Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1986-11-18 9792 MINUTES OF THE 527th REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, November 18, 1986, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 527th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. C. Russ Smith, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. , with approximately 45 interested persons in the audience. Members present: C. Russ Smith Herman Kluver Donald Vyhnalek Donna J. Naidow Sue Sobolewski Michael Soranno R. Lee Morrow Richard Straub Members absent: Jeanne Hildebrandt Messrs. John J. Nagy, 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 question. If a petition involves a waiver of use request and the request is denied, the 10 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 on a preliminary plat and/or a vacating petition. Planning Commission resolutions do not become effective until seven days after tonight. 460 Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 86-10-1-43 by William Roskelly to rezone property located south of Seven Mile Road between Wayne and Laurel Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 9 from RUFB to R-4B. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating they have no objections to this proposal. William Roskelly, 16211 Wyler: I think the drawings on the board show my intentions. I have two parcels. The one to the west is presently R-4B. In order to put in this proposed subdivision I am requesting that the east lot be rezoned to R-4B. William Stefani, 34715 Seven Mile: I see what you are going to do. Now that I see what he has right there, I want to know why for one thing and I object to it because I believe it will lower property value. I object to the whole thing. I don't want to see my house devalued. Mr. Morrow: Mr. Stefani you mentioned you do not want to see it devalued, what would you say the property value is of your house? to Mr. Stefani: Right now? I live on the corner of Laurel and Seven Mile. It is in excess of $200,000. 4110 i 9793 • Mr. Morrow: Would that be the norm for that area. ' Mr. Stefani: Yes. Who is the owner of this property right now? 1 Mr. Roskelly: I have offer to purchase which is predicated on the rezoning. Mr. Stefani: From whom? Mr. Roskelly: The owner of record. Mr. Morrow: It will come up about the property values as to what Mr. Roskelly plans as to size of lots. I was trying to find out the value of the property. He is trying to tie into R-4B zoning. Mr. Roskelly: Probably you are familiar with Camborne Subdivision on Hubbard Road between Five and Six Mile Roads. That subdivision is basically the same design as this one. Presently there are 14 houses under construction. The price of those homes is between $160,000 and $240,000. Because of my good fortune in marketing those parcels I felt I would pursue this same area. The ranch homes should run around 1800 square feet and the colonials 2300 square feet in this new subdivision. I would like to point out to the Planning Commission that at this point we are speaking of the land use per se for rezoning and not for conditions. Mr. Morrow: It is a zoning matter as you pointed out Mr. Roskelly but one of our IL citizens is interested in devaluation of property. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-10-1-43 closed. Mr. Smith took this opportunity to introduce the new Planning Commission member, Richard Straub, who indicated he would not vote tonight. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver and seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was #11-285-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 18, 1986 on Petition 86-10-1-43 by William Roskelly to rezone property located south of Seven Mile Road between Wayne and Laurel Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 9 from RUFB to R-4B, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-10-1-43 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning represents only a minor extension of a less restrictive zoning district in the area. (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 will provide for a more efficient use IL of the subject property. 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. - • 9794 A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES:1: Kluwer, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was #I11-286-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to waive the provisions of Section 10 of Article VI of the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure regarding the seven day period concerning effectiveness of Planning Commission resolutions in connection with Petition 86-10-1-43 by William Roskelly to rezone property located south of Seven Mile Road between Wayne and Laurel Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 9 from RUFB to R-4B. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub 1: ABSENT: Hildebrandt 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 86-10-1-44 by Centrum Development Company to rezone property located south of Jamison, west of Sunbury in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 24 from P.L. to R-9I. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating they have no objections with this proposal. The petitioner, Centrum Development, did furnish us with a copy of a letter they sent to area residents inviting them to meet to explain their project. Jim Hovey, 4990 Northwind Dr. , Lansing: We have a very brief presentation. We have some slides to just briefly introduce our company and show what we want to do. Mr. Kostowski: I would like to give a five minute introduction about type of product we build and tell you about our company and to give you an actual example of senior citizen housing Centrum Development has developed. The type of project we are proposing is an independent living senior citizen project. What I would like to do is give you a run through of an actual building that we have constructed and tell you about the development itself. The gentlemen from Centrum Development then showed some slides. Mr. Kostowski: It is not a subsidized project. $520 - $625 rent per month and that would be total responsibility of tenant. 9795 Mr. Smith: Do you serve meals. Mr. Kostowski: We do not serve meals as part of package. What we try to do is use meals on wheels or church group if meals are requested by tenants. Mr. Morrow: I think we were advised that you had sent a letter to the neighborhood inviting them to a meeting. Mr. Kostowski: Mr. Hovey was involved in that. Mr. Soranno: You have no medical facility? Mr. Kostowski: No medical for independent elderly. Mr. Soranno: At study meeting I asked question about policy on what is a senior or is there an age limit. Mr. Kostowski: Typically age 62 is required cutoff. No one younger than 62 will be able to live in project. It is built entirely to meet senior needs. Mr. Hovey: The part that I would like to touch on is why we are in Livonia and why we selected this site, who we are and what we want to do. I did send a letter out to people within a 500 foot radius. There were 15 people at that meeting and I think it was very worthwhile. We do a preliminary analysis of area and Livonia needs senior housing. We look at vacant housing available for seniors. There is a 6 1/2 year wait to get into senior citizen housing. Where is the best place for that. What we look for is public utilities, paved streets, stable environment, etc. There is an overwhelming need in this community. We want shopping that is convenient for seniors. There is ample shopping area. There are also many doctor offices. We have a site that has available shopping, medical facilities and most importantly it has a residential setting. Coming off Middlebelt we have a nursing home on corner and R-9 zoning and a church and community building. I went door to door to neighbors who live immediately adjacent to property and the common comment was they were having problems with vacant school and they thought senior housing was a good idea. Mr. Morrow: Fifteen people had responded to your letter and could you give us an idea of what their feelings were as to the project should the zoning go through. Mr. Hovey: Fifteen out of 125 is not a large number and those people that showed up asked the questions: What is going to happen here? Who is going to live there? What is it going to look like? Where are you going to locate the buildings and what is it going to do to our neighborhood? etc. All but 3 residents were in favor. We then met with those three people. Gentleman in extreme south had just purchased home and he was concerned with what this would look like. I sent him a letter inviting him up to Grand Blanc to visit our other place. A man who lives in the corner said he did not want it 9796 there. He does not want anything there. He wanted it vacant. He said he would fight anything to be built there. Last person lived in corner and her concern is there is a school building now, what is it going to do to the view she has now. Those were the only negative comments with letter and going door to door. Mr. Morrow: It is not a requirement of the petitioner to do this but it is gratifying to see petitioner go to neighborhoods and I compliment you on the time you spent. Mr. Smith: We are here tonight on the zoning not what is going to be built there, etc. Debbie Hawley, 14916 Alexander: I realize what you just said about what our job is here tonight. I am the closest resident whose house will be affected. We are all affected but my property is roughly 100 feet away from the corner of the building to be built. I am all for the senior citizen building. I have lived here for ten years and have sit and stared at this empty school for ten years. I object to it being a three-story building. I realize that is not the issue tonight but if we come in here and say nothing and they get the zoning they will build a three-story building. That gentleman seems to have this very well planned. I am not objecting to senior citizens. I feel the structure of the building is too high. I feel to look out my back door and look up three stories is not good. I am objecting because of the structure and also the $550 - $650 rent. Mr. Smith: R-9I is housing for elderly up to four stories but that is not the question tonight. 4/ Mrs. Hawley: I am saying I am not voting for it if this is the structure it is going to be, I would rather it be a vacant building. Frances Stillwell, 14897 Harrison: There were 125 letters sent out. I would like to know where mine went. Mr. Smith: Do you live within 500 feet? Ms. Stillwell: I live on corner of Jamison and Harrison. We are talking about my side yard. We did get a letter from the City of Livonia Planning Commission but not from the Centrum Development but I am definitely against it. I am not against senior citizen per se but in this area. Now we have it like the country. I feel my privacy would be completely gone. Now they are talking about paving Harrison. Mr. Smith: You are not against senior citizen housing you just don't want it there? Ms. Stillwell: Right. Robert Thompson, 14660 Garden: I live in the northern most house on Garden. I purchased the house over four years ago. I saw a school and that was vacant and a park. I was under the assumption that the school 9797 yard was so big and the park was so small. Of the 17 acres the park was only 6 acres. The park is used all the time. People are out there with model airplanes. Golfers are out there and people are t walking their dogs there. I really do not want to look out my back yard and see senior citizen housing. I also feel that in particular the zoning of this structure is still pretty close to where my house is for an 11 acre site. Mr. Smith: That is for the site plan. Mr. Thompson: I feel a senior citizen structure would lower the value of my house. There would be emergency vehicles, delivery vehicles and I have none right now. I believe $525 - $650 a month is pretty stiff. If I was a senior citizen and could spent $600 a month I would go to Florida. I did not get a chance to talk to all the neighbors but I did make up a petition that I would like to submit to Commission. Mr. Smith: You can present that to Mr. Nagy. Mr. Thompson: In talking to people most of them use and enjoy the park. Mr. Smith: We are not taking the park away. Mr. Thompson: I am strongly opposed to having the rezoning. I would rather they left it alone than to develop it. Mr. Thompson then submitted his petition to Mr. Nagy. 10 1 Mr. Vhynalek: Did the petitioner say he was going to tear down the school? 46, Mr. Hovey: Yes sir. We propose 83 units exactly where the school sits and at a future date another 83 units. Emmett Hines, 28881 Jamison: I live next door to elementary school and St. Genevieve. What is going to go next door. Mr. Smith: It is vacant. Mr. Hines: Are they likely to put up a fence? Who will pay for it? Mr. Smith: You would half it. Mr. Hines: Is it going to be one building? Mr. Smith: All 83 units will be attached. Mr. Hines: I didn't get a notice to be here today. My neighbor got three of them. Fritz Sanders, 29068 Lori: I live in the 4th house from the corner. There seems to be a question as to what will be put up. I realize that this is 9798 4 just a hearing for the zoning itself and not what will be put up. However, we received from the petitioner a rendition of the building that is proposed and it shows a three-story building which could be extended to four stores. It is not brick. It is a frame building. I think if this is allowed it could impair the value of the surrounding neighborhood. West of Jamison is all built in brick. I would like to say I am against this rezoning. Another thing is this whole area is a very important natural resource for the recreation of the neighborhood. If the proposal goes through and the park is cut down to about one third, I believe it will lower the value of the neighborhood properties. When people move in they see the park and it makes the whole area more desirable and that is another reason for my objecting. I would like to see that this area is better utilized by the City of Livonia to find a better use for this school rather than boarded up. Mr. Vhynalek: How many years has that been boarded up? Audience: Nine years. Steve Johnson, 14946 Alexander: They said they were concerned about locating this property in a residential area. Why not build a project that would fit in better with residential? I am not opposed to senior citizen housing but I am opposed to multiple dwelling. One of the attractions to my house was the availability of the park for recreation purposes. Is there an alternative zoning to allow for senior citizens but not multiple concept? 4 Mr. Morrow: Some people say they favor the senior citizens but they did not want to see anything up high. Any vote yes or no does not mean that what we see here tonight will not go in there. That is something that can be addressed in the site plan - to see if brick on all four sides would be more appropriate and maybe not be so high. That would be one of my concerns that it does not fit in with the residential area. It is not city property. Sometimes people have the tendency to think that the city owns the property. It is owned by the School Board. Mr. Smith: Mr. Nagy - Two-story colonial can go to maximum of 34 feet. What is the maximum height of three-story senior citizen? Mr. Nagy: Thirty-three feet. It would be about as high as a two-story colonial house. Bev Herdman, 15170 Alexander: I live in a tiny little house on a little lot and the only thing we have to enjoy is this area. We have taken our children there for years. We do need space to live in other ways. So I wanted to tell you I am against rezoning. Mr. Smith: Do you understand the park will not be affected? 1100 Donna Clement, 15140 Alexander: All summer the park is used for baseball and other facilities. I am against rezoning. I would like to see single family homes built there. I am not against senior citizens but I moved in area almost 9 years ago because of rural effect. 9799 t Mr. Hovey: I would like to briefly add if that were to be converted to all single family it would be 40 to 49 lots. Since the average family consists of three people it would represent 150 people. In our proposed two 83 unit buildings it would represent 160 units which would be about 180 persons. The traffic in there would be the same amount. A lot of people we sent letters to wanted it to be single family but to be developed that way you would have the same number of persons. It leaves a lot more green area than if it were developed single family. It is not going to remain vacant. Something is going to be built there. I think this is the best project. Mike Dunaway, 14489 Alexander: I just bought in neighborhood. I think it is a scare tactic saying that something is going to be built there. I would like to see it remain vacant. It is a nice view from my house. Let's leave it a park. Mr. Soranno: In the 9 or 10 years has there ever been any vandalism? Person in audience: In 10 years I have had to call the city one time in ten years to have graffito taken off. Lady in audience: I live across from school and have had no problems. Mr. Vyhnalek: I am going to support but I will not vote for any site plan as it is for three stories and I believe it should be one or two stories. I want the senior citizens in town but I think we can talk to them but it should be one or two stories. Mr. Soranno: When this does come before us for site plan approval you would have another opportunity if you wish to express your views on this. Mr. Morrow: I do not find fault with what my fellow Commissioners are saying. I want to make sure we are not attempting to condition this zoning. Mr. Smith: R-9I allows up to 4 stories. Mr. Morrow: I would like to make sure it will be in harmony with the neighborhood. Mr. Smith: Do you understand that? Mr. Hovey: Yes sir. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-10-1-44 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno and seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, it was #11-287-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November II18, 1986 on Petition 86-10-1-44 by Centrum Development Company to rezone property located south of Jamison, west of Sunbury in the Northwest 1/4 of ; 9800 Section 24 from P.L. to R-9I, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-10-1-44 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning will be compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding zoning in the area. (2) The proposed change of zoning will provide for senior citizen housing facilities which are in great demand in the City. (3) The proposed change of zoning will provide for the re-use of unused school property. 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, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: Kluver ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt 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 86-9-2-34 by Richard G. Olszewski requesting waiver use approval for outside storage of trailers and equipment on property located on the west side of Spanich Courts, south of Five Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 23. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating they have no objections to this rezoning proposal. Richard G. Olszewski, 7532 Fairmont, Canton: I have a lawn sprinkling company and I would like them to support so I can park my equipment alongside my building. Mr. Vyhnalek: Are you there now? Are you parking equipment there now? Mr. Olszewski: No. My equipment I take home every night. Mr. Vyhnalek: Your trencher is how big? Petitioner showed pictures of equipment to Commissioners. Mr. Morrow: Am I correct in assuming that a waiver for this kind of property runs with the land? Any kind of equipment storage that is approved could invite at a later date cranes, large tandems, etc. Mr. Nagy: The waiver use does run with the land. Mr. Morrow: If we approve it, it would open up a pandora box. 9801 Mr. Olszewski: After 20 some years in this business all we have had was small equipment. Mr. Morrow: You may decide to move to another location and the tenant following you could move in with large equipment. Mr. McCullough: I own the property in question. I lease the property to Mr. Olszewski. The equipment that he wants to store is trailers, trencher and pipe puller. It is very small equipment. I own U. S. Trailer Company and I had an opportunity to rent this building out to another customer who had 25 sewer cleaning trucks. It was alright to have these 23 trucks. This operation is very small and very clean which is what I wanted in there. It is one of the cleanest setups that I found that could be in that area. I feel that that type of business is well suited for the area. Tony Young, 14911 Flamingo: I have been here since 1941. I have big brick ranch type house and we had all kinds of trucks back there when Jack Spanich moved in and for a long time it was cleaned up but then I saw these big trucks there. Sandra Borovsky, 15007 Flamingo: May I ask this gentleman a question? I am under the assumption that you are storing chemicals. Mr. Olszewski:1[0 No - underground sprinklers. r Mr. Young: I was under the impression that there were going to be chemicals stored there. How well will this be maintained? Are you going to check your vehicles? I don't like the idea that with the waiver 41110 there is the possibility of bigger things. Roger Keller, 30920 Nye: I am not objecting to the storage of small items within this fenced area but there are already some vehicles there. I do have an objection to rezoning for the same reason Mr. Morrow brought out. I would just like to leave well enough alone and let this gentleman store his vehicles there. Marie Murphy, 14955 Flamingo: My property backs up to Flamingo. I agree with Mr. Young. We have had a mess there since Spanich has been there. They have had two fires back there and it is just starting to look better now. If it is going to change where they can bring in semi's I would be against it but if you could keep it clean I would be for it. Mr. McCullough: The last two people that were up here spoke about the mess that used to be there. I personally spent $7,000 cleaning that mess up. That is why I felt that the type of business that these people are in would be more suited for the area. The area has been cleaned up at my own expense. I will maintain that property to the standards of the city. Mr. Vhynalek: You have some offices and some storage in that building? 9802 Mr. Olszewski: A room 15 x 15. Not big enough to put the equipment inside at night. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-9-2-34 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow and seconded by Mr. Kluver, it was #11-288-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 18, 1986 on Petition 86-9-2-34 by Richard G. Olszewski requesting waiver use approval for outside storage of trailers and equipment on property located on the west side of Spanich Courts, south of Five Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 23, the City Planning Commission does hereby deny Petition 86-9-2-34 for the following reasons: (1) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use is in compliance with all of the general and specific waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 16.11 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543. (2) The proposed use is in violation of Section 16.11(b)(5) regarding the requirement for a 20' wide greenbelt. (3) The proposed use would detract from and adversely affect the t existing and surrounding uses in the area. (4) The proposed use is contrary to the Planning Commission's objective of limiting the industrial uses to those permitted within the M-1 classification, as it is the long term goal of the Commission to 46, phase out the existing industrial uses in the area. (5) The proposed use would be in too close proximity to existing residential uses and a residential neighborhood and thereby would be detrimental to the continued stability of the neighborhood and the ongoing peace and tranquility of the neighborhood. 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: Kluver, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: Soranno ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt 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 86-10-2-35 11, by the Southland Corporation requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDM License within a 7-Eleven store proposed to be located on the north side of Five Mile Road, west of Levan in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17. 4 9803 Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating they have no objections to the waiver use proposal. The petitioner was not present at the meeting. 46 Mario Tartaglia, 35296 Banbury 8 Ct. : I own building east of property which is the Quick Pic. I don't own the store but I own the building. The reason I object is there is already a Quick Pic. I am objecting because there is already two close by. Mr. Morrow: That property is zoned to the use that is going in there. Do you have the SDM license? Mr. Tartaglia: No, I just own the building. Mr. Morrow: At convenience store you own do you purvey beer and wine? Mr. Tartaglia: Yes. Bev Jovan, 36411 Roycroft: I have a real problem with another liquor license coming into this area. We have the Quick Pic and now we have a vacant building. I object to the whole thing being built. We don't need another liquor license. We have juveniles hanging around and going in there buying beer and wine. There are three locations that you can walk to from there where you can buy beer and wine. I am opposed. Mr. Vyhnalek: I think you have to deny this because of the 500 foot separation. We have no alternative but to deny. 410, There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-10-2-35 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek and seconded by Mr. Soranno, it was 4111-289-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 18, 1986 on Petition 86-10-2-35 by the Southland Corporation requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDM License within a 7-Eleven store proposed to be located on the north side of Five Mile Road, west of Levan in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17, the City Planning Commission does hereby deny Petition 86-10-2-35 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 and requirements set forth in Section 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance 41543. (2) The proposed use fails to comply with the waiver use standard set forth in Section 10.03(g) of the Zoning Ordinance #543. (3) The proposed use is incompatible to and not in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. 9804 t (4) 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 oversaturate an area with 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. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt 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 86-10-2-37 by Edwin A. Tillman requesting waiver use approval for general office uses to be located in an existing building located on the Southeast corner of Ann Arbor Trail and Newburgh Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 32. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating they lif have no objections to the waiver use proposal. Edwin Tillman, 6850 Highview, Dearborn Heights: We did improve the property and we did endeavor to lease or sell for two years and we have not had any professional services try to buy or lease the building. I feel that 41, general offices will not change anything with traffic. I would appreciate your consideration in this matter. Mr. Morrow: Have you had any interest from a general office standpoint. Mr. Tillman: When they find they have to go through zoning they get uninterested. Mr. Morrow: I have no problem with general offices and I think that corner is certainly cleaned up. Mr. Tillman: Thank you. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-10-2-37 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver and seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was #11-290-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on November 18, 1986 on Petition 86-10-2-37 by Edwin A. Tillman requesting waiver use approval for general office use within an existing building located on the southeast corner of Ann Arbor and Newburg Roads in Section 32, the City 110 Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-10-2-37 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use is in compliance with all waiver use standards and requirements set forth in the Zoning Ordinance #543. 9805 t: (2) The subject site has the capacity to accomodate 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 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt 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 with the regular meeting. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno and seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was #11-291-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on October 21, 1986 on Petition 86-9-1-39 by Westin Development Company to rezone li, property located on the south side of Five Mile Road, east of Bainbridge in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 23 from M-1 and RUF to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-9-1-39 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning will aid in the removal of undesirable industrial uses from the neighborhood. (2) The proposed change of zoning will help to eliminate and prevent blighting influences on the neighborhood. (3) The proposed change of zoning will provide for the re-use of the subject property for uses that are much more compatible to the residential uses in the neighborhood. (4) The proposed change of zoning will be a major step in correcting a spot zoning situation which has existed for years. (5) The proposed change of zoning is in the best interest of the subject neighborhood and the City as a whole. (6) The proposed change of zoning will provide for a buffer zone between homes located along Bainbridge Ave. and the subject area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance IL with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt 9806 I Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Soranno, it was #11-292-86 RESOLVED that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on October 21, 1986 on Petition 86-9-1-40 by Mary Omar to rezone property located on the north side of Schoolcraft Road between Newburgh Road and Richfield in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 19 from RUF to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-9-1-40 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change in zoning represents only a minor extension of an existing less restrictive zoning district in the area. (2) The proposed change in zoning will provide for uses which are consistent with adjacent development. (3) The proposed change in zoning is 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: IL AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Sobolewski, Naidow, Smith NAYS: Morrow ABSTAIN: Straub, Vyhnalek ABSENT: Hildebrandt Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made Mr. Kluver and seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski, it was #11-293-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that an extension for a period of one year be granted for Petition 81-1-8-4P by Rolland D. Schlosser requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to construct a commercial building on the southwest corner of Five Mile Road and Santa Anita in Section 24 be approved subject to all the conditions as were attached to the original approving Resolution #9-166-81, adopted by the Planning Commission on September 1, 1981 for the reason that the petitioner has made substantial progress in improving the property to a point where only the actual construction of the building is left to complete the project. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Smith I[: NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub, Vyhnalek ABSENT: Hildebrandt 9807 Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution 1E: adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow and seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, it was #11-294-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby withdraw Petition 84-2-7-2 by the Planning Commission to amend Part V of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master School & Park Plan, by deleting property located north of Six Mile Road, east of Wayne Road in Section 9, and Part VII, the Future Land Use Plan, by changing the designation of the subject property from Recreation/Open Space to Low Density Residential. A roll call vote on the foregoing rsolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow and seconded by Mr. Kluver, it was #11-295-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to reconsider its action taken in Resolution #10-227-85, adopted on October 29, 1985, regarding Petition 85-9-1-25 by FCA Senior Citizens Housing ILI IL, Corporation to rezone property located on the east side of Farmington Road between Pickford and Curtis in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10 from R-1 to P.S. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski and seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was #11-296-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 85-9-1-25 by FCA Senior Citizen's Housing Corporation to rezone property located on the east side of Farmington Road between Pickford and Curtis Ave. in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10 from R-1 to P.S. until the Planning Commission Study Meeting to be conducted on November 25, 1986. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek NAYS: Kluver ABSTAIN: Straub, Smith ABSENT: Hildebrandt 9808 ILMr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ILOn a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek and seconded by Mr. Soranno, it was #11-297-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Council Resolution #336-86 requesting report and recommendation from the City Planning Commission with respect to alternative and appropriate viable uses for property located on the east side of Farmington Road between Pickford and Curtis in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10 (Petition 85-9-1-25) until the Planning Commission Study Meeting to be conducted on November 25, 1986. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: Kluver ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski and seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, it was IL #i11-298-86 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 361st Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on October 14, 1986 are approved. I ILO A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub, Kluver ABSENT: Hildebrandt Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno and seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was #11-299-86 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 526th Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on October 21, 1986, as corrected, are approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt IIW Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski and seconded by Mr. Soranno, it was 9809 it #11-300-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Revised Site Plan submitted in connection with Petition 81-2-8-7 by John DelSignore requesting approval of all plans required by Section 8.02 and 29.02 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal for an addition to an existing commercial building located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Merriman and Farmington Roads in Section 27, subject to the following conditions: (1) That Revised Site Plan 86D-655, Sheet 1, dated 10/30/86 prepared by Affiliated Engineers, Inc. , is hereby approved and shall be adhered to; (2) That Building Elevation Plan 86D-655, Sheet 3, dated 11/1/86 prepared by Affiliated Engineers, Inc. is hereby approved and shall be adhered to. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt On a motion made by Mr. Vyhnalek and seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski, it was IL 4/11-301-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Landscape Plan and Sign Plan submitted in connection with Petition 86-9-8-59 by Mayflower Development Consultants, Inc. , requesting approval of all plans IL, required by Zoning Ordinance 41543 in connection with a proposal to construct a carryout bakery on the north side of Plymouth Road between Merriman Road and Hubbard in Section 27, subject to the following conditions: (1) That Landscape Plan 86/5-11, Sheet 1, dated 10/28/86 by Angelo Barile is approved and shall be adhered to; (2) That the landscaping be installed on the site prior to building occupancy and thereafter maintained in a healthy condition. (3) That the proposed monument sign submitted by Angelo Barile is approved and shall be adhered to. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. • 9810 ILOn a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski and seconded by Mr. Soranno, it was L #11-302-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Permit Application #4352 by K-Mart Corporation requesting approval to install a satellite disc antenna on property located at 30255 Plymouth Road, subject to the following condition: (1) That the permit application by K-Mart Corporation #4352, for a six foot diameter disc antenna at 30255 Plymouth Road is hereby approved and shall be adhered to. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno and seconded by Mr. Kluver it was 4411-303-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Sign Permit Application by Richard & Geraldine Besh for approval to erect a new ground sign at property located at 18922 Farmington Road be approved subject to the following conditions: ILO (1) That 2' x 4' ground sign as shown on the plan by Perry Sign Co. which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) That the conditions of approval shall be the same as set forth in Zoning Board of Appeals Case 8610-184 dated 10/21/86. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek and seconded by Mr. Soranno, it was 4111-304-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Permit Application #3082 by K-Mart Corporation requesting approval to install a satellite disc antenna on property located at 33400 Seven Mile Road, subject to the following condition: (1) That the Permit Application by K-Mart Corporation #3082, for a six foot diameter disc antenna at 33400 Seven Mile, which is hereby 1110 approved, shall be adhered to. 9811 A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: r AYES: Kluver, Soranno, Morrow, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek, Smith NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Straub ABSENT: Hildebrandt Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 527th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. 111 Donna J. Naidow, Secretary ATTEST: , 6a4a4.12)SY-litir\ C. Russ Smith, Chairman jg I