Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1979-11-13 7143 • MINUTES OF THE 381st REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY 3 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, November 13, 1979, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 381st Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, called the Regular Meeting and Public Hearings to order at 8:04 p.m. with approximately 25 interested people in the audience. MEMBERS PRESENT: Daniel R. Andrew Esther Friedrichs Herman Kluver - Lee R. Morrow Judith Scirto C. Russell Smith Jerome Zimmer Joseph J. Falk MEMBERS ABSENT: Suzanne Wisler* Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H G Shane, Assistant City Planning Director; Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV; and Robert M. Feinberg, Assistant City Attorney were also present. Mr. Andrew informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council, who in turn will then .hold their own Public Hearing and decide the question. If a petition involves a waiver use request, and the petition is denied by the Planning Commission, the petitioner then has ten days in which to appeal for relief. Other- wise, the petition is terminated. Mr. Falk, Secretary announced the first item on the agenda, Petition 79-5-1-13 1[0 (rehearing) by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the Southeast corner of Ann Arbor Trail and Newburgh Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 32, from C-1 to P.S. Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence on this petition? Mr. Shane: None, sir. Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to be heard on this petition? Douglas Mackinder: The piece of property in question is so small, several businesses .36910 Ann Arbor Trail have tried to go in there. I would just like to go along with it and have no objection to the rezoning. Wayne Brown,: A few gentlemen and I had the desire of purchasing the property. 14553 Dolphin We had talked to the owner Mr. Tilman, and we are here tonight to see Detroit the progress or will the C-1 zone remain. What we are hoping is to acquire the place for amechanical repair shop. I have been to the Zoning office and the Department of Inspection to see what possibilities there were. Now as it stands, if it stays C-1 it could operate as a gas station and that is also one of our desires. Mr. Andrew: In the opinion of the chair, the validity of that corner being used as a gas station does not exist because it has'been abandoned for one year and it has lost its nonconforming use. It could be a question to legal consideration. The statement you made in my opinion is not correct. 7144 1[0 Mr. Brown: I had talked to John Karol. If I am not mistaken, he told me it is not legally abandoned. However, whether or not it is or isn't we would not mind applying for rezoning to C-2 because of a second desire. There have been gas stations closing down in the area, for whatever reasons I do not know, however, we feel very confident that the opening of that type of business would be successful. Mr. Andrew: Any questions from the Planning Commission? Mr. Smith: Do you intend it to be primarily the selling of gasoline? Mr. Brown: If the zoning remains as C-1. If it can be rezoned to the C-2 - classification there is another desire we have. We will have to see what it comes to being. Mr. Morrow: In your opening remarks did you say you just had an interest in the property or do you have some sort of option on the property at this time? Mr. Brown: It is quite a strong desire. We have talked to Mr. Tilman and have had meetings with the few people that are interested. It is more of a serious thing. When we got together with Mr. Tilman we discussed plans such as buying on land contract, so much down, etc. . It is not just a desire, it is being followed through as much as possible. 1[0 Mrs. Scurto: Had you looked into the Mobil station on Ann Arbor Road? Mr. Brown: There are two shut down; one as far as I recall is sold. The other is up for sale and it may be 3 to 3 1/2 times the price as what Mr. Tilman is promising. Mr. Falk: You were here before us once before. Weren't you here in the last month saying you wanted to know how it would go after the zoning went through. Mr. Brown: No. Mr. Falk: You have a business right now? Mr. Brown: I do not own a business, I work at a gas station though. Mr. Falk: Do you reside in Detroit; Mr. Brown: , Yes, with option of moving. Mr. Kluver: Have you seen the legal instrument for the option to buy? Mr. Brown: No, sir. I am not that experienced in legalities and I took the advice of Mr. Tilman to see what you can do at City Hall. toBob Shepard: I am in favor of changing to Professional Services. 36731 Richland 4 Dorothy Seog: I am also in favor of going to Professional Services. 36906 Ann Arbor Trail 7145 IL Mrs. Scurto: Is the owner of the house that is next to this property here? Is not the house part of this property? Owner was not present. Mr. Smith: Was the owner notified? Mr. Nagy: Yes, sir. • There was no one else wishing to dicuss this matter and Mr. Andrew declared the Public Rehearing on Petition 79-5-1-13 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and adopted, it was #11-213-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Rehearing having been held on November 13, 1979 on Petition 79-5-1-13 as submitted by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located on the southeast corner of Ann Arbor Trail and Newburgh Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 32, from C-1 to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 79-5-1-13 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change in zoning will provide a zoning category that will allow land uses consistent with the Future Land Use Plan. 1[0 (2) The P.S. District regulations will provide for office uses not currently available in the general area. (3) The proposed change in zoning will encourage land uses which, by their very nature, will tend to generate less vehicular traffic to the area. (4) The P.S. zoning category will promote uses which will act as a buffer to the adjoining residential uses from the adverse affects emanting from the abutting major thoroughfare. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 10/25/79 and that notices of such hearing were sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Consumers Power Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Andrew, Falk, Friedrichs, Kluver, Morrow, Smith, Scurto, Zimmer NAYS: None ABSENT: Wisler Mr. Andrew declared the above motion caraiied and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-19-2-25 by Burger Chef 4 Systems, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to construct a restaurant on the west side of Farmington Road, north of Seven Mile Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 4. Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence on this petition, Mr. Nagy? 7146 Mr. Nagy: We have a letter dated October 17, 1979 from Engineering and there appears to be no problem with this proposal. Letter from Police department, Traffic Bureau states that parking is deficient. I Correspondence dated November 7, 1979 received from Fire Dept. Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone present wishing to speak on this petition? Kenneth Hale: When they first came tome several months ago, I took a very careful Attorney for look. . .is there a need for this restaurant in this area. . . . Burger Chef is it going to fit in with the community? Burger Chef Systems is Systems owned by one of the largest companies in America, General Foods. 15195 Farming- The closest similar restaurants are on Seven Mile and Middlebelt ton Road . and one on Five Mile and Merriman. I believe there is a need for this type of restaurant. Reclaimed brick will be used. It is going to provide 50 jobs. An average of seven (7) employees will be on duty at one time. It will mean $15,000 a year in tax dollars to the City. The particular site fits in well. As far as the traffic standpoint, I would have to study it further. There are a great deal of spaces for parking to the rear of this site. Lastly, I took a look at whether or not it would be pleasing to the community From a landscaping standpoint, they will work with the Planning Commission on this. I think it will be beneficial to the city to . have this ^ite occupied by Burger Chef. Mr. Andrew: I am concerned about the communication from the Traffic Bureau. Given that we cannot approve the plan that is in violation of parking, it doesn't have the means of ingress/egress that is required. Further, I look at the site plan and the architectural drawings and they are obviously in conflict. I would like to see a revised drawing submitted. Mrs. Scurto: Can you give me a rough estimate of the distance between the building as it will sit on the site and the closest residential structure to the west? Mr. Shane: Somewhere in the neighborhood of 400 ft. , plus or minus. Mrs. Scurto: As we see the plan before us, that whole back area that appears to be shrubbed is going to remain? Kenneth Hale: It is my understanding. .Mr. Falk: In 1973 we went through this; if anything the problems are greater in traffic. If you build something in the city just on a tax basis it is not a justifiable item. The neighbors are the ones that will suffer, the people right behind this establishment. Unless you can prove where your business differs from MacDonalds or that the traffic has gotten better, I do not think it is the place for it. You are going to generate more traffic. Kenneth Hale: I think the traffic will only be at two peak periods, 12 noon and 6:00 p.m. The difference between MacDonalds and Burger Chef is a totally different type of restaurant with less emphasis on the drive-in operation, more on sit down service. 4 Mr. Zimmer: As far as I am concerned, I have difficulty with the need for the restauarant. I do not see this location with regard to Farmington Road. It is my personal opinion, regardless of how well you respond to some of these questions, which are new to you, I personally do not see my position changing as being opposed. 7147 • Mrs. Friedrichs: I feel very concerned about the problems on that corner in relation to the traffic. The traffic has increased since 1973 with the addition of the K of C and the Leather Bottle. It is ' an intense traffic area. Mr. Kluver: In addition to my concern with the traffic and fire situation, the numbers of these types of restaurants are astonishing. We may be over developing this type of need. James Bagnell: I am opposed to this restaurant. 19323 Farmington Mr. Zimmer: Is there a house on there now? Mr. Andrew: Yes. Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Bagnell, these are your neighbors? Mr. Bagnell: Yes. I do not see why you need a restaurantthere. Mr. Andrew:. Anyone else on this case? Kenneth Hale: Can we have several weeks to revise the plan so that the Commission can pass on it one way or the other? Mr. Andrew: If I have to review it on the basis of this plan, I will have to deny it. If you revise the plan, at least I have a choice. If you so desire we would be happy to act on it tonight. Kenneth Hale: It would be more expedient for you to act on it tonight. There was no one else wishing to dicuss this matter and Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 79-10-2-25 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and adopted, it was • #11-214-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 13, 1979 on Petition 79-10-2-25 as submitted by Burger Chef Systems, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to construct a restaurant on the west side of Farmington Road, north of Seven Mile Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 4, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 79-10-2-25 be denied for the following reasons: '' (1) The proposal fails to comply with the special standards of Zoning Ordinance #543 relating to restaurant establishments as listed in Section 11.03. (2) The petitioner has failed to show that the proposed use is in compliance with the general waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. (3) The proposed use would be detrimental to and incompatible with the ' adjoining uses in the area. , 1 4 t5 (4) The location and size of the proposal, the nature and intensity of the principal use, the site layout and its relation to the thoroughfare giving access to it will be such that traffic to and from the site will unduly conflict with normal taffic in the area as well as emergency vehicles in the area as described in a letter dated 11/7/79 from the Division of Fire, Department of Public Safety, City of Livonia. 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. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Andrew, Friedrichs, Kluver, Morrow, Smith, Zimmer NAYS: Falk, Scurto ABSENT: Wisler Mr. Andrew declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat approval for Prides Court Subdivision proposed to be located on the east side of I-96/I-275 Freeway between Six Mile and Seven Mile Roads in the Northeast.1/4 of Section 7. Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence on this, Mr. Nagy? Mr. Nacy: We have a letter from the Department of Public Works, Mr. Frank Kerby dated November 1, 1979 stating that examination showsthat all lots meet or exceed the minimum zoning requirements. They have no objections to the proposal. Letter dated November 2, 1979 from Mr. John Bunk, Department of Public Safety that fire hydrants be installed in front of lots #14, #19 and #28 and that all water mains, fire hydrants must be in service prior to building construction. Roads shall also be paved prior to construction. Letter dated November 7, 1979 from Mr. Ronald Reinke, Department of Parks and Recreation stating that they have reviewed the preliminary plat and at this time find no problems with this development. . Letter dated November 9, 1979 from Mr. Gary Clark, Department of Public Works stating that there appears to be no engineering problems connected with this preliminary plat. However, the only means of ingress/egress appears to be Blue Skies.- Class C weight restrictions would be proposed on this street as well as the future home building operations. Letter dated November 7, 1979 from Lt. Richard Widmaier, Department of Public Safety, Traffic Bureau states that upon review they recommend that the design of the "T" intersection at Blue Skies/Susanna presents a problem for residents from time to time and should be avoided if at all possible. Otherwise, the preliminary plat appears satisfactory in other aspects of vehicular traffic. Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to be heard on this matter? R. Lewiston: Yes. Developer 21790 Coolidge ' Oak Park, MI 7149 to Mr. Andrew: Could you address yourself to the comment raised by the Police Dept. relative to the "T" intersection at Blue Skies/Susanna. Mr. Lewiston: We went through about fifteen or so different revisions of this plat. Of all the revisions that were done all of us believe to have found this plat most satisfactory. If there is anything by the way of signs that could cure the problem I think it is a minor type of traffic signing. Mrs. Scurto: There are already three Blue Skies Courts existing. I have a question as to whether or not it should be made a court. Mrs. Friedrichs: Do legal requirements insist that names be carried on the same? Mr. Lewiston: Yes, where there is direct alignment as this street is. However, it could be named just Blue Skies. Mrs. Friedrichs: Could you not have an entirely different name? Mr. Andrew:' There might be an objection from the Fire and Police Departments to creating a different name for a continuation of a street. It might cause confusion to these services. Mr. Lewiston: What. if I was to call it Blue Skies Circle? Mrs. Scurto: I have no problem with that. Mr. Smith: I have a question about the landscaping easement as presented. Mr. Lewiston: Trees will be cleared selectively. No living trees will be removed from certain areas, such as the easements. In that way, we can preserve as much of the trees as reasonable. Mrs. Scurto: Are there going to be front located utility boxes? Mr. Lewiston: Only in those areas where to put them in the rear would require removal of trees. R. Feinberg: I happen to face the south edge of this proposed development. 18386 University What are the minimum and maximum measurements of the easement Park which is proposed to be preserved? Mr. Lewiston: I believe it is about 80 ft. maximum to the minimum of 30 ft. Mr. Feinberg: What if the buyer comes up to you and says he wants to put a pool in? Mr. Lewiston: Restrictions do not prohibit it. Mr. Feinberg: What is the nature of the easement? Mr. Lewiston: It is a landscape easement created by covenant. No live trees may be removed. 11:: Mr. Feinberg: Being an easement it attaches to the property'of a particular homeowner? MR. Lewiston: Yes. 7150 li-000 Mr. Feinberg: Having lived in the Woods Condominums from the year one, I am very aware of a high water table. We had to dig a drainage ditch i to get some of the water of there. Are steps being taken to 9 insure that whatever drainage problem we have now is not going to be aggravated? • Mr. Lewiston: We drain in an opposite. directon. • Mr. Feinberg: You go north? Mr. Lewiston: Yes. Mr. Nagy: Can the City of Livonia as owner of a park site within the sub- division enforce the restrictive convenants? Mr. Lewiston: I believe they could. Mr. Feinberg: Mr. Nagy, after all this conversation is it still your prediction that the trees will die in any event? Mr. Nagy: Yes, I stand on my prior opionion with respect to the Beech Trees. *At this time, 9:10 p.m., Mrs. Wisler arrived at the meeting. . Mr. Andrew: Any further questions from the audience? Ray Schevel: I am not opposed to the subdivision, but I am strongly opposed to the 37912 Marareta placement of that park. That area has been pretty bad for us with rowdiness. I do not know how they are going to maintain any security in that park. By looking at the plat now I feel it will just give them more hiding places. There are no real accesses to either sub. You will have to come all the way down the street to get to that park. The mothers and fathers will have to take little children down to the park. We are right next to the expressway and there is only chicken wire there now. It is inviting disaster for the children. I represent Melody Manor and I do have a petition that we are opposed to the location of the park. We would like to see the park somew`Zere in the center. We have sixty (60) signatures from the homes in the subdivision. presented Mr. Andrew: I would like the record to show that we have had a petition/to us in opposition to the park site as shown on the plat signed by approximately sixty (60) people. Mrs. Friedrichs: Having a park site there does sort of act as a buffer for noise from the expressway. Geraldine Hoffman: I live next door to the expressway and my china cabinet vibrates 37930 Margareta at nightfrom traffic off the expressway. Mr. Schevel:ii: I feel the city has adequate parks already and they don't present the dangers that this park presents. 4 Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, did we get a report and recommendation from Parks and Recreation. Mr. Nagy: Yes, we did. No deficiencies were noted. 7151 Mr. Andrew: This seems to be a change in policy. Their plan in the past has i been to eliminate small park sites. Mrs. Scurto: I am totally confused now, then when we first discussed this whole plan. Mr. Lewiston: At that time we intended to devote approximately the same area to park and our plan indicated approximately 9/10 of an acre to be dedicated from this sub. Melody Manor at that time expressed a strong desire for a prk. The 'Woods Condominiums was holding out because of the existence of the trees. The next year we met with the City Council, Woods Condominiums and Melody Manor and all of - it came down to an attempt to preserve the trees along the south boundary and this park be donated to the city. There was never a time during that processing period of 15 months that Melody Manor ever opposed the park in this area. The only opposition always came from the Woods. It was presented at both a Study Session and City Council meeting and again no one objected. It was upon this basis that it went through. Mr. Zimmer: Is the fence part of the requirement? . Mr. Lewiston: The fence is owned by the State Highway Department. Mr. Zimmer: Is there a sidewalk along the front? Mr. Lewiston: Yes. Mr. Zimmer: In other words, I can walk on the sidewalk to the park? Mr. Lewiston: Yes. Mr. Smith: Was your intent of the park to use as a sound barrier? Mr. Lewiston: No, the expressway cannot be seen from the park. Mr. Schevel: I disagree with the height, you can by standing see the expressway. Mrs. Wisler: Would you rather the park be abolished? Mrs. Hoffman & If we cannot change the location, we would rather do without the .Mr. Schevel: park. Mr. Andrew: What will change after this sub is built that doesn't exist at the present time? Mrs. Hoffman: Probably more people can keep their eyes on the kids because there will be more houses around. Mr. Schevel: We do not have street lights. Mr. Andrew: There will be a special assessment to install street lights in this lisub. Mr. Morrow: You have input to the previous meetings relative to this? Mrs. Hoffman: Half of us had no say so, what Neil Sutton wanted, he got. 7152 Mr. Schevel: We were misrepresented. We thought the battle was dealing with the 80 ft. lots. The pople that signed the petition (90%) never received notification of any of the actions. Mr. Andrew: • Outside of rezoning, the city was under no obligation to notify any one (legally) that adp. ned this property. They certainly had a moral obligation though. Mr. Lewiston: Notice was given to Melody Manor for all meetings. Representatives were present for all. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Lewiston is just trying to be a good developer, he just got caught in the middle. However, I cannot support the preliminary plat approval. This represents the cumulation of a sell out by the Livonia Board of Education so that they can realize profits from the sale of this property and I feel it was an unfair burden placed upon the city. Secondly, we attempted for so many years to protect the forest in the southeast portion of this plat and again this is a con- tinued sell out. Thirdly, I would ask that you reconsider the use of "Court" in Blue Skies. Mr. Zimmer: I feel obliged as a strong supporter of this move and as a memb6r of the affirmative side of this thing that I never considered that any sell out ' was taking place and I have no love for the school board. The zoning was appropriate as far as I was concerned and the woods were fatally damaged in the opinion of our staff. There was no one else wishing to discuss this matter and Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Prides Court Preliminary P'_at approval closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, it was #11-215-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 13, 1979, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the Preliminary Plat for Prides Court Sub- division proposed to be located on the east side of the I-96/1-275 Freeway between Six Mile and Seven Mile Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 7, be approved for the following reasons; (1) The proposed plat complies with all applicable Ordinances and the Subdivision Rules and Regulations. (2) The proposed plat provides a good land development solution as it proposes a street and lot layout which provides for the preservation of existing trees to the extent possible and preserves open spaces for neighborhood recreation. (3) All reporting City Departments, the Fire Division, Engineering Division Building Inspection and Parks & Recreation, have recommended approval of the subdivision plat. with the following conditions: (1) That the proprietor shall, as a minimum, cause the following improvements to be provided in the park land to be dedicated to City of Livonia: 7153 • a. Fine grading and seeding in connection with an area to be i used as a softball diamond, said work to be as directed by a the Engineering Division. • b. An earth berm adjacent to the I-275 Freeway right of way the plan of which shall be submitted to and approved by the Michigan State Highway Department and the City of Livonia Engineering Division so as to achieve noise abatement according to current acceptable standards. c. A chain link fence with appropriate access openings to be located along the southern boundary of the Margareta Drive turnaround as directed by the Engineering Division. (2) That the City of Livonia be made a party to the Declaration of Covenants, conditions and restrictions so as to insure compliance particularly with the section relating to landscape easements. FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was sent to the 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 Dept. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Falk, Friedrichs, Morrow, Scurto, Smith, Wisler, Zimmer NAYS: Andrew, Kluver ABSENT: None Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat approval for Interplex Plaza Subdivision proposed to be located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and Sears Avenue in the South- east 1/4 of Section 26. Mr. Andrew: Do we have any representatives present? Mr. Nagy: We have had no contact with the proprietor. I cannot explain his absence. . Mr. Andrew: We do not know what has happened as far as the State Highway Department is concerned. Is there any correspondence from the City Departments that are negative to this plat? Mr. Nagy: Letter dated November 7, 1979 from the Department of Public Safety, Traffic Bureau stating that the location of Interplex Dr. as stipulated on the preliminary plat would be a short distance east of the westerly most ingress/egress of the K-Mart store. As such, there would be formed an interlocking and conflicting left turn traffic pattern on Plymouth Road at the accesses with resultant possible traffic hazards. The two accesses should be li: • in direct alignment in order to avoid the left turn traffic conflicts. In other respects, the preliminary plat would seem satisfactory. Letter dated November 9, 1979 from the Division of Engineering pointingout the same aforementioned left turn movement problem; otherwise no other engineering problem connected with the proposal. 7154 Letter dated November 2, 1979 from the Fire Division recommending a minimum 12" water main be installed the full length of Interplex IL Dr. and cross connected to the 36" main on Plymouth Road and to the 16" main on Sears Ave. Provide standard City of Livonia hydrants at Plymouth Road and at the ' end of the cul-de-sac and at 300 ft. intervals along the entire length of Interplex drive. Water Mains, fire hydrants and paving shall be completed prior to building construction. Letter dated November 2, 1979 from Mr. Gilmartin, Industrial Development recommending that the Livonia Traffic Commission be apprised of this project in lieu of the amount of vehicle traffic the Interplex Plaza would generate on Plymouth Road. Letter dated November 1, 1979 from the Bureau of Inspection having no objection to the proposal. Mr. Andrew: No one being present who wished to be heard on this item, I declare it closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and unanimously adopted, it was Iri'4, #11-216-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 13, 1979 on Preliminary Plat approval for Interplex Plaza Subdivision proposed to be located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and Sears Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 26, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table this item. Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-10-1-37 by Edmund Nida to rezone property located on the northeast corner of Plymouth Road and Deering in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 25, from P.S. to C-2. Mr. Andrew: Any correspondence, Mr. Nagy? •Mr. Nagy: Letter dated October 25, 1979 from the Division of Engineering reports no problems with this proposal. Mr. Andrew: Is then( anyone in the audience wishing to be heard on this petition? Edmund Nida: I have talked to the two attorneys and they have already had an 25779 Ridgewood architect take a look at the building to comply with the total Farmington Hills look. Two vans will be parked in the area completely shaded from the street. t Mr. Andrew: Will you be handling strictly aluminum products? Mr. Nida: Yes. Mr. Andrew: Will there be limited retail sales as far as walk-in trade is concerned. 7155 Mr. Nida: I don't know. fMr. Andrew: Is there any problem with parking, Mr. Nagy? Mr. Nagy: No. Mrs. Scurto: Is there any way we can limit the Plymouth Road parking? Mr. Nagy: The petitioner cannot rely on it, to satisfy his required off street parking needs. Mr. Morrow: How do you designate between the two buildings? If it is being used for commercial after we rezone it and if it is part of another building would it be a P.S. classification. Mr. Nagy: No, the commercial use would terminate at the boundary of the district line. Mr. Zimmer: Has that alley been vacated? Mr. Nida: The alley has been cut off at the Mama Mia parking lot. We are • suppose to have half of the alley. Mr. Zimmer: Do you have commercial plan for the 8 ft.? Mr. Nida: No. Mr. Zimmer: It would seem appropriate to have some sort of fence installed. Mr. Nida: If we get the zoning change, I definitely will talk to the people to help clean up. Mr. Smith: I feel like Mr. Morrow, that building that he intends to lease from Mr. Morris, I don't see how it cannot help but spill over commercially. Mr. Andrew: I would suggest that we on our own rezone the building. Mr. Morrow: Would there not be a problem with the property owner? Mr. Andrew: He can always object to it. • Mr. Smith: Are you now using this parking lot in common with Mr. Morris? Mr. Nida: , We are not in the building, and I do not intend to use it when we are in the buildi:zg. Mr. Smith: I would like to see that section improved. Mr. Andrew: What is the timetable for using this property? Mr. Nida: It is rather acute. We have to vacate our present building by ILFebruary 1, 1980. Mr. Andrew: If we wanted to, we could revise the petition to include the little portion and hold this petition for a new hearing, but it might present a timing problem. Mr. Nagy: I do not see any problem in taking a separate petition. 7156 • Lloyd Courtney: Mrs. Davison owns the adjoining property. There was an alley that 44523 W. AnnIL was closed. Mrs. Davison thought she owned that alley over to the Arbor Trail existing building. She had been using that alley. She has a garage Plymouth on that alley and the only access is through this alley. Mr. Andrew: Are the lots on Plymouth Road in the same subdivision? Mr. Nagy: Yes. Mr. Andrew: Mrs. Davison is operating under a false assumption. Mr. Courtney: Apparently the city is also, they just put in a new approach for her. Mr. Andrew: Where is your garage, in the back of the lot? Mrs. Davison: Yes. Mr. Andrew: So you have a 10 ft. roadway to the back of your garage. Is that not sufficient for you. Mrs. Davison: No, I could not turn into my garage. ` Mr. Andrew: Is the Planning Staff familiar with this problem? Mr. Nagy: No. EdoMr. Andrew: Can the Planning staff indicate when the alley was vacated? Mr. Nagy: City records indicate 1971. Mr. Andrew: We will come back to you. I do not believe that the vacating procedure has any bearing on the question before us. Mr. Feinberg: That is a private matter and has no bearing on the rezoning. That is something that has to be worked out between the respective property owners. Mr. Andrew: We are sympathetic to Mrs. Davison's problem, but this Commission can do nothing to alleviate the situation because it is a private matter and should be resolved between property owners. Mr. Courtney: The city should not have closed the alleyway. Mr. Andrew: You should have a meeting with the City Attorney's office. In my opinion, Ordinance #888 was adopted legally in 1971. There was no one else wishing to discuss this matter and Mr. Andrew declared the Public Hearing on Petition 79-10-1-37 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and adopted, it was #11-217-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 13, 1979 on Petition 79-10-1-37 as submitted by Edmund Nida to rezone property located on the northeast corner of Plymouth Road and Deering in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 25, from P.S. to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 79-10-1-37 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change in zoning represents a minor extension of comm rcia' zoning in t'-h!' ares. 7157 (2) The proposed zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the adjacent uses in the area. (3) The proposed zoning will tend to encourage the upgrading of the affected existing structure. (4) The proposed zoning is consistent with the recommendations of the FUTURE Land Use Plan. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 10/29/79 - and that notices of such hearing were sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Consumers Power Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Andrew, Falk, Friedrichs, Kluver, Morrow, Scurto, Wisler, Zimmer NAYS: Smith ABSENT: None Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Andrew: Do you desire to undertake the rezoning of the adjoining property? On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and unanimously adopted, it was 1[00 #11-218-79 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 23.01(b) of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended, does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to rezone the east half of Lot #5 and the north half of Lots 6, 7, 8 and 9, property located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Deering and Cardwell in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 25, from P.S. to C 2. Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-10-1-34 by Myron H. Beals American Legion Post #32 to rezone property located on the east side of Newburgh Road, south of Ann Arbor Trail in the Southwest 1/4 of Section . 32, from RUF to C-2. Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence on this petition? Mr. Nagy: Letter dated October 8, 1979 from the Division of Engineering stating that there are no storm sewers readily available to service the parking lot expansion proposed with the site, also recommended that consideration should be given to deeding the additional 27 ft. of right of way to the City in connection with the development of this site. Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone wishing to be heard on this petition? Charles Dryer: Yes, sir. 30760 Fernwood } WestLand 7158 Mr. Andrew: Is it because of the anticipated widening of Newburgh Road that you desire to abandon the existing clubhouse and occupy a new one? Mr. Dryer: 27 feet will be taken off the front by the widening of Newburgh. It is not feasible to remodel. We would like to get into our new IL facility in the spring. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, how is the Master Plan in relation to the timetable for the improvement of Newburgh Road? Mr. Nagy: It is based upon the ability of the city to acquire the right-of-way. It is scheduled in the Capital Improvement Program to be widened in the year 1982. Mr. Zimmer: Do you recognize that the road might not be widened? You want to get started with it? Mr. Dryer: We want to get started before it is condemed and torn out from under us. Mrs. Scurto: I have some concerns. I cannot see after taking20 ft. and removing this building, putting up a building a little larger than the one you have now. Mr. Dryer: Instead of sitting east to west it will be sitting north to south. Mrs. Scurto: I also have concerns about the parking situation. I:0 Mr. Smith: It is my feeling that you have to wait until the building is condemned and you get the money from the sale of this building to get the new one. Mr. Dryer: No, we do not have to wait for that. Mr. Smith: It is an old wooden structure, not feasible to re-do and is too close to the right of way. The Legion has been thereforty years and the building was donated to them. Mrs. Friedrichs: Has it been explored as to whether or not we could do this under anything other than C-2? •Mr. Andrew: We cannot. Mrs. Friedrichs: I think they have a right to stay there. Mr. Andrew: Let's explain the options. The district ordinance requires a C-2 zoning. They are suggesting that we table this petition and explore some other methods of handling the situation of this particular item. The alternatives are that we will have to do some Ordinance amendments. Does this present a major problem to the Legion if we perhaps table this until February in an attempt to work out some Ordinance solutions which will allow us to function better and to build some- thing better on this property? Mr. Dryer: No problems. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, do you see any problems with the February solution date? 7159 I: Mr. Nagy: No. Mr. Andrew: We will be looking for a. solution that will allow you to build there. We will make a recommendation to the City Council to this effect. We should have something worked out by February to resolve your problem. We will then call you in to a Study Meeting to discuss these alternatives. • On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-219-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 13, 1979 on Petition 79-10-1-34 by Myron H. Beals, American Legion Post #32 to rezone property located on the east side of Newburgh Road, south of Ann Arbor Trail in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 32, from RUF to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 79-10-1-34 until February of 1980. Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Wisler and unanimously adopted, ' it was #11-220-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 13, 1979 on Petition 79-8-1-29 by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to rezone property located on the west side of Newburgh Road, south of Ann Arbor Trail in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 31, from C-1 to RUF, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 79-8-1-29 until the first study meeting in June of 1980. Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-9-1-33 by R. B. Murninghan to rezone property located on the north side of Five Mile Road between Cavour and Garden Avenues in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13, from RUF to R-7 and C-2. Mr. Andrew: Petitioner is present, does anyone have any comments? 1 .Mr. Falk: Is that a commercial use with that house? Mr. Andrew: The petitioner has indicated that he resides in the house and that he will remain in the house. Mr. Falk: There is no commercial activity in that house? Mr. Andrew: He has indicated none. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and adopted, it was t #11-221-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on November 13, 1979 on Petition 79-9-1-33 as submitted by R.B.Murninghan to rezone property located on the north side of Five Mile Road between Cavour and Garden Avenues in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13, from RUF to R-7 and C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend the City Council that Petition 79-9-1-33 be approved in part and denied in part, that portion being approved being RUF to R-7 for the following reasons: 7160 (1) The proposal for R-7 zoning would be compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. 4 (2) R-7 zoning, as proposed, would be a logical extension of existing multiple family zoning in the area. (3) The subject area is of such limited size that a more practical and meaningful development can be achieved under one unified zoning category of R-7 as recommended on the Future Land Use Plan; and, that the request for a change of zoning on the balance of property . covered by Petition 79-9-1-33 from the RUF to C-2 zoning classification be denied for the following reasons: (1) The introduction of additional commercial zoning in this area would provide for uses which would be detrimental to the surrounding area and in conflict with Future Land Use Plan. (2) There is no demonstrated need for additional commercial zoning in the general area of the subject petition. (3) The subject site as proposed for C-2 zoning lacks the capacity to adequately support a commercial use while, at the same time, retain the single family residential use and still comply with all Zoning Ordinance requirements. 1[10 FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer under date of 9/20/79 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: Andrew, Friedrichs, Kluver, Morrow, Scurto, Wisler, Zimmer NAYS: Falk, Smith Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. '0n a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and adopted, it was RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 13, 1979 on Petition 79-8-2-20 as submitted by Willian & Valerie Stefani requesting waiver use approval to use the ground floor of an existing building located on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Wayne Road and Laurel in the i!orthwest 1/4 of Section 9, for an accounting office, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 79-8-2-20 be approved provided that the proposed use is confined to ground floor of subject building only and, further, that this approval is for a "professional office" use, for the following reasons: 7161 (1) The site in question has the capacity to support such limited professional office use without interfereing with the principal use of the property which is single family residential as well as surrounding properties. (2) The proposed use will not compromise the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. (3) The proposed use will not be detrimental to the surrounding uses of the area by way of traffic, noise or hours of operation and accordingly will preserve the residential character of the - neighborhood with the added condition that the use will be con- fined to the ground floor only of the accessory structure. Mr. Falk: If we approve this and the place is sold, does that open a door on Seven Mile for some other intrusion? Mr. Andrew: Bear in mind, Mr. Falk, that the waiver use runs with the land. Mrs. Scurto: Do you have the square floorarea of the building? Could it possibly be turned into several businesses should it be sold? Mr. Nagy: The district regulations would prohibit them from having more than (1) one employee other than the owner. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: IL AYES: Friedrichs, Kluver, Morrow, Zimmer NAYS: Andrew, Falk, Scurto, Smith ABSTAIN: Wisler Mr. Andrew declared the above motion failed on a tie vote. Mr. Andrew: Mrs. Wisler, if a resolution to deny was introduced, would you still abstain? Mrs. Wisler: Yes, my resolution to abstain being that I am not fully informed of this issue. On a motion duly made byMr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, and adopted, it was ' • #11-222-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 13, 1979 on Petition 79-8-2-20 as submitted by Willian & , Valerie Stefani requesting waiver use approval to use the ground floor of an existing building located on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Wayne Road and Laurel in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 9, for an accounting office, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 79-8-2-20 until the Study Meeting of November 27, 1979. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES; Andrew, Falk, Friedrichs, Morrow, Zimmer NAYS: Kluver, Scurto, Smith ABSTAIN: Wisler Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 1101I . 7162 Mr. Andrew:11: The owners of the property, William & Valerie Stefani, have requested that some time between now and November 27, 1979 that we stop in and look at the inside of their quarters. The address is: 34715 Seven Mile Road, corner of Laurel. On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-223-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 9, 1978 on Petition 78-3-1-18 and pursuant to a request by letter dated 10/24/79 from Eugene F. Pulice requesting withdrawal, - the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the withdrawal of Petition 78-3-1-18 as submitted by Eugene F. Pulice requesting to rezone property located on the west side of Hubbard Road, north of Five Mile Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15, from R-1 to P.S. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted, it was #11-224-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January 18, 1977 on Petition 76-10-7-3 as submitted by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to amend Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master Thoroughfare Plan, by deleting the Livonia Mall Circle Drive proposed to be located within the ILperimeter of the Livonia Mall area in Sections 1, 2, 11 and 12, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to withdraw Petition 76-10-7-3 and deems that no further action by the City is necessary. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. At this time, Mr. Smith temporarily dismissed himself from the meeting. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk, it was #11-225-79 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Landscape Easement Plan and Entrance Marker Plan 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, subject tc the following conditions: (1) That the Landscape and Entrance Marker Plan prepared by Schrader-Porter & Associates, Inc. , dated 11/5/79, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (2) that the approved landscaping and entrance marker shall be installed on the site by June 1, 1980 and thereafter maintained in a healthy condition. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Andrew, Falk, Friedrichs, Kluver, Morrow, Sdirto, Wisler, Zimmer NAYS: : None ABSTAIN: Smith . t • 1 7163 10 Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk, it was #11-226-79 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Final 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, for the following reasons: (1) The Final Plat has been drawn in full compliance with the previously approved Preliminary Plat. (2) The Engineering Division of the City of Livonia by letter dated 10/30/79 recommends approval of the Final Plat. (3) All of the financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor by the City of Livonia have been complied with as evidenced by a letter received from the City Clerk dated 11/13/79. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Andrew, Falk, Friedrichs, Kluver, Morrow, Scurto, Wisler, Zimmer ABSTAIN: Smith Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 1[0 On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was #11-227-79 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 380th Regular Meeting & Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on October 9, 1979 are approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Andrew, Falk, Friedrichs, Kluver, Morrow, Scurto, Zimmer ABSTAIN: Smith, Wisler Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. At this time Mr. Smith rejoined the meeting in session. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, it was #11-228-79 , RESOLVED that, the minutes of the333rd Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on October 30, 1979 are approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Andrew, Friedrichs, Kluver, Scurto, Smith, Wisler, Zimmer ABSTAIN: Falk, Morrow Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. IL 1 7164 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-229-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a letter dated 9/25/79 requesting an extension of approval of Petition 78-8-8-29 by Lindhout Associates, requesting app . 1 of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #990, submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a professional office complex on the west side of Farmington Road between Lyndon and Five Mile Roads in Section 21, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that an extension for a period of one year be granted subject to the same conditions as were set forth - in the original approving Resolution #9-203-79, adopted by the City Planning Commission on September 12, 1978. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted, it was #11-230-79 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve revised signage in connection with Petition 73-11-8-49 by Second Livonia ° Corporation requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Ordinance #543, in connection with a proposal to add new building to the existing shopping center located on the northeast corner of Middlebelt and Plymouth Roads in Section 25, 116, subject to the following amended conditions: (1) any wall signs proposed to be erected on the building elevations as approved by Petition 73-11-8-49 shall be a maximum of 48" in height; (2) that the length of any proposed sign shall be determined by the Planning staff after its review of the sign design in relationship to the lineal feet of store front to be occupied by the tenant. Mr. Andrew declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and unanimously adopted, it was • #11-231-79 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the revised sign plan and the landscape plan submitted as conditions of approval of Petition 78-12-8-40 by John D. Dinan requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #990, in connection with a proposal to construct commercial stores on the east side of Middleblet Road between Orangelawn and West Chicago in Section 36, subject to the following conditions: Revised Sign Plan: (1) that the Pole Sign shall not exceed 80 square feet and shall comply with the Design Plan dated 9/30/79 as s'hbmitted by the petitioner; 1 • I 7165 (2) that the approved location is subject to adherence to variances and conditions granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals in their Resolution #7910-151; and (3) that the proposed wall signs for the building shall be limited to 2' 6" x 12' for commercial tenants and 2' 6" x 24' for the Bank. Landscape Plan: (1) that the Landscape Plan as submitted by Green Thumb Nursery dated 10/2/79 which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that all landscape materials as shown on the approved Landscape Plan shall be installed on the site before issuance of a Certificate of Occupany is granted for the building; and (3) that all landscape materials installed on the site shall be permanently maintained in a healthy condition. Mr. Andrew declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Andrew: I would ask Mr. Zimmer to chair the meeting on this next issue. Mr. Zimmer: We will act on the following with reservations as to the detailed landscape. IrMr Falk: In what shape is the asphalt? Mr. Bakewell: The main area is fine, the back area is a little rough but it will be torn up for construction. Mr. Andrew: Do you have any indication as to what color the cement blocks are to be painted? Mr. Bakewell: No indication. Mr. Andrew: Does the petitioner know the color? Petitioner: White, and United Rent-All may want to continue their stripe along • the white, which is is green. Mr. Andrew: Noted that the block be painted white with a green stripe. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Falk, and adopted, it was #11-232-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #1468, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 79-10-8-34P by Dennis Bishop requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct an addition to an existing commercial building located on the west side of Middlebelt Road • i between Morlock and Eight Mile Road in Section 2, subject to the followin conditions: (1) that the Revised Site Plan dated 11/7/79, as prepared by Dennis k'" Bishop, P. E. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; M 7166 (2) that the Building Elevations as shown on the Revised Plan dated 11/7/79, prepared by Dennis Bishop, P.E. , which are hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (3) that a detailed Landscape Plan shall be submitted within thirty (30) days for Planning Commission approval; and (4) that the cement blocks be painted white with the possibility of a green stripe. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Andrew, Falk, Friedrichs, Kluver, Smith, Zimmer NAYS: Morrow, Scurto, Wisler Mr. Zimmer declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 381st Regular Meeting and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on November 13, 1979 were adjourned at 11:10 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION • Jo -ph J Fal , Secretary 6 ATTEST: 7 / if; Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman • • • • • F yy R