Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1986-07-22 9754 1[40 MINUTES OF THE 520th REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, July 22, 1986, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 520th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Halll , 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. C. Russ Smith, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present: C. Russ Smith Jeanne Hildebrandt Donald Vyhnalek Donna J. Naidow Sue Sobolewski Members absent: *Michael Soranno **Herman Kluver ***R. Lee Morrow Michael Duggan Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director; and Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV, were also present. Mr. Smith informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request or a subdivision, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and decide the 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. The Commission holds the only public hearing Lquestion. on a preliminary plat. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 86-5-1-21 by David W. Schostak for Newburgh/Six Mile Limited Partnership request- ing to rezone property located on the northwest corner of Six Mile and Newburgh Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7, from C-2 to C-4II, C-4 and P.O. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating that since the sanitary sewer systems for the site were originally designed on the basis of the 54 acres being developed as C-2 zoning, they will require additional information from the petitioner relative to the projected sanitary sewer flows for the project based on the revised zoning. Also, it stated that the Engineering office has reviewed the additional drive approach to Newburgh Road along with an associated one-way crossover of the island on Newburgh Road and have no objections to that proposal. Michael Polsinelli, 14416 Yale, representing the petitioner: There is one concern that came to our attention subsequent to filing the petition and that is that the legal descriptions need to be adjusted to reflect a minor change which reduces the site approximately 34' in depth in the C-4 area. '4r. Nagy: As long as it is a reduction in area, not an expansion, there is no problem. 9705 George Shurin, 37283 Bennet: Back in 1974-75, we were concerned with high rises. I[; C-4II can go up to eight stories. With Vargo and Bennett being so close, we feel it would be a detriment because of the cost we have in our homes. When this was discussed back then, it was a bitter fight and we are still against the high rises. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-5-1-21 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski and unanimously adopted, it was #7-190-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 22, 1986 on Petition 86-5-1-21 by David W. Schostak for Newburgh/Six Mile Limited Partnership requesting to rezone property located on the northwest corner of Six Mile and Newburgh Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7, from C-2 to C-4II, C-4 and P.0, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-5-1-21, as amended, be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed changes of zoning will provide zoning districts that will permit the various uses proposed for the project area. (2) The proposed changes of zoning will remove the non-conforming status of the buildings proposed and/or under construction for the project area. 140 (3) The proposed changes of zoning are compatible to and in harmony with the surrouning zoning in the 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. Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. *Mr. Soranno entered the meeting at 7:12 p.m. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-6-1-24 by Dora Sabatini requesting to rezone property located on the west side of Shadyside, north of Seven Mile Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3, from R-3A to C-2. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating they have no objection to this petition. Also, a letter has been received from the petitioner requesting to amend the request to a parking classification in lieu of C-2. Fred Armour, 27251 Joy Road, Dearborn Heights, representing the petitioner: The petitioner owns 77' on the northwest corner of Seven Mile and Shadyside. There is a vacant alley directly behind that property, then this one vacant lot. We wish to rezone to park- ing so she may develop the 77' on that corner. 9706 IcornMr. Vyhnalek: She is going to come back and want to put a building on that 4 er? Mr. Armour: Yes, about 2,500 square feet. There will be some parking in front but not too much. There will be parking in back. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-6-1-24 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski, seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt and unanimously adopted, it was #7-191-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 22, 1986 on Petition 86-6-1-24 by Dora Sabatini requesting to rezone property located on the west side of Shadyside, north of Seven Mile Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3 from R-3A to P, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-5-1-24 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning will provide an area for offstreet parking to serve adjacent commercial uses. (2) The proposed change of zoning will provide a transition or buffer zone between commercial uses and residential uses in the area. li; (3) The proposed change of zoning will provide for a use on a lot which is too narrow to comply with the existing residential zoning regulations. 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. Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ** Mr. Kluver entered the meeting at 7:20 p.m. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-6-1-25 by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Section 23.01(b) to rezone property located on the south side of Schoolcraft Road (I-96), west of Merriman Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 27 from C-3 to M-2. Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from the Engineering Division indicates they have no objection to this proposal. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-6-1-25 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno and seconded by Mrs.Hildebrandt, it was 10 it was W7-192-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 22 1986 on Petition 86-6-1-25 by the City Planning Commission pursuant 9707 to Section 23.01 of Zoning Ordinance #543 to rezone property located on the south side of Schoolcraft Road (I-96), west of Merriman Road IL in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 27 from C-3 to M-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-6-1-25 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning will provide an industrial classi- fication on the subject property so as to allow its use as part of the proposed S.I.J.L. Industrial Subdivision. (2) The proposed change of zoning will be compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding zoning in the 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. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Soranno, Hildebrandt, Vyhnalek, Sobolewski, Naidow, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Kluver ABSENT: Morrow, Duggan Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. IMrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-6-1-26 by Ved P. Kapila requesting to rezone property located north of Five Mile. Road, east of Middlebelt Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13 from R-7 and P to C-2. Mr. Nagy: The Engineering Division states in a letter to the Commission that they have no objection to this proposal. We have received an amended legal description which would extend the commercial zone into the parking zone by 42' . The parking zone would extend into the residential zone by a distance of 4' . Ved Kapila, 31333 Thirteen Mile Road, Farmington Hills: We revised the plan and the legal description according to the Commission's wishes. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-6-1-26 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Hildebrandt, seconded by Mr. Soranno and unanimously adopted, it was #7-193-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 22 1986 on Petition 86-6-1-26 by Ved P. Kapila requesting to rezone property located north of Five Mile Road, east of Middlebelt Road in IL the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13 from R-7 and P to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-6-1-26 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed changes of zoning will provide for additional development of the subject lands. 9708 11:0 (2) The existing zoning is too shallow to permit additional development absent action by the Zoning Board of Appeals. 4 (3) The proposed changes of zoning are compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding zoning in the 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 Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-5-2-23 by Angelo Barile requesting waiver use approval to construct a restaurant on the north side of Plymouth Road between Merriman and Farmington Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 27. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division recommending that the site plan for this project be reviewed by the Michigan Department of Transportation relative to the drive approaches and their proximity at the Arden and Melrose inter- sections. There is also a letter from Alice E. Dunlevy stating her objection to the granting of this petition and her feeling that another restaurant in this area is not needed. 11 ,10 Ed Glowacki, representing the petitioner: The waiver use is for a restaurant to seat about 60 people. He is not requesting a liquor license. It will be a pizza restaurant. The petitioner has a history where he has been a restauranteur for about twenty-five years in Dearborn. Mr. Soranno: Where is your restaurant in Dearborn? Mr. Barile: It is not actually a restaurant. It is the Dearborn Italian Bakery near Ford Road. Mr. Vyhnalek: Why a restaurant in this location? We were saturated with restaurants on Plymouth Road. Do you own this property? Mr. Barile: Yes. Mr. Vyhnalek: How long have you owned it? Mr. Barile: About three months. Mr. Glowacki: It is my understanding that restaurant uses have been turned down and approved at different times by the City Council and Planning Commission at this location. Mr. Vyhnalek:Mr. Barile: The piece to the east and north -- is that going to be vacant? At the present time, yes. 9709 IL Mr. Vyhnalek: Would you consider the removal of the parking on the west side-- the parallel parking? I don't like the parallel parking by the front door. Builder, representing the petitioner: It could be eliminated. We have 59 and only 43 are required. We could eliminate the parallel parking. Mr. Glowacki: If that is the Commission's request, we will eliminate the parallel parking. Mr. Vyhnalek: Also, the landscaping is not as required. Mr. Glowacki: We would eliminate the parallel parking and increase the land- scaping. We would not be opposed to getting back to Mr. Nagy with a revised plan and also to get the approval of the Michigan Department of Transportation. Mrs. Sobolewski: Is this your first attempt at a restaurant? Mr. Barile: Yes, a sit-down restaurant but I have been in the bakery business for a long time. Mrs. Sobolewski: Do you plan to be open for lunch or just evenings? Mr. Barile:1[ For lunch and until about 9:00 p.m. l Mrs. Sobolewski: Could I have some clarification on the Engineering Department's letter? Mr. Nagy: They would rather have driveways line up with the streets on Plymouth Road, but Plymouth Road is under the jurisdiction of the Michigan State Highway Department and not the City's. Mr. Glowacki: What Mr. Barile is putting in here will not be a problem. Bruno Petrucci, 35202 Vargo: Mr. Barile is very well respected in the City of Dear- born and is an honest man and an asset to the City. I think he should be granted this because it wouldn't be just another restaurant in Livonia, it will be an asset to the City. Mrs. Barile: Mr. Barile's background assures that he will be an asset to the community. He has been a good citizen and a good neighbor by sponsoring organizations and making other contributions. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-5-2-23 closed. On a motion duly made by Soranno and seconded by Mr. Kluver, it was RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 22, 1986 on Petition 86-5-2-23 by Angelo Barile requesting waiver use t#7-194-86 approval to construct a restaurant on the north side of Plymouth 9710 Road between Merriman and Farmington Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 27, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to City Council that Petition 86-5-2-23 be denied for the following reasons: 4 (1) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use is in compliance with all of the specific and general waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. (2) The proposal is in violation of Section 11.03(c)(1)c. and 19.06(j) of Zoning Ordinance #543 in that the proposed off- street parking spaces are deficient in width and the area proposed to be landscaped is less than 15% of the total area of the lot or parcel exclusive of public right-Of-way as shown on the Master Thoroughfare Plan. (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 with similar type uses as is being pro- posed. (4) The proposed use would be detrimental to and incompatible with the adjoining 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. I:a roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Soranno, Kluver, Hildebrandt, Sobolewski, Naidow, Smith NAYS: Vyhnalek ABSENT: Morrow, Duggan Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-6-2-24 by Fr. Alex J. Brunett requesting waiver use approval to construct a church building on the east side of Farmington Road, north of Six Mile Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 10. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating they have no objections to this proposal. A letter has been submitted from the Burton Hollow Woods Civic Assoc- iation asking that this petition not be approved this evening because plans have not been made available to the public re- garding this development proposal and it is their feeling that the City Planning Commission has not been given adequate time by the architect to evaluate his plans. The letter states that they question whether Livonia law has been met by not having the complete petition available for public examination. 9711 IL:0 Kenneth Hale, Attorney representing St. Aidan Church: We have brought a model this evening and will be able to address any concerns of the Civic Association tonight. Perhaps we can avoid the tabling suggestion because there is a very tight timetable to begin con- struction during the building season. Fr. Brunett, 17000 Farmington Road: I would like to indicate to all of you that the original plan for this property was submitted in 1973. There were 350 families in this parish in 1970; now there 1,000. We have taken great care in developing this land. It is well land- scaped and well developed. The only possible people that might be effected in any way would be the top four houses. I think it is clear that we have taken into consideration all of the needs of those people. All the other land is already developed. There will be a buffer zone there and we don't intend to take out any trees. Rex Reittenbach, Architect, 933 Howard, Saginaw, was present and explained the model and site plan to the members of the Commission and audience. Mr. Vyhnalek: What is the height of the building? Mr. Reittenbach: 45' from the ground to the roof. The tower is 115' . ' Mr. Hale:110 It will remain in tact. Regarding the letter from the Civic Association, we would be delighted to meet with any of the neighbors and deal with their concerns. There will be no impact on the neighbors from the lights. Mr. Vyhnalek; I thought you were going to contact the neighbors on the east to discuss this. Fr. Brunett: I don't think the letter says the neighbors. I think it says the civic association. I have talked with the people in the area except the two who just moved in. The President of the Civic Association was at a meeting with us. Mrs. Sobolewski: Is there any mention of a sign of any kind: Fr. Brunett: There will be a sign that says St. Aidan's. The sign we have now is too small. Mr. Smith: You will have to come back to the Commission with the sign. Fr. Brunett: Yes, of course. Mrs. Naidow: What are the beams on the outside made of? Mr. Reittenbach: Steel beams covered with a protective material, 12" wide and 4' deep. ,t Mrs. Naidow: Will there be protection to keep children from climbing up on the roof? 9712 Mr. Reittenbach: Yes, we are working on a protective device. Mr. Kluver: Where will the transformer be located and will the pad be outside? Mr. Reittenbach: The transformer is outside. The heating units inside in a base- ment. Jim McConnell, 17761 Bell Creek Lane: I have several concerns. The people in the neighborhood have tried to get more information. This was not seen by any of us. It would have been nice to have had a meet- ing. We appreciate that Fr. Brunett said they will not be taking any trees, however, the Architect in his presentation, said the Church is going 50' into the woods. Fr. Brunett: I said we are not taking the woods; we are taking only the trees that need to be taken for construction. Mr. McConnell: Another concern is the height of the tower. My major concern is that we would like to sit down and discuss the plans with them. Mr. Smith: Mr. Hale has stated that he will be happy to meet with the neighbors between the hearing by the Commission and the Council. 110 Richard Boyd, 17941 Bell Creek: I live behind the Church. I disagree with some of the ways this has been handled. Fr. Brunett assured me a while back that there would be no trees removed. I went to the Planning Commission to get plans so I could be a little more informed. Those plans have not been available and I get the feeling that this is a rush program but what is the hurry? I believe Fr. Brunett stated he started this in 1972. All of a sudden there is a big hurry to get it built this fall. I think a good neighbor would take time to discuss it with other neigh- bors. After going to the City and calling many times, it was about four weeks ago that I was able to obtain one drawing which the City told me was incomplete. Finally, plans were just turned in today and I was able to get one at noon today. To build a building like that, plans have to be made far in advance. I made some conclusions based on a very short period of time without benefit of professional people as the petitioner has. The Architect said the building is 45' in the center. According to the Ordinance, there is to be no building higher than 35' in this zoning but this is 45' without the tower. The circle surrounding the Church is about the size of a football field, nine acres. This is what we have been asking for -- some time to study the plans and to voice our opinions. They don't even have the location of the transformer. From a property value standpoint, it makes a lot of difference about the trans- former, the trees, the layout and the view. Driving down Farm- ington Road I am sure seeing the highest cross in Livonia is very dramatic but, again, it will effect the property values. In order to put that roof in like that, a considerable amount of 4 trees would have to be taken out. The drawing I have been wait- 9713 ing for is still not available -- the one showing the circum- 1[ ference. I think if he can't get all his plans in order until just before the public hearing that they are trying to rush this thing through too fast. I think some things have to be worked out. They have to have riggers in there and riggers need a lot of room and it can't be done without the loss of additional trees. That is a two-acre roof on a building that probably is about an acre. I guess I would like to make this a proposal to the Church that we have a stake of evergreens in back of the Church to soften the looks of the Church from behind. I would not really like a wall there to avoid people from walking to the Church through my property. I don't object to the parishioners walking through my property to the Church but I object to the size of the development. Ward Church parishioners use Bell Creek and other streets for parking. Before we were talking about a concentration of restaurants; now we have a concentration of churches. Another concern is what are they going to do with the existing building. It is important what the building will be used for because that again will effect property values. I am really concerned about the parking sit- uation and I would really like to work something out. Mr. Smith: I would like to assure you that Mr. Nagy states that the plans are in order. Mr. Nagy: Churches are exempt from the height limitation. Mr. Vyhnalek: Can you see the Church from where you live -- 250' away? $Mr. Reittenbach: 87' from the circle to the property line is correct. The amount of trees to be taken out for the building proper is within the 50' circle. The trees in the back will be allowed to grow within the circle. We know exactly how many trees have to come out. He is correct about the parking lot and some trees will have to be taken out but we have taken care of that with planting of new trees. The height of the tower is important to the length of the beams. They will be set with a crane with a 125' boom. David Wallace, President of the Burton Hollow Woods Civic Association, 17562 Bell Creek: We are very disappointed that we did not have a chance to get plans ahead of time. We had a meeting last night but it was a short meeting because we had no material. Our Civic Associa- tion is very active with 98% of the residents in membership. Our subdivision will be affected by this. I, as President of the Civic Association, was never contacted by the Church. I attended one early meeting and found out about it through a neighbor who is a member of the Church. We are trying to act as good neighbors. Member of St. Aidan's living on Edgewood: If you look at St. Aidan's now, and it has been there since 1960, it is well kept. When we built the kitchen in the back, we landscaped it. We do take into consideration the neighbors in the area. We were explicit with l 9714 10 the Architect that he doesn.t remove trees and, in fact, that he have the building blend in the wooded area. 'Mr. Boyd: I wonder if Fr. Brunett could consider a buffer back there. 4 Fr. Brunett: I don't think we would have any objection to that. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-6-2-24 closed. Mr. Soranno: I would like to confirm that the fellowship hall will not be used for other things, like weddings. Fr. Brunett: It will be used for parish functions only. Mr. Morrow: I would like the location of the transformer pad to be made a part of the Site Plan and Landscape Plan approval. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Hildebrandt, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it was #7-195-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 22, 1986 on Petition 86-6-2-24 by Fr. Alex J. Brunett requesting waiver use approval to construct a church building on the east side of Farmington Road, north of Six Mile Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 10, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-6-2-24 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that the Site Plan dated 7/9/86, prepared by Rex D. Reittenbach, Architect, and the Landscape Plan marked Sheet L-2 dated 7/9/86, prepared by Lester 0. Begick, Landscape Architect, which shall also include the location and landscaping of the transformer pad, which are hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that the landscaping shown on the approved Landscape Plans shall be installed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and shall thereafter be permanently maintained in a healthy condition; (3) that the Building Elevation Plans prepared by Rex D. Reittenbach, Architect, which are hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (4) that the Site Lighting Plan dated 7/9/86, prepared by Lester 0. Begick, Landscape Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; for the following reasons: 11, (1) The proposed use complies with all the specific and general waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 4.03 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. (2) The subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. 9715 (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. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-6-2-26 by Hart & Leidal Investment Company requesting waiver use approval for general office use for an office building located on the north side of Schoolcraft Service Drive between Berwick and Hubbard in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 22. Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from the Engineering Division indicates they have no objection to this petition. The petitioner nor a representative of the petitioner was present at the public hearing. Mr. Smith announced that this item would be heard later in the meeting in order to give the petitioner an opportunity to be present. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-6-2-27 by Ward Harriman requesting waiver use approval to build a facility 1[40 for automobile and light truck repair on the south side of Plymouth Road between Stark and Farmington Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division noting that Plymouth Road has not been dedicated to its fullest extend in accordance with the City's Master Thoroughfare Plan. Ward Harriman, 19075 Middlebelt: We made some changes in the site plan to eliminate some parking in the back and included some additional land- scaping on the west. We have indicated a monument sign in the the front. Mr. Harriman explained the revised site plan to the Commission in detail. Mr. Smith: How do you intend to enforce the no parking? Mr. Harriman: There won't be parking overnight because people work on cars and if they don't finish them, they will have to bring the car back. A transmission may have a problem because sometimes they can't get them done in a day and in those cases, they will be kept inside. Mr. Kluver; How many bays will there be? Mr. Harriman: Twenty-four maximum. 9716 rMrs. W. Drapinski, 34072 Parkdale: I was concerned about this development but now 110 that he has changed his plans I am not quite so concerned. The woods are why we bought the lot and having that 100' separation will help a lot. I do not want a wall. I am not too happy with car repair but with the 100' , that will really help. Patrick Barry, 34090 Parkdale: I want to see the changes in the plans that have been made regarding the woods and the parking in the back. Mr. Harriman showed the revised plan and explained the changes to Mr. Barry. Mr. Barry: I am not particularly enthused about this going in there and I don't think it goes with the area. If it does have to go in, I would want the woods left because that will be a noisy opera- tion. Dale Harmon, 34108 Parkdale: My concern also is the noise and the heavy concentra- tion of auto shops in one building. All the noise from this operation will come right in the back of our house. The trees are deciduous and without the leaves from the fall until spring will not offer a noise barrier at all. Mrs. Drapinski, 34072 Parkdale: I am concerned about seeing a junk yard from my property. 110 Dan Prevost, 34140 Parkdale: I am concerned about ther noise. Will those be open bays in the spring and fall? I don't like the lights that shine in my yard now. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-6-2-27 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver and seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, it was #7-196-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 22, 1986 on Petition 86-6-2-27 by Ward Harriman requesting waiver use approval to build a facility for automobile and light truck repair on the south side of Plymouth Road between Stark and Farmington Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33, the City Planning Com- mission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-6-2-27 be denied for the following reasons: (1) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use is in compliance with all of the general waiver use standards and requirements 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 i0 as is being proposed. 1 9717 110 (3) The proposed use would be detrimental to and incompatible with the adjoining uses of 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. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Vyhnalek, Hildebrandt, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow NAYS: Soranno, Smith ABSENT: Duggan Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-4-3-2 by Robert German requesting to vacate an easement located on the north side of Rayburn, east of Farmington Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15. Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from Engineering states they have no objections to the vacating, however, there appears to be Detroit Edison facilities within the easement areas. A letter from Detroit Edison states that they have objections to the proposed vacating since they have equipment involved, and if the reservation of an easement is not desired, they request that 4 the vacating of the subject easement be postponed until they have had the opportunity to arrange for relocation expenses with the property owner. Robert German, 31660 Bobrich, petitioner: I want the vacating so that I can build a building. Mr. Smith: Are you aware that Detroit Edison is objecting to this? Mr. Nagy: They don't object as long as the Edison equipment is relocated at the petitioner's expense. Mr. German: I do have drawings that show the relocation of the lines. If this is successful, I will be in contact with Detroit Edison about the relocation. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-4-3-2 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, it was #7-197-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 22, 1986 on Petition 86-4-3-2 by Robert German requesting to vacate an easement located on the north side of Rayburn, east of Farmington Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-4-3-2 be approved for the following reasons: 9718 (1) The vacating of the easement will facilitate the building of a proposed office building on the site. (2) The easement in its present location is no longer needed as this petitioner is prepared to relocate, at his own cost, the existing public utility and grant a new easement for its pro- tection. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances, as amended. Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-5-3-4 by the City Planning Commission to vacate a 5' wide utility easement located on Lot 113 of Alden Village Subdivision on the east side of Stark Road between Plymouth Road and the C&O Railway in the South- east 1/4 of Section 28. Mr. Nagy: Letters in the file from the Engineering Division and the Detroit Edison Company indicate there are no objections to the proposed vacating. 110 There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-5-3-4 closed. s On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski and unanimously adopted, it was #7-198-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 22, 1986 on Petition 86-5-3-4 by the City Planning Commission to vacate a 5' easement located on Lot 113 of Alden Village Subdivision on the east side of Stark Road between Plymouth Road and the C&O Railway in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 28, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-5-3-4 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The subject easement is no longer required to protect any public utilities or for any other public purpose. (2) The subject easement is located so as to be in the way of proposed construction. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances, as amended. Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 9719 Mr. Smith announced that the public hearing on Petition 86-6-2-26 would be continued ' at this time. Neither the petitioner nor a representative were present. David Raben, 32201 Scone: I am against this being anything but professional. We don't want general office. We have some problems with profes- sional there already and we don't want a mixed problem. Mr. Soranno: What kind of problems have you been having? Mr. Raben: If it is zoned to general he could put in a boiler room in or other types of offices that could possible bring a lot more people to the area. With professional, you are dealing with professional people and you just don't have a wide variety of unknown people coming into the area. General is a very broad category. Professional is specific. Mr. Smith: We have had very little problem with general office in Livonia. George Karageozian, 13929 Berwick: I agree with Mr. Raben. We have been here since 7:00 and they don't show up at this meeting or the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. 110.Ronald Phillipso, 13905 Berwick: This building is already under construction and I 0 would like to voice my displeasure at the notice I received which refers to a proposed building. What will happen to the land once the building is built -- with the house on the corner? Mr. Smith: That is a private residence. Mr. Nagy: The resident on the north owned the frontage on Schoolcraft and when he sold the property he retained an easement to Schoolcraft Road for access. The Planning Commission had previously approved the site plan for this professional office building. This petition was filed with the Commission on June 13th and there has been a lot of time to commence construction on this building and when the notice was prepared, we had not thought he had progressed so far as he has. Jack Gilbert, 13941 Berwick: I would like to propose that this be confined to a medical building and not a general office building. Nadine Bertini, 32223 Scone: I am not in favor of professional services because of the parking and the trash. Mrs. G. Karagiozian, 13929 Berwick: We do a lot of walking in this area and the landscaping and the area looks pretty bad around the buildings that are there. lipMr. Smith: We will request that the Planning staff contact the proper department regarding the looks of the area. I 9720 LThere was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-6-2-26 closed. 1110 i On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski and seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt, it was #7-199-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on July 22, 1986 on Petition 86-6-2-26 by Hart & Leidal Investment Company requesting waiver use approval for general office use for an office building located on the north side of Schoolcraft Service Drive between Berwick and Hubbard in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 22, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 86-6-2-26 until the Planning Commission Study Meeting to be conducted on July 29, 1986. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Sobolewski, Hildebrandt, Soranno, Morrow, Vyhnalek NAYS: Kluver, Naidow, Smith ABSENT: Duggan Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Smith: That concludes the public hearing portion of this meeting and we will now progress to the Regular Meeting. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek and seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt, it was 1[90 #7-200-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-3-8-12 by Sheldon Fuller requesting approval of all plans required by Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to renovate the exterior of an exist- restaurant on the south side of Plymouth Road, east of Middlebelt in Section 36 be approved subject to the following condition: (1) that the Building Remodeling Plan prepared by Thomas W. Kurmas & Associates for Dionysus Restaurant which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Vyhnalek, Hildebrandt, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Smith NAYS: Kluver ABSENT: Duggan Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolutioon adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it was #7-201-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-7-8-39 by Jude T. Fusco I 9721 ILAssociates, Inc. , requesting approval of all plans required by Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to construct an elderly retirement residence on the west side of Middlebelt between Bentley and Schoolcraft in Section 23 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that American imesnetcolend," e Development Plan, Sheet 1, dated 7/16/86, prepared by Ju . Fusco Associates, Inc. , which is herebyapproved shalladhered to; (2) that American e Exterior Elevation Plan, Sheet 5, dated6/23/896, prepby Jude T. Fusco Associates, Inc. , whichis hereby apprshall be adhered to;(3) that American Site Landscape Plan, Sheets 2 & 3, dated7/16/86, prepaby Jude T. Fusco Associates, Inc. , whichis hereby apprshall be adhered to; and(4) that the approlandscaping shall be installed on the siteprior to buildccupancy and thereafter permanently main- tained in a hecondition. Mr. Smith, Chairman, declaredmotion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. liOn a motion duly made by Mrs. ebrandt, seconded by Mr. Soranno and unanimously 4 adopted, it was ILO #7-202-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 86-7-8-40P by Lindhout Associates requesting approval of all plans required by Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to construct a branch bank on the south side of Plymouth Road between Denne and Hubbell in Section 35 subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan 8603, Sheet P-1, dated 7/8/86, prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Elevation Plan 8603, Sheet P-3, dated 7/8/86, prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (3) that Landscape Plan 8603, Sheets L-1 and L-2, dated 7/14/86, prepared by Lindhout Associates, Architects, which are hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (4) that the approved landscaping shall be installed on the site prior to building occupancy and thereafter maintained in a healthy condition, Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. IV1 9722 IL On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted, it was #7-203-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 86-7-8-41P by A. & J. O'Chel requesting approval of all plans required by Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a pro- posal to construct a studio/shop on the north side of Joy Road between Harrison and Hartel in Section 36 subject to the follow- ing conditions: (1) that Site Plan 8608, Sheet PC-1, dated 7/18/86, prepared by Dennis Bishop P.E. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Elevation Plan 8608, Sheet PC-1, dated 7/18/86, prepared by Dennis Bishop P.E. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (3) that Landscape Plan 8608, Sheet PC-2, dated 7/18/86, prepared by Dennis Bishop P.E. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (4) that the approved landscaping shall be installed on the site prior to building occupancy and thereafter permanently main- tained in a healthy condition. 11, Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted, it was #7-204-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the Sign Application submitted by Allen Animal Hospital for a ground sign on property located at 19066 Farmington Road be approved subject to the following condition: (1) that the 3' x 8' ground sign as shown on the Plan prepared by Row Sign Company which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, it was #7-205-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Sign Application submitted by Hoppy's Signs for a ground sign and master tenant wall signs on property located at 36083-36175 Plymouth Road subject to the following conditions: 9723 (1) that the 6' x 7' ground sign as shown on the Plan prepared by Hoppy's Signs which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (2) that the master tenant wall sign format proposing individual lettering mounted on exterior raceways which is hereby approved shall be adhered to for each tenant sign application. Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 520th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on July 22, 1986 was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. gjew gl,04)&1. 1 C (/.4 Donna J. Naid , Secretary ATTEST: C. Russ Smith, Chairman