HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1982-04-13 .r.re k !
• 7656
MINUTES OF THE 431st REGULAR MEETING
• AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LIVONIA
t
On Tuesday, April 13, 1982, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia, held
its 431st 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 8:05 p.m., with approximately 50 interested people in the audience.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sue Sobolewski Joseph Falk Jerome Zimmer
Herman Kluver Daniel R. Andrew Donna Naidow
MEMBERS ABSENT: Judith Scurto (vacation) R. Lee Morrow
Donald Vyhnalek
Messrs. H G Shane, Assistant 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.
Mr. Falk, Secretary announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 82-2-1-2 by
Farley Building Company, Inc. , to rezone property located on the northeast
corner of Middlebelt Road and Pickford Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section
12, from RUF to P.S.
Mr. Bakewell: Projected on the screen is a map of Section 12, the area of petition
is colored in red. It is located on the east side of Middlebelt at
the corner of Pickford. Zoning to the south and east is RUF; across
the street is R-1 and immediately north is some C-1.
Mr. Shane: We have a letter from City Engineering Department, indicating there
are no storm sewers immediatly available to the site. The closest
storm drain outlet is an open water course crossing Pickford Avenue
approximately 800 feet to the east. Development of this site as
professional could accelerate the need of paving Pickford. Submitted
tonight is a petition with 30 names opposing the rezoning.
Mr. Andrew: Are most of the signatures persons residing on Pickford and Clarita.
Mr. Shane: Yes. Most are signatures from residents on Pickford. There are some
on Clarita and Middlebelt.
Mr. Andrew: Is the petitioner present?
Kathleen McCann, Attorney: I am the attorney representing Farley Building Company.
"' 15195 Farmington I would like to introduce Mr. Bernie Reamer who is the architect.
;Livonia I would like to show a picture of the site plan.
Mr. Andrew: Tonight we are interested in the question of rezoning only.
7657
Ms. McCann: I realize that. Our purposes are to have the piece of property that
is at the far south portion of the site next to Pickford rezoned to
P.S. We had come to the Board earlier for a C-2 rezoning on the
abutting property which would be next to C-1. We amended that petition
on February 16 to request C-1 on that instead of C-2. That is presently
in the Committee of the Whole. We believe that the P.S. on the end
would be a good buffer between residential and commercial. We believe
we might put in a bank and office building. The front portion would
be one-story and the back building would be two-stories. We would
coordinate the entire project so that the professional coordinates
with the existing although the improvement would be to the existing.
We would upgrade the existing to match the plans for the proposed.
We have met with the residents. I recognize we have problems and we
have had problems in the past. We have tried to correct some of the
problems with the ice and snow and things like that. We are going to
make any adjustments in the back as far as fencing is concerned or walls.
We would like to use as much greenbelt as possible on each of the sides.
We would very much like to berm there.
Mr. Andrew: Any access on Pickford?
Ms. McCann: We originally intended to have access there but the residents did not
want one. We redesigned the plans and there is no access on to Pickford.
Mr. Andrew: One of the problems as I recall is a water problem along the rear
property line.
Ms. McCann: I believe it is low land. It has to be built up. I am not sure whether
it has been corrected.
Mr. Andrew: Is your client aware that the storm sewer is 800 feet away?
BMs. McCann: He is aware and is willing to do what is necessary.
Mr. Zimmer: Is Farley Building Company the current owner?
MsCann: Yes.
Ms. Bergmann: I am still opposed to this. The property south of us are attempting
29231 Pickford to go commercial. We will have front and back. We are right south
of this property. What happens if they need a driveway on Pickford
for fire code?
Mr. Andrew: If this zoning should be approved, they will have to come back to us for
site plan approval at which time we will review the location of building,
location of driveway. That is a separate proposal. The question before
us tonight is whether this should be rezoned from RUF to P.S. We
appreciate your comments.
Ms. Moyles: We had a meeting in Ms. McCann's office and we were supposed to get
29275 Pickford things patched up. Mr. Sanchez on Clarita who is also on the petition
has three feet of water. He is underwater most of the time as a result
of that present building and that night we agreed that we would not
agree to any changes until Mr. Sanchez has satisfaction. Mr. Sanchez
has never heard from them and they have done nothing for this man.
He has vandalism, children throwing bricks from the top of the wall to
his roof, standing water. They could care less about Mr. Sanchez.
They have their building. Pickford doesn't mean a thing to them.
Their promises aren't worth anything.
•
7658
•
Mr. Andrew: We will try to get the storm water taken care of.
t4Mr. Sanchez: I would like to extend a personal invitation to anyone to see what I
29223 Clarita have to live with. Right now I have water in my crawl space high
enough to touch my beams. My lot is 41a.
Mr. Andrew: Have you had this problem ever since the building was built?
Mr. Sanchez: Yes.
Mr. Andrew: You are the first lot east of the existing building.
Mr. Sanchez: Yes.
MsCann: Mr. Weissman is willing to do anything that he can to resolve the
problems. We have worked on other problems. The height of the wall
will be raised. The garbage will be cleaned up. If there is something
they can do we would be willing to do so as far as the sewers are
concerned so that the water is not standing there.
Mr. Kluver: In essence the issue is zoning. Therefore, the physical problems
that exist are not relative to the issue of rezoning. I as one
individual feel very strongly that this Commission should direct the
Building Department and the City Engineering Department to come back to
us and that they indicate to us what the situation is. How the water
got there. I don't know how it got there. I would like a definition of
what that phyical problem is. If we have to use the Building Dept.
of Engineering Dept. I think it is justified. I have no problem
looking at the issue itself as a case of zoning but I do have a problem
with the physical problem of water. That is a real thing. I can sympathize
with this gentleman. If the future development will continue to impede
that area I would like to know.
Mr. Andrew: I recall when we approved the first building there was talk about
that storm water but it was not corrected. What we have here is a
credibility issue on the part of the petitioner. Maybe these people
would not be opposed if these problems would have been taken care of.
I feel we have to resolve those problems first.
Mr. Zimmer: What is the status of this petition and the existing commercial.
Mr. Andrew: The petition was amended at Council level to C-1. It is in the
Committee of the Whole.
Mr. Zimmer: The current zoning is RUF.
Mr. Andrew: The piece to the north is.
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. Falk and seconded by Mr. Kluver, it was
t
4
• 7659
#4-59-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 13,
l:// 1982 on Petition 82-2-1-2 by Farley Building Company, Inc., requesting to
rezone property located on the northeast corner of Middlebelt Road and Pickford
Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, from RUF to P.S., the City Planning
Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 82-2-1-2 until the Study
Meeting of May 4, 1982 by which time we request that the Engineering cr Building
Department provide this Commission with a definitive answer regarding the
problem of water.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Sobolewski, Kluver, Falk, Naidow, Andrew
NAYS: Zimmer
ABSENT: Morrow, Scurto, Vyhnalek
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-3-1-5 by Carol D. & Jackie
Lee Gatewood requesting to rezone property located on the west side of
Farmington Road between Clarita and Pickford Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of
Section 9, from R-3 to P.S.
Mr. Shane: We have a letter from Division of Engineering signed by Gary Clark
regarding offstreet parking and storm sewers.
Ms. K. McCann: Mr. Gatewood purchased this property approximately three months ago.
Attorney He has done extensive remodeling. There was no heat or electricity
15195 Farming- in this home. It is a frame, one story home with a 1/2 cement, 1/2
/ ton Rd. dirt basement. They would like to use this residence as a day care
' Livonia center. There are a number of professional buildings in the area.
I visited with some of the neighbors but did not see everyone. I
intend to see them all. The garage will be renovated for a kindergarten.
The structure will be kept the way it is. There will be a complete
turn around driveway. There will be approximatel 40-45 children here.
The operation will be a five-day a week center with ours from 7 a.m. to
6 p.m.
Mr. Andrew: Have you been stopped by Inspection?
Mr. Gatewood: No, I have had my final plumbing and heating insptections.as of December,
81. The City at this point doesn't know if I am connected to the
sanitary sewer. I have had no problems with the City or Inspection.
Mr. Falk: You have no problems meeting the City of State Licensing requirements.
Ms.McCann: We have had no problems with any requirements other than the masonry
wall. We plan to apply for a year's variance from the Zoning Board of
Appeals.
Mr. Falk: I don't think this building would meet the fire code, with a frame
construction. I am afraid of having 40-45 children in that type of
building.
Mr. Andrew: When was the building built?
Mr. Gatewood: 1955.
Mr. Zimmer: The property is now zoned residential. Your improvements from the time
they were started were they aimed at making this a legitimate residential
building.
• 7660
Mr. Gatewood: Yes.
Victor Tartolini: I object because of the parking lot in the back. This is a quiet
18544 Filmore neighborhod right now.
Mr. Andrew: What lot number are you on?
Mr.Tartolini: 190. I am right behind them.
Ms.McCann: Under the use there will be no on premises parking. We will have a
small van type bus to bring the children in.
There was on 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. Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski, and adopted, it was
#4-60-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 13, 1982
on Petition 82-3-1-5 by Carol D. and Jackie Lee Gatewood requesting to rezone
property located on the west side of Farmington Road between Clarita and
Pickford Avenue 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 82-3-1-5 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed change of zoning will provide for uses consistent with the
Future Land Use Plan recommendation of office use along this area of
Farmington Road.
(2) The proposed zoning district will act as a buffer zone between the
abutting residential uses and the Farmington Road thoroughfare.
i
(3) The proposed zoning district will provide for uses which are compatible
to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area.
(4) The proposed change in zoning will provide for uses consistent with the
Future Land Use Plan recommendation of office use along this area of
Farmington Road.
(2) The proposed zoning district will act as a buffer zone between the
abutting residential uses and the Farmington Road thoroughfare.
(3) The proposed zoning district will provide for uses which are compatible
to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area.
(4) The proposed change in zoning is consistent with the developing character
of the Farmington Road frontage in the general area.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was given according
to Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Kluver, Sobolewski, Falk, Andrew
NAYS: Naidow, Zimmer
ABSENT: Morrow, Scurto, Vyhnalek
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
7661
•
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-3-2-6 by Dominic Soave
requesting waiver use approval to utilize an S.D.D. Liquor License within an
existing building located on the southwest corner of Seven Mile Road and Irving
in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9.
'Mr. Shane: We have a letter from Engineering stating no problems. We have a letter
from three homeowners on Myron, supporting the petition. We have a letter
from R. J. Jenkins, co-owner of property on Seven Mile, in favor of the
petition. We have letters favoring the petition from Bill's Bike and
Puck, Ken Hunt, Hunt's Ace Hardware, Nationwide Ceramics, Daniel Ozurn,
and Joseph Iannaci.
Dominic Soave: There are very few S.D.D. licensed stores between Six Mile and Eight Mile
• 33527 Seven and Farmington and Haggerty. I will be selling packaged liquor, beer and
Mile Road wine along with pizza.
Mr. Andrew: I do not have any problem with the petition. However, the Ordinance
states that in order for us to approve an S.D.D. license there must be
a 1000 foot separation. The B & N Party Store is within that 1000 foot
separation. We cannot grant your request. This can be waived by the
City Council.
Mr. Soave: Did the State measure this?
Mr. Shane: It was measured by Planning.
Jaafar Jaafar: I will be moving my party store to the corner of Seven and Farmington
35638 Elmira only one block from Mr. Soave. I have been coming here for two years
in order to move to the corner. I have had approval. I cannot
see having another liquor store 200 to 300 feet away from my location.
4
IMs. Reed: We are across the street. Dominic is our landlord. We also have
applied for a liquor license. We now have beer and wine. Where does
petition put us? Does the S.D.M license fall under the same 1000 foot
separation? All of a sudden there are too many beer and wine sales.
Mr. Shane: S.D.M. does not require 1000 ft. separation.
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 Mrs. Naidow, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#4-61-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 13, 1982
on Petition 82-3-2-6 by Dominic Soave requesting waiver use approval to
utilize an S.D.D. Liquor License within an existing building located on the
southwest corner of Seven Mile Road and Irving in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 82-3-2-6 be denied for the following reasons:
(1) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use
IL is in compliance with the general waiver use standards and requirements
set forth in Section 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
(2) The proposal fails to comply with Section 10.03(g) , subsection (1) of
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
1.11.1116— low 2 .
7662
•
(3) There is no demonstrated need for an additional S.D.D. Licensed
facility to be located in the general area of the petition.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was sent to
I[: property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as listed
in the Proof of Service.
Mr. Andrew: I am opposed to this petition only because of the 1000 foot statutory
requirement. I do not necessarily agree with the other reasons:
Mr. Kluver: I feel the same way.
Mr. Andrew: You have to file an appeal to the City Council within 10 days.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-3-2-7 by Jaafar K. Jaafar
requesting waiver use approval to utilize an S.D.D. Liquor License within a
building proposed to be located on the southwest corner of Seven Mile and
Farmington Roads in Section 9.
Mr. Shane: Engineering has stated there are no storm sewers readily available.
The nearest one is 800 feet south on Gilmore.
Jaafar K. Jaafar: I would like to transfer S.D.D. from B & N to this new location.
Mr. Andrew: He has the same problem as Mr. Soave has.
Mr. Shane: If he moves the S.D.D. license from B & N to this location he has moved
that license therefore it no longer exists at the existing location.
If he establishes a new S.D.D. at the new location and sells the other
he would have a problem.
Mr. Jaafar: I plan to close the old business and move. I am not selling anything.
Mr. Shane: The Liquor Control Commission will not issue another license to this
petitioner at this location unless it satisfies the City Ordinance.
Until the other license is abandoned or moved then that license won't
be issued by the Liquor Control Commission.
Mr. Andrew: Could he sell it?
Mr. Shane: Yes.
Mr. Zimmer: Is there some condition we could put on this?
Mr. Shane: You could condition your waiver use approval anyway you wish. There is
a precedent for doing that in S.D.D.
Mr. Zimmer: I find the site adequate to use an S.D.D. License.
Mr. Shane: I suggest in your resolution that the City Council waive the 1000 foot
requirement to approve the petition among other things.
Where was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
•
a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski, and unanimously adopted,
't was
• 7663
#4-62-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 13, 1982
1[40 on Petition 82-3-2-7 by Jaafar K. Jaafar requesting waiver use approval to
utilize an S. D. D. Liquor License -within a building proposed to be located
on the southwest corner of Seven Mile and Farmington Roads in Section 9, the
City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 82-3-2-7 be approved subject to a waiver by the City Council of the
1,000 foot separation between S. D. D. licensed establishments as set forth
in Section 11.03 of Zoning Ordinance #543, sub-section (r) (1) ; for the
following reasons:
(1) The subject property has the capacity to accommodate the proposal.
(2) The approval of this requested waiver use will provide for the
relocation of an SDD Licensed facility currently being utilized in the
area and therefore will not add to the number of such facilities.
(3) The proposed waiver use is in compliance with all of the specific and
general standards and requirements set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06
of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Naidow, Sobolewski, Falk, Zimmer
NAYS: Kluver, Andrew
• ' ABSENT: Morrow, Scurto, Vyhnalek
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
IMr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-3-2-8 by Arthur E. Pulice
•
1[0
requesting waiver Use approval to construct a one-story general office building
on the north side of Five Mile Road between Hubbard and Fairfield in the
Southwest 1/4 of Section 15.
Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Pulice why have you changed your decision on the zoning?
Mr. Pulice: It will give us a broader range to rent. It will be consistent with the
neighboring area and still conform pretty much to the area.
Mr. Zimmer: Your plans are contingent on this approval. You would not go through
with the P. S.
Mr. Pulice: It would be quite restrictive.
Mr. Zimmer: What was it zoned when you bought it?
Mr. Pulice: It was P.S. when we bought it.
Mr. Zimmer: How long have you owned it?
Mr. Pulice: Two years or so.
Mr. Zimmer: Was there a gas station there?
. Puiice: When we bought it the seller and City had an agreemtn. It was just
condemed. Part of the deal was that the seller would remove the gas
station in accordance with what the City wanted. They removed it.
. •
Andrew: They eliminated a great compaign headquarters.
• 7664
Mr. Shane: Some years ago that site along with frontage west was rezoned from
commercial to office.
Mr. Kluver: Would this zoning conform with the master use plan?
1[; Mr. Shane: Yes.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
Mr. Andrew: This compressor location; is that the same location we talked about
last week? It was supposed to be in the corner.
Fred Armour: Because of the door of the building we couldn't put it right in the
corner. You have to stay north of the walk.
Mr. Andrew: Are you satisfied with landscape?
Mr. Bakewell: Yes.
Mr. Zimmer: Comment as to the wall does that mean petitioner will have property
on both sidesof the wall.
Mr. Andrew: His property includes the 6 feet. The property line is in the middle
1 of the 12 foot easement.
Mr. Pulice: We plan to have the wall waived.
1 Mr. Zimmer:le
What are the parking requirements of P.S. versus waiver use in General
Office.
Mr. Shane: P.S. permitted uses include architectural offices those kinds of
professional and medical. Generally P.S. goes medical which calls for
1 space for 75 sq. ft. as opposed to general office which is 1 space for
every sq. ft.
Mr. Zimmer: If petitioner is interested in P.S. he would trade building for parking.
Mr. Shane: If he puts more than one medical building there he needs a significant
amount of parking.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Naidow, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#4-63-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held- April 13, 1982
on Petition 82-3-2-8 by Arthur Pulice requesting waiver use approval to
construct a one-story general office building on the north side of Five
Mile Road between Hubbard and Fairfield in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 82-3-2-8 be approved subject to the following conditions:
(1) that the Site and Landscape Plan dated 4/7/82, revised, prepared by
Affiliated Engineers, Inc., which is hereby approved shall be adhered to;
IL (2) that the landscaping as shown on the approved Site and Landscape Plan
shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
and thereafter permanently maintained;
7665
(3) that the Floor Plan marked 82D-564, Sheet 2, dated 2/10/82, prepared
by Affiliated Engineers, Inc., which is hereby approved shall be
adhered to;
(4) that the Building Elevation Plan marked 82D-564, Sheet 3, dated 2/14/82,
prepared by Affiliated Engineers, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall
be adhered to; and
(5) that, should the required protective walls be waived, in whole or in
part, by the Zoning Board of Appeals, the Landscape Plan shall be
revised by adding additional greenbelt plantings in lieu of the protective
walls and such revision shall be approved by the Planning Commission;
for the following reasons:
(1) The subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use.
(2) The proposed general office use is compatible to and in harmony with
the surrounding uses in the area.
(3) The proposal is in compliance with all of the specific and general
standards and requirements set forth in Section s 9.03 and 19.06 of
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
.
(4) The proposal provides generous site amenities and sensitive building
design which will be in harmony with and compatible to other such
buildings and uses in the area as well as with abutting residential uses.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was sent to
property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as listed
[Mr.
in the Proof of Service.Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-4-2-9 by George LaForest
requesting waiver use approval to locate a transmission repair business within an
existing building located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Wayne and
Yale in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33.
Mr. Shane: We have a letter from Engineering.
Mr. Andrew: Petitioner has resolved some of thosedifficulties we had at the study
meeting.
Mr. Shane: There are bumper blocks, screened trash enclosure, amount of maximum cars
placed in storage area, prohibits outdoor storage of scrap parts, etc.
Mr. Zimmer: The exterior block walls to be repainted what color?
Mr. LaForest: Same earth tones as building next door.
32320 Cambridge
Mr. Zimmer: I would recommend that all exterior block walls be repainted the same
color as building immediately to the east.
Replace all over head doors and paint and scrape windows. I would
like a condition added to include replacing. the overhead doors and
scraping and painting the windows.
7666
Mr. Falk: The dumpster will have a 6-foot privacy fence.
Mr. Shane: It will never be seen by the public because it is in the storage area.
Mr. Andrew: Could you give a copy of the standard detail for fencing for dumpster?
There was no one else present wishing to be heard on this petition.
1[0
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski, seconded by Mr. Kluver, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#4-64-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 13,
1982 on Petition 82-4-2-9 by George LaForest requesting waiver use approval
to located a transmission repair business within an existing building
located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Wayne Road and Yale in
the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33, the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-4-2-9 be approved subject to
the following conditions:
(1) that the Site and Landscape Plan marked 82D-565, Sheet 1, dated 4/7/82,
revised, prepared by Affiliated Engineers, Inc. , which is hereby approved
shall be adhered to;
(2) that the landscaping shown on the approved Site and Landscape Plan
shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
and thereafter maintained in a healthy condition;
IL
(3) that the building elevation and floor plan marked 82D-565, Sheet 1,
dated 4/7/82, revised, prepared by Affiliated Engineers, Inc. , which
is hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(4) that the maximum number of vehicles to be accommodated at any one time
in the storage area shall be twenty five (25) ;
(5) that there shall be no outside storage of new parts, used or scrap parts
or unlicensed vehicles on the premises;
(6) all exterior block walls be repainted the same color as building
immediately to the east.
(7) all overhead doors to be replaced and windows scraped and repainted; and
(8) that any lights to be placed on the building or elsewhere on the site
shall be shielded or placed so as not to shine toweard abutting residential
uses;
for the following reasons:
(1) The subject site has the capacity to support the proposed use.
(2) The proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding -
uses in the area.
or ...-✓----
7667
(3) The proposed use is in compliance with all of the specific and general
waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 11.03 and
1[:
19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
(4) The proposal will provide for the use of and upgrading of a vacant
commercial building as well as good site amenities, all of which will
substantially upgrade the site and provide a needed commercial service.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Zimmer and adopted, it was
#4-65-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 13,
1982 on Petition 78-2-6-3 by the City Planning Commission to amend Section
11.03, Waiver Uses within the C-2 Zoning District, by amending the present
stands and adding new standards for gasoline service stations, restaurants,
new and used car lots and showrooms, new or used mobile home sales; open air
sales, display and/or rental of utility trailers and buildings of 30,000
square feet or more, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
the City Council that Petition 78-2-6-3 be approved for the following reason:
(1) This amendment will give the City additional control over the size,
placement and nature of several waiver uses listed in the C-2 District
regulations of the Zoning Ordinance.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was given according
10 to Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia.
f roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
i
AYES: Kluver, Naidow, Sobolewski, Falk, Zimmer
NAYS: Andrew
ABSENT: Morrow, Scurto, Vyhnalek
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 81-2-6-3 by the City Planning
Commission pursuant to Section 23.01(b) of Zoning Ordinance #543, to amend
Article XII of Ordinance #543 by adding Section 12.03, Special Uses,. to the
P.L. District Regulations.
Mr. Shane: We have a letter from Dr. Garver.
Carol Strom: We do concur with the things Dr. Garver states in his letter. We
appreciate your time.
Mr. Zimmer: The language which we have adopted allows the petitioner a waiver use
from P.L. to come before us and within two meetings time could resolve
an issue. I think that eliminating the public hearing we have handled the
question very cleanly for the. I feel we recognize the needs of school
board to get it done in a hurry and protect our needs to look at property
in some consistent fashion. What is the fee for filing waiver use petition?
t
Mr. Shane: No fee. This is a special use.
7668
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
170 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,
' it was
#4-66-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on April 13,
1982 on Petition 81-2-6-3 by the City Planning Commission pursuant to
Section 23.01(b) of Zoning Ordinance #543, to amend Article XII of Ordinance
#543 by adding Section 12.03, Special Uses,'. to the P.L. District regulations,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 81-2-6-3 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed Zoning Ordinance language will accommodate limited
alternative uses for vacant public school buildings while, at the
same time, provide the City maximum control over their location and
nature.
(2) This proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment has been approved by the
Department of Law.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was given according
to Section 23.05 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
4 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Naidow, seconded by Mr. Kluver, and unanimously adopted,
1 it was
/#4-67-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Council Resolution #989-80 regarding
Petition 79-5-3-4 by the City Planning Commission pursuant to
Council Resolution #241-79 requesting to vacate a 10' wide public
walkway easement located south of Five Mile Road between Melvin
Avenue and Algonquin Park in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 23, and
having held a public hearing on June 5, 1979, the Planning Commission
does hereby reaffirm its recommendation that Petition 79-5-3-4 be
denied, said recommendation being contained in Planning Commission
Resolution #6-75-79.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Naidow, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#4-68-82 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 430th Regular Meeting held by the City
Planning Commission on March 30, 1982, be approved.
AYES: Kluver, Naidow, Falk, Andrew, Sobolewski, Zimmer
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Morrow, Scurto, Vyhnalek
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. •
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Kluver, and unaniriously adopted, it
Fal
7669
4-69-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.47 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning
1!: Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #1567, the
City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 82-3-8-7 by Marcello & Silvio Building Company requesting approval
of all plans required by Section 18.47 submitted in connection with a
proposal to construct a medical building on the west side of Farmington Road,
north of Five Mile Road in Section 16, be approved subject to the following
conditions:
(1) that Site Plan 26-2-82, Sheet 1, dated 2/26/82, prepared by
Marcello & Silvio Building Company, which is hereby approved
shall be adhered to including those conditions set forth in
the Zoning Board of Appeal Case No. 8203-28;
(2) that the Building Elevations as shown on Plan 26-2-82, Sheet 2,
dated 2/26/82, prepared by Marcello & Silvio Building Company,
which are hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(3) that the landscaping as shown on the approved Site Plan is approved
including a lawn sprinkling system and shall be installed on the site
before building occupancy is granted; and
� - (4) that any proposed ground sign shall be approved by the City Planning
Commission.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-3-8-9P by A.C.Trost &
1[0
Associates requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Zoning
Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #1567, submitted in connection with a
proposal to remodel an existing building located on the south side of Plymouth
Road between Farmington and Stark Roads in Section 33.
Mr. Andrew: What about the area behind the building.
Mr. Bakewell: Install a planter with evergreen trees in it. Grade between the ice-
cream store and his is about 18 inches higher. Whether the grade will
change when parking lot is paved we will have to wait for Engineering.
There will be a 10 foot wide greenbelt to the dumpster. That should be
a deterrent. Handicapped spots have changed.
Mrs. Sobolewski: Landscape plan change?
Mr. Bakewell: Originally the variety and size of the plantings were not spelled out.
I met with Mr. Trost and now the plan specifies the type of trees, size,
variety, etc.
Mrs. Sobolewski: No more than originally shown; just identified them.
Mr. Kluver: Irrigation system shown on site plan?
. Shane: Yes.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
in a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski, and unanimously adopted,
t was
or
7670
#4-70-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543 the Zoning Ordinance
I: of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #1567, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-3-8-9P
by A.C. Trost & Associates requesting approval of all plans required by
Section 18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal to remodel an existing
building located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Farmington and
Stark Roads in Section 33 be approved subject to the following conditions:
(1) that the Site Plan prepared by A.C. Trost & Associates, Sheet 5, which
is hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(2) that the Building Elevations as shown on Sheet 1 of drawings prepared
by A.C. Trost & Associates, which are hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(3) that the landscaping shown on Sheet 5 which is hereby approved shall be
installed on site when the site improvement and building renovations are
completed and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition; and
(4) that any signs proposed to be placed on the site shall be approved by
the Planning Commission.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
. Mr. Andrew announced that Petition 82-3-8-8 by Eddie E. Ayyash requesting approval of all
plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance
#1567, submitted in connection with a proposal to remodel an existing building
located on the west side of Farmington Road, south of Five Mile Road in Section
1[ req21, is off the agenda.
'11r. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-3-8-6P by Richard Gallagher
4
uesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Zoning Ordinance
#543, as amended by Ordinance #1567, submitted in connection with a proposal
to construct a medical office building on property located on the north side
of Joy Road between Inkster Road and Cardwell in Section 36.
Mr. Andrew: Is there a pad on transformer?
Mr. Bakewell: It is screened. No outside storage of trash.
Mr. Zimmer: Are those grade lines higher or lower than the sidewalk behind the big
. tree.
Mr. Bakewell: Grade at the tope of this is 100 but driveway goes down.
Mr. Zimmer: Grade behind big tree.
Mr. Bakewell: One foot higher than sidewalk.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Zimmer and unanimously adopted, it was
#4-71-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #1567, the
I City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 82-3-8-6P by Richard
„H Gallagher requesting approval of all plans submitted in connection with a
proposal to construct a medical office building on property located on the
north side of Joy Road between Inkster Road and Cardwell in Section 36,
subject to the following conditions:
7671
•
(1) that Landscape Plan #292, Sheet L-1, dated 4/12/82, prepared by
I: Bi-Con Construction, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and
(2) that the approved landscaping shall be installed on the site before
the building is occupied and thereafter permanently maintained in a
healthy condition.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 431st Regular Meeting and
Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on April 13, 1982 were adjourned
at 10:10 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
GG�e:/�
Jo ph J alk Secretary
0 e i r
ATTEST: ' �
Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman /
t1a
I