HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1977-06-07 6412
MINUTES OF THE 336th REGULAR MEETING
AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LIVONIA
4
On Tuesday, June 7, 1977, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia, held
its 336th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33001 Five
Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, called the Regular Meeting and Public Hearings to
order at 8:10 p.m. with approximately 60 interested persons in the audience.
Members Present: Daniel R. Andrew William Scruggs Esther Friedrichs
Judith Scurto Joseph J. Falk Jerome Zimmer
Suzanne Wisler Herman Kluver
William Dubose
Messrs. John J. Nagy, City Planning Director; h G Shane, Assistant City Planning
Director; Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV; and David Stoker, Assistant City Attorney
also were present.
Mr. Andrew then informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda
involves a question of vacating or rezoning any property, this Commission only
makes a recommendation to the City Council, and the City Council - after holding
their own Public Hearing - makes the final determination as to whether a petition
is approved or denied; and if a petition for a waiver use request or site plan
is denied, the petitioner then has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the
1[410 Council.
Mr. Andrew: Before we begin tonight's meeting, I want to publicly say a few
words about one of the Planning Commissioners who has chosen not
to seek reappointment to the Planning Commission, but instead will
conclude his term of office with the adjournment of tonight's
meeting. Bill Scruggs, our Vice-Chairman, has ably served this
Commission and this community since March, 1974. During this time
Bill's analytical ability, his objective approach to petitions
and his dedication to the job have earned him the gratitude of
not only the Commission, but also the professional planning staff
and many petitioners.
Bill, on behalf of all of us, thank you for having participated
in the democractic process, and for having been a member of this
Commission. We will miss you.
Mr. Scruggs then remarked that he had truly enjoyed serving on the Planning
Commission, finding it a marvelous, exciting experience in watching local government
in action.
Mrs. Friedrichs, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda Petition 77-4-2-7
by Jeanne Hildebrandt, General Manager of the Livonia Mall, requesting
waiver use approval to construct a Denny's Restauranton the south-
west corner of the parking lot of the Livonia Mall Shopping Center
located on the northwest corner of Seven Mile and Middlebelt Roads
i+
Mr. Andrew:
in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 2.
Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding the petition?
Mr. Nagy: Yes, we have a letter dated June 1, •1977 as follows:
This is in reply to your correspondence of May 23, 1977 addressed
to Mr. B.L.Hutchins. As the new President of the Hillcrest Civic
Association, many residents are totally against this petition to
N i
6413
construct a new Denny's Restaurant in the Livonia Mall Shopping
Center, signed Eddie E. Salem.
Mr. Andrew: The Hillcrest Civic Association, is it located southeast of this
particular location?
Mr. Nagy: No, they are located north of Seven Mile Road, west of Purlingbrook.
Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present?
J.Hildebrandt: Yes, I am the General Manager of the Livonia Mall Shopping Center.
Mr. Andrew: Jeanne, as I see it, one of the major problems is the location of the
proposed restaurant as it relates to the sanitary sewer in that area.
I am also wondering based on the preliminary plan does the proposed
building encroach onto that easement?
J.Hildebrandt: Currently, we have just a ,preliminay plan and it shows that the
restaurant will be right on top of the line. Final plans are being
drawn up now which should correct that situation.
Mr. Andrew: Another problem is the parking. I see where 80 parking spaces would
be required, but only 38 are shown plus the common parking area.
Can the common parking area of the Mall satisfy the Ordinance
requirements as they relate to the restaurant?
Mr. Nagy: It can, assuming that there is surplus off-street parking space for
the Mall. Surplus can be applied to the restaurant.
Mr. Andrew: Is there sufficient parking area in the Mall Shopping Center lot
that will meet or exceed the Ordinance requirements if this restaurant
should be approved?
Mr. Nagy: Based upon an earlier review when a Rustler's Restaurant was proposed
there is not any surplus parking within the Livonia Mall Shopping
Center to satisfy the parking needs for this. restaurant.
Mr. Andrew: Any comments or questions?
Larry Argenio: My question concerns your opinion as to the capacity of existing
Real Estate parking requirements for the proposed restaurant. In your opinion,
Agent for there is not enough parking based on the specific number of spaces
Denny's available or land area.
Mr. Nagy: Based on an analysis of the floor area of the entire Livonia Mall
Shopping Center, and counting the number of existing parking spaces,
there is a net deficiency.
Mr. Argenio: I am concerned with the determination of the original approval of
the Livonia Mall showing this particular area as a future building
site.
Mr. Andrew: When was this?
6414
Mr. Nagy: The original Mall plans were approved in 1964. Plans for approval
of restaurant usage were taken out of Permitted Uses of C-2 Districts
1969. Now subject to Waiver Use procedures. Must come back for
Waiver Use approval in a C-2 District. There is absolutely no prior
approval of restaurant usage based on original Shopping Center plans.
Jeanne We will file a letter either tomorrow or Thursday to bring this matter
Hildebrandt: before the Zoning Board of Appeals to waive the parking deficiency.
Mr. Andrew: Perhaps this matter should be tabled waiting on the outcome of the
decision before the Zoning Board of Appeals, and also to provide
Denny's, Inc. with sufficient time to come up with accurate site
plans in order for us to make a good judgement of the entire matter.
Is there any one else in the audience wishing to speak on this matter?
Donald Zapotny: I just bought a lot nearby and would like to know how big the
8215 Hazelton lot is that they want to build this restaurant on?
Dearborn Hghts.
Mr. Andrew: The lot before us is 200 feet square, 40 thousand square feet,
just a little less than an acre.
Mr.Zapotny: How close will the restaurant be to the adjoining property lines?
Mr. Andrew: We do not have the site plans at this time, but there are certain
1[0 set back requirments outlinalin our Ordinance relative to proximity
to adjoining property lines.
There was no one else wishing to speak further on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared
the Public Hearing on Petition 77-4-2-7 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Zimmer and adopted, it was
#6-113-77 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 7,
1977 on Petition 77-4-2-7 as submitted by Jeanne Hhldebrandt, General
Manager of the Livonia Mall, requesting waiver use approval to construct
a Denny's Restaurant on the southwest corner of the parking lot of the
Livonia Mall Shopping Center located on the northwest corner of Seven
Mile and Middlebelt Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 2, the City
Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 77-4-2-7
until the Study Meeting scheduled to be conducted on July 19, 1977.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Friedrichs, DuBose, Zimmer, Scurto, Falk, Scruggs, Andrew
NAYS: Kluver, Wisler
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mrs. Friedrichs announced the next item on the agenda Petition 77-5-2-8 by Diehl &
IL Diehl, Architects for St. Edith Parish, requesting waiver use approval
to construct an addition to the existing church facility located south of
Five Mile Road between Blue Skies and Newburgh Road in the Northeast 1/4
of Section 19.
1
6417
(2) The site has the capacity to support the Church addition.
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 declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Friedrichs announced the next item on the agenda is Petiton 77-5-1-12 by
Plymouth Investment. Company requesting to rezone property located
on the east side of Gill Road between Seven and Eight Mile Roads in
the Southeast 1/4 of Section 4, from RUFA to R-2.
Mr. Andrew: John, is there any correspondence in the file regarding the petition?
Mr. Nagy: Yes, we have a letter from the Engineering Division indicating that
the development of subject zoning would be predicated upon the
installation of a sanitary sewer.
Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present?
Gilbert Franklin: These parcels outlined in black are part of the holdings of the
petitioner, which also includes other areas designated as R-1.
Also includes parcels to the west of Windridge Village, which is
in itself now in the platting process. This entire group is
scheduled to become a single-family..residential subdivision. The lot
o
sizes meet the requirements of an R-2 district - 70' wide rather
than 60' . It is our hope to continue these lot sizes throughout the
entire parcel. I also would ' ike to call to the attention of the
Planning Commission that there is not only R-1 zoning adjacent but
but to the east there is R-7, C-2 and C-1 zoning. We are trying
to create some homogeneous classification within the section, and
are hopeful that tFie R-2 zoning will create some unity with connecting
residential subdivisions with a consistency in the size of the lots
such as those in Windridge Village which are 70' wide.
Mr. Andrew: Would you indicate as to whether or not you own or control the property
on the east and outlined by the dark yellow line?
Mr. Franklin: We have acquired that parcel and must go before the City Council
with a request for that to be rezoned R-2. Expect to have some word
within two weeks.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Franklin you also own property to the west of the area outlinedin
yellow indicated in an R-1 district.
Mr. Franklin: Yes.
Mr. Andrew: Any questions from the Commission?
Mr. Scruggs: One of the problems that concerns me is the continuation of R-2 zoning
1[1, on RUF lots. Has there ever been any consideration to develop any
part of the land into larger R-3 type of lots?
Mr.Franklin: We were of the opinion that Gill Road would be the dividing line
between R-2 and R-3.
6415
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding the petition?
1[0 Mr. Nagy: Yes, we have a letter from the Chief Building Inspector indicating
no objection to the proposed addition, as well as memos from the
City Engineer and the Fire Marshall advising no objections to project.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Diehl, did you wish to speak on this petition?
Gerald Diehl: Yes, I am here with Father Van and we would like to present a
rendering of the proposed Church addition. This will be extending
to the south, and the building materials used in the new Church
will be the same as those in the existing building. This new
addition will become the permanent Church, and the existing Church
will be developed into meeting rooms, as well as a portion will be
used for occasional overflow. The permanent Church will seat 610
people, with the overflow in the meeting room accommodating another
300. We have provided parking spaces on a one-to-three basis,
and the building itself should stand no more than 13' high, with the
center portion - a spire - possibly rising about 30' . There will
be no air conditioning units on the roof.
Mr. Andrew: The elevation - stone or brick?
Mr. Diehi: It will be brick to match the existing building. We will be tying
in with the existing building, and will be using the same brick
as is there now.
Mr. Andrew: This Commission has expressed a modest concern as to wheter or not
IL you would be able to complete the revised parking lot - the enlarged
parking lot — prior to the time you receive a Certificate of Occupancy
for the new church.
Mr. Diehl: Yes, I suppose it could be done - might be a little inconvenient
because of the construction of the Senior Citizens .Center. But a
path could be isolated for the trucks. I know how concerned you are
about the traffic in this area.
Mr. Andrew: Any comments from the Commission?
Mr. Zimmer: Does the entrance door face north?
Mr. Diehl: The main entrance door angles to the north. There will be no
entrances along the south.
Mr. Zimmer: Looking directly north - I can see a door.
Mr. Diehl: It is on an angle facing northeast.
Mr. Andrew: Are there any comments from anyone on the Commission regarding the
parking?
Mr. Scruggs: I know that it would be very convenient and useful to having the
tparking area completed prior to the winter, but what about the
possibility of damage you would get with the truck. I would
not like to see that imposed on them. Certainly a proper sub-bsse
could be required but completing the black-top would be a little
difficult.
6416
Mrs. Wisler: Mr. Diehl, my concern is that there is going to be a lot of
construction going on - a lot of changes are going to be made.
1[0
Do you anticipate that the Church will be finished before the
Senior Citizens Center?
Mr. Diehl: No, it will be after the Senior Citizens Center. But I realize you
are concerned about safety on the playground. There will be pre-
cast bumpers forming a barrier to the playground. We will be
creating a separate road for traffic to get to the back of the lot.
It is possible to get material in without encroaching on the play-
ground.
Mrs. Friedrichs: I am very concerned about having an area especially designated
to assure the safety of the children. I drive over there on Tuesdays
• between 11:30 and 12:00 noon, and see many children scattered all
over the black top area, with trucks coming in and out, it will pose
a hazard.
Mr. Diehl: We will make that a part of our specifications - an area will be
set up aside to provide safety for the children. Safety is a big
thing with our contractors.
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or
against this petition?
There was no one else in the audience wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr.
Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 77-5-2-8 closed.
4
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Scruggs, and adopted it was
#6-114-77 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 7,
1977 on Petition 77-5-2-8 as submitted by Diehl and Diehl,, Architects
for St. Edith Parish, requesting waiver use approval to construct an
addition to the existing Church facility located south of Five Mile
Road between Blue Skies and Newburgh Road in the Northeast 1/4 of
Section 19, the. City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 77-5-2-8 be approved, subject to the following
conditions:
(1) that Site Plan dated May 6, 1977, prepared by Diehl and Diehl,
Architects, Inc., which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to.
(2) that Building Elevation Plan dated May 6, 1977 prepared by Diehl
& Diehl, Architects, Inc.,, which is hereby approved, shall be
adhered to;
(3) that all landscape materials as shown on the approved Site Plan
shall be installed before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, and
(4) that the parking lot need not be completely paved until construction
is completed, but that a designated area be set aside and striped
and bumpers provided for the safety of the parishioners and the
school children during the construction period, and a separate road
t be setup for trucks to service the Senior Citizens area to the west,
for the following reasons:
(1) The proposal complies with Section 4.03(a) of the Zoning Ordinance #543.
6418
Mr. Scruggs: Has there been any thought to having a separate subdivision at the
north end. Just where do we stop the R-1 zoning? We appreciate
you are putting R-2 lot sizes in the R-1 district, but what about
the other question - nothing has been considered?
Mr. Franklin: I suppose we could do some rethinking on this.
Mrs. Scurto: As I understand it, it is our responsibility to try and encourage
zoning and development that will be an asset to our community. I
feel as one Commissioner that this area is large enough to take
an R-3 zoning, even if it has to be developed into two different
parcels.
Mrs. Wisler: I too hope that the petitioner could consider larger lot sizes.
I appreciate the fact thatthis property does not either abut or '
come close to any high density development, and I feel that he is
doing a great service by planning the R-1 as R-2. However, this
property is very large, and I feel that we have to look at some kind of
increase in the lot size before we get to Gill Road. Larger lots
mean smaller total number of homes. The R-2 zoning should not go
across Gill Road at this time. In fact, it should be changed before
Gill Road.
Mr. Falk: I share the feelings of the other Commissioners. If we want R-3
zoning here, we should allow the petitioner some time to do some
rethinking. We might table this petition at this time to allow
him to come up with an R-3 zoning in this area. We should go
in with larger lots, set a pattern for that whole section.
4 Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or
against this petition?
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this petition, Mr. Andrew declared
the Public Hearing on Petition 77-5-1-12 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#6-115-77 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 7,
1977 on Petition 77-5-1-12 as submitted by the Plymouth Investment Company
requesting rezoning of property located on the east side of Gill Road
between Seven and Eight Mile Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 4, from
RUFA to R-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table
Petition 77-5-1-12 until the Study Meeting scheduled to be conducted on
June 14, 1977.
Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Friedrichs announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 77-5-3-5 by the
City Planning Commission to vacate the unimproved portion of Melvin Avenue
,right-of-way located between Fairfax and Bretton Roads in the Southeast
1/4 of Section 2.
Mr. Andrew: John, any correspondence in the file regarding the petition?
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from Mr. Siemert of Engineering regarding a street
light at Fairfax and Melvin. . .Then a follow-up letter from Engineering
supporting the vacating of Melvin Ave. Also, a communication from the
Detroit Edison Company indicating no objection as they have no equipment
involved in the area.
i i
6419
i Mr. Andrew: Any correspondence from either the Fire or Police Departments?
f Mr. Nagy: None.
Mr. Andrew: This is a petition initiated by the Planning Commission requesting
the vacating of Melvin Avenue between Fairfax and Bretton. Is there
anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this matter?
Ruth Johnson: We live just west of Melvin Avenue.. What do you mean - vacate?
30091 Fairfax
Mr. Andrew: This road will no longer be under public ownership. The City will
reserve an easement for utilities, attached to Lots #1 and #28.
Ruth Johnson: We live on lot #28.
Mr. Andrew: You will receive another 30' of land.
Mr. Johnson: You mean we can move the fence over, 30' away from where it is now.
Mr. Andrew: Yes, you will be acquiring another piece of land - 120' x 30' .
Mr. Johnson: 30' from where?
Mr. Nagy: 30'from the existing markers. There are probably markers in the
ILnortheast and southeast corners - you can move your fence 30 feet
from these markers, but no more than 30' .
Mr. and Mrs. Johnson: Thank you.
Mr. Andrew: Anyone else in the audience?
Shirley Drysdale: We are talking about a letter we received about having the
29001 Bretton road with 15'of our yard.
Mr. Andrew: Exactly where do you live?
Mrs. Drysdale: To the east - toward Middlebelt.
Mr. Nagy: The street will be abandoned for street purposes —revert back
to private use - will not allow road way for street purposes.
Mr.Drysdale: You mean there will not be a street?
Mr. Andrew: We are not taking the street - we are giving the unused street right-
of-way to you - there will be no road through there - will become a
nice yard area.
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this matter, Mr. Andrew declared
the Public Hearing on Petiton 77-5-3-5 closed.
ILOn a motion duly made by Mr. Scruggs, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted,
it was
#6-116-77 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 7,
1977 on Petition 77-5-3-5 as submitted by the City Planning Commission
tovacate the unimproved portion of Melvin Avenue right-of-way located
between Fairfax and Bretton Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 2,
6420
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 77-5-3-5 be approved subject to the retention of a full
width easement., for the following reasons:
4 (1) The vacating of Melvin Avenue in this area would afford more
protection for surrounding subdivisions from the potential
hazards of through traffic between Eight Mile Road on the north
and St. Martins on the south.
(2) The vacating of Melvin Avenue was recommended by the Division
of Engineering.
(3) The retention of this right-of-way would serve no useful purpose.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 5/23/77,
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 declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Friedrichs announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 77-5-6-6 initiated
by Council Resolution #131-77 pursuant to Section 23.01(a) of Ordinance
#543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, to amend Section 10.03
(g) and Section 11.03(r) to provide that the waiver use requirements with
respect to SDD Licenses in C-1 and C-2 Zoning District shall henceforth
be applicable to SDD Licensed uses already in existence.
Mr. Andrew: This is a petition by the Planning Commission, pursuant to a Council
Resolution, to amend the Zoning Ordinance with respect to SDD Licenses
in C-1 and C-2 Districts. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to
speak either for or against this petition?
There was no one wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public
Hearing on Petiton 77-5-6-6 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Scruggs, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#6-117-77 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 7,
1977 on Petition 77-5-6-6 as submitted by the City Planning Commission,
pursuant to Council Resolution #131-77 and pursuant to Section 23.01(a)
of Zoning Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia,
to amend Section 10.03(g) and Section 11.03(r) to provide that the waiver
use requirements with respect to SDD Licenses in C-1 and C-2 Zoning
Districts shall henceforth not be applicable to the SDD Licensed uses
already in existence, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 77-5-6-6 be approved for the following
reason:
(1) SDD Licenses approved prior to the adoption of an amendment
requiring waiver use approval for SDD Licenses would no longer
be non-conforming. •
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer under date of 5/23/77,
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company,
6421
•
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company,
Consumers Power Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof
of Service.
Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
4
Mrs. Friedrichs announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 77-5-6-7 by
the City Planning Commission on its own motion pursuant to Section
23.01(b) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of
Livonia, to amend Section 18.42 regarding radio towers in residential
districts.
•
Mr. Andrew: Which member of the Planning Department will make the presentation?
Mr. H G Shane, Assistant City Planning Director, read aloud to the audience Section
18.42 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Shane: To explain the new language, it simply means that in residentially
zoned districts radio towers may not exceed a height of 50 feet
unless written permission is obtained from at least two-thirds of
the property owners lying within the same distance as the height
of the tower. Also, all freestanding towers must be of a self-
supporting design.
is
Mr.. Andrew: This/a motion by the Planning Commission to amend that part of the
Zoning Ordinance as explained by Mr. Shane. Is there anyone in the
audience wishing to be heard on this subject. How does the Law
t-4 Department feel regarding this change in the language?
' David Stoker: The Law Department recommends this proposed amendment to the Zoning
Assistant City Ordinance.
Attorney
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this petition, Mr. Andrew declared
the Public Hearing closed on Petition 77-5-6-7.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#6-118-77 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 7,
1977 on Petition 77-5-6-7 as submitted by the City Planning Commission
on its own motion to amend Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the
City of Livonia, to amend Section 18.42 regarding radio towers in
residential districts, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 77-5-6-7 be approved for the following
reasons:
•
(1) The recommended language will provide the City with additional
controls regarding the location, height and nature of amateur
radio towers in residential districts.
(2) This amendment is recommended by the Department of Law.
t .
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published'
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 5/23/77,
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.
I
6422
Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Friedrichs announced the next item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat approval
for Brookwood West Subdivision proposed to be located on the east side
of Merriman Road, north of Six Mile Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 11.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition?
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter dated May 23, 1977 from the Bureau of Inspection indicating
no problems. . .etc. Also a letter dated May 27, 1977. from the Division
of Engineering listing three proposals suggested:
(1) easement be provided for extension of water main;
(2) since there will be no connection with Jeanine Avenue on the
east, street entering into subdivision requires new name; and
(3) adequate markings at entrance at the Merriman Road intersection.
We also have a communication dated June 2, 1977 from the Brookwood Civic
Association addressed to the Planning Commission indicating agreements
made with the Rouge Valley Construction Company, signed by Mr. J.A.
Subatch.
Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present?
R.J.Pastor: Yes.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Pastor, has this Civic Association seen the latest Preliminary Plat?
Mr. Pastor: There have been no changes. I am more than happy to let them get
up and speak.
J.A.Subatch: Appears to be the same as the original plan.
Mr. Pastor: We have kept our agreement with the Civic Association in this area,.
and have met all requirements as outlinelby the City.
Mr. Andrew: One of the things that bothers me is the lack of easement information
when these Preliminary Plats come before the Planning Commission. We
are looking at a 50' right-of-way with no easements shown. Is
Engineering satisfied with that?
Mr. Nagy: That was their intent. They indicated their only request was with
regard to the water line, as indicated in their letter.
Mr. Andrew: Isn't that a departure from the normal standard of procedure of the
Engineering Division?
Mr. Nagy: They merely make information available as to the easements until after
the developer has submitted his detailed engineering plans.
Mr. Andrew: I see a 12' strip along the north property line for Detroit Edison.
Is that a new easement by virtue of this plan?
Mr. Pastor: N9, it is not.
Mr. Andrew: Any questions from the Commission?
Mrs. Wisler: Did we receive any communication from the school about that street that
will cul-de-sac on their property?
le-
6423
Mr. Nagy: No comments from the Livonia Board of Education.
' Mrs. Wisler: Thattenti10'on pedestrianfencethawalkway coming theoutre ofnow?Jeanine Street - is it your
I
into t, or is it
Mr. Pastor: We will be putting in this walkway. No fence.
Mrs. Wisler: It appears thatit will end right in the middle of the road.
Mr. Pastor: It will abut the existing road - Jeanine.
Mrs. Wisler: A 10' easement - is that the size of a side walk?
Mr. Andrew: Standard size of sidewalk is 4' .
Mr. Nagy: Standard easement dedication for a public walkway would be 10' .
Mrs. Wisler: I am wondering if this is such a good idea. Won't this be a problem
for those people who live right next door on Jeanine or those people
who purchase in the new subdivision - what about motor bikes running
through there?
Mr. Pastor: This is a walkway for the children to get to the school. There are
some places in the City where these walkways are set right between
two houses.
ille4,0
Mrs. Scurto: If there is a Binder and Lark Civic Association, have we received
anything from them. They were the ones who protested the loudest
about this before.
Mr. Pastor:. It is my understanding that there is no Binder and Lark Civic
Association - just one large association in the area known as Brookwood.
Mr. Zimmer: This current plan - this was the only alternative - rather than going
through to Jeanine?
Mr. Pastor: Yes.
Mr. Zimmer: Is there any particular reason why the cul-de -sac doesn't go through?
Mr. Pastor: If the school so wanted it, the street could be extended.
Mrs. Friedrichs: Have you done anything about the entrance markers?
Mr. Pastor: We have no plans as yet.
Mrs. Friedrichs: Are entrance markers required on the plan?
Mr. Pastor: It is just a one-street subdivision.
to Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this petition?
I Mr. Wilkinson: Is it still the same distance from our road to the school property
31098 Bobrich as it was before -. 282' - or has that been changed?
4
Mr. Pastor: No change.
6424
David Woods: I just purchased a lot on Bobrich with woods in the back, and I am
II27730 Bucking- wondering how much back yard there will be between the house and
' ham and the back lot line?
J
Mr. Nagy: A minimum of 30 feet.
Mr. Pastor: Depends upon the design of the house. There might be a distance of
165 to 175 feet from the back of your house to the back of one of
these new houses.
Mr. Nagy: There must be at least 30' minimum rear yard in the R-2 District.
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this petition and Mr. Andrew
declared the Public Hearing on Preliminary Plat approval for Brookwood West Sub-
division closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Scruggs and unanimously adopted,
it was
#6-119-77 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to
waive the open space requirements of Section 9.09 and the entrance
marker requirement of Section 6.02 of the Subdivision Rules and
Regulations as they relate to Brookwood West Subdivision proposed to
be located on the east side of Merriman Road, north of Six Mile Road
in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 11, for the following reasons:
E (1) The general neighborhood area is already served with adequate
open space and park area given the Bryant Junior High School
site on the north and the City-owned park site to the west
across Merriman Road.
(2) The maintenance of such a small amount of space area would be a
burden to the City of Livonia.
Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Scruggs and unanimously adopted,
it was
#6-120-77 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 7,
1977 and pursuant to Section 4.04 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance
of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #714, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the Preliminary
Plat for Brookwood West Subdivision proposed to be located on the east
side. of Merriman Road, north of Six Mile Road in the Southwest 1/4 of
Section 11, be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The plat complies with the R-2 zoning district regulations which is
the classification that the subject lands are zoned, the Planning
Commission having determined that there are fixed, immovable
boundaries which prohibit meeting lot depth requirements.
(2) It complies with the Subdivision Rules and Regulations, the Planning
Commission having waived the openspace requirements of Section 9.09
4 and the entrance marker requirement of Section 6.02 by Resolution
#6-119-77, adopted on June 7, 1977.
6425
1!
(3) The Subdivision plan represents a good development solution for
a parcel of land of unusual proportions.
i
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 Department.
Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Friedrichs announced the nextitemon the agenda is Petition 77-4-1-10 by the
Vacri Land Development to rezone property located south of Six Mile
Road between Merriman Road and Oporto in the North 1/2 of Section 14,
from RUFA, RUFC & C-1 to R-2B.
Mr. Andrew then read aloud a letter he had received from George and Jacquelyn
Eisenstein, 16581 Henry Ruff.
Mr. Andrew requested the Planning Staff to show a map explaining the flood plain
in this area. Mr. Nagy, then commenced to do this, and Mr. Falk suggested that the
developer amend his petition to read that all lots south of Munger Avenue, as well
as those two (#16 and 17) facing south on Munger, be rezoned to an R-3 classification,
11 with the remaining land (north of Munger and west of the Henry Ruff line) be rezoned
4 to the R-2 Classification. Mr. Paccico agreed to this suggestion, promising to submit
a letter to that effect to the City Clerk the next day.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mr. Kluver and adopted, it was
#6-121-77 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 17,
1977 on Petition 77-4-1-10 as submitted by Vacri Land Development Company
to rezone property located south of Six Mile Road between Merriman Road
and Oporto in the North 1/2 of Section 14, from RUFA & C-1 to R-2-B, the
City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 77-4-1-10 be approved as amended by letter dated June 8, 1977
from Gabriele Paciocco, Vacri Land Development Company, and that the
north portion of the property be changed from RUFA & C-1 to R-2B, subject
property being legally described as:
RUFA, RUFC & C-1 to R2-B
The North 670 feet of the following described parcel of land; that part
of the N.W.1/4 of Section 14, T.1S. ,R.9E. , City of Livonia, Wayne County
Michigan, described as beginning at the N. 1/4 corner of Section 14, and
proceeding thence due West along the North line of said section 173.90 ft. ;
thence S. 00 11' W. 1,253.78 ft. ; thence N. 89° 15' E. 173.92 ft. to the
North and South 1/4 line of Section 14; thence N. 0° 11' E. along said line
1,251.50 ft. to the point of beginning, except the North 60.0 ft. thereof.
and
The North 380 feet of Lots 16 and 17, Livrance Estates Subdivision, as
recorded in Liber 67, Page 10, Wayne County _Records, said subdivision being
of part of the N.E. 1/4 of Section 14, T.1S. ,R9E. , Livonia Township (now
City of Livonia) , Wayne County, Michigan.
a
AND, that the portion of the property lying south of a line 150' north
of the centerline of Munger in its location east of Henry Ruff Road be
changed from RUFC to R-3B, subject property being legally described as:
6426
RUFC to R3-B
The South 522,64 feet of the following described parcel of land:
That part of the N.W. 1/4 of Section 14, T.1S. ,R9E. , City of Livonia,
Wayne County, Michigan, described as beginning at the N. 1/4 corner
of Section 14, and proceeding thence due West along the North line
of said section, 173.90 ft. ; thence S. 00 11' W. 1,253.78 ft; thence
N. 89° 15' E. 173.92 ft. to the North and South 1/4 line of Section
14; thence N. 0° 11' E. along said line 1,251.50 ft. to the point of
beginning, except the North 60.0 ft. thereof.
and
The South 120 feet of Lots 16 and 17, Livrance Estates Subdivision,
as recorded in Liber 67, Page 10, Wayne County Records, said sub-
division being of part of the N.E. 1/4 of Section 14, T.1S. ,R9E. ,
Livonia Township (now City of Livonia) , Wayne County Michigan.
for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed changes of zoning are consistent with the land use
goals and policies as adopted by the Planning Commission in that.
the gyoposed changes of zoning will encourage the orderly develop-
ment/under-developed lands in a residential section of the City.
(2) The proposed changes of zoning will further promote the orderly
residential growth and development of the area and thereby eliminate
the potential expansion of commercial or other nonresidential uses
within the area.
(3) The proposed changes of zoning will result in residential develop-
ment that would encourage the installation of needed public
improvements resulting in the upgrading of the residential area by
improvements to storm drains, street paving, and underground rather
than overhead utilities.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 4/28/77,
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: Scurto, Scruggs, Friedrichs, Wisler, Kluver, Falk, Andrew, DuBose
NAYS: Zimmer
Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#6-122-77 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 3, 1977
on Petition 77-3-3-3 by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Council
Resolution #277-77, to vacate that portion of the right-of-way of Henry
Ruff located west of Oporto, south of Six Mile Road in the Northeast. 1/4
of Section 14, the City-Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 77-3-3-3 be approved for the following reasons:
6427
(1) With this vacating, any potential for opening up Henry Ruff to
tie in the commercial- development with the local street of the
adjoining residential area would be removed.
(2) Henry Ruff is not needed in this location and the Master Thoroughare
Plan _does not propose its extension to Six Mile Road.
(3) With the removal of the dedicated right-of-way, the area will be
freed up from -this encumbrance which would facilitate a more
reasonable lot development.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 4/14/77
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company,
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Consumers Power Company, Michigan
Bell Telephone Company, and City Departments as listed in the Proof of
Service.
Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Kluver and adopted it was
#6-123-77 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 3,
1977 Petition 77-3-1-8 by the Republic Development Corporation to
11rezone property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between
f Haggerty Road and the I-275 Freeway in the West 1/2 of Section 18, from
M-1 to R-2, R-7 and C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 77-3-1-8 be denied for the following
reasons:
. (1) The rezoning petition is not in full compliance with the adopted
Future Land Use Plan.
•
(2) The proposed changes in zoning do not maximize on the unique
qualities of the site or the site's unique locational characteristics
particularly with respect to the community's border locational image.
(3) The proposed change in zoning will not promote the orderly growth
and development of the area and it would detract from the quality
of planning that has been provided in the neighboring development
of the area.
(4). The proposed change in zoning proposes an excessive amount of commercial
, zoning - more than is needed or desired for the area as based upon
the Future Land Use Plan and the Commericial Base Study.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 4/18/77,
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.
1[
A rollcall vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Kluver, DuBose, Scurto, Falk, Wisler, Andrew
NAYS: ,Friedrichs, Zimmer, Scruggs
6428
0 Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted approved, the 336th Regular
Meeting and Public Hearings held by the Livonia City Planning Commission on June 7,
1977 was adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Esther Friedrichs, Secretary
ATTEST:
Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman