Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1976-08-24 6129 MINUTES OF THE 31"1..h REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARIN( 3 HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, August 24, 1976 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 319th 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 8:09 p.m., with approximately 70 interested persons in the audience. Members present: Daniel R. Andrew William DuBose Esther Friedrichs Judith Scurto William Scruggs Suzanne Wisler Jerome W. Zimmer Members absent: Joseph J. Falk (company business) Herman H. Kluver (vacation) Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV; and Robert M. Feinberg, Assistant City Attorney, were also present. Mr. Andrew informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a question of rezo&18g or vacating, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council,/after holding a public hearing, makes the final determination as ILto whether a petition is approved or denied, and if a petition requesting a waiver of use is denied, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the Council for relief, otherwise, the petition is terminated. Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 76-7-1-28 by R. William & Paula Ellen Joyner to rezone property located on the west side of Gill Road, north of Curtis in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 9, from RUFB to R-3. Mr. Andrew: Any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Bakewell: Yes, we have a letter from the Engineering Division dated July 29, 1976 advising that there appears to be no engineering problems with the proposal as outlined. However, if the petitioner's plan contemplates a future splitting of the area to be rezoned under his petition, the south 1/2 of the parcel would be cut off from an improved public access as well as public utilities. Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present? R. Wm. Joyner, 18361 Gill Road: Yes, I purchased this property in April when it was still zoned RUFB, and would like the zoning changed to R-3. When the house is completed I do not have any future plans for that particular parcel. Mr. Andrew:1- Is there a house there now under construction? Mr. Joyner: Yes, the house should be completed in about three weeks. 6130 Mr. Andrew: Do you own any part c '' Lot #22? Mr. Joyner: No, I do not own Lot #22, Lot #21 only. Mr. Andrew: Bill, one of the difficulties here 'is that while we would not have any objections to rezoning this property, we are concerned about the lack of public improvements in this area at the present time. It is logical to assume that additional projects might be proposed in the near future. Have you given any thought to the possibility that public utilities might be installed across your property? Is there water there now, or do you have a well? Mr. Joyner: Yes, there is a 4" water main there now, and it is my understanding that a 10" main will be installed later, to which I will have a 4" tap-in. I do have electricity and gas servicing the house right now. Mr. Andrew: What about road improvements? Mr. Joyner: Gill Road has deep-strength asphalt, and I have 120' of gravel in the front. Mr. Andrew: Any questions from the Commission? Mr. Zimmer: The drawing shows a building at the south end of the lot? Mr. Joyner: Yes, that is my house. Mr. Zimmer: It would seem odd to me that a lot closer to Gold Manor Estates would be vacant. Mr. Joyner: Presently, there are no structures to the south nor to the north, within 182' . Mr. Andrew: Have you made application to the Assessor for a lot split? Mr. Joyner: No, I have not. Mrs. Wisler: Bill, I do not understand the extension of the water lines. Mr. Joyner: My water line stops running here diagonally. (He then pointed to the map.) Mrs. Wisler: My concern runs along with Mr. Andrew's. Anyone wishing to build to the south of you would have to cut across your property to get to the water line? Mrs. Friedrichs: Didn't you say that you understood that there would be a 10" main rather than a 4"? Mr. Joyner: There would not have to be. Lots #22, 23, and 24 could tap into the 4". 6131 116: Mrs. Friedrichs: If lots to the south were developed, would the 4" line then be replaced by a 10"? Mr. Joyner: I cannot answer that. Mr. Andrew: An 8" water main and a 10" sanitary sewer dead-end at that location. Someone is going to have to pay for additional water & sewe lines. Mrs. Wisler: Mr. Bakewell, is this the only utility coming into this area? Mr. Bakewell: This is the closest utility that he could hook up into. Mrs. Wisler: Are there septic tanks or sewers in this area? Audience: Septic tanks. Mr. Zimmer: What is the depth of Lots #21, 22, 23, and 24 - Laurel to Gill? Mr. Joyner: I purchased 120' of Lot 21, and my concern here is with that property. Edward Paddock, 18462 Southampton: Mr. Joyner, did I understand that you own Lots #22, 23, and 24? I[: Mr. Joyner: No, I do not. I purchased 150' x 170' of Lot #21. Resident, 18466 Southampton: I merely want to question the future of Gill Road. Will Gill Road eventually be extended to Curtis? Mr. Andrew: There is nothing in the plans at the present time. Resident, 18466 Southampton: I presume then that Bill Joyner owns half of Gill Road. Mr. Andrew: A building permit has been issued. At this time, Mr. Zimmer questioned exactly where Southampton Road was. It was pointed out to him on the map. Mr. Andrew: Any more questions from the audience? Emil Cican: To be honest, I didn't even notice that a house was going up on that lot, but I do have a question about the 8" water line from Laurel. Wouldn't this gentleman require to have as easement from the City? Mr. Andrew: This would be an.Engineering consideration. Mrs. Scurto: Bill, the way I see it there is pavement that extends 40' on your property. In other words, Gill Road runs right across your property. Is that right? 6132 Mr. Joyner: Yes, I do have access , with no intention of paving for quite sometime. When I do, it will be with deep-strength asphalt, tying in with Gill Road. Mr. Andrew: Any more questions from the Commission or audience? There was no one else present wishing to be heard further regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared that the public hearing on Petition 76-7-1-28 closed. Mrs. Friedrichs: I make a motion that this petition be approved. Mr. Scruggs: I will second that motion. Mrs. Wisler: I personally have no objections to the rezoning of this property. My concern here is with the extension of the utilities for those people wishing to develop the southerly portions of that street. Who will absorb the costs of extending those lines? Mr. Andrew: Mr. Feinberg, it would appear to me that we are faced with future problems as to the extension of public utilities south along Gill Road. Quite frankly, I do not know what course of action this Commission can take. Mr. Feinberg: My only answer to that would be to examine comparable situations of this nature. Mr. Andrew: Well, I feel that my concern with future traffic in this area is a valid consideration. I can see in two or three years other property owners will be selling off their lots. What happens at that point? What do we do then? I am really at a loss as to what course of action can be taken. • Mr. Feinberg: I would say that the action to be taken now concerns only the present rezoning request. Mrs. Friedrichs: Why can't a 4" water pipe be replaced in time with a 10" water pipe? Mr. Andrew: Who will pay for the replacement? Is not that a valid consideration on a rezoning request? Mr. Feinberg: Are there any other areas in the City that are comparable to this rezoning request, who were faced with a lack of public utilities? Is there a precedent? Mr. Andrew: We have always rezoned property adjacent to public utilities. Mrs. Wisler: Mr. Feinberg, it would seem to me that it is our obligation to allow, if possible, for the future development of property, but it might not be beneficial for the future development of this area if we do not check further into the possibility of extending sewers. 6133 10: Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Joyner, do you h, ie only a 10' wide road to get to your property? Mr. Joyner: Yes, 110' to 120' of ten foot of gravel. Mr. Zimmer: What happens if someone wants to develop further south - certainly a 10' road would not be adequate. Mr. Joyner: I am sure that there will be future development. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Scruggs, it was RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 24, 1976 on Petition 76-7-1-28 by R. William & Paula Ellen Joyner to rezone property located on the west side of Gill Road, north of Curtis in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 9, from RUFB to R-3, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-7-1-28 be approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Zimmer, Scruggs NAYS: DuBose, Scurto, Wisler, Andrew ABSENT: Kluver, Falk 110 Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the resolution fails for lack of support. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler and seconded by Mr. DuBose, it was #8-143-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 24, 1976 on Petition 76-7-1-28 as submitted by R. William & Paula Ellen Joyner requesting to rezone property located on the west side of Gill Road, north of Curtis in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 9, from RUFB to R-3, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-7-1-28 be denied. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer/Eccentric, under date of August 5, 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, Wisler, Andrew NAYS: Friedrichs, Zimmer, Scruggs ABSENT: Kluver, Falk Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 6134 1[ 10 Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the ne) ': item on the agenda is Petition 76-7-1-29 by James A. Creed for the Monaghan K-C Building Association to rezone property located on the west side of Farmington Road, north of Seven Mile Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 4, from P.S. to C-2. Mr. Andrew: Any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Bakewell: Yes, we have a letter from the Woodlore Condominium Association, 33045 Fargo, representing approximately 104 apartment dwellers, expressing a protest against this particular petition, communi- cation signed by a Mr. Alex Zeid. We also have letters from the Engineering Division as well as the D.P.W. stating that petition as presented meets with their approval. Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner from the Monaghan Council present? Jack Russi: Yes, I will represent the petitioner. We are hoping that this Architect proposed facility will satisfy our membership needs in the area We are moving from our present location in Detroit and we will be functioning primarily during the daytime hours and sometimes at night. Mr. Andrew: Have you checked with the DNR regarding the drain flood plain area to the west? IL Mr. Russi: Yes, we have checked out the drainage aspects with the DNR, and they informed us that this new building should be placed as high as possible on the property. We certainly can go along with these instructions for aesthetic reasons as well. The building will be placed at the north end of the property. Mr. Andrew: You say that this will be a seven-day a week- operation? Any questions from the Commission? Mr. Zimmer: This problem with the DNR, what are their specifications? Mr. Russi: The DNR requires that we create a stoppage from the standpoint of sediment; possibly, bales of hay or a gravel field - something to serve as a filter. Mr. Zimmer: What happens if you place the building further south? Mr. Russi: We would then be approaching the drain, we cannot be located at the low end of the site. Mr. Scruggs: Mr. Russi, do you really believe that bales of hay would control erosion and sediment? Why not construct some sort of a berm? Mr. Russi: I feel that the construction of berms would have an objectionable aesthetic effect on the whole design. IL Mrs. Scurto: We really do not like to see encouragement of C-2 zoning on Farmington Road. 6135 1 ,0 Mr. Andrew: Any further question. from the audience? j 4 Alex Zeid, 33175 Fargo: I am the President of the Woodlore Condominium Association, and we are against having the K-C put their new building on that particular site. It will definitely be a seven-day operation with heavy traffic and noise at night. There is a hospital right across the street from there and I am sure they would not want any further commotion. If the property is rezoned from P.S. to C-2 anybody could build anything they want adjacent to the K-C Building; a pool hall, a 7-11 store, anything. I am certainly not against small businesses, but I am definitely against a K-C Building. Mr. Russi: I really don't feel that anyone is going to build a liquor store inthis area. The land is zoned Public Land to the south and R-3 to the north. Mr. Andrew: Well they could if the property is ever rezoned. Margaret Leiman, 33237 Fargo: I am a nurse and I work at the Ardmore Convalescent Home which is right across the street from the spot where they want to put a new K-C Hall. I strongly object to this because of the noise. I do not feel that 200 horns blaring in the middle of the night is going to help us try to bed down 200 psychiatric patients. Fred Shenlock: Presently, we are located in the City of Detroit and we have Monaghan Council never had any complaints from the residents near our location there. Members only will be attending during the week, maybe as many as 40 or 50. I am basing that figure on what happens at our present location. We do have approximately 800 members in the general area. We have looked all over the area to find an ideal spot, and feel that we have found it here in Livonia. Am definitely for this petition. James A. Creed, President, Monaghan Council: I just want to inform everyone here that our Council is not a bar, it is a club. I do not feel that any activities that take place in this building would have any effect on anyone across the street, north or south. Mr. Andrew: Did we receive any correspondence from either the Traffic or Fire Departments? Mr. Bakewell: None - nothing in the file. Mr. Andrew: Was any requested? Mr. Bakewell: No, there is nothing to indicate that any correspondence was requested. Mr. Andrew: Well, I feel that we should have requested something from the Fire Department. Station No. 3 is located in that area. • 6136 Mr. Russi: I have already contac !:ed the D.P.W. and they inform me that a lines will be extended to pick up a hydrant. 4 Mrs. Rue, 19604 Farmington Road: I just want to say that the traffic now on Farmington Road is so bad with five lanes of traffic constantly going by, I cannot see where this K-C Hall will cause any more traffic. I have no objections at all to them putting up this building. Mr. Andrew: Any comments from the Commission? Mrs. Scurto: I would make a motion that we table this petition until our next Study Session. Mr. Scruggs: I will second that motion. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Scruggs and unanimously adopted, it was #8-144-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 24, 1976 on Petition 76-7-1-29 by James A. Creed for the Monaghan K-C Building Association to rezone property located on the west side of Farmington Road, north of Seven Mile Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 4, from P.S. to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition. 76-7-1-29 until the Study Session to be conducted on August 31, 1976. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution t adopted. Mr. Andrew then extended an invitation to members of the Apartment Association, as well as members of the K-C Council to attend the Study Session to_be held on August 31, 1976, by which time the Commission hopes to have a report on the findings of the Traffic, Police and Fire Departments regarding this situation. Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-5-2-8 by John W. Cossin, Pastor of The Lord's House, requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to an existing Church located on the north side of Ann Arbor Trail, east of Newburgh Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 32. Mr. Andrew: Any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: Yes, we have a letter addressed to the City Council from a Mr. Ralph Anderson, 36844 Angeline Circle, stating that he is definitely opposed to this petition because he feels that this would create a traffic hazard, and feels that the Church is used solely as a hang-out. Also, we have a letter from the Engineering Division dated July 28, 1976 concerning an additional 27' of right-of-way. 40 6137 P Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, I have bef< :e me the most recent site plan. My question now relates to the setback. The plan shows that the setback from Newburgh Road is 77' . However, because of the design of the building facing in a southerly direction, aren't they in violation to local Ordinances as it relates to this petition? Mr. Nagy: Based on a quick analysis on our part, it appears that they are in violation regarding setback on Ann Arbor Trail. According to Ordinances, side yard would have to equal to front yard. The front yard is in the R-1 zone, and the requirement is 25' from the right-of-way or 85' from the center line of Ann Arbor Trail. Mr. Andrew: It would appear that the closer the building gets to Newburgh Road, the narrower the setback. Mr. Cossins: We can explain what happened. Mr. James Patrick, our Architect, was of the opinion that a 66' setback from the center of the road was all that was required, but as we see it now, you people are requesting an additional setback of another 10 to 12 feet. As far as the front yard becoming narrower, the building was so designed in order to maintain proper aesthetic appearance. We only want to go along with the building requirements, which originally was 66' back from the road. Mr. James Patrick: We also request additional parking in order to handle parking ' for our congregation. You do have a site plan for parking. o 1[0 I do have a detailed drawing with parking shown and landscaping to go along with it. We have a lease signed for 30 years on that piece of property which will be used for parking. It will accommodate 191 cars. I am sure that with the landscaping as shown it will enhance the beauty of that area. Mr. Andrew: Who owns Lot #735, which is that piece of property between the Church and the R-1 zoning to the north? Mr. Patrick: A woman named Mrs. Hanchett. Mr. Andrew: It is not owned by the Church. Mr. Patrick: No, it is not. Mr. Andrew: Can we take a lot on record that is not attached to the Church property and make a parking lot to service the Church people? Mr. Feinberg: I would have to look at the Ordinance. Mr. Andrew: Using land for parking when it is not adjacent to the principle use, this is a technicality that has to be answered before any decision can be made. 1[ z 6138 Mr. Feinberg:IL . I will quote from Section 18.37 Off-Street Parking Requirements: (g)---Off-street parking facilities for one or two family dwellings shall be located on the same lot or plot of ground as the building they are intended to serve. The location of required off-street parking facilities for other than one and two family dwellings shall be within three hundred (300) feet of the building they are intended to serve, measured from the nearest point of the off-street parking facilities and the nearest point of the building. Such facilities for multiple dwelling, commercial and professional uses, in order to insure their use as a parking area for the building they are intended to serve, shall be located in a convenient and conspicuous position with reference to such building. For this purpose, the area to the rear of the building shall be considered as satisfying the requirement only when the building is to have a heavily used public entrance in the rear. Mr. Nagy: In this case, we are dealing with other than one or two family dwellings. Therefore, it is my opinion that this section applies. I will quote further from Paragraph (1) of the same Section: "When the parking facilities are not on the same premises as the use to which they pertain or are under different ownership, or where one parking facility services two or more uses, the City may require appropriate recordable legal instruments sufficient, if recorded, to give third parties notice that the property is committed to use as parking facilities under this section." lb, Mr. Andrew: Mr. Feinberg, does the petition meet with the Ordinance as it relates to parking? Mr. Feinberg: Yes, paragraphs (g) and (1) do meet with the' petitioner's request. Mr. Andrew: Is that a house on Lot #734? Mr. Patrick: Yes, there is a house on the north portion of the lot. Mr. Andrew: Is the house to be demolished? Mr. Patrick: The actual parking facility will just be on 2-1/2 acres, and the house will be left intact as people do live in that house. Mr. Andrew: Do you intend to construct sidewalks along Newburgh Road? Mr. Patrick: Sidewalks will be put in for access to the Church from Newburgh Road. Mr. Andrew: Any questions from the Commission? tie Mrs. Scurto: How many seats in your facility? _ Mr. Patrick: Presently, we have between 560 and 580 attending our Church. Later on that will probably come down to 500 when the cold weather approaches. 6139 Mr. Patrick: We definitely need a0 :quate parking facilities. Mrs. Scurto: You are requesting 191 parking spots to accommodate 500 people? Mr. Patrick: We have 39 parking spots around the Church itself. We are requesting an additional 191, which would total 230. Mrs. Scurto: Is it not true that the vast majority come alone? Mr. Patrick: I travel 22 miles to come to this Church with 5 people in my car. Mrs. Scurto: Do you have permission to park in the gas station across the street? Mr. Cossins: I talked with the Manager of the Boron station. He said, "Go right ahead. I am not giving you permission, but go ahead." Mrs. Scurto: I must say that I am impressed with the building. How do the residents in the area feel about the parking? Mr. Cossins: The parking may put a strain on the residents for a while. Our people are supposed to park only on our property. Mrs. Scurto: What about those people who live on Angeline Circle? Mr. Cossins:I If our people park on Angeline Circle, they would get a ticket. They are supposed to park in that area so designated. We want to do right with the neighbors. Mrs. Wisler: What is your plan for surfacing the parking lot? Mr. Patrick: Hard surfacing along with adequate landscaping. Once we have assigned parking spaces people will know where to park. Mrs. Wisler: Mr. Nagy, are they required to asphalt? Mr. Nagy: Hard surfacing is asphalt as long as material is acceptable to the City Engineers. Must be surfaced within two years. Mr. Scruggs: Wouldn't a parking lot between the Church and Mrs. Hanchett's house become a real nuisance to her? Mr. Cossins: I talked to her about obtaining an easement. Mr. Andrew: Any further questions from the Commission or the audience? Mr. J. Vincent Sedg, 36906 Ann Arbor Trail: For as long as I can remember this space where they want to put the parking lot has been zoned RUE'. We were never notified that it was changed to R-1. I can't believe that Mrs. Hanchett wants 530 people going through her yard five or six times a week. I understand that they are going 110 to remove that old Church. What about sewer facilities-in that area? They wanted to put up a Bank on the southwest corner a little while back, but they were turned down because there is no sanitary or storm sewers. 6140 1[10 Mr. Andrew: Did the Engineering 1 ivision have any comment about that, Mr. Nagy? Mr. Nagy: No mention was made of utilities. They simply called attention to the road right-of-way. Resident: I question whether or not the storm and sanitary sewers can accommodate the amount of people using the Church facilities. And what about the traffic in that area now? The Church only has one or two driveways, Newburgh Road has only two lanes and all the traffic using Newburgh going to Hygrade's, Evans Products, Burroughs. We can't even get across the street. Does the City plan to widen Newburgh Road, and when? Mr. Patrick: Presently we are parking 75 to 80 cars around the Church, and that is one point we want to bring out tonight. We need additional parking spaces. Newburgh Road is supposed to be widened after the old chapel is removed. However, once the chapel is removed, there certainly will be more room on the corner and should be less traffic problems. W. J. Abbey, 36832 Angeline Circle: I would like to know where the additional parking spaces will come from? Where are they going to get additional parking? Every spot around there now is used for parking. If they widen Newburgh Road that will take away from their parking spaces. Our roads in that area are atrocious. Since we are an older section of Livonia, I feel that the City is not taking care of our roads properly. I think it is childish to keep arguing. Let's face it --- traffic is bad near any Church on Sunday. They definitely do need adequate parking, but if they enlarge the Church, where will the additional parking come from? Mr. Andrew: According to the site plans for the petition, they show 39 spaces for parking now, with a request for an additional 191 spaces, which would total 230 -which would mean one parking spot for each three persons in assemblage. Under the Ordinance, that would mean approximately 690 people possibly in attendance at that Church. Mr. Cossins, how many seats in your new Church? Mr. Cossins: There will be approximately 500 seats in the new Church. Mr. Andrew: What about the Fellowship Hall downstairs? Mr. Cossins: There will be no services going on downstairs while the main service is being held upstairs. Woman Resident: They close that Church around 10:00 at night, but there are always people hanging around that Church at 10:30 or 11:00 or later. The Pastor says that they close at 10:00 p.m. , so who is controlling those that hang around afterwards? toMr. Andrew: Mr. Cossins, would you care to answer her question? Mr. Cossins: I control all the young people that remain after services. 6141 ILMr. Andrew: Is the Church open 2, hours a day? Mr. Cossins: No, it is not. Mr. Andrew: But there is someone there to man the Church. Mr. Cossins: It is a Church. We do not ever close the Church. We get a lot of people at all times of the day. This is true. Mr. Scruggs: What is the size of your present congregation? Mr. Cossins: We have about 300 presently. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Feinberg, how does the Ordinance read with regard to parking for new uses or buildings? Mr. Feinberg: I will quote from Section 18.37, paragraph (j) : "The amount of required off-street parking space for new uses or buildings, additions thereto and additions to existing buildings as specified above shall be determined in accordance with the schedule set forth in Section 18.38 of this Ordinance and the space so required shall be stated in the application for a building permit and shall be irrevocably reserved for such use." Mr. Andrew: I understand that they have a 30-year lease to meet that section of the Ordinance. Mr. Feinberg: Mr. Cossins, can your lease be terminated? Mr. Patrick: We have a 3-page lease for 30 years that states that 60 days prior to the end of the 30 years, the lease can be reactivated for another 25 years. ' Mr. Andrew: Is the lease recordable? Mr. Patrick: The lease has been notarized. Mr. Andrew: Any objections to inserting it in the Wayne County Records. Mr. Patrick: No objections whatsoever. Al Hasen, Sunday School Superintendent, The Lord's House: I would like to answer an earlier question regarding whether or not people come to this Church one at a time. We have quite a few families coming to this Church with five and even seven members in the family, and sometimes even two families come together in one car. I will admit that we use Lot #734 for parking because the road is so dirty and muddy at times. Those people who get there early, of course, usually get the parking spaces that are closer. When we get a hard surface it will be much better than parking in the dirt. I do not have an accurate head count for Sunday School. 6142 IL Mrs. Friedrichs: It seems to me that isle major problem here is satisfying the neighborhood regarding the parking situation at this Church. I can see nothing wrong with people being at the Church at times other than specific service times. If people want to spend additional time at the Church, why not? Mr. Scruggs: I feel that we need more time to examine this petition. On a motion duly made by Mr. Scruggs, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted, it was #8-145-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 24, 1976 on Petition 76-5-2-8 by John W. Cossin, Pastor of The Lord's House, requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to an existing Church located on the north side of Ann Arbor Trail, east of Newburgh Road in the northwest 1/4 of Section 32, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 76-5-2-8 until the Study Session of August 31, 1976. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Andrew then informed Messrs. Patrick and Cossin to provide the Commission with revised Site Plans and Building Elevations. He also requested Mr. Feinberg to check into certain legal technicalities regarding this petition, and provide the Commission with information from the Law Department. 1[0 Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-7-2-12 by Reginald Hanosh requesting waiver use approval to locate an auto- motive glass repair facility and general retail outlet within an existing building located on the south side of Plymouth Road, west of Harrison in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 36. At this time, Mr. Andrew, Chairman, passed the gavel to Mr. Scruggs, Vice-Chairman, and stated that he would abstain from the discussion and the vote on this particular petition. Mr. Scruggs: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: Yes, we have a letter from the Engineering Division dated July 29th indicating no engineering problem relating to this petition. Mr. Scruggs: Is the petitioner present? Reginald Hanosh: I am the owner and President of Henderson Glass and Auto Service. My present lease expires on October 15th, and I would like to move my location further to the east on Plymouth Road. Mr. Scruggs: I understand that the building you now have is noncomplying as far as the required setback is concerned. 6143 Mrs. Scurto: If your lease expire: October 15th, do you intend to continue using the existing building until the other one is completed? t Mr. Hanosh: Yes, I would like to obtain an extension on present lease. Mr. Scruggs: Mr. Nagy, does petition meet all requirements of Ordinance? Mr. Nagy: Yes, this petition complies with all requirements pertaining to Auto Service facility. Mr. Scruggs: The site plans and landscaping appear to be in accordance with Ordinance. Any comments from the audience or the Commission? Mrs. Wisler: I assume there will be no painted signs on the building. Mr. Hanosh: No signs painted on the building. There will be a sign over the entrance to the garage door and another over the entrance to the main building. Mrs. Wisler: Has the Planning Department received any request for any proposed free-standing signs? Mr. Nagy: No, we have not. Mr. Zimmer: Will the words "Henderson Glass & Auto Repair" go on the mansard on the south wall? Mr. Scruggs: Proposed sign plans should be submitted in conformance with ,: Ordinance. Mr. Nagy: The suggested signs do comply with the Ordinance. No limit to sign size, as long as they do not project above the roof line for signs affixed to buildings. Mr. Hanosh: The present free-standing sign will come down. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer and seconded by Mrs. Scurto, it was #8-146-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 24, 1976 on Petition 76-7-2-12 by Reginald Hanosh requesting waiver use approval to locate an automotive glass repair facility and general retail outlet within an existing building located on the south side of Plymouth Road, west of Harrison in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 36, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-7-2-12 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan dated 8/6/76, prepared by Harold. E. Eskovitz, Architect, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; • 11 (2) that Building Elevation Plan, revised date 8/6/76, prepared 4 by Harold E. Eskovitz, Architect, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; 6144 (3) that all landscaping as shown on the approved Site Plan shall be installed on the site prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; (4) that all landscaping installed on the site shall be permanently maintained in a healthy condition; (5) that there shall be no signs painted on the walls of the building; and (6) that a sign plan for any new signs, either free-standing or affixed to the building, proposed to be installed on the site shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval. for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use complies with Zoning Ordinance #543, Section 11.03 (m) . (2) The site has the capacity to support the new use and therefore will not adversely affect the established uses of the area. (3) The Zoning Board of Appeals by resolution adopted on July 15, 1976, approved the expansion of the noncomplying building and allowed the encroachment into the required front yard '.4 of the C-2 Zoning District. (4) The proposed use provides for a substantial building and site improvement program which will convert an abandoned car wash facility into a modern, new use and facility all of which will be upgrading for the area. FURTHER RESOLVED, 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, DuBose, Zimmer, Scurto, Scruggs, Wisler NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Andrew ABSENT: Falk, Kluver Mr. Scruggs, Vice-Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-7-2-13 by W. P. Lindhout Associates for St. Colette Catholic Church requesting waiver use approval to construct a Church activities building on'the property located on the east side of Newburgh Road, north of Vargo Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 8. 0 6145 Mr. Scruggs: Mr. Nagy, any corresponcance in the file regarding petition? ? Mr. Nagy: Letter from Engineering indicating no problems at all. Mr. Lindhout: The Commission has before them a site plan showing the complete usage of the site as anticipated by the Parish. This new Activities Building is to be used for other than worship services. Therefore, we will be able to take full advantage of the present parking area as it now exists. We have also indicated a proposed plan for a rectory sometime in the future to be located right alongside Newburgh Road. As far as the Activities Building is concerned, we expect no increase at all in the traffic volume. Building has been designed to be compatible with existing Church building. It will house certain social functions as well as some school functions. Location of this building on the side lot should have no conflict whatsoever with adjacent property owners. Mr. Scruggs: I must say that this proposed building is most attractive. Mr. Zimmer: Would you say that there is no building presently on that site that could serve this proposed usage? Mr. Lindhout: No, there is no building there yet to serve for social functions of this nature. The capacity of proposed building will be ' 'I[: between 320 and 440 people. The present Church building seats more than that now. Mr. Scruggs: Any comments from the audience? Resident, 16429 Park: I belong to St. Colette's Church, and I wholeheartedly approve of such a building being put up to serve the other members of the Parish. No other persons present wished to be heard regarding this petition, therefore, Mr. Scruggs, Vice-Chairman, called the Public Hearing closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer and seconded by Mrs. Wisler, it was #8-147-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Petition 76-7-2-13 by W. P. Lindhout Associates for St. Colette Catholic Church requesting waiver use approval to construct a Church Activities Building on property located on the east side of Newburgh Road, north of Vargo Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 8, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-7-2-13 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) That Site Plan #7624, dated July 20, 1976, prepared by William P. Lindhout, which is hereby approved, shall 1[1;0be adhered to; i 6146 (2) That building elevation: as shown on the approved Site Plan which are hereby approved shall be adhered to; (3) That Landscape Plan #7624, dated July 20, 1976, prepared by William P. Lindhout, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; (4) That all landscpaing as shown on the approved landscape plan shall be installed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; and (5) That all landscape materials installed on the site shall be permanently maintained in a healthy condition. for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use complies with Section 4.03(a) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance. (2) The site has excess capacity to support the proposed expansion of use. FURTHER RESOLVED, 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: Scurto, Friedrichs, Scruggs, Wisler, Zimmer, DuBose NAYS: None ABSENT: Falk, Kluver ABSTAIN: Andrew Mr. Scruggs, Vice-Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. At this time Mr. Scruggs passed the gavel back to Mr. Andrew, Chairman. Mrs. Wisler, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-6-3-5 by Don E. Vargo requesting the vacating of a portion of Henry Ruff Road located south of Six Mile Road, west of Oporto in the North 1/2 of Section 14. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy,any correspondence in the file re petition? Mr. Nagy: Yes, we_ have a letter from the Engineering Division indicating full width easement to accommodate future storm sewers in this area. Also, a letter from the Detroit Edison Company indicating no objection to vacating proposed street. Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present? Richard Pastor: I will be representing the petitioner. This particular petition is tied in with previous petition pertaining to the rezoning of property from RUFA to P in order to obtain additional parking space. 4 Mr. Andrew: Does Henry Ruff Road exist by nature of some plat? Mr. Nagy: Yes, Livrance Estates Subdivision located to the east provided for one half of the right-of-way for Henry Ruff. 6147 Mr. Andrew: Any questions from the ( mmission? Mrs. Friedrichs: I would like to knol, more about Mr. Vargo's intention to put up a catering hall to accommodate 500-600 people. i Mr. Andrew: That particular petition was denied two weeks ago. Mrs. Friedrichs: I would certainly have to concur with this decision. No further encroachment in this area. Mr. Nagy: The recommendation to deny this petition has been forwarded to City Council, but they have taken no action as yet. Mrs. Scurto: Is Munger open from Oporto west to Henry Ruff? Mr. Nagy: Yes, it is. Frank Brodick: The residents in this area feel that if Mr. Vargo gets to use 16971 Oporto Henry Ruff for parking, there will be no stopping him from going down to Munger and then encircling the whole residential area. Robert King: I live right near to Frank Brodick, and I would like to know just what the reason is for opening Henry Ruff Road? Mr. Andrew: Actually, Mr. King, the road will be closed for the purpose of parking. Mr. King: Well, I don't see why he needs more parking space, He has all the IIparking space that he needs. 3 Mr. Andrew: Mr. Vargo asked for rezoning in his earlier petition; these two petitionsinterjoin. If the City Council approves his earlier petition, the subject property would have to be vacated. Mr. King: Maybe we should just wait and see what happens at the Council meeting. Mr. Brodick: Mr. Andrew, according to my calculations, there are two entrances off of Six Mile into the parking lot. Why does he have to use Munger to get into the parking lot? Mr. Pastor: We not trying to open this road, we are trying to close it. Mr. Brodick: We feel that if he is allowed to open parking space to his reataurant at this spot, that will open up the road around the subdivision. Resident: It was brought out at a Council meeting that the creek in this area 16581 Henry will be eventually filled up by soil being stripped with the widening Ruff of Six Mile Road. With the rainy season coming up, the creek will overflow and the area will become a flood problem. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, are there sanitary sewers in this area? • Mr. Nagy: No. ) Mr. Andrew: Any more questions? Mrs. Friedrichs: I make a motion that petition be denied. Mr. Scruggs: I support that motion. Mrs. Wisler: I would prefer to see the matter tabled until City Council makes up their mind regarding the companion petition. 6148 Mr. Zimmer: If the City Council apps ves the prior petition, and we were to deny this petition, woul 1 the whole matter go to the City Council for further action? Mr. Nagy: The City Council makes all final decisions on zoning and vacating. Mrs. Friedrichs: Prefer to continue with denying petition. Mrs. Wisler: Mr. Nagy, if the City Council did not hold a Public Hearing, there would still have to be a vote, right? Mr. Zimmer: Would there be any advantage to tabling the petition? Mr. Nagy: The petition could be withdrawn if City Council denies prior petition. Mr. Zimmer: How long does denial stand? Mr. Nagy: Property owner has the right to always petition. Petition can be altered at any time which would be reason to resubmit for new consideration. Mrs. Wisler: I would like to offer a tabling motion. Mr. DuBose: I will second the motion. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler and seconded by Mr. DuBose adopted,it was #8-148-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 24, 1976 on Petition 76-6-3-5 by Don E. Vargo requesting the vacating of a portion of Henry Ruff Road located south of 46 Six Mile Road, west of Oporto in the North 1/2 of Section 14, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 76-6-3-5 until after the City Council takes action on companion Petition 76-6-1-27. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: DuBose, Scurto, Wisler, Andrew NAYS: Friedrichs, Zimmer, Scruggs ABSENT: Falk, Kluver Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared motion carried, and foregoing resolution adopted. He then informed Mr. King that he should watch for the City Council Meeting that will determine Mr. Vargo's earlier petition. Mrs. Wisler announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-8-2-15 by Samual Durante requesting waiver use approval to establish a sit-down restaurant on premises presently occupied as a take-out and delivery establishment located on the south side of Ann Arbor Road between Hix and Knolson in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 31. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file re petition? 1111Cli Mr. Nagy: No, none at all. Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present? 410 Samual Durante: One and a half years ago, I applied for a restaurant license here; six weeks ago the Building Department said that I couldn't have tables in the restaurant. I applied for a re staur.7mt license, but T didn't apply for a 6149 110 Mr. Andrew: Is this strictly a take- mut service? Mr. Durante: I have always had tables in my restaurant; had no knowledge of waiver of use. I Mr. Andrew: How much longer is your lease? Mr. Durante: Three and a half years, plus another 5. Mr. Andrew: Are you going to put in any more tables? Mr. Durante: The most I could get in would be twenty; I have 12 now, the most would be 20. Mr. Andrew: Can you operate successfully with a 12 chair limitation. Mr. Durante: Yes. Mrs. Wisler: Are there any property owners here? Mr. Durante: No, they are already signed on my petition in support of the waiver of use petition. Mr. Zimmer: What are your hours? Mr. Durante: I am open from 10: 30 until 12:00 midnight during the week, until 2:00 a.m. on Fridays and Saturdays On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto and seconded by Mr. Scruggs, and unanimously adopted, it was 16 #8-149-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on , August 24, 1976 on Petition 76-8-2-15 by Samual Durante requesting waiver use approval to establish a sit-down restaurant on premises presently occupied as a take-out and delivery establishment located on the south side of Ann Arbor Road between Hix and Knolson in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 31, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-8-2-15 be approved subject to the following conditions: that subject be limited in the size of the sit-down, eating portion of the facility to 12 seats. for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use complies with Section 11.03(c) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, and (2) the site has the capacity to support the intended use. FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above Public Hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as rlisted in the Proof of Service. illit Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 40, Mrs. Wisler announced the next item on the agenda a Preliminary Plat approval for Blue Grass Estates Subdivision proposed to be located on the west side of Newburgh Road, north of Ladywood in the east 1/2 of Section 18. 6150 Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspond nce in the file re petition? Mr. Nagy: Yes, we have a letter da, ed August 13th from the Division of Engineering indicating no problems; `here is a sewer to be installed. Also, a letter dated August 13th from the Building Department indicating all lots meet with existing requirements; a letter dated August 17th from the Chief of Police indicating there may be some difficulties with the traffic patterns, as well as a letter from the Fire Marshall regarding opposition to the naming of some of the steets. Mr. Andrew: Mr. McNeely, there seems to be a problem with the storm sewer north of the proposed plat. Mr. McNeely: I have been in contact with the Engineering Department regarding this situation. Mr. Andrew: With the enclosure of this sewer, it would appear that some of the lot sizes could be increased. Maybe the entire plot plan would have to be revised. How do you stand with the Engineering Department? Mr. McNeely: We have been in direct contact with the Engineering Department, and we are sure that we can work out all problems. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, could the Planning Commission approve this Plat Plan as it now stands, with the storm sewer to be enclosed, with revised plans being brought back? Mr. Nagy: Cannot approve Preliminary Plans as they now stand; changes must be brought back before approval. Mr. Andrew: What is the possibility of splitting the property and asking for 16 approval of the south half, and leave the north half in "limbo"? Mr. McNeely: No, the proprietor wants to present this entire parcel as a Preliminary Plan. Mr. Andrew: Any comments or questions from the audience? Michael Sullivan: I am President of the Newburgh Swim Club, and I question the 15703 Stonehouse storm sewer to be installed. Circle Mr. Nagy: The storm drain will be intercepted to the west where it enters the land area of Blue Grass Estates subdivision at which point it will be enclosed within an underground sewer system. Mr. Sullivan: Once a year, the pool at the Swim Club has to be drained and cleaned. Would this sewer accommodate the drainage? Mr. Nagy: The pool should be drained into Newburgh Road sewer lines. Mr. Scruggs: We have a similar situation in my neighborhood. The pool drains into a ditch, ties in with a catch basin, will take in everything. 41tOd' _ Mr. Sullivan: Will there by any dust control procedure during evacuation? Are there any specific dust control procedures? Any specific requirements to keep the dust down? 4111/ Mr. Scruggs: Why not put a canvas cloth around the swim club? Mr. Sullivan: When will all this development take place? . 6151 Mr. Andrew: The Preliminary Plat apj :oval remains valid for one year. Actual construction will probably take five years. 1I a Mrs. Wisler: What about those streets Sunnydale and turning into the Junior High? Mr. Nagy: The driveways north of the Swim Club conflict with turning movements into the Junior High. Both directions occupy the same left turn lane. Problem will have to be overcome with a revised plan. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Scruggs and unanimously adopted, it was #8-150-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 24, 1976 on a Preliminary Plat approval for Blue Grass Estates Subdivision proposed to be located on the west side of Newburgh Road, north of Ladywood in the East 1/4 of Section 18, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table this Preliminary Plat approval until such time as all aspects of the drain installation, as well as the renaming and relocating of strees, is resolved. Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Wisler announced the next item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat approval for Stamford Estates Subdivision proposed to be located on the west side of Stamford Avenue, north of Curtis in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file re this Preliminary Plat II approval? 111, Mr. Nagy: Yes, we have a letter dated August 13th from the Engineering Division indicating no problems with the development of this subdivision; a letter from the Traffic Department indicating that proposal appears to be satisfactory; a letter from the Fire Marshall indicating no problems; a letter from the D.P.W. stating that 11 zoning require- ments are met; as well as a letter from the Stamford Investment company, dated August 16-, 1976, requesting waiver of open space requirements, since there will be only twenty-eight lots in this subdivision. Mr. Andrew: Was a copy of this Preliminary Plat approval sent to the Livonia School Board? Mr. Nagy: Yes, it was on August 6th, no reply so far. Mr. Andrew: What about the Blue Grass Preliminary Plat approval? Mr. Nagy: Yes, on August 3rd; no reply as yet. Mr. Andrew: Any comments or questions from the audience? . /r`.. Judith, Stewart: Do 1 understand correctly that Mr. Pioccio and the Stamford ;� 18344 Whitby Investment Corporation are one and the same: • Mr. Andrew: Mr. Pioccio, is that correct? 4110 Bob Pioccio: Yes, I own the property. Mrs. Stewart: Are there any definite requirements regarding the placement of the houses on the lots? 6152 Mr. Andrew: The configuration of the lot would certainly have an effect on the 4 placement of the buildi: j. Judith Stewart: Just where on the lot would the house be located? Mr. Andrew: The minimum setback requirement is 30' . Resident: If Stamford develops this area, who pays for the installation of the streets? Mr. Andrew: Are the new streets behind you? Bruce Bucholz: I live on the road east of Stamford. Do the residents on my street 18235 Myron have to pay for the installation of the streets? Mr. Nagy: Those residents who live on the east side of your street would get a free ride as far as the cost of installing new streets. Mr. Bucholz: When will this development take place? Mr. Pioccio: Within thirty days after approval. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler and seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopte it was #8-151-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a letter dated August 16, 1976 from 1[110 Stamford Investment Corporation, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to waive the open space requirements of Section 9.09 of the Subdivision Rules and Regulations as they relate to the development of Stamford Estates Subdivision proposed to be located on the west side of Stamford Avenue, north of Curtis in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9, for the reasons that: (1) there is already sufficient lands to provide this area with adequate open space for park, recreation and open space purposes, and (2) the size of the area that would accrue as a result of the development of the subdivision is not of sufficient size to have practical meaning to the subdivision and the maintenance of such a small open space area would burden the Parks and Recreation Department. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler and seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted, it was #8-152-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 24, 1976, the City Planning Commission does hereby recom- mend to the City Council that the Preliminary .Plat for Stamford Estates Subdivision proposed to be located on the west side of Stamford Avenue, north of Curtis in the Northeast 1/4 of .Section 9, be. approved for the following reasons: (1) The Preliminary Plat complies with the Subdivision Rules and Regulations, the open space requirement having been waived by the City Planning Commission. (2) All lot sizes meet or greatly exceed the requirements of the R-2 Zoning Distr. irt Hequlat.ionc of thu 7rninu °rdinanrc. 6153 (3) The Engineering Dii, ision of the City of Livonia has indicated they have no objecilon to the development of the Subdivision. 4 (4) The Traffic Bureau of the City of Livonia has indicated they ' have no objection to the development of the Subdivision. AND THAT, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend the waiving of the open space provisions of the Plat Ordinance, Section 9-116(p) of the Livonia Code of Ordinances, inasmuch as there is already sufficient lands to provide this area with adequate open space for park, recreation and open space purposes. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above hearing was sent to abutting property owners, proprietor, City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service and copies of the plat together with notice have been sent to the Building Department, Superintendent of Schools, Fire Department, Police Department and Parks and,Recreation Dept. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler and seconded by Mrs. Scurto, it was #8-153-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 24, 1976, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to reconsider its action taken in Resolution #8-143-76, adopted on August 24, 1976, with respect to Petition 76-7-1-28 as submitted by R. William & Paula Ellen Joyner requesting to rezone property located on the west side of Gill Road, north of Curtis in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 9, from RUFB to R-3. IL A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Zimmer, Scurto, Scruggs, Wisler, Andrew NAYS: DuBose ABSENT: Kluver, Falk Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Scruggs and unanimously adopted, it was #8-154-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 24, 1976 on Petition 76-7-1-28 as submitted by R. Willian and Paula Ellen Joyner requesting to rezone property located on the west side of Gill Road, north of Curtis in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 9, from RUFB to R-3, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 76-6-1-28 until a determination is made concerning the possible extension of existing utilities to accommodate future development in the area. _ Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. - i On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. DuBose, and unanimously adopted, it was 6154 #8-155-76 RESOLVED that, the City Planing Commission does hereby approve Petition 10 76-7-8-15P by Jimmies Rusts s, Inc., requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 ( ' Ordinance #543, as required by Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #988, submitted in connection with a proposal to increase the size of a warehouse located on the north side of Six Mile Road between Middlebelt and Louise in Section 11, subject to the following conditions: (1) the Site Plan by Jimmies Rustics, Inc. , dated 8/11/76, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and (2) that the Building Elevations as shown on Sheet #3 of a plan prepared by Brackney Engineering, dated 7/23/76, which are hereby approved, shall be adhered to. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer and seconded by Mr. Dubose and adopted, it was #8-156-76 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 76-6-2-10, as amended, by the Galilean Baptist School requesting waiver use approval to erect a multi-purpose activities building on property located on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt and Inkster Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan 75-09 Sheet A-1, prepared by Ashor, Walsh & Associates dated 8/6/76, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; 4 (2) that Building Elevation Plan, 75-09, Sheet A-2, prepared by Ashor, Walsh & Associates, dated 8/6/76, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; (3) that all landscaping surrounding the multi-purpose building as shown on the approved site plan shall be installed on the site prior to issuance_ of a certificate of occupancy; and (4) that all landscaping installed on the site shall be permanently maintained in a healthy condition. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Scurto, Friedrichs, Wisler, Zimmer, DuBose, Andrew, Scruggs NAYS: None ABSENT: Falk, Kluver Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried, and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs and seconded by Mr. DuBose, it was #8-157-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 24, 1976 on Petition 76-6-1-26 as submitted by Dr. Stella Evangelista requesting to rezone property located on the northwest corner of i Farmington Road and Orangelawn in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33, from RUF to P.S., the City Planning Commission does hereby recomm-:id to the City Council that Petition 76-6-1-26 be approved for the following reasons: . 6155 10 (1) the proposed rezoning is minor expansion of an existing professional service dist •ict located to the north; (2) the subject area has been approved in part for non-residential use by action of the Zoning Board of Appeals in connection with a proposed development of the parcel to the north; (3) the proposed rezoning will provide for professional office uses which will be compatible to and will not adversely affect the surrounding.established uses of the area; and (4) the proposed rezoning is consistent with the adopted Future Land Use Plan. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was publed in the official newspaper, the Observer-Eccentric, under date of 7/22/76, and 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, Wisler, Zimmer, DuBose, Andrew, Scruggs NAYS: None ABSENT: Falk, Kluver [ Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer and seconded by Mr. DuBose, it was #8-158-76 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Site Plan 76-5-8-7P submitted by Kenneth R. Hale, Attorney for Drs. Jose and Stella Evangelista, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #988, in connection with a proposal to construct a medical office building on property located on the west side of Farmington Road between Plymouth Road and Orangelawn in Section 33, subject to the following conditions; (1) that Site Plan #7608, Sheet S revised 8/30/76, prepared by Van Curler Associates, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; (2) that the Building Elevations as shown on Plan 7608, dated 8/24/76 by Van Curler Associates, which are hereby approved, shall be adhered to; (3) the landscaping as shown on the approved Site Plan shall be installed before the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; (4) that all landscaping shall be permanently maintained in a healthy condition; 4 (5) any proposed Ground Sign shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Commission; (6) there shall be no vehicle egress or ingress from Orangelawn; and 6156 [1410 (7) approval of this petit .on is subject to a change in the zoning being granted 1j the City Council. j. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs,. Scruggs, Wisler, Zimmer, DuBose, Andrew NAYS: None ABSENT: Falk, Kluver ABSTAIN: Scurto • Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. DuBose, seconded by Mr. Scruggs,and unanimously adopted, it was #8-159-76 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 76-4-8-5P by Ferruccio P. DeConti for Brose Electric Company requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a one-story building on . the northeast corner of Seven Mile and Newburgh Roads in Section 5, subject to the following conditions: (1) that the Sign Plan submtted by Ward Sign Inc. , which is hereby -4 approved, shall be adhered to; and (2) that the Sign Location Plan for Brose Electric showing a minimum setback of 22' from the Seven Mile Road property line, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to. • Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared motion carried, and foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Scruggs, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and unanimously adopted, it was #8-160-76 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 76-8-8-17 by Fred J. Armour requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #990, submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a shopping center on property located on the northwest corner of Joy and Hix Roads in Section 31, until after September 15, 1976. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared themotion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted, it was #8-161-76 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 76-8-8-16P by Richard J. Pastor, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, as amended, by Ordinance #988, submitted in connection with a proposal to construct office buildings on the northwest corner of Schoolcraft Road and Hubbard in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 22, untii such time as a more completed site and landscape plan has been submitted. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 6157 On a motion duly made by Mr. DuBose an seconded by Mr. Scruggs and unanimously 110 adopted, it was #8-162-76 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve all Revised Plans submitted in connection with Petition 75-10-2-27 by Jack Masek for the Wrigley Employee Credit Union requesting waiver use approval to construct and operate a credit union on the south side of Six. Mile Road between Middlehelk and Oporto in the 'r.r' h, :; ;t 1/4 of : �t7tion 14, nui'jort. to the 101101,1m/ (•onci {e•; (1) that Revised Plan #7632, dated 8/11/76 by Robert B. Alpern Associates, Inc. , which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and (2) that the Building Elevations as shown on the Revised Site Plan, which are hereby approved, shall be adhered to. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 319th Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on August 24, 1976 was adjourned at 12:32 a.m. August 25, 1976. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION JSuz a T. Wisler, Secretary ./e1;°°11!' . ATTEST: '/ Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman • 4