Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPUBLIC HEARING - 2017-01-11 - REZONING - SOAVE CITY OF LIVONIA PUBLIC HEARING Minutes of Meeting Held on Wednesday, January 11, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ A Public Hearing of the Council of the City of Livonia was held at the City Hall Auditorium on Wednesday, January 11, 2017. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kathleen E. McIntyre, President Brandon M. Kritzman, Vice President Scott Bahr Maureen Miller Brosnan Jim Jolly Brian Meakin Cathy K. White MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Taormina, Director of Planning Todd Zilincik Don Knapp, City Attorney Bonnie J. Murphy, CER-2300, Certified Electronic Recorder The Public Hearing was called to order at 7:24 p.m. with President Kathleen McIntyre presiding. The Public Hearing is in regard to Petition 2016-11-01-08, submitted by Soave Homes, to rezone the property located on the east side of Levan Road between Ann Arbor Trail and Plymouth Road (10014 Levan Road), in the Northeast ¼ of Section 32, from RUF (Rural Urban Farm) to R-1 (One Family Residential – 60’ x 120’ Lot). The City Clerk has mailed a notice to those persons in the area affected by the proposed changes, and all other requirements of Ordinance No. 543, the Zoning Ordinance, have been fulfilled. The public hearing is now open for comments. There were three people in the audience. Please state clearly your name and address before making your comments. Taormina: I can, if you like, Madam President. McIntyre: Thank you. Taormina: Just a few comments regarding this request. This is property that is located on the east side of Levan and south of Parkdale Avenue. The property in question is about 8/10ths of an acre in size, it includes 120 feet 2 of frontage on Levan and approximately 302 feet of frontage on Parkdale. So, the property is currently zoned RUF, the request this evening is to rezone it to the R-1 zoning category, that would be consistent with the single family homes that are located to the north on the opposite side of Parkdale Avenue as well as developed properties immediately to the east of the subject site. So, the R-1 would allow lots measuring 60 x 120, again consistent with many of the lots in the area. There are additional single family homes further to the south on Levan, in fact, Levan Road at this point turns from a paved road to gravel road, and that gravel road extends along the western boundary of this site, it’s relatively narrow and again, it provides only limited access to a few homes further to the south and then dead ends right at the Mill Rouge or Hines Parkway. So, the Future Land Use Plan does designate this property as Low Density Residential which corresponds to a density of about one to five units per acre, so the R-1 zoning would be consistent with the Future Land Use Plan. This was part of a larger site back as early as 2015 when it was split off. There’s a home located on the portion to the south which used to be attached to this property. That would remain as is. This property could then be subdivided into four R-1 lots that more than likely would be done via a site condominium so it would be something that would have to come back through a review process. Alternatively, it might be split into maybe three single family lots, acreage parcels, but I believe it’s the Petitioner’s intention to come back with the site condominium and have four lots, all meeting the R-1 District requirements. The Planning Commission is recommending approval of the rezoning as requested. Thank you. McIntyre: Thank you. Duggan: Good evening. Brian Duggan, 14215 Denne, Livonia, Michigan. Mark did a wonderful job. I would add that it would exceed the R-1, these lots will be 64 feet wide, R-1 zoning is 60 feet, so it would be a little larger lot. If I’m not mistaken, one of the lots, we would give an easement back to the City for a road, partial road that is needed. Taormina: If you’d like me to clarify that. McIntyre: Please. Taormina: Currently, as Levan Road exists adjacent to this property, it is deficient in right-of-way and the conceptual plan that was submitted with the application does show that the additional right-of-way would be dedicated to make Levan Road comply with the right-of-way requirements. McIntyre: Mr. Duggan, I assume you’re representing Soave Homes this evening? Duggan: Yes, I am. 3 Brosnan: Madam Chair. McIntyre: Ms. Brosnan. Brosnan: Through the Chair to Mr. Taormina, so just to clarify, once the zoning is secured then, if the Petitioner chose the site condominium route which most appear to go that way to get the project developed, that would then come back before us and it would be at that point that we would talk about the granting of the easement or does that need to be negotiated at this stage? Taormina: No, I think it would occur subsequent to the rezoning and as part of any entitlement to the property as far as whether it’s split as acreage parcels or developed as a site condominium, it would be at that time that we would secure the additional language. Brosnan: Okay. Madam Chair, I’ll offer the approving resolution. McIntyre: Thank you, Ms. Brosnan. Mr. Zilincik? Zilincik: I just wanted to remind you, thank you, Madam President, obviously whatever involvement takes place whether it’s lots or condos, we want to make sure the stormwater is resolved as far as however, that’s included as far as a development cost to develop the property. Obviously we appreciate the dedication of the right-of-way for Levan Road but as we all know there’s always issues that we see every day with the rain and we never know how the soils are until we get further information. But we definitely want to make sure that’s up front included as part of this whole development to make sure that we have those things in place for the future. Thank you. McIntyre: Thank you. Brosnan: Through the Chair to Mr. Taormina, about this process, is this one of those situations where we will hold the rezoning until we have the site plan so that all those issues can be addressed, stormwater, right-of-way? Taormina: The only complication with that would be if the developer elects to simply split the lots into three conforming parcels, no, three parcels, they would not conform unless it was rezoned because he couldn’t split those into three RUF lots and comply with the ordinance, so that could be done administratively so it wouldn’t trigger the second meeting and roll call vote for rezoning. So that would be the only obstacle I would say. In my opinion, I guess, you could proceed with the second reading without a site plan being submitted because it might be that the site plan is never 4 submitted, he chooses to develop it in another manner that can be handled administratively. McIntyre:: Thank you. Anyone else? As there were no further questions or comments, the Public Hearing was declared closed at 7:32 p.m. SUSAN M. NASH, CITY CLERK