HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1978-11-14 4 • 6852
MINUTES OF THE 362nd REGULAR MEETING
AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY
4 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LIVONIA
On Tuesday, November 14, 1978, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 362nd Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33001
Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, called the Regular Meeting and Public Hearings to
order at 8:02 p.m. ,• with approximately 65 interested people in the audience.
Members Present: Daniel R. Andrew Herman Kluver C. Russell Smith
Joseph Falk R. Lee Morrow Suzanne Wisler
Esther Friedrichs • Judith Scurto Jerome Zimmer
Messrs. John J. Nagy, City Planning Director; H G Shane, Assistant City Planning
Director; Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV; Robert M. Feinberg, Assistant City. Attorney;
and Gary Clarke, Assistant City Engineer were also present.
Mr. Andrew 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 willthen 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.
Mr. Falk, Secretary announced the first item on the agenda Petition 78-8-2-23 by
Wynne Garlow (now known as Wynne Garlow Zurek) and Peter Zurek requesting
waiver use approval to operate a restaurant within an existing structure
located in the Livonia Mall Shopping Center at the northwest corner of
. Middlebelt and Seven Mile Roads in Section .2.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, do you have any correspondence in the file regarding this
petition?
Mr. Nagy: The file contains a letter from Engineering indicating no engineering
problems in connection with this petition.
Wm. Shiels: We are located at Corridor G at the rear entrance which is now used
Architect. as a community room. We are attempting to establish a restaurant in
this location called "Wynne's Restaurant". It will have a seating
capacity of 110 people, possibly 116 and hopefully a liquor license.
The food will be limited to sandwiches, chili; a very limited menu.
We will have a turn of the century decor: Basically, we have a dining
area and a luncheon. area, a kitchen and tuility room in the back.
We have an entrance off "G" and from the Mall at the south end of "G" .
In conjunction with the Mall owners we have developed some upgrading
at the entranceway of the rear parking lot. We have a new canopied
. entrance with some potted trees, new lighting, a sign with "Wynne's"
and the Mall. We also propose an entrance sign at the Mall establishing
•
identity at that entrance. We would like to have a small canopy with
"Wynne's" on it. We will also be making improvements in the corridor
I[ which is now used mainly as a service corridor. Right now a sign
exists there indicating "exit to Lot G, public rest rooms, community
room, manager's office, etc." The corridor itself is block, tile and
exposed lighting fixtures. We will be using new materials. We will
.
6853
be painting and tying into the decor of the restaurant. We have
reviewed this with the Mall owners and have their approval.
1[40
Mr. Andrew: One of our concerns at the Study Meeting was the material to be used
on the exterior canopy entrance. Has any resolution been made. ,
Mr. Shiels: We have made the Mall owners aware of the request. We have no definite
committment from them that they would go along with upgrading or a
permanent material. We feel it would be to everyone's advantage. We
have not resolved it with them.
Mr. Smith: I made a trip over there. Have the owners of the Mall indicated to
you they would be willing to continue the improvement of the hallway.
Mr. Shiels: Yes, we have made designs for the entire corridor. They would like to
. see that corridor upgraded.
Mr. Smith: It is very gray.
Mr. Shiels: It is a nasty spot now.
•
Mr. Smith: Do you intend to install restrooms for your patrons?
Mr. Shiels: Yes, we have one new male and female restroom. We have talked to the
City Inspector` and because of the fact that the public restrooms are
around the corner we do not need as many toilets.
IL Mr. Andrew: Do your drawings indicate the improvement to the entire corridor exterior
entrance door to the entrance of "G"?
Mr. Shiels: That is indicated in two drawings.
Mr. Smith: I think the back entrance to your proposed establishment should be
used for emergency or fire exit only.
Mrs. Zurek: , ' It is our intent at the present time to use it as an exit only.
Mr. Shiels: jt is not intended for a public entrance.
Mr. Smith: I would like to add a condition that petitioner will use "G" as
principal means -of ingress and egress and all other entranceways
or exits will be emergency only or for employees' use.
Mr. Andrew: This is of course without prejudice. You can come back anytime
should your needs or plans change. Is there anyone in the audience
wishing to speak either for or against this. petition? Any comments
or questions from the Commission?
There was no one else present wishing to be heard .on this -natter, Mr. Andrew declared
the public hearing on Petition 78-8-2-23 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, _and unanimously adopted
it was
` #11-226-78 RESOLVED that, pursant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 14,
' 1978 on Petition 78-8-2-23 as submitted by Wynne Garlow (now known as
Garlow Zurek) and Peter Zurek requesting waiver use approval to operate
a restaurant within an existing structure located in the Livonia Mall
• Shopping Center at the northwest corner of Middlebelt and Seven Mile Roads
6854
IL
in Section 2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 78-8-2-23 be approved, for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed use will not adversely affect the surrounding uses of the
area but will provide for a compatible and complimentary use to those
uses of the overall shopping center.
(2) The proposed use will help maintain the ongoing viability and
economic stability of the Center.
(3) The proposed location of the restaurant use within the overall
center is of such location that it will not adversely affect the
surrounding, .uses or parking area of the center as the restaurant
can function either in concert with thehours of operation of the
center or independent of those hours.
subject to the following conditions,:
(1) that Building Elevation and Floor Plan #78-19, revised .9/14/78,
prepared by Shiels' Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved
shall be adhered to;
. (2) that Interior Elevation Plan #78-25A, dated 10/23/78, prepared by
Shiels Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved shall be
adhered to;
(3) that the Exterior Elevation Plan #78-19, dated 10/24/78, prepared.
by Shiels Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to.
with the added condition that the main canopy which wraps around from
4 the roof elevation to the hallway opening shall be constructed of a
prefinished, metal material of an earth-tone color, whfich color shall
have been applied as an integral part of the manufacturing operation;
(4) that signage shall be limited to that as shown on Plan #78-19 and
planters shall be installed in accordance with those shown on Plan
#78-19;
(5) that the petitioner will use "G" as principal means of ingress and
egress .and all other entranceways or exits will' be emergency only or
for employees' use. ,
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing waa sent to
property owners within 500 feet, the petitioner, and 'City Departments.
as listed in the Proof of Service. .
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-8-2-24 by Wynne Garlow
(now known as Wynne Garlow Zurek) and Peter Zurek requesting waiver use
approval to 'establish a Class C Liquor Licensed operation within an
existing building located in the Livonia Mall Shopping Center at the
s.
northwest corner of Middlebelt and Seven Mile Roads in Section 2.
I IL
Mr. Andrew: Any comments or questions from the Commission?
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak. either for or
against this petition?
6855
There was no one present wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared
the Public Hearing on Petition 78-8-2-24 closed.
1
4 On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer,- seconded by Mr. Smith, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#11-227-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 14,
1978 on Petition 78-8-2-24 submitted by Wynne Garlow (now known as
Wynne Garlow Zurek) and Peter Zurek requesting waiver use approval to
• establish a Class C Liquor Licensed operation within an existing building
located in the Livonia Mall Shopping Center at the northwest corner of
Middlebelt and Seven Mile Roads in Section 2, the City Planning Commission
does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-8-2-24 be
approved for the following reasons: .
(1) The proposed use is a .natural adjunct to the principal use of the
proposed-restaurant; .
•
• (2) • The site and building have the capacity to support the intended use;
•
(3) , The proposed use will not adversely affect the surrounding uses of
the area but would provide for a complementary use; and
(4) That the use complies with Zoning Ordinance #543, Section 11.03(h) .
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.
3
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing ,resolution adopted.
1
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda as, Petition 78-9-2-26 •
by Pizza Hut of Kalamazoo, Inc. , requesting a waiver use approval to
construct a Pizza Hut Restaurant on parcel 35D, which is on the south
side of Plymouth Road between Merriman Rced -between Merriman and Denne•
in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 35.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, do you have any correspondence in the file regarding this
petition?
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from Engineering dated October .6, 1978 indicating
the legal description meets with their approval. ,Plymouth Road has
not been dedicated to its fullest.
Mr. Andrew: Have we received word from the Traffic Department or the Fire Dept.?
Mr. Nagy: No six.
Mr. Andrew: We did request it? .
Mr. Nagy: Yes.
Mr. Ponder:1001
On behalf of Pizza Hut, I would like to go into our waiver. Mr.
,John Love is the property owner. Currently it is a real estate
office. Mr. Andrew is .the engineer. Pizza Hut was started in
1958 in Wichita, Kansas by two gentlemen. They had a good idea.
They kept expanding until 1977 when they merged with Pepsi Cola.
There are 3,600 restaurants in the United States as well as foreign
countries. The question comes up then why do we want a Pizza Hut
6856
in Livonia. First, we consider Livonia a very progressive, family
1!:
' oriented city and it would be a good business venture to have a
location here. After a study was made, it was determined that Plymouth
Road would be one of the better locations for the Pizza Hut for two reasons:
(1) Plymouth Road has both computer and neighborhood traffic and (2) it
is easily accessible to all people that would be using the food facility.
As far as the property we looked at two things, location and size and
zoning (C-2) . The zoning suits our category. The property, of course,
you can tell itis ample and plenty large for our uses. We come back
• to the restaurant itself. I will- give you this to pass briefly along.
It shows the design. As you know, there' is a Pizza Hut on Plymouth Road •
between Inkster and Beech Daly. You probably all have seen one. This one
will be comparable to the one on Plymouth Road. The restaurant .contains
approximately 2,000 sq. ft. and will seat 88-100 people. We would employ
approximately 14 people and most of these people would be from the City
of Livonia or general area. The Pizza Hut chain remains open from 11 a.m.
• Monday through Thursday to midnight; 11 "a.m. to 1 a.m. on Friday and '
• Saturd'y; and to midnight on Sunday. As stated before the Pizza Hut is
designed to be a family type restaurant.. This particular location would
serve the surrounding Rosedale Gardens, Clement Circle, and all other
neighborhoods within a couple of miles. The property is zoned properly
and the location is good.
Next, what are the benefits for having our business located here?
First, the biggest benefit is to the people. It is a good facility
for family type dining where our citizens can' go at a. reasonable price.
That is the primary concern. Secondly, it will be a- good tax producer
for the City and I triedto check the records on that today. The unit
will cost approximately $325.000 and based upon the present .tax structure
within $9,000 to $10,000 per year in taxes to the City of Livonia. Also
we have the employment, of 14 people. Generally speaking these will be from
.the City of Livonia. You can see the advantages. I have tried to look for
the disadvantages. Frankly, I see none. We would therefore ask•that
you approve us and. give us our waiver.
Mrs. Scurto: I am delighted that Pizza Hut finds Livonia desirable. I would
love to -have them. Strictly from a traffic standpoint, I think
this is a bad location. At meal time there is traffic from Wonderland.
After football games Allied is letting out. - .Maybe there is a location
in some other place that would lend it self to your needs and yet not
be as treacherous. Turning left is going to be dynamite.
• Mr. Zimmer: . The current building on that property is Mr. Love's. Is he going
to be the franchise owner?
Mr. Ponder: • The property will be sold to the Pizza Hut.
•
Mr. Zimmer: The business and land will ultimately be owned by Pizza Hut.
Mr. Ponder: Yes.
6857
IL, Mr. Zimmer: You have been located on Plymouth for sometime. You are aware of the
many restuarants along Plymouth Road and the problems• that have
existed with those restaurants. With the`exception of a few, there is
a constant turnover of ownership. There must be a problem, possibly
too many restaurants and the business opportunities for success
limited.
•
Mr. Ponder: I don't believe there are too many restaurants on Plymouth Road.
I think there has been bad management by those restaurants. There •
are restaurants doing very well, Big Boy, Daly and others. As to '
the traffic problem, the pattern on Plymouth Road has changed tremendous)
since the expressway has opened. There is not the traffic hazards that
we have imagined. On Saturday and Sunday you hardly see any traffic.
We need more businesses on Plymouth Road.
Mr. Zimmer: . There is very narrow frontage on this lot. It is barely adequate
for your purposes. As Mrs. Scurto pointed out, people making a left
turn into the PIzza Hut will conflict with Plymouth and Merriman
traffic also making left turns. In terms of frontage and traffic
problems this is less than an ideal spot. I have spent many years
on Plymouth Road also. There has been a reduction in traffic. It
is still an awfully busy thoroughfare. We have more restaurants
than are needed as evidenced by the failures, the traffic is still
heavy, it is too close to Merriman, frontage istoo narrow.
Mr. Andrew: Have you applied for a. liquor license?
' . Mr. Ponder: I would assume we are going to apply. The intent is there.
10
' :
Mr. Andrew: Your purchase of the property is not contingent upon the approval
or disapproval of the liquor license?
Mr. Ponder: You are tying into a 10" storm sewer which surprises me. Is this
" permissible?
Mr. Clark: That is a misprint. It is a 10 foot diameter.
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or
against this petition?
• • Mrs. Dawson Gilmore: My property is against the 7-11 store. We have a commercial
' 11415 Denne wall going part way down. The children are always on that wall.
They should design the wall differently to eliminate kids climbing
on top. There is constant noise too.- I don't want a Pizza Hut there.
Mr. Andrew: Are there any questions from the Planning Commission?
Mrs. Friedrichs: Do you remember the number of restaurants already in existence on
Plymouth Road?
Mr. Zimmer: Between Wayne Road and Inkster somewhere around 23 to 27. That does
not mean all sit down restaurants. At the 7-11 store you can go in
• for a sandwich. Are you aware. that a brand new restaurant was just
approved across the street?
Mr. Ponder: Yes. I would like to say that this is not a quick in and out type
of business. This is a family type restaurant.
' 6858
1!:
Mr. Love: I have been trying to sell that property for a couple of years. What
4 .
about an ACE Hardware going in? What kind of traffic would that generate?
• I am paying $2,500 in taxes. The building looks bad. This would be an
improvement.
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone else in the audinece wishing to speak either for or
against this petition. Comments from the Commission? .
• There was no one else wishing to discuss this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public
Hearing on Petition 78-9-2-26 closed. ro
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and unanimously adopted,
it was
•#11-228-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
November 14, 1978 on Petition 78-9-2-26 as submitted by Pizza Hut
. of Kalamazoo, Inc. , requesting a waiver of use approval to construct
a Pizza Hut restaurant on property on the south side of Plymouth Road
between Merriman and Denne in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 35,• the
City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition
78-9-2-26 until the Study Meeting scheduled to be held on November 21,
1978.
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion• carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Sr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda Petition 78-9-2-27 by BernardDavidson
4
requesting waiver use approval to construct a restaurant on the north
side of Five Mile Road between Middlebelt and Inkster Roads in the
Southwest 1/4 of Section 13.
Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence in connection with this petition?
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter dated October 31, 1978 from W. J. Abraham, present
owner of the property, stating he is in favor of having a restaurant
at this location. It is the best use for said property.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Abraham is the owner of the site in question.
Mr. Nagy: He is the owner of the property on the southside of Five Mile Road and
lives in the neighborhood. He has a real estate office on the south side
opposite the site in question.
.Robert Lorion: Mr. Bernard Davidson owns and operates Albie's across the street
from the site in question. He has been there since 1967. Mr. Davidson
wants to expand and we are restricted by parking at our present location.
. If we move across the street Mr. Davidson would like to put up a 3,000
• square foot building seating approximately 88 people. He is on a waiver
use right now where .he is and he would like a transfer from where he is
now to the north side of Five Mile. Presently, on the south side there -
is a beer and wine store. If we moved across the street, we would sell the
present building and phase out the beer and wine shop and• newsstand. We
tewould cover it up with some type of facade.
Mr. Andrew: Are there any deficiencies shown on the site plan?
4
a Mr. Nagy: According to the site plan he meets all the technical requirements of the
C-2 district regulations regarding off-street parking, number of driveways,
• etc. , however, the proposed building does not comply with the front yard
•
6859
setback of 603 and there. is a requirement for a masonry wall.
1!
4 Mr. Andrew: We have no choice. The Zoning Board can waive that.
Mr. Smith: What are you planning to do with the present building?
Mr. Lorion: It was suggested by the Council that we remove the beer and wine operation
and newspaper operation and we are going to sell the building but we are
going to refront it.
Mr. Smith: I assume that if this is denied you are going to fix up your building.
Mr. Lorion: We are restricted. He cannot expand, either move or get rid of the
business. It is a marginal business right now run by Mr. Davidson and
his wife.
Mrs. .Wisler: What is his present status, the one on the south side?
Mr. Nagy: Under the old ordinance a restaurant was permitted in C-1 and C-2.
It is a valid nonconforming use. Albie never petitioned for a. waiver
' use.
Mrs. Wisler: Could it be sold and operated as a restuarant?
Mr. Nagy: Yes.
Mrs. Wisler: By approval of this petition we would be creating another .restaurant.
4 Mr. Nagy: If Albie's was sold the new owner could use it as a restaurant, unless
there was a deliberate attempt on the part of the owner to abandon the use
for a period of over one year.
Mr. Zimmer: What is the current capacity now on the south side?
Mr. Lorion: 49 seats.
Mr. Zimmer: The present location is smaller than you would like and does not have
sufficient parking.
Mr. Lorion: Under the new parking regulations we do not have sufficient parking.
Mr. Zimmer: Does Mr. Davidson own the whole corner?
Mr. Lorion: Yes.
Mr. Zimmer: If you tear down the beer and wine building would that give you additional
room.
Mr. Lorion: It still would not be sufficient.
Mr. Falk: The Clock wanted to locate in, this very same spot. What has changed to
make you think that we would ant to approve this restaurant?
Mr. Lorion: This is more of a family type restaurant. It does not have the constant
I[
turnover as a Clock would. There is not much of a young crowd. We do
not have the constant flow of volume that is generated by the Clock.
Mr. Falk: What happens to the liquor license in the restaurant and store on the south?
6860 "
•
Mr. Lorion: The liquor license is not in Mr. Davidson's name. It would be
transferred to someone else.
to
Mr. Falk: Has Mr. Davidson purchased the property in question?
Mr. Lorion: No. It has until December 1.
•
Mr. Falk: Who is the realtor?
Mr. Lorion: Helen Slater is the owner and Mr. Abraham is the tealtor. -
•
Mr. Falk: All we are doing is moving one restaurant from one location to
another. The flow of traffic is bad on the south side. There has.
not been an improvement on the building for the last eight years.
My feeling is we are not improving anything. We are going to create
• another hazard. We have no guarantee that the person moving into
the present location will do anything to improve the building. I
objected to the Clock. I see more traffic. Why did you go and
negotiate with the Council first.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Falk, in fairness to the Council and Mr. Davidson, before the
City Council issues a liquor license they must appear. I believe
the conversation of refronting, etc. was as a result of that meeting.
Mr. 'Falk: Thank you.
Mr. Andrew: Assuming this petition was granted and restaurant was built on the
. north side and Mr. Davidson sold the building on the south side, at
the time the new owner applies for a certificate of occupancy for
-restaurant purposes what happens at the time of inspection?
4
Mr. Nagy: The building inspection dept. is left with no alternative but to
issue a certificate of compliance so long as the use has not been
expanded or enlarged.
•
Mr. Andrew: Even though he is deficient.
Mr. Nagy: So long as he occupies the existing premises, inspection has no
alternative but to honor that certificate. The use runs with the
land and the new owner can continue the use and make such ordinary
repairs to sustain the use, but he cannot expand the use.
Mrs. Scurto:' The existing building is so close to the road. As I view' this site
people on foot because of the Franklin Apartments (walking on the
north side of Five Mile) this is going to be a tremendous hazard
coming out of that establishment. I have no solution but I do find
that the amount of traffic generated by a restaurant is large.
Mrs. Wisler: I believe that the trash receptacle is located out side. I think
it should be located on the inside of the new location.
•
Mr. Andrew: We will worry about that at a later date when the site plan petition
if before us. Do we have any correspondence from the Traffic Dept.?
Mr. Nagy: No.
?" Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against
this petition? Further comments from the Commission?
6861
There was no one else wishing to discuss this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the Public
4 Hearing on Petition 78-9-2-27 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and adopted, it was
#11-229-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
, November 14, 1978 on Petition 78-9-2-27 submitted by Bernard Davidson
requesting waiver use approval to construct a restaurant on the north
side of Five Mile Road between Middlebelt' and Inkster Roads in the South-
. west 1/4 of Section 13, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 78-9-2-27 be dened for the following
reasons:
(1) The proposed use will be detrimental to and incompatible with the
adjoining uses of the area;
(2) Traffic to and from the site would be hazardous to the area and
conflict with the normal traffic-carrying capacity of Five Mile
• Road as sight distances in relation to the site are severly restricted
• as a result of adjoining buildings being constructed right out at the
property line;
•
(3) The proposed use would be detrimental to pedestrian traffic as
sight distances to pedestrians using the public sidewalk are obstructed
from clear view of traffic leaving the site by adjoining buildings;
and
•
(4) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed
use complies with requirements of Section 19.60, General Waiver
Requirements and General Standards,. of Zoning Ordinance #543.
(5) The proposed development does not comply with the C-2 Zoning District
regulations of Zoning Ordinance #543.-
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was sent
to property owners within 500 feet, the petitoner, and City Departments
as listed in the Proof of Service.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Smith, Zimmer, Scurto, Falk, Morrow, Wisler
• NAYS: Kluver, Friedrichs, Andrew
Mr. Andrew: • If you wish to appeal 'this to the City Council, you have ten days
from this date.
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-10-2-28 by Ben J.
Kronk requesting waiver use approval to construct a building on the
south side of Eight Mile Road, east of Osmus in the Northeast 1/4 of
Section 3, for a construction equipment repair shop.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, do you have any correspondence on this petition?
Mr. Nagy: A letter dated October 12, 1978 from Gary Clark, Engineering, stating
there are no city maintained storm sewers to service the subject site.
Also, a letter dated October 24, 1.978 from Dan Gilmartin, Industrial
6862
Development Coordinator stating that attempts to contact the petitioner
for full compliance with the application requirements have been fruitless
1!:
and that the building is rather small for parcel of property leaving a
large balance for outside vehicle storage.
Ben Kronk: I am the owner of the parcel and I have a party interested in purdhasing•
the property providing a 50 x 60 building could be constructed and used
for a construction equipment repair shop.
• Mr. Andrew: Are there any building plans?
Mr. Kronk: No.
Mr. Andrew: There is nothing to prevent you from constructing this building. Of
course, occupancy is a different story. You do have alternatives.
A building can be erected. It cannot be used as a contractor's yard.
•
Mr. Kronk: I will go ahead and prepare plans. •
Mr. Andrew: Do you wnat to withdraw this petition? -
•
Mr. Kronk: I would like to have this tabled.
Mr. Andrew: We will table it until we hear from you. Then we will invite you to
a study session and then you can present your plans., Is there anyone
in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition?
Any comments or questions from the Commission?
There was no one else present wishing to be heard on this matter, • Mr. Andrew declared
A the Public Hearing on Petition 78-10-2-28 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#11-230-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 14,
1978 on Petition 78-10-2-28 as submitted by Ben J. Kronk requesting waiver
use approval to constructs building on the south side of Eight Mile Road,
east of Osmus in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 3, for a construction equip-
ment repair shop, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to
. table Petition 78-10-2-28 until petitioner notifies the Planning Commission
at which time a date for a study meeting will be scheduled.
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the -agenda is Petition 78-9-3-12 by Estate Builders
requesting 'the vacating of an easement on Lot 22 of Stoneleigh Village
• Subdivision located east of Ellen Drive between Schoolcraft and Lyndon
in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 21.
Mr. Andrew: Any correspondence Mr. Nagy?
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter dated September 26,1978 from Mr. Gary Clarke, Engineering
IL Dept.
Mr. Andrew:' What happened?
•
6863 ,
Frank Bronzetti: We screwed up. The basement was started from the west monument
Estate Builders of the 8 foot easement. That is'how the house got misplaced.
II:
Mr. Andrew: _ What about a revocable license as opposed to vacating the subject
easement area?
Mr. Bronzetti: It is fine with us but the owners' attorney finds it unacceptable.
Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Feinberg, would you explain a revocable license? •
Mr. Fetsberg: A license which would allow them to encroach upon a portion of the
easement but would reserve to the City the right to enter upon that
property in connection with the construction, replacement, maintenance
repair or upkeep of the public utilities which were installed in the
easement. It is short of vacating the easement; gives us the right
to come upon the property but gives them the right to encroach upon
a portion of the easement.
Mr. Andrew: Does it limit our liability?
Mr. Feinberg: They hold us harmless from any claims that arise fromthe granting
of the permission to encroach.
Mrs. Scurto: The owners of the property should they want to sell would not have
clear title. It wouldbe difficult to sell this. If the City would
1[0
. have to dig on the property would the people have to repair the
damage to the landscaping?
Mr. Feinberg: No.
Mr, Andrew: If we had to restore that water main the City would restore the lawn.
Mr. Smith: If the water main did break and the City had to dig and through this
breakage, damage was done to the' homeowners' home is the City liable?
Mr. Andrew: Not under the license. Is the owner here?
Mrs. Karen Kolb; We have been in touch with our attorney. If it not vacated
34724 Middleboro we cannot sell our house.
Mr. Andrew: The City is reluctant to vacate. They prefer to give you the
license because of the liability factor.
. Mrs. Kolb: We would not accept a revocable license at this time.
Mr. Andrew: 'Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either
for or against this petition? Any commentsor questions from the
Commission?
There was no one else present wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared
the Public Hearing on Petition 78-9-3-12 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Smith, and unanimously adopted,
it was
1
6864
ta #11-231-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant .t.0 a Public Hearing having been held on
November 14, 1978 on Petition 78-9-3-12 as submitted by Estate
Builders requesting the vacating of an easement on Lot 22 of Stone-
leigh Village Subdivision located east of Ellen Drive between School-
- craft and Lyndon in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 21, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
78-9-3-12 be denied for the following reasons:
(1) The Division of Engineering recommends against the vacating. '
(2) The City's Public Utility Manager is opposed to the vacating
• for the reasons that there• is presently an 8' water main within
• the easement area and as a result of this encroachment it would
increase the City's liability should the main rupture.
(3) It is further recommended that a revocable license in lieu of the
vacating be granted to the petitioner.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 10/26/78,
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company,
Chesapeake& Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company,
Consumers Power Company -and City Departments as listed in the Proof of
' Service. .
Mr. Andrew: This petition will be sent to the City Council. You can get in
touch with their Secretary to see when it is going to be on the
agenda.
J Mr. Andrew declared the aboe motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 89-9-3-14 by Dembs-Roth
requesing the vacating of a 12' easement on Lot 10 of Julaur Industrial
Subdivision located on the south side of Industrial Road between Stark
and Wayne Roads in the North 1/2 of Section 28.
. Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence in the file, Mr. Nagy?
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from Gary Clarke, dated October 18, 1978 stating the .
Engineering Department has no objection.
Dennis Dembs: This particular piece of property was purchased from Clarence Jahn
approximately two years ago. He traded with Angelo DiPonio for the
entrance onto Fairlane Road andhe was given property along the back.
When we built our building we relocated all the other easements. Right
now this easement runs right through the building.
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against
this petition? Any comments or questions from the Commission?
There was no one else wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the
Public Hearing on Petition 78-9-3-14 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and unanimously adopted,
it was
6865
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and unanimously
adopted, it was
4
#11-232-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 14,
10
1978 on Petition 78-9-3-14 as submitted by Dembs-Roth requesting the
vacating of ,a 12' easement on Lot 10 of Julaur Industrial Subdivision
located on the south side of Industrial Road between Stark and Wayne
Roads in the North 1/2 of Section 28, the City Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 78-9-3-14 be approved
for the following reasons:
(1) The easement no longer functions for its intended purpose.
(2) No public utility companies object to the vacating request.
(3) . The Engineering Division recommends approval.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 10/26/78
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, -
Chesapeake& Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company,
Consumers Power Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof of
, Service.
Mr. Andrew decalred the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution •adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the nest item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat approval for
Livrance Estates Subdivision #2 proposed to be located south of Six
Mile Road, west of Oporto in Section 14. -
Mr. Andrew: Any correspondence Mr. Nagy?
Mr. Nagy: Yes. We have a letter dated October 26, 1978 from Mr. Gary Clarke of
Engineering. We also have a letter dated October 23, 1978 from Ted
Kovarik, Department of Public Safety, Fire Division and a letter dated
October 23, 1978 from Lieutenant Widmaier, Division of Police, Traffic
Bureau.
,Mrs. Friedrichs: Possibly, you may not be .able to answer this. I am. concerned with
the effect on the large floor plain area if this is eRglosed. What will
be the effect to the south and east, What does it do/the area immediately
surrounding it and farther down?
Mr. Clarke: No effect on it. The runoff will be minimal. We are taking the ditch
and putting it in a better location. Whether you enclose it or leave
it open.it won't make a difference. In this particular instance you are
going to develop 12 to 15 lots that will increase the runoff into the
Bell Creek to a minimal extent.
Geo. Eisenstein: In the paving of Munger and Henry Ruff the property that abuts
16581 Henry Ruff to that who pays for the paving?
.Mr. Andrew: A recommendation is made to the Council. They will make the final
4 decision. It is recommended that the subdivider pay for the paving.
Mr. Eisenstein: Right now there is a power line and I assume that that is an easement
what is going 'to happen to that •power line?
6866
1[0 Bob Paccico: We will leave it as it is.
Mr. Eisenstein: There is some talk of no overhead wires to go over a structure.
Mr. Andrew: We are not sure it will go over a structure. It is possible it
will not be the proper placement of the residential structures.
Mr. Eisentein: We have the lot sizes and in computing some of the figures on the
lots they appear to be somewhat less than 1/2 acre parcels and it
could be because of the configuration of the lots.- These are not
easily computed.
Mr. Andrew: Are the lot sizes available?
Mr. Nagy Yes, all exceed 1/2 acre lots.
Mrs. Brandt: I am adjacent to the flood plain area. I have the natural creek that
30175 Munger comes right across (north of me) . I have a creek and a big pond ,
that empties into Bell. Creek. Will there be a great big crock?
rylr. Andrew: . We are not certain what the recommendations are going to be as far
as the storm sewer. May I suggest that you contact the City Council
office so that you can be notified when the matter comes before them.
Robert King: I live' adjacent to the area 'of lots that are going to be subdivided.
30445 Six Mile I don't agree with the building of a house on the corner of Munger.
That will preclude Munger from ever going through onto the next
3 street.
J Mr. Andrew: Discussion has been had of a road pattern west of Merriman.
Mr. Nagy: The land to the west can be extended to go north of the drainage area
and bring it out to Six Mile. We do not think it is a good idea to
extend Munger and bring it through to Merriman. That would create
a thoroughfare paralleling Six Mile. We think Munger should be
interrupted only serving neighborhood area. Your lands and lands
to the west can be .serviced coming east of Merriman. We would
reroute Munger north of the drain. We do not want to link the area to-
gether.
Mr. King: I still think it is poor planning.
Mrs. Brodick: What kind of homes are being built and who would be the builder?
16971 Oporto
•
Mr. Andrew: You may answer the question Mr. Pacoccio.
Mr. Pacoccio: I don't know. I will sell but I do not know who the builder will be.
Mr. Eisentstein: At the time.we were before the City Council the builder indicated
70 lots. The Council turned it down. The Council asked us to get
together with the builder. Would it be possible to exit onto Six
1,' .
Mile and not onto Munger?
r
Mr. Paccico: I cannot go onto Six Mile. I have other plans for the other property.
I-
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak either for or
against this petition? Any additional comments or questions from the
Commission?
6867
There was no one else wishing to be heard onthis matter, Mr. Andrew declared the
Public Hearing on Petition for Preliminary Plat approval for Livrance Estates
4 Subdivision closed.
i
� 4 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#11-233-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November
14, 1978, the. City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that the Preliminary Plat for Livrance Estates Subdivision pro-
• posed' to be located south of Six Mile Road, west of Oporto in Section 14,
be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The Preliminary Plat is drawn in full compliance with the Zoning
Ordinance and Subdivision Rules and Regulations.
(2) .The Subdivision design represents a good solution to a small parcel
of land.
(3) The proposed plat is in harmony with the general development of the
surrounding neighborhood.
subject to the following condition:
(1) That. the petitioner will vacate a portion of Livrance Estates
Subdivision, that portion being lots 16 and 17, in accordance
with State law so as to allow the replatting of the subject area.
t ''
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was sent to abutting
property owners, proprietor, City Departments as listed in the Proof of
Service and copies of the plat together with notice have been sent to
the Building Department, Superintendent of Schools, Fire Department,
Police Department and Parks and Recreation Department.
Mr. Andrew: The interested parties here can call the Council office and ask to
be notified of further meetings.
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat approval for
Windridge Village Subdivision #3 proposed to. be located on the south.a
side of Eight Mile Road between Gill and Farmington Roads in the Northeast
• 1/4 of Section 4.
Mr. Andrew: Any correspondence Mr. Nagy?
Mr. Nagy: The following letters were received, Division of Engineeing, dated
10/23/78 from Gary Clarke; Dvision of Police, dated 10/23/78 from Lt.
Widmaier; Fire Dept. dated 10/23/78 from Ted Kovark and Inspection
Dept. , dated 10/23/78 from Frank Kerby and a letter from Division of
Engineering to Dale Granger.
•
il'' Gil Franklin: Parcel K-1 is being acquired by the developer. A petition has been
filed for rezoning. We will add another row of lots. We have proposed
a greenbelt. There is a concern about maintenance. We prefer the
greenbelt because there is a row of trees that could be kept. The
subdivision restrictions have language in them to require the home-
. • 6868
1[ owner to be responsible for the maintenance of this area. There is
still an enforcement involved. It allows a homeowner in the subdivision
and homeowners association to have some leverage. I recognize it is an addi-
4 . tional piece of ammunition to take the burden off the City. I would
like to indicate we are in favor of backing the lots on Gill to avoid
• congested traffic brought about by ,an additional 25 driveways. By backing
the lots on Gill we can maintain the atmosphere that is there now. If
• we frOnt the lots on Gill we can make more money but we feel we can create
a better atmosphere if the lots were to face in. There would be more
privacy. It is attractive to the residents that would be living there.
I do believe it has a significant feature that should be taken into
' consideration.
We cannot get the DNR to give us definite information unless we give them
something. There is no point going to DNR unless we get something from
the community. First we must design a subdivision that will comply, get
it approved on some tentative basis, then ship to to Lansing. The engineer
has to go through a lot of time and expense. He cannot do it without a
layout. We are looking for a tentative approval so that we can get the
exact information we need. With regard to these 7 lots we are not positive
where that flood plain is. Our feeling is that if we have a flood plain
that extends too far we can take out one or two lots and widen the others.
Mrs.Wisler: To Mr. Franklin, I appreciate your consideration. As far as maintenance
of a greenbelt the problem arises not from the sidewalk to the interior
but rather from the sidewalk to the curb as evidenced by Middlebelt north
' of the expressway. Who is responsible for that area?
4
Mr. Nagy: - The County has responsibility for right-of-way along county roads. The
4 homeowner always has and always will be responsible for the maintenance
of the right-of-way for City streets. .
Mrs. Wisler: Who is responsible for notifying the homeowners of their responsibility
for that area?
Mr. Nagy: The City through its building inspection Department has some responsibility
however, I think it is reasonable for the Civic association to take that
responsibility particularly for those areas where the lots backup to the
thoroughfares.
Mr. Andrew: As to those 7 lots along Gill, you are not certain where the flood plain
is and until DNR gets finished you do not know if they are buildable lots.
Mr. Clarke: When the DNR says, that looks OK with us, it may not fit our ordinance.
Mr. Andrew: You have 'indicated a radius for a turn around on the east side of the
Tarabusi Creek. Is this temporary?
.Mr. Franklin: It is not intended to be permanent.
Mrs. Wisler: We are going to discuss the drainage at another time.
Mr. Andrew: November 21 meeting. Is there anyone present in the audience that.
would like to speak for or against the petition?
Peter Antonelli: This traffic is going to come right by my driveway. What about
20375 Gil .Norfolk?
6869
-i Mr. Franklin: Creates area too large to deal with.
4 Mr. Andrew:' How many homes and how many exits?
•i
Mr. Nagy: There are 495 homes in the three Windridge Subdivisions and 4 exits
on Gill and one on Seven Mile.
M. Huziak: Who is going to pay for the paving for Gill?
20301 Gill
Mr. Nagy: It is recommended that the subdivider be required to pave Gill.
Mr. Huziak: On that flood plain are you going to enclose it? •
Mr. Nagy: No. •
Mr. Huziak: What kind of fences? .
•
Mr. Andrew: We don't know. ,
Mr. Nagy: Should the subdivision be approved it is the practice to condition on
a detailed landscaping treatment plan first be approved and adhered to
for those homes that back up on Gill.
Mr. Antonelli: On Gill before Eight Mile a stream what are they going to do about
that?
Mr. Andrew: That is something the Engineering Department will consider.
•
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak either for
or against this petition? Any additional comments or questions
from the Commission?
There was no one else wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared
the Public Hearing on Preliminary Plat Approval for Windridge Village Subdivision
#3 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Falk and adopted, it was
#11-234-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 14,
1978, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that the Preliminary Plat for Windridge Village Subdivision #3
proposed to be located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Gill
and Farmington Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 4, be tabled until
December. 5,1978.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Kluver, Friedrichs, Zimmer, Falk, Morrow, Wisler, Smith, Andrew
NAYS: Scurto
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-10-7-5 -by the City
Planning Commission to amend Part V of the Master Plan of the City of
ti
Livonia, the Master school and Park Plan, by incorporating Bainbridge
• Park located east of Merriman Road between, Curtis and Hillbrook Avenue
in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 11.
6870
•
t4o
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone present in the audience wishing-to speak for or
against the petition? Any comments or questions from the Commission?
There was no one else wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the
Public Hearing .on Petition 78-10-7-5 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and unanimously adopted.
it was
•
#11-235-78 RESOLVED that, . pursuant to the provisions of Act 285 of the Public
Acts of Michigan, 1931, as. amended, the City Planning Commission of the .
City of Livonia, having duly held a Public Hearing on November 14, 1978
• for the purpose of amending Part V of the Master Plan of the City of
Livonia, entitled "The Master School and Park Plan", the same is hereby
amended so as to incorporate Bainbridge Park located east of Merriman
Road between Curtis and Hilibrook Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 11,
subject property being legally described as follows: •
Bainbridge Park, Bainbridge Courts Subdivision, as
recorded in Liber 96, Pages 9, 10 and 11, Wayne County
Records, said subdivision being of part of the Northwest
1/4 of Section 11, T. 1 'S. , R. 9 E. , City of. Livonia,
Wayne County, Michigan.
for the following reasons:
(1) SubJect site is owned by the City of Livonia having been acquired
specifically for use as a passive park site and to protect open
space for this neighboring area.
(2) This proposed amendment to the Master School and Park Plan is
for purposes of incorporating into the Plan the subject park site
as this park site is not currently reflected on that plan.
•
AND, having given proper notice of such hearing as required by Act 285
of the Public Acts of Michigan, 1931, as amended, the City Planning
Commission does hereby adopt said amendment as part of the' Master School
and Park Plan of the City of Livonia which is incorporated herein by
reference, the same having been adopted by resolution of the City Planning
Commission with all amendments thereto, and further that this amendment
shall be• filed. with the City Council, City Clerk and the City Planning
• Commission and a certified copy shall also be forwarded to the Register •
of Deeds for the County of Wayne for recording.
•
Mr. Andrew declared the above -motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Revised Preliminary Plat approval
for Bicentennial Estates Subdivision proposed to be located north of
Seven Mile Road between Gill Road and Bicentennial Park in the Southwest
1/4 of Section 4.
Mr. Andrew: Do we have any correspondence Mr. Nagy?
1
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter dated November 13, 1978 from Gary Clarke, Division
of Engineering.
Mrs. Wisler: What about the sewers? They have to bring them across Seven Mile?
6871
Mr. Clark: They have to start on the north side of lot 2 in the new subdivision
Windridge #1. They have to extend westerly and across Gill Road.
i
4 Mrs. Scurto: How many .houses in this subdivision?
4
Angelo D'orazio: 110 houses.
R. Burg: I own 165 feet on Gill Road. I do not wish to sell my property.
9560 Winston .
Detroit, MI
A. D'Orazio: That is a private matter. That should be discussed with the petitioner.
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to speak •for or
against the petition? Comments from the Commission?
There was no one else wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Andrew declared the
Public Hearing on Revised Plat apporval for Bicentennial Estates Subdivision closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#11-236-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on •
November 14, 1978, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
. to the City Council that the Revised Preliminary Plat for Bicentennial
Estates subdivision proposed to be located north of Seven Mile Road
between-Gill Road and Bicentennial Park in the Southwest 1/4 of Section
4, be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed Subdivision Plat is well laid out and in full compliance
with the R-3 'Zoning District regulations of Zoning Ordinance #543.
'2) The proposed Subdivision Plat conforms to the requirements of the
Subdivision Rules and Regulations of the City of Livonia, the open
space requirements having been previously waived.
subject to the following condition: •
(1)' That a plan for the subdivision entrance marker, and a plan for the
greenbelt easement as shown on the Plat along Seven Mile Road be
submitted for Planning Commission approval prior to submittal of a
Final Plat.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was sent to abutting
property owners, proprietor, City Departments as listed in the Proof of
Service and copies of the plat together with notice have been sent to the
Building Dept. , Superintendent of Schools,' Fire Department, Police Dept.
and Parks and Recreation Dept.
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda Final Plat approval for Laurel Park South
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. ,
tP
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, passed the gavel to Mr. Zimmer, Vice-Chairman.
6872
Mr. Kluver: With the extension of this development is there a potential problem
. 4 in the future of a noise abatement being constructed on the freeway
side?
4
Mr, Nagy: These lots are deeper and a greenbelt has been added.
Mr. Zimmer: Can we add that there is no need for any additional noise barriers?
Mr. Nagy: That is State Highway property and subject to their control. We •
have to take some other .independent action. Iwould be glad to
write to them.
Mr. Zimmer: Anyone in the audience, wishing to speak for or against this petition?
Petitioner: I planted 200 trees over the weekend.
Mr. Zimmer: Any comments or questions from the Commission?
There was no one else wishing to be heard on this matter, Mr. Zimmer declared the
.Public Hearing on Final Plat approval for Laurel Park South Subdivision closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and adopted, it was
#11-237-78 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the
Final Plat for Laurel Park South 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, for the following reasons:
(1) The Final Plat conforms to the previously approved Preliminary
Plat.
4
(2) The Engineering Division of the City of Livonia recommends approval
of the Final Plat.
(3) All of the financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor by
the City have been complied with.
A roll call vote on the foregoing motion resulted in the following: '
AYES: Kluver, Friedrichs, Zimmer, Scurto, Falk, Morrow, Wisler, Smith
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Andrew
Mr. Zimmer 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
#11-238-78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 17,
1974 on Petition 78-8-1-24 as submitted by the City Planning Commission
on its own motion to' rezone property located on the south side of Section 10,
from P.L. and C-1 to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby determine
' to withdraw Petition 74-8-1-24 and deems that no further action by the
tiCity. is necessary.
1
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. .
On a motion duly made by Mrs.. Wisl.er, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and adopted, it was
6873
#11-239-78 RESO;VED that, the minutes of the 360th Regular Meeting and Public.
. Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on October 3, 1978.
4 A roll call vote on the above'motion resulted in the following:
AYES: Friedrichs, Zimmer, Scurto; Wisler, Smith, Andrew
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Kluver, Falk, Morrow
ABSENT: None
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mr. Zimmer,
and unanimously adopted, it was
#11-240-78 RESOLVED that, the minutes• of the 361st Regular Meeting held by the
City Planning Commission on October 1.7, 1978.
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted,
it was
,.#11-241-.78 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the
Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance
#1.3.06, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition
' 1 78-10-8-35P by Rockind/Debard, Architects, requesting approval of
all plans required by Section 18.58 submitted in connection with a
4
proposal to construct a medical/dental clinic on the north side of
Ann Arbor Trail between Ann• Arbor Road and Hix Road in Section 31,
subject to the following conditions:
(1) that Site Plan #7825, Revised 10/27/78, prepared by Rockind/Debard,
Architects, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(2) that Building Elevationsas shown on Plan #7825, dated 9/27/78,
prepared by Rockind/Debard, Architects, which are hereby approved
shall be adhered to;
(3) that a detailed landscape plan shall be• submitted for Planning
Commission approval within thirty days; and
• (4) that there shall be no trash stored outside the building.
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and unanimously
adopted, it was .
#11-242-78 RESOLVED that, ,pursuant to Section18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #1306, the
City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 78-10-8-34P by
[. .14
Alan R. Ettinger requesting approval of all plans required by Section
18.58 submitted .in. connection with a proposal to construct a dental
clinic on property located on the south side of Seven Mile Road between
Merriman and Middlebelt in Section 11, 'subject to the following conditions:
(1) that Site Plan for Dr. Alan Ettinger, Sheet 1, dated 11/6/78, which
is hereby approved shall be adhered to;
6874
1[10 .
(2) that Building Elevations as shown on Sheets 4 and 5 are hereby
approved and shall be adhered to;
(3) that a detailed landscape plan shall be submitted for Planning
Commission approval within thirty days; and
(4) that there shall be no trash stored outs:+.de the building._
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#11-243-78 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the
Sign Design plan submitted by Bill Settles in connection with a condition
of approval of Petition 77-8-8-16 by Eugene Pulice requesting approval
of all plans required by Section 18.47 in connection with a proposal
to construct additions to one existing building and remodel an existing
building located on the _north side of Five Mile Road between Loveland
and Mayfield in Section 15, subject to the following condition;
(1) That the Sign Plans for Century 21 and Arlington Insurance as
prepared by Bill Settles, Sign Contractor, are hereby approved
and shall be adhered to. .
•
Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and. unanimously adopted, the 362nd Regular Meeting
and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on November 14, 1978 were
I
t4 adjourned at 11:35 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
_ / Li-5(-- - '
- 14//?117
Jo.eph J' Fa , Secretary
/. 7
ATTEST: INV _
Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman
4