Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1982-09-28 • 7763 MINUTES OF THE 441st REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY 4 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF 4 LIVONIA 1 On Tuesday, September 28, 1982 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 441st Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall , 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Jerome Zimmer, Vice Chairman, called the Public Hearing and Regular Meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. with approximately 90 persons in the audience. Members present: Jerome Zimmer Joseph J. Falk Donald Vyhnalek Herman Kluver Sue Sobolewski Lee R. Morrow Judith Scurto Donna Naidow Members abesent: Daniel R. Andrew Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director; and Ralph H. Bakewell , Planner IV, were also present . Mr. Zimmer informed the audience that if a petition on tonight 's agenda involves a question of rezoning, this Commission only makes recommendations to the City Council and the City Council after holding a public hearing makes the final determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied, and if a petition requesting a waiver of use is denied, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City Council . tf Mr. Joseph J. Falk, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 82-8-1-11 by Kathleen McCann for Village Greengrocer, Inc. , to rezone property located south of Eight Mile Road between Farmington Road and Shadyside in the Northwest l/4 of Section 3, from R-3A to C-2. Mr. John J. Nagy, Planning Director: There is a letter dated August 17, 1982 in the file from the Engineering Division indicating that they see no dis- crepancies in right-of-way dedication or other engineering problems connected with this petition. Ms. Kathleen McCann, Attorney representing the petitioner: May Iask the Commission if you want me to handle this just as a rezoning. Mr. Zimmer: We are dealing with two questions. What we will consider at this point is the rezoning. Ms. McCann: The purpose for our request to have the back portion zoned uniformly with the rest of the property so that we can have use of the back and we ask for a waiver use approval in order to take some of the outdoor sales associated with this commercial use and put them to the rear of the property. Mr. Zimmer: The asphalt area indicated on the plan -- does that represent the only access the petitioner has to Shadyside? 4 Ms. McCann: That is correct. Mr. James A. Muir, 20200 Shadyside, President of the North Central Civic Association: I am very much concerned with any easement of any commercial property K - 7764 • fronting on the side street in a residential area. We already have traffic problems. I have not seen other places in the City where there is an easement to a side street allowing commercial traffic to flow on that side street with right or left hand traffic. Mrs. Scurto: Would you be opposed to this easement change if we later on made it a stipulation that there would be a right turn only? It is really not going to be an access way as you can see from the ultimate plan, but would you be opposed to that? Mr. Muir: I would have to think about that for a while. I am not sure what this does to the rest of the area. I am very concerned about the long term use other than for what the agreement was that said that would be a green zone. Mrs. Scurto: If this is part of the upgrading of the property, you would still like us not to change that? Mr. Muir: I think I am concerned from the standpoint that I don 't know that a driveway isolates a residence from the business section. Mrs. Scurto: You have not had an opportunity to see what is being planned? Mr. Muir: No. Mr. Zimmer: We have spent some time on what the proprietor plans to do. Mr. Robert Wyman, 20321 Shadyside: I live in the second house from the area you want to rezone. I am opposed to the rezoning. You are bringing the com- mercial closer to my property. a Mr. Morrow: Other than the minor strip where the home is - is that not in the C-2 which would be an ingress and egress to that property? Mr. Zimmer: Where the house is - it does side to Shadyside? Mr. Nagy: There is no house on Lot 18. Mr. Morrow: Does Lot 18 front on Shadyside and is it zoned C-2? Mr. Nagy: In part, C-2. Mr. Morrow: But it could be a service drive leading in to Shadyside as it now exists. I see this as a minor extension of the current C-2 zoning. Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Muir, you understand that there is already C-2 on Shadyside? Mr. Muir: Yes, I understand but that doesn 't diminish my opposition to the access on Shadyside. I wish you would look closely at the original plan as to the buffer. Mr. Nagy: He is referring to the 300' of manufacturing zoning further to the east. The Council has indicated that it is their policy not to go deeper with the manufacturing zoning. 4 . 7765 Mr. Michael Petteys, 20411 Shadyside: My property abuts Lots 18 and 19. I had a chance to examine this and I see no problem with it . I see no increased traffic according to their plans. I would like to see anyting estab- lished on that corner to make it more presentable. 0 i Mr. Vyhnalek: This is just going to be for trucks coming back for the material you plant? Ms. McCann: Just for deliveries. Mr. Smith, Architect for the petitioner: There is a 20' setack where the C-2 abuts the residential . The diagonal strip is 30' wide. The petitioner only owns 20' ; 10' of it is the other person's property. Mr. Zimmer: What you are saying is the petitioner does not have any access to Shadyside at the moment. Mr. Smith: Right. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-8-1-11 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow and seconded by Mr. Kluver, it was #9-161-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on September 28, 1982 on Petition 82-8-1-11 by Kathleen McCann for Village Greengrocer, Inc. , to rezone property located south of Eight Mile Road between Farmington Road and Shadyside in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 3, from R-3A to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-8-1-11 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning is a minor, logical extension of the C-2 commercial zoning classification. (2) The majority of the lot is presently zoned in the C-2 zoning classification and with this change of zoning it will merely reflect the established commercial use of the property. (3) With the proposed change of zoning the new zoning district lines will correspond to property lines. (4) It is consistent with the policy of the Planning Commission to have zoning classifications reflect the established use of the property and also to have zoning lines coterminus with property lines. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Morrow, Naidow, Sobolewski , Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer NAYS: Scurto ABSENT: Andrew i 7766 Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. I Mr. Falk, Secretary, announed the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-8-1-12 by Daniel A. Lord Holding Corporation to rezone property located on the north side of Schoolcraft Road between Eckles Road and the 1-96 Freeway in the Southwest l/4 of Section 19, from R-1 to P. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter dated August 26, 1982 in the file from the Engineer- ing Division stating that drainage for the area being considered for parking would be predicated on outletting westerly to the public storm sewer located in the Ford Truck site. Mr. Joseph A. Milko, President of the Board of Directors, Daniel A. Lord Holding Corpora- tion: This parcel of land was owned by Newman Farms, Inc. In 1959, we asked Newman Farms if we could use this land as a parking lot . We got their approval . About 1968, the State of Michigan used a large portion of this land in constructing the Jeffries Freeway and the Newman people offered to sell the balance to Daniel A. Lord Holding Corporation because it was now too small for their original purpose which was for an apartment. We purchased the land and have been using it for the last 23 years for parking. We are just trying to change the zoning to make it legal . There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, delcared the public hearing on Petition 82-8-1-12 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Naidow and unanimously adopted, it was [ #9-162-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on September 28, 1982 on Petition 82-8-1-12 by Daniel A. Lord Holding Corporation to rezone property located on the north side of School- craft Road between Eckles Road and the 1-96 Freeway in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 19 from R-1 to P, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-8-1-12 be approved for the following reasons: (1 ) The proposed change of zoning is in compliance with the Future Land use Plan of the City of Livonia which designates the subject area for commercial purposes. (2) It is consistent with the Planning Commission 's policy to have zoning classifications reflect the established use of property which, in this case, is parking. (3) The proposed change of zoning will eliminate the nonconforming status of the property by way of the parking use presently occurring within the subject area which is zoned single family residential . FURTHER RESOLVED that , notice of the above public hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution jadopted. 776"7 • • Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-9-1-13 by 4 St. Mary Hospital to rezone property located south of Six Mile Road between Fitzgerald Avenue and Newburgh Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 17, from P.L. to P.S. ' Mr. Nagy: There is a letter dated September 10, 1982 in the file from the Engineering Division stating there are no engineering problems in connection with this proposal . Mr. Zimmer: This item before us has a lot of interest and I would like to point out that this is a question of rezoning at the moment . That is what we are here to discuss tonight. If the current petition and plans are approved, later on there would be a need for them to obtain a waiver use permission from the City to effect their plans . The waiver use then requires that this procedure be conducted again on the use of the property. So, we have two different situations; the first is the rezoning and the second being the waiver use which has the same delibera- tions and public hearing should it be developed by this petitioner. Mr. Jacob Sobrieraj , Chairman, St. Mary Hospital , introduced Sister Mary Modesta, Pres- ident, Mr. Williams, Director of Planning and Rita Radzialowski , Administrator, of St. Mary Hospital . Mr. Williams: We met with and presented to the residents of the area on September 16, 1982, the concerns of the hospital which is under constant pressure from the government to develop health programs to increase care. St. Mary Hospital has developed plans to expand its operation and took an option to purchase Clay School subject to rezoning of the property and issuance of the Certificate from the Department of Public Health. We notified the businesses and residents in the area of our proposed use of the building and that we had filed a petition for rezoning. We let ti them know our means of access. We held a meeting with the residents on September 16th and proceeded then to contact business people and the Church about the possibility of a new access route to the property. We have had four suggestions developed by the City Engineer and it appears the most feasible access at this time is a route off Six Mile Road on the western edge of the Kingsbury Heights Subdivision. That is the shortest route through the residential area. Other routes men- tioned were on the south edge of the property; through the Newburgh Plaza and between the Big Boy Restaurant and the bank. That has been declined by that property owner. Mr. Zimmer: You mentioned two routes from Newburgh. Mr. Williams: The Plaza property - they still have that under discussion but it is not very feasible. They haven' t said no but it does not look like it will be yes. The Church indicated they would consider that property but it picks up considerably more residential property. Mr. Zimmer: Do you have one that you would favor given the four alternatives? Mr. Williams: The one next to the Big Boy would be the most desirable. Mr. Zimmer: Do you see it in your plans to use Mallory only as an entrance? t flci Mr. Williams: I don't know what our decision would be if we are not allowed to use anything but that. We prefer to see a more suitable access route. 4 Mrs . Scurto: If you were to proceed using one of the other accesses in existence, do you envision closing off the Mallory exit so there would be absolutely no access? Mr. Williams: The residents' concern was that they did not want us to use Mallory. I am sure the Hospital would close that completely. Mr. Morrow: The alternative route between First Federal Savings and Big Boy - you indicated Big Boy was opposed to it? Mr. Williams: No. Mr. Frankel , the owner of the shopping center - he would not con- sider that - in no way. Mr. Morrow: Is it safe to say that that route is dead? Mr. Williams: Yes, I would say that is out of the question. Mr. Morrow: Is he also the owner of the abutting site? Why would he not favor that route? Mr. Williams: He may be planning to develop the P.S. property. Mr. Nagy: At the time the litigation arose on the property for the Topps ' pro- posal , the court stipulated there would be no development closer than 80' of the east property line. Mr. Asher Telchon, partner and attorney for the Newburgh Professional Park: I discussed li, this with Mr. Williams. We support the idea of the rezoning believing that the change of zoning would enhance the quality of our development and certainly convert property lying fallow into constructive use. After discussion with our architect , Mr. Siegel , we have concluded that the burden that would be placed on our land by constructing an ingress and egress through our development would be an undue burden and would, in light of the scope of the development that could eventually emerge, adversely affect what we are trying to do and be detrimental to our property and the ultimate development of the hospital . Mrs. Shirley Welch, 37151 Bristol : This building has lain vacant and has been an attrac- tive nuisance for over 1-1/2 years and has been to us an undue burden. It seems to me that a community roadway going through there would benefit the community and take away from the attractive nuisance that presently exists. Mr. Zimmer: Mr. Nagy, do you have any comment on this property carrying additional traffic. Mr. Nagy: This development was designed with its own drive and offstreet parking system. There would be no real benefit for him to extend the driveway to Clay. The site of Newburgh Plaza Office complex under construction now would be burdened by additional traffic passing in front of those I: office buildings. Maybe he could be relieved of some maintenance problems -- snow removal and maintenance of the road but other than that from a purely planning standpoint of having some benefit, I can see none. 7769 Susan Tranquilla, 16823 Fitzgerald: I am opposed to having a full size access street in back of my property because of the increased traffic and the danger of lower property values and the danger to my children. There could be four entrances on Six Mile Road within less than a block and that would create a hazard. Mrs. Scurto: When you are talking about the safety of your children - is that on Fitzgerald? Mrs. Tranquilla: In back of my house. Mrs. Scurto: Doesn 't your property have a wall ? Mrs. Tanquilla: No, in back of my house there is no wall . A fence starts from the school . Mr. Morrow: If it was zoned P.S. , would the Ordinance require a six or eight foot wall where it abuts residential? Mr. Zimmer: It would require a wall . Lawrence D. Egan, 16974 Fitzgerald : I am opposed to the use of Clay Elementary School for this. If this is approved the future use of the school would be lost. I think any further deliberation in the area of this proposed use would lower the property values . I think this will destroy the quality of the neighborhood . I am really opposed to the whole plan. George Jevarjian, 36602 Grove: I think this is premature. They have no egress or ingress. This area has seventy to eighty homes. I don 't want to see my property value go down. I am totally against this. It just doesn 't fit in. I think the school board made a mistake putting a hospital in with no egress or ingress. I am opposed to it and would rather see it torn down. James Cowden, 16639 Fitzgerald : Myself and my neighbors are opposed to this . We don't want this in there. It is an unacceptable use right in the center of a residential area. Lincoln School was wanted for purchase but it was unacceptable because there was no ingress or egress and it was torn down. I think that should be the case here.so there would be homes built Mrs. Scurto: Mr. Cowden, would you be opposed to that being a continuation of the shopping center? Mr. Cowden: Yes, I would oppose that. Daniel Belcher, 17077 Fitzgerald: You want to build a roadway within ten feet of my yard. What you are trying to do is destroy the neighborhood completely. The State has already made a good start with that mentally retarded home there. Mrs. Donald Kobe, 16919 Fitzgerald: I am opposed to this. We are already getting noise from Big Boy from the teen agers and the dirt is unbelievable that the trucks stir up. John Dunn, 36980 Munger: It is not infrequently that the police are called to this area with the access road there now. I am opposed. J • . 7770 Mrs. Bryant, 37046 Munger: I knew the school was going to be there and the church is IL there. That is okay. Now they want to put up a brick wall . I used to look at trees in that area. If this is going to be any kind of medical facility, there will be a problem with drugs . The kids already cause problems and they have already shot out windows and they will do that to get drugs. There will be sirens . I am opposed to this . Mr. Zimmer: The wall is a requirement of the Zoning Ordinance. It need not be there. You can have something other than the wall . There is relief from the wall and I just wanted to point that out . Mr. Williams: A medical operation would be no different than a doctor's office in an area. No more occasion to have drugs than a doctor. We said we would provide the necessary service to guard that building with the hospital staff as required. There is no planned overnight stay for any kind of service. Our hours would be 9 to 9 and maybe to 10 for community educational programs. Carol Keblaitis, 16651 Fitzgerald: St. Mary has been very up-front with us. I can appreciate the services they want to have for the community but I feel these services in a subdivision is not right. They did not deny the fact that they would expand the school . Do we have any control over the expansion and the programs. Mr. Zimmer: If they were to expand, we would be examining those plans. Mrs. Keblaitis: After it is totally rezoned, would they have to go before another body to determine whether or not they could expand? i li Mr. Zimmer: They would have to have the same kind of procedure we are going through 4 tonight. Mr. Keblaitis: The old question is accessibility. This is a very great problem. Some of their problems would be for alcohol and medical retardation. This really concerns us as does the traffic and the type of programs planned . This could be developed again some day as a school . Dennis Keblaitis: How high can they go with a building here? Mr. Nagy: Two and a half stories. Mr, Keblaitis: We are very definitely against that . If we rezone this now and they don 't get their waiver, they are out of the picture and heaven knows what will go in there. I don't think it should be rezoned and that it is premature until we get definite plans for ingress and egress . Right now they are talking no emergency service but a year from now it might be more beneficial to have emergency services. Roger Doering, 36575 Mallory Drive: I agree with Dennis. Until they have an option to purchase property to provide an ingress and egress, I think it is pre- mature of St. Mary. You could rezone this and they might never get ingress and egress and then we would be stuck with a professional zone. Mrs. Scurto: Mrs. Radzialowski , does the State of Michigan regulate the expansion of hospital facilities and do they regulate what you are planning on doing here? 4 /771 • Mrs. Radzialowski : Yes, they do. Medical buildings are rarely open until 10:00 p.m. 1[ We are talking about Lamaze classes and other community classes and they are hardly ever open until 10:00 p.m. Mr. Sobrieraj : When we reach the point of maximum capacity, then naturally we may have to expand, however, the 45,000 square feet we have is more than enough for the next ten years. This will be an ambulatory service. We have to get a certificate of need for such a service. In the news- paper there was a great deal of emphasis put on health care costs . One way to cut these costs is through an HMO. This is what is planned for this facility. We have been contacted by HAP and IDP and others . St. Mary Hospital now has the farsight to get a facility for an ambulatory service that could be renovated in a short period of time and can provide the service. The State of Michigan has stated that any application for a health care facility would be approved because this is the trend . It is not a concept we just dreamed up but is becoming wide-spread. Mrs. Scurto: Are those not bedded hospitals? Mr. Sobrieraj : No, they are not, except where you have it available for a multi-facility, This will be a non-emergency center because we are too close to St. Mary Hospital . Jack Gawthrop, 37280 Munger: All these places he mentioned have beds and are not in a residential area. Stuart Vaughn, 36733 Grove: Why don't they put this in St . Mary Hosptial? Sister Modesta: This could be done in about five years and putting this in at St. Mary Hospital would be too costly. We do not have planned bed usage at 4 Clay School . Thomas Caprara, 37072 Munger: One roadway is right across my back yard. I feel my back yard couldn' t bear the burden of another street. I think the school could be put to better use. Mrs. Harry Manoian, 36954 Munger, was present and stated she is opposed to the rezoning. Ramond Trudeau, 36703 Mallory Drive: I am opposed. Mr. Vyhnalek: Have you contacted St. Timothy for any of their land? Mr. Williams: Yes we have. They would consider a strip of Lot F4 for possible sale but they are not very enthusiastic about it. Mr. Vyhnalek: Are there any other alternatives St. Timothy would entertain - like the northern part? Mr. Williams: No, they are not interested in that . Asa Harris, 37333 Munger: I am opposed to this rezoning. I don' t think we need this additional burden or of what probably will go in on the northwest corner. t Dorothy Norred, 16948 Fitzgerald; Mrs . Canzoneri , 37176 Munger; Don Atkinson, 36979 Munger; were present and opposed the rezoning. Representative of St. Timothy Church: Mr. Williams came to us and asked if we would entertain any interest in St. Mary obtaining some land from us . We do . 7772 have a deep concern that we have a vacant building behind us and we are concerned about the future use of it . We are also concerned that if it stays vacant, it will attract problems also. We indicated to Mr. Williams that we would sit down with them if they wanted to pursue it to see if we can come, up with an agreement. The southern end of our property is not developed right now so any use we discuss with them would probably be on the southern sector. Mr. Williams: When I had the meeting at the school , the Sisters stated then and 1 repeat, that they wanted to respect the views of the residents and we will go back and take another look as to whether or not these views can fit in with the total plans. Mrs. Scurto: I can't vote on this until I am sure that the change in zoning will not impact the traffic in a detrimental way. I would like to table it until the petitioner can get back with a plan for ingress and egress. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-9-1-13 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted, it was #9-163-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on Septebmer 28, 1982 on Petition 82-9-1-13 by St. Mary Hospital to rezone property located south of Six Mile Road between Fitzerald liAvenue and Newburgh Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 17 from ' P.L. to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 82-9-1-13 until such time as the petitioner is ' able to provide a plan which indicates an acceptable means of in- gress to and egress from the site. Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-9-2-25 by Joseph W. Giniel requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to and expand an auto repair business located on the northeast corner of Middlebelt Road and Elsie Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 24. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating that there are no problems in connection with this petition. Carl Creighton, 29200 Vassar, Suite 150, Livonia: This is a request to expand a noncon- forming use. There is a need because of Mr. Giniel 's business . The planned improvements for both the site and building are aesthetically pleasing over that which is there now although what is there is very good. I understand that at the time this was presented, there was some concern over the location of the dumpster. I think it was a unanimous decision that the dumpster be located on the southeast corner. There was some concern about whether or not the dumpster should be located outside at all and my client has assured me that he will put it in walls and locate it inside if that is practical . We are also asking that the seven day period be waived so that we can get to Council as soon as possible. 7773 Mr. Zimmer: Are you aware of the Zoning Board of Appeals ' conditions? '1 Mr. Giniel : Yes. Mrs. Scurto: Is there an underground watering system? Mr. Giniel : No, there is not but I think if you go by there you will find it very well maintained and it is maintained by a professional landscaper. Mr. Zimmer: As one Commissioner and as has been our policy, I would like to see some sort of sprinkler system. Mrs . Scurto: Do you not keep cars overnight? Mr. Giniel : Very seldom does a car have to stay overnight . If we do keep them they are kept inside. Mr. Kluver: I , as a Commissioner, do not think there is a need for underground sprinkler. It is well maintained . Mr. Zimmer: What are your hours? Mr. Giniel : 5:30 p.m. during the week. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-9-2-25 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it was 1 #9-166-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on September 28, 1982 on Petition 82-9-2-25 by Joseph W. Giniel re- questing waiver use approval to construct an addition to and ex- pand an auto repair business located on the northeast corner of Middlebelt Road and Elsie Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 24, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-9-2-25 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1 ) that Site Plan #81D-562, revised 8/20/82, prepared by Affiliated Engineers, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to in all respects; (2) that all landscape materials as shown on the approved Site Plan shall be installed on the site prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new addition and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition; and (3) that there shall not be allowed on the premises any refuse con- tainer and/or outside storage of either parts or material or refuse; for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use complies with Section 11 .03(m) of Zoning Ordinance #543. J 7774 (2) The site has the capacity to support the expansion of use, the Zoning Board of Appeals having allowed the proposed addition to the noncomplying building. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs . Naidow and unanimously adopted, it was #9-167-82 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to waive the provisions of Section 10 of Article VI of the Planning Com- mission Rules of Procedure regarding the seven-day period concerning effectiveness of Planning Commission resolutions in connection with Petition 82-9-2-25 by Joseph W. Giniel requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to and expand an auto repair business located on the northeast corner of Middlebelt Road and Elsie Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 24. Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 92-9-2-26 by Buddy's Livonia, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to construct an additionto and expand an existing restaurant located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Farmington and Stark Roads in the North- east 1/4 of Section 33. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating that there are no positive storm drainage facilities outletting the present parking areas. Robert Jacobs, petitioner, 4447 Laurel Club Drive, West Bloomfield: The purpose for this request is to increase the seating to 180 seats. I have enough park- ing to comply with the code. Mr. Zimmer: In order to handle the additional seating you propose a new east parking area? Mr. Jacobs: Right. Mr. Kluver: Has it been the past practice of this Commission to red-line a site plan and approve it by initialing it? Mr. Nagy: Yes, that has happened. Mr. Vyhnalek: Do you own that property to the south, Mr. Jacobs? Mr. Jacobs: No. Mr. Zimmer: Is all the property surfaced with ashphalt? 4 7775 Mr. Jacobs: Yes. 4 Mr. Morrow: The parking lot may have to be redesigned so as to act as a catch-all i itself. Mr. Zimmer: So any water run-off is not on your land. The Engineering Department says the problem was there and this will aggrevate it. Mr. Nagy: The purpose of the Engineering report is so that property owners are protected. It may be that the parking lot should be redesigned so as to act as a catch basin itself but I think you should rely on the Engineering Department to take care of those kinds of things. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-9-2-26 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski and seconded by Mrs. Scurto, it was #9-168-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on September 28, 1982 on Petition 82-9-2-26 by Buddy's Livonia, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to and expand an existing restaurant located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Farmington and Stark Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-9-2-26 be approved subject to the following conditions: t (1) that the Site Plan dated 8/20/82, prepared by R. Zischke, Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that the Building Elevation Plan, revised 9/28/82, prepared by R. Zischke, Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (3) that a landscape plan shall be submitted for Planning Com- mission approval within thirty (30) days; and (4) that the basic color of the building shall be white or brown with blue trim; for the following reasons: (1) The subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. (2) The waiver use requirements and standards of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, have been complied with. (3) The proposal will provide for the use of this existing commercial facility which is currently vacant and unused. (4) The expanded parking lot will remove a small residential structure currently existing in a C-2, general commercial , Zoning District . . 7776 FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. li: A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Morrow, Scurto, Naidow, Sobolewski , Vyhnanek, Zimmer NAYS: Falk ABSENT: Andrew Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-9-2-27 by Action Oldsmobile, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to con- struct an addition to and expand an existing auto dealership located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Farmington and Stark Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter dated September 15, 1982 in the file from the Engineer- ing Division stating that there appears to be no engineering problems connected with this proposal . Mr. Zimmer: The Chair refrains from voting or discussion on this matter. If the Commission has no problem, I will either conduct the proceeding or pass the gavel . I have no close association with Oldsmobile but I am an employee of General Motors. Robert Gillow, petitioner, 33850 Plymouth Road: The purpose of this petition is to re- I quest approval to expand the automobile dealership. We will expand the 4 Service Department, body shop, new and used car showrooms and put a new front on the building thereby upgrading the looks of the building from Plymouth Road. Mr. Gillow explained, in detail , the proposed site plan and displayed an artist 's render- ing of the proposed building expansion. Resident, 33901 Wadsworth: Are they putting up a fence or just a used car lot . The other builder showed me a nice building too that looked nice from the front but why didn't he do something to the back? I have been after him to clean that up. The place back there is used like a dump. I have no objection but I don 't like them using the property in the back as a dump. I would like to know if they are going to clean that up. Mr. Zimmer: Is there supposed to be a wall? Mr. Nagy: There is supposed to be a fence. Resident: The curly-haired man I talked to said they are going to make it beautiful back there. Mr. Vyhnalek: What are those things that are stored back there? Mr. Gillow: Transmission covers from another business we had. 1111; Mr. Vyhnalek: Is there any use for them? . 7777 Mr. Gillow: Not at all . Nb, that is really no problem. 4 Donna Debaldo, 33925 Wadsworth: How far back are you going and what will it be used for? , Mr. Gillow: 120' from where the fence is now. Not all of the 120' is being developed. It will be used for new car storage. Mrs. Debaldo: Are you planning on bringing any new cars through the back way? Mr. Gillow: There is no way to get in there. We have had to clean that up occas- ionally. William McEvoy, 33900 Wadsworth: On the expanded area you will have the same type of fence you have now? Mr. Gillow: Yes. Mr. McEvoy: And what you are adding on is the bump shop? Will you block the access so that other people can't drop tires and trash back there? We also can hear the noise from your loud speaker and noise from the pump shop. Mrs. Richard Householder, 33921 Beacon: There is a wall in there starting at Plymouth and then there is a steel fence in front of a fabricating place. They can start out with a restaurant then go to a dealership and then go back further. I think there is a need for a waiver use somewhere here. You are attaching C-2 to M-1 . Why aren't they extending the block wall there? i li: Mr. Zimmer: Because it isn 't required. Mr. Nagy: Within the industrial area there is no requirement for a wall where manufacturing abuts residential subdivisions because of plans for all industrial . The Zoning Ordinance exempts some subdivisions that are figured to be there permanently. One of the areas is the Newman Wadsworth Subdivision. That area is thought to be preserved first as residential and therefore a wall is required. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-9-2-27 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow and seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, it was #9-169-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on September 28, 1982 on Petition 82-9-2-27 by Action Oldsmobile, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to and ex- pand an existing auto dealership located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Farmington and Stark Roads in the Northeast l/4 of Section 33, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-9-2-27 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that the Site Plan dated 8/30/82, prepared by Seymour H. Mandell , Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; 7778 (2) that the Building Elevation Plan dated 8/30/82, prepared by [4 Seymour H. Mandell , Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (3) that the Landscape Plan dated 9/13/82, prepared by Seymour H. Mandell , Architect, shall be implemented and landscape materials installed on the site prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition; (4) that any new signs to be erected on the building or on the site shall be approved by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of a sign permit; (5) that a masonry wall shall be constructed along the property tine abutting the R-5 residential zoning; and (6) that any new lighting proposed to be installed on the site shall be placed in such a manner so as not to shine into the abutting residential area. for the following reasons: (1) The site has the capacity to support the proposed expansion of use. (2) All pertinent Zoning Ordinance requirements have been complied with. (3) The proposal represents significant building and site improvements which will vastly improve the appearance and usability of the facility. 4 (4) The proposal will not adversely affect the surrounding properties in the general area but rather will make the use more compatible to the surrounding neighborhood. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: K'luver, Morrow, Scurto, Naidow, Sobolewski , Vyhnalek, Falk NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Zimmer ABSENT: Andrew Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-8-7-5 by the City Planning Commission to amend Pqrt VII of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Future Land Use Plan, by changing the designation of property located on the east side of Haggerty Road, north of Seven Mile Road in Section 6. 7779 There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Zimmer, Vice liChairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-8-7-5 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted, 4 it was #9-170-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the provisions of Act 285 of the Public Acts of Michigan, 1931 , as amended, the City Planning Commission having held a public hearing on September 28, 1982 for the purpose of amending Part VII of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Future Land Use Plan, the same is hereby amended by changing the designation of property located on the east side of Haggerty Road north of Seven Mile Road in Section 6 from present classifications to commercial , office and open space for the following reasons: (1 ) The proposed amendment provides for proposed land use categories which reflect the Planning Commission 's current future development goals and policies for lands along the Freeway corridor. (2) The proposed amendment will promote the development of lands primarily for office uses which will provide employment and help to diversify and strengthen the economic base of the community. AND, having given proper notice of such hearing as required by Act li:' 285 of the Public Acts of Michigna, 1931 , as amended, the City Planning Commission does hereby adopt said amendment as part of the Future Land Use Plan of the City of Livonia which is incorporated herein by reference, the same having been adopted by resolution of the City Planning Commission with all amendments thereto, and further that this amendment shall be filed with the City Council , City Clerk and the City Planning Commission and a certified copy shall also be forwarded to the Register of Deeds for the County of Wayne for recording. Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-8-2-20 by Village Greengrocer requesting waiver use approval to have an open air retail sales on property proposed to be developed as a garden center and flower shop, which property is located on the south side of Eight Mile Road, east of Farmington Road in Section 3. Kathleen McCann, Attorney representing the petitioner, was present and introduced Mr. Joel Smith, Architect for the petitioner, to the Planning Commission and submitted a copy of a new site plan to each Commissioner. Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, stated that since the Commission and staff have not had an opportunity to review the new site plan, Petition 82-8-2-20 will remain on the table until the Planning Commission Study Meeting to be conducted on October 5, 1982. Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-8-2-23 by A. J. Charlet requesting waiver use approval to expand an existing muffler shop on property located on the northwest corner of Camden and Plymouth Road in the Southwest l/4 of Section 25. 4 7780 On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs . Sobolewski and unanimously adopted, it was #9-171-82 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on September 28, 1982 on Petition 82-8-2-23 by A. J. Charlet requesting i waiver use approval to expand an existing muffler shop on property located on the northwest corner of Camden and Plymouth Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 25, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-8-2-23 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan #82A8, revised 8/30/82, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Elevations as shown on the approved Site Plan #82A8, revised 8/30/82, which are hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (3) that all landscape materials installed on the site shall be permanently maintained in a healthy condition; for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use is in compliance with Section 11 .03 (m) of Zoning Ordinance #543 relating to the proposed use. (2) The site has adequate capacity to support the proposed expansion of use. li: (3) The proposed expansion of use will not provide for additional service bays but will add storage capacity to the building so as to make the operation more efficient. (4) With the proposed expansion of use will come new building, architectural improvements, new exterior materials, new mansard roof, site landscaping will be upgraded, the parking lot will be resealed and restriped and the outdoor dumpster will be screened from view. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted, it was #9-172-82 RESOLVED that, the Planning Commission does hereby determine to waive the provisions of Section 10 of Article VI of the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure regarding the seven day period concerning effective- ness of Planning Commission resolutions in connection with Petition li: 82-8-2-23 by A. J. Charlet requesting waiver use approval to expand an existing muffler shop pn property located on the northwest corner of Camden and Plymouth Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 25. 7781 Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto and seconded by Mrs. Naidow, it was li: #9-173-82 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 440th Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on Septebmer 14, 1982 are approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted inthe following: AYES: Kluver, Morrow, Scurto, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Sobolewski ABSENT: Andrew Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Naidow and unanimously adopted, it was #9-174-82 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 82-8-8-19P by Ross Properties 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 store located in the shopping center located on the south side of Eight Mile Road, east of Angling in Section 1 , subject to the following conditions: j (1) that the Building Elevation drawing for Murray's Discount Auto 4 Store, dated 9/7/82, prepared by Gary Greenberg Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that the site landscaping be upgraded as per letter of agreement signed by Ross Properties and filed with the Bureau of Inspection; and (3) that the petitioner shall , at all times, keep the dumpster contained within the dumpster enclosure located behind the building. Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted . On a motion duly made by Mrs. Naidow, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted, it was #9-175-82 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Sign Plan submitted by Jaafar K. Jaafar in connection with a condition of approval of Petition 82-1-8-1 requesting approval of all plans re- quired by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #1567, in connection with a proposal to construct a party sotre and retail space on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Farmington Road and Filmore in Section 9, subject to the following conditions: • - 7782 (1) that the Wall Sign showing individual , internally lit letters 30" high and 24" wide, as prepared by A.B.C. Signs which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and li: (2) that the 8' x 11 ' ground sign, 22' high, as shown on a plan prepared by A.B.C. Signs which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted . On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto and seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, it was #9-176-82 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 82-9-8-21P by Tom C. and Sara K. Sass requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #1567, submitted in connection with a pro- posal to construct an addition to an existing building located on the south side of Five Mile Road between Santa Anita and Harrison in Section 24, subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan 8151 , dated 9/28/82, as prepared by Michael L. Priest & Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Elevations as shown on the Plan prepared by Fred J. Horner, dated 9/10/82, which are hereby approved shall be adhered to; and li (3) that the road connection between the service area and the customer parking lot at the rear of the building shall be deleted from the i site plan. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Morrow, Scurto, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer NAYS: Sobolewski ABSENT: Andrew Mr. Zimmer, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 441st Regular Meeting and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on September 28, 1982 was adjourned at 12:20 a.m. , September 29, 1982. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION J. . ph J//Y, Sec etary _______±:_ Ail ATTEST: Je14e. r me Zimmer, V' a Chairman 4 ac