Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1978-09-12 . 6796 • MINUTES OF THE 359th REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA ILO On Tuesday, September 12, 1978, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia, helds its 359th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33001 'Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Jerome W. Zimmer, Acting Chairman, . called the Regular Meeting and Public Hearings to order at 8:10 p.m. , with approximately 100 interested people in the audience. ,e, MEMBERS PRESENT: Jerome Zimmer Joseph Falk Suzanne Wisler C. Russell Smith R. Lee Morrow Esther Friedrichs Herman Kluver MEMBERS'ABSENT: Daniel R. Andrew (vacation) Judith Scurto (company business} 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. Zimmer then informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this 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 1[00 Commission, the petitioner then has ten days in which to appeal for relief. Otherwise the petition is terminated. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the first ,item on the agenda Petition 78-7-1-27 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the west side of • Harrison, south of Brentwood in the West 1/2 of Section 12, from R-1 to P.L. Mr. Zimmer: This petition represents the Planning Commission's efforts to signify that piece of property which is already owned by the City and identify it with the P.L. zoning, which designates Public Land. Mr. Nagy, do you have any further comments? Mr. Nagy: .Only by way of explanation: just want to state that this land is presently owned by the City of Livonia, and we are only trying to correct our Zoning Map by so designating this as P.L. There will definitely be no change in the use of the property, whether it be for active recreation or passive at the present time. We are only changing the zoning from R-1 to P.L. ; because it is not intended to be used for residential purposes. Mr. Zimmer: Thank you, Mr. Nagy. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this topic? Rodney Beckwith: I am just questioning why a fence was put up across that creek which 18224 Brentwood intersects that corner of the park property? We have been after the City to keep this creek cleaned up in this flood plain area. There is a considerable amount of wildlife there, and we would like you to con- i sider keeping this as a wildlife refuge. Are you familiar with the fact that there is a fence across this creek in the flood plain? 4 6797 (w. Nagy: The Planning Commission does not get involved with the fencing of park land. That is a matter of the Parks and Recreation Department, but since you have brought this to our attention, we will check with Parks and Recreation to see whether or not this fence is actually needed. oris Bachman: I have lived here since December, 1949 and I have attended many Council 18001 Lathers meetings, and three times Mr. Pollack tried to develop this R-7 property. The traffic that would come in .and out through Lathers and Harrison would be terrible. This piece of property is a very poor place for a park to be. Not only because of the flooding pro)}1ems, but because of the traffic also. This whole area is not set up' for any parking here either. Mr. Zimmer: Are you speaking of how this park is now, or what you expect it to be? Doris Bachman: 'I just don't want this turned into a park. Mr. Zimmer: Do you have an alternative as to how this property could be used? D. Bachman: No, I don't. Mr. Pollack wanted to put in 385 apartments and that also presented a traffic problem in this area. I have heard that there are no plans to develop this for at least ten years. I understand your " wanting to rezone this P.L. , but I also want you to be aware of the traffic problems in this area. Do you know that there are hunters in that park? So much shooting. The police say this area is very difficult to control. Kids set fires in there, and the Fire Department can't even get in there. " ;s. Friedrichs: Mrs. Bachman, I want you to, know that according to the information we have, this area will be left in its natural state; it is not intended to 60, be developed any further, even as a park. Since it was purchased with federal funds, the City cannot sell it to anyone for any other use. D. Bachman: 'Well, I want to be on record as fighting this proposal. How can we be expected to keep hunters out of there? Mrs. Friedrichs: Are there any "No Hunting" signs posted? D. Bachman: No, there aren't. Mr. White: I am here to speak for my mother. She owns Lots 34, 35, 36 and 37 , which 18442 Brentwood face on Harrison. Are you intending to vacate that portion of Harrison as shown on the map? Mr. Nagy: That portion of Harrison, is already vacated. Mr. White: We have been here since 1951, and since we face on both streets, we do use access from Harrison to Curtis. We were led to believe that Curtis is the half-mile road, and we use this out to Middlebelt. This matter tonight willnot interfere with our use of Harrison, will it? Mr. Nagy: That is a separate matter. Has no bearing on this 'petition. Come into our office during regular business hours and we will discuss this further. 1[0: Zimmer: Are there any more comments or questions from the Commission? Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak on the matter? . 6798 was no one else wishing to discuss this matter, Mr. Zimmer declared Public Hearing n Petition 78-7-1-27 closed. , [here n a motion duly .made by Mr. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Smith, and unanimously adopted, it as #9-185-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 12, 1978 on Petition 78-7-1-27. as submitted by the City'Planning Commission • on its own motion to rezone property located on the west side of Harrison, south of. Brentwood in the West ,l/2 of Section 12, from R-1 to P.L. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City, Council that ' Petition 78-7-1-27 be approved, for the following reasons: 1) The proposed Public Lands classification will reflect City ownership of the land. ' • • 2) The site in question is listed on the Master School and Park Plan as an existing park site. 3) Approval of this petition is consistent with Planning ,Commission policy of recommending the rezoning of all City owned park sites to Public Lands zoning classification. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 8/24/76, and that notices of such hearing were sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake ILWand Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Consumers Power Company, and City Departments as listed in .the Proof of Service. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. .Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the Agenda as Petition 78-7-1-28 by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to rezone property . located east of Merriman Road between Curtis and Hillbrook Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 11, from R-2 to P.L. Mr, Zimmer: Again we have a housekeeping chore before us, that is correcting our Zoning Map to reflect proper classification of City owned lands. Any comments frpm the Commission? Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this matter? David Leslie: Do I understand correctly that there will be no development in that 31103 Hillbrook area because it is a flood plain? . • Mr. Zimmer: We don't have any knowledge that anything will happen to that area other than what it is how. Mr. Leslie: Will there ever be an actual park? . Mr. Zimmer: I cannot say with any finality that that will happen. We are here tonight to simply set our records straight, and indicate on our ' IL ' . Zoning Map as this being Public Lands. 6799 [es Becker: Will the City be responsible for maintaining that 200' beyond the 15 Hillbrook back of our lots? The builder scraped all dirt back in there, and now it is just weeds, and a lot of ruts. There is a steep grade • down to the creek whenever we get a heavy rain. It was my under- standing that the developer was supposed to do something about restoring it to what it was originally. But he has done nothing.. I have taken it upon myself to mow the weeds. Mr. ,Zimmer: How long has it been sincethe builder left that area? Mr. Becker: I would say about a year. He still has a model on Bainbridge, and although he is developing property at the other end, he still uses that model on Bainbridge. Even after we moved in, we were told that he would grade this property behind us, and either seed or sod it. It really looks bad. I have tried to landscape it myself. But I am just wondering what will happen to it if it becomes Public Land. Mr. Zimmer: Actually changing the zoning on that property will not change it in any way. The City does have a responsibility to keep it in good condition. As far as the condition that the developer left it, we will have to look into that. Mr. Nagy: Yes, the City does have some protection as to how a developer leaves property when he is finished. He does have to post Improvement Bonds, and the City then determines what amount of improvement "has been accomplished before any monies are returned. As far as that particular piece of land, we,will look into this. .IL ' Becker: Because of the grade back there, especially behind Lots #46 and #47 , there is a trough there, and we get an awful lot of water down the hill -- at the back end of my sod. If the City takes this over, what do they plan on doing about this? Mr. Zimmer: I would suggest that you contact Mr. Nagy during regular business hours, and he can pursue this further. Mr. Falk: Mr. Becker, when was the last time you talked to the developer? Mr. Becker: The only people I have directly talked, to are the salesman in themodel, and the superintendent in charge of building. The 'superintendent is the one who led me to believe that something would be done back there. I even had to pay a man to knock some of that dirt out of there. Mr. Zimmer: Any more discussion on this matter? There was no one else wishing to speak on ,this matter, Mr. Zimmer declared Public Hearing onPetition 78-7-1-28 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and unanimously adopted, it was _-186-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having beenheld on September 12, 1978 on Petition 78-7-1-28 as submitted by the City Planning Commission (4, on its own motion to rezone property located east of Merriman Road between Curtis and Hillbrook Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 11, from R-2 to P.L. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-7-1-28 be approved, for the following reasons: 6800 to . 1) The proposed Public Lands classification will reflect City ownership of the land. 2) Approval of this petition is ,consistent with Planning Commission policy of recommending the rezoning of all City owned park sites- to Public Lands. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 8/24/78, 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. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the Agenda, as Petition 78-7-1-29 by the City Planning Commission on its own motion' to rezone property located south of Pickford Avenue between Sunset and Hillcrest in. the Northwest 1/4 of Section 11, from R-1 to P.L. Mr. Zimmer: As in the previous two petitions .again we are attempting to reflect proper zoning of all lands on the comprehensive Zoning Map of the City of Livonia. Any comments from the Commission? Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this matter? ere was no one present wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Zimmer declared Public taring on Petition 78-7-1-29 closed. a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Smith, and unanimously adopted, was #9-187-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 12, • 1978 on Petition 78-7-1-2.9 as submitted by the City Planning Commission on • its own motion to rezone property located south of Pickford Avenue between Sunset and Hillcrest in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 11, from R-1 to P.L. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-7-1-29 be approved, for the following reasons: 1) The proposed Public Lands classification will reflect City ownership of the land. 2) The site in question is listed on the Master School and Park Plan as an existing park site. 3) Approval of this petition is consistent with Planning Commission policy of recommending the rezoning of all City owned park sites to Public Lands. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 8/24/78, 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. ': Zimmer declared the above motion carried-and foregoing resolution adopted. 6801 [0. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the Agenda as Petition 78-7-1-30 by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to rezone property located west of Middlebelt between Curtis and Six Mile Road in the South 1/2 of Section 11, from R-1 to P.L. Mr. Zimmer: Again, we are merely attempting to correct the zoning classifications as they appear on our Zoning Map. Any comments or questions from the Commission? Is there anyone' in the audience wishing to speak on this matter? If' William Willoughby: My question is - What would the City do if it remained R-lA. Could 30256 Brookview they develop it as a park even if it remained residential? Does it have to be designated as P.L. for them to do any developing? Mr. Nagy: The policy of the City is to try to adhere to its own zoning ordinances. It would have to be zoned P.L. before it could be developed as a park. The City could not go in there now and develop it under the R-lA zoning. Mr. Willoughby: I would like to see this remain as R-1A, and can see no reason for changing it to P.L. We like having the woods and the animals, and if you say nothing will change even if it is rezoned, why change it? Also, is it the Board's practice to systematically go through all the public land in the City and change the zoning? Zimmer:1[: No, it is not fair to say that we systematically do this, but we do intend to indicate on our Zoning Map the proper classifications on different pieces of property throughout the City. This is simply a housekeeping chore that we are attempting to accomplish tonight, and this was not brought to us by any other segment of the City government. Mr. Willoughby: I still say leave it R-1A. Mrs. Wisler: I am sure that if anyone came to the City and wanted to buy some property that was on the market because they wanted to build a home, they would want to know what the proper zoning is on that property. If the property is owned by the City, it must be designated as P.L. on the Zoning Map. Also, if the property lies in a flood plain area, they would want to know that as well. There is no point in having property that is owned by the City remain in the residential zoning classification. Mr. Zimmer: Yes, I just want to re-emphasize that we are merely trying to put our Zoning Map in order. There is nothing more to this than that.. Resident: I live directly south of this area, and have several questions. Why 30005 Bobrich are we wasting time here tonight if it is still going to be called a park? And what about the value of the homes in that area? And who is going to maintain the area and keep it clean? Mr. Zimmer: We have no choice, we have an obligation to put our Zoning Map in order. A P.L. classification simply implies public land, this petition says nothing about a park. 6802 I. Nagy: The use of land 'that is City owned and designated for recreational purposes rests with the Parks & Recreation Commission. They are the ones who set the policy regarding the use of the land. They have to identify these parcels by name, and just because some may be named "such and such park" that doesn't necessarily mean that it is an active recreation area. They usually identify these parcels naming them similarly to adjacent subdivisions for identification purposes only. If you ever have any questions regarding the development or use of these lands, call their office. I am sure they would invite you to one of their meetings. The Pa,rks & Recreation Commission sets the policy for the use of the land, oui job involves the zoning. Resident: Well, if it is called a park, doesn't that leave it open to be developed 30005 Bobrich as a park? Mr. Zimmer: The designation of "park" is nothing more than a name on a piece of land. Resident: How do we know when they have their meetings? Mr. Zimmer: They do not send out notices as we do. You simply just call the Parks & Recreation Department and ask them to send you a notice of their meetings. Mrs. Friedrichs: I would like to reiterate that there is no plan for any development of that area. It is simply to be left in its natural state. And as far as property value, I would certainly rather live adjacent to a park than have residences behind me. sident: Would you like to have your back yard next to a baseball field? And where will the people park who come to these ball games? . Wisler: I see these people are worried about the label on this area as "Sunset Park." This label has been on that area for many years. The Parks & Recreation people keep track of all their park land, and I am sure no changes are planned for this area. I have a park that backs up to my house, called "Heiman Park," and there hasn't been 'a single change in that area for the last fifteen years. Resident: Do we have any guarantee that it will never be developed? Mr. Nagy: Check with Parks and Recreation. Mrs. Kennedy: We have lived here for the last five years, and when we wanted to purchase 17486 Stamwich another 50' behind our house, we were told that this was designated as Public Land, and we could not purchase it. Three years ago this area went up for sale. We like the idea of wildlife running through there., but we don't want a park. We don't want beer bottles, trash, all that stuff. If that land is for sale, why can't. I buy it? Mr. Zimmer: I really don't believe that anyone could go in there and develop this as residential when in fact it is public land. -s. Kennedy: Well, they did sell to a realtor. . Nagy: The City did not own the land that was sold to Ager Building Company. That land was owned by a private individual. 6803 s. Kennedy: You are saying that the City owns only that property to the green line. What about that land beyond that? How did this realtor acquire that? Nagy: He acquired it from a private individual. The City was in no way involved in those negotiations. That subdivisiongoes back five or six years. Mrs. Kennedy: What about that property directly behind us? Mr. Nagy: In order to assist the City in acquiring various acreages throughout the City, the City became involved with a Federal program on a 50-50 basis. That is, the Federal Government pays for half and the City pays the other half. When the City acquired this particular piece north of Bell Creek, it was designated to be used as recreation and open space only. John Harrington: I really wouldn't mind having this designated as Public Land, but I did 30416 Brookview hear Mr. Nagy say "park." I was notaware of the manner in which this land was. acquired, but I understand now that with federal funds being involved in the purchase, it is consequently designed to be developed as a park. I suppose that means this whole area. I don't suppose anyone is opposed to a park per se, but what about that real narrow section just north of my property. It is less than 100' wide, and serves only as a Flood Drain. Why couldn't it be designated as Flood Plain on your map, because that is what it really is. .s. Wisler: Mr. Harrington, we couldn't possibly designate this area as Flood Plain because we do not have such a classification. If you were to check with our Engineering Department's maps, you would be able to see all the flood plain areas throughout the whole City. But the Planning Department does not have that detailed of a zoning classification. Mr. Zimmer: Yes, Mr. Harrington, our Engineering Department has many maps, showing the topography of the whole City. Our Planning Department's Zoning Map only identifies certain zones throughout the city, but does not get involved with anything of an engineering nature. Mr. Nagy: •Our Zoning Ordinance #543 incorporates flood plain regulations of the City. Engineering Department. records show that area as being part of the Tarabusi Flood Plain. You are welcome to visit either the Engineering Office or our Planning Department any time and take a look at our maps. George Nicholas: You say there are no parks going to be built here, but right on the map 30004 Bobrich it says two "park sites." . It says PARK SITES. What does that mean? Mr. Zimmer: I appreciate your concern. Asmentioned before, the word "park" means different things. We are here merely to set our records straight and show this as Public Land. We do not know of any park to be developed. You probably think "park" means baseball diamonds, swings, tables, etc. All we know is that this is supposed to be no different than it is right now —left in its natural state. The label "Park Site" implies nothing more than that. Nicholas: Show me a park that has been left in its natural state in the whole City. Zimmer: There are many such parks throughout the City. 6804 .Nicholas: I paid $50,000 for my home three years ago, and I like the natural l[le woods and the wildlife, and I don't want .any kids running through my yard when. it is turned into a park. Smith: I think we are getting away from the question which indicates that the map should be changed to show this area is no longer zoned R1A, but is zoned P.L. , which it is. This land is really owned by all the citizens of the City of Livonia. Currently, our map is marked incorrectly and we are merely trying to set the record straight. r. Mr. Zimmer: I really feel you people should direct your thoughts and feelings to the .Parks and Recreation Department, as well as their Commission. Let them know just how you would like this area to look. I am sure they will listen to your comments. Mary Bridges: When was thisland purchased? - 30208 Brookview Mr. Nagy: In 1969. Mrs. Bridges: . When you say that this park is open to the public, do you mean everyone, or just Livonia people. Mr. Nagy: Any Public Land sodesignated that provides open space is available to the whole public. -s. Bridges: You mean anyone outside of Livonia could come in there. Right now there are gangs that gather in there. Sometimes we. can even hear the noise coming from Rotary Park. I feel that some of the people that come in there are a real nuisance. Tell me, does P.L. mean park land or public land? Mr. Zimmer: Public Land. Mrs. Bridges: As Public Land -could the City sell it to somebody else for development? Mr. Zimmer: When the City owns land fully, yes they can sell it. But because this property was purchased with help from the Federal government, it cannot be used for anything other than public land. Mrs. Bridges: And you say the Parks & Recreation Department people would listen to what we say as to how we want this land to be used. Mr. Zimmer: Obviously, I cannot speak for them, but I am sure they will listen to the people of Livonia and do what they can in the best interests of the people. Mrs. Bridges: But you are saying that if it is made public land, people could come in and do whatever they wanted to do in there. Mr. Zimmer: Anything that is not illegal iv. Kluver: First of all, I want to apologize for being late, but in listening to this discussion since I arrived, it appears that some of these people are not too pleased with having a flood plain area behind .them. I also live with a flood plain areabehind, and I think it is great. My wife has planted flowers and bushes, and we have a great deal of privacy. There is really no danger to having this area so near. Mrs. Friedrichs lives on a flood • 6805 isplain area, Mr. Morrow lives on a flood plain area. What we are trying to do here tonight is just set our records straight and show this property zoned as it is. . Kennedy: Well, I don't live on a flood plain. My property backs right up to Sunset Park, and I really don't like the idea ofa lot of people coming and going into that area for recreation purposes. Mr. Zimmer: City Council will be making the final decision on this, and they will • be holding a Public Hearing,, just like tkiis one. You people should let ' them also know exactly how you feel about this. James A. Leslie: If the City bought this land in 1969, why did it take them nine years to 30112 Brookview get around to changing the zoning on it?, Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Leslie, I. really cannot answer that. Evidently, matters of rezoning are handled on a priority basis. I really cannot, say why this particular parcel took so long to get on the agenda. Is there anyone else wishing to speak on this matter? There was no further discussion on this matter, Mr. Zimmer declared Public Hearing on Petition 78-7-1-30 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously approved, it was . ?,-188-78. RESOLVED THAT, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 12, 1978 on Petition 78-7-1-30 as submitted by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to rezone property located west of Middlebelt Road, between Curtis and Six Mile Roads, in the South 1/2 of Section 11, from R-1A to P.L. , the City- Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City. Council that Petition 78-7-1-30 be approved, for the following reasons: 1) The proposed Public Lands classification will reflect City ownership of the land. 2) The site in question is listed on the Master School and Park Plan as an existing park site. 3) Approval of this petition is consistent with the Planning Commission's policy of recommending the rezoning of all City owned park sites to the Public Lands classification. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 8/24/78, 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. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary announced the next item on the Agenda as • Petition 78-7-2-20 by Ginter H. Blankenburg requesting waiver use approval to expand 4 .an existing auto repair, muffler and brake business within a building located on the ' south side of Schoolcraft Road, east of Newburgh Road, in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29. 6806 `. Zimmer: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file re petition? 1[ 10. Nagy: Yes, we have a letter from our Industrial Development Coordinator indicating that currently there exists a waiver use building on this site . . . etc. , signed Daniel J. Gilmartin. Also a letter from Engineering indicating no engineering problems connected with the proposal. Mr. Zimmer: Is the petitioner present? What are your plans? , '1 ' Ginther Blankenburg: I own the auto repair facility there now. There is only one building, 18592 Renwick but it is divided into two sections. One section was leased to the pizza company, but they went out of business, and rather than rent it out again, I would rather expand my own business into the other room. Mr. Zimmer: You are now the owner of the total property? Mr. Blankenburg: Yes, I purchased it approximately three years ago. Mr. Zimmer: Any questions from the Commission? Mr. Falk: John, doesn't this petition conflict with our M-1 Zoning District regulations? Mr. Nagy: Yes, the plans as submitted are in violation with the M-1 Zoning District regulations. ILFalk: Did the petitioner know this before he came before us tonight? Nagy: The petitioner was made aware of the Ordinance requirements after having discussed this with our Industrial Development Coordinator. Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Nagy, do I understand correctly this petitioner has to come before us requesting waiver use approval in order to expand his present business? Mr. ,Nagy: Yes, Petitioner currently has right to operate auto repair business only in the westerly one half portion of the building. Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Blankenburg, it appears there are some discrepancies currently out- standing that have to be taken care of. The front yard of the building is not properly landscaped and, the parking area is definitely not adequate. Mr. Blankenburg: What do you want in the front --- I have grass there. And as far as the parking, I plan to put in another driveway and parking to the east of the building. Mr. Zimmer: There are definitely some deficiencies that preclude us from approving this at this time. Mr. Blankenburg: What do I have to go through just to move next door in my own building? When I purchased this building, I got a permit to operate this auto repair shop? Now I can't even move into the next room? : .Zimmer: Actually, you are operating an auto repair facility in a M-1 or manufacturing district. We realize that all you want to do is expand your business, but this is commercial intrusion in an M-1 District. . .Blankenburg: What do you want me to do - burn the building? 6807 Zimmer: All I am saying is that we cannot approve this petition until certain conditions are met. In order to expand your auto repair facility in an M-1 District, you need waiver use approval. There are a couple of questions here that have. to be resolved first, and I feel that we should table this matter to a future Study Meeting so that we can look at this more closely. Mr. Blankenburg: How long will that take? Mr. Nagy: Could be scheduled for nett -week. , Mr. Zimmer: We can take no definiteaction on this until all the plans are in order. And I am wondering if there is anyone in the neighborhood who would like to speak on this matter. Is there anyone present wishing to speak either for or against this petition? Any more comments or questions from the Commission? There was no one present wishing to be heard any further on this matter, Mr. Zimmer declared Public Hearing on Petition 78-7-2-20 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and adopted, it was #9-189-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 12, 1978 on Petition 78-7-2-20 by Ginter H. Blankenburg requesting waiver use approval to expand an existing auto repair, muffler &brake business within a building 110rlocated on the south side of Schoolcraft Road, east of Newburgh Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29, the City Planning Commission scheduled to be held on September 19, 1978. oll call vote on the foregoing motion resulted in the following: ' AYES: Friedrichs, Smith, Falk,, Morrow and Wisler NAYS: Kluver and Zimmer ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Scurto and Andrew Mr. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the Agenda as Petition 78-8-2-21 by Wabeek Properties requesting waiver use approval to construct a branch bank facility on the southwest corner of Six Mile and Newburgh Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 18. Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file re this petition? Mr. Nagy: Just a letter from Engineering indicating no engineering problems connected with the proposal. The building plan fully complies with the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Zimmer: Is the petitioner present? Just what are your plans? 'nn Higgins: Yes, this is to be a branch office of Detroit Bank and Trust known as In Prop. Detroit Bank-Livonia. Will comprise of 3500 square feet, with eight 1 W. Fort St. teller cages, 3 management offices, safe-deposit box, as well as roit employee access areas. The exterior is to be constructed of face brick 6808 with aluminum metal siding. I would understand that we have a problem with the maximum coverage for signs allowed in this area. We feel our IL bank is a professional type organization, but we also need some visibility as far as signs are concerned. We have a free standing sign which we would like to place on the Newburgh Road side of the site, as well as a low-profile sign on the Six Mile Road side. We know this is not in compliance with the ordinance, and intend to appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals for variance on these signs. We feel our design is in good taste with the property. We intend to put up a facility similar to those at Six Mile and Farmington, as well as F .ve Mile and Levan. If the Board feels that these signs are too much, our next alternative would be signage on the building. (He then presented drawings to the Commission for their viewing.) Mr. Zimmer: Just where did you want to put the free standing sign? Mr. Higgins: On the Newburgh Road side of the property,. a few feet back from the right of way. Mr. Zimmer: Any comments or questions from the Commission? Mrs. Wisler: I am not sure I quite understand the problem. You are requesting .a free standing sign, and what was the alternative? - Mr. Higgins: Signs across the face of the building. s. Wisler : ' The pylon sign is a free standing sign, right? And that exceeds the area allowed for such a sign? Higgins: It would be allowed in a C-1 District. Mrs. Friedrichs: I would just like to comment that I frequently pass your bank at Six Mile and Farmington, and I have no objection at all to the pylon sign at that location. Would this new one be approximately the same size? Mr. Higgins: Yes, it would. Mrs. Friedrichs: I must say that compliments are in order for that whole site; the land- scaping and the maintenance are very well done. Mr. Falk: I would question the development of Laurel Park. Weren't there a lot of people who were opposed to something like this because of traffic, etc.? Mr. Nagy: The Laurel Park Plan was never developed in such detail. The master plan was intended to be more of a conceptual plan than a detailed site plan as such. Mr. Falk: I just want to make sure that we don't just go ahead and approve something that these people were never told about, something that might generate a lot of traffic. E. -Nagy: Actually most, of the discussion with the citizens in that area centered around Jacobson's and the other department stores that might want to go in there. The developer of Laurel Park did dedicate that corner adjacent to this bank site, an area of 22,500 square feet, to avoid excess traffic at that intersection. • 6809 } Zimmer: So you are saying, Mr. Nagy, that you have no problems with this waiver use request, that all plans and landscaping are acceptable? Nagy: With the exception of the signs as presented, which is subject to a variance by the Zoning Board of Appeals, all other aspects of the proposal are in full compliance and attractive in their design. The staff does recommend approval. Mr. Zimmer: Are there more comments or, questions frog the Commission? Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this matter? There was no one present wishing to speak any further on this matter, Mr. Zimmer declared Public Hearing on Petition 78-8-2-21 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and adopted, it was #9-190-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 12, 1978 on Petition 78-8-2-21 as submitted by Wabeek Properties, requesting waiver use approval to construct a branch bank facility on the southwest corner of Six Mile and Newburgh Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 18 the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-8-2-21 be approved, for the following reasons: 1) The proposed use is appropriate to the area and will not adversely affect the surrounding uses of the area. 2) The site has excess capacity to support the use. 3) All plans are drawn in full compliance with the requirements of Zoning Ordinance #543 as well as being consistent with good site planning and building architectural standards subject to the following conditions: 1) that Site Plan #DB-337, Sheet A-1-B, revised date 9/11/78, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; 2) that building elevations as shown on Plan #DB-337, Sheet A-1-B, revised date 9/11/78, with the exception of the signage shown thereon, are hereby approved and shall be adhered to; 3) that signage shall consist of two low-profile signs, one erected on the Newburgh Road side of the property and the other on the Six Mile Road side, exact locations to be determined by petitioner and the Planning Department, subject to approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals; 4) that Landscape Plan dated August 1978 prepared by Goldner-Walsh, Inc. , which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and 5) that all landscape materials as shown on the approved Landscape Plan shall be installed on the site prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet, the petitioner, and City Department as listed in the Proof of Service. 6810 [rollcall vote on the foregoing motion resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Friedrichs, Zimmer, Falk, Morrow and Wisler NAYS: Smith ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Andrew and Scurto Mr. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the Agenda as Petition 78-8-2-22 by Lindhout Associates requesting waiver use approval to construct a branch bank facility on the southwest corner of Five Mile and Merriman Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 22. Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file re petition? Mr. Nagy: Engineering Division advises investigation reveals availability to water main etc. , signed by Mr. McAllister. Mr. Zimmer: Is the petitioner or his representative here? Could you kindly explain briefly the plans for this corner? Frank Perrin: Yes, we have a proposal here to build a branch of Manufacturer National liPtndhout Assoc. Bank of. Livonia, consisting of 3000 square feet, with an attached canopy for drive-ins. J. Zimmer: Any comments or questions from the Commission? . Wisler: Where are your signs to be located? Mr. Perron: We have no signs included in this petition. Mr. Falk: Do you own just this parcel you plan to put the building on, or do you have an option to purchase the land further west? Mr. Perron: We own the entire site from Arden to Merriman Road. We have no plans to purchase any additional land. Mr. Zimmer: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? Mr. Nagy, do you find these plans to be in order? Mr. Nagy: Yes, we do. There was no one present wishing to speak any further on this matter, Mr. Zimmer declared Public Hearing on Petition 78-8-2-22 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Smith, and unanimously adopted, it was #9-191-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 12, I: 1978 on Petition 78-8-2-22 as submitted by Lindhout Associates requesting waiver use approval to construct a branch bank facility on the southwest corner of Five Mile and Merriman Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 22, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition. 78-8-2-22 be approved for the following reasons: . 6811 I[ 1) The proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding established uses of the area. 2) The proposed use is in full compliance with the P.S. District regulations and the specific standards of the waiver use section of the P.S. District regulations that relate to banks. 3) The site, building and .landscape plans are well done and fully consist with good site planning and building architectural standards. subject to the following conditions: 1) that Site Plan #7809, Sheet P-1, dated 8/16/78, prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; 2) that Building Elevation Plan #7809, Sheet P-3, dated 8/16/78, prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; • 3) that all landscape materials as shown on Plan#7809, Sheet P-2, dated 8/16/78, prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to and all landscape materials shall be in- stalled on the site prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter maintained in .a healthy condition; 4) all signage plans shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and approval before the issuance of any sign permits. 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. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution' adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary; announced the next item on the Agenda as Petition 78-8-3-8 by Mr. & Mrs. James Sturgill, et al, requesting the vacating of a public alley lying between Deering and. Floral Avenues in the Northeast 1/4 of " Section 12. Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Nagy, any correspondence in the file re this petition? • Mr. Nagy: Yes, we have a letter dated 8/11/78 from our Engineering Division indicating that a field check on this area reveals that this particular alley does serve as an egress and ingress to established commercial uses at this location. In addition, there is a 24" sanitary sewer located within this area and Engineering advises they have serious reservations' regarding the vacating of this. alley. .Zimmer: Is the petitioner present? • S. J. Sturgill: If you people feel itis not advisable to vacate this land, why don't 39 Deering you zone it P.L. and plant trees down the middle? I just want some sleep and rest after 15 years. The citizens do not deserve to have this nuisance so close. Do you know that this alley is used as a public • 6812 • `1p. Sturgill: bathroom and a race track,. and that's not all. It serves no useful continued) , purpose., maybe except for those three stores. I live right here on Lot #212, and I know what Engineering says. But they don't have to put up with what we have been putting up with for the past 15 years. I tell you I have seen cars pull in next to my garage, and the man gets out and steps behind the telephone pole and goes to the bathroom. Look, if I want to see a man's private parts, I have got the guts to ask him. I don't want to have to look at that outside my house in broad daylight. Every day of the week I am picking up garbage that is thrown out in that • alley. Cartons and bags from McDonalds7,,,Burger Chef,- Burger King, all kinds of trash. Why should I have to put up with this? The City doesn't maintain this alley. They have done nothing to keep the dust down, or even keep it clean. All I know is that it is going to be vacated one way or another. I am going to have some peace and rest. Mr. Zimmer: Mrs. Sturgill, has this situation changed lately? Mrs. Sturgill: Every year it gets worse. Mr.. Zimnier: This is a public thoroughfare. Mrs. Sturgill: Sure, it was an alley when we moved in,but all the other alleys up there have been closed. So now we get all the drunks down this alley. - I have even had my car hit. I tell you, I am going to get some peace and quiet. Mr. Zimmer: Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak on this petition? chael Kolodziej : I have a commercial building right along this alley. I do sympathize 4835 W. Seven Mile with Mrs. Sturgill. We have tried to work something out. 'I suggested 'ad, Circle TV that .maybe we could put some sort of barricade in the middle, but I do not feel that we should close this completely. There is a power • line in back of our building, and other than this alley there is no • access at the back of our store. Mr. Zimmer: . You are saying you have a need for this alley? Mr. Kolodziej : Yes, every day. That is the only way deliveries are made, and we are right in the ‘center of that group of buildings. Mrs. Sturgill: I even talked to Mr. Osborn and' asked him if there wasn't some way we could block that alley. I just want to stop all that unnecessary traffic. Mr. Osborn couldn't be persuaded to do anything about it. I went to City Council, and. they said "NO" - I would have to go to the Planning Com- mission but that it would probably take about six months. In six months, I'll be dead from all that disturbance. .Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Nagy, is there any alternative to vacating that alley? • Mr. Nagy: We really would have to examine the Traffic Ordinance to see what alternatives we might have as far as blocking the alley or posting sign for no thru traffic. • s. Sturgill: Rezone it to P.L. and plant trees down the middle. 4. Zimmer: Is there anyone else wishing. to speak.on this matter? Any more comments 4 or questions from the Commission? 6813 Falk: I really feel Mrs. Sturgill has some problems here, and I feel we should invite Mrs. Sturgill and this gentleman who owns the store to a Study Meeting so. that we can look into this further and possibly come up with some solution. - re was no one else wishing to discuss this matter, Mr. Zimmer declared Public Hearing1[0,6 , on Petition 78-8-3-8 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted, it was #9-192-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 12, 1978 on Petition 78-8-3-8 as submitted by Mr. & Mrs. James Sturgill, et al, ' requesting the vacating of a public alley. lying between Deering and Floral Avenues in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 12, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 78-8-3-8 until the. Study Meeting scheduled to be held on September 19, 1978. Mr. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the Agenda as . Petition 78-8-3-9 by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Council Resolution #703-78 to vacate Outlot C within the Stark Gardens Subdivision located north of the Schoolcraft Service Drive between Ellen Drive and Riverside in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 21. . Zimmer: This petition comes before us by way of a Council resolution. John, is there any correspondence regarding this matter? . . Nagy: Just a letter from Engineering advising that there is a storm sewer in this location and they suggest that a full width easement be retained. No other engineering problems connected with this proposal. • Mr. Zimmer: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this matter? William Shaw: I am here to represent the people of Stark Gardens. All the people are 13968 Ellen pretty much in agreement with the retention of the storm sewer easement between the two subdivisions, and feel this should be sent to City Council as soon as possible for the vacating of this outlot. Mr. Zimmer: Do we need to make it a matter of public record just how this will be divided? Mr. Shaw: The outlot is currently in my name, and I will handle all the details as far as splitting the property accordingly. Mr. Zimmer: All right. Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak on this matter? Any more comments or questions from the Commission. There was no further discussion on this matter, Mr. Zimmer declared Public Hearing on Petition 78-8-3-9 closed. " • 10 a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and unanimously adopted, was i-193-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 12, 1978 on Petition 78-8-3-9 as submitted by the City Planning Commission pursuant 6814 to Council Resolution #703-78 to vacate Outlot C within the Stark Gardens Subdivision located north of the Schoolcraft Service Drive between Ellen Drive and Riverside in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 21, the City Planning Commission does hereby: recommend to the City Council. that Petition 78-8-3-9 be approved :subject to the retention of a full width ,easement for the following reasons: 1) There is no need to retain the outlot for public purposes and uses as an easement would provide the, same protection that is required to properly service the underground public u .lities. 2) The outlot can. be better maintained and utilized if the City' abandoned its interest as same would attach to the adjoining residential properties of the area. • 3) The outlot area can better serve the public interest if it were to return to private ownership, attach to residential properties and, in turn, be properly maintained and placed back on the tax ,rolls 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 8/24/78, 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. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Smith, and unanimously adopted, it was f194-78 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 north- west corner of Plymouth Road and• Inkster Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 25, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-6-2-18 be denied for the following reasons: 1) The site lacks sufficient capacity to support the intended use. 2) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use complies with the C-2 District regulations, Section 11.03 (m) . 3) .The plan, as presented by the petitioner, clearly indicates that the site will be overburdened by vehicles entering and leavingthe site as plan ,reveals that the vehicles will have to pass over and/or back onto a public • sidewalk which is in violation of Ordinance #543, Section 18.37(b) , Offstreet Parking requirements. 4) The proposed use will be detrimental to and adversely affect the surrounding and established uses Of the area, particularly with respect to the adjoining public alley. 5) Traffic entering and leaving the alley will pass from a confined building area and will have an obstructed view of traffic located on the alley which will be hazardous to the safe flow of traffic on the alley. • . 6815 6) The petitioner has failed to show how the proposed site, building or area will benefit as a result of the installation of the new use and has further failed to show compliance with the general waiver use requirements of . Zoning Ordinance #543, Section 19.06, as the plan submitted in connection .with the petition shows no improvement proposed for the site and/or building other than painted wall signs and the installation of two garage doors at the north building wall which adjoins the public alley. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of, tlie above Pubic 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. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Morrow., and adopted, it was #9-195-78 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Landscape Plan and Entrance Marker Plan for Quakertown Subdivision proposed to be located south of Six Mile Road, east of Haggerty Road, in the. West 1/2 of Section 18, subject to the following conditions: • 1) that Landscape Plan LP 78-4-43, dated. 8/31/78, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; 2) that .the Entrance Marker Plan shown on the .approved Landscape Plan, which is hereby approved, shall be. adhered to; and 3) that the Entrance Marker and the landscape materials, as shown on the approved Landscape Plan shall be installed by 11/1/79. • A.roll call vote on the above motion resulted in the following: AYES: Friedrichs, Smith, Zimmer, Falk, Morrow and Wisler NAYS: Kluver ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Andrew and Scurto Mr. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. • . On a motion duly made by. Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Falk, and adopted, it was #9-196-78 RESOLVED that the minutes of the 358th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on August 15, 1978 be approved. A roll call. vote on the above motion resulted in the following: • AYES: Friedrichs, Smith, Falk, Wisler and Morrow NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Kluver and Zimmer ' ABSENT: Andrew and Scurto • [Ito Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. • 6816 a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Wisler and adopted, it was L -197-78 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 322nd Special Meeting held by the Planning Commission on August 29, 1978, be approved. AYES: Kiuver, Friedrichs, Smith, Zimmer, Morrow and Wisler NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Falk ABSENT: Andrew and Scurto • Mr. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously adopted, it was #9-198-78 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 determine to table Petition 78-7-8-23, required by Section 18.47 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct the Mid-7 Shopping Plaza on the east side of Middlebelt Road. between Clarita and Pickford in Section 12, until the Study Meeting scheduled for September 19, 1978. Mr. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly .made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and unanimously adopted, it was -1-99-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance L ' . ' of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #1306, the 'City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 78-8-8-24P as submitted by David E. Powell, Inc. , requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct an office building on the north side of Schoolcraft between-Hubbard and Farmington Road in Section 22, subject to the following conditions: 1) that Site Plan 7818, Sheet A-1, dated 8/29/78, prepared by St. Cyr Architect & Associates, Inc. , which is herebyapproved, shall be adhered to; 2) that building elevations as shown on Plan 7818, Sheet A-2 dated 8/2/78, prepared by St. Cyr Architect & Associates, Inc. , which are hereby 'approved, shall be adhered to; 3) that Landscape Plan dated 8/29/78, prepared by Artech, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and 4) that all landscape materials as shown on the approved Landscape Plan shall be installed before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition. Mr. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously. adopted, it was IL 6817 L200_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 does hereby approve Petition 78-8-8-26P as submitted by Amoco Oil Company requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct two canopies on an existing gasoline station site located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Six Mile Road and Ravine in Section ii, subject to the following conditions: 1) that Site Plan 5434, dated 8429/78, prepare# by American Oil Company, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; 2) that canopy elevations as shown on Plan 76021, dated 6/21/76, prepared by Amoco Oil Company, which are hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and 3) that the street trees shown on the approved Site Plan shall be plated on the site before May 1, 1979. Mr. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and unanimously adopted, it was #9-201-78 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 Com- 1[0', mission does hereby approve Petition 78-8-8-27P as submitted by Amoco Oil Company requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct two canopies on an existing gasoline station site located on the east side of Farmington Road between Six Mile-Road and Curtis in Section 10, subject to the following conditions: 1) that Site Plan 5729, dated 8/29/78, prepared by Standard Oil Company, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; 2) that canopy elevations as shown on Plan 76021, dated 6/21/76, prepared by Amoco Oil Company, which are hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and 3) that the street trees on the approved Site Plan shall be planted on the site before May 1, 1979. Mr. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and unanimously adopted, it was #9-202-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #988, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 77-10-8-29P as submitted by Nicholas Lubnik requesting approval of all plans required by Section_ 18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct an office building on the east side of Farmington Road between Six Mile Road and Curtis in Section i. Ihr 10, subject to the following conditions: 6818 1) that Landscape Plan for Heinlen-Lubnik dated 7/17/78, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and 2) that the landscaping as shown on the approved Landscape Plan shall be installed on the site by November 1, 1978 and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition. Mr. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. f,, Mrs. Wislerexcused from meeting at 11:30 p.m. On a motionduly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Smith, and unanimously adopted,. it was #9-203-78 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 78-8-8-29 by Lindhout Associates requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 submitted in connection .with a proposal to construct a professional office complex on the west side of Farmington • Road between Lyndon and Five Mile Road in Section 21, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) that Site Plan 7735, Sheet P-1, dated 8/25/78, prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; 2) that building elevations as shown on Plan 7735, Sheet P-3, dated S/16/78, prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, which are hereby approved, shall be adhered to; 3) that the landscaping as shown on Plan 7735, Sheet P-1, dated 8/25/78, prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; 4) that all landscaping as shown on the approved plan shall be installed on the site before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition; and 5) that the proposed use of chain link fencing and landscaping in lieu of the protective wall is conditionally approved subject to Zoning Board of Appeals' approval of same. Mr. -Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it was #9-204-78 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Sign Plan submitted by the Browne Sign Company in connection with a condition of approval of Petition 78-3-8-5 by Rockind/Debard, Architects, requesting approval of all plansrequired by Ordinance #990, 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, subject to the following conditions: 6819 I: 1) that the Sign Plan submitted by Browne Sign Company, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and 2) that the subject sign shall be internally illuminated with nonflashing white light. Mr. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr: Morrow, and unanimously adopted, it was #9-205-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a letter dated 8/16/78 from the Livonia Elks Lodge 2246 requesting deviations from the Landscape Plan approved in connection with ` Petition 73-6-8-21P by Denne Land, Inc. requesting approval of all plans required by Ordinance #988 submitted in connection with a, proposal to build an addition to an existing lodge facility located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Denne and Hubbell in Section 35, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to deny the request for the following reasons: 1) The originally approved Landscape Plan submitted in connection with the Site Plan was not an excessive, but an adequate treatment for the site. 2) No changes have occurred with regard to the surrounding land use to warrant a reduction in the landscape treatment of the site. 3) The implementation of the landscape treatment for the site at this time is not an undue hardship as the petitioner has had five years to complete the site landscaping since the time of the granting of Site Plan approval. Ile. Zimmer declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 359th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on September 12, 1978 were adjourned at 11:45 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION / //' sep.i J. F. ' , Secreta y ATTEST: i?r' � i���- / ��i/ ice iore W. Zimmer,j--Chairman /mk