Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PLANNING MINUTES 1978-08-15
• 6772 IF MINUTES OF THE 358th REGULAR MEETING Ihe AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA L • . On Tuesday, August 15, 1978, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 358th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, • 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, cal1e the Regular. Meeting and Public Hearings to order at 8:00 p.m. , with approximately 100 interested citizens in the audience. - MEMBERS PRESENT: Daniel R. Andrew Joseph J. Falk Esther Friedrichs Suzanne Wisler Robert L. Morrow Judith Scurto . C. Russell Smith MEMBERS ABSENT: Herman Kluver (vacation) • Jerome Zimmer (vacation) Messrs. John J. Nagy, City Planning Director; H G Shane, Assistant City 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 rezoning request, the Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council, who in turn will then hold their own Public Hearing and decide the question. • If a petition involves a waiver use request, and the petition is denied by the ( Planning Commission, the petitioner then has ten days in which to appeal for relief. Otherwise, the petition is terminated. kV Mr. Falk, Secretary announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 78-4-1-21, as amended, by James R. Gysel to rezone property located on the north side of Joy Road between Fremont and Hugh in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 35, from R-1 to C-l. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: No new correspondence in connection with the rehearing of this petition. Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present? As I understand it, this is the 'original petition amended to include another 20' lot. Is that right? What do you intend to do with this property in the event you are successful in obtaining this rezoning? • James Gysel: I would like to turn the building th--,t is there now into some sort 29544 Joy Rd. of commercial business. As it is right now, it is an eyesore. It's vacant at the present time. We certainly will comply with all City specifications when we develop it. • Mr. Andrew: Any comments or questions from the Commission? Mrs. Scurto: For the benefit of the audience, and also to reassure myself, I would CPI like to ask Mr. Gysel if any part of the top of that building will be 41/4:, used as a residence? Mr. Gysel: Not if it is zoned commercial. Mrs. Scurto:• You have no intentions of renting this space out, unless of course this request is not granted? • ' 6773 dr lbw Mr. Gysel: . No, I do not. e . Mr. Andrew: Any more comments or questions from the Commission? Is there anyone this in the audience wishing to speak either for or against petition? John Boczkay: What's the building going, to be used for? 8851 Melvin Mr. Andrew: My. Gysel has indicated to this Commission that he has. tenants ' wishing to occupy this building. .R,ight, Mr. Gysel? . Mr. Gysel: I did have tenants when we first started this thing, but I am not too sure now. But I am hoping it will be some sort of a warehouse, just a-place to store things. Mr. Bocakay:- If you start rezoning this to commercial, where will it stop? Are you going to start rezoning everything right down to Edward Hines Parkway? Mr. Andrew: We are just attempting to consider this man's request to rezone only this piece of property in order to support a commercial building as well as provide parking. Mr. Boczkay: You have already given him another 20 feet. Pretty soon all the lots down there will be zoned commercial. When people move out of there Ar it will be an empty building. Do you know that there are many empty buildings along here between Merriman and Middlebelt that are empty, 1:11 and the kids play in them. Who knows what they are doing inside? ILOMrs. Micalacean: How much parking will he have? 29512 Joy Rd. Mr. Nagy: If this rezoning is approved, he will have a total of seven (7) parking spaces available to him. There was no one else wishing to speak on this matter and Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-4-1-21, as amended, closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted, it was #8-159-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 15, 1978 on Petition 78-4-1-21, as amended, by James R. Gysel to rezone property located on the north side of Joy Road between Fremont and Hugh in the South- east 1/4 of Section 35, from R-1 to C-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-4-1-21 be approved, for the following reasons: (1) This proposed rezoning represents a very small, logical expansion of an existing C-1 zoning district. Or (2) This change in zoning will allow the use of a vacant commercial structure. \10 (3) The subject property does not have sufficient width or depth to .qualify as a residential lot required by the current zoning category of R-1, single family residential. • 6774 ' lirfa . (4) This change in zoning would allow uses which are in concurrence with the recommendations of the Future Land Use Plan. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/28/78, 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 tarried and'The foregoing resolution adopted. • _ Mr. Falk announced the next item,on the agenda is Petition 78-6-1-26 by Trinity Baptist Church to rezone property located on _the north side of Six Mile Road between the I-275 Freeway and Haggerty Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 7, from R-9-III and R-5-C to P.S, - Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: We have a letter froth our Engineering Division dated 7/20/78 indicating no engineering problems connected with this proposal. Mr. Andrew: Is there a representative of this Church here? Pastor of What we are proposing is to take a tip of the larger parcel of land Trinity that has already been zoned R-9-III and R-5-C and construct .a nursery orBaptist, center, child-care center, known as Childrens World. Thus the request 116: Rev. Adams for the P.S. zoning. We feel that this would be a very compatible use with the rest of our development. We have a firm committment on our home for the aged; and we just received FHA approval this week, so we are expecting to begin construction some time next month. We are planning to house approximately 202 senior citiznes, and feel that this will be quite similar to Ziegler Place presently being built by the City at Seven Mile and Middlebelt. Mr. Andrew: Any comments or questions from the Commission? Is there anyone in the . audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? Stewart Farber: I would just like to say that our company has no objections whatsoever Republic Dev. to this proposed rezoning. We feel this will be most harmonious 31275 North= with the zoning on the south' side of Six Mile. Western Hyw. There was no one else wishing to speak on this petition, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-6-1-26 closed. Ona motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it was #8-160-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August A.5, 1978 on Petition 78-6-1-26 by Trinity Baptist Church to rezone property located on the north side of Six Mile Road between the I-275 Freeway and (I Haggerty Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 7, from R-9-III and R-5-C to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78- 6-1-26 be approved, for the following reasons: . 6715 (1) The proposed change of zoning is a logical extension of an established P.S. District within the area. 10: • (2) It will provide for transitional uses between the established Church, Rectory, senior citizens housing, and intermediate cafe facility from the adverse effects of interchange and heavily travelled mile roads. ` FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/28/78, and that notices of such hearing were sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio RailwayrCompany, 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 78-7-1-31 by G. J. D'Adamo to rezone property located on the northwest corner of Melvin and Joy Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 35, from R-1 to C-1. Mr. Andrew: We have a letter from Engineering dated 7/20/78 advising that the existence of an easement over the previously vacated alley should • be verified as it relates to the proposed building, etc. Also we have a petition, received in our office on 8/1/78, signed by 30 • residents along Melvin and Joy Road, advising no objection to this. proposal. • or . Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present? 7 Clarence Charest: I am here appearing on behalf of the petitioner. The property 32437 Five Mile involved here is 120 x 120, and there already is PS zoning _ just one block east of this. On the south side there is a Catholic church. I have talked to many of the residents in this 'area and they have no objections at all with the property. We do not feel that this is spot zoning. As you can see; the design of the building as presented to you shows no windows along the front, will definitely be sound proof, no noise, nothing at all • foreign with that particular area. Residents to the west have no objections. I feel this petition has .merit - no deficits at all in this particular petition. Landscaping would be appropriate to the area. Dr. D'Adamo is here if you have any questions. Mr. Andrew: Clarence, were you instrumental in obtaining the signatures of those • people who signed the petition along Melvin? Mr. Charest: Yes, I talked to them, very cooperative. Mr. Andrew: Any comments or questions from the, Commission? Mrs. Scurto: I notice there are no outside runs? Mr. Charest: That is right, they are all within the building. Noninterference with the area. As to the sanitary factor, we will .advise you of plans when foiwe request waiver use. \of Mr. Falk: The people who signed this petition, were they rentors or owners. 6776 Mr. Charest: Mr. Falk, you know perfectly well that 85% of the people in. Livonia own their homes. I know of very few rentors. All those I talked to were definitely in favor of this petition, except of course with a one exception. Mr. Morrow: I would like to ask this gentleman why this particular site was chosen. There seems to be abundance of property already zoned C-1 that he could have'obtained. ' Mr. Charest: There are very few clinics of this sort within the City. There is one at Seven Mile andFaimingt©n, Mi'ddlebelt and Five Mile, Farmington Road just south of .Schoolcraft, and we felt that this would be• an ideal site. The owner is anxious to sell the property and this doesn't interfere with anyone on the south. Mr. Andrew: Any more comments or questions from the Commission? Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? • Sara Boczkay: We live immediately to the north of this property. Right alongside my 8851 Melvin backyard. We moved out here from Detroit because we liked the idea of not having a building on every single corner. We felt this was a real nice residential neighborhood. Now we have this facing us. Mr. Andrew: What about people parking for the. church? Do you have any trouble with that? ' Mrs. Boczkay: Oh, the church. Saturday and Sunday masses, you wouldn't believe the IL traffic. Certainly don't want another commercial structure in there. Just can't understand how so many many people signed that petition. Mrs. Wisler: What would you prefer to see on that corner? Mrs. Boczkay: Really, I suppose nothing. Would like to look at just. a nice green vacant lot. Maybe another house wouldn't be too bad, a next door neighbor would be alright, but not an animal hospital. • Mr. Andrew: Clarence, does your client have a purchase agreement on this land? Mr. Charest: Yes, contingent upon the rezoning. • Mr. Andrew. Who owns this property at the present time? Does he own any other property in the area? Wm. McKerracher: I own this property, and I reside in Livonia, about one-half 9043 Gilman mile away, east of Middlebelt. Mrs, Scurto: I can't help feeling that Mrs. Boczkay will have to keep fighting , this. It bothers me that she can come up with no alternative to this problem. I really feel that there probably aren't too many people who would want to live right on Joy Road. If she is so against this development, she should come up with other suggestions as to what might go in there. cirire . Mrs. Wisler: Can't a veterinary hospital be a waiver use in'any other classification? 6777 tiMr. Nagy: Must go in a C-1. The Livonia City Council did not support our petition to place as waiver uses veterinarian hospitals in P.S. district. Mrs. Scurto: I would like to ask the doctor what his hours are going to be? Dr. D'Adamo: The hours will depend upon the demand. Many times people come home from work in the evening and discover that their animal is sick, so they then bring them to the hospital. We must be open some evenings during the week. Many timed do survry very early in the morning. I suppose T will be at the hospital whenever I am needed there. No Sundays, though. There is an emergency clinic in the area which is - composed of some 30 veterinarians who handle those kinds of cases. Mr. Andrew: Where is that located? Dr. D'Adamo: That clinic is on Telegraph Road. I would also like to point out that the building I plan to construct will be most exceptional both inside and out. Extremely esthetically pleasing. Mr. Andrew: Any more questions? Mr. Falk: I would like to know if there is anyone in the audience who signed this petition? No one came forward to Mr. Falk's question. John'Boczkay: We have two kids, and I would like to know where they are going to ! keep their garbage. Let's face it, kids will get into it, and there might be something dangerous in their garbage. Mr. Andrew: I certainly understand your concern, and I want to say that in the event this rezoning is accomplished, this gentleman must then come before us again for site plan approval at which time we will get into the details of how he will handle his trash. Mr. Boczkay: You know, there used to be a clothes box across the street at the church, and the kids were always getting into that box. there was only one way to stop the kids from getting into the dumpster, and that was get rid of the box. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Boczay, keep the faith, let's just see what happens with this rezoning request. Mr. Nagy, how many signatures did you say were on this petition for approval from residents on Melvin? Mr. Nagy: I would say about 50 signatures. They were within reasonable distance to the area under petition. There was no one else wishing to speak on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-7-1-31 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and adopted, it was CO #8-161-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 15, J978 on Petition 78-7-1-31 by G. J. D'Adamo to rezone property located on \Ply the northwest corner of Melvin and :Toy Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 35, from R-1 to C-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-7-1-31 be approved, for the following: I • ' 6778 (1) The proposed rezoning will not adversely affect the 'surrounding and * 1160 • established uses of the area. (2) The proposed rezoning will provide a reasonable and logical buffer and transitional use separating the established residential neighborhood from the adverse affects of the heavily travelled mile road. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/28/78, and that notices of such hearing were sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway. Company, M•ichiln 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, Smith, Scurto, Wisler, Andrew NAYS: Falk, Morrow ABSENT: Kluver, Zimmer' Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-6-2-18 by John Close requesting waiver use approval to locate an automotive tune-up center within an existing building on the northwest corner of Plymouth Road and Inkster in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 25. I Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? . Mr. Nagy: Engineering Division indicates no engineering problems connected with - proposal. Mr. Andrew: Has the alley behind this property been vacated? Mr. Nagy: City records show no vacating of this alley. Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present? Could you briefly explain just what your intentions are regarding this corner? John Close: I would like to occupy the Texaco station and turn it into a tune-up 12620 Beacon center. No brakes - just tune-up and go. No cars overnight. The lot Hill, will not be cluttered up in any way. Cars will not be left overnight Plymouth,Mi on the premises. Mr. Falk: What will your hours of operation be? Mr. Close: 7:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. Mr. Falk: Texaco owns the property and you are just going to lease it. Mr. Falk: Texaco still has a sign on the building? Mr. Close:tili No. Mr. Falk: Have you ever notice that terrible sign that Texaco has on their station on Plymouth and Levan? I get so upset whenever I pass that corner. Mr. Close: Texaco has nothing at all to do with my operation. I am in no way affiliated with any oil company. 6779 Mr. Falk: Mr. Close, are there any other operations of this sort in existence. Mr. Close: We represent the entire State of Michigan. We are a division of Close International and we do have operations in Texas, California, Georgia, but this will be the first in Michigan. Mrs. Wisler: Mr. Nagy, what is the existing zoning that allowed a gas station here? 1[10 Mr. Nagy: The property is currently zoned C-2, but this Texaco station was 'established before our #543 Ordinance came into effect. A gas station would be subject to a waiver use, but Texaco was there before and ' therefore in a non-conforming use. /, Mrs. Wisler: Could Texaco re-establish use of this property? Mr. Nagy: Possibly, but as I understand it, they did abandon it removing the gas pumps. Mrs. Wisler: Mr. Close, can you tell me- how many employees you will have? Mr. Close: Four. . Mrs. Wisler: And how many cars do you feel you could tune-up in one day? Mr. Close: Twelve minimum. We would like to do between 12 and 18. Mrs. Scurto: I feel there are a number of things that should be discussed with this gentleman first; for instance, what about landscaping. . I see . nothing here that indicates any landscaping or improvements to the building. be Mr. Andrew: I would suggest that this matter/tabled because there are still many things to discuss. - Mrs. Wisler: Mr. Nagy, do the City records indicate that this alley has been vacated? Mr. Nagy: The alley behind is not a vacated alley. We will have to look into this further. Mr. Andrew: Just how do you go about tuning up these cars? Mr. Close: We put' them on a dynamometer. Mr. Andrew: You mean you have to race the engine? Mr. Close: It is similar to giving them a road test. We run them on a dynamometer. We feel our machine is quite unique. Mr. Andrew: You mean there is no service station who could do the same thing? Mr. Close: No service station in the state of Michigan. Mr. Andrew: Have you considered special exhausts to handle emissions? Have you checked with the W-ayne County Air Pollution Control Board? Mr. Close: Yes, we have, and there will be no problems. Mrs. Friedrichs: What about the noise factor, will the building be soundproofed? 6780 Mr. Closer Will be no more noisy than having a car running. I can see that you are a little concerned about this operation, and I would like to say ir that I could be pumping gas at this location and -tuning up cars as well but I would rather just have a tune-up service here. Mr. Andrew: Appreciate your comments, but since this is a petition to operate a new type of business we must go through the normal procedure of discussing the matter. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? . There was no one else wishing to heard on this matter. _. .,.. Mr_. Falk: .I agree that there are some questions here that need clarification and would hope this Commission would consider tabling this. Mr. Andrew: I have no problem with that. Mrs. Wisler: I am not opposed to tabling this petition, but I really hate to see • this petitioner invest an undue amount of time, money. and energy in pursuing this when I find the site inadequate for this typeof operation • There will likely be an abundance of traffic, and only two driveways in such 'a short distance of space. There are a number of things I object to. Mr. Falk: Mrs. Wisler, I too am opposed to this form a planning standpoint, but I feel we should give this gentleman further time to clarify some of the problems. 11 There was no one else wishing to be heard, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-6-2-18 closed. ILIO On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it was #8-.162-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 15, 1978 on Petition 78-6-2-18 as submitted by John Close requesting waiver use approval to locate an automotive tune-up center within an existing building on the northwest corner of Plymouth Road and Inkster Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 25, the City Planning Commission does hereby' determine to table Petition 78-6-2-18 until the Study Meeting scheduled to be held on August 29, 1978. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolption Mr. Falk announced -the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-7-2-19 by John Del Signore requesting waiver use approval to construct a storage addition to an existing restaurant located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Merriman and Hubbard Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 27. • Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: No correspondence. IL Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present? Just what is it you are planning to do here? John DelSignore: We just want to put on a storage room on the back of thebuilding. 32030 Plymouth for Mr. Andrew: Have you filed/relief from the Zoning Board of Appeals. 6781 Mr. Del Signore: Yes, I did on last Tuesday and it was approved. Mr. Andrew: Were there any conditions? . L Mr. Nagy: The Zoning Board of Appeals haven't approved their minutes as yet. We are not able to determine as yet if there were any conditions attached until we receive a copy of their minutes. Mr. Andrew: When will the Zoning Board of Appeals approve their minutes? Mr. Nagy: At the next subsequent meeting. , Mr. Andrew: John, do you know of any conditions imposed upon you? Mr. Del Signore: No. Mr. Nagy: Building Department representative did advise us cf the requirement to' remove. graphics on the two barrels in the front, as well as removal of parking space from the front and replace same with landscaping. Mr. Andrew: Any comments or questions from the Commission? Mrs. Wisler: Mr. Del. Signore, would it be a problem for you if we waited until we heard from the Zoning Board of Appeals on this matter, perhaps just a couple of weeks? Mr. Del Signore: Another week or two - I can wait. 1rIL, Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak further either for or against this petition? . There was no one else wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-7-2-19 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Smith and' unanimously adopted, it was #8-163-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 15, 1978 on Petition 78-7-2-19 as submitted by Tohn Del Signore requesting waiver use approval to construct a storage addition to an existing restaurant located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Merriman and Hubbard Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 27, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 78-7-2-19 until the Study Meeting scheduled to be conducted on August 22,, 1978. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-7-3-7 by Peter A. and Ruth A. Ventura requesting the vacating of a ten-foot wide drainage easement located on a portion of Lot 773 on the north side of Curtis between Shadyside and Loveland in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file regarding this petition? Mr. Nagy: We have a letter dated June 20, 1978 from Engineering indicating no objections to the vacating of this easement. 6782 • Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present? Peter Ventura, Jr. : Yes, I am here to represent my father. Mr. Andrew: I assume that this vacating of the easement will mean no changes. Mr. Ventura: Nothing will change. This vacating will just permit fullest use of the land. Mr. Andrew: Do you own the house on the property? Mr. Ventura: My father owns the house on Pickford, and the drainage easement cuts through the back yard. Mr. Andrew: Any comments or questions from the Commission? Is there anyone in the audience wishing to. speak either for or against this petition? Robert Mase: As I see from the drawing, the easement under petition runs through Lot 18535 Mayfield #773b1, and this brings to mind a whole lot of questions on my part. First of all, is it really necessary to vacate this easement? Mr. Andrew: We have a petition before us by a property owner who has requested this vacating of an easement. According. to our Engineering Department this easement is no longer needed, so why shouldn't it be vacated? Livonia Drain #28 currently handles all the drainage that this easement originally carried, and there is no further need for it. 1rMr. Mase: Where is Drain #28? Gary Clark: Current drain is on Loveland. Mr. Andrew: With storm sewers on both sides? Mr. Clark: Yes, that's right. Mr. Mase: What I am concerned about is the idea of a permanent dwelling being placed on Lot 773b1. There would sure be a peculiar sort of access driveway to a house placed on that lot. Can a permanent dwelling be placed on this lot 773b1 and have they satisfied the requirements concerning total footage and setbacks? Mr. Andrew: I really can't answer any of those questions because I don't know if there is going to be a house on that lot. And I fail to see what the erection of a house there has to do with this vacating procedure. Mr. Mase: I have a petition here signed by over 60 residents in the neighborhood indicating no objection to the vacating of this easement, but strongly objecting to the construction of a permanent dwelling on Lot 773b1. Mr, Andrew: This Commission has no controlover the possibility of a building being constructed on Lot 773b1. te Mr. Mase: We want to go on record as being totally against the construction of a permanent dwelling on this lot. Mr. Andrew: We will be happy to make your objections a part of our permanent record. Your comments will always be on file in our Planning Department as being opposed to the construction of a permanent dwelling. • 6783 • Bill O'Neill I am opposed to vacating this easement especially if it will 18444 Mayfield allow a dwelling to be built. • The City should not vacate that • property. Mr. Andrew: Whether or not the City vacates this drainage easement will not effect the construction of a house. This is not a city easement - it is a county drain. R. Pottenger: What is the reason Mr. Ventura wants the City to vacate this easement? 18467 Mayfield • Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, would you please read the letter from Mr. Ventura addressed to the City Council requesting the vacating of this easement. Mr. Pottenger: What can anyone do when there is no easement that they can't do when there is. Mr. Andrew: You can't build on an easement. We have many requests throughout the year showing encumbrances on easements. People want them vacated, primarily because they are no longer needed. Mr. Mase: What about all the people that are here tonight? They have spent a lot of money to buy these super nice houses. I just bought this house about two months ago, and what happens - a house goes up right behind me on the vacated street. Naturally, I'm bent out of shape. Certainly don't want another house right next to it. 1110 Mr. Andrew: Were you not aware that the property between your house and Loveland r was zoned residential? What did you think it was zoned. Mr. Mase: I checked with the Engineering Department of the City, and they told me "Don't worry, no house can be built back there." Gary Clark: Our office does not make any comments to any one on whether or not houses can be built on certain properties. S. Sethi: What are the reasons for doing away with this ten-foot easement? • 18499 Mayfield Why approve it if it isn't going to be used for anything? Mr. Andrew: This easement is not required. Why encumber land with an easement if you don't need it? They can put a house on that lot whether there is 'an easement there or not. Mr. Ventura: Actually, I guess we are asking that you vacate that easement that runs through the house on Lot 773b3a. That lot is 137' deep with 110' of frontage on Loveland. Mr. Andrew: Do I understand correctly that your are asking for the vacating ,of the easement on Lot 773b3a only? You are amending the original petition so that this Commission would vacate only that portion of the county drain that lies within the confines of 773b3a? • 100 Mr. Ventura: Yes, that is right. • 1 Mrs. Scurto: Could I have some clarification as to what effect this has on the buildability of 773b1? Mr. Andrew: It has no effect on 773b1. • 6784 Mrs. Scurto: Just wanted the people to hear that. 1[1.40 Mr. Andrew: This petition has been amended to cover onlythat portion of the easement that runs across the lot that fronts on Loveland. Mr. Mase: • How will we know if a request comes in for the vacating of the other two lots? I didn't receive any notice on this meeting. Just heard about' it from my neighbors. • Mr. Andrew: I would suggest that you invest aboutr$1.50 a week and pick up a copy of the local newspaper regularly% .OLir tax roll records are not that current, but legal notices are put in the local newspaper regularly advising citizens of all Public Hearings held by this Commission as well as the City Council. There was no further discussion on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-7-3-7 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and adopted, it was #8-164-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 15, 1978 on Petition 78-7-3-7 as submitted by Peter A. and Ruth A. Ventura requesting the vacating of a ten-foot wide drainage easement located on a portion of Lot 773 on the north side of Curtis between Shadyside and Loveland in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-7-3-7, as amended, be approved; such vacating to cover only that portion of Lot 773 being legally described . as follows: A ten (10) foot wide easement for drainage purposes as . established across the South 110 feet of the North 223 feet of Lot 773, Supervisor's Livonia Plat No. 13, as recorded in Liber 68, Page 17, Wayne County Records, said plat being of part of the N. W. 1/4 of Section 10, T. 1 S. , R. 9 E. , Livonia Township (now City of Livonia) , Wayne County, Michigan. for the following reasons: • (1) The Livonia Drain #28 now serves the function which this easement formerly. provided. (2) With the abandonment of the drain the encumbrance on the lot will be freed so as to provide a more convenient and efficient utilization of the land. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/28/78, 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: Smith, Scurto, Falk, Morrow, Wisler, Andrew NAYS: Friedrichs ABSENT: Kluver, Zimmer Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 6785 Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-7-6-9 by the City Planning Commission to amend Section 4.04, Schedule of Minimum Lot Sizes in R-1 through R-5 Districts, to increase the minimum } depth and/or width for lots abutting major thoroughfares. 4 Mr. Andrew: . This is a petition initiated by the City Planning Commission to amend certain lot sizes. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak eitherfor or against this petition? There was no one else wishing to speak on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-7-6-9 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously adopted, it was #8-165-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 15, 1978 on Petition 78-7-6-9 as submitted by -the City Planning Commission to amend Section 4.04, Schedule of Minimum Lot Sizes in R-1 through R-5 Districts to increase the minimum depth and/or width for lots abutting major thorough- fares, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-7-6-9 be approved, for the following reasons: (1) The Zoning Ordinance is a more legally enforcible document to ensure the establishment of greenbelt easements when lots within the R-1 through' R-5 districts abut major thoroughfares. (2) The Zoning Ordinance will then require the same standards consistent with the Subdivision Rules and Regulations. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published _in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/28/78, 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 78-7-6-10 by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to amend Section 2.10, Definitions of Miscellaneous Terms, and Sectioh 5.03, Waiver Uses, to provide a definition of, and controls for, the location of residential homes for mentally or physically handicapped persons. Mr. Andrew: Again, this is a petition initiated by the City Planning Commission to amend the language in the current zoning ordinance. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? Mr. Weinberg: I understand there is talk about putting up one of these homes at 31450 Grenada Lyndon and Bainbridge, and I am wondering about the rezoning. Understand they are talkingabout eight parking spaces, and I don't like the idea of putting this up in a residential area. Mr. Andrew: I'm sorry, sir, but I really can't discuss this with you tonight because we don't have a definite petition to discuss. The only thing we are talking about now is an amendment to the text of our Zoning Ordinance to allow residential homes for the mentally or physically handicapped citizens of our City. 6786 Mr. Weinberg: Well, I understand there are certain investors coming into this community, and they are hoping to buy up property, and then lease ;t out for this type of development, and I am against any sort of thing like that. Mr. Andrew: I have no idea at all what you are talking about. We are only trying to amend the text of the Ordinance. Mr. Nagy:. Mr. Weinberg, if you would read our Zoning Ordinance #543 from cover to cover, you would find no mention whatsoever of regulations regarding - homes for the mentally and physicallf'handica,pped persons. Yes; we are aware that there are certain organizations looking for property to establish such homes within the City of Livonia, but we cannot regulate them until certain provisions are spelled out in our Ordinance and that is what we are trying to do tonight. When the time comes that ' certain areas of the City are proposed- to accommodate such developments, a public hearing will be held and all property owners within 500 feet will be notified. Tonight we are only here to amend the language in our Ordinance to include these provisions for homes for the mentally and physically handicapped persons. Resident: I think it would be great if we provide a place of dignity for these 30259 Minton children to live, especially here in Livonia. Resident: I wonder if you are aware that 3% of our population falls into the 11603 Cranston category of being either mentally or physically handicapped. And I would certainly encourage the development of homes for these people in the City of Livonia. Mrs. Scurto: I realize we are supposed to be only discussing an amendment to the Ordinance, but I feel that if anyone were to take a trip out to the Community Opportunity Center in Plymouth they would see that this function is a real asset to the neighborhood. I feel no one has a right to make any judgement on these types of facilities until they, take first hand look on them. Paul Mueller: I definitely speak in support of this Commission's petition because I 35865 Leon think it is imperative that all areas of the Country, and this City as well, should attempt to help the mentally and physically handicapped people get back into the mainstream of life. I realize that there will always be certain individuals, such as we have witnessed here tonight, who do not feel the same as I, but I would urge this Commission to act immediately and'pass any petition regarding the development of homes for mentally and physically handicapped persons here in the City of Livonia. Mr. Andrew: Any more questions or comments from the Commission? Anyone else in the audience. There was no further discussion on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 78-7-6-10. iOn a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Smith, and unanimously adopted, 410it was 6787 #-166-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 15, 1978 on Petition 78-7-6-10 as submitted by the City Planning Commission to amend Section 2.L0, Definitions of Miscellaneous Terms, and Section 5.03, ' Waiver Uses, to provide a definition of, and controls for, the location of residential homes for mentally or physically handicapped persons, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-7-6-10 be approved for the following reasons: (1) Adequate control for this residential use within the RUF District is • provided as a result of the waiver use standards. ..r.'•. (2) The RUF district. is the appropriate district within which to locate residential homes for mentally and physically handicapped persons as the RUF district provides the largest of the lot sizes of the residential district. (3) By establishing the use within" the waiver use district, these uses are not automatically permitted but are subject to the waiver requirements which include public hearings and notice to the adjoining property owners of the petition to locate these uses within the RUF zone, thereby assuring that the public will have a right to comment on the location of the facilities before their actual construction commences. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/28/78 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. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted, 1[10 it was- . #8-167-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 18, 1978 on Petition 78-6-2-17 by Seymour J. Levine Architects, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to construct a retail commercial development on the southwest corner of Five Mile and Middlebelt Road in the North 1/2 of Section 23, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-6-2-17 be approved, subject to the following , conditions: (1) that Site Plan, revised dated 8/14/78, prepared by Seymour J. Levine, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Elevation Plan, revised date 8/3/78, prepared by Seymour J. Levine, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; - (3) that Landscape Plan dated 7/2/78, prepared by James C. Scott Associates, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; (4) that the site signage shall comply with that as shown on the approved site plan and building elevation plan; I: (5) that the outdoor lighting fixtthres shall conform to those as shown on the approved site paln and the architectural rendering as submitted in connection with the petition; 6788 (6) that all landscape materials as shown on the. approved Landscape Plan shall be installed on the site before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition; (7) that an underground irrigation system be installed covering all the landscaped area for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use fully. eomplies witbr,Zoning Ordinance #543, Section 11.03(p) . (2) The site has sufficient capacity to support the intended use. (3) The proposed use, parking and ingress and egress will not adversely affect the surrounding established uses of the area. (4) The proposed use represents a substantial upgrading of the commercial development of this property with respect to building architecture, site layout and site landscaping. 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. [IV On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it was #8-168-78-RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 23.01(b) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to rezone property located on the west side of Newburgh Road, south of Six Mile Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, from R-3-B to P.L. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of such hearing be given as provided in Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, and that thereafter there shall be a report and recommendation sub- mitted to the City Council. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On 'a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and adopted, it was #8-169-78 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 357th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on July 18, 1978 be approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Scurto, Falk, Morrow, Wisler, Andrew NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Smith ABSENT: Zimmer, Kluver Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 6789 1 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted, it was #8-170-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a letter dated 8/2/78 from the petitioner requesting the tabling for one year of Petition 78-4-2-11 by Concrete Control Corporation reges.ting waiver use approval to park trucks and construction 'equipment on property located on the west side of Brookfield between Capitol and Plymouth Road in the Southwest 1/2 of Section 27, the City . Planning Commission concurs in the request, and does hereby determine to table Petition 78-4-2-11 for a period of''one year. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. At this time,Mr. Andrew passed the gavel to the Acting Vice-Chairman Mrs. Wisler,. and announced that he would decline from discussing and voting on the following petition. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and unanimously adopted, it was #8-171-78 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Land- scape Plan submitted by Ager Building Company, in connection with a condition of approval of the Preliminary Plat approval for Laurel Park Subdivision proposed to be located on the south side of Six Mile Road, west of Newburgh Road in the northeast 1/4 of Section 18, subject to the following condition: 1[4110 (1) that the Landscape Plan submitted by Ager Building Company, 27620 Farmington Road, dated 8/15/78, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to. _FURTHER RESOLVED that, the Entrance Marker Plan submitted by Ager Building Company, in connection with the Preliminary Plat approval for Laurel Park ' Subdivision 'proposed to be located on the south side of Six Mile Road, west ' of Newburgh Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18, be approved subject to the following condition: (1) that the Entrance Marker Plan .submitted by Ager Building Company, 27620 Farmington Road, dated 8/15/78, which is hereby approved', shall be adhered to subject to the revision that ornamentation other than • lighting may be used for the topmounted feature of the masonry columns and shall be adhered to. Mrs. Wisler declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The gavel was returned to the Chairman, Mr. Daniel R. Andrew. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Smith, and unanimously adopted, it was #8-172-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Ordinance 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #1306, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 78-7-8-21P by Shell Oil Company requesting approval of all plans required by Section- 18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to install two free-standing pump island canopy covers on the site of an .existing gasoline service station on the west side of Newburgh Road between Five Mile Road and Schoolcraft in Section .19, subject to the following conditions: 6790 (1) that Site Plan D-T-0-6, dated 5/23/78, prepared by Shell Oil Company, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and . (2) that building elevations as shown on Plans R-3491-1, prepared by the Beaman Corporation, which are hereby approved, shall be adhered to. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted, itwas #8-173-78 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to hold a Special Meeting on August 22, 1978 to reconsider the Revised Site Plan as submitted by Michael S. Downes Associates in connection with Petition 77-3-8-7 by Lindhout Associates requesting approval of all plans required • by Section 11.02 of Ordinance #543, _as amended by Ordinance #957, submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a two-building addition to an existing commercial development located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Grand River and Angling in Section 1. 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 adopted, it was #8-174-78 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to split the question on the Landscape Plan and Sign Plan submitted in connection with a condition of approval of Petition 78-3-8-4P by 'Bob Bickle requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, as amended, by Ordinance #1306, submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a commercial building on property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between Middlebelt and Savoie in Section 13. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Smith, Falk, Morrow, Wisler, Andrew NAYS: Scurto ABSENT: Kluver, Zimmer Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. . On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously adopted, it was #8-175-78 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Landscape Plan. submitted in connection with a condition of approval of Petition 78-3-8-4P by Bob Bickle requesting approval of all plans required by section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #1306, submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a commercial building on property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between Middlebelt and Savoie in Section 13, subject to the following conditions: (1) that Landscape Plan dated 8/1/78, prepared by Robert Bickle, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and (2) that alllandscape materials as shown on the approved Landscape Plan shall be installed on the site before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter maintained in a healthy condition. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and it was 6791 RESOLVED that, the Sign Plan, submitted in connection with a condition of approval Petition 78-3-8-4P 'by Bob Bickle requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #1306, submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a commercial building on the south side of Six Mile Road between Middlebelt and Savoie in Section 13, be approved, subject to the following condition: (1) that Sign Plan #4596, prepared by United Signs Affiliates, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Smith, Scurto, Wisler NAYS: Friedrichs, Falk, Morrow, Andrew ABSENT: Kluver, Zimmer Mr. Andrew declared the above motion failed for lack of support.. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and adopted, it was • #8-176-78 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table the Sign Plan submitted in connection with a condition of approval of Petition 78-3-8-4P by Bob Bickle requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #1306, submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a commercial building, on property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between Middlebelt and Savoie in Section 13, until the Study Meeting scheduled to be held on August 22, 1978. 1[ 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 #8-177-78 RESOLVED that, the Landscape Plan submitted in connection with a condition • of approval of Petition 78-5-8-10P by Shiels Associates, Architects, requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #1306, in connection with a proposal to construct an addition to an existing commercial building located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Jarvis and Alois in Section 30, be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that Landscape Plan #78-08, Sheet Sp-1, dated 8/14/78, prepared by Shiels Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; (2) that all landscape materials as shown on the approved Landscape Plan shall be installed on the site before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the addition and thereafter maintained in a healthy condition. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the 358th Regular Meeting } and Public Hearings held b the Livonia City Planning Commission on August 15, 1978 tog were adjo at/c ,6 C Y PLA N CO SSI N� ATTEST Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman osein alk, Secretary