HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1979-08-07 7066
II; . MINUTES OF THE 377th REGULAR MEETING
AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LIVONIA
On Tuesday, August 7, 1979, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held
its 377th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall•, 33001 Five
Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, called the Regular Meeting and Public Hearings to
order at 8: 10 p.m. with approximately 85 interested persons in the audience. ,
Members present: Daniel R. Andrew Herman Kluver Jerome Zimmer
Suzanne Wisler Judith Scurto Joseph J. Falk
Robert Morrow
Members absent: Esther Friedrichs (Vacation) C. Russell Smith (Vacation)
Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director;
William H. Poppenger, Jr. ,• Planner I ; and Robert h.. Feinberg, Assistant City Attorney,
were also present.
Mr. Andrew informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a
rezoning request, this Commission makes a recommendation only to the City Council which,
in turn holds its own public hearing and decides the question. If a petition involves
a waiver of use request which is denied by the Planning Commission, the petitioner has
ten days in which to appeal the decision. Otherwise, the petition is terminated.
10 4 Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 79-6-1-17 by
Michael A. Boggio to rezone property located on the west side of
Inkster Road, north of Joy Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 36,
from RUF to R-8.
Mr. Andrew: This is a rezoning petition from RUF to R-8, which classification
would mean over two stories but not exceeding four stories. Should
it be approved at the Council level , then we would have before us a
site plan petition which would give the details of the building,
composition of building materials, brick, etc. We are only interested
in discussing the rezoning and the impact of the neighborhood and the
traffic pattern that it would create. Is there any correspondence
regarding this petition in the file?
John J. Nagy: We have a letter dated June 21 , 1979 from the Director of Properties
for the Archdiocese of Detroit to the Planning Department. We also
have a letter dated July 16, 1979 from Gary Clerk, Engineering Depart-
ment, stating there are no engineering problems in connection with this
petition.
Charles Barton, Berkley, Michigan: When we first looked at the property and decided we
were interested in it, we approached the Archdiocese of Detroit. How-
ever, there were a number of dilapidated houses that are vacant and
should be torn down. We met with he members of the homeowners ' assoc-
IL . iation and discussed the benefits that would occur versus any negative
aspects. I think we generally satisfied the members as to what we were
going to do, how we were going to do it and what we would do to protect
them. We presented to the people what we had in mind to do with the
7067
area and how we would set the buildings in such a fashion that it
would lessen the impact on the people. We received much input from
the people. After we were reasonably assured we had the cooperation
of the residents, we then commissioned Michael Boggio to present the
problem to the City to see in what areas we were in error.
Mr. Zimmer: Are you currently in this type of development? •
Mr. Barton: I have been building since 1953. I build two to four story multiple
buildings of solid masonry material .
Mr. Zimmer: Your plans are private in nature. There is no government funding.
Mr. Barton: This is a private project that will have financing but not government
financing.
Henry Binder, Wilson Acres Homeowners Association: A few years back, there was a
petition like this brought before the Council . At that time, it was
turned down. This property has lain vacant. It has turned ipto•a
worse mes"s. The City inspectors have gone into these homes and state
that each and every one should be condemned. The company I work for
thought of purchasing them but it was not feasible to repair them.
Since then two homes have been boarded shut. The Archdiocese has not
done anything. We finally got them to cut the weeds and get rid of
some of the heavy brush back there. There were at least 30 kids gather-
ing in the heavy brush and weeds. There have been police reports filed.
I have known Mr. Barton for 14 years. He is a good builder. I am
a commercial superintendent and I am familiar with some of the places
Kr. Barton has built. He runs a good, clean and neat operation.
This is what we want in our area. We would like one stipulation that
the buildings be limited to no more than 2 1/2 stories. The request
that was denied previously wanted nine-story high rise. This project
proposed by Mr. Barton will upgrade the area.
Mr. Mieszczur: I am immediately north of this. I was concerned with how this
9129 Inkster project would affect me as Iplan tohave solar heat. I did not
attend any of the homeowner meetings as I am not a member. I am
also concerned about the traffic.
Mr. Zimmer: How long have you lived in the area?
Mr. Mieszczur: One year.
Tish Markley: We would like to see something done with the property. We would
9000 Cardwell like only two stories. We wondered if it would be fenced.
John 011ar: Anything to improve that neighborhood would be welcomed.
Mr. Rowland: I am for it.
8085 Cardwell
to Mr. Taylor: I am in favor of it. How can we be assured there will be a cyclone
9186 Cardwell fence there?
Mr. Andrew: At this point we cannot assure it. At the time of site plan approval
it would seem to be a logical condition. Approval of five Commissioners
will be needed for that. I don't think that is a big problem.
7067
Mr. Laskowski: I would like a fence between me and the project.
8911 Inkster
I
Mr. Falk: I would like to point out one thing. Under the zoning you could go
to four stories. If Mr. Barton decides to sell this parcel that
is to be rezoned his promise of only two stories does not hold up.
Things could change and this does happen although Mr.,Barton now
has every intention to build. I want you people to know that another
developermight not do that same thing as Mr. Barton proposes.
Mr. Barton: Can you condition the rezoning?
Mr. Andrew: No.
Mr. Barton: I would like to point out that we will be adding acceleration
and de-acceleration lanes that will eliminate some traffic problems.
Mr. Andrew: Are there any further comments?
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on Petition 79-6-1-17 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted
it was
#8-133-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 7,
1979 on Petition 79-6-1-17 as submitted by Michael A. Boggio to rezone
IL property located on the west side of Inkster Road, north of Joy Road, in
the Southeast 1/4 of Section 36, from RUF to R-8, the City Planning Commission
does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 79-6-1-17 be
approved for the following reasons;
(1) The proposed rezoning is in accord with the spirit and purpose of the
Future Land Use Plan of the City of Livonia as adopted by the City
Planning Commission.
(2) The proposed rezoning will not be detrimental to the surrounding
established uses of the area as the site has the capacity to support
the proposed use.
(3) The site has good access to an adjoining major thoroughfare of Inkster
Road so as to accommodate traffic to and from the site and thereby
will not burden any adjoining residential streets of the area.
(4) The proposed rezoning represents a substantial housing improvement
program for this area as several substandard homes will be eliminated
and replaced with new, modern, attractive housing which housing will
have to fully comply with all building codes and housing and thereby
will have a positive effect upon the neighboring area.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/19/79,
and a notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company,
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Consumers
IL Power Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
7068
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-6-1-18 by Livonia
Public Schools to rezone property located on the northeast corner of
Hubbard Road and Bretton in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 3, from P.L. to
I
R-1.
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone present wishing to be heard on this matter?
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item including the petitioner.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 79-6-1-18 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted
it was
#8-134-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 7,
1979 on Petition 79-6-1-18 as submitted by Livonia Public Schools requesting
to rezone property located on the northeast corner of Hubbard Road and
Bretton in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 3, from P.L. to R-1, the City
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 79-6-1-18 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The Livonia School Board, through their petition, has indicated '
that they are no longer in need of the subject property for school
purposes.
(2) The proposed rezoning to the R-1, single-family, residential zoning
classification will provide for the most appropriate and logical
zoning extension of the area as the adjoining residential zoning
IL district is of the R-1 zoning classification.
(3) The proposed use of the property for single-family home purposes will
provide for a use that is compatible to and in full harmony with the
adjoining residential uses of the area.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, motice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/19/79,
and a 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, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-6-1-19 by Duane and
Nancy Foster to rezone property located on the north side of Schoolcraft
Service Drive between Farmington Road and Stamford in the Southeast 1/4
of Section 21, from R-2 to P.S.
Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence on this matter?
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from Gary Clark, Division of Engineering.
ILDuane Foster: I am a CPA and I am presently located one block west of the current
33900 Schoolcraft space (in the Stempien building) . I would like to make the home
into an office. I have engaged the firm of Ralls, Hammill to draw
up the plans.
Mr. Andrew: How soon do you plan to start?
• 7069
I Mr. Foster: If there is not too much red tape involved, I would like to be in
by December.
Mrs. Scurto: To the west of Mr. Foster's rear lot line, what is the size of that
lot?
Mr. Nagy: The lot on Stamford is 113' x 90 feet.
Mrs. Scurto: You plan on parking in the back. Are your working hours normally
from 8:00 a.m. to 5:oo p.m.
•
Mr. Foster: Yes, they might vary during tax time.
Mr. Morrow: Are you the present owners of the property?
Mr. Foster: I have entered into an offer to purchase agreement about six weeks
ago.
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew, Chairman
declared the public hearing on Petition 79-6-1-19 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#8-135-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 7,
IL 1979 as submitted by Duane & Nancy Foster requesting to rezone property
located on the north side of Schoolcraft Service Drive between Farmington
Road and Stamford in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 21, from R-2 to P.S. ,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 79-6-1-19 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed rezoning is consistent with the adopted Future Land
Use Plan which designates the subject area for office uses.
(2) The proposed rezoning to the P.S. classification is a logical extension
of the established P.S. zoning district of the area.
(3) The proposed rezoning to the professional service classification will
provide for uses that are compatible to and in full harmony with
existing and proposed uses of the area.
(4) The proposed rezoning will not be detrimental to the area as the
subject site area is the last remaining residential parcel between
the research/engineering/office classification on the east and the
professional service zoning classification on the west which indicates
that the area is being converted to office uses in accord with the
Future Land Use Plan so as to provide for transitional buffer uses
between the established residential neighborhood to the north and from the
adverse effects of the freeway and industrial corridor to the south.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/19/79,
and a 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.
7070
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
4 adopted.
& Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-6-1-20 initiated by
Council Resolution #418-79 to rezone property located south of Eight
Mile Road between Farmington Road and Osmus in the North 1/2 of Section 3,
from R-3-A to RUF.
Mr. Nagy: The Counicil has had many requests for lot splits in this particular
area and they have asked for azoning valuation to determine how the
the smaller lots affect the neighborhood of larger lots. There have
• been quite a few lots along Norfolk that were one acre and have been
split or divided into three lots. This is simply a valuation to hear
public comments as to whether or not the R-3 zoning should remain or
be changed to the RUF zoning classification.
Mr. Zaske: Why doesn't the map reflect the property to Merriman?
20016 Hubbard
Mr. Nagy: That is already zoned RUF.
R. Hastings: There are quite a few lots already broken up on Norfolk but I think
20220 Parker we should hold the present zoning. There isn't too much advantage to
going back to RUF after 19 years. A lot of us on larger lots built
in the middle and can't do much about dividing our property. There
are very few that can be split. I think it should stay the way it is.
1[ 40 Mr. Andrew: Out of 187 lots 40 lots conform to R-3. That would mean that those
40 nonconforming and would have to appear before the SBA for rebuilding
or adding on. I think that is an unfair burden. The Council though
is merely asking to to look at this.
Ms. Mroz: I would like the larger sized lots. I live on the west side of Osmus
20333 and does this include the east side also.
Osmus
Mr. Nagy: The east side is zoned RUF.
Mr. Bay: Which is bigger the R3A or RUF?
20133 Osmus
Mr. Nagy: The RUF lot has 21,780 square feet and the R-3A has 9,600 square feet.
The RUF therefore, would require a .larger lot.
Elvin Kahl: What affect would the change of zoning have on our taxes?
33091 Norfolk
Mr. Andrew: Shouldn't have any.
Mrs. Bay: I would like to see the RUF stay.
20133 Osmus
IL Mr. Nagy: It is presently not zoned RUF although the majority of the existing lots
meet RUF lot size requirements.
Mr. Herr and Mr. Harlow: We would like to leave it as it is.
Virginia Carpenter: I am on the board for the civic association in this area. We are
in favor of retaining the zoning. I would like you to ask for a show
of hands.
• 7071
1[,0 Mr. Andrew: How many are for retaining the present zoning? Against?
Show of hands indicated at least 80% were for the present zoning and 20% against.
Ms. Pommerville: Why is the Council interested in changing this?
Mr. Andrew: Due to the many lot splits.
Mr. Zimmer: I feel that the area would support the RUF zoning. There are 140 plus
homes on larger lots. If we deny this and continue to leave it R-3A
it would be possible to put another street in and divide all of the
lots along the back end of some of those lots. I have difficulty with
that.
Mrs. Wisler: The lots that have been divided show a good use of the land. Those
of you that have large lots will be able to divide them or if you
wish you may not divide them. The change of zoning would prohibit some
40 homeowners to make changes on their property.
Mr. Zimmer: It only means more red tape. The restrictions could be waived.
Mr. Morrow: This is a request by the Council to look at this section. This doesn't
mean there is any thing underfoot.
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on Petition 79-6-1-20 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto and seconded by Mrs. Wisler, it was
#8-136-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 7,
t979 on Petition 79-6-1-20 initiated by Council Resolution #418-79 to
rezone property located south of Eight Mile Road between Farmington Road
and Osmus in the North 1/2 of Section 3, from R-3A to RUF, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 79-6-1-20
be denied for the following reasons:
(1) All existing lots in the subject area at least conform to R-3A Zoning
requirements or larger.
(2) If this petition were to be approved, 40 existing lots would then
become nonconforming.
(3) The area has been zoned R.L. or R-3 (80' x 120'lots) since 1960
which has led to more efficient use of the land in some instances, a
fact which the Planning Commission believes is of paramount importance
particularly in these times of high cost of land and housing.
(4) The subject area has the capacity to accept additional dwellings
which may result from future development occurring in accordance
with R-3A zoning district requirements.
(5) Retention of the R-3A zoning in the subject area will not be detrimental
1[1 .0; . to the overall development of the general area, nor will it be injurious
to the continued use and enjoyment of the existing residential properies
in this area.
• 7072
I: . FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
44
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/19/79,
and a notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company,
Chesapeake & Ohio R,,ilway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company,
Consumers Power Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof of
Service.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Kluver, Scurto, Morrow,'Wisler, Andrew
NAYS: Zimmer, Falk
. ABSENT: Friedrichs, Smith
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-7-3-7 initiated by
Council Resolution #590-79 requesting the vacating of the portion of
Oporto Avenue located between Pembroke and Bretton in the Southeast
1/4 of Section 2.
Lee Spence: I represent Doris Batten who owns lot 472 and a home on lot 479. The
Brashear, vacating would make the development of this lot in this area a little
Conley & more economical and would allow the expenditure to be spent to improve
Tangora Pembroke.
IL Mr. Andrew: Would your client object to special assessment for paving on Pembroke?
Mr. Spence: My client hopes to develop lot 472 and we realize that it will have
to be paved. Whether it comes now or later she realizes it would be
to her advantage.
Mr. Andrew: We have a recommendation from the engineering division if the street
is vacated a full-width easement would be retained to protect an existing
storm sewer located in the right-of-way.
Mrs. Maynor: Why not vacate Pembroke and leave Oporto.
19828 Doris
Mr. Andrew: That would create a jigsaw.
Mrs. Maynor: This portion would be a good place for children to have a mini park.
Mr. Zimmer: Is Oporto north of Pembroke developed?
Mr. Nagy: No.
Mr. Zimmer: What is west of Oporto?
Mr. Nagy: Doris street.
Mrs. Scurto: West of Doris is Purlingbrook.
Mrs. Maynor: From Purlingbrook to Oporto Pembroke doesn't exist.
1
Mrs. Scurto: The house on Pembroke and Doris (southwest corner) it faces Doris?
Mr. Nagy: Yes.
• 7073
Mrs. Wisler: It would seem to me that whether Pembroke is extended or not or in
which direction doesn't really make much difference in terms of vacating
# this street. There doesn't seem to be any reason to maintain it.
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the Public Hearing on Petition 79-7-3-7 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto and seconded by Mrs. Wisler, it was
#8-137-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 7,
1979 on Petition 79-7-3-7 initiated by Council Resolution #599-79 requesting
• the vacating of the portion of Oporto Avenue located between Pembroke and
Bretton in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 2, the City Planning Commission
does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 79-7-3-7 be approved
for the following reasons:
(1) The subject portion of Oporto Avenue is not currently developed and
could be more advantageously used in conjunction with adjacent
properties. •
(2) The subject right-of-way is not needed to serve adjacent properties
since access is available from Pembroke and Bretton.
(3) Development of this unimproved right-of-way would not contribute .to
better traffic circulation in the overall area.
(4) No City Departments or public utility companies have objected to
the proposed vacating provided a full-width easement is retained.
IL
(5) The subject street right-of-way of Oporto is not needed in this
location as the area is overburdened with an excessive amount of
undeveloped road rights-of-way leaving short blocks of too many crossing
streets, representative of a gridiron street pattern which is not
consistent with present day standards.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/19/79,
and a notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company,
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company,
Consumers Power Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof of
Service.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Kluver, Scurto, Falk, Morrow, Wisler, Andrew
NAYS: Zimmer
ABSENT: Friedrichs, Smith
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-6-6-3 proposed amendment
to Section 18.37, Offstreet Parking Requirements, of Zoning Ordinance #543,
by incorporating regulations to prohibit the sale of vehicles or merchandise
on parking lots.
i
Mr. Andrew: Any correspondence on this matter or anyone present wishing to be •
heard?
There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on Petition 79-6-6-3 c:]c, cd.
• 7074
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted,
to it was
4
, #8-138-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 7,
1979 on Petition 79-6-6-3 as submitted by the City Planning Commission
to amend Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, by
incorporating regulations to prohibit the sale of vehicles or merchandise
on parking lots, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 79-6-6-3 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) This amendment is required to prevent the use of commercial parking
lots for purposes other than for parking of customers' vehicles.
•
(2) The Bureau of Inspection supports this amendment.
(3) This proposed amendment to limit and restrict the use of off-street
parking facilities for employee and customer parking only is needed
to control the abuses that have occurred in off-street parking
areas as a result of the indescriminate display and sales of passenger
cars, recreation vehicles and other such similar vehicles, creating
substantial loss of customer parking and thereby leaving the facility
deficient in parking to legitimately satisfy the required needs for
off-street parking.
FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/19/79
and a 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
Services,
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-6-6-4 initiated by
Council Resolution #507-79 to amend Section 11.02, Permitted Uses, of
Zoning Ordinance #543, by providing regulations to permit motorcycle sales
and repair establishments in C-2 zoning districts.
Mr. John 011ar: I just wanted to say that I am the only motorcycle shop In the area.
We have to have a place to test the bikes outside before it is given
to the consumer.
Mr. Andrew: Why not put it on a test stand?
Mr. 011ar: If there was a good one Iwould have one.
Mrs. Wisler: Is there anything in our Ordinance that provides for any testing in
C-2?
Mr. Nagy: The Ordinance is very restrictive on outdoor uses. Outdoor testing would
be more appropriate in C-3. C-2 is strictly sales and indoor repair and
service.
Mrs. Scurto: Mr. 011ar would be grandfathered in if this amendment were-approved.
ILW Mr. Morrow: Your motorcycles can't be tested on the street.
Mr. 011ar: We sell off the road vehicles. Some are competition bikes, dirt bikes
that are not licensed for roadway use.
7075
Mr. Andrew:1:
Would you place on a study session in the near future an amendment
to the C-3 District Regulations so as to incorporate testing of motor
vehicles as a permitted use.
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew, Chairman
declared the public hearing on Petition 79-6-6-4 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted,
it was
#8-139-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 7,
• 1979 on Petition 79-6-6-4 as initiated by Council Resolution #507-79 to
amend Section 11.02, Permitted Uses, of Zoning Ordinance #543, by providing
regulations to permit motorcyle sales and repair establishments in C-2
zoning districts, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City, Council that Petition 79-6-6-4 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) This amendment is needed to provide controls for the location and
operation of motorcycle sales and repair establishments.
(2) Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, is silent with respect to this
use and with this proposed amendment, this deficiency will be
corrected and the use more adequately controlled.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 7/19/79,
IL and a 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, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda Petition 79-6-7-3 by the City Planning
Commission to amend Part VII of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the
Future Land Use Plan, by changing the designation of property located on the
southeast corner of Ann Arbor Trail and Newburgh Road in the Northwest 1/4
of Section 32, from General Commercial to Office.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Wisler and unanimously adopted,
it was
#9-140-79 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 August 7, 1979 for the
purpose of amending Part VII of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia,
the Future Land Use Plan, the same as hereby amended so as to change the
designation of property located on the southeast corner of Ann Arbor Trail
and Newburgh Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 32, from General Commercial
to Office, subject property be legally described as follows:
Part of the N.E. 1/4 of Section 31, T.1S. ,R.9E.,
ILCity of Livonia, Wayne County, Michigan, beginning
N. 0° 08' 15" W. 198.20 ft. from the E. 1/4 corner
Section 31, thence N. 0° 8' 15" W. 81 ft. thence N. 89°
41' W. 202.74 ft. thenfe S. 0° 8' 15" E. 81 ft. thence
S. 89° 41' E. 202.74 ft. to the point of beginning except
the E. 60' . (Bureau of Taxation Parcel No. 31D2a)
7076
for the following reasons:
(1) An office designation would promote uses which would act as a
t transition between commercial and residential uses.
(2) An office designation would promote uses more compatible to adjacent
and surrounding uses. •
(3) An office designation would promote uses which would be more likely
to generate less vehicular traffic.
. (4) An office designation would promote uses which would be less intense
in character.
(5) An office designation would provide for uses not readily available
to the surrounding neighborhood.
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.
ILMr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted. .
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-6-7-4 by the City Planning
Commission to amend Part VII of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia,
the Future Land Use Plan, by changing the designation of property located
on the west side of Newburgh Road, south of Ann Arbor Trail in the Northeast
1/4 of Section 31, from General Commercial to Office.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted
it was
#9-141-79 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 August 7, 1979 for the
purpose of amending Part VII of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia,
the Future Land Use Plan, the same is hereby amended by changing the
designation of property located on the west side of Newburgh Road, south of
Ann Arbor Trail in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 31, from General Commercial
to Residential, subject property being legally described as follows:
Part of the N.E. 1/4 of Section 31, T.1S. ,R.9E. , City
of Livonia, Wayne County, Michigan, beginning N. 0° 8' 15" W.
198.20 ft. from the E. 1/4 corner Section 31, thence N. 0° 8'
15" W. 81 ft. thence N. 89° 41' W. 202.74 ft. thence S. 0° 8' 15"
IL . E. 81 ft. thence S. 89° 41' E. 202.74 ft. to the point of beginning
except the E. 60' . (Bureau of Taxation Parcel No. 31D2a) .
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
7077
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, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing' resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat Approval for
Windridge Village Subdivision #4 proposed to be located south of Eight
• Mile Road, west of Gill Road in the West 1/2 of Section 4.
Mr. Zimmer: Is there an access way to the park?
Mr. Nagy: The initial plan did not show one but a revised plan has been
submitted and provides a walkway which we have illustrated here
in green.
Mr. Andrew: That is park land as opposed to school.
Mr. Nagy: The walkway is at park land property. The location has been
recommended by Parks and Recreation.
Mr. Zimmer: Does the walkway meet the standards so we don't have problems?
Mr. Nagy:IL It will have paved cement for 6 feet of the 10 feet with a chain
link fence inside the walkway dedication.
Ed. Green: I am here in behalf of my father. When will this project start?
Mr. Franklin: Next spring.
Mrs. Vi Machowski: Why are the lots not zoned RUF? I owned a lot near by that is
32450 Queensboro RUF.
Farmington, MI
Mr. Andrew: The petitioner petitioned to the City. You have that option also.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew
declared the public hearing on Petition for Preliminary Plat Approval for Windridge
Village Subdivision #4 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, it was
#9-142-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 7,
1979, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to waive open
space requirements of Section 9.09 of the Subdivision Rules and Regulations
as they relate to Windridge Village Subdivision #4 for the following reasons:
(1) The area is already adequately served by open space as the Subdivision
immediately adjoins the 240 acre Bicentennial Park which has both
IL . active and passive recreation facilities.
(2) Immediately adjoining the area is the Glen Eden Memorial Park which
adds additional dimension of open space and defines the subdivision
area.
. 7078
IL (3) The Parks & Recreation in a letter dated 7/23/79 approves the
, subdivision layout and indicates no objection to the waiving of
the open space requirement so long as an adequate walkway is
provided within the Subdivision area to link the proposed new
Subdivision with the Bicentennial Park.
A roll call vote on the foregoing motion resulted in the following:
AYES: Kluver, Falk, Morrow, Zimmer, Wisler, Andrew
NAYS: Scurto
ABSENT: Friedrichs, Smith
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made by Ur. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted,
it was
#9-143-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 7,
1979, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that the Preliminary Plat for Windridge Village Subdivision No. 4
proposed to be located south of Eight Mile Road, west of Gill Road in the
West 1/2 of Section 4, be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed subdivision layout fully complies with all applicable
provisions of Zoning Ordinance #543 and the Subdivision Rules and
IL Regulations, the Planning Commission having waived the open space
requirements of Section 9.09 of the Subdivision Rules and Regulations.
(2) The Subdivision plan is well laid out, providing for an attractive
functional and livable residential area.
subject to the following conditions:
(1) That an Entrance Marker Plan and a Greenbelt Landscape Plan be
submitted for Planning Commission approval prior to Final Plat
Approval.
(2) That the deed restrictions of the subdivision shall provide for
perpetuationand maintenance of the greenbelt as proposed on
the preliminary plat and shall be recorded as an integral part of
the final plat recording process.
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
Buildind Dept. , Superintendent of Schools, Fire Dept. , Police Dept. and
Parks and Recreation Dept.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
ILMr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-7-2-17 by Fred J. Armour
. requesting waiver use approval to construct a general office building on
the east side of Farmington between Five Mile Road and Rayburn in the
Southwest 1/4 of Section 15. •
Mr. Andrew: What is the proposed use?
• 7079
•
Fred Armour: It will be an office for Burton Abstract.
Mr. Falk: I would like to see the brick on the back and, of course, the
trash inside.
Mrs. Scurto: The visibility of this building is very obvious and even with the
wall I feel it should be a four-sided brick building.
Mrs. Wisler: Would it be cheaper to use the aggregate panel across the top?
Mr. Armour: That would create a problem to take water off the building.
We would create an expensive problem more than brick. The steel
framework would cost as much as the brick.
Mr. Andrew: Is the air conditioning unit on the roof.
Mr. Armour: It is hidden by the aggregate.
Mr. Andrew: If you look from the east would you see it?
Mr. Armour: Probably. We will screen it.
H. Daminski: I was concerned about the grade. The property is elevated at
15615 Westmore Farmington Road and it slopes toward Westmore.
Mr. Armour: That will have to be cut down. We will level the front and pust it
toward the back.
Mr. Kaminski: How far will the building be from my property? Air conditioning
will be noisy.
Mr. Andrew: The air conditioning unit will be at least 30 feet from the property
line. The building line is 15 feet west of the property line.
Roland Eveleth: I was concerned in the aesthetics of the property. There are
15600 Westmore a lot of trees in the back about 30 feet from Mr. Kaminski
that could possibly be saved. What type of wall will be used?
Mr. Andrew: . If a wall is objectionable possibly landscaping could be used.
Mr. Kaminski: I would like the wall.
Mr. Eveleth: I am across the street so of course Mr. Kaminski would be more
affected. Mr. Kaminski is adjacent to the property in question.
Mr. Andrew: I would like to see two east parking spots eliminated and some
flowering crabs coming across there.
Mr. Armour: We have ample landscaping but of course there is never ample. It
could be done.
Mr. Andrew: You have 19 parking spots and need only 13. You could cut it to 17
parking spots.
Mr. Nagy: He also eliminated the dumpster.
i .
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew
declared the public hearing on Petition 79-7-2-17 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted.,
it was
• 7080
#9-144-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 7,
1979 on Petition 79-7-2-17 as submitted by Fred J. Armour, requesting
waiver use approval to construct a general office building on the east
side of Farmington Road between Five Mile Road and Rayburn in the Southwest
1/4 of Section 15, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
the City Council that Petition 79-7-2-17 be approved subject to the following
conditions:
(1) that Site Plan #79D-529, dated 6/7/79, prepared by Affiliated
Engineers, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(2) that Building Elevation Plan 79D-529 dated 6/7/79, prepared by
Affiliated Engineers, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be
adhered to with the exception that face brick shall be used on
all four sides of the building;
(3) that all landscape materials as shown on the approved Site Plan
shall be installed on the site prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy
condition;
(4) that the air conditioning unit on the roof or any other roof mounted
equipment shall be screened;
(5) that all trash storage shall be inside the building; and
(6) that two parking spots to the east will be deleted and two flowering
1[10crabtrees and supporting landscaping be provided in lieu thereof.
for the following reasons:
(1) The waiver use is in full compliance with Section 9.03(a) of the
P.S. District regulations of the Zoning Ordinance.
(2) The proposed waiver use will not be detrimental to or incompatible
with the surrounding established uses of the area.
(3) The site has the capacity to support the intended use.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was sent to
property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as listed
in the Proof of Service.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, it was
#9-145-79 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 375th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings
held by the City Planning Commission on July 10, 1979, are approved.
AYES: Falk, Morrow, Zimmer, Scurto, Wisler, Andrew
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Kluver
ABSENT: Friedrichs, Smith
7081
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
ILadopted.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#8-146-79 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 330th Special Meeting held by the
City Planning Commission on July 17, 1979 are approved.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion-is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and unanimously adopted,
it was
• #8-147-79 RESOLVED that, the Minutes of the 376th Regular Meeting held by the City
Planning Commission on July 24, 1979 are approved.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution ,
adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 78-6-8-20 by Fred Armour
requesting to modify Condition #2 of Planning Commission Resolution #2-26-79.
Mrs. Wisler: Is the west side being used for signs.
Mr. Nagy: Signs were just approved on the east elevation only.
Mr. Armour: I.moved the trash container into the rear of the building.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted,
it was
#8-148-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a letter dated 7/19/79 from Fred J. Armour, the
City Planning Commission does hereby approve a modification in Condition #2
of Planning Commission Resolution #2-26-79 in connection with the approval
of Petition 78-6-8-20 by Philip Pisto requesting approval of all plans
required by Section 18.47 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #990,
submitted in connection with a proposal to construct commercial retail stores
on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Farmington and Gill Roads in
Section 4, so as to allow face brick on all four sides of the proposed new
structure in lieu of the previously approved Spectra-Glaze Block and elimination
of decorative pilasters; and further, that the Planning Commission approves
the request to add no more than three wall signs on the north face of the
mansard roof for purposes of identifying those tenants who will occupy the
south end of the proposed structure;
FURTHER RESOLVED that, all other conditions as set forth in Planning
Commission Resolution #2-26-79, adopted on 2/19/79, are valid and remain
in full force and effect.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-6-8-20P by T.H.Marsh
Construction Company requesting approval of all plans required by Section
18.58 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #1306, submitted in
connection with a proposal to construct an addition to a party store located
on the south side of Plymouth Road between Stark and Wayne Roads in Section 33.
7082
Mrs. Scurto: Are we permitted to prohibit people from using signage in the front
windows?
IL Mr. Shane: Unless it is on the outside we have no control.
Mr. Scurto: I will cast a favorable vote in good faith in the hopes that
petitioner will eliminate his past business practices,.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#8-14p-79 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 79-6-8-20P by T.H.Marsh
Construction Company requesting approval of all plans required by Section
18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct an addition to a
party store located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Stark and
Wayne Roads in Section 33, subject to the following conditions:
(1) That Site Plan #1778, Rev. 1, prepared by T. H. Marsh Construction
Company, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to;
plan
(2) That all landscape materials as shown on the approved/shall be
installed on the site by November 1, 1979 and thereafter permanently
maintained in a healthy condition.
1[0 Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
i
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-7-8-22P by Michael Nalu
requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Ordinance
#543, the Zoning Ordinance, as amended by Ordinance 1306, submitted in
connection with a proposal to construct a retail store on the northeast
corner of Six Mile Road and Haggerty in Section 7.
Mr. Andrew: What about the light standard?
Michael Nalu: 10 foot.
Architect
Mr. Nagy: As to the sign, the site plan shows a freestanding sign. We are asking
that they bring that back.
Mrs. Scurto: How many parking places are required?
Mr. Nagy: 31 are required and they have 35.
Mrs. Scurto: I would like to see more landscaping and less parking.
Mr. Nalu: We presently have a lot of landscaping. There is a 30 foot strip on
Six Mile as well as Newburgh.
,,t Mrs. Scurto: I feel the first five parking spots on the eastern side could be
eliminated. This is a new area that we are pioneering.
Mr. Andrew: What is the zoning to the east?
Mr. Nagy: C-2 with a 60 foot setback.
7083
Mr. Andrew: With the elimination of the five parking spots here should the
IL .
property to the east be developed there would be no parking in the
front yard for him.
Mrs. Wisler: Eliminating two would be acceptable.
Mr. Zimmer: I think this is a very well done plan. I have no pro} lem with the
Plan as it stands as much as I share everyone's worry of too much
asphalt.
Mrs. Scurto: I think we should keep in mind the vast commercial areas that are
in this particular area.
Mr. Andrew: I think there should be a greater width of landscaping along Haggerty
Road. What is the width of the driveway?
Mr. Shane: 22 feet, width of driveway adjacent to the landscaped area.
Mr. Andrew: Would you give consideration to a greater width of landscaping
adjacent to the landscaping area and come back next Tuesday.
Mr. Nalu: Could we resolve this now if it is a small problem?
There was no one else wishing to speak regarding this item, Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on Petition 79-7-8-22P closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and unanimously adopted,
IL it was
#9-150-79 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 79-7-8-22P by Michael
Nalu requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 submitted
in connection with a proposal to construct a retail store on the northeast
corner of Six Mile Road and Haggerty Road in Section 7, subject to the
following conditions:
(1) that Site Plan dated 5/18/79, revised 8/13/79, prepared by Michael
Nalu Associates, Architect be approved and hereby adhered to;
(2) That Building Elevaion Plans dated 7/23/79, prepared by Michael
Nalu Associates, Architect, which are hereby approved shall be
adhered to;
(3) That Landscape Plan dated 8/5/79, revised 8/13/79, be approved and
adhered to and that all landscape materials installed on the site
shall be permanently maintained in a healthy condition.
(4) That the free-standing sign proposed to be located on the site shall
first be approved by the Planning Commission before the issuance of
the sign permit.
L
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
• 7084
.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-7-8-23P by George
Hajal requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of
Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance, as amended by Ordinance #1306,
submitted in connection with a proposal to construct an addition to
an existing party store located on the north side of Plymouth Road
between Cavell andArcola in Section 25.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, announced that Petition 79-7-8-23P is removed from the agenda.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-7-8-24P by Section
18.58 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #1306, submitted in
. connection with a proposal to construct a medical office building on
the west side of Farmington Road between Rayburn and Roycroft in SEction
16.
Mr. Andrew: What is the height of the lighting fixtures?
Petitioner: We are allowed 16 feet maximum.
Mr. Andrew: 14 feet would seem adequate.
There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 79-7-8-24P closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and unanimously adopted,
it was
1: #8-151-79 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 79-7-8-24P by Dr. K.C.
Nair requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 submitted
in connection with a proposal to construct a medical office building on the
west side of Farmington Road between Rayburn and Roycroft in Section 16,
subject to the following ,conditions:
(1) That Site Plan 79-2613, dated 8/3/79, prepared by Progressive Associates,
Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to.
(2) That Building Elevations as shown on Plan 79-2613, dated 7/24/79
prepared by Progressive Associates, Inc. , which are hereby approved
shall be adhered to.
(3) That all landscape materials as shown on Plat 79-2613, prepared by
Progressive Associates, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be
adhered to; and
(4) That all landscape materials as shown on the approved plan shall
be installed on the site prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy and thereafter maintained in a healthy condition.
(5) That the proposed outdoor lighting standards shall be limited in
height not to exceed 14' in height.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
7085
.ar
ILOn a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 377th Regular Meeting
and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on August 7, 1979 were
adjourned at 11:20 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
r . .
\, iii,
e ra__.
•JArill :c,.sep ecrttary
. /// 1J;l'elr
ATTEST:
Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman