HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1979-12-04 7168
MINUTES OF THE 382nd REGULAR MEETING
: -
AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY
Planning Commission of the City of
LIVONIA
On Tuesday, December 4, 1979, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 382nd Regular Meeting and Public Hearings at the Livonia City Hall, 33001 Five
Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, called the Regular Meeting and Public Hearing to
order at 8:05 p.m. , with approximately 30 interested people present.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Herman Kluver Joseph Falk Judith Scurto
Esther Friedrichs Jerome Zimmer R. Lee Morrow
Suzanne Wisler Daniel R. Andrew
MEMBERS ABSENT: C. Russell Smith
Messrs. John J. Nagy, City Planning Director and Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV were
also present.
Mr. Andrew then informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves
a rezoning request, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council,
who in turn will then hold their own Public Hearing and decide the question. If
a petition involves a waiver use request, and the petition is denied by the Planning
Commission, the petitioner then has ten days in which to appeal for relief. Otherwise
the petition is terminated.
IL Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 79-10-1-35
initiated by Council Resolution #1019-79 to rezone property located
on the east side of Filmore, south of Seven Mile Road in the Northeast
1/4 of Section 9, from C-2 to R-3.
Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence on this matter?
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from Engineering stating there are no engineering
problems.
Mr. Andrew: The Tax Rolls show some commercial zoning some 24 years ago. The
taxes on the property reflect commercial zoning. There are occupied
homes on the property.
Mrs. Scurto: Once this goes back to R-3 their taxes will go down.
Mr. Nagy: That is possible.
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to be heard regarding this item.
There was no one else wishing to be heard,
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 79-10-1-35 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted,
it was
o #12-233-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 4,
110 1979 on Petition 79-10-1-35 initiated by Council Resolution #1019-79 to
rezone property located on the east s'.de of Filmore, south of Seven Mile
Road_ in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9, from C-2 to R-3, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 79-10-1-35
be approved for the following reasons:
I
17169
(1) The zoning change would reflect the current use of the
t ' property.
(2) Thero
p posed zoning is in accord with the recommendation of
the Future Land Use Plan.
(3) Commercial zoning represents a potential encroachment of
undesirable and incompatible uses into an established residential
area.
(4) The change in zoning would, for the most part, confine the commercial
zoning in the area to major thoroughfare frontage, thus reducing the
potential conflict between commercial and residential traffic.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspeper, the Livonia Observer under date of 11/15/79
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 79-10-1-36 by the City
Planning Commission to rezone property located on the west side of
Farmington Road, south of Plymouth Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33
/ILfrom C-2 to P.S.
Mr, Andrew: This is a petition initiated by the City Planning Commission on its
own motion.
Mr. John McKenna: Is this usual procedure, this rezoning?
30885 Six Mile
Mr. Andrew: We were looking at another piece in this area and we noticed the
zoning on the property in question. If we see a use that is contrary
to the zoning classification we attempt to bring those in line. The
Master Land Use calls for this area to be used and zoned for P.S.
We are merely trying to accomplish that.
Mr. McKenna: What would the impact be on the taxes?
Mr. Andrew: Either a lessening of the tax or zero change.
Mr. McKenna: There was no request or initiation from anyone other than the Commission.
Mr. Andrew: The Commission was reviewing some property to the north of this parcel,
a Lawson's or Seven-Eleven and we notica3at that time this property's
zoning.
Mr. McKenna: How long has the property been zoned this way?
Mr. Nagy: Since 1951.
IL
Mr. McKenna: I object to that change.
Mr. Andrew: What is your relationship to that property?
•
•
7170
Mr. McKenna: I am a tenant.
t4i
Mrs. Scurto: Does a pharmacy fall into a P.S. classification?
Mr. Nagy: A pure pharmacy would reflect P.S.
Mr. McKenna: There are two non-professional uses in that professional complex,
a pharmacy and a medical laboratory.
Mr. Andrew: Are medical laboratories considered P.S.?
Mr. Nagy: Yes.
Mrs. Wisler: Are there any tenants presently in that facility that would be
nonconforming?
Mr. Nagy: No.
Mrs. Scurto: If this was rezoned to P.S. it would mean that the pharmacy could
not expand their sales to whatever they might want.
Mr. McKenna: I owned the pharmacy. I am in the laboratory now.
Mr. Zimmer: Does the owner get notification regardless of where he lives?
Mr. Nagy: Yes. I have had some conversations with the owner and he is aware
of this.
Mr. Zimmer: Is there one owner?
Mr. Nagy: Yes.
Mr. Andrew: If you received a notice tonight you will receive a notice when
this item appears before the Council which will be sometime in late
January.
Mr. McKenna: I did not receive a notice.
Mr. Andrew: You might call the City Clerk or Council secretary and ask to be
notified of that date. Is there anyone else present wishing to be
heard on this matter? Any comments from the Commission?
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 79-10-1-36 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Zimmer and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-234-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 4,
1979 on Petition 79-10-1-36 by the City Planning Commission to rezone
property located on the west side of Farmington Road, south of Plymouth
Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33, from C-2 to P.S. , the City
4 Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
79-10-1-36 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed change in zoning would provide a zoning category
commensurate with the current uses of the subject property.
7171
: .
(2) This proposed change in zoning will encourage similar office
development along this section of Farmington Road in concert with
the Planning Commission's adopted goals and policies for office
development.
(3) This change in zoning is in accord with the land Ilse recommendation
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 11/15/79
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company,
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company,
Consumers Power Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof of
Service.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-10-1-38 by Ernest A.
Ajluni to rezone property located on the west side of Farmington Road,
south of Clarita in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9, from R-3 to P.S.
Mr. Andrew; Is there any correspondence on this matter?
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter from Gary Clark, Engineering, dated November 5,
1979 regarding the storm sewer outlet.
Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present?
L
R. Ajluni: I am Mr. Ernest Ajluni's attorney and relative.
17310 Farmington
Livonia
Mr.` Andrew: How soon would you start construction?
Ray Ajluni: We merely have an offer to purchase with a contingency regarding the
rezoning. Perhaps if everything goes right we would start building
next year.
Mr. Andrew: Are you aware of the sewer problem? I would check that out rapidly.
That might be an expensive problem.
Mr. R. Ajluni: I was not aware of it. I will check it immediately.
Mr. Zimmer: Would this building be used for personal practice only?
Mr. Ajluni: Perhaps one other tenant. It might be medical related or perhaps
non-related. The lot is only 60 x 100 and it has its limitations.
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone present wishing to be heard on this matter?
Any further comments from the Commission?
IIThere was no one present wishing to be heard on this item.
4 Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 79-10-1-38 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mr. Zimmer and unanimously adopted,
it was
I
. 7172
I! #12-235-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
4 December 4, 1979 on Petition 79-10-1-38 by Ernest A. Ajluni to
rezone property located on the west side of Farmington Road, south
of Clarita in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9, from R-3 to P.S. ,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 79-10-1-38 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) This proposed change in zoning is consistent with the recommendations
of the Future Land Use Plan.
(2) The proposed change in zoning is consistent with the Planning
Commission's adopted goals and policies in that it will provide
a transitional land use along Farmington Road as a buffer between
residential uses and a major thoroughfare.
(3) The proposed P.S. zoning district regulations will allow uses which
are more suited to a parcel of such limited width and depth.
(4) The proposed change in zoning will provide for uses which will be
compatible to and in harmony with the surroundinguses in the area.
(5) The proposed change in zoning represents a minor expansion of an
existing P.S. zoning District located north of and adjacent to the
subject lands.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
IL in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 11/15/79,
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 79-11-1-39 initiated by
Council Resolution #1201-79 to rezone property located north of Joy Road
between Thorpe Drive and Deering Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section
36, from C-2 to RUF.
Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nagy: No.
Jerry Bay: The Majority of the homeowners in our association are for this.
8928 Floral We see no reason why this should not be done. These are residential
Presidenti of homes here. It simply would make a level line of residential zoning
Wil:on Acres here.
Homeowners
Association
Henry Binder: This goes back many years, five or six. There has been a continuous
9207 Inkster problem with Mom's Fruit Market parking in front of this residence.
Albert Rowland: The business runs in back of my home. I favor this rezoning.
II:
8885 Cardwell
John 011ar: I own property on Joy Road. I have been a Livonia resident for 24
27788 Joy Road years and a Livonia businessman for 14 years. I depend on my motorcylce
1
7173
business for my livelihood. I plan to expand my motorcycle, train
and hobby business. This will affect me. My petition is tabled
before tl-e council right now. They are waiting to get to this petition
and then come back to me. They said something about spot zoning and
lawsuits. If you approve this, what chance do I have down here.
This will affect me and put 7 employees out of work.
Mr. Andrew: I cannot see where this rezoning would affect you. The Council
would like to straighten the line up here.
Roger Ratkowski: At one time the line had been brought down to 15 feet to meet the
28932 Grandon property line.
Mr. Zimmer: I have trouble with that projection southwest of Floral.
Mr, Nagy: The house is on the property line, or very close to it so there is
somewhat of a jog there. The house falls within an existing
commercial classification.
Mr. 011ar: That house is presently being used as commercial. It is a painting
business. There is a painting contractor in there.
Mr. Andrew: Does he reside there?
Mr. 011ar: I don't know.
Mr. Bay: The man lives there for about four years. He started a painting
business recently. He has one truck parked there and a phone in
1[: the house.
Mr. Andrew: If the rezoning is accomplished it won't affect him.
Mrs. Scurto: Why don't we bring the line straight across.
Mr. Nagy: The gentleman owns 1 1/2 lots.
Mrs. Scurto: Why can't we just rezone to that lot line?
Mr. Nagy: Our policy is to have consistent zoning lines and consistent property
lines. We do not want to cut across a lot of record. His 70 foot
lot would be R-1 for 50 feet and commercial for 20 feet. We would
like the entire lot all within the RUF classification.
Mrs. Wisler: I think this action speaks to something we have looked at for
sometime in this area. We are looking to control the expansion of
commercial. There is enough commercial on Joy Road and we do not
want it extended back into the residential area.
Mr. Andrew: I have a concern in relation to Mr. 011ar's comments. I think the
City could make a strong court case. I think it is immaterial what
we do on this property. The action recommended can stand for itself
in a court of law.
1!:
Mr. Zimmer: We have proposed this rezoning for sometime.
Mr, 011ar: My property was skipped over. It's like you don't know what to do
with my property.
Mr. Andrew: East of Cardwell the rezoning was denied on Council level. We did
not win the battle.
•
7174
Mr. Rowland: I get all the noise from the racing of motorcycles.
d Kr. Andrew: There will be a reduction of taxes for the people who reside
in this particular area. Is there anyone else wishing to speak
on this matter?. Further comments?
There was no one else present wishing to be heard on this item.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 79-11-1-39 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-236-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
December 4, 1979 on Petition 79-11-1-39 initiated by Council Resolution
#1021-79 to rezone property located north of Joy Road between Thorpe Drive
and Deering Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 36, from C-2 to RUF,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 79-11-1-39 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The Future Land Use Plan recommends residential use for the
subject properties.
(2) The current use of subject lots is residential commensurate with
the proposed zoning districts.
(3) There is an abundance of commercially zoned property located all
along Joy Road in this general area some of which is vacant or contains
vacant commercial buildings.
i
(4) The subject lots are oriented to essentially residential streets
and abut other residentially used and zoned lots.
(5) Commercial property should be confined to frontage on major thorough-
fares capable of handling large volumes of traffic associated with
commercially used property and to prevent the potential conflict between
commercial and residential traffic.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 11/15/79
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 79-11-1-40 by the City
Planning Commission to rezone property located on the west side of Hix:
Road, south of Lyndon Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 19, from
P.L. to R-1 and R-1 to P.L.
Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter from the Engineering Department indicating there
are no engineering problems.
7175
Mr, Andrew: The owner cannot get a second mortgage with the present zoning.
Is there anyone present wishing to be heard on this matter? Are
i
there any comments from the Commission?
i
There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 79-11-1-40 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Zimmer and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-237-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
December 4, 1979 on Petition 79-11-1-40 by the City Planning Commission
to rezone property located on the west side of Hix Road, south of
Lyndon Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 19, from P.L. to R-1 and
R-1 to P.L. , the City Planning Comm3.ssion does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 79-11-1-40 be approved for the following
reasons:
(1) This is a zoning adjustment necessary to establish zoning districts
on subject parcels reflecting their current ownership and uses.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 11/15/79,
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.
LI
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-10-3-11 by the City
Planning Commission pursuant to Council Resolution #918-79 to vacate
that portion of Pembroke Avenue located between Purlingbrook and Melvin
in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 2.
Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence on this matter?
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter dated October 25, 1979 from Gary Clark, Engineering
Dept.
Mrs. Eva Cairns: What happens to the property if it is vacated?
19820 Doris
Mr. Andrew: The fee title to the property goes to the abutting property owners
but the City will retain a full-width easement over the right-of-way
to be used for sidewalks, underground utilities and drains if we want
to put them in.
Mrs. Aitchison: Will the street go through on Pembroke?
19816 Purlingbrook
1!
Mr. Andrew: No, there will be no street put in with the vacating of Pembroke.
' There will be no east west road.
° John Quinn: I don't abut thisro tt but
P Pe Y I supportthis. I live immediately
north of the property that adjoins the road.
I
7176
M'r. Andrew: Are there any more comments?
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
3 ,
declared the public hearing on Petition 79-10-3-11 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#12-238-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 4,
1979 on Petition 79-10-3-11 by the City Planning Commission pursuant to
Council Resolution #918-79 to vacate that portion of Pembroke Avenue
located between Purlingbrook and Melvin in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 2,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 79-10-3-11 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The portion of Pembroke Avenue to be vacated 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 other existing street
rights-of-way.
(3) The Engineering Division has no objection to the proposed
vacating provided a full-width easement is retained.
(4) The subject street right-of-way of Pembroke 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.
(5) The vacating of the subject portion of Pembroke Avenue represents
a viable alternative to the vacating of Oporto Avenue between
Pembroke and Bretton, as requested by Petition 79-7-3-7.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 11/15/79,
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company,
Chesapeake & Ohio Wailway 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 79-10-3-12 by the City
Planning Commission pursuant to Council Resolution #999-79 to vacate
a ten-foot wide easement located on the west side of Richfield, south
of Perth Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 19.
t4 Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence on this matter?
Mr. Nagy: There is no engineering problem as stated in a letter from the
Engineering Department.
Mr. Andrew: We are correcting an obvious problem of the drain running through
an existing house.
voirmiumm
7177
il:: Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone wishing to speak on this matter?
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 79-10-3-12 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-239-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
December 4, 1979 on Petition 79-10-3-12 by the City Planning Commission
pursuant to Council Resolution #999-79 to vacate a ten-foot wide easement
located on the west side of Richfield south of Perth Avenue in the South-
east 1/4 of Section 19, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 79-10-3-12 be approved for the following
reasons:
(1) There is no reason to retain this surface drainage easement
as it is no longer required since the surface drainage is being
intercepted by storm sewers developed within the Perth Avenue
right-of-way.
(2) The Engineering Division has no objection to the proposal to
abandon this easement.
(3) The abandonment of this easement would provide a solution to the
problem that the property involved contains an existing single
Lfamily residence which encroaches into the subject easement.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 11/15/79,
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company,
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company,
Consumers Power Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof of
Service.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is proposed amendments to Section 10.03
and Section 11.03 of Zoning Ordinance #543 to establish new regulations
for the control of the use of S.D.D. Licenses in the waiver use sections
of the C-1 and C-2 Districts.
Mr. Andrew: Is there anyone present wishing to be heard on this matter?
Is there any correspondence?
Mr. Nagy: There is no correspondence.
There was no one wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted,
titwas
I
7178
#12-240-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
ilDecember 4, 1979 on Petition 79-10-6-5 as submitted by the City
Planning Commission to amend Sections 10.03 and 11.03 of Ordinance
#543, the Zoning Ordinance, to establish new regulations for the
a control of the use of S.D.D. Licenses in the waiver use sections
of the C-1 and C-2 Districts, the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 79-10-6-5 be approved for
the following reasons:
(1) It is necessary to provide a set of specific standards for
waiver uses so as to supply the Planning Commission and City
Council with criteria for approval or denial of such requests.
(2) The proposed amendment will provide the City with added control
with regard to the location of S.D.D. Licensed facilities.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 11/15/79
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company,
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company,
Consumers Power Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof
of Service.
Mr. Andrew, 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
Elliot Industrial Park Subdivision proposed to be located on the west
side of Merriman Road, north of the C & 0 Railway in the Northeast 1/4
of Section 27.
Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence on this matter?
Mr. Nagy: The following letters were received:
November 1, 1979 from Frank Kerby, Bureau of Inspection.
November 2, 1979 from Ted Kovarik, Fire Department.
November 2, 1979 from Dan Gilmartin, Industrial
November 7, 1979 from Lt. R. Widmaier, Police Department.
November 9, 1979 from Gary Clark, Engineering.
November 21, 1979 from D. J. Gilmartin, Industrial.
Mrs. Scurto: Is the area serviced by the fire station at City Hall?
Mr. Nagy: No it is serviced by the fire station by the C & 0 and Middlebelt.
E. Schubiner: The area indicated on the map for a road is a surprise to me.
6650 Mt. Elliott We were informed that a road could not go through because the
Detroit property will not hold a road. We were going to move the road an
additional 5 feet in. Our engineer indicated it would be 200 years
before that area could be built on.
Mr. Nagy: The road indicated on that map does not show the actual pavement widths
only rights-of-way lines that will contain the road.
4
, 3
Mr. Andrew: I have no difficulty with the proposal provided that final right-of-way
dedication to the City is indicated on the final plat and soil borings
are provided. I think some minor adjustments are necessary. I
believe Engineering review is needed again. Is the Detroit Edison
overhead transmitter line on your side?
7179
Mr. Nagy: It is on the Allied side.
Mr. Schubiner: What do I need to get the approval?
Mr. Andrew: You should submit soil borings on the dump site to Ed Siemert
in the Engineering Department and provide on the plan for a
dedication to the City for the right-of-way needed for the grade
separation.
Chas. Mountain I own the property that contains the first building north of the
KarKraft Inc. road. I am interested in traffic pattern, water run off, all
10611 Haggerty the things one would be interested in knowing when a complex like
Dearborn, MI this is going in.
Mr. Andrew: You will have a road you will be able to use on your south boundary
line. You will have a sanitary, storm sewer, water main that you
can tap into for a fee.
Mr. Mountain: I have a concern and want to so state. I wish to obtain more
information on the subject.
Mr. Andrew: In view of the desire of this Commission to table this matter
we will be happy to give you a copy of the preliminary plat.
We will be glad to inform you of the next meeting. Ir you
leave your card, you will be notified. Is there anyone else
wishing to be heard on this matter?
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Wisler and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-241-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 4,
1979 on Preliminary Plat approval for Elliott Industrial Park Subdivision
proposed to be located on the west side of Merriman Road, north of the
C&O Railway in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 27, the City Planning
Commission does hereby determine to table this petition until the
Regular Meeting to be conducted on December 18, 1979.
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
Veronica Industrial Park Subdivision proposed to be located east of
Levan Road between Industrial Road and the C&O Railway in the Northeast
1/4 of Section 29.
7180
' Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence on this matter?
Mr. Nagy: We received the following letters:
September 26, 1979 from Ted Kovarik, Fire Department.
November 26, 1979 from Gary Clark, Engineering Department.
November 27, 1979 from Frank Kerby of Bureau of Inspection.
November 29, from Lt. Richard Widmaier, Police Department.
Lee Lasser: Was present.
3001 W. Big Beaver
Suite 720
Troy, MI 48084
Mr. Lasser: I am the proprietor and one of the owners of Industrial Development
Company.
Mr. Andrew: Veronica Drive has been dedicated to the City of Livonia
which would mean that there would have to be another plat
if you are going to do anything with Lot 9.
Mr. Lasser: We own the property to the east also and we plan to develop that
soon. This is actually a plat after the fact. We need to
include Lot 9 presently to get financing on that lot.
1!:' Mr. Andrew: i think you should work with Mr. Nagy on the technical aspects.
Are there any further comments? Anyone wishing to speak on
this matter?
There was no one wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Friedrichs, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#12-242-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
December 4, 1979 on Preliminary Plat approval for Veronica Industrial
Park Subdivision proposed to be located east of Levan Road between
Industrial Road and the C&O Railway in the Northeast 1/4 of Section
29, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table the
petition until the Regular Meeting to be conducted on December 18, 1979.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-11-2-27 by the White
Castle System, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to construct a
restaurant on the south side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt and
Merriman Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 35.
I4Mr. Andrew: Is there any correspondence on this matter?
7181
Mr. Nagy: We have a..letter dated November 28, 1979 from Gary Clark, Engineering.
I
Mr. L. Farber: I represent Wonderland Shopping Center. This building proposed
31275 Northwestern to be torn down is presently vacant. A new building is
Farmington Hills, proposed in its place.
MI
John Shampton: I am the attorney for White Castle. I would like to give you
555 West Good Ale a brief history of the White Castle. It was started in 1921
Columbus, Ohio and was the first fast food chain. Its original owners were
E. W. Ingram and Mr. Anderson. They have the lowest restaurant
prices in business. A restaurant was opened in the Detroit area in 1929.
The operations here have expanded slowly. We have one new store at
John R. and Big Beaver, one new one in Roseville and one in Canton
Township (Ford and Haggerty) . There are 149 stores in 9 states of
which 10 are in the Detroit meto area. We have two bakeries, one in
New Jersey and one in Cincinnati, Ohio. We produce our own buns.
They are the only two bakeries that produce only buns. We also
manufacture the light fixtures in our buildings. We also make a
Scott's Lawn spreader. We have 6,000 employees nationally, of which
5,000 are in our profit sharing plan. We paid $4 million in deferred
benefits. We offer a bonus from our sales, 1% of the gross sales.
We are proud of the longevity of our employees. The company is completely
family owned. One employee worked for the company for 50 years out of
58 years. We have one 25 year employee for every one store. We hope to
open 8 stores this year. This White Castle building has a distinct
architectural style. There have been four or five different building
styles in all our years. The exterior is porcelain steel for cleanliness
and the interior is tile floors with stainless steel fixtures. These
are fabricated in our own plant. The highest standard only will provide
us with the durability we need to stay in a location. INAtHtore has closed
before 40 years. Our landscaper, Mr. Greenif, is here/the landscape plan.
Mr. Andrew: Has our Planning Commission reviewed it?
Mr. Nagy: We have not seen it.
Mr. Farber: They, are committed to modify that plan in any way you planners want
them to.
Mr. Kluver: What is the approximate size of the building?
Mr. Shampton: The building is 45 x 55, a total of 2,470 square feet. It will
seat 64 people. The tables and booths are in the forward portion
of the building.
Mr. Andrew: I note on the site plan that the parking spots along the west
property line (next to the planter on the northwest corner) are
9 x 20 and some9 x 21. The ordinance calls for 10 x 22.
Mr. Farber: I would like to point out that there will be a full basement and the
building with the equipment will cost approximately $720,000,00.
Mr. Andrew: I note that the sign is 128 square feet at a 5 foot setback.
7182
Mr. Nagy: We are taking that up with the Building Department to determine whether
or not there is compliance or if it is a valid non-conforming sign.
Mr. Shampton: A substantial part of the cost is for the stainless steel fixtures,
block wall and poured floors. All our restaurants are built with
cash surplus and there is no financing involved. The "White" stands
for clean and "Castle" stands for durability. Some White Castle
buildings are 35 and 40 years old so you must take that into account.
The new restaurant in Canton is quite a nice looking site.
Mr. Andrew: In the refuse enclosure you have some kind of concrete structure
and then you go down into some kind of a storage area.
Mr. Shampton: At the end of the rubbish enclosure is a storage area for grass
cutting equipment, hoses, tools. The dumpsters will be serviced
three times a week. A supervisor will assign pickup duty on the
grounds outside as is needed. There will be a seven foot redwood
fence around the storage area.
Mr. Morrow: Will this be a 24-hour operation? Will there be a drive in window?
Mr. Shampton: We will be opened 24 hours but there will be no drive in window.
We realize the drive in window is a treand but one we do not follow.
Mrs. Scurto: I would prefer something other than redwood around the storage.
That does not hold up well. I think white brick would be better.
I would preferinside storage.
Mrs. Wisler: I would prefer the inside storage.
Mr. Shampton: We do not have any extra storage inside. We would have to add
on to the building. We could use the whie brick around the outside
storage area.
Mr. Zimmer: I notice a lot of lights are used on your establishments.
Mr. Shampton: The lighting is not as much as it looks. The building will be
very visible at night. A beacon along the road will not be a
problem for any residents as there are none nearby.
Mr. Zimmer: I notice the lighting is concealed within the perimeter and that
is part of your logo. Do you have a prediction upon the volume.
Mr. Shampton: We expect the volume to be above average. It is difficult to compute
the cars. We expect 300 to 500 per hour at peak. We draw on people
that are travelling by our establishment as opposed to local residents.
Mr. Zimmer: There is a lot of east west traffic going from K-Mart to Wonderland.
This corner is getting a whole lot of crossing traffic. There
exists a dangerous situation. This presents an additional serious
effect on what I consider currently a difficult problem now. The
bank has their abnormal traffic pattern. There are serious traffic
problems now and this would only accentuate them.
Mr. Shampton: We located the building back in order to eliminate traffic conflict
within czar parking lot. I am not sure I can speak to the conflict
of the traffic of the shopping center.
7183
Mr. Farber:1:: We have not had very many accidents that I am aware of.
Mrs. Wisler: I would like to see the back portion of the building landscaped.
The back is visible from many sides. I would also urge inside
storage of trash.
Mrs. Friedrichs: I would like to commend you for a very interesting presentation.
Mr. Andrew: Are there any further comments? Anyone in the audience wishing
to be heard on this matter?
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on Petition 79-11-2-27 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-243-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 4,
1979 on Petition 79-11-2-27 as submitted by White Castle System, Inc.
requesting waiver use approval to construct a restaurant on the south
side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt and Merriman Roads in the
Northeast 1/4 of Section 35, the City Planning Commission does hereby
determine to table Petition 79-11-2-27 until the Regular Meeting to be
conducted on December 18, 1979.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted
•
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-8-1-27 by Eugene &
Arthur Pulice 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.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Friedrichs, it was
RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
October 9, 1979 on Petition 79-8-1-27 as submitted by Eugene &
Arther Pulice 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. the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
the City Council that Petition 79-8-1-27 be approved for the following
reasons:
(1) The proposed rezoning to the parking classification will
provide for uses that will be compatible to surrounding and
established uses of the area.
(2) The proposed change of zoning to the parking classification
will provide for a more reasonable, practical and efficient
development of the adjoining professional office district to
which the subject area is attached.
1[ (3) Parking uses when properly developed, paved and adequately
landscaped and screened can be made compatible to residential
areas.
1
•
7184
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 motion resulted in the following:
AYES: Kluver, Friedrichs, Morrow, Andrew
NAYS: Wisler, Zimmer, Scurto, Falk
ABSENT: Smith
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is not carried.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, it was
RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
October 9, 1979 on Petition 79-8-1-27 as submitted by Eugene & Arthur
Pulice 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, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that Petition 79-8-1-27 be denied for the following reasons:
(1) Encroachment into residential property would create future
problems such as we have along Joy Road.
(2) This is a serious long term problem. We need to be concerned
about the protection of the residential area in that part of town.
(3) This would begin to erode a delicate area.
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: Zimmer, Scurto, Falk, Wisler
NAYS: Friedrichs, Morrow, Kluver, Andrew
ABSENT: Smith
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is not carried.
Mrs. Friedrichs: I think this will make a better looking area by placing the
parking in the rear. I don't think there is a danger of
encroachment further into the residential area. This is a
logical place to stop.
Mr. Morrow: This is a definite effort to improve a corner that has been a eyesore
for a long time.
4
Mr. Falk: Could we table this until we have our ninth member present to
view this matter.
Mrs. Scurto: This area could support a building of lesser size with the already
zoned property.
7185
Mr. Andrew: We will table this matter to December 18, 1979.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 79-8-1-26 by Jose
& Stella Evangelista to rezone property located on the west side
of Parkville Avenue between Seven Mile Road and Vassar in the
Southwest 1/4 of Section 1, from P to R-1.
Mr. Andrew: Has the lot split been prepared?
Mr. Nagy: Yes.
There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petiton 79-8-1-26 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Wisler, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#12-244-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
October 9, 1979 on Petition 79-8-1-26 as submitted by Jose & Stella
Evangelista to rezone property located on the west side of Parkville
Avenue between Seven Mile Road and Vassar in the Southwest 1/4 of
Section 1, from P. to R-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 79-8-1-26 be approved for
the following reasons:
(1) No additional offstreet parking facilities are needed to serve
abutting commercial uses.
(2) The proposed change in zoning will provide for uses which would
be compatible to and in harmony with the abutting residential
uses in the Area.
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.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-245-79 RESOLVED that, having given due consideration, after having met with
the Parks and Recreation Commission, to the subject of Council Re-
solution #760-79, the Planning Commission has concluded that no City-
owned park property located in Section 9 should be made available for
sale for the following reasons:
(1) No substantial evidence has been presented which would lead the
Planning Commission to conclude that any or all of the existing
park land is no longer needed to
g provide open spaces and recreation
for the surrounding neighborhood.
(2) There is a substantial flood control area which traverses Helman
Park in addition to substantial wooded areas which must be preserved.
•
7186
(3) A report by the Engineering Division reveals that there is
questionable abilityto
support additional residential development
in the area because of limited sanitary sewer capacity available.
(4) The lack of a clearly defined plan for the use of the proceeds
from the sale of park land and, further, there is no assurance that
proceeds would subsequently be used for the provisions of additional
recreational lands and/or facilities in locations where deficiencies
exist.
(5) The presence of expressed local neighborhood opposition to the
reduction in the amount of park land available to the subject area.
(6) The sale of park lands would violate the spirit and intent of the
Master School and Park Plan, the preparation of which was based on
a park land needs analysis which, in turn, formed the basis for
passage of a parks bond issue to provide for purchase of park land
including the majority of the subject lands.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
#12-246-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a request by Lindhout Associates, the City
Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the revised building
elevations submitted in connection with Petition 78-11-2-30 by Lindhout
Associates requesting waiver use approval to construct a one-story
residential home for the mentally and physically handicapped on the
northwest corner of Lyndon and Bainbridge in the Northwest 1/4 of
Section 23, subject to the following conditions:
(1) That the revised partial south building elevation as shown on
Plan 7811, Sheet 1, dated 11/26/79, prepared by Lindhout Associates
Architects, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to.
(2) That all other conditions set forth in the original approving
Resolution #1-1-79, adopted by the Planning Commission on January 9,
1979, are valid and in full force and effect.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Kluver, Friedrichs, Zimmer, Scurto, Falk, Morrow, Wisler
NAYS: Andrew
ABSENT: Smith
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Wisler, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-247-79 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a request by Volk and London, Architects,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the revised
building elevations submitted in connection with Petition 78-12-2-31 by
Volk and London, Architects, requesting waiver use approval to construct
a children's day care center on the north side of Six Mile Road, west of
the I-96 Freeway in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 7, subject to the
following conditions:
limmummum
' 7187
(1) That the revised Site Plan #0910, Sheet PS-1, dated 11/26/79,
prepared by Thomas Hansz, Architect, which is hereby approved
shall be adhered to;
(2) That the revised Landscape Plan shown on Sheet PS-1, dated 11/27/79
prepared by Thomas Hansz, Architect, which is hereby approved shall
be adhered to; and
(3) That there shall be no outside storage of trash allowed on the site;
and
(4) That all other conditions set forth in the original approving
Resolution #1-8-79, adopted by the Planning Commission on January 23,
1979, are valid and in full force and effect.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-248-79 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 381st Regular Meeting and Public
Hearings held on November 13, 1979 by the City Planning Commission
be approved as corrected on page 7152.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
C
On motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 382nd Regular Meeting
and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on December 4, 1979
were adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
// 4 . b. f /
Jos ph J. al �ecre ary
ATTEST: / 1
Daniel R. ndrew, Chairman