Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1973-08-14 5369 MINUTES OF THE 262nd REGULAR MEETING AND A PUBLIC HEARING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ) LIVONIA On Tuesday, August 14, 1973 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 262nd Regular Meeting and a Public Hearing at the Livonia City Hall, 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman called the Public Hearing and Regular Meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. with approximately 35 interested persons in the audience. Members Present: Daniel R. Andrew Suzanne Taylor Charles Pinto Francis M. Hand Esther Friedrichs Herman H. Kluver Members Absent: Joseph J. Falk (vacation) Joseph Talbot (vacation) David Merrion (out of town business) John J. Nagy, City Planner; Ralph Bakewell, Planner IV; H. G. Shane, Planner IV; and Robert M. Feinberg, Assistant City Attorney were also present. Mr. Andrew informed the audience that if a petition on the evening's agenda involved a question of rezoning or vacating then the Planning Commission would only recommend to the City Council that certain action be taken whereupon the Council would ultimately decide whether or not to approve the petition. If the petition is a waiver of use that is denied, the the petitioner had ten days in which to appeal the decision to the Council. Mr. Kluver, Secretary announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 73-7-1-26 by Mario Fallone requesting to rezone property located on the south- west corner of Seven Mile Road and Brentwood in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, from R-1 and RUF to C-1. Mr. Nagy: The Engineering Department states there is a need for additional right of way to make the street 120 ft. Sanitary sewer is available but storm sewers are not. Mr. Andrew: Do you presently have a bakery in the vicinity? Mr. Fallone: No. Mr. Andrew: Do you have a bakery in another area? Mr. Fallone: I have a grocery store. Mr. Andrew: Did you purchase subject to rezoning? Mr. Fallone: Yes, I did. to; Mr. Hand: I think Seven Mile Road is in very serious need of a traffic study and perhaps it would point out some solution to the problem of traffic on that street. You are attempting to locate a commercial establishment in a residential area. This is known as "spot zoning" or "strip zoning" which will 5370 • )11:( create more commercial east and west therefore I am against this request for rezoning.g q g _ ili; Mr. Fallone: My type of business is from 9 to 6. My specialty is Italian food and does not bring that much traffic to the area. I do not think I would contribute to the traffic problem. Mr. Hand: I am not against your operation, I am just against the spot you are trying to develop a bakery on. Maybe you can find some area already zoned commercial. Mr. Fallone: I have looked but it is too expensive. Mr. Hand: That is just the reason we are trying to keep the zoning as is. John Hunt: 19004 Brentwood Is he trying to rezone two lots where there is a house located? Why would we want commercial zoning on a side street? Mr. Andrew: Probably to take care of his parking needs. J. Hunt: I am against the rezoning. i '40' Paul Spence: , We are zoned RUF and located to the left where we have 2 1/2 acres. This is our home and we would not want this next to our home. There was no one else present wishing to be heard and the Chairman closed the public hearing on this item. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mrs. Taylor and unanimously adopted, it was #8-201-73 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 14, 1973 on Petition 73-7-1-26 as submitted by Mario - Fallone requesting to rezone property located on the southwest corner of Seven Mile Road and Brentwood in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, from R-1 and RUF to C-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 73-7-1-26 be denied for the following reasons: (1) The proposed zoning change will provide for uses that are not related to and are incompatible with the surrounding and established uses of the area. (2) The' proposed zoning change represents a spot zone of commercial in an area that is otherwise zoned and used residentially. tif (3) The proposed zoning change would be detrimental to and would impair the value of the nearby permitted uses of the residential districts. 5371 FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of July 28, 1973 and a notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Consumers Power Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 73-7-1-27 by 3M Corporation requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Schoolcraft Road between Hubbard and Berwick Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 22, from RUF to P. Kenneth Morris: When we first requested the PS zone in this area we wanted Rep. 3M Corp. to put a building in there, I am sorry now that at that time we did not also request to zone it "P" for parking. A wall would be very expensive and cost more than the lot is worth we are therefore requesting that this be rezoned to "parking" We have created a piece of land that cannot be used for RUF or is it suitable to build on for RUF purposes. Mr. Andrew: What is the size of this piece of land? Mr. Nagy: 129ft. x 132 ft. , which is 17,028 sq. ft. Mr. Andrew: The property to the right is owned by Lot #555 is that 11 '40correct? Mr. Nagy: Yes. Mr. Hand: Does 3 M own the front property? Mr. Morris: Yes, they own both parcels. Mr. Hand: Have you discussed this with residents in that immediate area to determine whether there is some method of screening that would make it acceptable to them? Mr. Morris: Not recently. In fact some residents at the time thought we should rezone to "Parking." Mr. Hand: Could you provide about 20 feet of greenbelt? Mr. Morris: I think that this would be cheaper than the wall. Mr. Kluver: Would the building to the west have access to the proposed parking site? Mr. Morris: I do not know. Mr. Andrew: Is the wall behind the other building a brick wall? Mr. Nagy: Yes. Mr. Andrew: Wouldn't they have to continue this? Mr. Nagy: Yes, we would make it a condition of approval on the site plan. 5372 Mr. Andrew: Would the parking plan have to come before the Planning Commission for approval? Mr. Nagy: If they were trying to develop the P.S. zoning only they would still not avoid having to construct the wall around that property. Even if they are going to build this complex piece by piece you must still put the entire wall up at one time. Mrs. Karagosian: There was to be a brick wall and there was to be a greenbelt. 13929 Berwick There was not to be any parking. I am against the rezoning. Jack Gilbert: 13941 Berwick There would be a need for some lighting arrangement and this would affect my privacy. I am against the rezoning. Mrs. Reynold: I am the lady with the pool and I am against the rezoning. Kimberly Oak I do not think there was anything ever mentioned about parking. George Karagosian: It has taken the existing building an awful long time to be 13929 Berwick finished especially the wall. How long will it take them to put up another building? . What kind of parking lot will this turn out to be? I am opposed to the rezoning. Charles Michalski: This rezoning will devalue our homes. I am against the rezoning. 13930 Berwick: Mrd. Friedrichs: Is there a possibility that you meet with the residents and work out some sort of compromise like a wall and a very wide greenbelt. I think you will have to meet with the residents and see if some compromise can be worked out. Mr. Morris: I would feel the same way if I lived there and would probably. like it to remain vacant also. Mr. Reynolds: I am against the rezoning. 14504 Blackburn There was no one else present wishing to be heard and the Chairman closed the public hearing on this item. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs and unanimously adopted it was, #8-202-73 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on August 14, 1973 on Petition 73-7-1-27 as submitted by 3M Corporation requesting to rezone property located on the north side of School- craft Road between Hubbard and Berwick Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 22, from RUF to P, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table this item to the September 11th meeting. Mr. Andrew declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 1E: Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 73-7-1-28 by Burton- Share, Inc. requesting to rezone property located on the west side of Farmington Road, north of Schoolcraft Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 21 from R-2 to R-E. 5373 Mr. Burton: When our firm was contacted by the owner and asked to ) undertake the development of this corner, the first thing I did was to meet with the residents to the east and I met with their board at one time and another time with the president of the civic association. When I met with the board several weeks ago, I explained to them that our firm would not want to do anything in here that would cause them any problems. The last meeting I had with the Board I met with them for several hours and I explained it to them and they indicated that there would be no. opposition. My reaction was that they were.-very sensitive about what was going on. I also spoke with Mr. Basset who lives behind the area and I spoke with him and explained to him what we proposed to do and told him that this would create less traffic than anything that couldgo in there. We would leave the grading the same. We would not burden the schools. There would be no doors facing on Farmington. There would be a door on the north and the very south end. Mr. Andrew read a letter submitted by Mr. Burton stating that he believed this to be in the best interest of the City. The letter was signed by Mr. Polgar, Nathaniel Share and William Pulte. Mr. Burton: I told the people that if we would create a bad impression then we would abandon this development. I think the general feeling we got was that there would no opposition. Mr. Hand: There is 10.2 acres of land. Are you attempting to purchase any additional land to the north. Mr. Burton: No, it is my impression that the City was interested pur- chasing that property for extension of the park. Mr. Hand: Is there any other piece zoned R.E.? Mr. Nagy: There are two pieces in the City zoned R.E. Mr. Hand: Your rendering indicates you have nine buildings spaced across this land. Is this what you plan on doing here? Mr. Burton: We have made 12 or 13 studies and of course we cannot say what it will be exactly until we get a rezoning. Mr. Hand: If the zoning were obtained, what kind of construction schedule would you be anticipating. Mr. Burton: This fall, you know what our record is here in the City. Mr. Pinto: 'Have we received any communication from residents. IL: Mr. Nagy: Not of an official nature. The office has had several calls from residents but no official statements. Mr. Pinto: It appears the parcel to the north is zoned R-2 also. Mr. Nagy: That is correct and the City has tried to acquire that land to the north for park purposes. • . 5374 Mr. Pinto: You have met with several associations? Mr. Burton: Yes. Mr. Pinto: You explained to them what R.E. is? Mr. Burton: I went beyond that. Mr. Pinto: Did you go into the scope of what R. E. zoning does allow? Mr. Burton: No, I did not. However, I took the President to see uses similar to it in Warren in order to show him like uses. Mr. Pinto: Did you discuss with them other uses this -could be put to. Mr. Burton: I told them that the owner was pursuing the use of the property for a motel and bar and that what we had to offer was better than the motel and the bar. If it is not rezoned I'll pull out. Mr. Pinto: Returning to my question, did you show them renderings of what I have in front of me? Mr. Burton: Yes, I did. J. Matika: I have been out of town for four weeks. I told Mr. Burton President,KOCA. that it was the least objectionable to date. I am giving the correct version of what was said and am asking for a IL; tabling resolution. J. Jackson: What does the term R.E. mean? 32730 Lyndon Mr. Andrew: Research Engineering. Mr. Jackson: I was here when the K Mart and all the other business in the past were petitioned for. The Corporation that is interested in purchasing this property has not indicated who the principal lessee is, if any. Mr. Burton: There will be a number of buildings and maybe 25 lessees. Sony will be one of them and they have a small amount of employees. There will be no retail sales. It will be wholesale and distributors. Mr. Jackson: This is the information our association needs to make some sort of a decision. You are saying that for instance Sony can be distrihutors for this to other companies. Mr. Burton: ,Yes, that is right. I took Mr. Oswalt to one of these other buildings and we stayed there fifteen minutes and there was no traffic at all. 5375 Mr. Jackson: This property is adjacent to our Civic Center what will the traffic situation be. Will this be a nine to five operation? If it is 24 hours it's an Industrial Park. Mr. Sawyer: We would like Mr. Burton to give us a presentation like he .14028 Stanford has some others. Also what type of use is permitted in this zoning? We would like to see what this development is. R-2 zoning certainly does not seem feasible. Mr. Burton's suggestion for this area certainly sounds pretty good. What is the feeling of the Planning Commission. Mr. Andrew: Instead of trying to answer your question maybe we can arrange a study meeting with ourselves and Mr. Burton and the residents of the area to meet on this. Mr. Burton: I welcome it very much. And, I also want to tell them that we do not want to enter into a dispute with the community. Mrs. Basset Mr. Burton came to my home but our information was limited. 15015 Stanford Can we have an individual meeting? Mr. Andrew: I have no objection. R. Dwyer: Are there any other uses intended or going to be? 32626 Oakley Mr. Hand: There is an amendment to the zoning isn't there? Mr. Nagy: The amendment is to appear before the council on September 10th for a public hearing. Mr. Hand: I understand it would prohibit the storage of vehicles or tractors. Mr. Burton: If trucks are restricted from being left outside then I cannot pursue this project because there would not be room inside to park these vehicles. Mr. Pinto: I think it is a sensible idea for the people to meet with Mr. Burton. We already have some acknowledged differences by Mr. Burton against restrictions. I want to point that out. How will the members of the Civic Association gauge what they are to measure against. Resident: I would like to be present for the meeting. 14020 Farmington Mr. Andrew: Mr. Matika will you notify residents of a meeting? Mr. Matika: Yes. . There was no one else present wishing to be heard and the Chairman closed the public hearing on this item. • 5376 On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mrs. Taylor and unanimously • adppted it was, #8-203-73 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on August 14, 1973, on Petition 73-7-1-28 as submitted by Burton- - Share, Inc., requesting to rezone property located on the west side of Farmington Road north of Schoolcraft Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 21, from R-2 to R-E. , the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table this item for further study. Mr. Rluver announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 73-7-2-13 by Eugene P. Brandt requesting to be granted a waiver use appoval to construct a Pizza Hut restaurant on property located on the northwest corner of Merriman and Plymouth Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 27. Mr. Andrew: You have a front yard deficiency. Can you correct this. E. Brandt: Yes, I think we can. We can move the building back. Mr. Andrew: Do you have a liquor license? Mr. Brandt: Our hours of operation are noon to 12 midnight. It is a sit down restaurant. We seek a license but we will open without a license. II; Mr. Andrew: I want to clarify what a family type restaurant is. Will you stop serving family after 9 p.m.? Mr. Brandt: We will only seek a beer license. • Mr. Rl.uver: Will this be a carry out? Mr. Brandt: Very little. It is mostly a sit down. We will also offer spaghetti and salad bar. Mr. Andrew: Did the Police Department make comments about left turn movements into Merriman? Mr. Nagy: Yes and the Police Department is opposed for the reason Merriman will be one of the access roads of the expressway and the heavy traffic that will result. Mr. Pinto: Are there houses immediately north of this parcel? Mr. Nagy: Yes. Mr. Pinto; Are there other Pizza Hut operations in the area? R. Lynch: • The closest is Battle Creek. Investment Land Development Mr. Pinto: What led you to select this site? Mr. Lynch: First the population of the immediate site area. 5377 Mr. Pinto: - . - - - There is none north, east or west just to the south. What was your other criteria?_ . Mr. Lynch: People in area work in manufacturing and they favor our = type. of:..restaurant. _:. _ . Mr. Pinto: What else? Would you find any drawbacks? - Mr. Lynch:: _ _The .oniy_ one would be getting in_from the north.: Mr. Pinto:-: -What about getting out? Rud Grace: I would like to-point-out that if these gentlemen say 34980 Merriman their peak traffic is 6 tomidnightthey mentioned that Da1y_B.estaurant they wanted to locate there to attract people that work in the area, that is after normal business hours. Cur_ _ :- a__ _ _ - _- __ Mr. Brandt: That'_-s_true.-but_we are_busier in_the evening than_in the afternoons_,- -- == e--= _ = ,_ - __= _ There was no one else present wishing to be heard and the Chairman closed the public hearing on this_item. : __- - _= _ On a motion duly made-by=Mr:=Kluver,-seconded-by Mr. Hand :and=unanimously adopted it was, - __ #8-204-73 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on August 14, =1973_on Petition_73-7-2-13_as_submitted by Eugene P. Brandt requesting to be granted a waiver use approval to construct a Pizza Hut restaurant on property located on thewest side of Merriman Rad,-:north of Plymouth Road-in .the Southeast 1/4 of Section 27, the Eity_Planning__Commission _does-hereby _recommend to the City Council that Petition_73-7-2-13 be.deniedfor_the_following reasons: _ -. _--- (1) The proposed use does not comply with the Zoning Ordinance requirements _relative to the-C-2 District regulations with _ . __ respect to required front yard setback. - (2) The traffic analysis by the Police and Fire Departments indicates that_there=will be additional traffic congestion as a result of this proposed use locating in this area due to the proximity of tlar_use with respect to the intersection of Merriman and Plymouth Roads which would impede their emergency vehicles- from=responding properly:to _emergency situations. (3) There is an over-abundance of restaurants in this area and no marketfeasibilitystudy, or other data, has been furnished to thie=Planning Commission to justify a-need for another restaurant facility in this location. (4) The proposed use will be hazardous and detrimental to the area due to-its high- intensity of use, traffic generation, hours of operation, odors, fumes, lights and noise which would cause a problem to the nearby permitted and established uses of the area. 5378 FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was • sent to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City 4 Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Rluver announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 73-7-2-14 by Mobil Oil Corporation requesting to be granted a waiver use approval to rebuild an existing service station located on the northwest corner of Schoolcraft and Farmington Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 21. Mr. Pence: The building setback according to code is 75 ft. We Mobil Oil Co. propose a setback of 57 1/2 ft. Representative: Curb cuts according to code must be 25 ft. from intersection. Due to property lines the one we propose or the egress is 20 ft. and the one on Farmington Road is 17 ft. According to code, the entire lot to be used for the business is to be blacktopped or have some sort of hard surface. With that in mind, I would like to review the particular variances that I mentioned. 1 As I mentioned the building that is on there now is obsolete. We built this station in 1955. It is worn out. The code calls for 22,500 ft. We are proposing 19,600 ft. The reason we are requesting this variance is the short frontage on Farmington Road. We are unable to obtain more front on the Farmington side We have more than adequate frontage on Schoolcraft service drive. On that basis it really does not matter where you face it on the service drive. The traffic potential will be greater on the Schoolcraft service drive than the Farmington side. We have used traffic counts to substantiate what I am saying. If the variance is granted, we do not feel that it will jeopardize the safety at that intersection. You call for a 75 ft. setback. We are proposing 57 ft. 6 ins. We have some room for variation. It is a hardship on the dealer to require the full 75 ft. It is too far for him to walk. We propose that the island should be 20 ft. from the property line. You require 25 ft. from this intersection of this corner, property lines to the beginning of curbs. Mrs. Bauer donated land to highway department and was assured that the curb cuts would be as shown on the plan. • With the short frontage on the Farmington Road side and ,keeping safety in mind, we are operating with those curb cuts, and have been for some time; and there have been i' no problems to date. We have come up with 20 ft. on the Farmington Road side and do not feel we need the 25 ft. We do not see how we can lay out the station without that small variance. 17 ft. was looked upon by the Highway Department as no problem. At the present time we have 140 ft. of frontage on Schoolcraft under lease. We are 5379 lid proposing to acquire the entire block which is 240 ft. The only reason we have to take this total of 240 ft. is that Mrs. Bauer will not sell only part. She wants to sell it all. As I mentioned before the 180 ft. is adequate. We have no use for that property to the north unless we can work out something with the adjacent property owner to the north. To blacktop the whole area would be wasted money. If at a later time we can work something out with the adjacent property owner. Therefore, the 60 ft. to the west would be excess land. Mr. Andrew: Is this traffic count a current traffic count? Mr. Pence: Within the last 3 months. May 24th and the last one on June 5th, 6 a.m. to 12 midnight. Mr. Kluver: How was the count taken? Mr. Pence: By personal observation. Mr. Andrew: You have indicated a rotating sign. Will it rotate? Mr. Pence: No, we do not put up rotating signs anymore. Mr. Andrew: I note you will have a 550 gallon fuel oil tank. Is this normal? Mr. Pence: This is heating oil not diesel fuel. Mr. Pinto: I would like to compliment Mr. Pence on his presentation. Will this ever be a three bay station. Mri Pence: We build two bay stations and if in the future addition is justified then we build a third bay but we have not built a third bay in the last six years from coast to coast. Mr. Pinto: Will he have to blacktop to the end of his construction, and do I understand that he wants to sell off the excess. Then the petitioner is allowing himself room to sell this property without getting himself in a bind to meet the waiver use. Mr. Pence: When we put in our curb cuts this will leave only 20 to 40 ft. I can see this being used only for a road. Mr. Hand: Will Mobil Oil landscape and maintain this area? Mr. Pence: We left this in a vague area because we really did not know. Mx. Hand: With the variances required those variances should be secured so that this body can act on the waiver and the site plan at the same time. Philip Barth: Do they ownthis land? 19713 Seven Mile Real Estate Broker 5380 it: Mr. Pence: Why are you interested in this? Mr. Barth: I represent the people to the north. Mr. Pence: Then submit your questions in writing to Mobil Oil. I cannot answer that question for you. There was no one else present wishing to be heard and the Chairman closed the public hearing on this item. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted it was, #8-205-73 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on August 14, 1973 on Petition 73-7-2-14 by Mobil Oil Corporation requesting to be granted a waiver use approval to rebuild an existing service station located on the northwest corner of Schoolcraft and Farmington Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 21, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table this petition. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 73-7-2-15 by W. J. Golbesky, Operation Manager, requesting to be granted a waiver use approval to rebuild an existing auto service station located at the southwest corner of Plymouth and Middlebelt Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 35, by increasing storage area for merchandize and ten additional stalls. Mr. Nagy: The Engineering Department indicates no problems. Mr. Colbesky: We are desirous of expanding building to increase Operation Mgr. inside storage. Ward's Mr. Hand: How about some landscaping? Have you considered any of this? Mr. Goldbesky: Wonderland Center is responsible for that corner. Mr. Nagy: The new pylon sign proposed for the shopping center has to go on your property. Mr. Golbesky: Something is wrong. That is not my corner. My main purpose is to get additional space for storage. Wonderland Center would be responsible for putting up the sign. Mr. Andrew: Can you put in landscaping without approval of Wonderland Center? Mr. Golbesky: No. There was no one present wishing to be heard and the Chairman closed the public hearing on this item. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs and adopted it was, 5381 #8-206-73 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public heaeng having been held on August 14, 1973 on Petition 73-7,-245 by W. J. Golbesky, Operation Manager, requesting to be granted a waiver use approval to expand existing auto service station located at the southwest corner of Plymouth and Middlebelt Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 35, by increasing storage area for merchandize and ten additional stalls, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table this item to the August 21, 1973 study meeting. Mr. Andrew advised Mr. Nagy to notify Mr. Goodman, Wonderland Center to attend the Study meeting. A roll call vote resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Pinto, Taylor, Hand NAYS: Andrew, Kluver ABSENT: Falk, Merrion, Talbot Mr. Andrew, Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 73-7-2-16 by E. Louis Schuette for Hi-Fy Gasoline Stations, Inc. requesting a waiver use approval to rebuild an existing gasoline station located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Farmington Road and Stark Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 28. Mr. Nagy: The City Engineer indicated that additional right of way should be obtained. Mr. Schuette: I have obtained variance allowance from the zoning board of appeals. Mr. Andrew: When do you plan to start? Mr. Schuette: This fall. Mr. Andrew: How many hours of operation? Mr. Schuette: 24 hours. Mrs.,Taylor: Will you have self serve? Mr. Schuette: We have an island to put it in if it is allowed. There was no one present wishing to be heard and the Chairman closed the public hearing. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mrs. Taylor and adopted it was, #8-207-73 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held IL; on August 14, 1973 on Petition 73-7-2-16 as submitted by E. Louis Schuette for Hi-Fy Gasoline Stations, Inc. , requesting a waiver use approval to rebuild an existing gasoline service station located on the north side of Plymouth Road between 5382 Farmington Road and Stark Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 28, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 73-7-2-16 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) That Site Plan prepared by Garner, Kissinger & Associates, revised dated July 14, 1973, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to. (2) That Building Elevation Plan prepared by Garner, Kissinger & Associates, dated 1-1-73, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to. (3) That all landscaping as shown on the approved Site Plan shall be installed before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use is an upgrading of the development through the reconstruction and rebuilding of the existing gasoline service station. (2) The proposed use complies with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the special waiver use standards of the Zoning Ordinance as they relate to gasoline service stations since the same have been modified by iL action of the Zoning Board of Appeals. FURTHER RESOLVED that, 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. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Pinto, Taylor, Hand, Andrew NAYS: Kluver ABSENT: Falk, Merrion, TAlbot The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 73-7-7-4 by the City Planning Commission to amend Part .V of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master School and Park Plan, by deleting property located in the East 1/4 of Section 5 and by incorporating property located in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 5. There was no one present wishing to be heard and the Chairman closed the public hearing on this item. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Hand and unanimously adopted it was, #8-208-73 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the provisions of Act 285 of the Public Acts of Michigan, 1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia having duly held 5383 a lublic Hearing on August 14, 1973 for the purpose of amending Part V of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master School. and Park Plan, the same is hereby amended so as to delete property located on the East 1/2 of Section 5, described as follows: The East 1/2 of the West 1/2 of the S. E. 1/4 and the West 1/2 of the East 1/2 of the Section 5, T. 1 S., R. 9 E. , City of Livonia, Wayne County, Michigan. and by incorporating property located in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 5, described as follows: Land in the City of Livonia, County of Wayne and State of Michigan, described as follows: the East 1/2 of the West 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 and the West 1/2 of the East 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 5, T. 1 S. , R. 9 E., City of Livonia, Wayne County, Michigan. AND, having given proper notice of such hearing as required by Act 285 of the Public Acts of Michigan, 1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission does hereby adopt said amend- ment as part of the Master School and Park Plan of the City of Livonia which is incorporated herein by reference, the same having been adopted by resolution of the City Planning it: Commission with all amendements thereto, and further that this amendment shall be filed with the City Council, City Clerk and the City Planning Commission and a Certified copy shall also be forwarded to the Register of Deeds for the County of Wayne for recording. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, final plat approval for Gold Manor Estates Subdivision proposed to be located on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Farmington Road and Wayne Road in the North 1/2 of Section 9. On a motion duly made by Mr. hand, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted it was, #8-209-73 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the final plat of Gold Manor Estates Suhdivision located on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Farmington Road and Wayne Road in the North 1/2 of Section 9, be approved for the following reasons: • 5384 (1) It conforms to the previously approved preliminary plat. (2) All the financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor by the City have been satisfied. FURTHER RESOLVED, inasmuch as it appears on the records that tentative approval of said proposed plat was given by the City Planning Commission under Resolution #1-27-73 adopted on January 30, 1973; and it further appearing that said proposed plat together with plans and specifications for improvements herein have been approved by the Department of Public Works, Engineering Division, under date of July 31, 1973; and it further appearing that the financial assurances required in Council Resolution #264-73 adopted on April 4, 1973 have been filed with the City Clerk as confirmed by a letter dated August 2, 1973 from Addison W. Bacon, City Clerk, it would therefore appear that all the conditions necessary to the release of building permits have been met and the Building Department is hereby so notified. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mx. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, Council Resolution #338-73 referring Petition 72-12-2-44 by Curran Construction Company requesting a waiver use approval to construct a McDonald's Restaurant on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Wayne and Yale in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33 back to the Planning Commission for further study and thereafter a new report and recommendation. On a motion duly made, seconded and it was, RESOLVED that, pursuant to this item being referred back to Planning Commission for further study and thereafter a new report and recommendation, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Council Resolution #338-73. A roll call vote resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Hand, Kluver NAYS: Pinto, Taylor, Andrew ABSENT: Merrion, Falk, Talbot The Chairman declared the motion failed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Hand and adopted it was, #8-210-73 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Council Resolution #338-73 the City Planning Commission after having reviewed reports and recommendations from the Fire and Police Departments which indicate that the proposed site change will not improve the hazardous traffic problems that will be encountered as a result of this use on this property, does hereby reaffirm its position taken in Resolution #353-73 which recommends denial of this use for the reasons as set forth in that Resolution. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Pinto, Taylor, Hand, Andrew NAYS; Kluver ABSENT: Falk, Merrion, Talbot • 5385 Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda: Council Resolution #339-73 referring Petition 72--12-2-43 by Curran Construction Company requesting a waiver use approval to construct a McDonaldts . Restaurant on property located on the west side of Farmington Road, north of Seven Mile Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 4 back to the Planning Commission for further study and thereafter a new report and recommendation. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Kluver and it was, RESOLVED that, pursuant to this item being back to the Plaquing Commission for further study and thereafter a new report and recommendation, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Council Resolution #339-73. A roll call vote resulted in the following: - AYES: Taylor, Hand, Kluver NAYS: Friedrichs, Pinto, Andrew ABSENT: Falk, TAlbot, Merrion The Chairman declared the motion failed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs and adopted it was, #8-211-73 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Council Resolution #339-73, the City Planning Commission after having reviewed reports and recommendations from the Fire and Police Departments which indicate the proposed site change will not improve the hazardous traffic problems that will be encountered as a result of this use on this property, does hereby reaffirm its position taken in Resolution #354-73 which recommends denial of this use for the reasons set forth in t11, Resolution. A roll call vote resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Pinto, Taylor, Hand, Andrew NAYS: Kluver ABSENT: Falk, Talbot, Merrion The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, letter dated June 8, 1973 from J. J. Stone, Lowell Construction Company, relative to release of Lot 39, Parkridge Subdivision for construction purposes. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted it was, #8-212-73 RESPLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the relase of Lot No. 39 of Parkridge Subdivision, which lot was placed in escrow for a period of one year by J. J. Stone, President of Lowell Construction Company, under the terms of the original approval of Parkridge Subdivision to facilitate the development of property to the east of subject lot, and takes this means to notify all parties of interest that all conditions of the escrow commitment have been fulfilled. 5386 The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, approval of the minutes of the 286th Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on July 10, 1973. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Kluver and adopted it was, #8-213-73 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 286th Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on July 19, 1973 are hereby approved. A roll call vote suited in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Pinto, Taylor, Kluver, Andrew NAYS: None ABSENT: Falk, Talbot, Merrion ABSTAIN: Hand The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, approval of the minutes of the 261st Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on July 17, 1973. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Pinto and unanimously adopted it was, #8-214-73 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 261st Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on July 17, 1973 are hereby approved. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, approval of the minutes of the 287th Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on July 24, 1973. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Pinto and adopted it was, #8-215-73 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 287th Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on July 24, 1973 are hereby approved. A roll call vote resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Pinto, Hand, Kluver, Andrew NAYS: None ' ABSENT: Falk, Talbot, Merrion ABSTAIN:, ,Taylor The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, approval of the minutes of the 288th Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on July 31, 1973. 5387 On a motion duly made and seconded and unanimously adopted it was, #8-216-73 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 288th Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on July 31, 1973 were tabled. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, letter dated July 17, 1973 from McNeely, Lincoln & Schrader, Inc., relative to final plat approval of Nottingham Woods West Subdivision #3 proposed to be located east of Wayne Road between Six Mile and Seven Mile Roads in Southwest 1/4 of Section 9. On a motion duly made by Mr. Pinto, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted it was, #8-217-73 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the final plat of Nottingham Woods WEst Subdivision #3 located east of Wayne 'Road between Six Mile and Seven Mile Roads in Southwest 1/4 of Section 9, be approved for the following reasons: (1) It conforms to the previously approved preliminary plat. (2) All the financial obligations imposed upon the IL; proprietor by the City have been satisfied. FURTHER RESOLVED, inasmuch as it appears on the records that tentative approval of said proposed plat was given by the City Planning Commission under Resolution #8-231-73 adopted on August 24, 1971; and it further appearing that proposed plat together with plans and specifications for improvements herein have been approved by the Department of Public Works, Engineering Division, under date of July 20, 1973; and it further appearing that the financial assurances required in Council Resolution #330-72 adopted on April 12, 1972 have been filed with the City Clerk as confirmed by a letter dated August 9, 1973 from Addison W. Bacon, City Clerk, it would therefore appear that all the conditions necessary to the release of building permits have been met and the Building Department is hereby so notified. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, petition 73-7-8-32 by • Clarence P. Jahn requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #990, submitted in connection with a proposal to erect a commercial building in Jahn's Shopping Center located on the south side of Five Mile Road between Farmington and Surrey in Section 21. On a motion duly made by Mr. Pinto, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs and unanimously adopted it was, 5388 #8-218-73 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.47 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #990, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition 73-7-8-32 by Clarence P. Jahn requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 submitted in connection with a proposal to erect a commercial building in Jahn's Shopping Center located on the south side of Five Mile Road between Farmington and Surrey in Section 21, be approved subject to the following conditions; (1) That Site Plan #7122, revised 7/31/73, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to in all respects. (2) That the proposed building addition shall conform to the building elevation as shown on the approved Site Plan. (3) That a detailed landscape plan showing the precise landscape treatment of the site for those areas on the site plan shown to be landscaped, shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval within thirty (30) days from the date of Site Plan approval. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluwer announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 73-7-8-28P by Martin Cohen requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #988, submitted in connection with a proposal to construct an addition to existing facilities located at Six Mile and Farmington Roads in Section 10. "On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Pinto and adopted it was, #8-219-73 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #988, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 73-7-8-28P by Martin Cohen requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct an addition to existing facilities located at Six Mile and Farmington Roads in Section 10, subject to the following conditions: (1) That Site Plan #380-68, Sheet 1, revised 8/9/73, shall be adhered to in all respects including all landscaping and the sign treatment shown thereon. (2) That all landscaping as shown on the approved Site Plan shall be installed before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy is granted for the proposed addition unless planting time is not proper .in which case the petitioner shall then come before the Planning Commission for additional time. (3) That Building Elevation Drawing #380-68 for the proposed addition, revised 8/9/73, shall be adhered to. (4) That Building Elevation Drawing #627-72, revised 8/9/73, showing the remodeling of the existing stores including • 5389 the canopy and exterior building treatment, shall be adhered to. (5) That all of the foregoing conditions must be met and completed before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued with the exception of the deceleration lane. (6) That no later than June 30, 1974, the petitioner shall install at his sole cost and expense a deceleration lane as reflected in the Site Plan and that the foregoing condition was agreed to by the petitioner at a meeting of the Planning Commission held on August 14, 1973. A roll call vote resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Pinto, Taylor, Andrew NAYS: Hand, Kluver ABSENT: Falk, Merrion, Talbot The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, Sign Design Plans submitted in connection with a condition of approval of Petition 72-9-8-23P by Andries Butler requesting approval of all plans required by by Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance 4988, in connection with a proposal to construct a retail furniture store on property on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Sunnydale and Broadmoor Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13. IL; On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Pinto and unanimously adopted it was, #8-220-73 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Sign Design Plan submitted in connection with a condition of approval of Petition 72-9-8-23P by Andries Butler requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #988, in connection with a proposal to construct a retail furniture store on property located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Sunnydale and Broadmoor in the South- west 1/4 of Section 13 subject to the following conditions: • (1) That the Sign Plan by Walker Sign Studio indicating the sign size and construction details for the free-standing sign, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to. (2) That the Sign Plan as revised by Walker Sign Corporation indicating the sign size and construction details for the wall mounted signs, which is hereby approved, shall be . adhered to. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. (11; On a motion duly made and seconded and unanimously adopted the 262nd Regular Meeting of the City Planning Commission was adjourned at 12 midnight. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Daniel R. Andrew? Chairman German H. Kluver? Secretary