Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1966-05-10 4763 MINUTES OF THE 221ST SPECIAL MEETING AND A PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISS ION OF THE CITY OF LIVON IA On "2_-esday, May 10, 1966, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held the 221st Special Meeting and a Public Hearing at the Livonia City Hall, 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan, Mr, Charles WI Walker, Chairman, called the Public Hearing to order at approximately 8:30 p.m. with approximately 15 interested persons in the audience, Members Present: Charles 144 Walker Donald Heusted Harry Wrightman Raymond Wj Tent Bob R. Whitehead Marvin Moser Donald Pollock John J, Ward Members Absent: Myra Chandler Messrs. Don Hull, Planning Director; John J. Nagy, Assistant Planning Director; Harry Tatigian, Assistant City Attorney; William J. Strasser, Chief City Engineer; and Daniel RL Andrew, Industrial Coordinator, were present. Mr. Wrightman announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 66-4-2-9 by W.E.Lockwood requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to operate a fruit market on the west half of lot #6 and all of to, lot #7 of Horton's Newburgh Subdivision, located on the north side of Ann Arbor Trail between Newburgh Road and Horton Avenue in Section 31. Mr, E. C. Hunt, 9817 Newburgh, stated that this is the same party as has operated this stand in the past and he is in favor of the stand in this location. Mr, W. E. Lockwood, 9717 Newburgh, stated it is his desire to obtain a permit to operate an open air fruit stand and that there is a building on the property at the present time, Mr, Walker questioned Mr4 Lockwood regarding his intentions regarding improv- ing the property and also regarding parking. Mr, Lockwood stated that he plans on putting up a 24' x 40' building and that it will be set back from the road so that there will be ample parking, Mr. Walker questioned if Mr. Lockwood operated this stand last year, Mr, Lockwood replied yes, M_, Walker questioned what the difference will be in the operation of this business this year and last year - just the building? 4764 Mr. Lockwood replied, yes. Mr. Hull advised that Mr. Lockwood wes notified by the Bureau of Inspection last year to obtain a waiver use permit for this operation, and that is the reason he is before the Commission tonight/ Mr. Lockwood stated that he was told that the present building is too close to the road and was requested to remove it. Mr. Tent questioned if Mr. Lockwood is planning to erect a permanent building and does he have a site plan now/ Mr. Lockwood stated he will build whatever he needs to get along with and he has one sketch of the proposed building. Mr. Hull advised the Commission that Mr. Lockwood would only need a permit to operate his business on a seasonal basis, but if he intends to have a per- manent business he does not have to have Planning Commission approval. Mr. Wrightman questioned if it would be to his advantage to put up aper- manent structure. Mr. Lockwood replied no, not in the produce business because it is seasonal. Mr. Walker asked if this operation will be similar to the one on Farmington Road and Schoolcraft Road. Mr. Lockwood stated, no, this will be just a shelter and there will be no doors such as there is there. Mr. Pollock stated that Mr. Lockwood will have to maintain a setback in accordance with the Ordinance. Mr. Lockwood stated that he understands that he will have to have a setback and that he will have a 30' driveway, and that he will have frontage that can be used for parking. Mr. Wrightman questioned what type of surface there is bn the property. Mr. Lockwood replied that it is just dirt, but cinder could be put in. Mr. Wrightman questioned how long he has been in this business. Mr. Lockwood advised practically all his life and he was located on Plymouth Road for 12 years. Mr. Tent stated that the only way this matter can be handled is with an approval for a limited length of time.. Mr. Walker directed the petitioner to supply the Commission with ten additional copies of the site plan. ?+: �• heck questioned the petitioner regarding houses in the aria476and the residents attitudes. l r, Lockwood advised that there is a house just east of this proper ty and he ,gets along fine with them. There being no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petit ion "-„ Walker advised that it will be taken ur_'er advisement„ 17r„ Wrightman announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-3-2-7 by H. A, Hemminger requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to construct a 2 story, 120 unit motel on parcel 35A3 and a portion of parcel 35A3a2b3 located on the south side of Plymouth Road approximately 2,136 feet west of Middlebelt Road in Section 35. 1120 Ho A,, Hemminger, 16581 Meyers Road, Detroit, Michigan, was present re- presenting a portion of the owners of Wonderland Shopping Center, and stated tht he had contacted the people living within 400 feet of tha -orr.'e: cial establish- ment proposed for petition 66-3-2-8 and explained his plans for developing a 110 unit Holiday Inn with a cocktail lounge, meeting roots, etc, and the gas service station being proposed in conjunction with it. He stated that he was successful in obtaining signature from each of the property owners within the distance requirements of the ordinance. Mr. Hemminger s: bmi.tted a petitien :.o the 2ernission dated May 10, 1966 and containing eight: . ;na tLres, Mr,, Hemminger advised the commission that inasmuch as t`:. i of .day Inn 1 Corporation is closely aligned with the Gulf Oil Company it is almost nnr,'.atory that where one establishment goes the other goes also, and that the aeacnd piece of property was acquired for the purpose of erecting the gas service station. He further stated that he advised the property owners that .__ tb-2. Gulf Station goes in it will be a very well kept station atd is intended to compliment the Holiday Inn and in his agreement with the Gulf Oil Company he in responsible for the maintenance of that parcel. This use, he added, is b . .s; ': ,rested for the purpose of maintaining a close liaiccn between the H.ol iday Ian and the Gulf Oil Company. I_r, :Talker questioned that if Mr. Hemminger is representing Mr. Greene, et a'_, tie owners of Wonderland Shopping Center, does he also represent them in r.ego :i.ating with the Holiday Inn people. 1,1r, Her_min;er replied, yes. pr„ Wrightman questioned why the gas service station operation is isolated `: c:.t the property being used by the Holiday Inn. Hr. He.t.r1nger stated that they were unable to acquire the parcels in between. 17r. _ghtran asked if the property behind is vacant, !'766 Mr. Hemminger stated, yes, but this will not be used for a gas station - an easement will be granted from the Holiday Inn property to the service station so that additional traffic on Plymouth Road will not be created. Mr, Tent questioned if the agreement with Gulf Oil Company pertains to M'thigan only,, Mr. Hemminger stated nod it pertains throughout the United States and Canada. Mr, Tent questioned if there were plans for the expansion of the Holiday Inn, Mr.,Hemminger replied that at the present time they have no plans for the balance of the property in Parcel B. Mr,_Walker questioned if approval is given will the Holiday Inn Corporation be interested in establishing right away. Mr. Hemminger stated very definitely so., Mr. Walker questioned if the Gulf Station did not go in will Holiday Inn still be built, and how long before they would know for sure whether or not Gulf will go in.. Mr,,Hemminger stated he would think that Holiday Inn would still build if the station did not and he assumed that Holiday Inn will want a service station on this location._ Mr. Walker questioned if approval was granted on both uses and the Gulf people did not build did Mr. Hemminger have the auLhoLiLy to make an agree- ment to withdraw the approval of the gas station if the Holiday Inn Corporation decided not to build. Mr. Hemminger stated that his purchase agreement on parcel B is contingent upon the Holiday Inn being built and that they have permission to build a car wash on parcel B but feel a gas service station will be better in conjunction with a Holiday Inn, Mr. Walker requested to know if this included a car wash., Mr. Hemminger stated that this will not be a mechanical and car wash operation except what could be done inside the building. Mr,,Ward questioned if the reason for the petition being for a two story motel is because we have no ordinance for anything higher than two stories., Mr. Hemminger stated that two stories is the standard for a Holiday Inn Motel ,, although they have built structures of four stories. The operation in Dearborn is a four story franchised operation and was originally a two story motel, but eventually became a four story. (110: 4767 Mr. Walker requested to know if any portion of this property will be reserved for any of the local businesses. Mr. Hemminger replied no. Mr.' Pollock questioned that in the event this petition is approved to Holiday Inn and they decide not to utilize the property themselves could they sell to another party and that party put up a different motel. Mr. Hull advised the Commisitioh that the Zoning Ordinance makes provision for Planning Commission to ccttdition waiver use approvals and that this approval could be conditioned to use by the Holiday Inn Corporation. Mr. Pollock raised a question regarding the location of the proposed s ation on the centerline of Henry Ruff Road and the plan for Henry Ruff Road as shown on the Master Thoroughfare Plan, and requested to know the zoning of par- cels A2a and A2b. Mr. Hull stated that these parcels are zoned C-2 and that it is indicated on the Master Thoroughfare Plan, but whether or not it is felt that Henry Ruff should go through to Plymouth Road the Planning Commission should con- dition this approval on its extension, thereby establishing flexibility. He also questioned if the petitioner would consider a 27' dedication of Plymouth Road frontage. Mr. Walker stated that dedication on a mile road is automatic, and that the Commission will either have to delete the property within the right-of-way from the petition or at a later date remove it from the Master Thoroughfare Plan. Mr. Hull stated that we are asking that the petitioner figure on a setback so as not to encroach on the Henry Ruff right-of-way and that the gas station as shown to the Commission by Mr. Hemminger is agreeable but there is concern about the use of the balance of parcel B since Mr. Hemminger indicated that he needs only the upper portion of the property now. Mr. Walker stated that this is a concern of the Commission also and at a later date when we go into the use of this land, and Henry Ruff, the feelings of the residences in the area will be taken into consideration, Mr. Nagy stated that after checking the tax roll he finds that this is not a dedicated right-of-way. There being no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition Mr. Walker announced that it will be taken under advisement, 1.768 IL =`:r, Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-3-2-8 by H. A. Hemminger requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to construct a gasoline service station on the northerly portion of parcel 35B located on the south side of Plymouth Road approximately 750 feet east of Milburn Avenue in Section 35. `ca:e being no one present wishing to be heard regarding this petition, tI:,. Walker advised that this item would be taken under advisement. 't.., Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-3-1-7 by Alexander and Rose C. Spiro requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Morlock Road, approximately 280 feet east'of Middlebelt Road located in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 1, from RUF to PS for addition to existing nursing home, iRr, Alexander Spiro, 14705 Flamingo, Livonia, Michigan, was present and read the following prepared statement to the Commission; "This land was ' p:irrased on June 30, 1964, in whole with the purchase of the nursing home, the Dorvin Convalescent and Nursing Center, 29270 Morlock, from the previous cwnersO The land the nursing home is situated upon is zoned Public Service. Vie adjoining parcel, which was included in the purchase of the nursing i:c^)e, and lies to the east, is zoned RUF. The total land frontage is 303 3::- , 17,0 feet PS - 123 feet RUF, all involved in the nursing home utilizition; 21-t17 for parking, and land identified with the nursing home. We request :.ist the land, the 123 feet RUF, be incorporated with the adjoining PS ze;_'._ng. to Zoning this parcel will allow us to construct a projected addition to the existing nursing home, thereby lending the property identified with the cursing home to more utilization, as was our intent at the onset of the purchase oZ this existing nursing home. The history of the existence of this nursing '..cr:e :In relation to the residents in the area has, to the best of our knowledge, br'7 very compatible. I would assure you this would continue to be so. We ha-ie been continually improving the interior and exterior of this building so it f7','id bn_ an asset to the community, and we have further immediate plans for e-c:;=for modernization which would result in enhancing this area. As to the projccted addition to the nursing home, we are contemplating additional beds -foie). we had planned when we purchased this nursing home and this economically r-:-Jld assist the home. This would result in improved service and also render larger employment factor to this community; which I"believe is important. feel this request is reasonable. This nursing home, if it is to be able to oo::ti nue to render service In our aging population, must have this grant so IL: may answer to demands being imposed upon the facility for larger expanded c rvice and more confortable accommodations. Again, to repeat, this would result in utilizing this land to the utmost it primarily has been dedicated TZ-, Walker questioned if Mr. Spiro has had people attempting to enter his c,':ebli.shmert but found it had no room. ",=, gniro stated, yes, and we are filled. 4769 Mr. Tent asked if the proposed expansion of the building will be compatible with the existing structure+ Mr„ Spiro indicated that he had a copy of the projected plan and that it is simply a wing across the front and will be extended about 601. Mr,. Tent questioned how many units were in the present building. Mr„ Sr'ro replied about 15 beds, Mt:, Tent questioned if he had adequate parking. Mr. Spiro replied, yes. Mr. Spiro submitted his plan to the Commission and stated that he has attempted to acquire the property on the west but has not been successful. Mr. Walker requested to know why a site plan had not been submitted prior to this meeting. Mr, Hull advised the Commission that Mrj Spiro will have to come back before the Commission for approval of a waiver use and that a site plan was not requrted for this zoning change but would be required for the waiver use approval. BSS. Pollock questioned Mr. Spiro regarding the lack of trees in the area and if air conditioning was included in his plans for the addition. I Mr. Spiro advised that after the building is completed the area will be completely landscaped and that he does not intend to air condition the building because elderly people seem not to be able to tolerate it. Mr„ Walker requested to know if outdoor recreation will be av)ilable. M: . Spiro stated that there is ample land for outdoor activity. Th- -ebeing no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition, Mr. Walker advised that it will be taken under advisement. Mr, Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-3-3-5 by Stephan F. Slavik requesting the vacation of an easement located on the west side of Riverside Drive between Six Mile Road and Wood Drive in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 16. yr, David Meinsinger, representing the petitioner, was present and stated that they would like to make four lots out of three and in order to do this the easement will have to be moved about 60' south.. There being no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition Mr. Walker advised that it will to taken under advisement. 4770 Mr„ Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-4-7-6 by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to amend Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master Thoroughfare Plan,, by modifying the right-of-way width of Wayne Road from 120' to 86' . Mr.. Walker questioned Mr, Hull regarding his recommendation on this matter north of the railroad track of Schoolcraft. Mr, Hull stated that it is his feeling that Wayne Road should be extended, but that the Commission has not had a great opportunity to study this matter, Mr, Acchione owns the land within the right-of-way of Wayne Road extended and the last thing he has done is to ask the Council to purchase the land that was set up in the Master Thoroughfare Plan, On receipt of that request, Mr. Hull stated, the Council referred it back to the Planning Commission for study and review. Mr, Acchione has now requested that action not be taken on this item for a short period of time and Mr, Hull stated that he felt this request reaEonable for two reasons; (1) if the City does not buy the right-of-way at this time the possibility of extending it will be lost forever, and (2) in the original discussion with Mr. Acchione he was agreeable to rot force the issue of the acquisition of the right-of-way by the City and would =ossib27 dedicate it. Mr. Pollock questioned if this is the case where there are numerous letters in the f4..'_A and stated it would be his suggestion that the Commission have something in writing from Mr. Acchione regarding this request. Mr. Hull stated there are numerous letters in the file, but that we had held it up and the reason for the delay in a request from Mr, Acchione could be that he has not been well. Mr. Pollock stated that he strongly suggests that we get something in writing asking that this be held up. Mr. Hull stated that he is sure we can have that but he thought it is to the City's advantage not to force this issue and by having the flexibility on the judgment as to the right-of-way width, Mr, Pollock stated that the Commission has spent time discussing this item already and now Mr. Acchione would like a delay, but ttie Commission's time is as valuable to them as Mr, Achhione's is to him, Mr. Hull stated that the main question is the extension of this road connecting Plymouth Road with property to the north and it is very controversial but advantageous to the City by not having to act on this now. Mr. Walker questioned if Mr. Hull knows why Mr. Acchione wants it held up. Mr. Hull stated he did not know,, 4771 ': IL Mr. Walker stated that Mr. Acchione's letter was to the Council and at that time he wanted the City to buy the property. Mr. Hull stated that Mr. Acchione wrote the Council at his request, then he came back and said he would dedicate the land to the city provided the right- of-way was reduced so he could use the balance of the property„ This; Mr, Hull stated, gives us the flexibility of approving Wayne Road as an 86' , 110' or 120' right-of-way, and if we can't work something out with Mr. Acchione and the city does not buy the land Mr. Acchione could force the issue and the land is gone forever because legally if he requests the Council to purchase the land and they don't they will have to release it Mr. Walker stated that the city has power to condemn property and it 'is his belief that the city can acquire the land at any later date, Mr. Hull stated that the city cannot stop Mr. Acchione from building on the property, Mr. Walker stated it is not the Commission's concern whether or not he builds on this land, but they don't alter a road to accommodate one individual, Mr. Rodney Kropf stated, on behalf of adjoining property owners, that they would just as soon have the road eliminated, and added that Wayne County does not see any future in this road going north, Mr. Pollock stated that the Commission was requested by the City Council to resolve this matter and has received a letter from the property owner requesting action and it is his feeling that the Commission should get another letter from Mr. Acchione requesting a delay in action. Mr, Pollock questioned Mr. Daniel Andrew, Industrial Coordinate„, regarding the Wayne Road extension. Mr. Andrew stated that he did not care to comment at this point because this item is so controversial, Mr. Walker announced that this item will be taken under advisement, Mr. Wrightman announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-4-1-8 by Irving Allain requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Fargo Avenue approximately 305' east of Merriman Road in Section 2, from RUFA to R-5, Mr. Irving Allain, 15561 Fitzgerald, stated his desire to subdivide this property because it will be easier to sell it, and that he wished to have frontage on Fargo. Mr. Walker questioned if Mr, Allain has a residence on this land., Mr, Allain replied no. kW 4772 Mr„ Tent questioned if there will be access to the property to the north. Ind„ Hull stated that it would take a street to accomplish access to it. Th re being no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition Mr, Walker advised that it will be taken under advisement. Mr° Wrightman announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-4-6-6 by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to amend Ordinance Not 543, the Zoning Ordinance, said amendments to create industrial park provisions in the M-1 and M-L Districts„ Mr. Hull advised the Commission that this proposed ordinance amendment requires a 60' setback and will create a greater aesthetic value by requiring a wider right-of-way with greenery in front instead of parking. Mr„ Ward requested to know what will be done with the wider right-of-way, Mr, Hull stated that it will give the site greater flexibility regarding underground utilities. • 3:Tr„ Andrew, Industrial Coordinator, stated that at 60' there is trouble with underground utilities and he would like a 70' setback; and the Bureau of Inspection will be able to dictate what type of landscaping will be required .n an industrial district. Hull stated that the landscape requirement was added but somebody has to be charged with the responsibility of following through and the most logical dcnartment would be the Bureau of Inspection, in his opinion. Mr. Tent questioned if existing industrial development could be notified of this ordinance and given a period of time, two or three years, to comply„ Hr. Hull stated he thought that can be done but that is a separate ordinance, Mr. Nagy stated that once this ordinance is on the books if existing industry ,wanted to expand then they would be subject to this requirement. Mr. Andrew stated that this ordinance pertains only to industrial parks and not industrial land per se, and would have no effect on the Eight Mile Road industrial property. He added that the minimum front yard setback is pr, _ i� to be 25' from the right-of-way line or 60' from the centerline. There being no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition 1-.„ Walker stated that it will be taken under advisement. 4773 Mr. Wrightman announced the next item oft the agenda is Petition 66-3-6-5 by the City Planning Commissions pursuant to Council Resolution No. 1161-65 to determine wheth a or not to amend Ordinance No. 543, the Zoning Ordinance, by obviating the necessity presently provided for City Council approval on requests made for grants of waivers. (waiver uses) Mr. Hull stated that this is a Council Resolution requesting that the Department of Law draft an ordinance which would eliminate the necessity of Council action on waiver Uses! The Planning Commission action would then be final except in the case of an aggrieved petitioner. There being no one present wishing to be heard regarding this pt ition Mr. Walker advised that it will be taken under advisement. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Tent, seconded by Mr. Wrightman, and unanimously adopted it was #5-77-66 RESOLVED that the City Planning Commission'does hereby ' adjourn the Public Hearing held on Tuesday, May 10, 1966-, at approximately 10:30 p.m. * * * * * * * * * Mr, Walker, Chairman, called the 221st Special Meeting to order at approx- imately 10:45 p.m. with approximately 7 interested persons in the audience. Mr. Wrightman announced that the first item on the agenda is Petition 66-4-2-9 by W. E. Lockwood requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to operate a fruit market on the west half of lot #6 and all of lot #7 of Horton's Newburgh Subdivision, located on the north side of Ann Arbor Trail between Newburgh Road and Horton Avenue in Section 31. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Pollock and seconded by Mr. Wrightman, it was #5-78-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to 'a Public Hearing having been held on May 10, 1966 on Petition 66-4-2-9 as submitted by W. E. Lockwood requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to operate a fruit market on the west half of lot #6 and all of lot #7 of Horton's Newburgh Subdivision, located on the north side of Ann Arbor Trail between Newburgh Road and Horton Avenue in Section 31 , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 66-4-2-9 be approved for a period of two (2) years for the following reasons : (1) It is only a temporary use and will provide the property owner and the City with revenue until a more substantial use can be justified. 3 4774 ILFURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above Public Hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as listed in tte Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the followingt AYES : Tent, Walker, Pollocki Heusted, Whit^.head, Ward, Moser, Wrightman NAYS : None ABSENT: Chandler Mr. Walker, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted, Mr. Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-3-2-7 by H. A. Hemminger requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to construct a 2-story, 120 unit motel on parcel 35A3 and a portion of parcel 35A3a2b3 located on the south side of Plymouth Road approximately 2,136 feet west of Middlebelt Road in Section 35. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Tent and seconded by Mr. Wrightman, it was #5-79-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 10, 1966 on Petition 66-3-2-7 as submitted by H. A. Hemminger id to requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to construct a 2-story 120 unit motel on parcel 35A3 and a portion of parcel 35A3a2b3 located on the south side of Plymouth Road approximately 2,136 feet west of Middlebelt Road in Section 35, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 66-3-2-7 be approved based on the following legal -A- description which excludes the westerly ZA.5of Henry Ruff Road: That part of the N.E. 1/4 of Section 35, T. 1 S., R. 9 E., City of Livonia, Wayne County, Michigan, described as beginning at a point distant S 89° 52' 30" E. 496.50 feet; and S 0° 03' 45" E. 60 feet from the N 1/4 corner of Section 35 and proceeding thence S 0° 03' 45" E. 625 feet; thence N 89° 52' 30" W. 480.31 feet; thence N 0° 02' 02" W. 325 feet; thence S 89° 52' 30" E. 180,00 feet; thence N 0° 02' 02" W 300 feet; thence S 89° 52' 30" E 300 feet to the point of beginning, except the westerlymost 26.5 feet thereof for the future extension of Henry Ruff Road. for the following reasons: (1) It is a relatively low traffic generator for the dollar valuation involved (31,000,000); (2) It will not have a negative effect on the adjacent development; 4775 (3) There is a need for this type of facili';y within the City and within this specific area; AND contingent upon the proposed motel in question being con- structed and operated by the Holiday Inn Corp. FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the'above public hearing was sent to property owners ?aithih 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Walkers Pollock, Heusted, Whitehead, Ward, Moser, Tent, Wrightman NAYS : None ABSENT: Chandler Mr. Walker, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted, Mr. Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-3-2-8 by H. A. Hemminger requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to construct a gasoline service station on the northerly portion of parcel 35B located on the south side of Plymouth Road approximately 750 feet east of Milburn Avenue in Section 35, Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Tent and seconded by Mr. Wrightman, it was #5-80-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 10, 1966 on Petition 66-3-2-8 as submitted by H.S,Hemminger requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to construct a gasoline service station on the northerly portion of parcel 35B located on the south side of Plymouth Road approximately 750 feet east of Milburn Avenue in Sectio. 35, theCity Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 66-3-2-8 be approved ba^^d on the following legal description k'lich excludes the easterly 5of Henry Ruff Road: That part of the N.W. 1/4 of Section 35, . and that part of the N.E, 1/4 of Section 35,T. 1 S. , R. 9 E. , City of Livonia, Wayne County: Michigan described as being the North 210 feet of the west 16.5 feet of the N.W. 1/4 of the N.E. 1/4 of Section 35 and the north 210 feet of the East 148.5 feet of the N.E. 1/4 of the N.V. 1/4 of Sectiot 35, except the north 60 feet thereof; also except the east 59,5 feet thereof for the future extension of Henry Ruff Road. 4776 for the following reasons (1) It is an integral and related part of the proposed Holiday Inn.; (2) It is less objectionable to the general area than the existing intended use (car wash and gasoline station); AND with the condition that the gasoline service station be related to the motel proposed to be erected on parcel 35A3 and a portion of parcel 35A3a2b3 as stated in the petition; FURTHER RF'SOlVED, notice of the above public hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and city departments as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr, Tent requested to know if this action by the Planning Commission will supersede the prior approval by the Planning Commission of a car wash on this location, Mr, Tatigian'stated that he would assume this action will supersede any prior action, but that he would like an opportunity to look the matter over but would anticipate that the permission the Council gave previously would ultimately terminate in the event that they concurred in the Planning Commission's recommendation as far as this is concerned and since there has been a change of owneship of the property and the Building Department has not issued a permit as yet.. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES : Heusted, Whitehead, Ward, Moser, Tent, Wrightman, Pollock, Walker NAYS : None ABSENT: Chandler Mr, Walker, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted; Mr, Wrightman announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-3-1-7 by Alexander and Rose C. Spiro requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Morlock Road, approximately 280 feet east of Middlebelt Road located in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 1, from REF to PS , for addition to existing nursing home. Mr„ Walker, Chairman, announced that this item will be taken under advisement. 4777 Mr,. Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-3-3-5 by Stephan F. Slavik requesting the vacation of an easement located on the west side of Riverside Drive between Six Mile Road and Wood Drive in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 16 Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Ward and seconded by Mr. Whitehead, it was #5-81-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on May 10, 1966 on Petition 66-3-3-5 as submitted by Stephan F,,. Slavik requesting the vacation of an easement located on the west side of Riverside Drive between Six Mile Road and Wood Drive in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 16, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 66-3-3-5 be approved with the provision that the subject easement will be relocated approximately 60 feet south, and for the following reasons: (1) The Engineering Department has no objection to it and contemplates no problem; (2) The split will facilitate a reduction in density and an increase in lot size; FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was pub- lished in the official newspaper, the Livonian Observer and City Post under date of April 20, 1966 and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, City Departments, and petitioner, as listed in 11; the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES : Tent, Heusted, Ward, Whitehead, Moser, Pollock, Walker, Wrightman NAYS; None ABSENT: Chandler Mr, Walker, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Wrightman announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-4-7-6 by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or net to amend Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master Thoroughfare Plan, by modifying the right-of-way width of Wayne Road from 120' to 86'. Mr. Walker, Chairman, announced that this item will be taken under advisement. 4778 Mr„ Wrightman announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-4-1-8 by Irving Allain requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Fargo Avenue approximately 305' east of Merriman Road in Section 2 from RUFA to R-5. Upon a motion duly made by Mr; Heusted and seconded by Mr. Tent, it was #5-82-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on May 10, 1966 on Petition 66-4-1-8 as submitted by Irving Allain requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Fargo Avenue approximately 305' east of Merriman Road in Section 2 from RUFA to R-5, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 66-4-1-8 be denied for the follaing reasons: (1) The increase in density proposed by this petition will establish a precedent that will substantially increase the population of this area which will, in effect, tax the existing facilities of the area; (2) This is an arbitrary division of land that does not fall into a logical pattern and will seriously hamper a more logical future division of land if this is deemed advisable; FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonian Observer and City Post, under date of April 20, 1966, and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company and Con- sumers Power Company, City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES : Ward, Whitehead, Moser, Pollock, Walker, Tent,' Heusted, Wrightman NAYS : None ABSENT: Chandler Mr. Walker, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Wrightman announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-4-5-2 by H. T. Monroe, United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, regarding bond release in connection with TA-95 and TA-96, top- soil removal operation located on the northside of Seven Mile Road approximately 650' east of Gill Road in the Southeast 1/4 of ' Section 4. t 4779 Upon a motion duly made by Mrd Wrightman and seconded by Mr. Pollock it was #5-83-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the recommendations and report of the Bureau of Inspection dated January 27, 1965, the City Planning Commission does herein authorize the release of the bond dated May 28, 1964 in the amount of $2;500.00 by the' United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, 415 Griswold, Detroit, Michigan, 48226, posted with the City in connection with topsoil removal operations performed under Permit No. 91 " (TA-96) issued to John Migut, General Sand Company, 1943'' Archer, Detroit, Michigan 48219; it appears from the above report that all ordinances, rules and regulations have been complied with and the City Clerk is herein authorized to do all things necessary to the 1 full performance of this resolution. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Whitehead, Moser, Pollock, Walker, Tent, Heusted, Ward, Wrightman NAYS: None ABSENT: Chandler ';.'alker, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. (NOTE: Bond #EX-187-398 dated April 16, 1962 issued in connection with Permit #90 (TA-95) was previously cancelled pursuant to notice dated April 19, 1964 from American States Insurance Company.) Mr. Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-2-3-•2 by the City Planning Commission requesting to vacate the alley 100 feet north of and parallel to Plymouth Road from Stark Road to the east line of the Walter Dann Subdivision in Section 28. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Ward and seconded by Mr. Tent, it was 1`5-84-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on March 8, 1966 on Petition 66-2-3-2 as submitted by the City PlaJ 'Ting Commission requesting to vacate the alley 100 feet north of and parallel to Plymouth Road from Stark Road 'to the east line of the Walter Dann Subdivision in Section 28, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 66-2-3-2 be approved with the follcwing condition: (1) That the alley be vacated subject to the retention of an easement of similar width for public utility purposes immediately adjacent to lots one through five of Walter Dann Subdivision; and 4780 it: for the following reasons: (1) the alley serves no useful function and bisects land in common ownership; (2) it could be more advantageously used as a single parcel; FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was published in the official newspaper; the Livonian Observer and City Post under date of February 16, 1966, and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, City Departments and petitioner as listed in the. Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Moser, Pollock, Walker, Tent, Heustedf, Ward, Whitehead, Wrightman NAYS: None ABSENT: Chandler • Mr. Walker, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ,; li, Mr. Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 65-10-1-37 by Harold Thomas requesting to rezone property located between Beatrice and Middlebelt Road, approximately 671 feet south of Five Mile Road, in the North 1/2 of Section 23, from RUFA to C-2 Mr. Hull presented a brief background on'this petition and stated that it is the Planning Department's belief that Mr. Thomas can develop aid expand his pre- sent nursery operation as shown on his plan without the additional land being zoned to C-2. Mr. Kropf stated that Mr. Thomas has options to buy the useless strips of pro- perty to the rear of his present property, but unless it can be zoned C-2 he does not feel that he should purchase it. Mr. Tent questioned the intent of the petitioner in buying the additional praperty if his proposed expansion could be accomplished without additional C-2 property, and if his intent was to rezone the property and tt'en sell all of it. Mr. Kropf stated that there is no intent to do /his, but that additional C-2 zoned land was wanted and that the CL2 request had been cut down to in'1ude a portion to be zoned fir parking instead. 4781 Mr, Tent stated that Mr. Thomas' plan gives him his parking and existing buildings and operations without additional C-2 and is this not acceptable Mr, Ward stated that he supported the Planning Department's feeling regarding this petition - that property should not be rezoned to C-2 indiscriminately because by doing so it makes thp.property more valuable for selling in ten or fifteen years. Mr. Tent stated that the first plan was reviewed and thought very good and requested the Planning Department to see if Mr. Thomas could be given his proposed expansion without additional C-2 zoning. Mr. Wrightman questioned what good the prcerty in question would do anyone if it remains in the residentially zoned category. Mr. Hull stated that it is his opinion that Mr. Thomas can carry out his expansion exactly as shown on his plan without a change of zoning, and that there is concern that this amount of C-2 zoning will make it more lucritive for this man to get out of the nursery business because he will be given property that will accommidate a shopping center of rather large magnitude. Mr. Hull further stated that it may be more provident in the future to limit the commercial development to the existing land that is zoned C-2 and zone the RUF to the ^^ parking category or to a combination of parking and P.S. if the nursery operation is abandoned. His site plan does not show any need for additional C-2 zoning now to expand his nursery. Mr. Hull stated that he could not see granting him additional C-2 zoning now. Mr. Tent stated that if he can develop his plan with the existing zoning then he goes along with that. Mr. Kropf stated that they will not buy the RUF property at the price the owner wants for it. Mr. Hull stated that Mr. Kropf had presented a different story at all prior meetings. Mr. Thomas stated that operating a business in a residential area does not work and that he does not want to argue with his neighbors. Mr. Walker asked if Mr. Thomas could give the Commission a list of the employees cars and the equipment that Mr. Thomas mentioned had been parking on the east side of Middlebelt. Mr. Pollock questioned tht if the nursery business can be expanded without a change of zoning why is Mr. Thomas requesting C-2 rather than C-1. Mr, Kropf stated that C-2 zoning would be consistent with the existing zoning. Mr. Walker questioned if a plan could be submitted showing that some of the land is proposed for parking. Mr. Kropf replied yes, he could do that and that 100 feet is proposed for parking and 162 feet is proposed for C-2. 4782 1[: Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Ward and seconded by Mr. Moser, it was #5-85-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on November 30, 1965 on Petition 65-10-1-37 as submitted by Harold Thomas requesting to'rezone property located between Beatrice and Middlebelt Roads, approximately 671 feet south of Five Mile Road, in the North 1/2 of Section 23, from RUFA to C-2,the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 65-10-1-37 be denied for the following reasons: (1) this large a quantity of commercial zoning in this area would not be in the best interest of the City; (2) The intended use, as proposed by the petitioner, can be contained in the existing C-2 zoning property according to the Planning Director; FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was published in the official newspaper, 'the Livo nian Observer and City Post, under date of November 10, 1965, and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company and Con- sumers Power Company, City Departments and Petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service. IL A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES : Tent, Pollock, Moser,, Whitehead, Heusted, Ward NAYS: Walker, Wrightman ABSENT: Chandler Mr, Walker, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-4-6-6 by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to amend Ordinance No, 543, the Zoning Ordinance, said amendments to create industrial park provisions in the M-1 and M-L Districts, Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Wrightman and seconded by Mr.. Ward, it was #5-86-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on May 10, 1966 on Petition 66-4-6-6 as submitted by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to amend Ordinance No. 543, theZoning Ordinance, said amendments to create industrial park provisions in the M-1 and M-L Districts,the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition IL66-4-6-6 be approved for the following reasons: 4783 (1) there is need for a provision in the Zoning Ordinance that specifically provides for industrial parks; (2) this will help to make industrial development more compatible with adjacent development; FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of 'the above public hearing was pub- lished in the official newspaper; the Livonian Observer and City Post, under date of April 20, 1966, and notice of such hearing was sent to'the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company; Michigan Bell Telephone Company and Consumers Power Company, City Departments, as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Tent, Heusted, Ward, Whitehead, Moser, Pollocki Walker, Wrightman NAYS: None ABSENT: Chandler Mr. Walker, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-3-6-5 by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution No.1161=65, to determine whether or not to amend Ordinance No. 543, the Zoning Ordinance, by obviating the necessity presently provided for City Council approval on requests made for grants of waivers (waiver uses), Upon a motion duly made by Mrs Moser and seconded by Mr. Tent, it was #5-87-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on May 10,. 1966 on Petition 66-3-6-5 as submitted by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution #1161-65 to determine wheth€ror not to amend Ordinance No. 543, the Zoning Ordinance, by obviating the necessity presently provided for City Council approval on requests made for grants of waivers (waiver uses), the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 66-3-6-5 be approved for the follow- ing reasons: (1) This will reduce the amount of administrative work for the City FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of'the above public hearing was pub- lished in the official newspaper, the Livonian Observer and City Post, under date of April 20, 1966, and notice of such hearing was sent to'the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company; Michigan Bell Telephone Company and Consumers Power Company, City Departments, as listed in the Proof of Service, 4784 A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES : Heusted, Ward, Whitehead, Moser, Pollock, Walker, Tent, Wrightman NAYS i Noire ABSENT: Chandler Mr. Walker, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Ward and seconded by Mr. Tent, it was #5-88-66 RESOLVED that the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the minutes of the meetings held on March 8, 1966; March 29, 1966, April 12, 1966 and May 3, 1966. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES : Whitehead, Moser, Pollock, Walker, Tent, Heusted, Ward, Wrightman NAYS: None ABSENT: Chandler. Mr. Walker, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is a motion by the Planning Commission, pursuant to a request dated April 28, 1966 from Daniel R. Andrew, Coordinator, Industrial Development Commission, to rezone tax parcel 27D2a, D2b1 and D2b2, located in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 27 from REF to M-1 Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Ward and seconded by Mr. Wrightman, it was #5-89-66 RESOLVED that pursuant to Section 23.01 of, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, No. 543, as amended, the City Planning Commission does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to rezone tax parcel 27D2a, D2bl and D2b2, located in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 27, from RUF to M-1. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES : Moser, Pollock, Walker, Tent, Heusted, Ward, Whitehead, Wrightman NAYS: None ABSENT: Chandler 6 4785 Mr. Walker, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Whitehead, and unanimously adopted, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the 221st Special Meeting held on Tuesday, May 10, 1966 at approximately 11:50 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION • .LL.— J.( :4 . // / ATTESTED: arry ti•`.' ghtma /Secretary P Char es W. Walker, Chairman