Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1986-02-18 • 9554 MINUTES OF THE 511th REGULAR MEETING. AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, February 18, 1986, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 511th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall , 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. R. Lee Morrow, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. , with approx- imately 60 interested persons in the audience. Members present: R. Lee Morrow Herman Kluver Jeanne Hildebrandt C. Russ Smith Michael Duggan Donald Vyhnalek Donna J. Naidow Michael Sorrano Members absent: Sue Sobolewski Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director; and Ralph H. Bakewell , Planner IV, were also present. Mr. Morrow 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 hold its own public hearing and decide the question. If a petition involves a waiver of use request and the request is denied, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City Council ; otherwise the petition is terminated. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 85-12-1-40 by John D. Divan to rezone property located on the southwest corner of Eight Mile and Gill Roads in Section 4 from RUFB to P.S. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating that the 36 and 25 foot residential zoning areas excluded from the petition along the east (Gill Road) and south property line respec- tively would present a practical problem, from a standpoint of maintenance of the landscape areas, should protective walls be required between the P.S. and residential zoning districts. Charles Tangora, Attorney representing the petitioner: We are prepared to go into the prepared site plan and rendering on this rezoning if the residents are interested. Eight Mile is a changing road, not only with this petition but development going along Eight Mile Road all the way to Haggerty. It is changing to a commercial-type road. We feel this petition is a low impact use -- professional . The design is laid out to lessen the impact on the residential in back of us. We have eliminated all ingress and egress off Gill Road. A 25' area will be bermed. The only ingress and egress will be from Eight Mile Road. Mr. Morrow: We are not developing the site plan here but we will look at it. ‘00 Mr. Tangora explained the proposed site plan in detail to the Commission and interested persons in the audience. Mr. Vyhnalek: What did Engineering mean about the 25' strip would be a problem? Mr. Morrow: He is leaving 25' in the residential classification and by Ordinance a wall would be required separating the P.S. from the residential . • 9555 Mr. Nagy: Yes, by Ordinance the wall is required at the zoning line, not the property line. The zoning, as proposed, does not go all the way to the property line. In order to provide privacy, there will be a 25' separation between the greenbelt and the street. Mr. Vyhnalek: Can they have that waived? Mr. Nagy: Absolutely. Mr. Dinan: The wall would require a waiver but the 25' berm will give the effect of a wall and will be landscaped in accordance with Planning Com- mission requirements. I presume they would waive the wall . This is to ensure the neighborhood that there will never be a way into there. It is a built-in guarantee. Mr. Morrow: Have you talked with the people in the neighborhood? Mr. Tangora: I met with some of the property owners and the Board. There were three problems. One, the proposed parking between the lots facing Gill Road. They wanted to eliminate that and that property will go to the abutting property owners. Two, the view from Gill Road. Through the development of the berm, we feel we are blocking off the parking lot and we have eliminated the access on Gill Road. Three, we have consolidated this into one building instead of two. It will look more like a southern mansion rather than a professional building. Terry Hoeft, 20520 Gill Road: The last time I was here I had a lot of concerns. I am on the Board of Directors for the homeowners he was speaking to. I am speaking now as a homeowner. I think any homeowner would like to see the area stay rural . Looking at reality and what is happen- ing to Eight Mile Road, I have a different view. The first lots on Eight Mile will eventually be zoned differently. I would like to have a building like Mr. Dinan is going to put in. I respect his integrity in coming to talk to me. We had problems before with the entrance to Gill Road. That is all taken care of. I would like to see the area along Gill Road have a berm rather than a wall . I would be in favor of such a development. Mr. Morrow: Tonight we are considering zoning. We have some technical problems with the site plans and Gill Road. Mr. Domeyer, 20417 Gill Road: I appreciate Mr. Dinan coming to the house and going through this matter in detail . I talked with Mr. Divan about the area south which was to be a parking lot. He offered this 150' of property to me and some to Mr. David Allen. The gift is fine. I ' ll have to pay taxes on it but I want the audience to know that I am not going to defend Mr. Dinan because I am getting this property. I want no come-back in the event he may buy back the property he has given to him atd me free. Another building could go in there. am promised by Mr. Divan and Mr. Allen that this will never happen and that no drive will ever be put in off Gill Road. I have contacted owners in the area and many said go ahead with it. In the event that you approve this non-commercial area some day for commercial , then we will get who knows what. We may get a 7-11 or a beer store or some- thing that will give us almost around-the-clock traffic. This isn't kro that bad. The Hondo motorcycle place is north of Eight Mile Road and their proving ground goes right down Gill Road south. There are more 9556 accidents now on Gill Road than there are on Plymouth Road. If you knock this down now and approve a commercial five years from now, you had better stay away from me. i Carl Bales, 34655 Eight Mile: I am concerned about them doing like they did on the Farmington side. They said it was the only place it would be zoned commercial . I am on Lot 13 with one lot between me and if it is all commercial , that is something else but if they' re going to do one, that is something else, too. Where is the parking going to be? It only gives him 35' . Mr. Morrow: This is professional service as opposed to commercial . Mr. Bales: I would rather have housing in there because otherwise I will be looking at a wall . Resident, 20564 Gill Road: The building looks like a sensational building but I think when we start to take a hard look at commercial zoning . . . South- field has some of the best buildings but Southfield also has a high crime rate . . . higher than Detroit. If we continue to build this way, we will have crime. As a resident, I don't want commercial . You don't know the character of the people coming into these places. I would rather leave this residential . I want the Board to take a look at the zoning . . . with commercial you are exposing the resi- dents to robbery, break-ins. I would rather have professional than commercial . Mr. Bales: There is no question about the beauty of the building but it reminds me of the days when we had to have a gasoline station on every corner. Do we really need another medical building? We have them all up and down Eight Mile Road. Owner of the fourth house on Gill Road: I feel the same as the gentleman who just spoke. Livonia is really a residential City. With this property rezoned, there will be a lot of problems. Sometimes I wonder what we will do about Police protection. Mr. Morrow: What is the track record of your other offices. Mr. Dinan: We have four other locations much more commercialized and we have yet to have a BSE in the area. In Livonia, crime is very low. Mr. Duggan: I would like to address the crime issue. I live less than two blocks from Plymouth Road and it is developed straight with commercial development. I don't think crime is really a major concern as long as we keep the emphasis on crime. I want the neighbors to understand that we understand that if this particular site goes office, in the next ten years you will see development west go commercial . We will not let this happen in a haphazard way but if we shoot this down there will be a great deal of pressure along Eight Mile for office and commercial development and I want to assure you that it doesn't happen in a haphazard manner. a There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, 3 Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 85-12-1-40 closed. 9557 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Hildebrandt and seconded by Mr. Smith, it was Eie #2-35-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 18, 1986 on Petition 85-12-1-40 by John D. Dinan to rezone property located on the southwest corner of Eight Mile and Gill Roads in Section 4 from RUFB to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 85-12-1-40 until the Study Meeting of February 25, 1986. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Hildebrandt, Smith, Kluver, Soranno, Duggan, Naidow, Morrow NAYS: Vyhnalek ABSENT: Sobolewski Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-1-1-1 by Westin Development Company to rezone property located on the west side of Farmington Road, south of Eight Mile Road in Section 4 from RUFA to P.S. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating that there are no City maintained storm sewers readily available to this site and an off-site storm sewer extension westerly to the Tarabusi Drain would be required in order to properly drain the site. le Ms. Williams, representing Donald Colone, owner of Westin Development Co. : We are proposing P.S. for the property and it is our opinion that the P.S. District is the highest and best use for the property. We do not feel it will be a detriment to the surrounding property. P.S. does not crea W a high traffic volume and it is also a daytime, 8 to 5, population. Ms. Williams showed a site plan of the proposed development and explained it in detail . Resident on Lot 441 , west of Farmington Road: I am very disappointed with this development company. We were contacted in no way by the company to let us know this is coming about. We feel this next to a resi- dential neighborhood would destroy the neighborhood and plummet the market values. There simply is no room here for this kind of develop- ment. Several of these homes are not yet occupied and those people will not be aware of this. That leaves only a few of us to defend our properties. I feel it is a gross misuse of the property and there would be the destruction of property values that would ensue because of this development. We were not approached by the developer at all about this development. We are definitely opposed to this. We were told by someone in the Planning office that there would be no change of any kind in this area. Mr. Morrow: Some developers do approach residents but not all . What does the Master Plan call for in this area? ‘0,0, Mr. Nagy: It calls for medium density residential . 9558 Mr. Soranno: How do you feel about multi-family as opposed to P.S. ? z Lot 441 resident: Any residential use is appropriate, but I would not be in favor of apartment buildings. It would increase the property values of that property and I find that less objectionable to R-7 but I 'm not in favor of that. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-1-1-1 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith and seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, it was RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 18, 1986 on Petition 86-1-1-1 by Westin Development Company to rezone property located on the west side of Farmington Road, south of Eight Mile Road in Section 4 from RUFA to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-1-1-1 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning is consistent with the developing character of the area. (2) The proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding development in the area. (3) The proposed zoning district will provide for uses that are compatible with the single family residential uses abutting ILon the south and will end commercial development along Farmington Road. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Smith, Vyhnalek, Kluver, Naidow NAYS: Hildebrandt, Soranno, Duggan, Morrow ABSENT: Sobolewski Mr. Morrow, declared the resolution is not adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Duggan and seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt, it was #2-36-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 18, 1986 on Petition 86-1-1-1 by Westin Development Company to rezone property located on the west side of Farmington Road, south of Eight Mile Road in Section 4 from RUFA to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-1-1-1 be denied for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Plan recommendation of medium density land use for the subject area. (2) The proposed change of zoning would represent a further intrusion of non-residential zoning into a residential area. \roo' (3) The proposed change of zoning would be detrimental to the adjacent residential uses in the area. 9559 FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance ILwith the provisions of Section 23.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Duggan, Hildebrandt, Soranno, Smith, Morrow NAYS: Kluver, Vyhnalek, Naidow ABSENT: Sobolewski Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-1-1-2 by Timothy Liang for Mayflower Development, Inc. , to rezone property located on the east side of Stark Road, south of Plymouth Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33 from R-1A to C-2. Mr. Nagy: A letter from the Engineering Division notes that Stark Road has not been dedicated to its fullest extent of 43' adjacent to the parcel in question, and in addition, that office has not reviewed any site plans connected with the proposal as they relate to storm drainage for the site. There is also a letter in the file from Saburo Kunimatsu asking that the Commission deny approval of this petition. Gerhard Becker, 34361 Parkdale: I am against the zoning change. There is a single family residence on this lot. It is heavily treed and provides some privacy from traffic on Plymouth Road. I don't know what's going IL in there but I have several concerns. Crime in the area is one. Mr. Duggan says there is none but last year we had several break-ins. The petitioner was not present. Mr. Nagy: The application indicates that Mayflower Development Company is the petitioner and owner. They give their address as 33897 Five Mile Road. Mayflower Development Company proposed the rezoning on Ann Arbor Road and Newburgh. Mr. Smith: Does this have anything to do with a total development and upgrading of the Stark and Plymouth Road area? Have they indicated anything like that? Mr. Nagy: The site plan shows the total redevelopment of the subject property both with regard to the existing and proposed commercial zoning which would be affected by this development proposal . Mr. Smith: With that answer, I think the petitioner should be present. I can't vote without him being present to let us know what his plans are. Mr. Becker: There is a shopping center up and down the road across from the Ford Transmission Plant, and with the restaurants we already have, the commercial stress along the street will be increased. Edward Marzee, 34397 Parkdale: We have Volkswagen on the corner and on the other side of Plymouth Action Olds. If there is going to a project here, there koe will be heavier traffic on Parkdale. The Police are always sitting on the corner watching the traffic. I oppose this rezoning. Arthur Trost: I can enlighten you on what is going to happen in this area. The 9560 developer is Mayflower Development Company and what they propose on doing is acquiring additional property, taking a building down and putting up a shopping center. A total of about 28 stores. On the southeast corner there will be a parking lot and landscaping. They want to purchase all this property. Guy Williams, 11051 Stark Road: There is a lot of traffic in this area plus there are back lights that light up the whole area. I am opposed to the petition. Cloverdale Dairy owner: My wife owns Cloverdale. Can any decision be made on this without the petitioner being present? I have a problem with a person wanting to develop such a large area and him not being present. 1 can't say that I am for or against it because I don't know what's going on, and I think it 's ridiculous that he is not present. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-1-1-2 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Smith and unanimously adopted, it was #2-37-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 18, 1986 on Petition 86-1-1-2 by Timothy Liang for Mayflower Development, Inc. , to rezone property located on the east side of Stark Road, south of Plymouth Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33 from R-1A to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 86-1-1-2 until the study meeting of February 25, 1986. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-1-1-3 by Quakertown Ltd. Partnership to rezone property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between Haggerty and Quakertown Lane in Section 18 from C-2 to P.S. Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from the Engineering Division indicates that that office has no objections to this proposal from an engineering standpoint. Also, this petitioner will not be present tonight. They have indicated that they have a commitment elsewhere. Mr. Morrow: Their office building has already been approved and this is a request that is part of the prior proposal to eliminate the commercial zoning. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this petition and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-1-1-3 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Hildebrandt, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, it was #2-38-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 18, 1986 on Petition 86-1-1-3 by Quakertown Ltd. Partnership to rezone property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between Haggerty Road and Quakertown Lane in Section 18 from C-2 to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-1-1-3 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning will provide for a zoning 9561 district that is consistent with the proposed office use of the subject property. (2) The proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding zoning in the area. (3) The proposed change of zoning is consistent with the develop- ing character of the surrounding area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 85-9-2-40 by John Gargaro requesting waiver use approval to locate a general use office building on the north side of Schoolcraft, west of Newburgh Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 19. Mr. Vyhnalek: What are you thinking about putting in for general office? John Gargaro, 17523 Edgewood: To make this project viable, general office is more in line. We feel it is a less intense use than medical . We are now trying to get computer companies, insurance uses. . . We have modified our elevation on the building and we have eliminated the overhang. Mr. Nagy: Since the site plan was approved, Mr. Gargaro has been trying to decide if he should change the elevation. If there is a change, he will have to have it officially sanctioned by the Planning Com- mission and he will have to do it with this petition. If the Com- mission wants to approve this change, in the resolution you can include wording to modify the former site plan. Mr. Morrow: Have you seen these plans? Mr. Nagy: Yes. They have never been officially presented to us. I have looked at the rendering and I think it will be a very professional and contemporary looking building and I have no problem with approving them. It is an architectural change. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 85-9-2-40 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mr. Smith and unanimously adopted, it was #2-39-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 18, 1986 on Petition 85-9-2-40 by John Gargaro requesting waiver use approval to locate a general use office building on the north side of Schoolcraft, west of Newburgh Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 19, the City Plan- ning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-9-2-40 be approved subject to adherence to Revised Building Elevation Plan #4173, A-3, dated 2/3/86, prepared by Thomas W. Kurmas & Associates, 9562 and subject to compliance with the previously approved Site Plan 1160 conditions as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution #10-237-85, and Council Resolution #44-86 for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use complies in every respect with the waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 9.03 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. (2) The subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. (3) The proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 85-12-2-48 by Home & Hospital , Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDM License within a drug store located in the Civic Center Plaza on the south side of Five Mile Road, west of Farmington Road in Section 21 . Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from the Engineering Division states that they have no objections to the petition from an engineering standpoint. Larry Leyeski , Secretary of. Home & Hospital , was present and read a prepared statement for the record which is herein incorporated in its entirety and identified as Statement A. Mr. Morrow: We have a technical problem with your request. Mr. Leyeski : I was not aware of that. Mr. Morrow: By Ordinance, an SDM License has to be farther than 500' from another SDM License. We have two such licensed establishments in the area. Mr. Leyeski : With the nature of our business, that type of convenience is almost necessary to our survival . Mr. Morrow: We have nothing against the SDM License but we are precluded from approving it. The City Council has the power to waive that provision of the Ordinance. The Planning Commission does not. Mr. Soave: I am the owner of the complex and if you measure from the front door to the next door, you have 650' . Mr. Nagy: We don't measure the same way as the Liquor Control Commission. We figure from the nearest point of the building to building. The Ordinance has this criteria. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, 9563 Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 85-12-2-48 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. Soranno and unanimously adopted, it was #2-40-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 18, 1986 on Petition 85-12-2-48 by Home & Hospital , Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDM License within a drug store located in the Civic Center Plaza on the south side of Five Mile Road, west of Farmington Road in Section 21 , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-12-2-48 be denied for the following reasons: (1 ) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use is in compliance with the specific and general standards and requirements set forth in Section 11 .03 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordi- nance #543. (2) The proposed use is in violation of Section 11 .03(r) (1) of the Zoning Ordinance which requires a 500' separation between an existing SDM Licensed facility and a proposed SDM Licensed facility. (3) The proposed use is contrary to the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance which, among other things, is to promote and encourage a balanced and appropriate mix of uses and not over-saturate an area [10with similar type uses as is being proposed. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-1-2-1 by Simoni Associates, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to operate a quick oil change business within a building proposed to be located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Raleigh and Levan in Section 32. Mr. Nagy: The Engineering Division, in a letter dated 1/29/86, indicates that there are no City maintained storm sewers or sanitary sewers readily available to service the site. These utilities are generally available in Levan Road located to the east of the subject site. Ronald Smith, representing Simoni Associates, Inc. : I have agreed to the change in the sign. I spoke with Mr. MacDonald and he indicated the size and setback met with the Ordinance and we have no objection. There has been a landscape plan submitted but the revised parking is not shown on it. I am currently trying to get information from the State High- way Department and they verbally have said we can tap into the storm sewer on Plymouth Road. I have a verbal agreement to use the easement from the Parkside Credit Union for the sewer there. to Mr. Shane presented and explained the revised Site Plan to the Commission and audience. Mr. Vyhnalek: I feel this will improve the property with the building and the landscaping. 9564 Mr. Soranno: There will be no overnight parking? Mr. Smith: Our hours are until about 7:00 p.m. It is not our intention to have parking there at all . There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-1-2-1 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Duggan and unanimously adopted, it was #2-41-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 18, 1986 on Petition 86-1-2-1 by Simoni Associates, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to operate a quick oil change business within a building proposed to be located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Raleigh and Levan in Section 32, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that . Petition 86-1-2-1 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that the Site Plan marked 10F1 , revised 2/17/$6, prepared by Nowak & Fraus, Engineers, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that the Building Elevation Plan dated 1/15/86, prepared by Nowak & Fraus, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (3) that the Landscape Plan prepared by Nowak & Fraus, Engineer, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to and shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter 1[0 permanently maintained in a healthy condition; (4) that the petitioner shall install an underground sprinkler system as part of the landscaping work required; and (5) that the proposed ground sign shall be limited in height to six feet (6') and shall not exceed forty-eight feet ' (48') in sign area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-1-2-2 by Nazar and Emod Mesi requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDM License within an existing party store located on the northeast corner of Joy Road and Cardwell Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 36. Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from the Engineering Division states that there appears to be no engineering problems connected with this proposal . Michael Demchak, Attorney, Cummings, McClorey, Davis & Ocho, 33900 Schoolcraft, was present representing the petitioner. Mr. Demchak: The prior operator had a license and there is no record of residents having problems, and there is no over-saturation of licenses in the area. 9565 Mr. Kluver: Did the previous owner of the party store sell that license to ILthe petitioner? Mr. Demchak: No, he did not- want to sell it. Mr. Smith: Do you have at the present time any other party stores? Mr. Mesi : Yes, one at Joy and Evergreen and one at Joy and Fielding. Mike Karim, owner of the Wine Gallery, 28292 Joy Road: We take exception to this license because the original party store closed in June and this has been open for one month. There is a heavy over-useage of SDM Licenses in the areawiththe Mid Joy, Mom's, Wine Gallery, and there is the party store in Redford with and SDD, SDM and Lottery. In Westland there is a party store with and SDD, SDM and Lottery. There are seven SDM Licenses within a one mile strip. It is up to the Planning Commission to weigh the high concentration of liquor lic- enses.- You know better the population and concentrations of your City. There will be hardships on the other businesses in the area which have been in business for a long time. Spread the wealth among the City rather than all in one area. Mr. Romain, former owner of the Romain Party Store: I have the license in escrow and have never been contacted regarding selling my license. Mr. Morrow: If you were contacted, would you have sold it? Mr. Romain:1[: Yes. Mr. Demchak: That store was there for a number of years. He wants to continue the prior establishment. It is not a new use. Mr. Duggan: How can you account for the fact that you said you attempted to buy the license but he says he was never contacted. Mr. Morrow: It is our obligation to ascertain that we do not have an over-saturation of a use in a particular area. Mr. Karim: Once the license is established, it can be used at the discretion of the community. Once it is taken out of circulation, it can be placed in another area. Mr. Soranno: If the former tenant is willing to transfer the license, can that still be done and thereby negate the need for this waiver use approval? Mr. Nagy: We would have to check it out because of the disruption of use. We would need to review it with the Law Department. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-1-2-2 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt and unanimously adopted, tof it was #2-42-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 18, 1986 on Petition 86-1-2-2 by Nazar and Emod Mesi requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDM License within an existing party store located 9566 on the northeast corner of Joy Road and Cardwell Avenue in the IL Southeast 1/4 of Section 36, the City Planning Commission does hereby deny Petition 86-1-2-2 for the following reasons: (1) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use is in compliance with the general waiver use standards set forth in Section 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. (2) The proposed use is contrary to the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance which, among other things, is to promote and encourage a balanced and appropriate mix of uses and not over- saturate an area with similar type uses as is being proposed. (3) The proposed use is incompatible with the surrounding uses of the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-1-2-3 by John Carney requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDM License within a building proposed to be constructed on the south side of Plymouth Road between Jarvis and Newburgh Road in the Southeast 1/4 of IL Section 30. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating there appears to be no engineering problems connected with this proposal . A letter from Ms. Shirley Kostoff dated 2/13/86 indicates that she has no objection to an SDM License at this location. There is a letter dated 2/14/86 from the Bartel family stating that it is their feeling that a pizzeria-deli which carried beer and wine would be a welcome addition to the neighborhood. A letter dated 2/17/86 from Dominic Saove states that he hopes for a favorable decision on this petition. There is also a letter in the file dated 2/18/86 from Debra Clark stating she is opposed to the granting of this petition. John Carney, 18515 Farmington Road, representing the owner, Albert Croletto: Mrs. Croletto is present in the audience. There are no SDM Licenses in the area and Mrs. Croletto is experienced in the business. In order to give her the same opportunity we are requesting the license. It will not in any way harm anyone and it is an adjunct to a primarily food establishment, and according to the Ordinance at least one-half of the floor area must be devoted to a dining or eating area. Mr. Morrow: Can we get some insight as to how much space can be allotted to the SDM? IL Mr. Nagy: The petitioner has revised the site plan. It clearly indicates that it is a pizza and a deli . Michael Siggia, owner of the property: In the coolers would be cold, soft drinks and maybe dairy products. There would be one shelf of wine and beverages. There will be a waiting room for pizza. 9567 Mr. Siggia submitted a site plan to the Commission. Mr. Morrow: We appreciate your submitting the plans. The Zoning Board of Appeals has recommended that the use of a party store would not be in keeping with the area. Daniel Jablonski , 11645 Jarvis: Just what is this place going to be? A carry-out, a deli or a party store? Mr. Siggia: It is all three of those things. Pizza is the main thing. The beer, wine and pop is an added thing. Mr. Morrow: A carry-out food establish that sells beer and pop. What will the hours be? Mr. Carney: They will be open from about 11 :00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. On week-ends maybe a little bit later but never in the mornings. Dorothy Bailey, 11750 Jarvis: I have lived here for 35 years. I oppose the approval of this. Either the ingress or egress will be on Jarvis. This is a very dangerous intersection. We are not talking about a professional situation -- not an 8 to 5 operation -- we are talking about an 11 to 11 situation which will increase the traffic. I find it most dis- turbing that when this petition came up the first time, the builders did not know or did not reveal what this building would be used for. It was for a party store and this is a complete surprise to me that 1[0 it is a pizza place. The street is a residential street, not a com- mercial street. Why are we using a residentail street for a commercial situation? Mr. Vyhnalek: Do you plan on exiting on Jarvis? Mr. Siggia: Only in the part that is zoned commercial . Martha Deiakow, 11827 Jarvis: I am concerned about the safety factor on the street. This is our kids' bus stop and it also dead-ends at Hines Park. If this is a beer and wine store, I can't imagine the traffic up and down the street. We have no sidewalk and have to use the grass. All the residents in the area are opposed to this, and don't need it. If the people in the factory are working, why do they need beer and wine? Mr. Nagy: The question is not whether it should be a deli or convenience store. That is a matter of right. We are here because of the license. They could have a party store there. Whether or not they can have a beer and wine sales in conjunction with the use is the matter before the Commission. Cindy Cashmore, 11668 Jarvis: My husband on his way to work has seen evidence of alcohol in the park. There is noise and we acknowledge that but substance abuse is what we are concerned about. 110 Carol Pankow, 11716 Jarvis: We moved there with our two children six years ago because it is a quiet neighborhood. What is our guarantee if we approve this 9568 with the license? At the last meeting, we were under the assumption that this would be a nice medical use. We don't need a party store here. IL Mr. Vyhnalek: Why would the people from the factory go down Jarvis when it is a dead-end? Mr. Pankow: Because they only see the park there. They don't know it is a dead-end until they go down it and then they have to turn around. Edwin Koziol , 11790 Jarvis: At first there was going to be four doors in this build- ing but they didn't know what it was going to be. Ten of the resi- dents on Jarvis are here tonight. I was told they could cut the building in half and have two businesses. The residents on Jarvis do not want liquor on Jarvis. Charles Wheeler, 11878 Jarvis: My property abuts this site. There will be noise up until 2:00 a.m. , cars coming in and out, and lights shining. Cars will be turning around. There is not enough parking to begin with. I am against any SDM License. It will lower the property value of my property, too. George Bailey, 11750 Jarvis: I haven't seen a print showing where the entrance will be. Two entrances on Jarvis and one on Plymouth -- lam totally against this. I 've been 34 years on this street. Greg Hrbal , 11731 Jarvis: Where are they going with the pizza they pick up here? They will be coming down our street and I think that is where they will park while they eat their pizza and drink their beer and wine. I don't want that on the street. 10 Ms. Pankow: I agree with this gentleman. They come down our street all summer long looking for the park. We see them go down there at night and park. Valerie White, 11783 Jarvis: I would like to talk about the kind of clientele this place will draw. There is not a lot of residents to draw from here so it has to be from the facto ryacross the road. In the area where we live, you are looking at the residents here so we know the draw will not be from residents. Marshall Anderson, 11820 Jarvis: How many beer stores are you going to allow in Livonia? They are all over this area. Haven't we got enough of them now? I pick up garbage all the time from people throwing their trash around. Roger Olson, 11740 Alois: I am opposed to the petition. Mrs. Bailey: I humbly ask you to consider the egress and ingress to Jarvis Street. That is a very dangerous corner. Mrs. Anderson, 11820 Jarvis: If they put a building up and there is not enough parking, they will have to park on the street. toThere was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-1-2-3 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith and seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, it was 9569 #2-43-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 18, 1986 on Petition 86-1-2-3 by John Carney requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDM License within a building proposed to be constructed on the south side of Plymouth Road between Jarvis and Newburgh Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 30, the City Planning Commission does hereby deny Petition 86-1-2-3 for the following reasons: (1) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use is in compliance with the general waiver use standards set forth in Section 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. (2) The subject site does not have the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. (3) The proposed use is incompatible with the surrounding uses of the area, FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Smith, Kluver, Hildebrandt, Soranno, Duggan, Naidow, Morrow NAYS: Vyhnalek ABSENT: Sobolewski Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. IL On a motion duly made by Mr. Duggan, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, it was #2-44-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January 21 , 1986 on Petition 85-12-1-37 by Quakertown Ltd. Partnership to rezone property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between Haggerty and Quakertown Lane in Section 18 from P.S. to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-12-1-37 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. (2) The proposed zoning is in keeping with the petitioner's overall plan for development of this area. (3) The proposed zoning is supported by the Future Land Use Plan recommendation for this general area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. ILMr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs, Hildebrandt, seconded by Mr. Duggan and unanimously adopted, it was #2-45-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543, the 9 570 City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-2-8-6 by National Satellite Corporation requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance 1[0 #543 submitted in connection with a proposal to erect two satellite dish antennas at the Quality Inn Motel located on the south side of Six Mile Road between 1-275 and S. Laurel Park Drive in Section 18 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan #84-05, Sheet A-13, dated 2/18/86, prepared by Kamp-DiComo Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (2) that the landscaping shown on Site Plan #84-05, Sheet A-13, dated 2/18/86, prepared by Kamp-DiComo Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to and all landscape materials shown on the approval plan shall be installed on the site prior to June 1 , 1986. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mr. Smith and unanimously adopted, it was #2-46-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Permit Application by Dalley Carpet, Inc. , requesting 1[0 to erect a wall sign on a building located at 33326 Seven Mile Road be approved subject to the following condition: (1 ) that the Sign Plan for Dalley Carpet which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted, it was #2-47-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Permit Application by Burghardt 's Bakery requesting to erect an awning with signage, and a wall sign on a building located at 33009 Seven Mile Road be approved only to permit the erection of the awning with signage on the building, and that the request to erect a wall sign on the building be denied; approval of the awning with signage being subject to the following conditions: (1) that the awning sign as shown on the Plan prepared by Marygrove Awning Company which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (2) that the petitioner shall provide shutters for the two upper level windows as per his agreement to enhance the appearance of the building. EWMr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Hildebrandt, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted, it was 9 571 #2-48-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Permit Application by Scott Colburn's Saddlery request- ing to erect a ground sign on property located at 20411 Farmington Road be approved subject to the following condition: 1[0 (1) that the low-profile ground Sign Plan for Scott Colburn's Saddlery, prepared by Rob Boggs/Wooden Graphics, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Naidow and seconded by Mr. Duggan, it was #2-49-86 RESOLVED that the minutes of the 510th Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on February 4, 1986 are approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Duggan, Smith, Kluver, Soranno, Vyhnalek, Naidow, Morrow NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Hildebrandt ABSENT: Sobolewski Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ILOn a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 511th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on February 18, 1986, was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. CITY P ANNING COMMISSION t9-. -Va.„*.iee,---e_cr-- Donna J. Naidow, Secretary ATTEST: CiZ... ?"\ti--121\ACT R. Lee Morrow, Chairman ac