Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1980-09-23 7405 MINUTES OF THE 398th REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY IL PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA ILOOn Tuesday, September 23, 1980, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia, held its 398th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, called the Regular Meeting and Public Hearings to order at 8:05 p.m., with approximately 72 interested people in the audience. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jerome Zimmer C. Russell Smith* Joseph J. Falk L. Robert Morrow Sue Sobolewski Herman Kluver* Judith Scurto Donald Vy;tnalek Daniel R. Andrew *arrived at 8:25 p.m. MEMBERS ABSENT: None Messrs. John J. Nagy, City Planning Director; H G Shane, Assistant City Planning Director; 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 ItIO Commission, the petitioner then has ten days in which to appeal for relief. Other- wisef the petition is terminated. J Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Rehearing of Petition 80-5-1-18, as amended, by Construction Craftsman Corporation to rezone property located at the northeast corner of Merriman and Seven Mile Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 2, from RUFA to R-7. Mr. Nagy: We have a letter dated September 3, 1980 from Gary Clark, Division of Engineering stating the legal description contained in the petition contained in the petition meets with approval and the letter previously sent on May 28, 1980 by Gary Clark would also apply to the amended petition. We have a letter dated September 23, 1980 stating that 300 residents were opposed to the rezoning to multi-family. The letter is signed by three homeowners indicating they were speaking for the 300 property owners. Mr. Andrew: Previously this petition was for both P.S. and R-7 rezoning. The southern 25% was proposed to be the P.S. category. The petition as amended is that the rezoning of the entire parcel would be R-7. Because of that change petitioner is required to come back. Is • the petitioner or his representative present? Norman Naimark, representing Construction Craftsman Corp., 25020 Devon Lane, IrdFranklin, Michigan was present. Mr. Naimark: The petition, as amended, complies with the Future Land Plan which is medium density. As to the increase of traffic volume that is occurring it is because of what is happening blocks and miles away as the areas 7406 get built up. It is my thinking that this property if rezoned would be used for condominiums. Our preference is condominiums. Mr. Andrew: I would like to point out that rezoning cannot be conditioned. 411Mrs. Scurto: How many stories do you propose? Mr. Naimark: Two stories which is the valid height. 1110 Mr. Zimmer: Do you own the property outright? Mr. Naimark: We do not own it. The purchase is subject to getting the rezoning. Mr. Zimmer: Is their a single ownership on the whole piece? Mr. Naimark: Yes. Mrs. Scurto: The letter you read to us does it indicate where the residents live? Mr. Nagy: No, there are three signatures without addresses. Mr. Morrow: How many stories are allowed in R-7? . Mr. Andrew: Two stories or 35 feet. Mr. Joseph Moore, 19499 Merriman, was present. Mr. Moore: We collected a petition with 300 signatures against the original petition. It stated the residents were against both apartment and ,& P.S. Does the Commission have those signatures? Mr. Nagy: We have an earlier petition. There could be 300 signatures. Mr. Andrew: This was attached to the recent letter. Mr. Nagy: No. Mr. Moore: We were told by Audrey in the Planning Department that the original signatures were good and valid even though the petition was amended. Mr. Andrew: We will seek an opinion from the Legal Department. Deborah Lindahl, 19475 Merriman, was present: Ms. Lindahl: We have 99% of the surrounding residents on our petition. I was also toldiby Audrey in Planning that the prior petition was valid. Mr. Thomas Hauserman, 19290 Merriman, was present. Mr. Hauserman: My wife made a phone call and received the same response from the Planning Department. I have some more signatures. The circled numbers represent new signatures. The other ones are signatures we secured before. We stopped taking this new petition after we found out we did not need Ira new one. 41, Mr. Morrow: Does the petition speak to apartments or R-7? 7407 Mr. Nagy: The letter dated September 23, 1980 states residents are opposed 1[01 to R-7 and the old petition reads they are opposed to R-7 and P.S. IL Jean Moore, 19499 Merriman, was present. Mrs. Moore: One hundred percent of the persons affected were against R-7. Mr. Zimmer: Based on R-7 zoning what would be the number of dwelling units that could be produced on this property? Mr. Andrew: 81 units are proposed, 40 one-bedroom, and 41 two-bedroom units. Mr. Zimmer: R-1 would be considerably less than that? Mr. Andrew: What is the rule of thumb on R-7? Mr. Nagy: Thirteen one-bedroom units are allowed per acre. Approximately 88 one-bedroom units would be allowed on this site. Mr. Andrew: If it was R-1 what would be allowed? Mr. Nagy: Four lots to the acre or approximately 28 houses. Ms. Helena Caudle, 19515 Merriman Court, was present. Ms. Caudle: I would abut this and I am against this. Mr. Zimmer: Who was the former owner and what were his plans? l 1 Mr. Andrew: The Archidiocese is the owner and we presume it was intended for a {110 church site. Mr. Zimmer: On the question of rezoning to R-7 from a traffic standpoint it no doubt would be more intensive than R-l. The Archdiocese has never developed this piece for a long time and it could have been a very intensive use for some time had it been developed previously. Dorothy Lessner, 19405 Merriman Ct., was present. Ms. Lessner: Our street is a dead end street. We have a big traffic problem about 350 feet from Merriman and Seven Mile to Merriman Court. This is where the accidents happen. I have been involved in a serious accident and two members of our family have. We have not been able to get a traffic study here. With more cars there we won't even be able to get off our street. Sometimes it takes ten minutes to get off our street. Mr. Andrew: If there was no access from this site on Seven Mile Road would that make a difference. Ms. Lessner: I do not know. I think it warrants a traffic study. We don't make a left turn. We don't come home from the west. We come from the east. IrMrs. Scurto: What about a left hand turn lane? Is there one near Merriman Court? 7408 Mr. Nagy: Merriman Court does not have a left hand turn lane at that point. IL It tapers just west of Merriman Court. Both Seven Mile and Merriman are under jurisdiction of Wayne County Road Commission and lane widening would be needed, both deacceleration and acceleration lanes. 16; Mr. Andrew: Any comments from Wayne County requested? Mr. Nagy: No. Mrs. Scurto: How long has this been designated as R-7 on the Future Land Use Plan? Mr. Nagy: Since. 1973. Mr. Zimmer: Do you see any likelihood in this location for single family residents? Mr. Naimark: I said the last time and I will repeat it I doubt, if anybody would put his money into this parcel and try to develop it as single family residential. It is not economically feasible to do that. Mrs.SCurto: How old are the houses north of here on the west side of Merriman? Mr. Nagy: They were built in the mid to late 60's. Mrs. Scurto: Someone made reference to the new homes going in at Hidden Pines as being an incentive and reason for upgrading and regenerating the area. I recall much opposition a few years back to Hidden Pines ari because people did not want anyone going into those lovely pines and destroying them. 4i0 ° Tom Hauserman: Hidden Pines are selling homes in the neighborhood of $90,000. I am worried about my property value with apartments. Bob Smith, 19710 Merriman, was present: Mr. Smith: We have enough apartments in the area. Homes will go down in price in this area. There will be an increase of traffic. There are a lot of people who would not mind living on Merriman Road. Mr. Vyhnalek: If you don't want multiple, do you just want single homes? Audience: Yes. Tom Hauserman: Six and Merriman has three new homes. They are occupied. Mark Winterhalter, 19250 Merriman Ct. , was present. Mr. Winterhalter: We have enough P.S. and commercial development in the area. As far as I am concerned the commercial development at our corner is a flop. Businesses are continuously turning over. The P.S. is• vacant. One is partially developed. This area is cluttered with that type of development. This addition to our neighborhood would be a disaster. Iril The apartments down Middlebelt are still not filled. Hidden Pines is still not completed. In a few years when it is we will have much 4i00 more traffic from there. Hidden Pines is a rebirth. Let's give our area a chance. Mr. Andrew: The Future Land Use Plan is a clearly designed instrument.which we place a lot of value on.. It is not a hidden instrument. • 7409 Mrs. Scurto: I feel I have labored long and hard on this issue. I cannot 1[0' imagine families as a mother myself who would want to raise their children on a street that is so heavily travelled. At Six Mile and Merriman the people look out at a church. Here they look out Iii, at a commercial development. In my way of thinking I do not think property values will go down. Mr. Kluver: We are only a recommending board. The Council willthen make the final determination. Mr. Falk: I hope someday to see homes there. I think that people would live on Merriman Road just to live in Livonia. We approve commercial development on one corner and then when we take the next corner and say sorry but we have to be consistent with the other corner. I still say homes could be built there. Resident: If we have 100% of the surrounding area opposing the rezoning isn't it your duty to deny this? Mr. Andrew: No, that has application to the City Council regarding protests being filed, meeting certain standards requires 6 out of 7 members of Council to approve zoning changes. Mr. Naimark: If this is approved I know the Planning Department and Road Commission will be sensitive to the road condition and they will do everything possible to attain satisfactory conditions. I built condominiums at Nine and Inkster, "The Arbors" and I would like to have the people see what I built there. i There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on this item closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Kluver, it was #9-226-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 23, 1980 rehearing on Petition 80-5-1-18 as amended, as submitted by Construction Craftsman Corporation requesting to rezone property located at the northeast corner of Merriman and Seven Mile Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 2, from RUFA to R-7, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 80-5-1-18 as amended, be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change in zoning is consistent with the adopted Future Land Use Plan of the City Planning Commission, which plan designates the subject area for medium density residential use. (2) The proposed change in zoning provides for a good use for the subject property, which property has severe physical limitations due to its configuration having a very narrow depth and extreme frontage along Merriman Road. 7410 (3) The proposed change in zoning will provide for a good buffer and gr transitional use for the subject area separating the established 11144 single family area from the adverse effects of the heavily travelled mile roads of Merriman Road and Seven Mile Road and the related intersection. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 9/8/80 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: Kiuver, Scurto, Sobolewski, Zimmer, Andrew NAYS: Morrow, Vyhnalek, Falk ABSTAIN: Smith Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 80-8-1-27 by Veteran's of Foreign Wars Livonia Post 3941 to rezone property located south of Plymouth Road between Newburgh Road and Jarvis in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 30, from RUF to C-2. Ir Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from Mr. W. G. Southerland, Director of Transportation, ' Wayne County. Road Commission and a letter dated August 29, 1980 from Division of Engineering by Gary Clark. Mr. Jerry Raymond, 15510 Farmington Road, Livonia, was present, representing the petitioner. Mr. Raymond: We maintain a post on Grantland just west of Inkster Road. Almost exclusively the members of this post are residents of the City of Livonia. We need a more adequate facility. We would like to erect a good post quarters as we have set forth in the plan before you. We propose to construct our facility in two stages. Whether we would go forward with the second stage would depend on the response we have. What we propose to do now would be to go forward with the first facility. The rezoning of the entire parcel may not be necessary. Mr. Andrew: Do the veterans own this property? Mr. Raymond: We have an option to buy the property. The owners of the property are not here today. I represent the owners also. They are in favor of the rezoning. Mr. Andrew: Are you aware of the comments of the Engineering Department relating to the storm sewer situation? 1rMr. Raymond: Our architects are a most able firm. They are fully aware. There is no I problem with the right-of-way also. li, 4 Mrs. Scurto: You would have to build a wall in the back where the C-2 adjoins residential. Mr. Andrew: Where C-2 abuts RUF or AG yes. They could of course go to the zoning board. 7411 Mrs. Scurto: Perhaps your organization would be receptive to the idea of going to Mr.ILIC-1 rather than C-2. Raymond:Ra : The discussion just came to me recently. I have not had an opportunity Y� to discuss it. We are not necessarily adverse to the proposal. We would only wonder why we would be singled out. None of the other veteran organizations are zoned C-1. That is my only response. Mrs. Scurto: We are only getting a little smarter now. We are not singling out your organization. Mr. Raymond: I understand C-1 gives you more control. We plan to go forward with construction immediately. With the approval of site plan the control would be there. We are talking about what is going on the land even before we make the rezoning. Mr. Falk: C-1 was never requested by another veteran organization? Mr. Nagy: Both the K. of C. and Monahan are C-2. Mr. Andrew: The American Legion at Newburgh and Ann Arbor Trail has a C-1 which' will require a waiver. Mr. Vyhnalek: How long has the V.F.W. been looking for land? Mr. Raymond: They have been looking very seriously for about two years. ifMr. Vyhnalek: Any other sites? r' liL, Larry Poucher, 14265 Norman, Livonia, was present. Mr. Poucher: We have 265 members. We have looked on 5,6, 7, and 8 Mile Roads. We looked on Newburgh. We looked at property next to the Sherwood. All the property is too costly to buy. We would not be able to put up a building for 10 years. Out of the 10 or 15 pieces of property we looked at this is the only piece that would be adequate in size. The price is acceptable. Mrs. Otzelnais, 37921 Plymouth Road, Livonia, was present: Mrs. Otzelnais: This would be next to my bedroom. We are retired. My husband is 70 years old. It would be too noisy. The parking lot may be next to my window. If they rezone this piece they should rezone all the pieces. Mr. Andrew: If the rezoning is successful they must return to City Planning for site plan approval. Landscaping, parking lot, etc. will be discussed then. Right now we are concerned with whether or not the V.F.W. would be proper in this location. Mrs. Otzelnais: It should be commercial all the way down. 1 7412 Mrs. Scurto: That might be possible if other petitions were filed. We ( continuously tell our veterans' organizations to go out and look for a piece of property that would affect the least amount of people. I can see 32 homes here. That is the most important piece of property to 32 homeowners. With Hygrade's here and Chevrolet I have difficulty seeing this as a residential area. Mr. Zimmer: I consider this a very delicate area. I see this as negating any possibility of a good development for future medium density. When looking for a piece of property, if one looks at commercial property then it is priced high. If one looks at a residential piece of property that is difficult to develop the price is substantially lower and therefore more attractive to the buyer. Mr. Morrow: Notwithstanding the organization that brings a petition before us I would have trouble with the C-2 classification. I would like the opportunity to study C-1 and the impact it would have on this area. Jerry Baldwin, 37917 Plymouth Road, Livonia, was present. Mr. Baldwin: I would be 100 feet from this property. I know they rent these halls. There would be a lot of noise generated here. Leonard Johnson, Jr. , 37865 Plymouth Road, Livonia, was present. Mr. Johnson: I own two acres. This is my home and I would not trade it for the Dodge mansion. This peace and quiet I have here would be destroyed by the noise. 4 Frank Kenel, 11644 Alois, Livonia, was present. Mr. Kenel: That piece of property is huge but I don't think it' should be develped that far back into the residential. Mr. Andrew: You feel part of the property could be rezoned but not the entire piece. Mr. Kenel: If it is developed that far back people will park in the back and create all sorts of problems. Mr. Otzelnais, 37921 Plymouth Road, Livonia, was present. Mr. Otzelnais: For a long time we live here and see nothing but rabbits, raccoons, mice. There are no sidewalks here and we are the last ones to to get snow removal service. Nothing built here and now something. Mr. Raymond: When the post moved on Grantland the neighbors were concerned. It was something new just as this is something new. This is not a commercial enterprise. The law says it is. This is a family post. The hall will be available for weddings. That is the purpose of it. They are building it for their own use. On occassion when it is not in use then it will be rented. We would like if possible to get together with the old neighbors and the new neighbors. We have been 41 on Grantland since 1960 in an old church building and we have had no complaints from the neighbors. 7413 Mr. Falk: This establishment would be considerably bigger than your present operation. If this thing fails you could sell it and make a profit. . I am afraid of the C-2 zoning here. Most of your members are middleaged and in ten or twenty years they may not require the facilities. Then what? Mrs. Scurto: We are all adverse to change. We are afraid of our property values going down. Listening to and watching property values in this town there are very few that have gone down. I think with proper landscaping and properly developed this establishment will not be detrimental. I do not find the one on Grantland offensive. It won't be like living next door to rabbits, raccoons, or mice. As far as my remarks about this not being a residential area, I consider the acreage that is taken up by residential versus land taken up by commercial. I. feel the commercial is predominant iii this area. Mr. Smith: Do you have a strong opposition to C-1? Mr. Raymond: I don't think we are adverse to it. I am not prepared right now to answer that. I have not had an opportunity to meet with the building committee. My only problem with C-1 is that when remodeling is required we of course would have to come back. Mr. Smith: Is this a standard V.F.W. Hall? Mr. Raymond: This is an original plan. Mr. Smith: I would like to see you each time you make a change in the building. I am concerned with the age group of the organization. Most members are middleage. I would like to study a. 0-1 classification. Mr. Raymond: We are not adverse to the C-1. The plans are intial plans. We have no problem when we get to the site plan to make changes. We of course plan very substantial landscaping improvement. Mr. Andrew: If we assume the petitioner would agree to a C-1 waiver use for this petition would that require a new public hearing? Mr. Nagy: Amending from C-2 to C-1 does not require a new public hearing. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on this item closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was #9-227-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 23, on Petition 80-8-1-27 as submitted by Veteran's of Foreign Wars Livonia Post 3941 requesting to rezone property located south of Plymouth Road between Newburgh Road and Jarvis in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 30, from RUF to C-2, the City Planning Commission d es hereby determine to table Petition 80-8-1-27 until the Study Meeting to be conducted on October 14, 1980. 4: A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: g g AYES: Kluver, Morrow, Scurto, Smith, Sobolewski, Vyhnalek, Falk, Andrew NAYS: Zimmer . 7414 Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. IL Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition - - - g o 80 7 3 4 initiated by Council Resolution #705-80 to vacate the north/south alley located east of Farmington Road between Haldane and Carl in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3. Mr. Nagy: We have a letter dated August 29, 1980 from Division of Engineering by Gary Clark. We have a letter from Department of Public Works, Public Service Division by Mr. Gronevelt and Mr. Osborne. We have a letter from Michigan Bell by Dorothy Debain. James Grode, 19531 Westmore, Livonia, was present. Mr. Grode: This alley is nothing but a sand, dirt and dust catch all. There are five houses on the street and I live in the middle. Resident, 19604 Farmington, Livonia, was present. Resident: I am at the corner of Carl and alley. This alley has not been taken care of by the City. It is not used for any good purpose. Just kids and motorcycles. I am in favor of vacating it. Frank Holmes, 19505 Westmore, Livonia, was present. Mr. Holmes: I support them. Water accummulates here. When the kids come through on their cycles they splash mud all over. We could plant and maintain that it would look better. Mr. Andrew: Each abutting owner would pick up 10 feet. Kenneth Steinke, 36049 Grennada, was present. Mr. Steinke: I am here for my mother. Could a fence be put through there? Mr. Andrew: Yes. It will become part of your lot of record. If you convey title it would also convey that 10 feet. You put the fence at your own peril due to the easement retained by the public utility companies. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition. Mr. Andrew; Chairman, declared the public hearing on this item closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Smith, and unanimously adopted, it was #9-228-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 23, 1980 on Petition 80-7-3-4 pursuant to Council Resolution #705-80 requesting the vacating of the north/south alley located east of Farmington Road between Haldane and Carl in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the (01 City Council that Petition 80-7-3-4 be approved subject to the retention of an easement over the full width of the subject alley, for the follow- ing reasons: 7415 (1) No public purpose could be served by the retention of the subject alley in publio'.right-of-way since none of the 11:4; abutting properties depend upon use of the alley for access purposes. IL (2) The area encompassed by the alley could be more properly used and maintained if attached to abutting property. (3) No reporting City department or public utility company has objected to the vacating request. (4) The Superintendent of Public Services recommends that the subject alley be vacated. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 9/8/80 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 80-8-6-9 by the City Planning Commission to amend Section 18.47, Vicinity Control Ordinance, and Section 18.58, Site Plan Ordinance, of Zoning Ordinance . #543, to require the posting of bonds to ensure installation of approved site landscaping. 4 On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Falk, and unanimously adopted, it was #9-229-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 23, 1980 on Petition 80-8-6-9 by the City Planning Commission to amend Section 18.47, Vicinity Control Ordinance, and Section 18.58, Site Plan Ordinance, of Zoning Ordinance #543, to require the posting of bonds to ensure installation of approved site landscaping, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 80-8-6-9 be approved for the following reasons: (1) This zoning ordinance amendment would significantly aid the Bureau of Inspection in enforcing compliance with conditions and requirements imposed by the Planning Commission and City Council through site plan approval. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published in the official newspaper,the Livonia Observer, under date of 9/8/80, 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 gr listed in the Proof of Service. i 7416 Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution Cadopted. IL Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 80-9-2-23 by Friar Tuck's Diet Delite, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to locate a sit-down restaurant within an existing building located at the southeast corner of Plymouth and Middlebelt Roads in Section 36. Mr. Nagy: There is no site plan attached to the petition. We have correspondence from Department of Public Works Inspection Department by John Karol. We have a communication from the Division of Police, Traffic Bureau by Lieutenant Widmaier. We have a letter from Di7ision of Fire from Mr. Sawyer. Mr. Andrew: I would like to see a revised floor plan that picks up plumbing. Mr. Mike Foley, 1097 Jessica, Birmingham, was present. Mr. Foley: I am one of the partners in the Friar Tuck's Diet Delite, Inc. We are planning on using one restroom in the large lobby of • Dr. Sadlowski. We will have a new one for women going in. We will work out all the details so we meet the code. We can enlarge the women's to incorporate another water closet. As far as the landscaping Dr. Sadlowski talked with Mr. Bakewell. I am willing to sign a bond if that is necessary about the landscaping completion. Mrs. Scurto: Do you and the doctor share the entrance? i Mr. Foley: Yes. It will be an emergency exit only. We are fronting off of Middlebelt. Mrs. Scurto: Is one of the owners Mr. Stella? Mr. Foley: No. His company designed the restaurant layout. Mrs. Scurto: Is this going to be like the Thirteen Mile and Orchard Lake restaurant? Mr. Foley: No. That one and Clawson, Grosse Pointe Woods and Twelve Mile and Ryan are full line restaurant. This one will have a limited menu. Mrs. Scurto: Do the same people manage and set standards? Mr. Foley: Yes. Mr. Smith: What are the hours of operation? Mr. Foley: 10 a.m. to 11 p.m. and starting December 1 to March 1. After that we close at 10 p.m. We have weight watchers meetings at some of our other locations. Mr. Zimmer: Is this cafeteria style? d 7417 Mr. Foley: You can place your order and the food is brought out. We clean up the tables afterward. We have three to six people working. We have had no problems with the other locations in five years. (6; Mr. Zimmer: Is all the food made on site? lib; Mr. Foley: No. The baked good items are made in Troy. 80% of our evening business is soft serve. We have no grills, fryers, or broilers. We have three microwave ovens. We have two unit burner to make soup. Mrs. Scurto: Are you going to have vented hoods? Mr. Foley: No. Our restaurant is very limited and very clean. Mr. Zimmer: What is the percentage of take-out? Mr. Foley: 20% Mr. Zimmer: What are the peak hours? Mr. Foley: 8 to 9:30 p.m. Mrs. Sobolewski: How do you propose to dispose of the trash? Mr. Foley: We will have a dumpster in back. We will replace the one that is there with a larger one. gr' Mrs. Sobolewski: Have you considered an internal one? J Mr. Foley: That would be feasible. Mrs. Sobolewski: What about signage? Mr. Foley: From the door's entrance and around to the side and across the front we will have a yellow awning about 2 feet. The sign on the front will be on a portion of the canopy. It will be canvass. The letters will be brown. Mr. Zimmer: What will be around the corner of the west side? Mr. Foley: We are taking the siding down and putting inthree sections of glass. We will have tiffany lamps on the inside. They will be seen through the windows. The Middlebelt side will be all windows. Mr. Morrow: Did you know at the Wonderland Mall there will be a "Slimmery" going in? Mr. Foley: Yes, I am aware of that. I am familiar with the operation and I know the owner. That is a grocery store type operation. I believe there might be a microwave and some seats. Mrs. Scurto: Your Orchard Lake store is not in my estimation a very well kept place. I have not been to the others. dr- Ms. Margaret A. Altovilla, 29228 Elmira, Livonia, was present. • 7418 Ms. Altovilla: There are already several eating places in the area. There are 10 dumpsters that I counted in this complex. All are open. There are rats all around. I have had to replace my fence three times in five years. People come back there and run into it. Kids park back there. This would only be adding to the aggravation that is 116; already there. George Papgeorgious, 18467 Middlesex, Lathrup Village, was present. Mr. Papageorgious: I am in the real estate business. I sell only restaurants. I am the only real estate brokerin Michigan that sells restaurants. I have written two different books on restaurants and restaurant management. There are 73 restaurants on Plymouth, starting from Inkster. Half are for sale. I have sold everyone two or three times. Mr. Andrew: What is the grounds for the opposition? Mr. Papgeorgious: Too many restaurants are not good economics. Mr. Andrew: Economic competition is not a consideration of planning or zoning. Mr. Papageorgious: With too many restaurants there is a deterioration of the properties. Half will not sell because they are not making any money. Mr. Smith: I think this restaurant does represent a specialty item. Since reading this petition I visited the Fourteen Mile and Clawson restaurant and I found it to be unclean. We have problems here with the dumpster situation. The parking lot is always in need of repair. I wonder why there is no wall back there. Is there a requirement for a concrete wall? Mr. Nagy: There is a requirement. I think we should look intb this. Paul Fregolle, owner Spaghetti Company, was present. Mr. Fregolle: I have had an opportunity to experience the Friar Tuck establishments. They are not the kind of operators that should be allowed to operate here in Livonia. I take particular pride in the restaurant I am involved in. We would hope that any one coming in would not add to the deterioration of the area. Mr. Falk: Are you objecting because of the economical impact it will have on the other restaurants? Mr. Fregolle: I don't think it would come up to the Livonia code. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on this item closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Smith, it was Ir' #9-230-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on 0 September 23, 1980 on Petition 80-9-2-23 as submitted by Friar Tuck's Diet Delite, Inc., requesting waiver use approval to locate a sit- down restaurant within an existing building located at the southeast corner of Plymouth and Middlebelt Roads in Section 36, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 80-9-2-23 be denied for the following reasons: x 7419 (1) The proposed use is contrary to the spirit and intent of the ( Zoning Ordinance which is to promote and encourage a balance and appropriate mix of uses and not over saturate an area with similar type uses as is being proposed. lib; (2) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use is in compliance with the general waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543. (3) A letter from the Bureau of Inspection dated 9/22/80 states that this proposal does not comply with the requirements of the Building Code with regard to the number of fixtures for mens and womens restrooms and with regard to the restroom size standards relating to physically handicapped. (4) The location and size of the proposed use, the nature and intensity of the principal use, the site layout and its relation to streets giving access to it will be such that traffic to and from the site will be hazardous to the neighborhood since it will unduly conflict with the normal traffic of the area. (5) Petitioner has failed to comply with the requirements of Zoning Ordinance 4543 as no site plan has been submitted indicating that the proposed use complies with the specific standards established therefore. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was sent fri to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. 11.0 A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Scurto, Morrow, Smith, Zimmer, Falk, Sobolewski NAYS: Andrew, Vyhnalek, Kluver Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carriedand the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Andrew: You have ten days in which to appeal this decision to the City Council for relief. Otherwise the petition is terminated. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, and unanimously adopted, it was #9-231-80 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission pursuant to Council Resolution #677-80, and pursuant to. Section 23.01(a)., 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 amend Section 18.50 of Ordinance#543, regarding certain regulations controlling the erection of signs within the City. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of such tearing be given as provided in dr Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of ILd Livonia, as amended. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. . 7420 4 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted, ir, it was ille #9-232-80 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 397th Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on September 9, 1980, be approved. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Vynhalek, and unanimously adopted, it was #9-233-80 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Sign Plan submitted by Lidia Veri in connection with a condition of approval of Petition 79-9-8-30 by Lidia Veri 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 a retail complex on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Stamford and Myron in Section 9, subject to the following conditions: (1) That the sign plan prepared by the Sign Place graphically showing a 6' x 10' sign 19 feet high is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; (2) That the approved sign shall be located a minimum of 19 feet back from the existing sidewalk, which sidewalk establishes the thorough- fare line for Seven Mile Road in this location as approved by the Wayne County Road Commission. 4i0Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vynhalek, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted, it was #9-234-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning _ Ordinahce of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #1468, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 80-8-8-20 by Fred J. Armour requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a bank building on the north side of Schoolcraft between Middlebelt and Lyons in Section 24, subject to the following conditions: (1) That Site Plan 8009, Sheet 1, dated September 18, 1980 by TMP Associates, Inc. is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; (2) That the building elevations as shown on Plan 8009, Sheet 4, dated August 21, 1980 are hereby approved and shall be adhered to; (3) That Landscape Plan 8009, Sheet 3, dated August 15, 1980 by James C. Scott & Associates, Inc. , is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; (4) That the approved landscaping shall be installed on the site Ar prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy and thereafter maintained in a healthy condition; IL:10 (5) That the free standing sign showing a 6' x 12' identification panel and a 3' x 7' time/temp panel 20 feet high is hereby approved and shall be located at the 25' setback as indicated on the approved site plan. " 7 421 ir (6) That trash handling shall be by means of a trash compactor contained within the building as there shall be no outside if trash container allowed. (7) Any and all mechanical equipment that may be placed on the roof of the building shall be screened from public view. Fred Armour: • The sign will be the same one as the one at Six Mile and Farmington. It will not revolve. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Morrow, and unanimously adopted, it was #9-235-80 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Ordinance #29 of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #50, does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to vacate north/south alleys located east of Farmington Road between Haldane and Seven Mile Road in the South- west 1/4 of Section 3. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of such hearing shall be given as provided in Ordinance #29 of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #50. I Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 398th Regular Meeting and Public Hearing held by the City Planning Commission on September 23, 1980 were adjourned at 10:55 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION h J. Fa/---- (-1(7-ec ary ATTEST: / /2//67: / Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman I'