Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1976-07-13 P. 6083 • MINUTES OF THE 317th REGULAR MEETING ILIVAND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, July 13, 1976 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 317th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall , 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, called the Public Hearings and Regular Meeting to order at 8:00 p.m., with approximately 40 interested persons in the audience. Members present: Daniel R. Andrew Joseph J. Falk Jerome W. Zimmer William P. Scruggs Esther Friedrichs William DuBose Suzanne T. Wisler Judith Scurto Members absent: Herman H. Kluver (moving) Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; Ralph H. Bakewell , Planner IV; H G Shane, Planner IV; and David G. Stoker, Assistant City Attorney, were also present. Mr. Andrew informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a question of rezoning or vacating, this Commission only makes recommendations to the City Council and the City Council after holding a public hearing makes the final determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied, and if a petition for a waiver of use request is denied, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the Council . II Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 76-4-1-15 by Greenfield Construction Company to rezone property located on the south side of Six Mile Road, west of Newburgh Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, from R-9-I to R-3-B. Mr. Andrew: Let the record show that the Chair will abstain from discussion and from voting on this petition and so also will the Secretary, and that I pass the gavel to the Vice-Chairman at this time. Mr. Scruggs, Vice-Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Nagy, do we have any correspondence in the file concerning this petition. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division dated June 1 , 1976, stating that the petition has been -reviewed by that department and they assume that the petitioner will provide for the extension of the underground utilities and streets to service the subject rezoning. That is the extent of our correspondence. Mr. Scruggs: Mr. Martin, you are representing the petitioner? Raymond Martin, 14030 •Merriman Road, Livonia: I represent the petitioner. Mr. Scruggs: Would you give us some background on the purpose of this change? " Mr. Martin: Perhaps if I could repeat the reasons we gave in the petition, our reasons for requesting and justifying the petition is that the rezoning is in accord with Council policy as it pertains to the area south of Six Mile, particularly as it influences the Livonia School District property to the south. It was not based on an overall design plan but was the result of w 6084 ' Council 's zoning actions wherein the original petitioh for R-7 was IL • ' denied and R-3 substituted. The. expansion would permit the opportunity to achieve a more reasonable development in that the configuration now does not permit or allow reasonable single-family development. As amended, we could achieve those objectives. It is basically a request for R-3, single-family zoning. Mr. Scruggs: I understand there are some problems with financing R-9? Mr. Martin: We choose to proceed with the senior citizen housing development in con- junction with development on the north side of Six Mile. We would like to proceed with the overall development on the south side, particularly the single-family. Mr. Falk: But you still have plans to carry on with the senior citizen housing on the north side? Mr. Martin: Yes, that is our objective given the proper time and financing. Mr. Falk: I think-the location on the north side of Six is a better location. Mr. Scruggs: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak for or against this petition? If so, please come forward and give your name and address please. There was no one in the audience wishing to be heard concerning Petition 76-4-1-15. 11[0Mr. Falk: I am going to vote in favor of the petition but I want to make my position I clear. In the open areas we have remaining in the City, what comes in primarily has a lot of influence as to how that area develops. We have been looking for a development to come in with money like Francavilla on Six Mile and Greenfield has a well-planned development. I think this will have influence on the school' property that is open right now. I welcome this petition. These are my reasons for voting in favor of this petition. Mr. Scruggs, Vice-Chairman, declared the public hearing. on Petition 76-4-1-15 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk and adopted, it was #7-111-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 13, 1976 on Petition 76-4-1-15 as submitted by Greenfield Construction Company to rezone property located on the south side of Six Mile Road, west of Newburgh Road' in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, from R-9-I to R-3-B, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-4-1-15 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning will provide for a uniform R-3, single-family residential area south and west of the south loop of the ring road. (2) The proposed change of zoning will provide for an R-3 residential lie subdivision at a size and scale that will have more meaning than the existing narrower R-3 transitional area that is now provided. 6085 FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer/Eccentric, under date of June 24, 1976 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. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, DuBose, Zimmer, Scurto, Falk, Scruggs NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Wisler, Andrew ABSENT: Kluver Mr. Scruggs, Vice-Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted, and returned the gavel to Mr. Andrew, Chairman. Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-6-1-20 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the north side of Joy Road between Harrison and Thorpe Drive in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 36, from RUF to C-2. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, is there any correspondence in the file concerning this petition? Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating there appears to be no engineering problems connected with this zoning change. 110 Mr. Andrew: This is a petition by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to rezone property on the north side of Joy Road between Harrison and Thorpe Drive. Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against the granting of the petition? There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 76-6-1-20 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Scruggs, seconded by Mrs. Wisler and unanimously adopted, it was #7-112-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 13, 1976 on Petition 76-6-1-20 as submitted by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to rezone property located on the north side of Joy Road between Harrison and Thorpe Drive in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 36, from RUF to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-6-1-20 be approved for the follow- ing reasons: (1) Zoning lines should be contiguous with property lines. (2) This zoning change will provide a uniform C-2 Zoning District for the affected property which is used in its entirety for commercial purposes. (3) This is a housekeeping chore only so as to have the zoning reflect the established use of the property. 6086 FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer/Eccentric, under date of June 24, 1976 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. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-6-1-21 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the north side of Joy Road between Inkster and Harrison in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 36, from C-2 to RUF. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating there appear to be no engineering problems connected with this zoning change. Mr. Bidwell , owner of Lots 70, 71 , 72 and 73: According to your plans, you want to change my lots from C-2 returning them to urban farm. I want to know why you want to do it. When I bought this property, I knew it was C-2 and I want to keep it that way. I can't see any reason for changing it. Mr. Andrew: You live on the west side of Floral? The basic problem; actually it is two-fold, is #1 the property is presently used for residential purposes. The Commission is of the opinion that the use should be reflected in the zoning and the zoning should be RUF. Secondly, I am not certain I want commercial development to extend down Floral or Deering Avenue or any other, encroaching further into the residential development to the north. That is the basic premise for instituting this change of zoning. 4 Mr. Bidwell : We just moved into this area and it is my understanding it has been C-2 for quite a while. All of a sudden you want to change it and I am against it. Mr. Andrew: There is a residential structure on the property; do you live in it and own it? Mr. Bidwell : Last June 20th I purchased the property. Mr. Scruggs: What we are really trying to do isto get the actual uses of the property zoned the way they are being used. That is our intent and we are trying to put some control in the future as to how far this will develop as com- mercial property which we don't want all the way to the residential . Mr. Bidwell.: I understand this will drop the value of my property. Mr. Scruggs: Yes, I suppose that is true but it is presently being used as RUF. Mr. Bidwell :. With a classification of C-2, I can put a small business on it. Mr. Scruggs: That is the purpose of the Planning Commission; to control zoning and pro- tect residential areas and keep developments from developing where they should not develop. / Mr. Bidwell : I bought it because it was C-2. • • 6087 • Mr. Zimmer: Was this property part of that which fronts on Joy Road; the owner, did you buy it from him? Was there a residence on the property when you bought it? 400. Mr. Nagy: At one time it was part of Lot 71 , 72 and 73 which fronted on Joy Road but many years ago the lots were split. Mr. Andrew: How much frontage do you have on Floral Avenue? Mr. Bidwell : A rough estimate would be 60' . Mr. Adrew: What is the depth? Mr. Bidwell : It must be 80' . Mr. Andrew: Are you aware of the fact that the building codes of the City of Livonia would require you to upgrade that structure substantially or, in fact, the demolition of the structure? Mr. Bidwell : That sounds like a threat. Mr. Andrew: My only question is are you aware of the fact that the City would require substantial upgrading of the structure in order for it to be used for com- mercial purposes? Mr. Bidwell : Yes, I am, and I want this in the records--the statement from this gentleman. Mr. Falk: A doctor came in a month ago and the same question was put to him. He wanted to take an old sturcture and Mr. Andrew pointed out to him the nec- essity of substantial upgrading of the structure in order for it to be put to use. There are no threats made from the Chair or any other member, just statement of fact. Years ago, I was involvedwith people in that area and every time the Council tries to undo some of the bad done long ago, we run into these problems. We are trying to get the zoning to reflect the use. We have done work on this in meetings with the civic association, the Mayor and the Council . We have reviewed it and studied it and came to believe that this would be good for Livonia. Sometimes a person feels he is being denied his rights but he does have recourse. It is nothing personal , Mr. Bidwell . With all the work we have done, I think this is a good proposal . Mr. Bidwell : I just want to say that I am against it. Helen Agee, 8863 Floral : Our property is zoned commercial and whether you want to change it or not, I don' t know, but we did get a letter. Mr. Andrew: What is yourlot number? Mrs. Agee: 71 , 72 and 73 d. Mr. Nagy: She is not in the area of the rezoning petition. Mr. Andrew: Your property is zoned C-2 but is not involved in this petition. John 011ar, 8818 Merriman: I have talked with the residents along here and they don't want their property rezoned but they didn't show up tonight. I will have I to put up a 60' wall if you rezone this property to RUF. According to the f 60.88 ` Zoning Ordinance, these properties are not big enough anyway to comply• with RUF zoning. Ir' Mr. Andrew: The reason they are being changed to RUF is to conform with the entireCIO . ' district which is zoned RUF. Mr. 011ar: When I bought the property it was zoned C-2. Why do you want to change it? Mr. Nagy: You would only have to put up a wall if you wanted or needed a building permit to expand or change your business. Mr. Andrew: If you wanted to expand your business, you could go to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a waiver Mr. 011ar: If you don' t change the zoning, I, don't have to. Goodloe Bonnell , 8886 Thorpe: What about these lots where you take a portion and therest of them is residential? Mr. Nagy: The commercial zoning extends into his residential lot by a distance of 15' so we are pulling the commercial zoning off his lots not only the 15' but also the adjacent lot to the south which is 50' . Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy is saying that part of this property is C-2 and with this pro- posal it will be taken away. Bonnell : I only have 35' . Mr._ Andrew: If this goes through, you will have 50' . L. Mr. Mr. Bonnett : What can I do with it? Mr. Andrew: The same as you can do now. Mr. Bidwell : If you change it back to urban farm, do my taxes go down? Mr. Andrew: I am not the Assessor but zoning is one of the terms for assessing value so you should see some reduction in your assessed value. There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 76-6-1-21 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs and unanimously adopted, it was #7-113-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 13, 1976 on Petition 76-6-1-21 as submitted by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the north side of Joy Road between Inkster and Harrison in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 36, from C-2 to RUF, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-6-1-21 be approved for the following reasons: 1!: (1) This change in zoning would establish a residential zoning classification on the affected properties consistent with the established residential use. I 6089 • (2) There is no need for additional commercial development in this area of the City. ' (3) Commercial development that may otherwise occur on these side residential streets would adversely affect the abutting resi- / dential neighborhood to the north and detract from their con- tinued use and enjoyment. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer/Eccentric, under date of June 24, 1976 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. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolutionadopted. Mr. Andrew: This rezoning will be sent to the Council and they will have a public hearing and decide the question. This probably won't appear for about six weeks and you should be notified. Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-6-1-22 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the north side of Joy Road between Inkster and Harrison in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 36, from C-2 to RUF and R-7. Mr. Nagy: There is .a letter in the file from the Division of Engineering stating that there appears to be no engineering problems connected with this zoning change. d Bernard Byle, 27680 Joy Road: I don' t see any purpose in changing this to RUF. If I attempted to sell it as commercial , I would have to send the prospective buyer in to this Commission for a zoning change. Mr. Andrew: How long have you lived here? Mr. Byle: Eleven years. Mr. Andrew: New or used home? Mr. Byle: Used. Mr. Andrew: Thank you very much. Thomas Picha, 26700 Joy Road: I bought in 1938; a little house, not brick, and I want the property to stay commercial because I don't intend to stay there the rest of my life. I would like to sell it or go into a business. Mr. Andrew: Thank you. Robert Nicholas, 32242 Barkley: . My brother and I own this lot; it is commercial and RUF. We bought the property from my uncle and have had it in the family for a long time hoping this entire area would turn commercial and we could sell it. My uncle owns the boat store and my grandfather owns the hardware. We would like to keep it commercial because if it is changedit would drop I 6090 the value. 16:Mr. Andrew: What would your feeling be if the piece immediately east goes R-7? Mr. Nicholas: I really don't want R-7. It would restrict the whole area unless a builder would buy the whole block. Mr. Andrew: I presume there is a renter i-n the house on your property. Leo Nicholas: I am the brother. My grandfather doesn't care to have apartments. We don' t think it would be good for Livonia to have apartments. These people here want the zoning to stay as it is. Mr. and Mrs. Stratz, owners of Suburban Lock-Safe, 27458 Joy Road, were present. Mrs. Stratz: We are key makers and we own the next lot. We object strenuously to having our property changed. We now have a house and a small building attached for business but our future plans are to make a complete store, something new in a locksmith store because we have a large parking area. The only reason we farm the back of this is to keep the weeds down. Mr. Stratz: In the future, I plan to tear out the building and rebuild and put-the parking in the back. There is no driveway now but we have agreements with people who have driveways to use theirs until we can change it. Mr. Andrew: How long have you been operating there? Mr. Stratz: Since 1970. ti 'Mr. Andrew: How much frontage do you have? • Mr. Stratz: 60' . Mrs. Stratz: We bought it at commercial prices and if it is rezoned, it will really kill us. Mrs. Fred Montalvo, 8932 Deering: Are there plans now for building multiple family homes in this area? Two or three years ago there was a plan for apartments to go in and .I would like to know if there is a plan now. Mr. Andrew: At one time we had a piece of land to the north to go apartments but it never got off the ground. Mr. Nagy: There is no developer who has come in about constructing apartments on that property. Mr. Andrew: My personal opinion is that there is enough commercial zoning on Joy Road and that no more is needed. Mrs. Montalvo: We don't want multiple housing here either; we don't think that will be good here. Mr. Andrew: That is debatable. 4 Mrs. Montalvo: If by chance multiple housing• goes in, I .hope we don't have a Herman Gardens. • 6091 10- Resident: If more commercial goes in more people come in my store, too. I am a businessman. If you take this away from us you take- away free enterprise and that is what this Country was built on. Mrs. Wisler: I understand the problem of the property owners but as a Commission, and individually, we have studied this area for many months and it is my con- sidered opinion that there is enough commercial in that area to be supported by the people who live there. It is my desire to see some residential in there other than single family residences because I do not believe that a single family home off Joy Road is a safe thing. I would rather see a development to correspond with multiple development. . Leo Nicholas, 2290 Nickson Road, Howell , Michigan: I can't see the logic in this if everybody on the road does not want the change. We paid high dollar for that land. The people who own it, the people who live there and around there think it should be left the way it is. Mr. Andrew: This Commission has met with the Mayor and the people in the civic assoc- iation and there is no agreement that it should stay commercial . Leo Nicholas: I have lived in the area all my life and I know how the people feel about it. Mr. Andrew: Everybody within 500' received notice of this hearing. Scruggs: Just to make a comment about your not seeing our logic; these two parcels presently have residences and we are only trying to get the zoning the same as the use. The Planning Commission wants to have consistency in tMr. development. We don' t want a. Plymouth Road; we try to stop that where we have an opportunity. This property has been zoned for quite a while and apparently there are no plans to develop. it or it would have beendeveloped and we would like to develop a buffer for these areas. Leo Nicholas: Mr. Byle had his property up for sale but didn't have enough. We bought this land and planned to develop it. There are a lot of businesses that would do real well in there, . Mrs. Friedrichs: What would your reaction be, Mr. Nicholas, to retaining the C-2 on the four lots that now have a house on and rezoning the additional lots as shown on the map to R-7? Leo 'Nicholas: To be honest, apartments just don' t appeal . Mrs. Friedrichs: Perhaps you are aware of Franklin Square apartments on Five Mile and those on Farmington. and Middlebelt. We have very few apartments in Livonia but those we have are very attractive and enhance the area including the com- mercial area. I don't think apartments downgrade areas at all . Leo Nicholas: I would say Livonia does a fine job on apartments but the people who go -r in are the problems. Mrs. Friedrichs: I have occasion every Tuesday to drive into probably three apartment developments and the people who live there like them very much and the people living near them like them very much. I can't see this argument substantiated. i • 6092 i • Scurto: We worked at this at the study session and I was under the impression that the people were interested in upgrading the area. I wonder about IMrs. the whole area as packaged R-7 as compared to RUF especially if you are looking for protection of your financial investment. I think the homes on the lots are worth more than just demolishing them and to turn the area to R-7 which would not be new as far as classification goes. I was listening and sympathizing with those living in the homes and trying to come up with a compromise, perhaps a block R-7 which would make it more saleable. I wonder if the residents would consider that as a possibility. Mrs. Stratz: If we decided not to sell and you go ahead, would we be forced to? Would we be allowed to build a store there? Mr. Andrew: You would be a nonconforming use and would have to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mrs. Stratz: What guarantee do we have? Mr. Andrew: None at all . Mr. Byle: Three years ago I appeared before this Commission and had the rear portion of my property zoned C-2. The front was commercial and the rear_ was RU.F. Leo Nicholas: After speaking with the people here tonight, they have said that they want to leave it as it is and sell it in a package as commercial . Nicholas: Let some developer come in and buy it all as a block as commercial and then come in for a rezoning. ti tRobert Mr. Stratz: Apartments are nice but those across Inkster I have put in 200 deadbolts because they were having break-ins five at a time. Mr. 011ar: In 1967, Howard White owned this piece of property. He was my real estate agent at that time and he came in with a plan for apartments on the property. We were going to do the same. He went to the City and was turned down flatly because they didn'twant apartments. Now you want to turn around and rezone it to apartments. Why would they turn it down then? Mr. Andrew: I have no idea; times change. Mr. Byle: And three or four years ago they wanted to build a senior citizen apart- ment there; do you recall that? That goes to show you how these people feel about apartments. Henry Binder, 9207 Inkster: I was thoroughly involved with' the high-rise at that time which the gentleman spoke of. If any of you had been at that meeting, I was the one who put out that petition. I am the Vice President of Wilson Acres Homeowners Association and was asked to come down here tonight. The majority of our members are for this rezoning. We represent 800 and some homes. We have had a lot of complaints about the commercial and we have been tolerating these complaints. The City of Livonia in their Future Plan calls for low-density housing which I don' t like but it is better than what I have now--garbage trucks 130' from my window. This would not mean you people with businesses would have to loose your business; there is a grand- father's clause that says if you have a key maker's business on the property, you can continue it. We have regular meetings of the Association and we would like for you folks to come in and discuss this with us. We thought we had it all together. ' 6093 Leo Nicholas: His Association is way up there (north) and we are down here (south) and ILthese are the ones we care about. I know those people up there and they ' don't want this. Everybody on Inkster Road doesn' t want it. I don't know who wants it. Joseph Sokol , 8908 Cardwell : We all agree with Wilson Homeowners about the apartments. Whatever Wilson Homewoners say, we go along with. What are multiple apart- ments, two stories, ten, or what? Mr. Andrew: Not to exceed two stories. Mr. Sokol : Whatever Wilson Homeowners want is OK with us. Somebody said there is nobody here from this area. Well , I am. Mr. Bidwell : These multiple apartments coming in--is this money backed by HUD? Mr. Andrew: We have no development proposals for that property at all . Just because it is zoned R-7 doesn't mean it has to be apartments. Mr. Scruggs: The petition you have before you tonight is part of our Future Land Use f Plan which was developed over a period of years. Our function here is to try to plan and limit the activities of the area and ,to limit contin- uous strip commercial . This is our main function. We are now showing you a plan that we developed approximately two years ago as a good plan and all we are trying to do is develop a good system. Mr. Stratz: If we decide to build a locksmith in less than a year, would they turn me down on that? , ,Mr. Andrew: Not if you have C-2 zoning. Mr. Stratz: How long does - it take to change the zoning? Mr. Andrew: About six to nine months. Mr. Stratz: If I built it, then would it stay C-2? Mr. Andrew: I don't know what the Council will do. John, would nine months be fair to say for a change of zoning? Mr. Nagy: I would say six to nine months would be a fairly accurate time. I can't comment on what the Council will do but they will have a public hearing the same as we are having tonight and Mr. Stratz can bring this matter to the Council 's attention and perhaps have an impact on them. Mr. 011ar: What plans have you for my peice of property. Mr. Andrew: None. Mr. 011ar: Why is it that the Planning Commission on its own motion can change zoning at any time and if I want to change zoning I have to go through a long process? fMr. Andrew: The law provides that the Planning Commission can initiate a petition and recommend to the Council a change of zoning. The Council changes zoning. 110Mr. 011ar: I think you should leave it as it is. 6094 There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, 'Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 76-6-1-22 closed. 4 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted, it was #7-114-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 13, 1976 on Petition 76-6-1-22 as submitted by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the north side of Joy Road between Inkster and Harrison in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 36, from C-2 to RUF and R-7, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-6-1-22 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The change in zoning from C-2 to RUF would establish a residential zoning classification on the affected properties consistent with the established single-family residential use. (2) There is no need for additional commercial facilities in this area of the City. (3) The change in zoning from C-2 to R-7 is consistent with the Planning Commission's adopted Land Use Goals and Policies as follows: 1 . "Encourage and guide the development of a diversity of housing types, at densities and in locations meeting the housing needs of persons of all economic levels. 2. Multiple housing should be restricted to sites with good access to major arterial highways, designed and at densities which relate to adjacent single family areas." (4) The change in zoning is consistent with the Future Land Use Plan adopted by the Planning Commission. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer/Eccentric, under date of June 24, 1976 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. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-6-7-2 by the City Planning Commission to amend Part V of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master School and Park Plan, so as to delete property. located on the north side of Lyndon Avenue between Farmington and Stark Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 21 . Mr. Nagy: There is a letter dated July 13, 1976 from Milton R. Holley. 10 Air. Nagy read the contents of the letter for the record which is made part of these minutes Py reference. The letter concerned the appraised value of the property subject to this rezoning before and after the rezoning of it anc! stated that Mr. Holley is opposed. 6095 Mr. Andrew: Do we have a recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission? • Mr. Andrew: We have a letter from the Parks & Recreation Commission which recommends the removal of the site from the Master Plan in preference of senior citizen housing. There was no one present wishing to be heard concerning this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 76-6-7-2 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Scruggs and unanimously adopted, it was #7-115-76 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 a Public Hearing on July 13, 1976 for the purpose of amending Part V of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, entitled The Master School and Park Plan, the same is hereby amended so as to delete property located on the north side of Lyndon Avenue between Farmington and Stark Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 21 , • for the following reasons: (1) The Parks and Recreation Commission has determined that the t ' subject area is not needed for park and recreational purposes. (2) The immediate area is already adequately serviced by recreational lands and facilities with the adjacent Ford Field park site located to the south and Veterans Park located to the southwest. 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 amendment 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 Plan- ning Commission with all amendments thereto, and further that this amend- ment shall be filed with the City Council , City Clerk and the City Plan- ning Commission and a certified copy shall also be forwarded to the • Register of Deeds for the County of Wayne for recording. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-6-1-23 .by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Council Resolution #463-76 to rezone property located on the north side of Lyndon Avenue between Farmington and Stark Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 21 , from R-2 to R-9. • )Mr. Andrew: This is a rezoning petition by the City Planning Commission pursuant to a Council resolution to rezone this property to senior citizen housing. 6096 Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Division of Engineering stating that the available sanitary sewer on Stark Road is only 6-1/2 feet deep, and should the proposed development include basements, the sanitary sewer on Farmington Road must be used and would necessitate an easement through pri- vate property; also, that depending on the type of development, available storm sewers on Stark Road would appear to be under-sized. Lawrence Coopersmith, 33470 Lyndon: When this is changed to R-9 can only elderly housing be built? Mr. Andrew: Yes, and R-9 restricts this housing for people 55 years or older. Mr. Coopersmith: When they start clearing, I would like to have a snow fence there. I would not like to have a street coming up here or a parking lot by me, but I have no objection to the R-9 zoning. Mr. Andrew: Under the R-9 regulations, the developer will be required to come to this Commission and Council for site plan approval . At that time, we will invite you to the meeting because it is these things that will be discussed then. There was no one else present wishing to be heard concerning this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 76-6-1-23 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mr. Zimmer and unanimously adopted, it was AJ7-116-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 13, 1976 on Petition 76-6-1-23 as submitted by the City Planning Commission pur- 1 suant to Council Resolution #463-76 to rezone property located on the north side of Lyndon Avenue between Farmington and Stark Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 21 , from R-2 to R-9, the City Planning Commis- sion does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-6-1-23 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning will provide for uses that are compatible to the established uses of the surrounding area. (2) The proposed change of zoning so as to allow senior citizen housing is supported by the Parks and Recreation Commission. (3) The proposed change of zoning to the R-9, housing for the elderly, classification, is supported by convenient public services of transportation, senior citizens' drop-in center, recreation facilities, shopping and banking institutions. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer/Eccentric, under date of June 24, 1976 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. 1[P4'Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 6097 Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-6-2-10 by Galilean Baptist School requesting waiver use approval to erect three pre-built classrooms on property located on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt Road and Inkster in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, is there any correspondence from the Chief Building Inspector? Mr. Nagy: Yes. There is a letter dated July 13, 1976 stating that the Building De- partment has reviewed the plans and finds that they comply with the re- quirements of the Livonia Building Code provided that the continuous 42" deep masonry footings are provided around the perimeter of each building and that approval will have to be obtained from the State Fire Marshall prior to issuance of a building permit. Mr. Kerby also states in his letter that he cannot consider these as temporary structures because of a specific prohibition in the BOCA Building Code which limits their use to a period of one year. There is also a letter dated July 13, 1976 in the file which has been signed by six residents stating that they are opposed to this petition. These six residents live on Maplewood. Mr. Andrew: Reverend Noe, will you explain to the Commission and audience your reasons for this request and give some background on it. Reverend Noe: This is a five-day, regular Christian school and operates five days a week from 8:30 to 3:00. We educate children in Christian training in our partic- ular religious belief. Mr. Andrew: Are you licensed by the State of Michigan? Rev. Noe: Yes, we are approved but they do not issue a license to any school . Mr. Andrew: I notice on your site plan that you have indicated a concrete walk starting at the parking lot and extending to the east. In my opinion, it might be feasible if two parking spaces were blocked out to give clear access to the sidewalk. Would you have any objection to that? Rev. Noe: No. Mr. Andrew: I also notice that all your literature on the modular units calls for one or two rows of block above the footing. ! guess the block bothers me. Is there any reason why' you couldn't start the structure so the block and beginning of the building would be contiguous? Rev. Noe: I believe we have a drawing that shows that. Mr. Andrew: Should the plan be approved, ',would like the front elevation to show that that is some kind of paneling. Mrs. Scurto: You indicated last week that you own the property behind where the school buildings are going to go. Is that correct? iRev. Noe: Yes. 1[00 4 6098 Mrs. Scurto: And you now have entrance and exit on Maplewood back along the site where the buildings are going to go? Rev. Noe: Yes. I would like to answer my neighbors who signed that petition. We have kept that part closed off so that people do not come in that entrance. Also, I was of the opinion that we are trying to train children to be good neighbors. I have sought to keep them off the property of our neighbors. We have tried in every way to be good neighbors and we keep that entrance closed off to keep traffic from coming in. Mrs. Scurto: Do you intend to open it up? Rev. Noe: Only on Sundays. We keep them closed to keep through traffic out. With children on the property it could be dangerous. We keep them closed too to keep parents using Seven Mile. Mrs. Scurto: Do you also use these buildings for Sunday School? Rev. Noe: Not at the present time. We do not need them. Mrs. Scurto: They are rather attractive buildings and I understand you are willing to have this petition approved based on a four or five year time period. Rev. Noe: It will take me five years to pay for them; I would hope for five years. Mrs. Scurto: When we saw the structures at the study session, I asked if it was possible to have cement steps. ; Rev. Noe: The plan shows pre-fab cement steps. Mrs. Scurto: I understand you have grades 1 through 12. How many students. Rev. Noe: Apprxoimately 90. We had 77 last year. This will be expanded to 90 and that is capacity. Mrs. Scurto: Would you use the former facility if it got to be more than 90? Rev. Noe: No, but there will be occasions when we will use the auditorium. Mrs. Scurto: Do the children use it for recreation? Rev. Noe: Yes, a playground. Mrs. Friedrichs: Your school is approved by the Northwest Central Accreditation? Rev. Noe: I don't know. We have done everyting that the State has asked us to do. Mr. Andrew: Js Mr. Kerby concerned about your using the existing building as a school? Rev• Noe: No. The Church was granted a temporary use and children aged six through sixteen have to have a fire approved building and our temporary permit on the Church building has run out and we are seeking these buildings with proper fire proofing. 6099 Mr. Falk: We have had other Reverends in and we asked the same questions because we want to make sure that these are going to be used primarily as classrooms. Do you see these being used for other functions? Then, the neighbors might IL object. I have no reservations about these being used as classrooms, but I wouldn't want to see them used for other things because the people don't understand that to be the case. Rev. Noe: I have no plans for any use other than classrooms. I wish I could use the buildings for other things but I need the classrooms. That is my reason for requesting them. Hugh Jones, 18914 Maplewood: When we and other neighbors bought in our neighborhood, it was a quiet residential neighborhood. Since the school has happened we have lost some of our neighbors. We feel these will degrade and bring down the value of our homes. Will there be an increase in our taxes? We have nothing against the Reverend but we don't want modular buildings in our neighborhood. There is a lot of noise going on down there at recess time. Resident: We object to those buildings because we don' t think they will be taken care of. The garage was supposed to be completely landscaped which he never did. How can he take care of these when he can't take care of what he has now? Mrs. John Stevens, 18934 Maplewood: . I am against modular buildings since I am right next door. I have a new baby and he has been woke up by the noise the children make on the playground and he doesn 't take care of it at all . 'Mr. Andrew: Is the noise generally during the lunch hour or when? It doesn't occur all day long, does it? Mrs. Stevens.: No, through the lunch hour when my baby is sleeping. The noise wakes up my baby. Mr. Andrew: Would you object if these were not modular buildings, but brick? Mrs. Stevens: I wouldn' t object then because we wouldn't be hearing the noise. Mr. Zimmer: How long have you lived there? Mrs. Stevens: Since November. John Stevens, 18934 Maplewood: I was told by word of mouth that there was a plan for the property to be seeded. It is the_ lowest part in the area and there is still water and mosquitos and it is very unkept. I was told that they were going to do something there but production stopped. They have, put in the cheapest thing. because of course they have no money. They haven't landscaped. As expenses go up, we are going to suffer. I have nothing against kids but what you call attractive may not be attractive to us. When they get more children, then they' ll be overcrowded. James Stradtner, 18921 Maplewood: The lot next to the Church is not safe being used as a playground. It is not fenced in. It is a hole. There was an above- ground pool there until it was put in the ground. lr. Zimmer: . Is the house there occupied now by your assi.stant and family? ev. Noe: Yes. 6100 Mr. Zimmer: Has it recently come under your ownership? ILRev. Noe: Yes. Mr. Falk: You have some people who can't be converted and are not receptive to the Church. You have always hada delegation coming in here putting you down and that seems to be true this evening. There have been statements made that you haven't lived up to your commitments and I think I would like to see this petition tabled to see if he has lived up to his commitments. I can also sympathize with the young people who just bought their house. Have you complied and are you in deed taking care of some of these things that make it an eyesore or a nuisance? Rev. Noe: I will answer anything that has been stated. The last structure is still under construction. Inflation has hit us. When he says we are poor, he is right. I just renewed the petition for the bus garage a while ago,. I have not landscaped the bus fence and don 't want to. Mr. Falk: What was, our agreement? Rev. Noe: To landscape it. Mr. Falk: An agreement is a bonefide agreement and if you want some modification, you should come in and talk with us. I think these people have a legitmate complaint. I don't feel we should approve anything when you haven 't made good on your last commitment. Rev. Noe: When that structure is finished, I Will comply and put in a barrier. 1Mrs. Scurto: When Mr. Kerby said these can' t bepermanent structures, would our approval make then permanent structures? Mr. Andrew: Our limitation would call for a limitation of five years. Mr. Falk: When you say one year is temporary and we approve it for five, could you say it is permanent? How do we know we can do anything five years from now? Mr. Stoker: We have a problem with interplay of the two codes. It could create a problem. I don't know that the building code would necessarily prevent you from putting the five year limitation on it. Mr. Andrew: Reverend Noe, a review of the file indicates that the Commission in January of 1973 did grant you landscape approval . Unfortunately, the Certificate of Occupancy was not to be granted for the store bus garage until the landscaping was in. I understand you have been using it. Rev. Noe: Yes. Mr.. Andrew: We still do not have landscaping around the garage after three years and I have to agree with Mr. Falk. Was that area in back being filled with soil from the freeway at one time. : ev. Noe: It is filled higher now and it has been seeded. 4Ir. Andrew: Do you intend to raise it? Rev. Noe: No, it can' t be raised without water runoff on the next property. ' 6101 110 Mr. Andrew: Your comment is that if you raisethe grade, you will have water runoff i on your neighbor's property. Did you fill in a drainage ditch? Rev. Noe: No, I don't think so. Mr. Nagy: There is a natural retention area where the water has settled. I think the Reverend said if he fills it., he replaces the drainage space with fill causing water runoff. Mr. Scruggs: Do you have any idea when you will complete the landscaping from the pre- vious petition. Rev. Noe: If it is contingent on that, we will complete it right away. Mr. Falk: Why can't you meet with your neighbors and find out what their real bone of contention is. I would like to check on your accreditation and see about the landscaping and safety factors regarding the children. I am just not ready to vote on this yet. Mr. Scruggs: Do you have in mind some day building permanent classrooms. Rev. Noe: If we enlarge, we would have to. Mr. Scruggs: Would you build closer to the Church facility? ',Rev.. Noe:10 I don't think so. May I say to you and my neighbors that the purpose of a Christian school is to try to develop young people into good neighbors. I have never complained about my neighbors sending their children to play on our playgound except when they have been in danger. We obtained this property and try to do a Christian work on the lives of people. I have several of those children here tonight and I think they are shaping up to be good citizens. I guarantee that when theygraduate they won't be run- ning on the lawns of my neighbors. I am sorry about that landscaping. I told you the truth. You know that we have had a recession. We had to curtail the construction of the garage. I just renewed the permit now so we can finish it. I hope to do the landscaping along with the structure but I assumed it was all part of finishing the building and the building is not finished. If I can't expand, I will have to go out to the country and my neighbors might want a shopping center there. I have put hours into training children and that is what I want to do. I can't understand people not understanding children in the day time; when they play ball or laugh, there is going to be noise. I am only asking to use my own property for what God has called me to do. I will comply with what you want. That hole was there when we bought the property. I don 't want to spend $60,000 to put up these modular units but I am dealing with childrens' lives. I will be happy to meet with these neighbors any time but if I can' t have these units I will have to sell the whole thing and I don't want neighbors telling me what to do. I don't tell them what to do and I don't particularly like being questioned about my integrity. I will comply and I will please my neighbors within reason. 10 Mrs. Stradtner: The noise from the playground is consistent. 4Mr. Andrew: You are confident that these are all students of the school and not neigh- bors? Resident: I tell my kids to go down there. • 6102 Woman: I reside at 8646 Artesian in Detroit. I would like to say that my husband and I have been looking for a home in this area. There is a home on Maple- wood,' for sale. It is a small , tri-level they are asking $38,000 for and we would have to sell our souls to have that home but we have chosen to sacri- fice instead to send our children to a Christian school and can't afford the _ home. They are assuming this is going to affect their property values but I don't think it will . There is no downgrading of. proper'ty when they can ask $38,000 for a home there. When you have boys and girls who stand up and say yes sir and no sir, it is worth paying for. Mrs. Richard Juntunen, 17134 Wakenden, Redford Township: I teach at the school . I would like to say to my neighbors that you will never see a quieter school . Our children are not outside all day. Theydo not have extended breaks to that extent. They have one-half hour at lunch, one-half hour break in the morn- ing and afternoon generally involving 15 to 20 students at the other end of the block playing volley ball . Our students are not outside and not running out in the neighborhood. We have boundary lines and the students do not usually go beyond them more than once. Mrs. Scurto: I am deeply upset with people who are complaining about the pleasant noises the children make, however, I am concerned with the lack of fulfillment of an agreement and would also entertain a tabling motion to see if we can complete one project before beginning another. I think Rev. Noe is asking for something that is breaking a precedent in terms of modular units; non- permanent structures, and us as a Commission to approve them, and I , in turn, would like to ask you to finish the things you have agreed to do. Arthur Stagnen,smn.gtWe Hairle lsconcWeernheadvae oacbrrfiinceg tocheerupchrigrte.n t1 o go oe so my children can get a decent education. I have been in this Church ten years and he has been Pastor for ten years and I can tell you there is no better man than this gentleman. He has given hours and. hours of his time to these children. I help clean the Church; windows have been broken among other things and I am not saying these people do it but I can say that people here honk their horns while we are in Church. That Church looks. very nice and would compare to any in Livonia. Rev. Noe: I have a lot of people here and a lot would like to talk about the merits of our education. Everybody knows I am not up here talking against public education, however, public education a few years ago by jurisdictional decree, said that we could not any longer pray or read a Bible. Schools years ago in America had no problems with that. I am interested in these people who want to continue with a high class education in conjunction with ' Christian training. Proverbs 1 ;7, says "The fear of the Lord is the begin- ning of knowledge. Fools despise wisdom and instruction." I am not in competition with public schools. These people just want their children to have Christian training. My two children graduated from the Livonia Public School system. I continue to support public education but we want a Christian school . I don't want all my people to come up here because they will say the same thing and take up a lot of time. If you want landscaping that is what we will do. We need that school and we want it this fall . If we put in the fence, will there be another reason why we can't have the school? If I put in a petition to build a school , will that be contested? [I' I say we don't have money and never did. Some people say that buying a house takes a lot of money, but you don' t buy the house, the bank does and you don' need money to buy a house. I don't think the property will be downgraded. • • 6103 We will do what you want but will we get our school? I petition and beg; 1[10 whatever promises you want me to make, I will make them but we have got to get moving. Mr. Scruggs: I can recognize that it is unfortunate that it has taken so long for the Reverend to complete his structure. Would it be possible for you to complete it in view of the renewal . Mr. Nagy: There has been no renewal of the waiver use. What he is referring to is a renewal of the building permit. We have not taken any action other than the initial action. Mr. Andrew: The Bureau of Inspection has issued a' violation and he has renewed his permit. Mr. Allison, 19185 Maplewood: I live on Maplewood and what these people say is true. There was no one else presenting wish to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion on Petition 76-6-2-10 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, it was #7-117-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 13, 1976 on Petition 76-6-2-10 as submitted by Galilean Baptist School requesting waiver use approval to erect three pre-built classrooms on property located on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt Road and Inkster in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 76-6-2-210 until the Planning Commission's Study Meeting to be conducted on July 20, 1576. 1[110 A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Scurto, Falk, Wisler, Andrew NAYS: Scruggs, DuBose, Zimmer ABSENT: Kluver Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Andrew: The Planning Commission invites the Reverend and three people and the residents and three people to the meeting on July 20, 1976 for the purpose of discussing this item. The number of people who can be accommodated in the Commission Conference Room is limited due to the small size of the room. Also, Mr. Nagy, I would like some statement from the Law Department relative to the five-year limitation on the classrooms and some correspondence from Mr. Kerby relating to the renewal of the old petition and comments from the Engineering staff relative to the grade situation behind residential proper- ties to the south. Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-4-3-3 by Ronald McMullin requesting the vacating of a portion of an easement located north of Deering Road, south of Puritan Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 13. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating they have no objections to the vacating but would recommend that a public ease- ment for public purposes and use be retained over the area, 6104 IL There is also a letter in the file dated July 7, 1976 from Lt. Richard Widmaier setting forth recommendations and opinions of the Traffic Bureau and a letter dated July 7, 1976 from the Fire Marshall setting forth recom- mendations of the Fire Department. A letter dated July 13, 1976 from Don Carter was received, this evening and states that Mr. Carter has no objection to this vacating. Joseph Marotta, 27851 Terrence: I don't want that blocked off. How will I get through? Mrs. Ronald McMullin: We have lived in that house for twenty-five years and we alone have maintained that. easement. The Attorney's office said they couldn't understand why we didn't petition to have this vacated because Puritan Avenue would never go through. Mr. Andrew: There apparently is a fence with an opening in the fence onto Puritan Avenue. Is that correct? Mrs. McMullin: Yes. Mr. Zimmer: If they built a road between the two streets, would that bother you? Mrs. McMullin: It has been dedicated and if they want to build it, they can but we were told Puritan Avenue would never go through. We would like to landscape it and maintain it because it is a mess now. 'Mr. Marotta: There are people back there with no way to get in; there is a pool . 1[0 'Mr. Andrew: Does he use it now? Mrs. McMullin: No. Mr. Andrew: If he doesn't use it now, how does he get in there?. Is there a fence opening along there? Mr, . McMullin: Yes, there is one opening. Mr. Andrew: Didn't you indicate at a study meeting, Mr. Nagy, that there was a severe grade differential? Mr. Nagy: Yes. Mr. Andrew: What is the situation on the east side concerning access to Puritan? Mr. Nagy: They don't have the same problems and no fence openings. Mrs. Friedrichs: If we vacate, there are no restrictions? Mr. Andrew: We will vacate the right-of-way and retain an easement. The/ could not build on it. Mrs. Friedrichs: The man with the pool ; they would be able to prohibit him from servicing his pool? Mrs. McMullin: He didn't use it before. Mrs. Scurto: How long has the pool been in. 6105 Mr. Marotta: Three or four years. ,Mrs. Scurto: And he did not go through there? Mr. Marotta: Oh yes he did. Mr. Zimmer: Both of those streets are long and narrow and I think they should be connected. On a motion duly made by Mr. Scruggsand seconded by Mrs. Scurto, it was #7-118-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 13, 1976 on Petition 76-4-3-3 by Ronald McMullin requesting the vacating of a portion of an easement located north of Deering Road, south of Puritan Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 13, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-4-3-3 be approved subject to the retention of a full-width easement for public utilities, for the following reasons: , (1) The Master Thoroughfare Plan does not provide for the extension of Puritan Avenue east or west in this Section. (2) The Fire Department and Engineering Division do not recommend the retention of subject right-of-way for road purposes. (3) Vehicular traffic can be accommodated on Oak Drive as will Deering 1[01 Avenue by the use of a T-type turn-around. 4 (4) Construction of a roadway within subject right-of-way would be extremely difficult due to existing severe grade changes and mature tree cover. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published inthe official newspaper, the Livonia Observer/Eccentric, under date of June 24, 1976 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. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: DuBose, Scurto, Scruggs , Wisler, Andrew . NAYS: Friedrichs, Zimmer, Falk ABSENT: Kluver Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Scruggs and seconded by Mr. Falk, it was #7-119-76 RESOLVED that pursuant to a letter dated June 24, 1976 from Philip Gerard requesting an extension from July 1 , 1976 to August 11 , 1976 with regard to Condition #3 imposed by the City Planning Commission in if connection with approval of Petition 75-2-2-4 as submitted by Philip Gerard requesting waiver use approval for a trailer sales facility proposed to be located on the southeast corner of Schoolcraft and , 6106 Eckles Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 19, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to grant an extension of Condition #3 from July 1 , 1976 to August 11 , 1976. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, DuBose, Zimmer, Falk, Scruggs, Wisler NAYS: Scurto, Andrew ABSENT: Kluwer Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Scruggs, seconded by Mr. DuBose and unanimously adopted, it was #7-120-76 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 23.01 (b) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to amend Section 25.04, Uses Permitted, so as to expand the permitted uses in the C-2 Zoning District. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of such hearing shall be given as provided in Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shall be a report and recommendation submitted to the City Council. L Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted, it was #7-121-76 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 23.01 (b) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to amend Section 26.04, Uses Permitted, so as to provide for P. S. waiver uses as permitted uses in the P. 0. Zoning District. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of such hearing shall be given as provided in Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shall be a report and recommendation submitted to the City Council . Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Scruggs and seconded by Mr. Falk, it was #7-122-76 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 316th Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on June 22, 1976 are hereby approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: li: AYES: Zimmer, Scurto, Falk, Scruggs , Wisler, Andrew NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Friedrichs, DuBose ABSENT: Kluver Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 6107 Ion a motion duly made by Mrs. .Wisler, seconded by Mrs. Zimmer and unanimously adopted, it was #7-123-76 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 311th Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on June 29, 1976 are hereby approved. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the "foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Scruggs, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs and unanimously adopted, it was , #7-124-76 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 to the City Council that Petition 73-4-8-15 by Philip Pisto requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 submitted in con- nection with a proposal to construct an addition to an existing . f building located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between 1 Farmington and Gill Roads in Section 4, be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that the Site Plan dated 7/9/76, Sheet #1 , prepared by Anthony C. Rea, Architect, for Philip Pisto, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to in all respects; (2) that Building Elevations as shown on Sheet #3, dated 7/9/76, including thereon the added sign treatment for both the new addition and established stores, which is hereby approved, . shall be adhered to; (3) that the storage trailer now parked at the rear of the building be removed from the site within fifteen (15). days from the date of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new addition; (4) that the" service area behind the building be paved as per letter dated June 9, 1976 from Philip Pisto addressed to Frank Kerby; (5) that all dead trees along the west property line be removed within thirty (30) days from the date of this approval ; (6) that the new trash enclosure unit shall be painted to match in color the west wall of the principal structure; (7) that the sign treatment forthe existing center shall match that of the proposed addition as per letter dated June 29, 1976 signed by Philip Pisto; and (8) that the site shall be fully landscaped in accordance with the approved Site Plan before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. IL Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 1 6108 :On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 317th Regular Meeting held by' the City Planning Commission on July 13, 1976, was adjourned at 11 :50 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Suzan T. Wisler, Secretary E ATTEST: -_,Zeet/,4/11°171 Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman ac:7/20/76 • 1[10