Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1988-03-22 10130 MINUTES OF THE 555th REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF t;011‘040a# ,J LIVONIA1 C7.+' On Tuesday, March 22, 1988, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 555th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. 4r. Mr. Donald Vyhnalek, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. , with approximately 45 interested persons in the audience. Members present: Donald Vyhnalek Sue Sobolewski James C. McCann Donna J. Naidow Richard Straub William LaPine Michael Soranno Members absent: *Herman Kluver **R. Lee Morrow Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director; and Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV, were also present. Mr. Vyhnalek informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and decide the question. If a petition involves a waiver of use request and the request is denied, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City Council; otherwise the petition is terminated. The Commission holds the only public hearing on a preliminary plat and/or a vacating petition. Planning Commission resolutions do not become effective until seven days after tonight. The Planning Commission has reviewed the petitions upon their filing and have been furnished by the staff with approving and denying reso- lutions. The Commission may use them or not use them depending upon the outcome of the hearing tonight. `tow Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 88-2-1-1 by Marcello Scappaticci to rezone property located on the northeast corner of Joy Road and Houghton Street in the southeast 1/4 of Section 31 from R-1 to R-6. Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from the Engineering Division states they have reviewed this petition and have no objections to it. There is a letter in the file from residents in the area expressing opposition to this rezoning request and asking that the Commission deny it. *Mr. Kluver entered the meeting at 7:06 p.m. Marcello Scappaticci, 27505 Ford Road, Garden City, petitioner: I proposed to rezone a small piece of property for a duplex. I have had the property for twenty years. I tried to sell it but it is in the front of an Edison station and there is multiple across the street. The house next door I tried to sell but the guy said he would not like the house because of the station across the street. A duplex would be the best use to go from a single family. Mr. Soranno: What is your reasoning for feeling that you will be able to sell a duplex if not a single family? Mr. Scappaticci: I don't want to sell it. We would own it to rent out ourselves. 10131 Mr. Kluver: You intend to lease out both portions of the building for an invest- ment? Mr. Scappaticci: Yes. Mr. LaPine: You owned the property for twenty years? Mr. Scappaticci: Yes. `w Mr. LaPine: How often did you have it up for sale? Mr. Scappaticci: I advertised at least twenty times and I had a real estate company. I tried the guy next door but he didn't want it because he didn't think it would sell because of the station across the street. Mr. McCann: Do you plan on building a two story or one story brick? How many square feet? Mr. Scappaticci: About 2,000 square feet total. Mr. McCann: With a garage? Mr. Scappaticci: We would be happy to also add a garage if the Commission would support this petition. Mr. McCann: The possibility of putting a single family home would not be viable to you? Mr. Scappaticci: I have been in the building business for thirty years. I do not feel confortable doing it. We have been building homes of different sizes in many cities. I can build it but I will rent it. I don't think I would be comfortable selling it. We have on Joy Road C-1 and C-2 next door. We are the first house on Joy Road east of the commercial zone so I thought if I put a nice duplex, it would not `Nay decrease the value of the neighborhood. Mr. Straub: What is the status of the lot? Mr. Scappaticci: There are a few trees on it but not very many. We have to keep the property up and pay taxes. We feel it has to come to an end. We own a lot of real estate in Plymouth and Westland and we maintain them. We will not build and abandon them. Mr. Sobolewski: Did you buy the property as a single family lot? Mr. Scappaticci: Yes, but I thought it was commercial land as it was on Joy Road and there are 4 twenty-foot wide lots making up this overall parcel. Mrs. Sobolewski: The house to the east -- do you own that? Mr. Scappaticci: No. A different builder constructed it and I offered to him to buy the lot we own but he didn't want to take a risk in marketing it. Helen Shepard, 8865 Houghton: I have never seen a for sale sign on that lot. The builder who built on the east side of Houghton was allowed to divide the lot so he could put the end house on a fifty-foot lot and they really have a problem with cars. They border an alley and I can't see how they can have another two families living there. 10132 Robert Corney, 38134 Joy Road: He was in front of the Planning Commission about two months ago opposing closing that alley because of that house she is referring to on the north side. The lot is fifty feet and they need that area for parking. There is a garage in the back. I am totally against a duplex because I didn't move to Livonia to live next door to a rental unit. Some rental people just don't care as well as others about their property. It is a nice subdivision. The builder at one time told me the lot next door was too small to build a residence on. I had inquired at one time about purchasing it but the owner just denied it. I cut one lot next door to me and the City cuts one lot. I would like to see a residence put up there. Mr. Straub: You own the property just east? Mr. Corney: Yes. Mr. Kluver: There are many outlots that have been developed as single-family homes off Seven Mile and off Newburgh. They have been developed very nicely. They have been built on outlots and sold. I, as one Commissioner, look on that to mean you could build a single family home and have no problem selling it. Mr. Soranno: I don't really see a compelling need to have a duplex. I don't see whether it is single family or duplex that it makes any difference if he going to rent it out. Mr. McCann: He is in a commercial area and there would be difficulty in terms of selling single family. I would more than likely prefer it to be single family but from a practical standpoint, I think it would be difficult for him to develop it as single family. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 88-2-1-1 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Straub, seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimously adopted, it was #3-43-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 22, 1988, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 88-2-1-1 by Marcello Scappaticci to rezone property located on the northeast corner of Joy Road and Houghton Street in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 31 from R-1 to R-6 be denied for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning represents a spot zone in the area. (2) The proposed change of zoning will permit a two family residence unlike the adjacent and surrounding single family residences prevalent in the area. (3) The subject site will be difficult to develop so as to comply with all building setback requirements set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. 10133 Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 88-2-1-2 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the north side of Five Mile Road, east of the I-96 Freeway in the South- west 1/4 of Section 18 from R.E. to P.S. 'tray H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director: This proposed rezoning was initiated by the Planning Commission on its own motion acting on a recommendation from the Planning staff. The subject parcel is 5.2 acres in area and has been zoned R.E. since 1968. Because of its location adjacent to the Freeway and its odd shape, the staff is of the opinion that it is not conducive to development as residential. No development has occurred on the property under the R.E. District which permits research, limited manufacturing and general office type uses. It is felt that a rezoning to the P.S. classification will be more likely to attract a user and that the uses permitted will be more compatible to the adjacent Church and nearby residents. Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from the Engineering Department states that there are no storm or sanitary sewers readily available to service the site, and that access to the site may be limited due to the limited access requirements along Five Mile Road imposed by the Michigan Department of Transportation. Virginia Krenz, 34075 Pembroke, representing Holy Trinity Lutheran Church: A driveway would have to be very narrow because of the Freeway. I would prefer that our driveway not be used. There could be no access onto the Freeway. I understand that if professional buildings go in, there would have to be a wall between the properties. Mr. Nagy: It is a requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. The screen wall at the property line would have to be at least a five foot wall, not more than seven feet in height. Mrs. Krenz: We feel it is a bad location for anything because of access. The only thing the property has done over the years is to collect garbage. I have noticed the building going on in Livonia and there is a hard time renting office buildings already constructed. I would hate to see the building become an eye-sore. Mr. LaPine: We are rezoning the property. There is no building going on the property at this time. It may or may not happen. Nobody has decided they want to build. Has the Church ever considered buying that property and expanding their Church? Mrs. Krenz: No, we have a lot of land in the back of our property that we can't afford to do anything with. Mr. LaPine: Can you understand that something has to be done with the property? Somebody, some way, will find a way to build something on there and will have to work out something for a joint driveway with the Church. James Winters, 15467 Knolson: I am against the rezoning because of the noise. The trees there provide us some cover. From my back porch, you have to talk loud or can't be heard. We did ask that barriers be put up 10134 along the Freeway but got nowhere with that. I think it is the City who should see that barriers are put up. If it is wooded like it is now, we would have some protection against the noise. Mr. Nagy: The property is already zoned R.E. and office. Right now, the owner can build offices on the property. The R.E. preceding the office 4.. designation would allow limited manufacturing. (Mr. Nagy read from the Zoning Ordinance the uses allowed in the R.E. Zoning District). With this rezoning, we are taking away the use of the property for research and engineering and a 25% limitation on manufacturing. They will be left with only the option of using the property for offices. A wall is required for research and engineering. The purpose for the wall is to screen the parking lot lights and the debris in the park- ing area; not the noise. Mr. Winters: Thank you. I am staill against it. Richard Yannatta, 15445 Knolson: When we moved in that area, we paid a lot for a premium lot. Doesn't that count for anything? What little woods we have, are you going to take that away? You wouldn't like that if you lived there. If the property sat there for twenty more years, what harm does that do? Mr. Vyhnalek: There is an individual who owns that and he may want to sell it. As Mr. Nagy pointed out, there could be light manufacturing there, but nobody wants to build there at this time. Mr. Winters asked for a definition of a single family dwelling in Livonia. Follow- the definition by Mr. Nagy, Mr. Winters advised the Commission that there is a single family dwelling in the area with seven families living in it. Mr. Winters was advised by Mr. Vyhnalek that the Inspection Department should be contacted regarding that situation and invited Mr. Winters to contact Mr. Nagy about assistance with the problem. Mitchell Drag, 15239 Adams Court: I have put up with some problems with Eckles Road with the traffic and noise. If they put in a factory, we will really have problems. My suggestion would be for the City to make that a nature park. We have all the wild animals in there. I have seen wild foxes in there and that is their home. A nice park in there would be sufficient. An office there wouldn't be good unless they put in a good, solid buffer from the noise. The noise really comes from the overpass. With a southwest wind, there is a heck of a noise. The solid wall that is supposed to be a barrier -- all I can say is that someone made some money on it. Sam Polumbo, 15147 Adams Court: Our street lets out at the edge of the property. If anything went in there, there would have to be a driveway in there because people would be turning left onto Five Mile. People on Five Mile would be turning left and people going to the Church would be turning left. That would be hazardous and coming down the overpass on a slippery day is very hazardous. Dan Arnold, West Bloomfield, owner of the property: The City thinks this should be done -- zoned to office. My office for five years was in Livonia on 10135 Merriman Road. I own property in Livonia. For the last fifteen years, I have been involved in the sale of property in Livonia. I was a member of the Chamber of Commerce for many years and active in organi- zations in Livonia. I bought this property three years ago. The reason it is vacant is not because it can't be built on. It is because I have an interest in putting in the type of development that would be �.. compatible with the area. I will be cooperative with the City in having the office zoning. That is something I could work with. Mr. Soranno: You don't happen to own the triangular piece, do you? Mr. Arnold: No. Mr. Soranno: Have you ever pursued the property? Mr. Arnold: I have talked to him. The owner of the property, Mr. Finkel, owned 100 feet across that started at Haggerty Road. When the Freeway went in, that was one of the pieces left over. He has not approached me and I have not approached him as far as purchasing it goes. Mr. Soranno: I am concerned about that rear piece. John Quigley, 38829 Kingsbury: I would make a suggestion that the Council take a bird's eye view of that property. You will find it would be very hazardous concerning traffic. Traffic in that area will not be able to see traffic coming over the bridge. Mr. Soranno: I hope you understand that this is a down-grade in the use of the land. You could have a worse problem with the use of that land as it is now. Mr. Drag: I made a suggestion that it be a nature trail. `. Mr. McCann: We have a choice tonight of approving a resolution which would reduce the type of business that can go in there, or deny it, which means we would do nothing with it. It is not that we wouldn't like to do that but our choise is to leave the industrial as it is now or put it to office. He could put industrial in there tomorrow or we could put a limit on it for offices. If you want to leave it alone, he can put industrial on it. Mr. Drag: I would say leave it alone. Mr. Soranno: Leaving it alone doesn't mean leaving it vacant. If he wants to put up a building under the R.E. classification, he can do that. Mr. Vyhnalek: Mr. Arnold would prefer R.E. so he can build bigger and better things. Mr. Winters: Does down-grading it increase the salability of it? Is it less salable this way? As industrial, you have no access to it off Five Mile. People in an industrial area wouldn't want it that way because they would have to go to Six Mile or Schoolcraft to get to the Free- way. If he made it doctors offices, we would have a lot of cars going up that grade. 10136 Mr. Vuhnalek: It probably would be more salable as P.S. Mrs. Krenz: Why doesn't the City buy this land and solve the whole problem? Mr. McCann: The opinion of the audience is to leave it alone but to buy it is something the Council would have to do. Nue. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 88-2-1-2 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mr. LaPine, it was #3-44-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 22, 1988, on Petition 88-2-1-2 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the north side of Five Mile Road, east of the I-96 Freeway in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18 from R.E. to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 88-2-1-2 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning will provide for uses which are compatible to and in harmony with the adjacent and surrounding uses in the area. (2) The proposed change of zoning will provide a buffer or transition zone between the I-275 Freeway and adjacent uses to the east. (3) The proposed change of zoning will provide a zoning classi- fication which will be much more likely to attract a prospective user, thus having a positive affect on the City's tax base. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Soranno, LaPine, Straub, Kluver, Vyhnalek NAYS: Sobolewski, McCann, Naidow ABSENT: Morrow Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 88-2-1-3 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the north- west corner of five Mile Road and Levan Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17 from C-1 to P.S. Mr. Shane: This petition has been initiated by the Planning Commission after having received a recommendation from the Planning staff to consider rezoning to a more restrictive zoning category. The parcel has been vacant since 1967. The P.S. , Professional Service District, will permit office uses which are complimentary to the adjacent shopping center and surrounding uses in the area. While the C-1 District also permits office uses, it also permits many retail commercial uses. In addition, the P.S. category will allow more land coverage because 10137 of reduced building setback requirements and offstreet parking re- quirements. Also, the P.S. District will tend to cause less traffic congestion than will the existing C-1 District. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Department stating they have no objection to this petition. Michael Raedler, employee of Southland Corporation, owner of the property, 26533 Evergreen, Southfield: Southland bought this property in 1986 for a 7-Eleven Store. We subsequently were not able to get a beer and wine license. We decided last year to dispose of the property. I have been trying to do that since January. Rezoning from C-1 will cause a loss to me in selling the property. I am presently talking with parties who would like to buy the property as C-1. Mr. Straub: What type of operation do you envision on that property? Another 7-Eleven? Mr. Raedler: Anything allowable in a C-1. We discussed with the City some uses that wouldn't be amenable to the City and I have been trying to work out something that would be amenable to the City. Mr. Soranno: Is one buyer the owner of the C-1 adjacent to it? Mr. Raedler: Partially, yes. I am talking with two or three now and it is in the negotiating stage. Nothing in writing. Mr. Vyhnalek: What would be permitted in C-? Mr. Nagy: It is limited to retail sales. Grocery stores, convenience foods, carry-out foods. Restaurants are not permitted in C-1. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Vyhnalek, '14"" Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 88-2-1-2 closed. Mr. Straub: My intention is not to work a hardship on the Southland Corporation but even with P.S. that property would be highly marketable. Based on our own study, we feel P.S. is a much less intensive use for that corner and our objective is to preserve the corner. On a motion duly made by Mr. Straub, seconded by Mr. Soranno and unanimously adopted, it was #3-45-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 22, 1988 on Petition 88-2-1-3 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the northwest corner of five Mile Road and Levan Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17 from C-1 to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 88-2-1-3 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning will provide for uses which would be less intensive then uses permitted by the current C-1, local commercial, Zoning District. (2) The proposed change of zoning will be compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. 10136 (3) The proposed change of zoning will encourage the development of professional office uses in conjunction with the adjacent retail shopping center to provide for more of a variety of facilities to attract and serve the public. (4) The P.S. Zoning District will allow greater utilization of the land for building purposes due to less restrictive build- ing setback requirements and off street parking requirements. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 88-2-2-4 by Fred J. Armour requesting waiver use approval for outdoor storage of contractor's equipment on property located on the southwest corner of Eight Mile Road and Hugh Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 2. Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from the Engineering Department states that they have no objection to the proposal. There is also a letter in the file from the petitioner's representative which states that four Ford F-600, 9' high trucks and two farm tractors, each 5' high, will be stored on the property outside. Fred Armour, 27010 Joy Road, Dearborn Heights: My client is in the landscape business. There is a building on the property which has been used for repair of cars. He wishes to be able to store his equipment in that yard and to be able to repair them when needed in that building. We have agreed to landscape 25' on Hugh. I think it is a really good use for the property because if he used it for M-1, you could put almost anything in there. Sandra De Water, 20335 Fremont: The City has totally bombarded our neighborhood with salvage yards and storage areas. The neighborhood is a dump, the alleys are dirty. We can't get anything done. We can't get the rats out. Now you want us to accept another. The building there will not be able to take a 9' high truck. The building is not big enough for a vehicle of that size. There is one building after another that you are putting all this junk in. Why do you allow the Smith Kellering Company to park east and west on a north/south street. That was supposed to be landscaped but the City doesn't make them do it. There is garbage everywhere around that store. Does the City help us? No. Now you want to put in another. I am ashamed of Smith Kellering Company. Now you want us to take on another storage. I am opposed to it. I just don't think they can do the repair in that building. And, east and west parking is not allowed on that street but yet you are allowing it. Mrs. De Water submitted picture of the area for the Commission's review. **Mr. Morrow entered the meeting at 8: 10 p.m. Mr. Straub: We, as the current available representatives for the City, serve as whipping posts for the citizens of the City of Livonia. What I would `► 10137 like to happen here is some statement to the audience as to what re- course they have in this matter. From time to time, we feel the passion of citizens about matters that we can do nothing about. Per- haps it would be worthwhile if the staff did point out the procedure for handling matters of this type. You are operating under a deficit of information and we are taking the blame. The matters you mention are matters we can do nothing about. Mrs. De Water We came down here and agreed to these things but the City has not made them do what they were supposed to do. Sharon Wagner, 20417 Fremont: This has been going on for years. We have lived here all our lives and this has been an ongoing problem since 1965. It is like beating your head against the wall. What recourse do we have except to speak to Ordinance Enforcement? We want the City to make these people comply with the rules and regulations like they are supposed to do which nobody is making them do. Mr. Kluver: I would like to recommend that this Commission, through the staff, write a letter to the Chief Inspector and request that he go out to this area, review it, and come back with a report of which a copy would be forwarded to the Planning Commission. Even though this is not part of rezoning, it is part of the infrastructure. I will make that recommendation through the Chair to the Planning Staff. Perhaps this will get you some positive action. Mrs. Wagner: Mr. Barton was referring to how long it takes to get things cleaned up because of the Smith Kellering Company. Now there are other companies in the area that are disgraceful. We want this area cleaned up. We would be lucky to get three-fourths of the value of our homes because of the area. Mr. McNamara even agreed and said "let's get this place cleaned up", but nobody ever follows through. '\r• Mr. Vyhnalek: Have you seen the site plan for this development? Mrs. Wagner: It would be no different than what it has been in the past. You can say you will allow only two trucks in the yard but once the owner has control of the property, he can do virtually anthing he wants. Our taxes are increasing too outrageously to look out our yard to see a junk yard. Mrs. Silvernail, 20404 Fremont: The area is getting much worse. We don't want another one of these. They say they will put in landscaping but the City won't make him do it. The area is a rat trap. This is not fair. Their property across Eight mile is horrible and we do not want it on our side. The doctors' offices are beautiful. I don't want to look at another piece of garbage like you see in the pictures. Bill Ackroyd, 20421 Hugh: There was an auto facility there. We have tractor trailers parking there. I am opposed to having any more construction or storage areas in that area. Jim Harper, 205060 Hugh: The area is a mess and nobody wants to go into it -- what is my house worth? I am opposed. 10138 Frank Kozan, 20403 Fremont: What we are asking you to do is stop this situation. There is an injunction on Smith Kellering to see what they are doing in there. We are asking you to stop what could happen in the next block. We have our lives in our homes and would like to ask you to help us protect them. Mr. McCann: I have been out there to look and agree with the residents. At the meeting last week, one of the requirements was that he would have to move 25' in. Mr. Armour: That is right. We did that and it is on the new drawing which you have. Mr. McCann: Would you be opposed to putting up instead of an 8' fence a wooden decorative fence? Mr. Armour: I personally don't like that type of fence because it doesn't hold up. With good landscaping in front of a cyclone fence, it would be better, but if that is what you would want, we would agree to it. Mr. McCann: The neighbors would have to look at the fence. Mr. Armour: Not if it has landscaping. It wouldn't make any difference cost- wise. Mr. LaPine: Eight Mile has been a problem child for Livonia for years. I think we agreed that we would get after Eight Mile but nothing has happened. The question tonight is, do we want to stop it and if so this would be a time to stop it. The next time somebody comes in with storage, we stop it. It might take years but it could happen. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 88-2-2-4 closed. Mr. Straub: Although I am in favor of denying, this will not solve the problem you have with the Inspection Department and I suggest that you follow through with contacting the Inspection Bureau about the area. Mr. Morrow: I think we have made some stride west of Merriman Road and I would like to see some stride made east of Merriman Road. To approve another waiver use for outside storage would not be decreasing the problem but increasing the problem. On a motion duly made by Mr. McCann, seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimously adopted, it was #3-46-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 22, 1988 on Petition 88-2-2-4 by Fred J. Armour requesting waiver use approval for outdoor storage of contractor's equipment on property located on the southwest corner of Eight Mile Road and Hugh Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 88-2-2-4 be denied for the following reasons: (1) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use is in compliance with the general standards and requirments set forth in Section 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. \r. 10139 (2) The proposed use would be detrimental to the surrounding area because it would add more outdoor storage of equip- ment and material to an area already well served with such facilities. (3) The subject land area can be developed for more suitable industrial uses that have the potential for creating additional jobs and adding more substantially to the City's tax base. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 88-2-2-5 by Charles Tangora for Kaftan-Gottlieb for waiver use approval to construct a building for general office use on property located on the southeast corner of Seven Mile and Merriman Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 11. Mr. Nagy: A letter from the Engineering Department indicates that there are no storm or sanitary sewers immediately available to serve the site. Charles Tangora, 33900 Five Mile Road, representing the Kaftan-Gottlieb: As we advised at the study session, we are here for a waiver use. The Council recently had second reading on the rezoning petition. We informed them that we plan a general office use for the corner. One story elevation. That is the type of site plan we have before you also. We have worked with the neighbors on Seven Mile immediately east of the property and south of the site on Merriman. They have had input into the site plan. They know what the waiver use will `r do for them. We have made a list of the things the neighbors do not want to see. We would ask that the waiver use be approved based on the condition that the uses will not be objectionable to the neigh- bors. The sprinkling system and landscaping are on the site plan submitted to the Commission. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 88-2-2-5 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno and seconded by Mr. McCann, it was #3-47-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 22, 1988 on Petition 88-2-2-5 by Charles Tangora for Kaftan-Gottlieb for waiver use approval to construct a building for general office use on property located on the southeast corner of Seven Mile and Merriman Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 11, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 88-2-2-5 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that the Site Plan dated 1/25/88, as revised and submitted on 3/28/88, prepared by Fred J. Horner, Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; 10140 (2) that the Landscape Plan, as revised, dated 2/8/88, prepared by Ray's Landscaping & Nursery, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to and the landscaping installed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter perma- nently maintained in a healthy condition; (3) that the Building Elevation Plan #88-8860-M, Sheet 2, pre- pared by Fred J. Horner, Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (4) that this waiver use shall not include and hereby prohibits "real estate" offices; for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use is in compliance with all waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 9.03 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. (2) The proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. (3) The subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Soranno, McCann, Straub, Sobolewski, Morrow, Kluver, Naidow, Vyhnalek NAYS: LaPine 'to'' Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 88-2-2-6 by Carl J. Volk for waiver use approval to construct a building for general office use on property located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Westfield and Grandon in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 36. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Department stating that they have no objection to this petition from an engineering standpoint. Carl Volk, 9736 Knolson, Livonia, representing the property owner: The owner has a piece of property zoned P.S. From Joy Road to Plymouth Road there is a lot of office space available for professional service. What we would like is to get a waiver for general office space. What we are proposing is a means of ingress on Middlebelt Road. No traffic on side streets. Everything will be landscaped. We just want some- thing that is a little, single story office space for an individual. No retail. Mr. Volk submitted the original site plan and a revised site plan to the Commission members and discussion was held regarding them. 10141 Mrs. Grant, 29173 Minton: I am afraid of what he going to do. What are we going to get? Mr. Vyhnalek: General office. Mr. Nagy: P.S. would limit it to doctors, engineers, etc. It wouldn't permit an insurance office. An insurance office wouldn't fall under the New heading of professional. This waiver would allow them to lease to general administrative offices but no commercial. It doesn't allow banks, museums, convalescent homes but it gives a greater variety of options. Ninety percent of offices come back when they get P.S. for general offices. We have never had any problem with the general office use. In fact, the Commission has initiated a petition to allow general offices to locate in professional office districts. Mrs. Grant: We have lived here for thirty-three years and that land has been vacant all this time and we want to make sure something nice goes in. Mrs. Bernard Matusz, 29197 Grandon: I would prefer it to stay the same. I don't want it to change. I want it to stay professional. Mr. Morrow: In my opinion, doctors' , dentists' , lawyers' offices are a more intense use regarding the amount of traffic they generate than a general office type use. The odds are that this will generate less traffic around this site. As far as the type of clientele, you would find no difference than a professional office. Mr. McCann: We did take a look at this. The original proposal, we had a lot of problems with. He revised it and I think it is of higher calibre. He has included a spinkling system, overhead lighting and has generally tried to make that building as compatible with the area as he can. He does have foresight in going general office because he sees you have had a problem in the area with professional offices. rr. I think the petitioner has tried to come up with something that I think will really not hurt the area. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 88-2-2-6 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it was #3-48-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 22, 1988 on Petition 88-2-2-6 by Carl J. Volk for waiver use approval to construct a building for general office use on property located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Westfield and Grandon in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 36, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 88-2-2-6 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that the site plan dated 2-22-88 marked sheet 1-A prepared by R. James Wilson, Architect & Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that the building elevation plan dated 3-18-88, as revised, prepared by R. James Wilson, Architect & Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; 10142 (3) that the landscaping shown on the approved site plan, which shall also include an underground sprinkler system, shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter be permanently maintained in a healthy condition; for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use is in compliance with the waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 9.03 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. (2) That the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. (3) That the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. LaPine left the meeting at 9:10 p.m. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 88-3-2-7 by the Rotary Club for waiver use approval to operate a carnival within the Sheldon Shopping Center located on the south side of Plymouth Road, west of Farmington Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 34. Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from the Superintendent of Parks and Recreation points out that it would be appreciated if there would be no en- croachment by the carnival in the way of parking, storage or housing _"' on the City park site. A letter from the Fire Department states there should be no parking on the east side of the shopping center build- ing in the event this roadway should be needed to accommodate emergency vehicles. The City Librarian indicates a concern that the carnival traffic not block or obstruct the library parking lot which is for library or park use only. Another concern of the City Librarian is restroom facilities to be provided by the carnival. The library restrooms are not designed to accommodate the heavy use as has been their experience in the past. The Traffic Bureau of the Police Department indicates in a letter that a problem is foreseen with the parking and ingress/egress that is not addressed in the application. Parking cannot be allowed on Plymouth Road, nor along Woodring and a possible conflict can be seen with regard to the sport activities that would be using the Shelden Pool lot and the Van Court area. The Police Department also questions the security and crowd control and suggests that the applicant contact the Chief's office or the Community Service Bureau concerning a police detail. In con- clusion, it is stated that it is not possible to give a recommendation for or against the proposal due to the incomplete information sub- mitted. Jim Craver, 15333 Middlebelt, representing the Rotary Club, was present. Mrs. Naidow: What will be the period of operation? `• 10143 Mr. Vyhnalek: April 18th to May 1st, 12:00 to 10:00 p.m. , except I doubt that it would be open before 4:00 during the week -- only on week-ends. Mr. Craver: Wade Shows are putting this on and assure us that as far as rest- \ room facilities go, they would be supplying those. Also, site clean up on a daily basis and security would be handled by them. We are trying for funds to be earmarked for community service to improve Rotary Park. Mr. Morrow: Will the Club have management on-site? Mr. Craver: Yes, we will. Mr. Morrow: Do you have a site layout? Mr. Craver: Not with me. Mr. Morrow: Sometimes we have problems with carnivals. The more involved the organization is with the carnival, the better run it is. We have heard the concerns of the Police Department and without their recommendation, I would be hard pressed to approve this tonight. I am not doubting the integrity of the organization but by the same token, the City is in a quasi-monitoring spot once it starts grant- ing these waiver uses so that we don't have the problems we have had in the past. Mr. Vyhnalek: Do they need a site plan? Mr. Nagy: No. The requirement is a legal description and a map of the pro- posed area but, as the Commission may recall, when we have approved this use for the Jaycees, we have never required a detailed site plan. Mr. Straub: I agree with Mr. Morrow and I know there is a shortage of time but I couldn't vote on this until we have a recommendation from the Police Department. Mr. Soranno: Will parking be throughout the Center? Mr. Craver: Yes. Mr. Soranno: So, potentially, we have no control of the area. Mr. Craver: I am sure we could handle anything the City would want us to do so that people wouldn't be using facilities they shouldn't. I believe they have had carnivals in this area before. Mr. Vyhnalek: Were there problems when the Jaycee carnival was there? Mr. Nagy: I detect from Mr. Reinke's letter that they were spread all over but other than that, I don't know of any. Mrs. Sobolewski: The trailers that the carnival people live in on the site -- I don't see how they will be able to have it all there. Did you try to find a larger site? Mr. Craver: We talked with Ladbroke yesterday and they don't want to become in- volved. The show is now smaller. It is designed by Wade as to the size he can put here and it will be smaller than the Jaycee's. fir. 10144 Mr. Morrow: The Jaycees have been doing this for a long time and I want to be sure in my mind that there will be active involvement by the Rotary Club because problems will come up, and not just letting Wade put the show on. You have to have people on-site supervising the Wade show. Mr. Craver: In the end, the Rotary Club will be responsible and should be adequately insured. The members of the Commission indicated that they would be willing to approve this petition if the Rotary Club could comply with the recommendations of the Police Department and assure the Commission that there would be involvement on the site by the Rotary Club. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 88-3-2-7 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno and seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski, it was #4-49-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 22, 1988 on Petition 88-3-2-7 by the Rotary Club for waiver use approval to operate a carnival within the Sheldon Shopping Center located on the south side of Plymouth Road, west of Farmington Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 34, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 88-3-2-7 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that all truck parking, temporary housing units and all other related transportation equipment and apparatus relating to the operation of the carnival shall be parked or stored on the site; *ft. (2) that there shall be active involvement by the members of the Rotary Club in containing carnival participants on the site; (3) that a letter from the Police Department stating its recom- mendations regarding the petition be obtained by the Rotary Club and that the Rotary Club adhere to those recommendations; for the following reasons: (1) The site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. (2) The proposed use complies with all special and general waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. FURTHER RESOLVED that notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Soranno, Sobolewski, McCann, Naidow, Vyhnalek NAYS: Straub, Morrow ABSTAIN: Kluver ABSENT: LaPine 10145 Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Vyhnalek: That concludes the public hearing portion of the meeting. The Com- mission will now proceed with items pending before it. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously Nom, adopted, it was #3-50-88 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Final Plat for Regency Circle Subdivision proposed to be located on the north side of Joy Road between Hix and Pere Avenue in the South- west 1/4 of Section 31 for the following reasons: (1) The Final Plat conforms in every respect to the approved Preliminary Plat. (2) The City Engineer has recommended approval of the Final Plat. (3) All financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor by the City have been satisfied. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski and unanimously adopted, it was #3-51-88 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Final Plat for Carrington Estates Subdivision proposed to be located south of Seven Mile Road between Wayne and Gill Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 9 for the following reasons: Nom. (1) The Final Plat conforms in every respect to the approved Preliminary Plat. (2) The City Engineer has recommended approval of the Final Plat. (3) All financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor by the City have been satisfied. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Straub, seconded by Mr. McCann and unanimously adopted, it was #5-52-88 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to waive the provisions of Section 10 of Article VI of the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure regarding the seven-day period con- cerning effectiveness of Planning Commission resolution in connec- tion with the Final Plat approval for Carrington Estates Subdivision proposed to be located south of Seven Mile Road between Wayne and Gill Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 9. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 10146 On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mr. Straub and unanimously adopted, it was #3-53-88 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Final Plat for Paragon Technology Park Subdivision proposed to be located on the west side of Merriman Road, north of the C&O Railway in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 27 for the following reasons: (1) The Final Plat conforms in every respect to the approved Preliminary Plat. (2) The City Engineer has recommended approval of the Final Plat. (3) All financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor by the City have been satisfied. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Soranno and unanimously adopted, it was #5-54-88 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Final Plat for Willow Woods Subdivision proposed to be located north of Seven Mile Road on the east side of Newburgh Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 5 for the following reasons: (1) The Final Plat conforms in every respect to the approved Preliminary Plat. (2) The City Engineer has recommended approval of the Final Plat. (3) All financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor by the '41111. City have been satisfied. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it was #5-55-88 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 88-3-8-7 by First Federal of Michigan for approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to construct an addition to an existing building located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Merriman Road and Arden in Section 34, subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan 88015, Sheet P-1, dated 3/8/88, prepared by Winebrenner Ebejer Group, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Plan 88015, Sheet P-3, dated 3/8/88, prepared by Winebrenner Ebejer Group, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; 10147 (3) that Landscape Plan dated 3/3/88, prepared by J. F. Reske Landscape Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (4) that this approval is subject to a variance being granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals for an addition to a nonconforming building and any subsequent conditions the Board may imposed thereto. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. McCann and unanimously adoplted, it was #3-56-88 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 88-3-8-8 by Livonia Chamber of Commerce for approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to construct an addition to an existing building located on the west side of Farmington Road, north of Five Mile Road in Section 16 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan 87-1088, Sheet 1, dated 3/7/88, prepared by Harvey Faxon, Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Plan 87-1088, Sheet 1, dated 3/7/88, prepared by Harvey Faxon, Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (3) that this approval is subject to a variance being granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals for an addition to a nonconforming building and any subsequent conditions the Board may impose thereto. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted, it was #3-57-88 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Revised Sign Permit Application by Dominic Soave for a monument sign on property located at 19221-19241 Newburgh Road subject to the following condition: (1) that the monument sign shown on Plan 8625, Sheet SS-1, prepared by Sam Dorchen, Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the minutes of the 554th Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on March 8, 1988 are approved. 10148 On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 554th held by the City Planning Commission on March 22, 1988 was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. CI -PLANNING COMMISSION . 224-1:4-14f-- �1t V Donna J. Nai , Secretary N. 2J4 - ATTEST: � ���/// Donald Vyhnalek,'Chairman ac