. Rutzey, a member of the Industrial Development Commission, stated the plans for the expressway had not been finalized but it was to be a depressed expressway and the property line now would still exist along with the greenbelt. He continued by stating that as for the Kroger setback, they do have parking in front of their plant. And as for any odors, Kroger has their baking department in that area and they have had no objections to it. It isn't objectionable as to fumes and odors of a steel mill. Mr. H. J. Hiles, 32541 Schoolcraft stated he worked across the street from a potatoe chip 'company and the odor from this plant is terrific. There was no odor from peanut 3596 butter but there is from potatoe chips. ILMr. Campbell stated this plant will have nothing to do with the making of potatoe chips, only peanut butter. Mr. Bugeja stated they were requesting a rezoning for approximately 1,000 ft. of frontage along Schoolcraft. What assurance is there that nothing more objectionable than the Velvet Peanut Butter Company would come into this area for the remaining portion not being used by this company? Mr. Campbell stated that some months ago they had had an inquiry from the Radio Corporation of America. This very same property had been submitted to them, but when they found out that they had to maintain the 300 ft. setback, they decided to move into Plymouth. Their building has already been built across from the Burroughs Company on Plymouth Road. This was an excellent type of industry - one of a very high grade. Plymouth, Michigan had made all kinds of offers to obtain their business. Mr. Ed. S. Golnick, 32901 Schoolcraft stated he owned property on Schoolcraft consisting of 600 ft. in depth. (This was determined to be located between Merriman and Farmington). He asked why couldn't they go on the proposed and designated industrial road? He also asked how close to a home can a factory be built? Mr. Walker stated all industrial plants have to conform to the zoning ordinance as to side yard requirements, parking, etc. Mr. Bugeja asked if there was a compromise made tonight, is there any assurance that it wouldn't be changed again later? Mr. Campbell stated they had been retained by the owner of the property to subdivide this parcel into an industrial subdivision. Building restrictions will be drawn up which will LOhave to be complied with by all other industries coming into the subdivision. He was confident that no other plant will be allowed to come into the subdivision if it might hurt the Velvet Peanut Butter plant. He stated there would be no other appeals to the Planning Commission to encroach further on the 100 ft. setback either with buildings or parking. It was felt by Mr. Campbell that the proposal offered is actually an improve- ment over what presently exists. They felt that it was objectionable to have parking in front of a building. As part of the deed restrictions, there will be no parking allowed at the front or will trucks be allowed to stand in the 100 ft. setback. The question of a compromise on the amount of setback was brought up again. Someone asked why does zoning have to change so many times? Mr. Milligan stated that zoning could not be frozen. Looking at the zoning map will prove this out. Since the map and zoning ordinance were adopted in 1952 there have been 90 amendments which mean at least 90 changes. He stated that on the area plan submitted with the petition, it appeared that the gas station, which is to be part of the GEM Development, east of this property, is set back approximately 100 ft. West of the gas station, is the Detroit Edison station which is set back less than 100 ft. Immediately west of the Edison property begins this property extending westerly 1086 ft. at which point the residents begin. The residents appear to be set back approximately 150 ft. Mr. Milligan continued by stating that when one considers the amount of traffic which will generate due to the GEM development, and the 300 ft. setback is maintained, a major industry would have to come into the area. The 300 ft. setback would be too hard for the smaller plants. When a major plant is thrown in the area with a discount house, there will develop a tremendous traffic problem that no one wants to cope with. If this Lipis not approved, all Livonia can do is hope that maybe in the future a major industrial plant will want to cope with the traffic problems and the 300 ft. setback. Mr. Milligan concluded by stating that a compromise can be reached, due to the gas station being 100 ft. back, the Edison Company station less than 100 ft. and the residents are approxi- mately 150 ft. back. He could not see where the problem was. 3597 Mr1 Campbell stated there was one other reason for requesting the 100 ft. setback. It 1[40 appears because of the depth of the property and the location of the rail the owner has actually only the minimum requirements as stated by the ordinance. If he was to be made to set back further than 100 ft. he could not comply with the ordinance. Mr. Milligan explained this more fully to the audience. Mr« Walker asked Mr. Campbell if they would consider a compromise on the setback? Mr. Campbell answered he would be glad to discuss it with the owner, Mr. Paul Zuckerman. Mr. Zuckerman came forward and explained his situation to those present. He stated he had purchased the property approximately five or six years ago because he wanted to move into Livonia. He sold out to Sunshine Biscuit Company after purchasing the property. He suggested to Sunshine Biscuit Company at that time to move to Livonia but when they realized there was a 300 ft. setback, they bought property in Detroit. Later, he purchased the Velvet Peanut Butter Company from the Sunshine Biscuit Company. He has attempted to sell this property to a larger firm but the 300 ft. setback has always been a detriment. Mr. Walker was excused at 9:50 p.m. and Mr. Milligan assumed the Chair in his absence. Mr. Zuckerman continued to explain there would only be three buildings in the 1086 ft. frontage but it could not be done with the 300 ft. setback. He did not want cars parked at the front of his building. He concluded by stating that he did not think people realized just how deep 100 ft. is. Mr. Walker returned at 9:54 p.m. He stated Mayor Moelke was present and he would like to call upon him at this time to say a few words on the matter before the Commission. Mayor Moelke stated he was surprised that the Planning Commission was still on this item of the agenda. Mr. Zuckerman has discussed this rezoning with members of the Industrial Commission, the City Planner and himself. He stated he has heard a few of the remarks made by the audience relative to the proposed 100 ft. setback. He said he knew, no matter where industry or commercial goes into the city, that it will effect some property owners. He felt this could not be helped. He said the same thing happened when the shopping centers at Seven Mile Road and Middlebelt Road and at Eight Mile Road and Grand River were discussed. He felt that these facilities are going to add greatly to the tax base. He said that Mr. Zuckerman had originally planned on erecting his building in Plymouth. Plymouth is holding out open arms for people like Mr. Zuckerman to build plants in their community to assist in the tax load. He said the only way Livonia can improve the value of the homes and make the homes worth more, is to attract business and industrial plants so that they can take up some of the tax load. Mayor Moelke stated he could appreciate the way the property owners felt about a plant going across from their homes but, by the same token, he has taken into consideration that Schoolcraft is slated to become an expressway and that it will happen within the next five years and there is very little anyone can do about it. He said Mr. Zuckerman is being asked to give up 200 ft. of property and to maintain that 200 ft. as a front yard. He felt that when you look across Schoolcraft you will not be able to tell whether it is 300 ft. or 100 ft. Mayor Moelke stated he was sorry so many people were taking this position. As far as he was concerned, he was going to try and get industry into this city even though it may affect the feelings of the IL: property owners towards him and his administration. He concluded by stating that he and his administration want to do what is best for everyone in the City. Mayor Moelke thanked Mr. Walker for allowing him to speak. 3598 Mr. Walker informed the audience that the petitioner has asked for a decision tonight ILle and if the Commission does act tonight, it is very possible that this item will be on the Council's agenda for tomorrori'night's meeting. He stated that whatever decision is made, it is only a recommendation to the Council. The council will make the final decision. Mr. Harry Bugeja asked if there was any assurance as to the type of business that would be going in on the other two sites? Mr. Zuckerman answered that his plant will be there and he wanted a nice neighbor as well as the property owners. ` Mr. Campbell stated they knew Mr. Zuckerman' s feelings about the neighbors and the community and they believe they will be able to develop an industrial subdivision restriction that would be satisfactory to all. Mr. Okerstrom asked about the industrial. highway. It appeared on the proposed site plan of the industrial subdivision that a portion of the industrial highway was not going to be used. Did this mean that the Master Thorougb.tare 'Plan had to be amended before he could develop this area? Mr. McCullough stated that as long as Mr. Zuckerman did not build upon the designated highway, it did not need to be deleted or amended from the Master Thoroughfare Plan. Mr. Milligan stated he had some figures on valuations compiled by the City Planner going back to 1957. At that time the percent of commercial and industrial valuation IL0 to the toal valuation was 62%. In 1962 it was 47%. In addition, in 1957 the total ,,;.entolliclaant of children in the schools was 11,015, in 1962 it is 22,311. Because of this, Mi. Milligan felt he would like to make a motion approving this rezoning because Livonia needed this type of industrial development and they needed it now. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Milligan, it was #11-214-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public. Hearing having been held on Petition Z-575 as submitted by the City Planning Commission for a change of zoning in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 26 from RUFB, C-2 and P to M-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-575 be granted for the following reasons: (a) that in balancing the desperate need of the City and School Board for additional revenues against whatever harm is done to residential owners in Section 23, the City and School would see to have a paramount interest. Sufficient evidence of this need is furnished by the tables set out below: Table I Percent of Commercial and Industrial Valuation to the Total Valuation Year Percent of Total 1957 62.57 ime 1958 59.6 1959 56.0 1960 54.3 1961 46.4 1962 47.0 3599 Table II 1:10 Operating Expense, School Enrollment and Per Pupil Cost Year School Operating Expense Enrollment Cost per Pupil 1957 4,149,439 11,015 $ 376 1958 5,181.070 13,066 396 1959 6,549,822 15,174 431 1960 8,296,696 17,423 476 1961 9,091,940 19,735 460 1962 10,264,261 22,311 460 CO that it is probable that the existing 23,149 autos passing along Schoolcraft each day when increased upon the opening of the GEM Department Store, actually do more harm to residential properties than moving the line to its proposed new position. (c) there is evidence that industries will not pay the advanced price for this land and still have to maintain so much thereof in non-buildable area. FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The 'Livonian-City Post under date of November 7, 1962 and notice of which hearing was sent to The Detroit Edison Co. , Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co., Michigan Bell Telephone Co. , TheIL Consumers 'Power Co. , City Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr. Angevine sfatdd the owner of the property stated he would not have any parking on the 100 ft. setback. Could this be made a deed restriction? Mr. Walker stated that before he could use the 100 ft. setback for parking he would have to have it rezoned because it will remain RUFB. Mr. Angevine stated he would support Mr. Milligan's motion for approval. Mr. Milligan asked Mr. Forrest if the Planning Commission had the authority to enter into matters of deed restrictions? Mr. Forrest answered the Planning Commission does not have the authority to do so. The Commission merely makes recommendations to the Council. The City Council, if the petition is approved by them, will make the change in the form of an ordinance and the Planning Commission's function is to present themtith a recommendation. Deed restrictions are not in keeping with the zoning change. Mr. Ingold asked Mr. Forrest if the Planning Commission could request something in writing with regard to the type of tenant for the other two sites in the area? Mr. Forrest answered that this could be put in the minutes as a matter of record. This Would not be out of line. LMr. Zuckerman asked how did the Planning Commission want this?' 3600 Mr. Walker felt that the Planning Commission had to have some faith in Mr. Zuckerman's decision as to what type of tenants will go in. Mr. Zuckerman stated he was just as much concerned as to the type of tenant that will go in as the Planning Commission and property owners are, but he would be happy to put in writing with regard to not going less than 100 ft. Mr. Walker stated there were some nice homes along Schoolcraft and the Planning Commission did not want to see a development go in that would detract from them. A roll call vote on Resolution #11-214-62 resulted in the following: AYES: Ingold, Milligan, Anderson, Okerstrom, Angevine and Walker NAYS: None Mr. Walker declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-571 by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to rezone all of the RUFB property located on the South side of Schoolcraft Road between Farmington and Merriman Roads from RUFB to M-1, except the north 300 ft. I thereof and situated in the north half of Section 27. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak? Mr. H. J. Hiles, 32541 Schoolcraft Road stated they had very Iiighcdeed restrictions in their subdivision, Schoolcraft Acres and that they had no property to sell for industrial use. Mr. H. qrNeal, 32719 Schoolcraft, President of the Schoolcraft Acres Ci3aic Association stated they were against the rezoning. He said their deed restrictions prohibited any industrial or commercial zoning. Mr. O'Neal submitted the deed restrictions to Mr. Forrest for his examination. It was determined that this area could not be used for industrial or commercial as stated in the restrictions. Mr. Walker said that this was found out to be true in other sections of the city also, and::because of this it has reduced the amount of industrial land that is available for development. Mr. Alex West, 13781 Merriman Road, stated the rezoning should be left as it is until someone wanted a large area for development, otherwise the property would be all split into small plants which could very possibly deadlock the property at the rear of those lots fronting on the mile roads. Mr. Walker stated that the Planning Commission was not going to act upon this item tonight. This was merely brought up to determine if a change of zoning was necessary to conform with the Master Plan. It was determined there were approximately 13 persons present who were opposed to the change. Mr. Will Kissire, 31575 Schoolcraft, Mr. Karl Kurkowski, 32543 Schoolcraft and Mr. ibr William Haavisto, 32465 Schoolcraft all voiced their objection to the proposed rezoning. Mr. Walker stated this item would be taken under advisement. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-576 by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to rezone property located on the Southeast 3601 corner of Haggerty and Seven Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 7 from RUA to C-2. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak? Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Milligan, supoorted by Mr. Okerstrom and unanimously adopted, it was #11-215-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Petition Z-576 by the City Planning Commission for a change of zoning in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 7 from RUA to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-576 be granted for the reason that this concession was necessary in order to retain the community college for the City, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian, under date of November 7, 1962 and notice of which heating was sent to The Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. , Michigan Bell Telephone Co. , The Consumers Power Company, City Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr. Walker declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-573 by Lester Karr who 1110 is requesting the rezoning ofproperty located on the Southeast corner of Jamison and Lyons in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 24 from RUFB to R-1A. Mr. Lester Karr was present. He stated he would like to split his lot into 4 separate lots. He submitted a petition signed by 0 number of surrounding property owners who were not opposed to the resoning into smaller lots. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak? It was ascertained that Jamison Street was only dedicated for 3Q feet instead of 60 in this immediate area. It is designated as a 60 ft. street on the Master Thoroughfare Plan. Mr. Okerstrom asked if this area wasn't supposed to be rezoned to R-lA when the Master Pattern was adopted. Mr. McCullough answered that the City Council did not go for the smaller lots in this area at that time. Mr. Karr stated he wouldn't mind dedicating the necessary footage for Lyods but on Jamison it couldn't be done due to the fact that his house is in the way. Mr. Karr was asked if he would be willing to amend his petition to request RM (70 ft. lots) zoning instead of R-1A (610r- ft. lots)? We answered-Re would prefer to have the zoning in 60 ft. lots. After a brief discussion pertaining to the existing Setback of the homes in the area, 1:: it was determihed that this item would be taken under advisement until Mr. McCullough could verify said setback. Mr. Walker called a recess at approximately 11:05 p.m. ********* 302 The Chairman called the Public Hearing back to order at approximately 11:15 p.m. with all those present now who were present at the time recess was called. 1:: Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition V-72 by Donald and Mary Walton who are requesting the vacating of the walkway easement located adjacent to Lots 189 and 190, Livonia Meadows Subdivision on the north side of Bennett in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 12. Mrs. Mary Walton was present. She stated the walkway was not being used by the children any more. Mr. McCullough informed the Commission that the School Board did not object to it being removed because it was no longer needed. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak? Letters from the Michigan Bell Telephone Company, The Detroit Edison Company and the Engineering Department of the City of Livonia all recommend that the walkway easement be vacated provided,however, that the north 6' of the present walkway easement be retained as an easement for public utilities. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Angevine, supported by Mr. Ingold and unanimously adopted, it was #11-216-62LRESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, November 27, 1962 on Petition V-72 as submitted by Donald and Mary Walton who are requesting the vacating of the walkway easement located adjacent to Lots 189 and 190, Livonia Meadows Subdivision on the north side of Bennett in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 12, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition V-72 be granted, provided, however, that the North 6' of the present walkway easement be retained as an easement for public utilities, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian-City Post under date of November 7, 1962 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, petitioners and abutting property owners as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr. Walker declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is proposed Kimberly Oaks Subdivision #4 located on the East and West sides of Hubbard Road between Lyndon Avenue and Schoolcraft Road in the South half of Section 22, submitted by George H. Pastor. This subdivision was formerly known as Rosemor Manor Subdivision. Mr. George H. Pastor was present. Mr. McCullough informed the Commission that the School Board has indicated that another school site is needed in this section. Mr. Pastor and the School Board have had several meetings on this matter. Ere Mr. Benton Yates, Superintendent of the Livonia PLblic Schools, was present and stated the Board of Education has indicated that another school site is necessary in this section. He stated that on October 11th, 1962 they were at the point of final negotiations with Mr. Pastor who has an option on the property but they will not come to an agreement before the 6th of December. The site designated by the School Board lies on Brookfield as shown on the proposed plat. This site was designated by the 3603 School Board before they saw any proposed plat of the area by the developer. He stated he wanted to assure the Commission that they are negotiating for the purchase of the site but they will not be able to give any final decision until another week or so. Mr. Walker asked Mr. Yates if it is possible that the School Board will come up with a definite answer on the 6th of December? Mr. Yates answered it was possible. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak? Mr. John Daugherty, 14336 Brookfield; stated he wanted to clarify a few points in representing other residents on Brookfield Avenue. These residents are not opposed to additional school facilities, to a park site or to any extension of school facilities. They do object to the particular choice of the school site in fairness to the residents on Brookfield. Mr. Daugherty stated also there was a deed restriction for those lots on Brookfield requiring a 75 ft. setback. He felt that Mr. Pastor was honor bound to observe this restriction. He said there was ample space to pias so as to locate the school elsewhere. As a suggestion he felt that a logical one would be at the intersection of Hubbard and Lyndon. It would adjoin Jackson School. The present park Site could be placed at the rear of the school site. He said that a park site did not have to be on a major road. Mr. Daugherty stated in summary he would lite to point out that the City can meet the objections of the people on Brookfield, meet the needs of an additional school site and the need for a park site because there is still raw acreage. But once it is guilt up it is another story. If there wasn't other land available it would be different but there is ample space to locate the school in a different location. Mr. Daugherty concluded by stating that the people on Brookfield were eager to make some sort of a compromise. He suggested that the matter be taken under advisement in order that a meeting comld be held with the school authorities to discuss a possible alternate site and then in turn discuss it with Mr. Pastor and the Planning Commission at which time the matter of the frontage of the lots on Brookfield could be discussed. Mr. Walker asked if there wasianyone else in the audience who wished to speak? Mr. Pastor stated the proposed plat is not a new plat. It was originally approved in 1960 and at that time was known as the Rosemor Manor Subdivision. It is nothing more than a revision of this original plat. He stated he asked the Planning Commission approximately 30 days ago if he submitted a revised plat of the Rosemor Manor Subdivision would they consider it? The Planning Commission stated they would. This is the reason he is before the Planning Commission at this time. Since that time, it has been determined that an additional school site was needed in Section 22. After the School made their selection, Mr. Pastor stated he had the plat revised eliminating the area selected, and he then submitted the revision to the Planning Commission for their approval of the balance of the original one given approval two years ago. Mr. Pastor concluded by stating that he has an agreement with Mr. A. Pollack, from the Fort Investment Company, from whom he is purchasing the property that all details must be,completed by January 10, 1963 or he will not be able to pick up. the option. If the option is not picked up, it may result in the loss of the park site because the donating of the park site was one of the conditions of approval for the Rosemor Manor Subdivision. Mr. Walker felt that because of the many questions pertaining to this plat, that it might be wise to take it under advisement until at least the School Board has made their decision as to where the proposed school should be located. Mr. Yates stated he could not guarantee that the Board would make up their minds on the 6th of December 3604 but they certainly would try to do so. He stated there was a definite need for IL: an additional school site in this area; and while they do not prefer to have a new site located near the old site and the park site, they were not adamant in their decision and it is possible that they could change their minds. Mr. Pastor stated that he would not like to see the school site east of Hubbard because Hubbard was a half mile road and children should not be made to cross Hubbard. Mr. Bill Carter, 32230 Barkley and Mr.John Birch, Brookfield did not approve of having two school sites in close proximity to each other. Mrs. Sally Katz, President of the PTA for Jackson School objected to this also. Mr. Pastor submitted a plan showing Hubbard Road made into a boulevard in order to slow up the traffic. Mr. Angevine stated that this meeting was being held to approve a plat not to approve a school site. Dr. H. Fortson, Kimberly Oaks Civic Association, stated they were definitely opposed to hating their children cross any more highways than is necessary. Mr. Daugherty. stated he would do everything possible to help Mr. Pastor• meet his. deadline. A special meeting of the Council can be called by three members of the City Council or the 'Mayor and the minutes can be approved at the following meeting. Mr. Yates informed theCommission that although the site on Brookfield was favored, IL, it did not necessarily mean that this is where the school will be situated. This decision has to be made by the School Board. Mr. Angevine asked about the deed restrictions on .Brookfield? Mr. Pastor answered these restrictions require every lot to have 100' in width and a setback of 70' . Mr. Okerstrom stated he would rather wait until the School Board has Made a decision before action is taken on the proposed plat. Mr. Walker stated that the Planning Commission must keep in mind that if this plat is not approved by a certain time it may mean the loss of a park site. He asked Mr. Daugherty to inform the City Council of the dead line. Mr. M. Ingold asked what difference did it make whether or not the plat was approied at this time without the school site and later after the School Board has made a decision - designate the site on the plat. Mr. McCullough and Mr. Yates both contended it would thake a difference in the price asked for the property. Mr. Milligan stated he did not see why this plat could not be approved as presented. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Milligan, supported by Mr. Anderson, it was #11- -62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, January 27, 1962, the City Planning Commission does hereby give approval to the preliminary plat of the Kimberly Oaks Subdivision #4 located on the East and West side of Hubbard, between Lyndon and Schoolcraft in the South half of Section 22, • Mr. Yates stated that anytime the Planning Commission gives preliminary approval to a plat it can be used against the School Board in determining the price of the land 3605 and it is prejudicial to the school. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Milligan, Anderson NAYS: Ingold, Okerstrom, Angevine and Walker Mr. Walker declared the motion was not carried and therefore the resolution is not adopted. He further stated this item would be tabled until a decision has been made by the School Board. Mr. Yates stated they would do everything to expedite the matter. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-574 by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to rezone property located approximately 402 ft. North of the centerline of Schoolcraft Road between Lyons and Middlebelt Road in the South half of Section 24 from R-3 to R-1A. Mr. McCullough informed the Commission that the owner of the property has asked that this item be taken under advisement until he could be present. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speakZ. 1eastated this item would be taken underadvisement. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition V-71 by Arthur Wheeler, etal who is requesting the vacating of the north/south alley located 1:, between Farmington and Westmore Avenue and between Gable on the South and Lots 1 and 123 on the north in the Westmore Subdivision situated in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak? Mr. Frank Holmes, 19505 Westmore, stated his neighbor needed the alley in order to get in and out of his garage. His objection to the petition was because the alley was needed in his area because his septic tank and oil tank. If the alley was vacatt.ed the septic tank or the oil tank could not be serviced. Mr. Iothmes was speaking of the alley located north of Haldane. After a further brief discussion, this item was taken under advisement. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition V-73 by S. Z. Wolack, Dotty Realty Company, who is requesting the vacating of two walkway easements located in the 'Meadowview Subdivision situated in the East 1/2 of Section 20 and part of the West 1/2 of Section 21 and in the Meadowview Subdivision #2 situated in the East - 1/2 of Section 20. • Letters of recommendations were submitted from the Minhigan. Bell Telephone Company, Detroit Edison Company and the Enginening Department of the City of Livonia. ''!hey all recommended approval. - • Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Milligan, it was #11-217-62 RESOLVED tuat, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, November 27, 1962 on Petition V-73 as submitted by 3606 S. Z. Wolack, Dotty Realty Company for the vacating of two walkway 1:: easements in the East 1/2 of Section 20 and the West 1/2 of Section 21, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition V-73 be granted, provided, however, that private easements are created as recommended in the letter dated November 20, 1962 from the Michigan Bell Telephone Co. , a letter dated November 23, 1962 from theDetroit Edison Co. , and in the letter dated November 27, 1962 from the Engineering Department of the City of Livonia, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian, under date of November 7, 1962 and notice of which hearing was sent to The Detroit Edison Co. , Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Co. , The Consumers Power Co. , City Departments,petitioner and abutting property owners as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Ingold, Milligan, Anderson, Okerstrom, Angevine and Walker NAYS: None Mr. Walker declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Application TA-92 by A. K. Miller, Inc. , requesting permission to remove a stockpile of topsoil from property located on the Southeast corner of Six Mile Road and Riverside Drive in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 16. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak? It was determined that the bond is to be set for five (5) acres. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Angevine, supported by Mr. Anderson and unanimously adopted, it was #11-218-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held the City Planning Commission does hereby grant Application TA-92 by A. K. Miller, Inc. , requesting permission to remove a stockpile of topsoil from property located on the Southeast corner of Six Mile Road and RiversideDrive in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 16, subject, however, to the following conditions: (a) that the applicant shall not at any time allow water to collect on the subject property or on adjoining property and at all times shall maintain adequate drainage; (b) that the applicant shall not excavate below the grade of any proposed subdivision streets; (c) that the applicant shall at all times comply with all traffic requirements established by the Police Department; (d) that the applicant shall be obligated to seed all of the land from which topsoil has been removed with some seed acceptable to 1:: the Department of Parks & Recreation unless at the time the applicant petitions for the release of the topsoil bond that the 'Planning Commission relieves the petitioners of this obligation, and 3Q7 FURTHER RESOLVED, that the applicant deposit with the City Clerk 1:: a corporate surety bond at $500.00 per acre for five (5) acres ($2;500.00) which bond shall be for at least a one year period, and THAT, the period for which the permit herein, authorized shall be for period of one year or period not to exceed the expiration date of the bond as required therein, whichever is the shorter period, and THAT, the applicant shall apply for and obtain the permit herein authorized within thirty (30) days from the date of this resolution, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was sent to the property owners within 500 feet, petitioner, City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service and recommendations having been obtained from the Department of Public Works under date of November 1, 1962 and from the Police Department under date of November 5, 1962. Mr. Walker declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Ingold, it was #11-219-62 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the Public Hearing held on Tuesday, November 27, 1962 at approximately 12:15 A.M. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Ingold, Milligan, Anderson, Okerstrom, Angevine and Walker NAYS: None Mr. Walker declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. He called the 144th Regular Meeting to order at approximately 12:16 A.M. with all those present now who were present at the time the Public Hearing was adjourned. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Milligan, supported by Mr. Angevine, it was #11-220-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been on Tuesday, November 13, 1962, the City Planning Commission does hereby grant Petition M-265 by James Murphy seeking approval to use certain property for a used car lot located on the northeast corner of Ann Arbor Trail and Ann Arbor Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 31, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. IL: A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Ingold, Milligan, Anderson, Angevine and Walker NAYS: None NOT VOTING: Okerstrom 3608 Mr. Walker declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. tra:4 Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Angevine and unanimously adopted, it was #11-221-62 RESOLVED that, final plat of Meri-Lynn Farms Subdivision #6 located west of Merriman and north of Schoolcraft in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 22 be given final approval, and FURTHER RESOLVED, inasmuch as it appears on the records that tentative approval of said proposed plat was given by the City Planning Commission April 3, 1956 and October 20, 1959; and it further appearing that said proposed plat together with the plans and specifications rmr improvemer therein have been approved by the Department of Public Works under date of November 4, 159; and it further appearing that a bond in the amount of $12,000.00, pursuant to Council's resolution #847-62 to cover the installation of improvements has been filed in the office of the City Clerk under date of November 20, 1962; such bond having been approved by C. J. Pinto, Assistant City Attorney on November 23, 1962 it would therefore appear that all the conditions necessary to the release of building permits have been met and the Building Department is hereby so notified. Mr. Walker declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is the final approval for the ILWIdyle Hills Subdivision located in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 16. There was a brief discussion after which it was determined that the stub showanon the plat should be deleted and made into an outlot. This stub was located in the north end of the subdivision. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Milligan, supported by Mr. Angevine and unanimously adopted, it was #11-222-62 RESOLVED that, final plat of the Idyl= Hills Subdivision located north of Five Mile Road, immediately east of the Idyl Wyld Golf Course in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 16 be given final approval, and FURTHER RESOLVED, inasmuch as it appears on the records that tentative approval of said proposed plat was given by the City Planning Commission on April 7, 1959; and it further appearing that said proposed plat together with the plans and specifications for improvements therein have been approved by the Department of Public Works under date of Apbii:c.4, 1, 196Q;and it further appearing that a bond in the form of a $120,000 Letter of Credit and $16,000.00 in cash to cover the installation of improvements has been filed in the office of the City Clerk, pursuant to Resolution #320-62 adopted by the City Council on April 23, 1962; such bonds having been approvdd by C. J. Pinto, Assistant City Attorney on November 1, 1962 it would therefore appear that all the conditions necessary to the release of building permits have been met and the Building Department is hereby so notified. 3609 1:: Mr. Walker declared the motioh is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is the proposed Burton Hollows Estates Subdivision #5 located south of Six Mile Road between Burton Hollows Subdivision #3 and #4 and the proposed GoliV iew Estates Subdivision in the North half of Section 16. Public Hearing 11/13/62, item taken under advisement. There was a brief discussion relative to tie walkway easements between the subdivisions, after which it was decided to take this item under further advisement. Mr. Milligan asked Mr. Meinzinger, representative for the Rouge Building Company, to inform him before the next meeting where the walkway easement was looted going from Burton Hollows Subdivision #1 and #2. Mr. Meinzinger stated he would do so. Due to the late hour, it was determined to take the other items on the agenda under advisement. They would be acted upon at the next scheduled meeting. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Anderson and unanimously adopted, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the 144th Regular Meeting held on Tuesday, November 27, 1962, at approximately 1:30 A.M. CITY PLANNING C0MMISSION I Robert L. Angevi - , Secretary ATTESTED: , a2 - WQ--atli Charle• W. Walker, Chairman