HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1976-12-07 •
6238
' ' MINUTES OF THE 326th REGULAR MEETING
4.
AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LIVONIA •
„,On Tuesday, December 7, 1976, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia, held
it 326th 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 8:08 p.m. with approximately 85 interested citizens in the audience.
Members Present: Daniel R. Andrew Suzanne Wisler Joseph Falk
William Scruggs Herman Kluver William DuBose
Esther Friedrichs
Members Absent: *Judith Scurto
Jerome Zimmer
Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV; and Robert M.
Feinberg, Assistant City Attorney, also were present.
Mr. Andrew then informed the audience that if .a Petition on tonight's agenda involves
a question of rezoning or vacating, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the
City Council, and the City City Council, after holding a Public Hearing, then makes
the final determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied; and if a
petition for a waiver of use or a site plan is denied, the petitioner has ten days in
which to appeal the decision to the City Council for relief, otherwise the petition is
. terminated.
Mrs. Wisler, Secretary, then announced the first item on the agenda as Petition 76-10-1-35
Aar
by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to rezone property located on
the east side of Henry Ruff between Five Mile Road and Jamison 'in the Northeast
1/4 of Section 23, from RUF to P.L.
Mr. Andrew: This is a petition by the City Planning Commission, the purpose of which
is to bring the Zoning Map into its proper perspective showing public
ownership and public use of the land. .Is there anyone in the audience
wishing to speak either for or against this petition?
James P. Hosey:. You say that you want to turn this area into a park site. Do you know
14954 Flamingo that during the evening hours, you cannot even walk past that area. My
wife has already had beer bottles thrown at her. The Police Department
• cannot control the activities that 'go on in the park at night. We called
a Lieutenant on the Police Department, but those kids just keep coming
back. We don't need any more parks in this area - they are enough
nuisance as it is. Everybody who bought property around here knew
• what it was when they bought it - a fine neighborhood. I would like to
know why it is brought up at this time. One of the members of-the City
Council has property interest in Lot #80. Is that why it was brought up? •
Mr. Andrew: The property under discussion tonight is..that which is outlined• in heavy
black. It is owned in fee by the City of Livonia. The purpose of this
rezoning petition is simply to remove the RUF designation from the
property and re-establish it as Public Land to reflect that it is owned by
the City of Livonia.
S
Mr. Hosey: When did the City acquire this land? We never received any notice.
Mr.. Andrew: It is not necessary that the neighbors. be notified of land purchase.
All we are trying to do is bring the Zoning Map in compliance with the City'
ownership. This area will he developed with two tennis courts.
6239
Mr. Hosey: Looks to me like the residents got shafted again. We do not need any
ILOmore parks in the area. Let the property sit idle.
•
Mr. Andrew: The City Council will determine exactly what is to be done with the
property along with the. Parks & Recreation Commission.
Mr. Hosey: Let's face it, the City will do whatever they want with it whether we
like it or not. They bought a piece of land nearby without our know-
ledge. And tennis courts - you say. People will probably start parking
right on my property.
Audience: Why don't you read off the kind of buildings they can build on this
land? Everything from city halls to fire stations. .
Mr. Hosey: These people are asking a question that is not clear to them.
Mr. Falk: You know, I have, lived in my neighborhood for 10 years and we would
have liked to have a park. But we did not get a park because there
was not enough space for one. In the area we are talking about, there
is space for 'a' park and the Chairman has stated that all we are doing
is trying to rezone this' property so that others may see just how the
land is zoned.. RUF means Rural Urban Farms, and whenever we take RUF
land try to rezone it Public Land, the people in the neighborhood get
scared. and• oppose the rezoning. We go through this hassle every week.
I would like to see the meeting proceed. We are trying to change this
property just be able to show others who come in to look at our Zoning
ide
10 Maps that this is public land intended for public purposes.
Mr. Hosey: You bought property and don't have a park. I bought my property in
1950 when it was RUF, and I expected it to stay that way. I bought
myself a park and a home at the same time. We don't need any parks where
beer bottles are thrown around. Leave it RUF. What about the new park
on Seven Mile Road - Bicentennial Park? Let them go over there. We do
not need any nuisances in our neighborhood. We have already had about
10 fights on Henry Ruff Road - kids come down from Riley Junior High.
I really like living in an RUF zone, but we have enough nuisances. It
seems that all we have done is fight the City, and we always lose. We
bought in that neighborhood because we felt that it we's desirable. We
do not need the City to come in and desecrate the houses. And I also
feel• that I could be put on the Planning Commission, just .as well as you.
Ruth Ford: We bought our property thirty years ago, and these last few years have
just been dreadful. The kids comedown with their snowmobiles and motor-
bikes. When you took Lot #50 for a park, how are we going to keep the
kids off of our property. They come out from the city land. They don't
know that the property along the street belongs to the people. They
think it is for everybody. I was promised a fence, but the fence isn't
there. I talked to a man at Parks and Recreation. I was told that a
fence would be built to stop the kids from coming across my property,
but nothing has every happened.
Mr. Andrew: We will contact the Parks & Recreation Department. Do you feel that there
might be some other kind of barrier put there besides a fence?
S Mrs. Ford: We had a hedge there for a while, but the kids burned that down.
Mr: Andrew: Mr. Nagy, please communicate with Mr. DuFour at Parks & Recreation
regarding this matter.
•
Mr. Kluver: I see a serious 'nuisance problem here. I feel that the Police '
Commissioner should also be notified and stricter enforcement in that
area.
C41.1#
Mr. Andrew: Good suggestion. Mr. Nagy, also communicate with Police Commissioner
Milligan and Chief Turner.
Mrs. Lechner: We have lived at this address for 27 years, and as you know most of
30179 Hoy us are older people. And what I would like to know is why do we need
tennis courts?
Mr. Andrew: I really cannot answer that question. Maybe the City wants you to
recapture your youth.
Mrs. Lechner: Asinine. The City had no business buying that piece of property to
begin with. Strictly an underhanded deal. Probably dream up something
else.
Mr. Lechner: When I built my house, I wanted it to face toward Henry Ruff, but I was
told that the house had to face Hoy. What about the fellow here on the
very corner of Henry Ruff and not Hoy. He must have some pull. This
Ventura fellow. I have a swimming pool. I built it myself. It took
me four years to build that pool. Now they are tearing up the road,
but they never touched Henry Ruff. Nothing but gravel on Hoy. So
much dust - cannot use swimming pool. I have been there for 27 years, but
I am ready to sell. Dust a mile high, pay taxes, cannot use pool, and
if they open up the road to get to the park, there will be more dust.
Mrs. Lechner: Need more dust like a hole in the head.
Audience: Maybe the City should buy all the land.
Mr. Andrew Read to the audience the permitted used in a Public Land Zoning District.
Section 12.02 •
Mr. Scruggs: The only purpose for having a Public Hearing on this particular petition
is to put this property into its proper classification. There is no
intention to develop this land further. They may in the future, if they
. ever get any money, but not at this time. If you people feel that you •
• do not want tennis courts, contact the Parks & Recreation Department.
They will be happy to listen to you regarding this area.
•
Mrs. R.Ewald. .1 originally owned the lot shown here as #50. I understand that the
,13998 Beatrice purchase of this land was partially government financed, and in view
of that, I am wondering if the City wants to change the zoning from
RUF to P.L. , can they put up all those buildings that are listed under
the P.L. classification?
Mr. Andrew: I belEive that there are certain restrictions on just how the City can use
the land. The regulations on lands purchased with Federal grants
.specifically requires that it be used as P.L. I believe the City would
have to reimburse the Federal Government if they had any other intentions
for it. Is that right, Mr. Nagy?
41 Mr. Nagy: Yes, that is correct. •
Mrs. Ewald: Well, when we sold the. lot, it wasn't because we really wanted to. We
finally settled out of court, because the property was condemned.
•
•
Mr. Hosey: It seems to me that if the City condemned this lady's property in order
to make it Public Land, the people in that neighborhood'should have
had a public hearing on it.
S •
111: Mr. Andrew: I don't think so. That is a question for your attorney, Contact him.
Mrs. Ford: How do I go about getting a fence?
Mr. Andrew: Write a letter to Mr. Dufour and remind him of your conversation with
him. The Planning Commission will also write a letter to Mr. Dufour.
Mrs.. Ford: Could I have a copy of that letter?
Mr. Andrew Yes, you will receive a copy.
There was no one else wishing to be heard on this petition and Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the Public Hearing on this item closed.
#12-242-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been hell on December 7,
1976 on Petition 76-10-1-35 by the City Planning Commission on its own
motion to rezone property located on the east side of Henry Ruff between
Five Mile Road and Jamison in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, from RUFA to
P.L. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 76-10-1-35 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The property under petition is ownedand operated as a City park
1[11.1 site and City-owned land used for public purposes should be zoned in
the Public Land classification,' and
(2) the proposed zoning change is needed to have the Comprehensive Zoning
Map of the City of Livonia reflect the public ownership and public use
the property.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 11/18/76,
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.
Mr. Andrew; Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
He informed the audience that the recommendation will be forwarded to City Council, and
if you received a notice of_this Public Hearing, you will be receiving a notice of the
• Council's Hearing.
•
Mrs. Wisler announced the next item on the agenda is petition 76-10-1-38 by the City
Planning Commission on its own motion to rezone property located north of
Schoolcraft Road between Melvin and Beatrice in the Southeast 1/4 of Section
• 23, from R-1A to P.L.
Mr. Andrew: Again, this is a petition by the City Planning Commission in order
for the Comprehensive Zoning of the City to reflect the public owner-
ship and public use ofthe land. Eventually, the area is to be turned
irk into a "Tot Lot" .
Mr:;. Ewald: Tot Lot today - Senior Citizens' Home tomorrow.
13998 Beatrice
Mr. Andrew: Not on one acre.
Mrs. Ewald: What's to keep them from condemning the backs of all of the lots
I
(10 in this area?
Mr. Andrew: I cannot speak for the City Council, they decide what property is to
be condemned.
Mrs. Ewald: City Council would and could do anything they want 20 years from now.
I thought we are supposed to be protected. There are all single family
residences here. Now you are asking to change the land to something
that you just read you could put all those buildings on. I would like
to see the property remain zoned the way it was when we bought it. If
we wanted this land changed to Public Land, we would have considered.
this fifteen years ago. There are all brick homes there now. What
about the land that was needed for a reservoir? Now it is all fenced -
and filled in.
Mr. Andrew: Anyone .else? '
R. Benoit: If this land is changed, what will happen to it tenyears from now?
29661 Bucking- At that time, the Council might decide to change it again. There is
ham a parkright behind Roosevelt School, and it is dangerous there at
night. The same thing might happen to the property right behind our
houses.
Mr. Nagy: If I may - I think it is just as misleading to leave City-owned land
4(09 in a "Residential" classification, because as the lady before stated,
prior to buying the land she looked at the zoning in the area. If it
remains in the R-1-A classification, one would think that it is to be
used for residences, which is not the case. The official Master Land
Use Plan, along with the city's Comprehensive Zoning Map, tells the
public that this is City-owned land intended for Public Use, and to
leave it remain in a Residential classification would continue to mis-
lead the public.
Mr. Benoit: Well why don't they change it to R-1, and build houses on it, rather then
change to Public Land? That way we would know what we have.
Robert Childs: When this property in question was first deeded, it was my understanding
29831 Bucking- that the City would deed it back to the builder if he wanted it. The
ham Planning Commission doesn't have to rezone it P.L. Just recommend to
the Council that they sell the land back to the builder and leave it
residential.
Mr. Andrew: We have a report from the Planning Department staff that this Section
23 is a most densely populated area. There are only 19 acres of land
available in this section for recreation. That ranks 21st out of 36
as being a section of the City with the least amount of land devoted to
recreation. For this reason, this Planning Commission is supporting
this petition.
Mr. Childs: Just a few years ago, they wanted to build a senior citizens' home on
the other side of Henry Ruff. The residents objected, but there was
I nothing mentioned about changing the zoning at that time.
10 Mr. Benoit: As far as developing a Tot Lot here, there are very few young kids
here anymore. Most of, them are teen-agers now - 10th or 11th graders.
. 6243
`° Mr. Andrew: The "Tot Lot" recommendation came from the Parks & Recreation Dept.
_ i Mrs. Ewald: I feel that it would be a prtection for us if it remained residential.
Mr. Andrew: But it is property owned by the City to be used for city purposes.
Mrs.EWald: Why couldn't you just leave it the way it is? . Why change the zoning?
Mrs. Wisler: . Mrs. Ewald, I do not believe that it is a protection for you to leave
the zoning at its present classification. Inasmuch as the City owns
the land, the City can use it in any way they want.
•
• Mrs. Ewald: You mean to say that they City can use any land they own any way they
want? .
Mr. Nagy: You can be assured that the City will abide by its own Zoning Ordinance.
Mrs. Ewald: I feel that we would have more protection if they left the land as it
is now.
Mr. Falk: Please, let's continue with the meeting. All we are trying to do is
put our ,Comprehensive Zoning map into proper order. The' City Council
is the legislative body and they will do what they think is right.
Your comments should be addressed to the Council when they act on the
petition. We get this kind of reaction from the. people in the neighbor-
'
hood every time we have a rezoning on the agenda. I think the people are
missing one main factor, and that is cost and available money. Let's
IL . fact it - most of us won't even be here twenty-five years from now.
However, we have a responsibility, we have studied the situation, we
put notices in the paper and we we are not doing anything we are not
supposed to do by law. We just want to change the zoning of this land,
by putting a different color on the comprehensive map to show the
proper classification. There are restrictions in all zoning classification
Just too many to explain in one evening.
There was no one else wishing to be heard on this petition and Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the Public Hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Scruggs and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-243-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 7,
1976 on Petition 76-10-1-38 by the City Planning Commission on its own
motion to rezone property located north of Schoolcraft Road between Melvin
and Beatrice in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 23, from R-1-A to P.L. ,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 76-10-1-38 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The property under petition is owned and operated as a City park
site and City-owned land used for public purposes should be zoned
in Public Land classification.
(2) The proposed zoning change is needed to have the Comprehensive Zoning
Map of the City of Livonia reflect the public ownership and intended
public use of the property.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 11/18/76,
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company,
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Consumer
Power Company, and city r`.npartment-:. ;fir. 1 isted in the Proof or !-7,r =ir,,,e.
icMr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
ILadopted. He then informed the audience that the recommendation will be forwarded to
4 City Council, and if they recieved a notice of this Public Hearing, they will be
receiving a notice of the Council's hearing so they may. attend. .
Mrs. Wisler announced the next item on the agenda Petition 76-10-1-41 by the City
Planning Commission on its own motion to rezone property located north
of Schoolcraft, west of Hubbard in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 22, from
RUF to R-1-B.
Mr. Andrew: Again, this is a petition by the Planning Commission to bring the
Zoning Map into conformance with the actual development of the area.
Anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this
petition?
Mrs. Normane E. Stefanski: Will this change in zoning affect our taxes?
32464 Scone
Mr. Andrew: It shouldn't. Your lot has already been assessed. Assessment based
on square footage of home.
Mrs. Stefanski: I know that rural land has a lower tax base than other residential land.
Now they are going to change the zoning, and I am wondering if that
will change the tax base.
Mr. Andrew: It is my personal opinion that this shouldn't raise your taxes one bit.
James Mercer: Why, after all these years, why are theybothering to change it?
1[10
4 32465 Scone .
Mr. Andrew: To bring the Zoning Map into conformance with the acutal use of the
land as it stands today. The fact is that at the present time, your
home is on non-conforming property. If there was a total destruction
of your home, technically you would not be allowed to rebuild it. That's
what we are trying to take care of. Zoning on the map is not correct
• at this time - should be corrected. That is the basic reason for this
petition and the public hearing tonight.
There was no one else wishing to be heard on this petition, Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared
the Public Hearing on this item closed.
•
On a motion duly made by Mr. Scruggs, seconded by Mr. DuBose and unanimously, adopted it was
#12-244-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 7,
1976 on Petition 76-10-1-41 by the City Planning Commission on its own motion
to rezone property located north of Schoolcarft Road, west of Hubbard in
the Southwest 1/4 of Section 22, from RUF to R-1-B, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-10-1-41
be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed change of zoning is necessary to bring the Comprehensive
Zoning map of the. City of Livonia into conformance with the actual
development of the affected area.
I
(2) The affected lots under petition are presently nonconforming with
respect to the existing zoning classification of RUF and with the
proposed change, the nonconl:orming status will be removed and the
lots brought into conforman:.e.
I
6245
ID (3) The proposed change of zoning is corrective in nature in that with
the exception of two lots, the affected area is platted as part of the
Kimberly Oaks Subdivision No. 3 and developed residentially.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer under date of 11/18/76,
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.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Wisler announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-11-1-42 by the City
Planning Commission on its own motion to rezone property located on the
south side of Five Mile Road between Arden and Melrose in the Northeast 1/4
of Section 22, from P.S. to R-1.
Mr. Andrew: This is a petition by the City Planning Commission to discourage the
further encroachment westward of commercial development, ' as well as to
maintain and stabilize the residential value of the property. Anyone
in audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition?
There was no one present wishing to be heard on this 'petition, Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the Public Hearing on this' item closed.
IDOn a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded•by Mr. DuBose, and unanimously
adopted, it was
1[10
s #12-245-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 7,
1976 on Petition 76-11-1-42 as submitted by the City Planning Commission
on its own motion to rezone property located on the south side of Five
Mile Road between Arden and Melrose in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 22,
from P.S. to R-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
.the City Council that Petition 76-11-1-42 be approved for the following
reasons:
(1) The proposed change of zoning is to remove the professional service
classification from the affected residential areawandthereby
tn
remove the noncompliance the residential lots have/respect to the
Zoning District regulations,
(2) the proposed change of zoning is to eliminate professional service
zoning from this residential area and thereby discourage any further
expansion of office or commercial zoning from occurring within this
' area, and .
(3) the proposed change of zoning which will eliminate the professional
service zoning classification is to maintain and stablize this
residential neighborhood from being adversely affected by office and/or
commercial uses.
to FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was published
t„, in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer under date of 11/18/76,
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.
wasival
6246
Mr. Andrew, Chairman; declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Wisler announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-10-2-19 by the
tApostolic Christian Church requesting waiver use approval to construct
a church on the south side of Wentworth, west of Middlebelt Road in the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 14.
Nagy,Mr. Andrew: an
Mr. correspondence in the file regarding this petition?
Y
11110
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter dated November 4, 1976 from the Engineering Division
pointing out that Wentworth Avenue, in its present state, is in very
poor condition. Consideration should be given to the improvement
of Wentworth Avenue if this petition is approved. That is the extent
of correspondence.
Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present?
Mr. Morrison: Yes, I will be representing Mr. Wieland, Pastor of the Apostolic
Architect for Christian Church.
Apostolic
Church
Mr. Andrew: You have submitted a set of drawings to the Planning Department and
the Planning Commission. Would you please put them up for everyone
to see.
At this time, Mr. Morrison displayed drawings on easel for all to see.
Mr. Andrew: If there is anyone present in the audience who is interested in this
petition, would you please approach the front?
t
Mr. Morrison: We would like to construct a church on this 4 1/2 acre site, along
side of Wentworth Avenue. The auditorium itself would consist of
approximately 10,000 sq. ft. with a seating of 250 being considered.
No day school is being considered at this time. You will see that the
building abides with the ordinance as far as set-back is concerned
There is a small knoll containing some trees and vegetation on the east
that will remain. We will expect people to drive across the front of
the Church and then park in the lot at the rear of the building. Site
abuts the Armenian Home to the south, and we have shown parking for
100 cars. You will realize that this is more than required by the
local ordinance. The building will be colonial in appearance, with a
low structure. The exterior walls will be face brick with shingles on
the roof. It will be a domestic type building - residential look to it.
It will not have any institutional features about it at all. We will
maintain as much of the wooded area as we can. This will be so that the
building will be somewhat screened from Wentworth Avenue, especially in
the summer. •
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to question the Site Plan
or architectural drawings?
Harold E. Johnson: As mentioned before, this is an extremely heavily wooded area,
29724 Wentworth including my own lot and the one next door. In my way of thinking
11 if they put up this Church, that will bring in a lot more people
into this very quiet area. Wentworth will probably be paved. Once
you get pavement, there will be more cars running up and down the
street. I don't believe: that will help the neighborhood, just
bring in more people.
6247
Mr. Scruggs: Mr. Johnson, I agree with you - this is a very heavily wooded area.
Wentworth couldn't stand much traffic. I am sure that this architect
has done his best in attempting to preserve the serenity that you
now. have. Mr. Morrison, do you have any plans on improving Wentworth?
Mr. Morrison: That is not under our jurisdiction. We are well aware of the fact
that there will be an increase in traffic. That is why we put the
entrance to the property on the extreme east end - closest to Middle-
belt - right adjacent to the property zoned P.S. I really don't
believe that the residents will be affected by the traffic at Mr.
Johnson's end of the street.
Mr. Clyde Wieland: I don't think you people are considering the members of this
Pastor, Apostolic church at this time. You will agree that going to church is
Christian Church a private matter, and we hold our services on Sunday morning
only two services. There are services on Wednesday - some
special meetings, as well as regular meetings.
Mr. Andrew: What time on Sunday do you hold your services?
Mr. Wieland: 10:30 a.m. in the morning and again at 1:15 p.m. Usually, the
congregation stays the entire time.
Mr. Andrew: What about the services on Wednesdays?
Mr. Wieland: They start at 8:00 p.m. and usually last about one hour.
Mr. Andrew: Any comments or questions from the Commission?
4
Mr. Falk: I would suggest that some sort of screening be put up along the
Church south property line. Does the Planning Department have any
additional information from the architect?
460 Mr. Nagy: We have recommended that the area between the parking lot and the
property line be left in its natural state.
Mr. Falk: Take a look at that new subdivision at Six Mile and Farmington. We
were told that all trees would be left in their natural state. Have
you seen that area lately? It looks like a lot of trees are coming
down. What about the house in back of this Church, as well as that
Armenian Home. I direct this question to John and the Chairman -
as far as natural state remaining, will this new building cut into
the trees? I want to see what trees are going to stay.
Mr. Andrew: The landscaping on the Site Plan has been reviewed and indicates six
feet between the south parking lot and the property line, and the
trees will not be disturbed.
Mr. Nagy: There is a general note to that effect on the plans and it will be
enforced.
Mr. Andrew: Does the topography or the landscape plan indicate the kind of
A greenery on this six-foot strip?
Mr. Nagy: No, it does not.
6248
s
11.
Mr. Morrison: The congregation has indiated that they would be willing to install
t Mrs. Wisler: and maintain trees on the east side of the building. All the neighbors
in the area were contacted, .and this was explained to them. They have
no objections.
Mrs. Wisler: If 'trees are put in, where will the road go?
F
4
LO
Mr. Andrew: Our concern here- is the six-foot strip between the parking lot and the
south property line.
's
Mr. Morrison: Frankly, we have not plotted any trees in that area. We did not .
realize that that question would come up tonight, but we will do so
if you make it a condition.
i
Mr. Falk: Mr. Johnson, are you people satisfied with the answer you got as far
as the road goes? Do you want the street paved?
1
,
Mr. Johnson: I speak only for myself. I do not know how my neighbors feel. Will
they pave' only as far as the Church and stop. I
Mr. Andrew: The Church does not intend to improve the road. The City will improve
it only under special assessment. I think that is a question for the
Engineering Division.
Mrs. Friedrichs: How many feet between Middlebelt and the entrance to the Church?
Mr. Nagy: 280' to 300' .
Mrs. Friedrichs: 100 yds. to just the one entrance drive to the Church.
td
Mr. Nagy: Yes, that is correct.
16 Mrs. Friedrichs: Well, why couldn't 100 yds. between Middlebelt and the drive be paved?
Mr. Scruggs:
Mr. Morrison, are you planning on using black top on the driveway and
the parking lot? I would like to see improvement from the east end
of the driveway to Middlebelt. Whatever would be agreeable to the
people in that area.
Mr. Morrison: I am certain that Wentworth more or less lies like a dividing line ,
•
between their property and the Church's. And I also know that the
neighbors would want to keep it that way. They don't want a 36'
wide street. I think if the Commission 'could do this - if we could
just black top the present gravel surface from.Middlebelt to 50 ft.
• west of the entrance - make that a condition of your redommendation
to the Council.
Mr. Andrew: Settled.
Mr. Nagy: The road is presently 18 ft. wide.
Mr. Scruggs: Extremely narrow 2 lane road. '
t4Mr. Andrew: Mr. Morrison, would you be agreeable to 24 feet?
0
Mr. Morrison: Yes, with black top. .
Mrs. Wisler: There is no 24 feet there now.
Mr. Morrison: That is right - 18 feet of gravel right now.
6249
•
Mr. Andrew: We will worry about that 'ater.
Mr. Scruggs: This should be determined by the Engineering Division. My compliments
to you, Mr. Morrison, on your fine drawings and site plans.
There was no one else wishing to be heard on this .petition and Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the Public Hearing on this item closed.
. ' On a motion duly made by Mr. DuBose, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs and unanimously adopted,
it was 1
•
#12-246-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 7,
1976 on Petition 76-10-2-19 as submitted by the Apostolic Church requesting
waiver use approval to construct a church on the south side of Wentworth
west of Middlebelt Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14, the City
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
76-10-2-19 be approved subject to the following conditions:
•
(1) that Site Plan #7603, revised date 9/28/76, prepared by Morrison
Associates, Inc. , which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to;
(2) . that Building Elevation Plan #7603, P-4, dated 10/11/76, prepared
by Morrison Associates, Inc. , which is hereby approved, shall be
adhered to;
(3) that Landscape Plan #7603, P-2, dated 9/28/76, prepared by Morrison
Associates, Inc. , which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to;
ti . (4) that all landscape materials installed on the site shall be maintained
in a healthy condition;
(5) that the landscape plan will designate, by name and size, the trees
16 presently located on the 6' strip of land between the south 'property
line and the offstreet parking lot; these trees to be undisturbed
and the property left in its natural state or these trees shall be
replaced with new plant materials of substantial size so as to provide
natural screening of the parking lot from view of the adjacent properties
located to the south; and
(6) Wentworth Avenue be improved with asphalt on the existing gravel base
• for a distant of approximately 300 ft. i.e. , from the most westerly
lane of Middlebelt Road to the entrance driveway of the Church site,
the final determination of the width resting with the Engineering
Division of the City of Livonia and that the Engineering Division of
the City indicate to the contractor whether or not open ditches on
each side of the road will be required.
For the following reasons:
' (1) the proposed use complies with Zoning Ordinance #543, Section 5.03(a) .
(2) the site has excess capacity to support the intended use, and
•
•
' (3) given the size_ of the site, the proposed use will not adversely affect
1 the surrounding uses of the area but will complement the adjacent
institutional and residential uses of the area.
4
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of. the above Public Hearing was sent to
s property owners within 500 feet, the petitioner and City Departments as
listed in the Proof of Service.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. I
II:: . k
*Mrs. Scurto entered the meeting at 9:45 p.m.
Mrs. Wisler, Secretary announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 76-11-2-21
by Al Green's on the Hill requesting waiver use approval to operate a Class
C Liquor License establishment within an existing building located. in the
Wonderland Shopping Center on the southwest corner of Plymouth and Middlebelt
Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 35.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in file regarding this petition?
Mr. Nagy: No correspondence
Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present?
. Ted Richman of the Kresco Corporation was present.
Mr. Andrew: Any questions from the Commission on this petition?
Mr. Scruggs: I just want to review Mr. Richman's petition. You are requesting to
i
have a Class C liquor 'license at your restaurant.
Mr. Richman: Yes, we will call it the Spaghetti Company, and we would like to have
a bar in the dining area, which restaurant is going to be in the south
portion of the existing Farmer Jack Supermarket.
Mr. Scruggs: Mr. Richman, are any of your other restaurants located within a shopping
Center, or are they free standing?
Mr. Richman: We have Archibald's, which is located in a combination shopping and
. . apartment structure - not a shopping center as you see here.
Mr. Andrew: What about the one in the Fisher Building?
• Mr. Richman: The Fisher Building is not considered a shopping center.
Mr. Andrew: If this request for a waiver use approval is granted, would there' be
a specific area within your restaurant where no liquor would be served?
Mr. Richman' There is no plan to that effect.
Mr. Andrew: Are there any more questions from either the audience or the Commission
of the petitioner?
There was no one else present wishing to be heard on this petition and Mr. Andrew,
Chairman declared the Public Hearing on this item closed.
1 On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Scurto it was
(It
ow
6251
RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 7,
or 1976 on Petition 76-11-2-21 by Al Green's on the Hill requesting waiver use
400 approval to operate a Class C liquor licensed establishment within an-
t, existing building located in the Wonderland Shopping Center on the southwest
-corner of Plymouth and Middlebelt Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 35,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 76-11-2-21 be denied for the following reasons:
(1) The Planning Commission, having determined to deny the waiver use petition
to locate within the same building a restaurant,, similarly determines
for the same reasons to deny the Class C Liquor License Use of the
subject building, and I
(2) the petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use
complies with Section 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Kluver, Scurto, Falk
NAYS: Friedrichs, DuBose, Scruggs, Andrew
ABSTAIN: Wisler
ABSENT: Zimmer
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the resolution fails for lack of support.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. DuBose, and adopted, it was
#12-247-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 7,
1976 on Petition 76-11-2-21 by Al Green's on the Hill requesting waiver use
approval to operate a Class C Liquor licensed establishment within an
existing building located in Wonderland Shopping Center on the southwest
corner of Plymouth and Middlebelt Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 35,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 76-11-2x21 be approved for the following reasons:
(I) the proposed use is a natural adjunct to the principal use of the
proposed restaurant,
(2) the site and building have the capacity to support the intended use, and
(3) the proposed use will not adversely affect the surrounding uses of the
area but would provide for a complementary use.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was sent to property
owners within 500 feet, the 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, Scruggs, Andrew
NAYS: Kluver, Scurto, Falk
filt • ABSTAIN: Wisler
ABSENT: Zimmer
Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the motion is carried and -the foregoing resolution adopted.
Petition 76-9-2-18 by John Maxwell
Mrs. Wisler announced the next item on the agenda as Restaurant
requesting waiver use approval to construct a Bonanza Family-Style
on. the north side of Plymouth Road between Merriman and Farmington Roads in the
Southeast 1 /4 of Sertinn 27.
6252
Mr. Andrew Mr. Nagy, any corresponde-ce in the file regarding the petition?
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from the City Fire Marshall, advising that aside from
. 7 ,
41::
the obvious traffic problems, access would be OK. Letter continues
questioning type of gas to be used, as well as location of tank if
propane would be the type. Also, letter from the Police Department,
indicating effect of traffic congestion at the site. However, with
expected opening of I-96 sometime in 1977, a great deal of traffic
may be diverted away from this area. Letter from Bureau of Inspection,
advising no' deficiencies noted. Letter from Engineering seeing no
. engineering problems connected with proposal. Also, we .have a letter
from Bud W. Grace, 31480 Myrna, who owns the restaurant adjacent to the
proposed site (Daly's Drive-In) , objecting to this petition, as well as
• a letter from .a Mrs. Alice Dunleavy, 11426 Arden, objection to the
petition. , Also, a letter from Barry •L. King, Attorney, representing
Mr. Bud Grace, objecting to the petition.
Mr. Falk: In Mr: Grace's letter, he mentioned 17 restaurants along Plymouth Road.
Did he mention what area specifically? ,
Mr. Nagy: He cites 17 restaurants between Farmington and Middlebelt Roads.
Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present?
Mr. Jerry Bielfield: , I represent Mr. John Maxwell who is the proposed user of this
Bonanza Intl. Inc. property. Mr. Maxwell proposed to operate this restaurant as
a local investment. With respect to the number of restaurants
li • along this thoroughfare, we do not. dispute the number. I am
sure that it would not be to our best interests to open such a
restaurant if we were not confident that we could be a success.
We do not intend to cut into the revenue of the adjacent facility.
We are proposing a family style restaurant, open between the hours
of 11:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. We do not cater to carry-out which
perhaps accounts for 1/10 of 1% of our business. Main features
would be steak, chicken, lobster, salad bar, soup, and sandwiches.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Bielfield, tell us one more time - do you have an easement out to
Merriman Road? •
Mr. Bielfield: There is a recorded easement.
Mr. Andrew Mr. Bielfield, the Fire Marshal questioned whether there would be
natural gas or propane used for space heating? Can you clarify that
• situation?
Mr. Bielfield : We could use whatever gas is available at that time.
Mr. Andrew What about a combination of natural and propane?
Mr. Bielfield If natural gas is not sufficient, and all our propane has been burned,
we will use electricity where needed. Cost of electricity and gas is
coming so close together. Doesn't really make much difference.
Ict„
` Mr. Andrew Mr. Nagy, would you please indicate to this commission the number of
parking spaces allowed on this site as it relates to the number of
1 parking spaces required in the Zoning Ordinance?
625
Mr. Nagy: The 'Ordinance would allow no more than 160 seats in the proposed buildir
as there are only 80 spac.:s shown for customers, as well as five for
(41.11:
the employees, with a total of 85parkingspaces shown on the propoed
IL;
P p posed
site plan as submitted.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Bielfield, it has been my pleasure to eat at the Bonanza Restaurant
at Seven Mile and Farmington on maybe two or three different occasions.
My question has to do with the number of five employees. Unless thi'rn2.
has been a change in the method of operation, five employees is an
extremely low number of people serving the public.
Mr. Bielfield Many of the employees in the Bonanza Restaurants are part time. The
only full time people would be the Manager, and two Assistant Managers
who do not work simultaneously. Many of the youngsters are not old
enough to drive, and are therefore dropped off at work.
Mr. Andrew Mr. Bielfield, the Zoning Ordinance indicates that parking spaces mustoi
be allocated for each employee,' whether or not they drive.
Mr. Bielfield: I really don't know if there are ever more than five employees at any one
time.
Mr. Andrew: I would think that there would probably be about 10 people working
during the rush hour. I really questionwhether or not these plans
meet with the Zoning Ordinance as it relates to parking spaces. I see
two different questions not clearly answered here: . (1) the number of
parking spaces as related to the number of employees; and (2) I would
require a more definitive statement from the.Architect as to the type
of heating to be provided, and if it is propane gas, the location of tl
tank.
Mr. Falk: I don't see the relavency as to the source of their energy or whether
they have 10 seats or 90 seats or whether they employ 5 people. Who
are we to tell them how to run their business. Secondly, I know of
children who work at different restaurants around the city. My own
two children work where they are supposed to have parking spaces
provided, but they are automatically driven to work. We are creating
a problem here that is not right.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Falk, I am not trying to find fault with the proposed site. The
petition must meet the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
of the main requirements of the Zoning Ordinance is that there he
one parking space for each employee. I am simply trying to determine
from Mr. Bielfield whether or not in fact there are only five employe(.
on any one shift. Whether or not they drive a car is not important.
The Zoning Ordinance is quite clear - if he has 10 employees, he shout.
have 10 parking spaces. If he does not meet that part of the Zoning
Ordinance, the petition cannot be approved. They certainly had more than
five employees when I was there.
Mr. Falk: I resent the letter from the lawyer representing the fellow next door,
asking me not to approve the petition. I certainly hope we have more
reasons than the number of parking spaces to deny this man.. The letter
mentioned 17 restaurants along Plymouth Road. I didn't hear about all
these restaurants on Plymouth Road when they put up the Fonte d'Amour,
I feel that the fellow next door just doesn't want any competition right
next to him. If this petitioner meets the requirements listed in the
Ordinance, he should be allowed to go in there.
UlL
Mrs. Scurto: I have two very deep conc, mns. . First, during the past week it was
tit , brought to my attention tlat Bonanza Restaurants have a history of
fire hazards in their grease traps. I would like to ask Mr. Bielfield
if he knows anything about this because I• feel it is a real concern,
if there is any fire hazard.
4 Mr. Bielfield: There are 600 Bonanza Restaurants in the country, and I am fortunate to
be part owner of five; and I have never experienced any fire. My
insurance rates have never been increased for this reason. Mr. Maxwell
requires that the grease traps be cleaned every 30 days.
Mrs. Scurto: OK. Secondly, you must admit that there is an extreme amount of traffi,
in this area. During a 24 hour period in September of 1975, 45,000 vehicles
traveled east and west along Plymouth Road, and 25,000 went north and
south along Merriman. Personally, I would do everything I can to avoid
that particular corner. I really am not concerned about stealing busi;
from Daly's; but I am concerned about the traffic. Isn't there anythir
you can do to alleviate this problem?
Mr. Bielfield: I am not sure that we would particularly add to the traffic as it now
exists. In fact, we are hoping to take some of it and put it in our
parking lot during the day. Most of our restaurants are located on
heavily traveled arteries, and we don't look for traffic congestion
to help our business.
Mr. Andrew: Any more questions from the Commission?
Mrs. Wisler: I am wondering if it is necessary for him to get permanent curb cuts for
both driveways.
d
Mr. Nagy: Obtaining permission for curb cuts would have to come from the Wayne _„,,t
County Road Commission.
Mrs. Wisler: Mr. Bielfield, have you obtained permission for these curb cuts as yet?
Mr. Bielfield: I don't think this permission has been requested yet. We are here to
see whether or not we will be able to set up this restaurant.
Mrs. Wisler: I am very much concerned about the number of drive-ways entering from
Merriman and Plymouth. Many accidents occur because of turning traffic.
Is there any information about the number of curb cuts in that area?
Mr. Nagy: We can tell you the number of curb cuts there. (Mr. Nagy then itemized
each and every curb cut along both roads at that intersection) .
Mrs. Wisler: So you are saying twelve (12) curb cuts within a distance of how many
feet?
Mr. Nagy: Approximately 350 feet.
Mr. Kiuver: . Really, Mrs. Wisler, there are the same number of .curb cuts on every
corner.
3
t Mrs. Wisler: That may be true, but I think that Plymouth Road has been a great concern
for quite a number of years. I am very reluctant to encourage any more
.,.i curb cuts at that intersection. - ,
i,
, 6255
Mr. Andrew: Any further comments?
ItMr. Falk: In all fairness to the petitioner, I am just wondering about all this:
4, dili
concern about curb cuts - we haven't looked at curb cuts this much for
the last five years.
lio Mr. Andrew: Mr. Falk, please rephrase your comment.
Mr. Falk: Why are we counting curb cuts at this particular intersection?
Mrs. Wisler: Mr. Falk, you know very well that there is a lot of turning movement
in and out of the stores along Plymouth Road. This is not a new
concern. The City has put in larger parking lots trying to avoid
the high number of accidents in that area. This is a concern that we
have had for a long time.
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience' who could indicate for the record
who is the owner of this propetty in question?
Mr. Bielfield: Yes, Bonanza International- Nebraska Division - owns this piece of
property.
Mr. Andrew: Any further comments from the audience?
Barry King: Yes, I am the lawyer who wrote the letter representing Mr. Bud Grace.
In response to Mr. Falk's question, we sent copies of this letter to
4 all the Planning Commissioners, but we did not mean to create any
pre-judgement.
1"- Mr. Falk: Mr. King, basically, why is Mr. Daly objecting to this new restaurant?
Mr. King: I would have to agree with Mr. Bielfield that this new restaurant will
takeaway some of our business. Our concern is partly economical.
However, we also feel that certain controls should be implemented
regarding the development of this area.
Mr. Falk: This seems to be a bonafide reason. But I also feel that each petition
presented to this Commission should be considered on its own individual
merits.
Mr. Scruggs: I have eaten at the Bonanza Restaurant in Dearborn, and have found it
very enjoyable - cheap meal but a good one. But there is no question
that traffic is going to be a problem here. Also, the thing that
bothers me the most is having two restaurants standing side by side.
Take a look at the restaurants along Ford Road - one right after the
other. I would say that there is something wrong here regarding the
planning of facilities in that area. It is not in the spirit of the
Zoning Ordinance or with good planning to have restaurants one right
after the other.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto and seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, it was
ti RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 7,
1976 on Petition 76-9-2-18 by John Maxwell requesting waiver use approval
4 to construct a Bonanza Family-Style Restaurant on the north side of Plymouth
Road between Merriman and Farmington Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 27,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition 76-9-2-18
be tabled for the following reasons:
(1) More clarification is needed regarding the type of heating to
be installed;
(2) some settlement should be arrived at regarding number of parking
spaces;
(3) to allow a further investigation regarding excessive traffic
time in the area.
A roll call vote resulted in the following:
AYES: Scurto, Friedrichs, Andrew
NAYS: Kluver, DuBose, Falk, Scruggs, Wisler
ABSENT: Zimmer
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the resolution fails for lack of support.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver and seconded by Mr. Falk, and adopted, it was
#12-248-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 7,
1976 on Petition 76-9-2-18 by John Maxwell requesting waiver use approval
to construct a Bonanza Family-Style Restaurant on the north side of Plymouth
• Road between Merriman and Farmington Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section
27, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that such Petition 76-9-2-18 be denied for the following reasons:
(1) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed
use complies with Section 19.06, General Waiver Requirements, of
Zoning Ordinance #543, particularly with respect to showing that
the site of the proposed use has sufficient size and capacity that
it would be in harmony with the appropriate and orderly development
of the surrounding area, and that the location and size of the proposed
use, the nature and intensity of the principal use, and the site
layout and its relation to streets giving access to it, will be such
that traffic to and from the use and assembly of persons in connection
with the use, will be convenient and not be unduly hazardous nor
conflict with the normal traffic of the neighborhood.
(2) The proposed use is not in accord with the spirit and purpose of this
Ordinance and is inconsistent with andcontrary to the objectives sought
to be accomplished by this Ordinance and principles of sound planning
because this proposed use represents the fifth waiver use proposed
to be located within this intersection area of Merriman and Plymouth
Roads and waiver uses by their very nature have such special problems
that are associated with their activity that they require special
conditions and special attention.
(3) The proposed use is located near the intersection of two major thoroughfar
which have exhibited very high volumes of traffic as evidenced by Wayne
County traffic counts dated September 4 and 5, 1976 caused by a variety
of commercial and industrial establishments being located along both
thoroughfares in addition to the three gas stations and a 'restaurant
presently located at the intersection, a condition only to be aggravated
by the addition of the proposed use.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Kluver, Friedrichs, Fal':, Scruggs, Wisler
NAYS: DuBose, Scurto, Andrew
ABSENT: Zimmer
4
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
He then informed Mr. Bielfield that he has 10 days in which to appeal the decision to
the City Council.
Mrs. wislerannounced the next item on the agenda Petition 76-11-6-11 by the City
Planning Commission pursuant to Council Resolution #809-76 to amend Section
11.03(a) and 30.03(b) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the
City of Livonia, so as to require that all gas stations shall provide at
least one full service gasoline pump island for senior citizens, the sick
or handicapped and such other persons in the community as may be in need of
this service.
Mr. Andrew: This, is a petition by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Council
Resolution to amend the Zoning Ordinance so as to provide at least
one full service gasoline pump island at each gas station for Senior
Citizens, the sick or handicapped, and any such other persons in the
community who may be in need of such service. Is there anyone in the
audience who wishes to speak either for or against this petition?
Frank Hand: We are here representing the Livonia Chamber of Commerce, and we recognize
15778 Riverside that this Commission is holding this Public Hearing because the petition
was referred by the City Council. We realize that you did not originate
the petition, but that you are required to hear it. What we would like
to do is present some information that we have accumulated, and also
request some information. No. 1 - we would like to know what information
you received from the City Council with respect to this resolution.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Hand, this Commission received a copy of the resolution.
Mr. Hand: You receivedno communication from the handicapped requesting such a
service? Has the Commission conducted any surveys regarding the situation"
Mr. Andrew: The Planning Staff did conduct a survey of service stations as of
November 1, 1976. We will be happy to supply anyone with that survey.
At a study meeting we had a few weeks ago, we did have representatives
of the Marathon Oil Company present, who appeared on a more or less
informal basis to discuss with us their feelings why this ordinance should
not be adopted.
Mr. Hand: Were any pertinent facts brought out at that meeting about the lack
of service to handicapped or disabled people?
Mr. Andrew: To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Hand, no.
Mr. Hand: The Livonia Chamber of Commerce conducted a similar survey, and we would
like to present the results of that survey now. The Chamber feels that su
an amendment to the Ordinance would be an infringement on our free
enterprise system. I am very surprised that the City Council did not
conduct some survey before initiating this kind of resolution. It
tdo places us in a very diffcult position. So we would like to present our
feelings on this at this time.
4110 Ray Lech, Executive Director of the Livonia Chamber of Commerce, distributed copies of
the Chamber's survey to all members.
6258
•
Ray Lech: . You will note that most CC the information was obtained over the phone.
Some of the information is attached to the survey reflecting the
opinions of 57 service station operators who responded to the questions.
Mr. Falk: I am in complete support with what I see on this survey. I have had
lioa disability since the war, and I have never been refused extra service
at any station I have gone to. We cannot tell these service station
people how they are to run their business. The gasoline business is
a strict competitive business. Let people shop for gas where they
want. I don't think anyone would be turned down if they were to ask
for help.
Ray LeCH. On the survey, you will find on the extreme right hand side, a list of
comments made by the owners and operators of the 57 stations surveyed.
They also list their intentions regarding long-range plans.
Mildred Wieland:The Chamber says they did a study - I would like to know just how
Commission on many senior citizens or handicapped persons they surveyed. They should
Aging insist that all stations should be full service. I talked with some
of the people on my Commission, and I asked how many would be willing
to pump their own gas. One gentleman said he pulled into one of those
self serve stations, and he didn't even know how to get the gas into
the car. There are many more elderly women around today than men, and
not one in 100 said she would want•to pump her own gas. Some provision
should be made for people who are handicapped. People like that have
a hard time pumping their own gas. Strongly against self service gas
stations. I may be wrong on my theories, but I think the trend is towel
self-service stations. I know of many senior citizens who are against
them.
Ilo Mrs. Wisler: Mildred, have you had any senior citizens in your group complain
that they have had difficulty in obtaining service at a self-service
station?
Mrs. Wieland Senior citizens do not stop at self-service stations. I am concerned
that this is a trend, and that we are going to have to look for miles
in order to find a station offering full service.
Mr. Kluver: Just one comment - there are only six (6) self-service stations in the
City out of 74 open stations. That is less than 10%.
Jack Bingham: I don't know if Mrs. Wieland knows it, but there is a P-A system installe
36375 Five Mile out to all islands of gas stations. That is required by law. Perhaps
the people should obtain some sort of identification card so we will knos
that they need help.
Lewis Shute: I have a statement to read from my company opposing the amendment to yo
Ashland Pet. local ordinance. (He then proceeded to read aloud the two page letter)
Company That is the statement and I would like to add further that at our
location in this area on Plymouth Road, we do have the intercom system
where if the occasion comes up where a handicapped person lets us know
that he wants help, he will receive that help any time.
•
. Mr. Gaberman: I attended the brief info' nal study session held a couple of weeks aq,.
Attorney for Basically, I just want to add. the trend toward self-service stations is
tMarathon Oil not really new. They have had this type of service for quite some time
on the West Coast. This is a new type of merchandising, and has saved us
a considerable number of dollars. Supermarkets are not required to
carry every single item of food products on their shelves - service
stations should not be compelled to provide every single type of. service.
Jack Burdette: Boron Oil only has three stations in Livonia. None of them are self
36420 Ladywood serve, but I feel that this has little or no effect on our business.
Retail Sales But I couldn't just sit here and not take a stand on this question.
Mgr. of Boron With regard to the amendment to the Ordinance, I personally challenge
Oil Co. the legality of it on the grounds that there is a definite segment of
the community to be served.
Mr. Burdette indicated his and his company's opposition to the
amendment to the ordinance, based on the fact that people in Livonia
will travel to neighboring communities in order to buy gasoline at
. cheaper prices, which he feels is the major reason for the success
of these self-service stations and those members of the community who
desire full service, full service stations are available and he mentioned
his own company's. He did not feel that self-service stations are athreat
but rather just another example of fair merchandising in a competitive
market.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard on this petition, Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on this item closed.
ILOn a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted, it was
#12-249-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to- a Public Hearing having been hd.ld on December 7, •
1976 on Petition 76-11-6-11 by the City Planning Commission pursuant to
Council Resolution #809-76 to amend Section 11.03(a) and 30.03(b) of Ordinance
#543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, so as to require that all
gas stations shall provide at least one full service gasoline pump island for
senior citizens, the sick or handicapped and such other persons in the
community as may be in need of this service, the City Planning Commission
• does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 76-11-6-11 be
denied for the following reasons:
(1) There is no need to amend the Ordinance to provide this further
regulation to the standards of the Ordinance as they relate togasoline
service stations as to do so would eliminate from the community the
full self-service type of station thereby denying the citizenry of
Livonia the economic benefit such facilities offer.
(2) A survey of the community shows that the public is adequately being
served by full-service stations so that no one person is being incon-
venienced or denied the opportunity to seek full service should they
i desire it.
(3) The standards of Zoning Ordinance #543, Section 11.03, Waiver Uses,
Subparagraph (a) and Section 30.03, Subparagraph (b) , already provides
i E for adequate controls to ensure that gasoline service to the public
is adequately reviewed, regulated and controlled.
• 6260
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 11/18/76,
4 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.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Wisler announced the next item on the agenda Petition 76-11-2-22 by Arby's, Inc.
requesting waiver use approval to expand an existing business operation
located on the east side of Middlebelt Road, south of Dardenella in the
• Northwest 1/4 of Section 12.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding the petition?
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from the Engineering Division, stating no engineering
problems connected with proposal.
Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present? •
Henry Landgraff: We are proposing to put up a new style restaurant at this location.
Rep. of Arby's It's time we went to a full sit-down restaurant.
Youngstown,Ohio
Mr. Andrew: Are you talking about replacing the present facility?
Mr. Landgraff: We would like to remodel the physical appearance.
Mr. Andrew. At the study meeting last week, the Commission had several questions.
One had to do with the walkway 20 feet wide immediately in front of the
planned building. I see now this has been reduced to eleven feet.
lio Mr. Nagy: Landscaping will replace the area where the concrete was previously
planned.
Mr. Andrew: What about the proposed wall sign on the North elevation?
Mr., Landgraff: That is a plastic sign with a light behind it - strictly allows sign to
show up during the dark.
Mr. Andrew: Any particular difficulties if we didn't approve the sign?
Mr. Landgraff: Would really like to have the sign.
Mr. Andrew: Any other questions from the Commission?
Mr. Kluver: I would like to compliment your organization for the tremendous up-
grading of your present restaurant facility,
Mr. Andrew: Any other comments, either from the Commission or the audience:
There was no one else present wishing to be heard on this petition and Mr. Andrew,
lie
Chairman, declared the public hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. DuBose and unanimously adopted,
it was
;, 6261
#12-250-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a '.'ublic Hearing having been held on December 7,
1976 on Petition 76-11-2-22 by Arby's Inc., requesting waiver use approval
to remodel an existing restaurant located on the east side of Middlebelt
Road, south of Dardenella in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, the City
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
76-11-2-22 be approved subject to the following conditions:
(1) that Site,Plan #7528, Sheet Fp-2, revised 12/7/76, prepared by W':' ' '
Christian Riedel, Architect, which is hereby approved, shall be
adhered to;
(2) that Building Elevation Plan dated 9/17/76, Sheet A-3, prepared by
W. Christian Riedel, Architect, which is hereby approved, shall be
adhered to;
(3) that Landscape Plan, revised 12/7/76, prepared by Arby's Inter-
national, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and
(4) that all landscape materials as shown on the approved Landscape Plan
shall be installed on the site before issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the new addition and thereafter permanently maintained
in a healthy condition;
(5) that adequate lighting be installed on the north side of the building .
where needed, as concurred in by the Planning Department
t , •
for the following reasons:
(1) The proposal represents an upgrading of an existing restaurant
use and not the establishment of a new restaurant use for the
subject area.
460
(2) The plans submitted in connection with the proposal document a substantial
improvement in site layout, building architecture and site landscaping
so as to be in greater harmony with the surrounding uses of the area.
(3) The proposed use complies with Zoning Ordinance #543, Section 11.03(c) .
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was sent to
property owners within 500 feet, the petitioner 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 announced the next item on the agenda Petition 76-8-2-14 by Georgia A.
Gumas requesting waiver use approval to expand an existing business
operation located on the north side of Five Mile Road between Middlebelt
Road and Harrison in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in file regarding the petition?
Mr. Nagy: Letter from Engineering Division regarding vacating public alley, as
well as effect on ingress and egress to parking area. Also, letter
from Mr. W. E. Okerstrom, giving approval to business using area
behind store for parking purposes.
liMr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present?
Mr. Rodney Kropf: We have a small store here that was originally meant to be just
an ice cream store, but we have had people come in asking for a
hot dog or a sandwich, and there appears to be a market for this
type of operation in that area. We would like to be able to serve
people a hot dog, or a sandwich, or just a cup of coffee. As far
as the parking is concerned, we have the permission of the fellow
010 next door, Mr. Loeffler, to use his parking lot until the end of
the year. . However, since Mr. Loeffler wrote his letter', the Bureau
of Inspection wanted some:hing more definite from us regarding a
parking lot. We know there are other stores in Livonia that sell
food at a counter, such as Cloverdale, but we don't want to
far. During the summer we were selling a lot of ice cream, but
that business has fallen way down now. All our merchandise is
strictly fresh, and we have aI ut 50 seats in the location. Whatever
parking is necessary, Mr. Okerstrom has consented to rent us his
property in order 'to meet your requirements. ,
•
Mr. Andrew: I understand that Mr. Okerstom is the owner of all this property?
Does the lease covering the building and the parking run concurrent?
Do they both expire at the same time?
Mr. Kropf: Yes, they do.
Mr. Andrew: Any questions from the Commission?
Mr. Scruggs: I have been in your Soda Saloon, and feel that it is a very fine
operation, and I would like to see it continue. The only problem
i . here is that you must comply with the local ordinance. Parking is
one of the problem here. . What kind of a parking lot can you get
by with at a minimum? I feel that it must have a hard surface.
co Mr. Kropf: This time of the year, nothing can be done, but in the spring
provisions will be made to install adequate parking. Loeffler
Hardware has been used. People use his parking and it is true
that not all our seats are filled at the same time.
Mr. Scruggs: But you must comply with the ordinance.
Mr. Kropf: Since we are only renting this parking area, we cannot tell you
• definitely how it will be improved, but why can't you allow us to
maintain this gravel lot temporarily for a year and see how it
works out? We will completely surface it so that it will not be
dusty. I can tell you right now that not too many people are coming
in right now, but we will try to comply with the code.
Mrs. Scurto: As you can see, my family and I are large supporters of your business,
but as in the case of any business establishment certain obligations
have to be met. The small businessman still has to meet certain codes,
and I would like an opportunity to go over some of these things and
suggest that we table this item.
Mr. Kropf: Have no objections to that suggestion.
Mr. Okerstrom: What would be the object of a study meeting?
I i
Mr. Andrew: We have a couple of concerns yet to be considered; (1) letter from
Engineering regarding tilt: vacating of the public alley, as well as
the ingress and egress provisons, (2) the lighting of the parking
lot, and (3) what other buildings might encroach on the parking lot?.
u10.1
Mr. Okerstrom: The parking lot is ex'. remely hard at this time, and Mrs. Gumas
has indicated feasible ingress and egress into that parking area.
Mr. Andrew: I would still like to table this item until next Tuesday. Let the
man continue with his business, while we review the parking and
lighting situations, as well as the site plan.
There was no one else wishing to be heard on this petition and Mr. Andrew, Chairman
declared the Public Hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted, it was
#12-251-76 RESOLVED THAT; pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 7,
1976 on Petition 76-8-2-14 by Georgia A. Gumas requesting waiver use approval
to expand an existing business operation located on the north side of
Five Mile Road between Middlebelt Road and Harrison in the Southwest 1/4
of Section 13, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table
Petition 76-8-2-14 until the Special Meeting to be conducted on December 14,
1976.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above Public Hearing was sent to
property owners within 500 feet, the petitioner and City Departments
as listed in the Proof of Service.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted, it was
#12-252-76 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Petition 76-11-8-28P as submitted by Dembs-Roth
Management Company requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58
of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance, as amended by Ordinance #988,
submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a furniture store
on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Bretton and Morlock in Section 1,
the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 76-11-8-2s
until the Study Meeting to be 'conducted on December 14, 1976.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mr. Kluver, and unanimously adopted,. it was
#12-253-76 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 76-12-8-29P by M.A.Boggio .
Associates requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58
in connection with a proposal to construct a medical clinic on the east side
of Levan between Five Mile Road and Roycroft in Section 17, subject to the
following conditions:
(1) that the Site Plan prepared by Michael A. Boggio Associates, Architects
labled Sheet #1, revised 12/6/76, which is hereby approved, shall be
adhered to;
(2) that the Building Elevations as shown on Sheet #3, prepared by Michael
A. Boggio Associates, Architects, revised 12/6/76, which are hereby
approved, shall be adhered to;
, 6264 .
•
(3) that the landscaping as shown on Sheets 1 & 2, dated 12/6/76, by
Michael A. Boggier Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved,
' shall be adhered to; and
a
(4) the approved landscaping shall be installed before the issuance of a
1111110 Certificate of Occupancy for the building and thereafter permanently
maintained in a healthy condition.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Scruggs, seconded by Mr. DuBose, and unanimously adopted, it
was
#12-254-76 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 73-7-8-33P by Donald
Freed & Associates requesting approval of all plans required by Section
18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a one-story
medical office building on the south side of Eight Mile Road between
Brentwood and Angling in Section 1, subject to the following conditions: .
•
(1) that Site Plan #1039, Sheet #a, as revised 12/3/76, prepared by Donald
Freed & Associates, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to;
and further this approval shall supersede all plans as previously
approved by the Planning Commission in Resolution #5-74-76;
(2) that Landscape Plan #1039, Sheet #d, as revised 12/3/76, prepared by
Donald Freed and Associates, which is hereby approved, shall be
.adhered to;
(3) that Building ElevationPlan #1039, Sheet #c, as revised 12/3/76,
prepared by Donald Freed and Associates, which is hereby approved,
• shall be adhered to; and
(4) that all landscape materials as shown on the approved landscape
plan shall be installed on the site before issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy. and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy
condition. .
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr'. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted, it was
#12-255-76 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 314th Special Meeting held by the City
Planning Commission on November 30, 1976 are hereby approved.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted, it was
#12-256-76 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Final
Plat for the Sheffield Subdivision proposed to be located at the northeast
corner of Wayne Road and Curtis Road in Section 9, for the following reasons:
' (I) The Final Plat conforms to the previously approved Preliminary Plat.
t; (2) The Engineering Division recommends approval of the Final Plat.
(3) The Final Plat conforms to the Subdivision Rules and Regulations
of the Citx. of Livonia and the R-4 Zoning District regulationsof
0
,,. •J i b265
. (4) All of the financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor
i
have been satisfied.
J
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
1
4100 On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, it was
#12-257-76 RESOLVED that, the City of Livonia Planning Commission hold an election ,
of Officers of the Planning Commission for the year beginning January 1, 1977,
to wit: Chairman, Vice Chairman and Secretary.
Nominations were made, votes cast and the following members of the City Planning Commission
were duly declared elected to said offices:
Chairman Daniel R. Andrew .
Vice Chairman William F. Scruggs
Secretary Esther M. Friedrichs
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 326th Regular Meeting and
Public Hearing held by the City Planning 'Commission on Tuesday, December 7, 1976 was •
adjourned at 12:55 a.m. Wednesday, December 8, 1976.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
•
Suz.n e T. Wisler, Secretary
; i
ATTEST: / c
L
Daniel R. ndrew, Chairman