Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1978-04-11 • 6677 MINUTES OF THE 351st REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, April 11, 1978, the Livonia City Planning Commission held its 351st Regular Meeting and Public Hearings at the Livonia City Hall, 33001, Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, called" the Regular Meeting and Public Hearing to order at 8:05 p.m. with approximately 80 interested citizens in the audience. MEMBERS PRESENT: Daniel R. Andrew Joseph J. Falk Suzanne H. Wisler Esther Friedrichs Judith Scurto Jerome W. Zimmer MEMBERS ABSENT: Herman Kluver (Company Business) R. Lee Morrow (Company Business) William DuBose (Resigned) Messrs. John J. Nagy, City Planning Director; H G Shane, Assistant Planning Director; Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV; and Robert M. Feinberg, Assistant City Attorney were also•present. Mr. Andrew then informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a question of rezoning, the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council, who in turn will hold their awn Public Hearing and then decide the question. If a petition involves a waiver use request, and the petition is denied by the Planning i Commission, the petitioner then has ten days in which to appeal for relief. Otherwise, the petition is terminated. On Preliminary Plat approvals, this Commission is the only body which holds a Public Hearing on the matter. This Commission forwards its recommendation to the City Council, who will then either accept or reject the Plat. 1140 Mr. Falk, Secretary, then announced the first item on the agenda Petition 78-1-1-4 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the north side of Curtis Avenue, east of Golfview in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 8, from R-3B and R-4B to P.L. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: No correspondence. Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? David Chamberlain: I would just like to know what other uses, other than park land, 35491 Curtis are permitted in the P.L. district? Mr. Nagy: I will read the Article as it is written in the Zoning Ordinance: "In P.L. Districts no building shall be erected or used, or land used, in whole or in part, except for one or more of the following uses: (a) Municipal or Civic Center purposes, (b) Municipal or other 1440 governmental buildings such as: city hall, municipal offices, fire stations, police stations, and post offices. (c) Outdoor publicly owned or leased recreational uses, such as playgrounds, parks, boating areas, parkways and golf courses. (d) Educational buildings, such as public primary and secondary schools and publicly owned and operated institutions of higher learning. (e) Public service buildings, such as publicly owned and operated hospitals, homes for aged and children's 6678 11:0homes. (f) Municipally owned airports. (g) Cultural services buildings, such as publicly owned museums, art galleries and libraries. (h) Accessory uses, necessary or incidental to the above principal uses. Mr. Chamberlain: Is it possible that a residential development could go in there now it is currently zoned residential? Mr. Andrew: No. It would not be possible for the City to sell this land for residential development as federal funds were used for the acquisition of this property. • Mr. Chamberlain; Well, the area is really quite a mess now. You really couldn't call that natural. Junk all over the weeds; debris laying everywhere. I am really concerned what is going to happen to that piece of land later on. Isn't the city going to improve it in any way? Right now, it is just a dumping ground for bottles. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Chamberlain, the Parks and Recreation Dept. advise that this property is to remain in its "natural state". Mr. Chamberlain: You cannot call this messy area a "natural state". Grass doesn't grow there, just a hodge-podge of weeds. Mr. Andrew: How long has Curtis been improved? 140 Mr. Chamberlain: About six or seven years. 4 4 Mr. Andrew: I would suggest that you direct a letter to the Dept. of Public Works asking them to take some action regarding the maintenance of that area. There really isn't much that we can do. James Laird: If this rezoning is granted, would the local residents have an 35515 Curtis opportunity to decide on what would be put in there? Mr. Andrew: Itis not planned that anything will be put in there. The area is to remain in its natural state. You could address your question to the Parks & Recreation Commission. Mr. Laird: So it is possible that they could put a building in there? Mr. Andrew: Theoretically, yes they could. Mr. Laird: Then I think this petition should be denied. Mr. Andrew: But it is the intention of the city that this property will remain as woods. Mr. Laird: But we really have no definite assurance that it will remain a park forever. Mr. Andrew: No assurance. / Mr. Laird: Then I request that this be denied. Mrs. Wisler: Since this property was acquired with federal funds, then we do have a responsibility to see that it remains as park land. Is that right? 6679 IL Mr. Nagy: Yes, federal dollars along with local dollars were specifically earmarked to acquire this land strictly for park and recreational purposes. The city would have to return to the federal government all of its monies used to purchase this land if any other uses were planned for this property. Any municipal buildings such as fire stations, general administrative offices, etc. would/igohibited, would be a violation of the conditions granted in the acquistion of this land. In addition, we have a Master Land Use Plan which specifically designates this for park and recreation purposes. This will always remain as property used for park purposes. Mrs. Scurto: John, if for some reason in the future, this property were removed from the Master School and Park Plan, would a Public Hearing be required? Mr. Nagy: Yes, definitely. Jack Ficara: I am concerned with the fact that this area is to be left in its 35462 Gardner present condition. I spoke with Mr. Dufour in the Parks and Recreation Department, and he also substantiated this. But I really feel that if this property is to be the responsibility of the city, something should be done to take care of it better than is being done now. It is very shabby looking. Mr. Andrew: There are two different courses of action that could be taken. One is direct a letter to the Parks and Recreation Commission stating your concern, and the other is contact the Department of Public Works requesting their action. If that doesn't get results, let the Mayor and the Council know of your concern. 4 Mr. Andrew: Any more comments or questions from anyone in the audience, or the Commission? There was no one else present wishing to speak on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petiton 78-1-1-4 -closed. On a motion duly made by. Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted, it was #4-56-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 11, 1978 on Petition 78-1-1-4 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the north side of Curtis Avenue, east of Golfview in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 8, from R-3B and R-4B toP.L. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-1-1-4 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The Zoning Map should be corrected to reflect the public ownership of the property as well as its use for park purposes. (2) This change of zoning is consistent with the Planning Commission's policy of having all public lands zoned in a Public Lands classification and so shown on the Comprehensive Zoning Map of the City of Livonia. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 3/23/78, and that notices of such hearing were 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. 6680 Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. J Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-1-1-5 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located north of Curtis Road, west of Comstock in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 8, from R-4B to P.L. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: No correspondence. Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? Larry Millen: I understand that this parcel of land was set aside in exchange 36744 Curtis for that parcel-which is going to be rezoned from P.L. to R-4. That parcel that is zoned P.L. was in fact built and developed by the developer. Maybe the reason for this rezoning is they want to exchange this property for the P.L. property so there would be easier access to the eighty acres along side. Mr. Andrew: You have to understand that this land was acquired by park dedication. Mr. Nagy: There will be no land exchange subsequent to this petition as this land was dedicated to the City of Livonia pursuant to our Subdivision Rules and Regulations. This land was dedicated to the City for park purposes and if the City cannot use it in this way, it would revert back to the proprietor of the subdivision and no one else. The City may not sell it or otherwise despose of it. It would revert back to the original owner of the property which in this case would be the subdivider. IL Mr. Millen: So you are saying another developer couldn't come in there and develop it the way he wants? Mr. Andrew: That's right. Larry Massa: You indicate that this property was set aside for dedication to the City by the proprietor of the subdivision. Is this the same as the previous petition. Mr. Nagy: No. The previous petition dealt with land that was acquired through funds from the federal government. Mr. Massa: Is there any difference as to how this land can be used, or is it the same as the previous petition? Mr. Andrew: I think that would depend on the actual plat of the property. Actually, the Parks and Recreation Dept. indicates there will be no change in the use of this property. Will remain in its natural state. Mr. Massa: So that is the same as the one before. Mr. Andrew:140 Any further comments or questions on this matter? There was no one else wishing to speak any further on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared 4 the Public Hearing on Petition 78-1-1-5 closed. 6681 t On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs and unanimously adopted, it was $4-57-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 11, 1979 on Petition 78-1-1-5 as submitted by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located north of Curtis Road, west of Comstock in the North- west 1/4 of Section 8, from R-4B to P.L, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-1-1-5 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The Zoning Map should be corrected to reflect the public ownership of the property as well as its use for park purposes. (2) This change of zoning is consistent with the Planning Commission's policy of having all public lands zoned in a Public Lands classification and so shown on the Comprehensive Zoning Map of the City of Livonia. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 3/23/78, and that notices of the above hearing were 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 above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-2-1-11 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located east of Newburgh Road between Curtis and Gardner in the West 1/2 of Section 8, from R-3B, R-4B and P.L. to R-4B and P.L. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: No correspondence. Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? Andy Mazzara: I would like to know if any of this school property that they would 36642 Gardner receive as a result of this swap would be sold by the Board of Education for the use of any governmental building or something like that? Mr. Andrew: I really hate to talk for the School Board. But I would suppose any piece of property owned by them could be sold by them. Mr. Mazzara: What about ingress and egress to this particular property? Mr. Andrew: I suppose through their property off of Newburgh Road, If this rezoning is accomplished to P.L, any purchaser of the property could do nothing with it until it is rezoned back to residential. With the P.L. classificati in there, it conforms to the Master Land Use Plan of the City of Livonia. ii: Larry Millen: I can understand the school wanting to make this swap, but what if 36744 Curtis somebody wants to make some change in the future. 6682 too Mr. Andrew: I really don't think that will happen here. The School Board exchanged deeds to the property, and it really makes sense in this area. Mr. Millen: Do we have any assurances that it will remain this way? Mr. Andrew: If this property is changed to P.L, the only way anyone could come in and put a building on it, it would have to be rezoned. Mr. Millen: Well, I can accept that. It seems that I have been living on public land for the last seven years. It should have been tax free. Mr. Andrew: Any more comments or questions on this matter? There was no one else wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-2-1-11 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted, it was #4-58-78 , RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 11, 1978 on Petition 78-2-1-11 as submitted by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located east of Newburgh Road between Curtis and Gardner in the West 1/2 of Section 8, from R-3B, R-4B and P.L. to R-4B and P.L. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-2-1-11 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The Zoning Map should be corrected to reflect the current use of properties in question. (2) The Zoning Map should be corrected to reflect the public ownership of those properties used for school purposes. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 3/23/78. and that notices of such hearing were 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 above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-1-1-8 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the east side of Newburgh Road, south of the I-96 Freeway in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29, from M-1 to M-2. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: Yes, we have a letter dated April 7, 1978 from the A. Z. Shmina and Sons Company . . . signed by William Scruggs, Vice President, Mr. Andrew: If this petition should be approved, the only new requirements would be that the yard set backs on the north side in the direction of Schoolcraft would increase. Therefore it may necessitate relief from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Is that right? IL Mr. Nagy: Yes. 6683 ,Mr. Andrew: Ts there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? There was no one else wishing to be speak on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-1-1-8 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted, it was #4-59-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 11, 1978 on Petition 78-1-1-8 as submitted by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the east side .of Newburgh Road, south of the I-96 Freeway in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29, from M-1 to M-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommendto the City Council that Petition 78-1-1-8 be approved for the following reasons: (1) This amendment will eliminate split zoning established on the two subject parcels. (2) M-2 zoning will provide for development of subject parcels for uses compatible with existing uses in the area. (3) This change in zoning is recommended by the Industrial Coordinator. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 3/23/78, and that notices of such hearing were 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 above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-1-1-9 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the west side of Levan Road, south of the I-96 Freeway in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29, from M-1 to M-2. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: Nothing other than the letter received from Shmina and Sons which made reference to both petitions. Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone present wishing to speak on this matter. There was no one else present wishing to be heard either for or against this petition, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-1-1-9 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Freidrichs and seconded by Mrs. Scurto, it was #4-60-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 11, 1978 on Petition 78-1-1-9 as submitted by the Planning Commission to rezone 1[0 property located on the west side of Levan Road, south of the I-96 Freeway in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29, from M-1 to M-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-1-1-9 be apprbved for the following reasons: 6684 (1) This amendment will eliminate split zoning establishedon the subject parcel. (2) The established use on the property complies with the M-2 District regulations. (3) This change in zoning is recommended by the Industrial Coordinator. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, _under date of 3/23/78, and that notices of such hearing were sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Consumers Power Company, and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Scurto, Falk, Wisler, Andrew NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Zimmer ABSENT: Kluver, Morrow Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda Petition 78-2-1-12 by Michael L. & Janet T. O'Connor to rezone property located on the southeast corner of 1[: Eight Mile Road and Newburgh Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 5, from RUF to C-1. Mr. Andrew: John, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: We have a letter dated February 22, 1978 from Engineering indicating no problems connected with proposal. We also have a letter from the department of Public Safety, Police Division outlining numerous traffic problems anticipated with the approval of this petition, signed by R.F. Widmaier. Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present? Would you please indicate exactly what you are proposing to do. Michael J. O'Connor: We would like to operate a family flower shop at this location. 37355 Eight Mi. Rd. We would bring any building up to City codes. Mr. Andrew: You are talking about converting the present house into a commercial store? Mr. O'Connor: Yes. Mr. Andrew: Do you propose some type of improvement into that parking area off of Eight Mile Road? What is it now - crushed gravel? Mr. O'Connor: Yes, at the present time it is crushed gravel. We do plan on a better parking area that would live up to those standards established by the City, 1[0but as you can realize, it would only be seasonal parking. Mr. Andrew: How large is the house at the present time? Mr. O'Connor: I think it is 1900 square feet. 6685 • `_ Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, what is the Ordinance requirement as far as parking area in a C-1 district? Mr. Nagy: One parking space for each 150 square feet of floor space. Mr. Andrew: Do you understand that you can do everything you want except you cannot convert this house into a shop for commercial business under the present zoning. Mr. O'Connor: We feel we could do a much better business here than in our present location at Newburgh Plaza. Mrs. Scurto: Do you plan on converting the entire house that you now live in? Mr.O'Connor: Most of our business is handled over the phone but we do not intend to continue to live in this house. Mrs. Scurto: What plans do you have for the other two structures on the property? Mr.O'Connor: One is a greenhouse and the other a storage facility. Mr. Andrew: The garage is a wooden structure? Mr.O'Connor: Yes, with a concrete floor and rat wall. Mr. Andrew: What kind of material used in the construction of the house? li: Mr.O'Connor: Stone. We have checked with the Chief Building Inspector and feel it is possible to bring the entire structure up to code. Mr. Andrew: Would it upset your plans very much if you were required to tear down the garage? Mr. O'Connor: Yes, it would. Mr. Andrew: I have some personal problems with this inasmuch this is an intrusion of commercial zoning at the corner of Eight Mile and Newburgh. I am really hard pressed to support this petition as I see it right now. Are there any comments from the Commission? Mr. Zimmer: Do you currently grow those plants that are used to supply your flower shop at this particular location? Mr.O'Connor: Yes, many of our flowers and plants are grown on this property, as well as bedding plants. Mr. Zimmer: Then this proposal would only make this location a more permanent year- round operation. Mr. Falk: How long have you owned this property? , Mr. O'Connor: Three years. Mr. Falk: I suppose that if this petition is approved, you would move out of your Six Mile Road location. Which would mean another vacant store there. Mr. Chairman, I agree with you in that I would hate to see an intrusion of commercial into this particular corner, especially based on our Future Land Use Plan. I definitely have negative feelings regarding this proposal. 6686 Mr. O'Connor:Would you people object to a waiver use request? i Mrs. Friedrichs: Is it possible to have a waiver use request specifically for a flower shop? Mr. Andrew: It is not. Mr. Nagy: Flower shop would not be permitted under waiver use procedures. Mr. O'Connor: We already have our greenhouse on this property, and feel that our proposal would not inflict any kind of blight on the corner. Would certainly continue to maintain the property, and since we are so close to the golf course, we feel that there really isn't too much else that could be done with that corner. Mrs. Friedrichs: Personally, I feel that this might be quite an attractive development here since it is bounded by Greenmead and Whispering Willows Golf Course. I am really quite inclined to look on this proposal favorably. Mrs. Scurto: My only thought on this is the fact that the flower shop might not always remain there. True, the flower shop would not be too terribly unattractive on this corner, but what would happen if they choose to leave and the property is already zoned commercial? I feel we have a responsibility to those homeowners on the northwest corner of this intersection even though it is not in Livonia. ILMr. Andrew: Any further comments or questions from the Commission? Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? There was no one present wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-2-1-12 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and adopted, it was #4-61-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 11, 1978 on Petition 78-2-1-12 as submitted by Michael L. and Janet T. O'Connor to rezone property located on the southeast corner of Eight Mile Road and Newburgh Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 5, from RUF to C-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-2-1-12 be denied for the following reasons: (1) Commercial development and retail uses that would be permitted by this proposed change in zoning would cause a major increase in traffic in an area already over burdened with heavy traffic. (2) The proposed change in zoning would be incompatible with the existing uses in the area both in the City of Livonia as well as in the adjacent community of Farmington Hills, which is residential in character. (3) The RUF Zoning District which is the current zoning of the subject property already allows the growth and sales of flowers and other products of greenhouses located on the site. (4) This proposed zoning change would allow uses which are contrary to the FUTURE Land Use Plan. (5) This proposed change in zoning would tend to attract further requests for commercial zoning in the immediate area. 6687 L FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 3/23/78, and that notices of such hearing were 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: Zimmer, Scurto, Falk, Andrew NAYS: Friedrichs, Wisler ABSENT: Kluver, Morrow Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda Petition 78-2-2-5 by the Berean Baptist Church requesting waiver use approval to construct a Church on property located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Newburgh Road and Meadowview in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 6. Mr. Andrew: John, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition. Mr. Nagy: Yes, we have a letter from Engineering indicating no problems connected with proposal. Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present? 1Mr. Campbell, Pastor: In talking with Mr. Shane, he advised me to come to this Berean Baptist meeting tonight and tell you just what my plans are. He told lChurch me I should just lay my cards on the table and tell all. Well, being a Baptist Minister, I can't very well lay out any cards, but I would like to tell you a little about us. We are an independent Church affiliated with the General Association of Baptist Churches, and feel that we have to leave our present church in Detroit. We are not a big Church with approximately 70 people attending our Sunday morning services. We chose this particular area because we felt that it was centrally located. We draw persons from Livonia, Farmington Hills, Plymouth, Northville as well as Detroit. We would like to build that size of a structure that our people can afford, and would certainly promise to maintain it in a proper. fashion. Of course, we do expect growth, and would like a building that would fit these needs. We are not here to try and turn the City around. We only want to keep our congregation together, and feel that this location would be ideal. I would like to introduce our Architect, Mr. Svol?oda, who, as you know, was the Architect for Madonna College, in the event you have any questions you want to ask him. Mr. Andrew: Are there any questions from the Commission of the Reverend? Mr. Falk: Reverend, I understand you own the twenty acres in front? What about the perk test? .Rev. Campbell: Perk test in the front twenty is OK. I am not sure about the other twenty acres in the back. Mr. Falk: Do you have any intention of purchasing the remaining acreage at some future time? 6688 Rev. Campbell: The original parcel consisted of approximately 42 acres, 20 of which we have purchased. We understand the remaining is to be sold as residential lot. We have no intention of buying any more than we have right now. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Svoboda, could you please explain the Site Plan and what the exterior material is to be used on the building. Mr. R. Svoboda: Basically, what this church is contemplating is a small chapel with Architect a seating of about 250. The Sunday School facility will probably consist of about 10 classrooms. The Chapel is roughly 60 square feet in size and the design of the structure is of a contemporary nature which we feel could be added onto at a later date, depending upon the growth of the parish. Mr. Andrew: The building is essentially brick? Mr. Svoboda: The structure will be masonry brick on three sides, the front facing Eight Mile Road, the east facing Greenmead, the west facing the I-275 Freeway. This west side will be block primarily for the reason is that any addition will take place on that side. Mr. Andrew: Any comments or questions from the Commission? Mr. Falk: I hear talk about classrooms. I am wondering about their size and the number of students they will accommodate. ILRev. Campbell: We are thinking about a church only at this time. Any future plans depend on the growth of the parish. Tentative classrooms would be about 16 x 24' in size, with 10 to 15 people per room. And it would be on Sunday morning only. Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to be heard on this petition? Ken Phillips: If they are going to put a church in there, what about widening the lanes 38521 Jahn Drive on Eight Mile to get in and out? Mr. Andrew: I understand there is going to be a deceleration lane on the south side of Eight Mile Road. Mr. Phillips: What about the north side? Mr. Andrew: There will be a passing lane on the north side. All road construction will take place within the right-of-way. Mr. Phillips: I understand they are thinking about apartments in there. Mr. Andrew: That would take a separate action before this Commission. We are now considering a waiver use request for the construction of a church. Mrs. Scurto: I think we are getting chickens and eggs mixed up. Reverend, have you ever said anything about putting in senior citizens' housing? . Rev. Campbell: Never, in public. 'Mr. Falk: The Reverend claims he has never said anything about this in public - what about in private conversations? 6689 Rev. Campbell: A home for senior citizens would be one of the very last things we would have for our church. Too many of them are operating in the red, and we do not want any part of that. I will admit that there is a need to have a place for our older people, but we are not considering this at our church. Mr. Andrew: Any one else in the audience wishing to speak? Mr. Waterman; We have had a topographical survey made on our land, although we have Lots 44,45 not built a house there as yet. We see no reason whatsoever why they on Meadowview shouldn't be able to build a church on this property. We put our wholehearted approval on this proposal. Mr. Andrew: It sure is gratifying to see a nearby lot owner put his approval on the construction of a church. A little different from what our Council has been through the last three months. Rev. Campbell: I just want to add that I own lot #25 in this neighboring subdivision, and I also can see no reason why this petition shouldn't be approved. There was no one else wishing to speak on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-2-2-5 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted, it was R ' #4-62-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 11, 1978 110 on Petition 78-2-2-5 as submitted by the Berean Baptist Church requesting waiver use approval to construct a Church on property located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Newburgh Road and Meadowview Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 6, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-2-2-5 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan #7802, Sheet No. P-1, dated 3/41/78, prepared by Robert.L. Svoboda, Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; (2) that building elevations as shown on the approved site plan which are hereby approved, shall be adhered to; (3) that landscape plan showing all landscape materials proposed to be installed on the site shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Commission within thirty days from the date of this approval which plan shall, in addition, show the location and nature of parking lot lights proposed to be erected on the site; and (4) that a plan showing any signs proposed to be erected on the site shall be submitted for Planning Commission approval. for the following reasons: (1) The Site is more than ample in size to accommodate this proposed use. (2) The proposal meets or exceeds all the general requirements and special standards of the Zoning Ordinance regarding church uses. (3) This proposal is compatible with the surrounding uses of the area. 6690 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 above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-3-1-14 by Floyd A. and Edith M. Balman to rezone property located on the south side of Pembroke between Angling Road and Deering Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 1, from R-3 to R-1. Mr. Andrew: John, is there any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: Just a letter from Engineering indicating that legal description has been reviewed and approved. Mr. Andrew: Is Vassar the half-mile road between Seven and Eight Mile? Mr. Nagy: Vassar is just a local street. Pembroke is half mile road between Seven and Eight Mile Roads in this section. Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present? Steve Potok: I will be representing Mr. and Mrs. Balman in their application for a rezoning of this property. Would like to remind you that this particular parcel is a buffer between the 40-50'lots to the east and the RUF homes on the west. We feel that lots with a 60' frontage would be most contiguous as far as developing this area residential. f Mr. Andrew: You see no difficulty with the dedication of Deering? Mr. Potok: No difficulty. Although I do question as to why that much right-of-way is required particularly since Deering dead-ends at St. Martins at the present time. But if it is required, we can work around it. Mr. Andrew: If this is approved at the Council level, is it your intention to plat the entire parcel? the Mr. Potok: Yes, it is our intention to split off two lots to/north facing Pembroke, and then plat the entire remaining property. Mr. Andrew: Are there any comments or questions of this representative of the petitioner from the Commission? Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? Bob Prost: It seems we come back every year on this same particular parcel. There is 19614 Deering the problem that Deering is one-way from Pembroke to St. Martins. What about Lot #67 south of St. Martins? If you were to widen Deering, you would be taking almost all of that property.. And I wDuld like to add that Deering doesn't dead-end at St. Martins, it goes all the way straight through to Vassar. .Mr. Andrew:li Mr. Nagy, have you had an opportunity to review the plans for the paving of Deering. d Mr. Nagy: No, I haven't. Engineering has only recently recommended this. r. Prost: Everyone from Pembroke to Vassar objected to the widening of Deering. How can you put in 60' lots across from my home. They certainly wouldn't be 120' in depth. I also heard talk about duplexes. 6691 Mr. Andrew:11 . They are requesting R-1 zoning which is strictly single family type homes. It appears that 27 more feet is needed for the right of way along Deering, and I would have to assume that the Engineering Depart- ment has already talked to the owner of this property as well as the owner of Lot #67 about the improvement of Deering to Vassar. Mr. Nagy: At the City Council's study meeting last night, they reviewed the matter of initiating a Special Assessment District for this area. Those residents that were present at that meeting were divided as to going along with this improvement. The Council will vote on the matter at their April 19th meeting. • Mr. Prost: Will the new houses face Deering? , Mr. Andrew: I do not think that that is a valid question until such time as a plat is submitted. This is simply a request for rezoning at this time. Mr. Prost: You know, we seem to be coming back on this many times during the last couple of years. And each time the anticipated lots get smaller. This is the most populated area in the whole City, and I see no reason not to keep it the way it is now. Mr. Andrew: Your point may be valid. I think this property has come before us two times, maybe three times before, and no developer has been able to come up with anything,. I believe that in time the court will _ make a decision for us. I do not see that this request for rezoning is unreasonable. It would not be detrimental to the neighborhood. One of these days we will have to go to court, and they will se successful in deciding the issue for us. 1[: Mary Ann Lewis: Were all the neighbors informed about the meeting last night? 19602 Deering Mr. Nagy: There was a report from Engineering recommending that they initiate a hearing on the question of whether or not there should be a paving project on Deering between Vassar and Pembroke. All Council meetings are open to the public, but there were no notices addressed to the property owners affected. If the project is initiated a public hearing with affected property owners would be required. Ms. Lewis: How many houses will be put in there? Mr. Prost: Originally, before we were aware of the fact that we would have to give up 27' for right of way, we had planned to get 12 lots out of the parcel. It now looks like we wilL do well to get 11. Ms. Lewis: I very much object to this petition. Mr. Andrew: Any more questions or comments from anyone? There was no one else wishing to speak on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-3-1-14 closed. 6692 ILOn a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and unanimously adopted, it was 11110 #4-63-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 11, 1978 on Petition 78-3-1-14 as submitted by Floyd A. and Edith M. Balman to rezone property located on the south side of Pembroke between Angling Road and Deering Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 1, from R-3 to R-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-3-1-14 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The zoning change will allow a small residential development of lot sizes and uses compatible to the majority of the surrounding existing residential neighborhoods. (2) The zoning change would allow a reasonable and feasible residential subdivision appropriate for a small, odd-shaped parcel of land. (3) This zoning change would provide for the construction of homes which would be consistent in character to those existing in the surrounding area and in compliance with new, modern housing code and building requirements. (4) This zoning change would provide for a reasonable solution for an under-developed parcel of land consistent with the goals and policies adopted by the Planning Commission. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in t ' the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 3/23/78, and that notices of such hearing were 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 above motion carried and the foregoing' resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda Petition 78-3-3-3 by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Council Resolution #112-78 to vacate property located on the north side of Perth Avenue between Ellen Drive and Riverside in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 21. Mr. Andrew: John, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: Yes, we have a communication from the Engineering Division advising that abutting property owners of the subject parcel have shown an interest in the vacating of this land, allowing them to relocate their rear yard fences to expand their rear yard areas thereby properly maintaining and utilizing the area more efficiently than the City would. The Engineering division supports the proposed vacating subject to the retention of a full width easement. Mr. Andrew: This is a petition by the Planning Commission pursuant to Council Resolution to vacate subject property. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? There was no one else wishing to speak on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public 1[4 toHearing on Petition 78-3-3-3 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted, it was 6693 • IL #4-64-78 RESOLVED THAT, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 11, 1978 on Petition 78-3-3-3 as submitted by the City Planning Commission IL pursuant to Council Resolution #112-78 to vacate property located on the north side of Perth Avenue between Ellen Drive and Riverside in the South- west 1/4 of Section 21, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-3-3-3 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The subject outlot is no longer needed for surface drainage purposes. (2) It will be more advantageous to the City for the subject property to be in private ownership for maintenance purposes. (3) The Engineering Division has no objection to the vacating of the outlot SUBJECT TO THE RETENTION OF A FULL-WIDTH EASEMENT since there is an underground storm sewer located within it. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 3/23/78, and that notices of such hearing were sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Consumers Power Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 1[0 Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat Approval for Woodcreek Farms Subdivision No. 3 proposed to be located on the east side of Farmington i Road between Rayburn and Myrna in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15. Mr. Andrew: John, is there any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: Yes, we have a letter from the Department of Public Safety, Fire Division, indicating no objections to the plat as submitted. Also, a letter from Engineering indicating no problems connected with proposal. The Police Division of the Department of Public Safety originally found fault with the location of the entrance to the proposed subdivision, but since the plat has been revised, the Police Department feels that there will be minimal problems connected with left turns in the area. That is the extent of correspondence on this petition. Mr. Andrew: Is the proprietor of the plat present? Michael Priest; I prepared the plans for this project, and I am here to represent the proprietor as he is not able to attend the meeting tonight. Mr. Andrew: How many lots do you propose for this subdivision? Mr. Priest: Fifteen. Mr. Andrew: I assume the square in the middle is strictly a landscaped area. Mr. Priest: Yes, we are thinking about leaving that island in its natural state. Pretty dense woods in there. LMr. Andrew: How soon do you plan to initiate construction? Mr. Priest: As soon as possible. Mr. Andrew: You are aware of the required landscape easement along Farmington Road? 6694 J' Mr. Priest: Yes, and we are wondering if that couldn't be reduced from 30 to 20' . If we are required to take 30' off of Lot #15, that would represent quite a hardship in that there would not be too much room left for the side yard of the house on that lot. Would only leave us 52' on which to place the house. Mr. Andrew: Where is Lot #15? Mr. Priest: Right alongside Farmington Road in the southwest corner of the plat. There are a lot of existing trees in this area, and we feel that the landscaping presently there will take care of the requirement. This is not an open field area like Francavilla. Mr. Andrew: Are there any comments or questions from the Commission? Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? Jim Gallas: I am a resident of Woodcreek Farms and President of the Civic Association. 15902 Shadyside There are several residents of the subdivision here tonight, but I wish to speak primarily for myself. We have all lived in Woodcreek Farms for several years, and we have come to accept the woods as being there forever. Realize now that is not the case. Our concern now is that any future development in the woods would be compatible with the present Woodcreek Farms. As you can see this will surround us on two sides. Also, I would like to know the difference between a Preliminary Plat Approval and a Site Plan Approval. Mr. Andrew: Preliminary Plat Approval is a procedure. required by state law, modified It ' by City ordinances, which requires owners of property to outline their acreage into specific lots sizes consistent with zoning regulations. Specific plans showing location of underground utilities such as electricity, water and sewer lines are submitted to the City's Engineering Department for approval. The City Council takes final action on all such plans showing all improvements planned for the area. Now, Site Plan approval has to do with the location of a building on a specific piece of property, usually in a commercially zoned district, with regard to park- ing, landscaping, signage, etc. Mr. Gallas: So Site Plan Approval does not apply here? Mr. Andrew: That is right. tsr. Gallas: Am I free to ask what type of homes will be put in there? Mr. Andrew: We have no guarantee that the gentleman here before us tonight will. be the builder. He might sell the land to someone else who will put up the houses. Mr. Gallas: Are there not any restrictions on what kind of homes can be put in there according to the City codes? Isn't,_this an R-3B district? Mr. Andrew: Yes, this is an R-3B district, and lots 80 x 120 are required. Of course, they would be single family type homes, and John, just exactly what is the size under the "B" designation? 6695 Mr. Nagy: The "B" designation means 1300 sq. ft. for a ranch style home; for a IL 1 1/2 story home, the ground floor would have to have 900 sq. ft., with a total of 1400 for the entire house; and for a 2 story home, there would have to be a minimum of 1500 square feet. Mr. Gallas: Is the developer here tonight? . Mr. Priest: No, he is not here tonight, but he does intend to do the building himself. His name is Mickey Schwartz, and does business under the name of United Homes, Inc. Mr. Nagy: Yes, he is a reputable builder, and has built other homes in Livonia. He has built homes in the Seven Mile and Farmington area, as well as Curtis and Farmington. He has built homes on scattered lots near Stamford Estates, and has been in Livonia for many years. Mr. Gallas: Will be putting in any kind of fences between his homes and those presently in Woodcreek Farms? Mr. Andrew: It is not required. Mr. Gallas: But will he be doing that? Mr. Priest: No. Mr. Gallas: I would also like to point out the traffic problems that this new subdivision will create. II Mr. Andrew: The original plat has been revised to reduce any traffic problems. 1r. Gallas: I would like to suggest that they find an alternate route for access to and from Farmington Road. Rather than put in a new street off of Farmington, why not extend Westmore from the south into the subdivision? Mr. Andrew: Is Westmore a paper street? Mr. Nagy: Yes. Mr. Andrew: What about Rayburn - is that a seal coat road? Mr. Nagy: A poor seal coat road. Mr. Gallas: Do you realixe that there are probably 150 to 200 cars travelling up and down Farmington Road in the morning, and any more traffic would certainly be bad. Mr. Andrew: What is the distance between Rayburn and Sherwood? Mr. Nagy: 258' . Mr. Gallas: Another thing, they proposed to call it Woodcreek Farms No. 3. Is that a legal name? Couldn't we object? ILMr. Andrew: Yes, but wouldn't do you any good. Resident: I would like to know what kind of surface they intend to put on the internal roads? Mr. Priest: That hasn't been determined as yet. I suppose it would depend upon the soil conditions. Probably the same type as in other subdivisions - asphalt or concrete. • 6696 1[ i Fred Flanagan: Myself as well as other residents in the area are a little concerned 33237 Hampshire about the quality of homes that will be going in there. If they put Court $35,000 to $40,000 homes in there, there is sure to be a decline in the �� market value of our homes. Most of the homes in Woodcreek Farms could bring in as much as $62,000 with some of them possibly $80,000. Mr. Falk: Mr. Priest, how many trees would be left. Do you intent to strip away all the trees? Or leave as many as you can? Mr. Priest: Every effort will be made to save as many trees as possible. Hey, I like trees too. I live in Wildwood Forest and I paid $3500 extra for a premium lot with trees. So does Mr. Schwartz. As far as that gentleman's concern about the quality of the homes, the lots alone in there would go for $20,000. The selling price of the homes will probably be between $75,000 and $85,000. Just a case of economics. Mr. Andrew: Well I can beleive that with the cost of improvement alone, the houses would have to go for at least $60,000 minimum. Mr. Priest: At least $75,000. Mr. Flanagan: Well, that' encouraging. Mrs. Friedrichs: I am still concerned about the traffic congestion in that area. Isn't there any way there could be a different point of ingress and egress into that new subdivision? IL Mr. Andrew: Maybe the residents in that area should address a letter to the Wayne County Road Commission for a traffic signal. Mr. Nagy: Wayne County usually tries to locate traffic signals halfway between the mile roads, and in this case that wouldn't help this particular area too much. Mrs. Friedrichs: Something definitely should be worked out. I know for a fact, as I try to get onto Farmington Road every day, that traffic in this area is real bad. Maybe the idea of extending Westmore into the new sub could be worked out. That way there would be no new roads leading onto Farmington. There was no one else wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Preliminary Plat Approval on Woodcreek Farms No. 3 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted, it was #4-65-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 11, 1978 on Preliminary Plat Approval for Woodcreek Farms Subdivision No. 3 proposed to be located on the east side of Farmington Road between Rayburn and Myrna in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table this Preliminary Plat Approval until the Study Meeting scheduled to be held on April 18, 1978. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 1[40 ' Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-2-6-3 by the City Planning Commission to amend Section 11.03 Waiver Uses within the C-2 zoning district, by amending the present standards and adding new standards for gasoline service station; restaurants; new and used car lots and showrooms; new or used mobile home sales; open air sales, display and/or rental of 6697 Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for, or against this petition? I received a communication from Eldon Raymond, Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals, requesting that we table this item as he �, would like to speak to us regarding certain problems connected with this petition. There was no one present wishing to add anything to this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-2-6-3 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously adopted, it was #4-66-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 11, 1978 on Petition 78-2-6-3 by the City Planning Commission to amend Section 11.03, Waiver Uses within the C-2 Zoning District, by amending the present standards and adding new standards for gasoline service stations, restaurants, new and used car lots and showrooms; new or used mobile home sales; open air sales, display and/or rental of utility trailers and buildings of 30,000 square feet or more, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 78-2-6-3. Mr.} Andrew: declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda Petition 78-2-6-5 by the City Planning Commission to amend Section 10.03, Waiver Uses within the C-1 Zoning District, by adding "paragraph (h) to establish controls for buildings of 30,000 square feet or more. ' "' Mr. Andrew: This is a petition initiated by the Planning Commission to amend the Zoning Ordinance. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? There was no one present wishing to be heard, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-2-6-5 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and unanimously adopted, it was #4-67-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 11, 1978 on Petition 78-2-6-5 as submitted by the City Planning Commission to amend Section 10.03, Waiver Uses within the C-1 Zoning District, by adding paragraph (h) to establish controls for buildings of 30,000 square feet or more, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-2-6-5 be approved for the following reason: (1) This amendment is needed to provide additional control over the location, size and nature of large retail establishments. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 3/23/78, and that notices of such hearing were 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 above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 1 6698 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted, it was i 0 #4-68-78 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Final 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, for the following reasons: (1) The Final Plat conforms to the previously approved Preliminary Plat. (2) The Engineering Division of the City of Livonia recommends approval of the Final Plat. (3) All of the financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor by the City have been complied with. Mr. Andrew declared the move motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted,. it was #4-69-78 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 350th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on March 14, 1978 be approved. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto and seconded by Mrs. Wisler, it was i #4-79-78 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 321st Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on March 21, 1978 be approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Scurto, Wisler, Andrew NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Zimmer, Falk ABSENT: Kluver, Morrow Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and unanimously adopted, it was #4-71-78 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Revised Building Elevation Plan showing signage as submitted in connection with 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, subject to the following condition: (1) that proposed sign conforms to Drawing A-223-12 as submitted by the Peskin Sign Company. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. IL 6699 a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously adopted, it was [ On #4-72-78 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approved the Revised Site Plan submitted in connection with Petition 77-8-2-16 by Merritt, Cole& McCallum requesting waiver use approval to 'erect a Church on the west side of Farmington Road between Ford Field and Schoolcraft Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 21, subject to the following conditions: (1) that Revised Site Plan dated 3/18/78, prepared by Merritt, Cole & McCallum, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and FURTHER RESOLVED that, all other conditions as set forth in Resolution #10-218-77, adoptedby the Planning Commission on October 18, 1977 are still valid and shall be adhered to. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, it was #4-73-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.47 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Sign Plan submitted in connection with Petition 77-2-8-3 by Rick-Mar Corporation requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 submitted in connection with a proposal to remodel the exterior of IL ' an existing building located on the east side of Farmington Road, north of Seven Mile Road in Section 3, be approved subject to the following condition: (1) that Sign Plan dated 4/11/78 prepared by the Planning Department, which hereby shall be adhered to. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Zimmer, Scurto, Wisler, Andrew NAYS: Falk ABSENT: Kluver, Morrow Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Wisler left the meeting at 11:05 p.m. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and unanimously adopbed, it was #4-74-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.47 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #990, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-3-8-5 by Rockind/Debard, Architects, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a retail sales building on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Seven and Eight Mile Roads in Section 1, be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that the Revised Site Plan, dated 4/11/78, prepared by Rocking/Debard Architects, and slightly modified by the Planning Department, which is IL hereby approved, shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Elevation Plan, dated 4/7/78, Sheet A-1, prepared by Rockind/Debard Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; - 6700 (3) that a detailed landscape plan showing all landscape materials proposed to be installed on the site shall be submitted within 30 days for Planning Commission approval; IL (4) that any signs proposed to be erected on the site shall be approved by the Planning Commission prior to installation. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and unanimously adopted, it was #4-75-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.47 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #990, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-3-8-6 by William P. Lindhout requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a retail sales building on the west side of Farmington Road, south of Eight Mile Road in Section 4, be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan #7801, Sheet 1, prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Elevation Plan #7801, Sheet 4, dated 4/11/78, prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, and slightly amended by the Planning Department, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; (3) that Landscape Plan #7801, Sheet #6, dated 3/31/78, prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and (4) that all landscape materials shown on the approved Landscape Plan shall be installed in the site before the building is occupied and thereafter maintained in a healthy condition. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and unanimously adopted, it was #4-76-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #1306, the City Planning Commission doeshereby determine to table Petition 78-2-8-3P by John D. Dinan requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a medical building on the west side of Merriman between Seven Mile Road and Gable in Section 3. Mr.'Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimouslyadopted, it was RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.47 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #990, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the Revised t#4_77-78 Building Elevation Plan, showing signage submitted in connection with Petition 77-11-8-33 by John E. Higgins, Detroit Bank-Livonia, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 submitted in connection with a proposal to alter the exterior of an existing building located on the north side of 6702 Seven Mile Road within the Livonia Mall Shopping Center in Section 2, be approved, subject to the following condition: (1) that Sign Plan by Media Six, Inc., dated 3/22/78, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded, and unanimously approved, the 351st Regular Meeting and .Public Hearing held by the City Planning Commission on April 11, 1978 were adjourned at 11:20 p.m., April 11, 1978. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION _/ Jo =•h J.� al -ecretary ATTEST: Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman • •