HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1984-03-13 • 9096
MINUTES OF THE 470th REGULAR MEETING
AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
1[140
LIVONIA
On Tuesday, March 13, 1984, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 470th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall , 33000
Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Daniel Andrew, Chairman, called the Regular Meeting and Public Hearings to order
at 8:00 p.m. , with approximately 35 interested persons in the audience.
Members present: Daniel R. Andrew Donald Vyhnalek Sue Sobolewski
Joseph J. Falk Jerome Zimmer Donna Naidow
Judith Scurto
Members absent: *Herman Kl uve r Lee R. Morrow
Messrs. John J. Nagy, City Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant City Planning
Director; and Ralph H. Bakewell , Planner IV, were also present.
Mr. Andrew informed the audience that if a petition on tonights agenda involves a
rezoning request, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council
who, in turn, will conduct its own public hearing and decide the question. If a
petition involves a waiver of use request and the petition is denied by the Planning
Commission, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City
10 Council ; otherwise the petition is terminated.
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 84-1-1-1
o
by Feliciano N. Ferrer, M. D. , requesting to rezone property located
on the north side of Six Mile Road between Middlebelt and Louise in the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 11 from R-1A 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
service this site and it may be necessary for the owner to extend
a storm sewer northerly into the Valley Wood Apartment site where
there is a public storm sewer system. There is a letter from
Janet M. Mathieu, 29540 W. Six Mile Road, stating that the area has
become saturated with professional services and requesting that the
Planning Commission not grant Dr. Ferrer's request for rezoning.
Thomas Goebel , 18903 Melvin , Livonia, Real Estate Agent handling transaction, was present .
Dr. Ferrer, M. D. , 17874 Farmington Road, Livonia, petitioner, was present.
Mr. Andrew: Since you are the Real Estate Agent, Mr. Goebel , has the Doctor an
option to buy, a purchase agreement or does he own it outright?
Mr. Goebel : He has a purchase agreement, subject to rezoning.
Mr. Andrew: Is there a time limit?
ILMr. Goebel : Approximately thirty days.
9097
Mr. Andrew: Has it expired?
1[10 Mr. Goebel : No, not yet.
Mr. Andrew: Do you own any other commercial property in Livonia?
Dr. Ferrer: Yes, I am a resident and I have a small lot on Six Mile Road near
Merriman.
Mr. Goebel : It is Item #3 on your agenda tonight.
Mr. Andrew: Do you practice in the City of Livonia today?
Dr. Ferrer: Yes , my office is on Farmington between Six and Seven Mile Roads.
Mr. Vyhnalek: Do you plan on moving here yourself or is this speculative?
Dr. Ferrer: I am going to move here.
Mr. Vyhnalek: Is this just for you alone or are there other doctors?
Dr. Ferrer: There will be four doctors.
Mr. Vyhnalek: This is quite a deep lot; do you plan on using all of it or half
of it?
ILDr. Ferrer: It depends on how many people want to go in.
Mr. Vyhnalek: What do you have planned for the back?
Dr. Ferrer: We might develop it if there is a need for it.
Mr. Vyhnalek: Buildings in the future?
Dr. Ferrer; Yes.
Glenn Lottie, 30320 Six Mile Road: I came down because of Items #3 and #4 but this
one too. I am against this . Six Mile Road is supposed to be zoned
residential . These other petitions are to rezone to P.S. , too. We
have gone throught this before. The area just before this lot was
supposed to stay residential . If we give into one lot being rezoned,
it will go all the way, and the atmosphere will be gone.
Mr. Andrew; Where do you live?
Mr. Lottie: Right across from Bossio's.
Mr. Falk: The proposed change of zoning is in conflict with our Future Land
Use Plan and I do recall that we did tell the people in your sub-
division that we will try to hold the line going westerly on Six
Mile. The K of C was an intrusion and I agree with you and I think
there has to be a line drawn. I think we have gone on Six Mile
far enough with P.S. and commercial uses.
9098
Mrs. Scurto: It seems to me that in the last four or five years we have had
several petitions; one being for a school on Six Mile and Merriman
and on the corner we were told it could never go residential . I
would strongly object to this as well as any other intrusion on
4 Six Mile where residential has been protected and the homes are
well taken care of.
Mr. Zimmer; Is the building presently on the property occupied?
Mr. Goebel : Yes, there is a house approximately sixty years old.
Mr. Zimmer: Does the owner reside there?
Mr. Goebel : No.
Mr. Zimmer: The letter from the people next door; are they the property owners?
Mr. Nagy: Yes, they are.
Mr. Vyhnalek: Mr. Goebel , the home that is being rented now; is it in poor shape?
Mr. Goebel : I don' t think Livonia would be proud of it.
Mr. Vyhnalek: I remember it is in poor shape and should be torn down.
Mr. Goebel : It is an older home and I don't think there is much need for it .
Mr. Vyhnalek:110
I think this would be a buffer between commercial and residential ,
just like the Knights of Columbus is a buffer. I would be in favor
of it.
Mr. Goebel : This sort of squares off the whole area.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 84-1-1-1 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto and seconded by Mr. Zimmer, it was
#3-42-84 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 13, 1984
on Petition 84-1-1-1 by Feliciano N. Ferrer, M. D. , requesting to
rezone property located on the north side of Six Mile Road between
Middlebelt and Louise in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 11 from R-1A
to P. S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 84-1-1-1 be denied for the following
reasons :
(1) The proposed change of zoning is in conflict with the Future
Land Use Plan which recommends medium density land use for
the subject area.
(2) The proposed change of zoning would encourage the spread of
non-residential zoning west along the north side of Six Mile
Road.
9099
(3) The proposed change of zoning would provide for uses which are
already prevalent in the area along the south side of Six Mile
Road & there is other vacant land appropriately zoned to accommodate
this expansion in use.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was given in
accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Scurto, Naidow, Sobolewski , Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
NAYS : Vyhnalek
ABSENT: Kluver, Morrow
Mr. Andrew, Chairman , declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 84-2-1-3
by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Section 23.01 (a) of Zoning
Ordinance #543 to rezone property located on the south side of Six
Mile Road, east of Haggerty Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 18
from R-7 to R-2.
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating
there are no engineering problems connected with this petition .
Mr. Andrew: This is a petition by the City Planning Commission pursuant to a
Council resolution to consider this rezoning. Is there anyone in
the audience who wishes to speak on this petition?
1[ Mr. Falk: Did we notify any of these people? The last time we had a meeting
in this area there were very many people who were interested.
Mr. Andrew: Because this is a rezoning, we used the statutory steps to notify
everyone; i . e. , the newspaper and all property owners within 500
feet of this property.
Peter Gentelia, President of Quakertown Civic Association, 16221 Quakertown Lane: On
behalf of the residents, I would like to go on record that we do
not object to maintaining the present status.
Mr. Falk: How many families do you represent, Mr. Gentelia?
Mr. Gentelia: Approximately eighty. The subdivision is platted for about 250
homes.
Mr. Falk: Have you had a meeting on this or are you addressing it without a
consensus?
Mr. Gentelia: We had a Board meeting regarding it.
Mike Cassa r, 39046 Meeting House Lane: I am a resident of Quakertown. My street
abuts this property (Lot 10) . I am really not for apartments
and I don' t want to see a big brick wall . I am for this rezoning.
9100
Mrs. Scurto: Are you a member of the civic association?
1[00 Mr. Cassar; Yes.
4 Mr. Andrew; The Planning Commission has spent considerable time over the years
discussing land use in this particular quadrant of the City. One
of the possible alternative land uses we discussed would be to
encourage the rezoning of that parcel of land lying east of Quaker-
town Lane, south of Six Mile , to a professional office zoning, a
category which would allow general office uses and would allow
buildings not to exceed four stories in height. At the same time,
the Commission has expressed the desire to retain the R-7 zoning
west of Quakertown Lane. Could I have your reaction and if the
Board has discussed that, I would like to know about it.
Mr. Gentelia: This came up last July and I understand it was a way of getting the
attention of Republic to improve the homes they were building at
that time. At the meeting two weeks ago, we decided there wouldn't
be any advantage to rezoning to single family residential since Six
Mile will eventually be rezoned.
Mr. Andrew: Have you ever discussed the possibility of office zoning?
Mr. Gentelia: We expect it will be zoned commercial some day. We don't feel it
will benefit Livonia or the residents to have residences along that
strip. It will probably be commercial mid-rise buildings adjacent
to the site or across the street. I don' t think anybody will want
to move on Six Mile Road with maybe a shopping mall there.
IL Mr. Cassar: I really don't like the idea of apartment buildings but I don' t know
what I want to see there.
Mr. Goebel : I seems to me that at least it is residential now and if you go to
single family lots, some day Republic will say that that is not
feasible and you will give them ammunition they need to go commercial .
Mr. Andrew; It is your feeling that to rezone it to R-2 will provide ammunition
to create some commercial .
Mr. Goebel : Yes.
There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on Petition 84-2-1-3 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted,
it was
#3-43-84 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 13, 1984
on Petition 84-2-1-3 by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Section
23.01 (a) of Zoning Ordinance #543 to rezone property located on the south
side of Six Mile Road, east of Haggerty Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section
18 from R-7 to R-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
9101
the City Council that Petition 84-2-1-3 be denied for the following
reasons:
1[; (1) The proposed change of zoning is in conflict with the Future
Land Use Plan which recommends medium density land use such as
can be accomplished by the current R-7 zoning classification of
the subject property.
(2) The existence of the heavily travelled thoroughfare of Six Mile
Road and 1-275 adjacent to the subject lands would not be con-
dusive to single-family residential development.
(3) There is a need for additional alternative types of residential
dwelling units in the City.
(4) The proposed change of zoning would not provide a means of
developing the subject property in accordance with its potential
within the context of good planning principles.
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. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek and seconded by Mr. Zimmer, it was
#3-44-84 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 23.05(b) of Zoning Ordinance #543,
the City Planning Commission does hereby establish and order that a
IL
public hearing be held to determine whether or not to rezone property
located east of Quakertown Lane, south of Six Mile Road in the North-
west 1/4 of Section 18 from R-7 to P.O.
Barry Stalberg, Vice President of Republic Development Corp: I would like to request
that the Planning Commission defer holding this public hearing.
would like them to wait until there is a use. I understand the
concept has been, in the past, to wait until a use has been named
before proceeding with a public hearing, especially in this area
of the City. 1 don' t think there is any particular urgency in this
matter.
Mr. Andrew: I as one Commissioner would not concur with your recommendation. I
think it is long overdue for the City to develop through zoning
parcels of land in the 1-96/275 corridor for professional office
development in order to attract users to at least look at the
property and to circumvent the extremely long delay that anyone has
in a rezoning procedure ; in this particular community about five
months to rezone a piece of land.
Mrs . Scurto: I feel this is a valid civic association which is doing a nice job
in a slowly developing area; keeping it a good area. I think there
is other land along the Freeway that we should go after. I don' t
feel these people deserve an office building in their back yard.
9102
Mr. Andrew: But you concur they deserve an apartment building.
Mrs. Scurto: There are other alternatives in this day and age and I think some-
1[0 body will come along and put a good development in the area; I
don't think the word "apartment" need be used.
Mr. Stalberg: With respect to the timing on the rezoning and the length of time
involved on having it rezoned to attract someone, the major developers
are totally aware of the procedures. It doesn't scare them because
it is R-7. When somebody has something that you like, rezoning will
be accomplished very quickly within the time they need.
Mr. Andrew: I don' t agree with that. It will be rezoned according to the com-
munity's ordinance. It will take about five months.
Mr. Stalberg: I bow to your experience but usually putting together a deal like
that will be a lot longer than five months and it is time enough.
The Council resolution as mentioned earlier was initiated to get
our attention. You have our attention and we have met people with
the City. We have settled our differences; now I would like you to
defer the rezoning until a later time.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Naidow, Sobolewski , Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
NAYS: Scurto
Absent: Kluver, Morrow
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
4
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 84-2-1-4
by Tim Nikou to rezone property located south of Six Mile Road
between Merriman and Oporto in the Northeast 1/4 of Section
14 from RUF to P.S.
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division regarding
storm sewer availability to service this site. There is a letter
from William Shiels, President, Brookwood Estates Association, re-
commending that the Commission deny this petition , and a letter from
Darcy and Brian Maher stating their opposition to this change of
zoning.
*Mr. Kluver entered the meeting at 8:55 p.m.
Thomas Goebel , Real Estate Representative , 18903 Melvin, was present.
Mr. Andrew: Do you have a purchase agreement?
Tim Nikou, 18680 Southampton : Yes.
Mr. Andrew: Who is the owner of record?
liov Mr. Nikou: Dr. Ferrer.
9103
Mr. Andrew: If the rezoning should be accomplished, what do you intend to do?
11100 Mr. Nikou: Medical office.
4 Mr. Thomas Goebel : There was a comment earlier in the evening that a number of parcels
had been sold and one is still available. That is surprising. There
is 90% occupancy. Ten years ago I would agree with those letters.
Six Mile had a beautiful residential atmosphere but ten of those
thirteen have been rezoned and built upon not counting the K of C
and Bossio's.
Mr. Andrew; Bossio's is a nonconforming use -- a carry over from earlier years.
That is something the City was stuck with.
Mrs. Sobolewski : The property is owned by the Doctor?
Mr. Goebel : Yes.
Mrs. Sobolewski : Lot 15 -- is that house occupied?
Mr. Goebel : Yes, by Mrs. Bowers who owns the property.
Mrs. Sobolewski : Lot 13 is owned by the Doctor?
Mr. Goebel : No, Lot 13 is owned by Mr. Borregard.
110 Mrs. Scurto: Is Nikou going to develope Lot 13 and 14 or is Mrs. Bowers going to
develop 13 and Nikou 14?
4
Mr. Goebel : Mr. Borregard is going to develop Lot 13 and Mr. Nikou Lot 14.
Mr. Zimmer: From a size standpoint -- would it support an office?
Mr. Nagy: Yes, they have submitted a very tentative site plan.
Mr. Zimmer: I think it is not appropriate from the neighborhood and traffic
standpoint.
Mrs. Scurto: About three or four years ago, there was some talk about development
at the end of Munger -- what happened to that? Is it still zoned
residential?
Mr. Nagy: Yes . The petition was just withdrawn -- the property ownership
changed.
Grover Lewis, 30000 Six Mile Road: We got into a situation where we have spot zoning.
The values of our property by building all these little buildings
will go down. I don't want to see black top when I look out my
door. I am against the petition.
[aniel
O'Neil , 29970 Six Mile: I purchased a home on the north side of Six Mile and
planned on raising a family. Seeing more professional buildings
makes me think I will move.
• 9104
Brian Maher, 17005 Oporto: We have lived here four years now, and in Livonia for
twenty years. It is a nice, quiet neighborhood. We have children.
This will be 6 to 7 feet from our bedrooms . We are surrounded now
IL, by woods and it seems to be a shame to wreck the value of the area.
Mr. Vyhnalek: Has there ever been a house on that lot?
Mr. Goebel : I don' t believe so.
Mrs. Bowers: There never was a house on i t. That and my house was one lot at one
time.
Mr. Vyhnalek: I think a few years ago I , as a Commissioner, made a commitment
that we should not go commercial or professional along Six Mile.
Mrs. Frank Brodick, 16971 Oporto: I agree with my neighbors here and I am against this
proposal .
James Gibson, 16978 Oporto: I oppose it for the same reasons as stated.
Glen Lottie, 30320 Six Mile: I will be directly affected by the traffic. I was glad
to see Vargos go to Bossio's. It is a nice family restaurant. I
would like to see this stay residential .
Mr. Boebel : Can you ask Mrs. Bowers her position?
toMrs. Bowers: No comment.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew,
Chairman , declared the public hearing on Petition 84-2-1-4 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted,
it was
#3-45-84 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 13, 1984
on Petition 84-2-1-4 by Tim Nikou to rezone property located south of
Six Mile Road between Merriman and Oporto in the Northeast 1/4 of
Section 14 from RUF to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 84-2-1-4 be denied for the
following reasons:
(1) The proposed change of zoning is in conflict with the Future
Land use Plan of the City of Livonia which designates the
subject area for low-density residential uses.
(2) The proposed change of zoning would be detrimental to and
detract from the ongoing residential use and enjoyment of
the area.
(3) The proposed change of zoning would not promote the orderly
growth and development of the surrounding area but would tend
to encourage other requests for office and commercial zoning
in the adjoining area.
9105
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.
to Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 84-2-1-5
by Gerald Borregard to rezone property located south of Six Mile Road
between Merriman and Oporto in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 14 from
RUF to P.S.
Mr. Nagy: The letters in the file regarding Petition 84-2-1-4 apply also to
this petition.
Mr. Borregard, 30026 Bentley: We do own a house on the corner of this property. I am
a Realtor in Livonia. I don 't see where you will be able to maintain
Lot 14 for residential use. This is not one of the finer homes.
I appreciate what the people in the neighborhood are striving for.
We are actually trying to improve the neighborhood. There is com-
mercial which is not even shown on the map which I don' t think is
quite fair.
Mrs. Scurto: Are you referring to the child care?
Mr. Borregard: No, you have a kennel within 300' east.
Mr. Andrew: I have a problem with your comment. Is a dog kennel permitted in
RUF?
IL Mr. Borregard: Yes, and it was there before Zoning Ordinance #543 and is a valid
non-conforming use.
Mr. Zimmer: How long have you owned the property?
Mr. Borregard: About one and a half years. It was an estate and it was destined
to be sold. I didn' t buy it to live in. I thought it was very
viable and I thought we could develop it .
Grover Lewis, 30000 Six Mile Road: That kennel was just sold and it is a house. I am
opposed to this petition.
Mrs. Brodick: What were you proposing to put there?
Mr. Borregard: An office building.
Glen Lottie: I am opposed.
Mrs. Rowland, 30091 Oporto: I am opposed.
Mr. Maher: This will be about ten feet from my house. I am opposed.
Mrs. Scurto: Is the house currently occupied?
Mr. Borregard: Yes.
;Mrs. Scurto: I am concerned that if this doesn' t go through , that house needs a
lot of work, and your neighborhood is not going to be allowed to
have a single residence in some need of repair.
James Gibson, 16978 Oporto: We cannot stand any more traffic, and if it was a real
9106
estate office there would be more traffic.
Imo Charles Rowe, 30091 Six Mile: At first I was not opposed because I don' t feel the people
in there are keeping it up. But I decided it is a bus stop and the
kids walk up there to the corner and I can't see the added traffic.
Mr. Lottie: I think you assume that if the house is torn down no other house will
be built there. But along Six Mile people are building residences.
Even if the house does decay, someone else will build a house there.
Mr. Goebel : I would like to speak in support of the proposal . It would be doing
the City a favor in replacing the house with a better structure. 1
wouldn't have been a part of either one of these if I didn' t think
there would be commercial here in the area. I have no desire to put
anything in an area that wouldn' t fit . It is my professional opinion
that office buildings would improve the area.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 85-2-1-5 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski , seconded by Mrs. Naidow and unanimously adopted,
it was
#3-46-84 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 13, 1984
on Petition 84-2-1-5 by Gerald Borregard to rezone property located south
of Six Mile Road between Merriman and Oporto in the Northeast 1/4 of
Section 14 from RUF to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 84-2-1-5 be denied for the
following reasons:
(1) The proposed change of zoning is in conflict with the Future Land
Use Plan of the City of Livonia which designates the subject area
for low-density residential uses.
(2) The proposed change of zoning would be detrimental to and detract
from the ongoing residential use and enjoyment of the area.
(3) The proposed change of zoning would not promote the orderly growth
and development of the surrounding area but would tend to encourage
other requests for office and commercial zoning in the adjoining 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. Andrew, Chairman , declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 84-1 -2-5
by Arthur C. Trost requesting waiver use approval for additional seating
space within an existing restaurant located on the south side of Plymouth
'toad, east of Stark Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33.
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division indicating
they have no problems with this petition .
9107
Mr. Andrew: I understand that you dismantled the bakery operation.
1[0 A. C. Trost, petitioner: Yes.
1 Mr. Andrew: How long ago?
Mr. Trost: January 1st.
Mr. Andrew; It is all now restaurant?
Mr. Trost: I hope to make it all restaurant. I have seating in the bakery.
Mr. Zimmer: I don' t recall the bakery had any seats.
Mr. Trost: It didn' t.
Mr. Zimmer; How did you get seats? Didn' t you need approval ?
Mr. Trost: I was under the impression that in a bakery you didn't need
approval .
Mr. Zimmer: That is crucial .
Mr. Trost: That is why i am here now.
Mr. Falk: You promised to do certain things. I would like someone to tell me
what he said he was going to do, what he did without us and where we
li, are now.
3
Mr. Shane, Assistant Planning Director, explained the original plan submitted to the
Commission in connection with approval of the original operation,
pointing out the unimproved areas and what was proposed for outside
renovation when the waiver use petition was submitted for approval .
Mr. Shane: When it was approved, it was approved with the usual conditions of
upgrading the site.
Mr. Falk: How much was the restaurant going to occupy originally?
Mr. Shane: About 10%.
Mr. Falk: How about the bakery?
Mr. Shane: 20 to 30 percent. He did construct a parking lot but he didn 't put
in the landscaped areas. He striped the parking lot and put in
some landscaping. Now he has expanded the restaurant internally.
Accordingly, he had to provide additional parking which is shown
on the plan because he used for parking the areas that he was going
to landscape. If he had put in the landscaping, he would have had
to do something else to provide additional parking.
Mr. Shane explained to the Commission what is on the site at the present time.
toMr. Andrew: What use is being put to the area that was the kitchen in the bakery
where the bread was made?
3
' 9108
Mr. Trost: We still use it as a kitchen.
Mr. Vyhnalek: Who would catch this? Aren' t we suppose to have somebody check
this out. He has been in business for a year.
a
Mr. Trost : The reason the islands weren' t put in is because of the traffic.
My delivery truck would not be able to get back there because
of the post.
Mr. Andrew: Was the pole shown on the original site plan?
Mr. Trost: Yes.
Mr. Andrew: Identified as a pole?
Mr. Shane; No.
Mr. Zimmer: I think what we are interested in doing is breaking up the depth
of asphalt by looking at some planters ; something substantial .
I would suggest that we get what we think will enhance the
property with landscaping and give you room for your truck. We
will still let you make your turns in the back but further back
on the property. I am sure the staff can work out a solution
to the problem.
Mr. Falk: I agree with Mr. Zimmer. I would like to see something sub-
1[10 stantial . We can' t check these sites because of more assignments
to the staff. We are here to approve site plans and site plans
should be done the way they are approved. You can get something
from the staff that is presentable and I would like to see a lot
more green. I would like to see the parking moved back. The staff
and you should get together and get something nice and let him
have a restaurant and the things he wants.
Mr. David Trost, 8902 Hillcrest : Mr. Falk things we did a lot to take away from the
appearance of the building. The building had white tile. We
have gone along with the Council and Commission from the beginning.
You want these little planters that set away from Plymouth Road.
There is another two acres in the back that is all trees but that
doesn't seem to make any difference.
Mrs. Scurto: I object to what you have done and will vote no.
Mr. Trost: I was told by someone in the City that to sit down and eat in a
bakery, you didn' t need a waiver use.
Mr. Nagy : Accordingly to our Ordinance, it is a restaurant and a waiver use
approval is necessary.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 84-1-2-5 closed.
11110 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Zimmer and seconded by Mr. Falk, it was
' #3-47-84 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 13, 1984
on Petition 84-1-2-5 by Arthur C. Trost requesting waiver use approval
for additional seating space within an existing restaurant located on the
•
9109
south side of Plymouth Road, east of Stark Road in the Northeast 1/4
of Section 33, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine
to table Petition 84-1-2-5 until the Study Meeting to be conducted
by the City Planning Commission on March 20, 1984.
1[0: A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Naidow, Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
NAYS: Kluver, Scurto, Sobolewski
ABSENT: Morrow
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 84-2-2-7
by Peter Romain requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD
License in connection with an existing party store located on the
northeast corner of Joy Road and Cardwell in the Southeast 1/4 of
Section 36.
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating
there are no engineering problems in connection with this petition.
There also is a petition of numerous pages from residents indicating
that they are in favor of this request.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Romain, this Commission has no choice but to deny your petition
because there is a requirement that we cannot recommend approval
to tfte City Council when it is a request for an SDD license that is
within 1 ,000 feet of an existing license. The City Council has
authority to waive that but we do not.
i There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on Petition 84-2-2-7 closed.
1[00
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Naidow, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted,
it was
#3-48-84 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 13, 1984
on Petition 84-2-2-7 by Peter Romain requesting waiver use approval to
utilize an SDD License in connection with an existing party store located
on the northeast corner of Joy Road and Cardwell in the Southeast 1/4 of
Section 36, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that Petition 84-2-2-7 be denied for the following reasons :
(1) The proposal fails to comply with the waiver use standards set forth
in Section 11 .03(r) of Zoning Ordinance #543 which states that "such
proposed SDD Licensed establishment shall be located at least 1 ,000
feet distant from any existing SDD Licensed establishment, as measured
from the nearest point on the building proposed to be licensed to the
building in which the existing licensed establishment is located."
(2) 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 Zoning Ordinance #543.
9110
(3) The proposed use is contrary to the spirit and intent of the
IL 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.
FURTHER REZOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance
with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 84-2-2-8
by Harley Ellington for Glen Eden Lutheran Memorial Park requesting
waiver use approval to construct an addition to an existing mausoleum
located on the south side of Eight Mile Road, east of Newburgh Road in
Section 5.
Representative of Harley Ellington Associates : We are duplicating an addition on an
existing building; about 5,000 square feet. We have submitted
plans. There will be 458 entombments and 668 niches.
Mr. Andrew: We have seen the plans and compliment you on them.
Mrs. Scurto: I would like to compliment you on the phenomenal job you do in keep-
ing that lake clean.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 84-2-2-8 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted,
k it was
4
1[10
#3-49-84 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on March 13, 1984
on Petition 84-2-2-8 by Harley Ellington for Glen Eden Lutheran Memorial
Park requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to an
existing mausoleum located on the south side of Eight Mile Road, east
of Newburgh Road in Section 5, the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 84-2-2-8 be approved subject
to the following conditions:
(1) that Site Plan, Sheet S-1 , prepared by Harley Ellington
Pierce Yee Associates, which is hereby approved shall be
adhered to;
(2) that Landscape Plan dated 2/23/84, prepared by Harley Ellington
Pierce Yee Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered
to;
(3) that Elevation Plan dated 2/24/84, prepared by Harley Ellington
Pierce Yee Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered
to; and
(4) that all landscape materials as shown on the approved Landscape
Plan shall be installed on the site prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy con-
IL dition;
9111
for the following reasons :
(1) The proposed use complies with all of the regulations of
Ordinance #543 that relate to the proposed use.
(2) The site has the capacity to accomodate the expansion in
use.
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. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski , seconded by Mrs. Naidow and unanimously adopted,
it was
#3-50-84 RESOLVED that pursuant to Section 23.01 (b) of Zoning Ordinance #543,
the City Planning Commission does hereby establish and order that
a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to amend Section
18.50(F) of Ordinance #543 relating to sign regulations in industrial
districts.
AND that, notice of the above hearing be given in accordance with the
provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mrs . Scurto and seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, it was
4 #3-51-84 RESOLVED that the minutes of the 469th Regular Meeting held by the City
Planning Commission on February 28, 1984 are approved.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Scurto, Naidow, Sobolewski , Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Kluver, Andrew
ABSENT: Morrow
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Zimmer and unanimously adopted,
it was
#4-52-84 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that Petition 84-1-8-3 by Richard D. Oliver requesting
approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 submitted in con-
nection with a proposal to erect a four-story office building on
the west side of Laurel Park Drive between Six and Seven Mile Roads
in Section 7, be approved subject to the following conditions :
(1) that Site Plan 8401 , Sheet 2, dated 3/6/84, prepared by
Seymour J. Levine Architects, Inc. , which is hereby approved
shall be adhered to;
9112
(2) that Building Elevations as shown on Plan 8401 , Sheets 4 & 5,
dated 3/6/84, prpeared by Seymour J, Levine Architects, Inc. ,
which are hereby approved shall be adhered to; and
IL
(3) that a detailed Landscape Plan showing a complete underground
sprinkler system shall be submitted for Planning Commission
approval within thirty (30) days.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted,
it was
#3-53-84 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 84-2-8-10 by Villanova Construction, Inc. , requesting
approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 in connection with a
proposal to erect a retail store complex on the north side of Seven Mile
Road between Westmore and Shadyside in Section 3, be approved subject to
the following conditions:
(1) that Site Plan 101 , Sheet 1 , dated 3/7/84, prepared by G. J. Sweeney
Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(2) that the Building Elevations as shown on Plan 101 , Sheet 1 , dated
3/7/84, prepared by G. J. Sweeney Associates, which are hereby
approved shall be adhered to; and
Irti; (3) that the landscaping as shown on the Site Plan which is hereby
approved shall be installed on the site prior to occupancy of the
building and thereafter maintained in a healthy condition.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Zimmer and unanimously adopted,
it was
#3-54-84 RESOLVED that, the City Planning does hereby approve the Landscape Plan
submitted in connection with Petition 83-10-2-36 by Ventura & Associates
Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to use an existing building located
on the northwest corner of Middlebelt and Puritan in the Northeast 1/4
of Section 14 for general office uses subject to the following conditions :
(1) that the Landscape Plan for Damiani Insurance , dated 3/6/84, prepared
by Harold Thomas Nursery, which is hereby approved shall be adhered
to; and
(2) that the landscaping as shown on the approved plan shall be installed
on the site prior to occupancy and thereafter maintained in a healthy
condition.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
9113
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 470th Regular Meeting
and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on March 13, 1984
was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
a
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Jos-ph J. 'al , Secrets- y
i
ATTEST: ' •
Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman
ac