HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1955-07-26 103QL
MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING OF THE
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
On July 26, 1955 the above hearing was held by the City Planning Commission
at the City Hall, 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Chairman Peter A.
Ventura called the Public Hearing to order at approximately 8:07 p.m.
William R. Robinson precided as secretary pro tem.
Members present: Robert Miller Karle Steinhoff H. Paul Harsha
Fred Lotz Daniel Lepo Peter A. Ventura
Robert L. Greene Dallas F. Hay William Robinson
Members absent: None
Approximately 75 people were present.
The secretary announced that the first item on the agenda was the request
dated June 21, 1955 by Joseph H. Freedman, Trojan Building Company for
approval of the final plat of Rosedale Gardens Subdivision, No. 15 located
on the East side of Farmington Road between Orangelawn Avenue and West Chicago
Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 34. Messrs. Joseph H. Freedman and Jack
Garber were present.
The secretary read letters dated July 14, 1955 from Marie W. Clark, City Clerk;
resolution adopted by the City Council July 11, 1955 and letter dated July 12,
1955 from Marie W. Clark, City Clerk.
Mr. Ventura asked whether there have been any changes made since approval was
given to the preliminary plat May 10, 1955. Mr. Freedman stated one lot was
made a little larger as requested by this commission.
Mr. Hugh Wood, Jr., Chief Inspector arrived at meeting at approximately
8:17 p.m.
No one was present opposed to approval of final plat of Rosedale Gardens Sub-
division, No. 15.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Steinhoff, seconded by Mr. Lotz and unanimously
carried, it was
#7-251-55 RESOLVED that, final plat of Rosedale Gardens Subdivision,
No. 15 located in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 34 be
approved, and
FURTHER RESOLVED, inasmuch as it appears on the records that
tentative approval of said proposed plat was given by the
City Planning Commission May 10, 1955; and it further appear-
ing that said proposed plat has been approved by the Depart-
ment of Public Works under date of July 1, 1955; and it
further appearing that a bond in the amount of $2,000 to
cover the installation of improvements has been filed in the
office of the City Clerk under date of July 21, 1955; such
bond having been approved by George D. Haller, City Attorney
on July 21, 1955 it would therefore appear that all the con-
ditions necessary to the release of building permits have
been met and the Building Department is hereby so notified.
The Chairman declared the foregoing resolution adopted. ,'
The Chair requested an expression from this commission as to whether or not
the letter granting approval of final plat be withheld temporarily from the
Building Department in order to comply with request of Mr. A. T. Kunze,
Wayne County Road Commission.
Mr. Garber stated he is aware of the request of the Wayne County Road
Commissioners that no building permits be issued, no water top ins, etc.
but that he would like to be able to record final plat in the meantime.
It was the decision of the commission that the letter granting approval of
final plat not be withheld from the Building Department.
The secretary announced that the next item on the agenda was the petition by
R. A. Buerrosse, Division Manager, Sinclair Refining Company requesting
permission to erect two metal neon roof signs 24' long and 39n high on Outlot
A, Greenette Subdivision located on the Southeast corner of Plymouth Road and
Garden Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 36. The secretary read petition
submitted by R. A. Buerrosse dated June 22, 1955. Mr. Randall, Randall Signs
23544 Hoover, Van Dyke was present.
Mr. Ventura asked Mr. Wood what action is being taken on violation issued by
his department dated July 21, 1955. Mr. Wood stated that not only are they in
violation regarding erection of sign without approval of this cannnssion but
are in violation in not having final inspection of building before opening
for business. Stated a notice of violation is sent and if matter has not
been corrected a notice is sent to appear in court.
Mr. Randall stated it is their usual procedure to take out permit for building
which shows proposed signs. Stated he did not realize location was in
Livonia and that in another instance when it was drawn to his attention he
had to remove base of sign and put it on private property. Stated he has
installed in Livonia other signs of the same type.
Mr. Ventura asked the square footage of proposed sign. Mr. Randall stated 100
square feet.
Mr. Hay made the following resolution which he withdrew after further con—
sideration:
RESOLVED that, petition by R. A. Buerrosse, Division Manager
Sinclair 4efining Company requesting permission to erect two
metal neon roof signs 24' long and 39" high on Outlot A
Greenette Subdivision located on the Southeast corner of
Plymouth Road and Garden Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of
Section 36 be tabled until after court hearing.
Mr. Ventura read violation dated July 21, 1955 that was issued to Randall
Signs Company by the Building Department and stated that if this commission
gives approval of this sign that that will correct violation.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Hay and seconded by Mr. Lepo, it was
r 1032
#7-252-55 RESOLVED that, petition by R. A. Buerrosse, Division Manager
Sinclair Refining Company requesting permission to erect two
metal neon roof signs 24' long and 39“ high on Outlot A,
Greenette Subdivision located on the Southeast corner of
Plymouth Road and Garden Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of
Section 36 be tabled until such time as the violation of
Zoning Ordinance, No. 60 has been taken care of in Municipal
Court.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Greene, Miller, Lotz, Lepo, Steinhoff, Hay, Marsha, and
Ventura
NAYS: Robinson
Mr. George D. Haller arrived at meeting at approximately 8:20 p.m.
The secretary announced that the next item on the agenda was petition by
John K. Semizian, John's Drive-In Cleaners and Tailors requesting permission
to erect Wolverine Porcelain Enamel Neon Sign 3' wide and 30' long located
across front of building on Outlots Bob and B5, Greenette Subdivision located
at 29175 Plymouth Road and situated on the South side of Plymouth Road
approximately 600 feet East of Middlebelt Road'in the Northwest 1/4 of Section
36. The secretary read letter dated July 22, 1955 from Calvin Roberts, Chief
Livonia Fire Department. Mr. John K. Semizian was present.
Mr. Ventura asked the size of the proposed sign. It was established the sign
would be 90 square feet.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Hay, seconded by Mr. Lepo and unanimously
carried, it was
#7-253-55 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
July 19, 1955 the City Planning Commission does hereby grant
the petition by John K. Semizian, John's Drive-In Cleaners
and Tailors requesting permission to erect Wolverine Porcelain
Enamel Neon Sign 3' wide and 30' long located across front of
building on Outlots Bob and B5, Greenette Subdivision located
at 29175 Plymouth Road and situated on the South side of
Plymouth Road approximately 600 feet East of Middlebelt Road
in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 36, and
FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was sent to
property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Depart-
ments as listed in the Proof of Service.
The Chairman declared the foregoing resolution adopted.
The secretary announced that the next item on the agenda was Petition No.
Z-106 by Leonard R. Farber asking that the zoning classification of portion
of Parcels Flel, Flf3, F2b1F2c5 and all of Parcels Fiala, F4aF5b2b, F6alb,
F5a, F8al, F9a, F10 and FllaFllc2 located on the North side of Plymouth Road
approximately 1,325 feet West of Merriman Road in the South 1/2 of Section
27 be changed from M-1 to R-l. The secretary read letter dated July 12, 1955
from Leonard R. Farber. The petitioner nor a representative was present.
I:1:d 0
Mr. Hay made the following motion which he withdrew after further consider-
ation:
RESOLVED that, Petition No. Z-106 as submitted by Leonard R.
Farber for a change of zoning in the South 1/2 of Section 27
from M-1 to R-1 be tabled until August 16, 1955.
Mr. Harsha stated he believed this matter should be settled tonight and
that commission knows at this time whether or not it wants to break up
industrial zoning as requested in this petition. Stated petitioner should
be present.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Harsha and seconded by Mr. Steinhoff, it was
#7-254-55 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
on Petition No. Z-106 as submitted by Leonard R. Farber for
a change of zoning in the South 1/2 of Section 27 from M-1 to
R-1 the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition No. Z-106 be denied, and
FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in
the official newspaper, The Livonian under date of July 7,
1955 and notice of which hearing was sent to The Detroit
Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan
Bell Telephone Company, The Consumer Power Company, City
Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Miller, Lotz, Lepo, Steinhoff, Hay, Harsha, Ventura and
Robinson
NAYS: None
NOT VOTING: Greene
The secretary announced that the next item on the agenda was Petition No.
Z-114 by Bernice Lehn asking that the zoning classification of Parcel FF1
located on the North side of Schoolcraft Road approximately 1,830 feet West
of Inkster Road in the Southea8t 1/4 of Section 24 be changed from C-2 to
R-1-A. The Secretary read letters dated June 2, 1955 from Marie W. Clark,
City Clerk and dated July 7, 1955 from Calvin Roberts, Chief Livonia Fire
Department. The petitioner nor a representative was present.
No one was present opposed to petition as presented.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Lotz, seconded by Mr. Robinson and
unanimously carried, it was
#7-255-55 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
on Petition No. Z-114 as submitted by Bernice Lehn for a
change of zoning in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 24 from C-2
to R-1-A the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition No. Z-114 be granted, and
:]I
FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published
in the official newspaper, The Livonian under date of July 7,
1955 and noti ce of which hearing was sent to The Detroit
Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan
Bell Telephone Company, The Consumer Power Company, City
Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service.
The Chairman declared the foregoing resolution adopted.
The secretary read Petition No. Z-109,56a by Elliot D. Cohen, et al asking
that Section 4.09, Zoning Ordinance, No. 60 be amended to allow Outdoor
Theaters to be erected and operated in the City of Livonia and thatthey be
allowed to erect an Outdoor Theater on Parcel T located between Plymouth
Road andthe C & 0 Railway and between Merriman and Middlebelt Roads in the
Southwest 1/4 of Section 26. The secretary read letters from Marie W. Clark,
City Clerk dated May 19, 1955 and dated July 11, 1955 from W. J. Harahan, Jr.
Industrial Commissioner, The Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company.
Mr. Ventura read Section 4.09, Zoning Ordinance, No. 60 and stated that all
argument will be confined to whether or not ordinance should be changed.
Stated in his opinion it would be waste of time to argue whether or not one
location is better than the next.
The secretary read letter dated July 15, 1955 from George E. Harmon, Chief
Livonia Police Department
Mr. Avern Cohn, 701 Bankers Equitable Building, Det. 26 was present
representing petitioner. Mr. Cohn stated that it is their opinion that
under the Constitution of Michigan that an absolute prohibition as contained
in Section 4.09, Zoning Ordinance, No. 60 is an arbitrary prohibition.
Stated such a use as this cannot be prohibited completely but that it could
be regulated. Gave example of a recent Supreme Court ruling whereby trailer
camps that were prohibited in a community by ordinance that such ordinance
was ruled to be void and that such an ordinance as this is unreasonable.
Suggested that ordinance be amended to permit drive-in theaters in Livonia
and that commission could set forth certain reasonable conditions such as
the plans of a proposed drive-in theater having to be presented to this
commission. Stated that if at some future date a permit to build a drive-in
theater was denied by the Building Department under Section 4.09 it is quite
conceivable that if this was taken to court the court would rule that section
of ordinance void thus perhaps allowing drive-in theater in undesirable
location.
Mr. William McGiverin, 1077 Penobscot Building, Detroit stated he has
acquired a suitable site for drive-in theater and that he agreed with
Mr. Cohn that ordinance should be amended.
Mr. B. E. Pool, 12837 Stark Road stated he filed a letter with this
commission and wondered why he wasnot on agenda. Mr. Ventura stated
Mr. Pool's request is a letter and not a petition.
Mr. Pool stated he though that was all that was necessary. Mr. Ventura
read portion of Section 20.01, Zoning Ordinance, No. 60 "...On receipt of a
petition for amendment in due form and on payment of the required filing fee,
the City Clerk shall forthwith refer such petition to the City Planning
Commission. Such commission shall within 90 days following reference to it
of a petition, hold a public hearing..."
400 c�
•moi
Mr. John E. Precobb, 9819 Auburndale stated he represented Eldorado Drive-In
Company. Stated his group has done considerable study and research on the
subject of Drive-In Theaters. Stated the source of information he found most
helpful is the study by the State Highway Officials "Policy on Drive-In
Theaters" which is a report on what constitutes a good Drive-in Theater.
Submitted five copies of report by State Highway Officials for commission's
inspection and information. Stated that after commission knows facts, it
can make fair decision. Stated it is not their intent to take ordinance to
court although they have been aware for some time that if ordinance was
taken to court it could be broken. Stated if and when ordinance is amended,
they will come in with their proposal. Stated a Drive-In Theater combines
two pleasures: (1) Automobile and (2) Theater. Stated a Drive-In Theater
affords the entire family to go to theater for half the price of an in-door
theater. Whether a Drive-In Theater is good or bad depends on the way it is
regulated and developed.
Mr. Ventura asked Mr. Haller whether it would have bearing on legality of
this commission's position on the question inasmuch as ordinance was adopted
after vote of the people.
Mr. Haller stated the legality would be substantially the same. Stated
ordinance represents public policy of the community.
Mr. Lepo asked Mr. Haller whether an individual could file request for Drive-
In Theater in the Building Department; request be denied; individual take
matter to court and court rule that ordinance wasn't constitutional and thus
Drive-In Theater could be erected at a location not approved by this commission.
Mr. Haller stated that if matter was taken to court and court upheld them,
they could proceed.
Mr. Greene asked Mr. Haller about the statement that if this was taken to
court it would be ruled unconstitutional.
Mr. Haller stated one cannot be certain what ruling one will get when one
goes to court. Stated different facts make for different cases. Stated
he did not think it is foregone conclusion as to what would be decision of
court.
There were 28 people present opposed to Petition No. Z-109,56a.
Mr. Pat Bizel, 29898 Richland stated that by referendum the people of
Livonia voted not to allow Drive-In Theaters. Stated industrial property
is the back bone of a community. Gave example of the Drive-In Theater
located at Telegraph and West Chicago Roads and the fact that the duplex
dwellings across the street could not be rented.
Mr. Mitchell, Merriman Road stated ordinance should not be amended and that
income from taxes on Drive-In Theaters is low.
Mr. William Birkett, 11022 Sunset submitted petition with 69 signatures
opposed to change of Section 4.09.
Mr. Richard Highland, President, Devonshire Park Subdivision stated highways
in Livonia are incapable of handling normal daily traffic and that to add
4
additional traffic by allowing Drive-In Theater in City would be a detriment
to City and people.
Mrs. Kenneth Crawford, 30844 Schoolcraft Road stated she is against change
in ordinance. Stated she visited Drive-In Theater once and that it was an
unpleasent experience -- traffic was heavy, police had to patrol in jeeps
and it is a breeding ground for delinquency.
Mr, H. L. Rasmussen, Plymouth Road and Mr. Garrett, 29821 Richland stated
they were opposed to amending ordinance. Mr. Rasmussen suggested an in-
door theater be erected.
Mr. Pool stated he proposed to build both a Drive-In Theater and an In Door
Theater.
Mr. Greene stated this commission has been studying this question for several
months. Read letter dated July 6, 1955 prepared by Albe Munson on this
subject.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Greene, seconded by Mr. Lotz and unanimously
carried, it was
#7-256-55 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
on Petition No. Z-109,56a as submitted by Elliot D. Cohen,
et al requesting that Section 4.09, Zoning Ordinance, No. 60
be amended to allow Outdoor Theaters to be erected and
operated in the City of Livonia and that he be allowed to
erect an Outdoor Theater in the Northeast3/4 of Section 26
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition No. Z-109,56a be denied, and
FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published
in the official newspaper, The Livonian under date of
July 7, 1955 and notice of which hearing was sent to The
Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company
Michigan Bell Telephone Company, The Consumer Power Company
City Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of
Service.
The Chairman declared the foregoing resolution adopted and called a recess
at approximately 9:35 p.m.
The Chairman called the Public Hearing to order at approximately 9:53 p.m.
with all present as named at the beginning and the course of the meeting
except Mr. Hugh Wood, Jr.
The secretary read petition No. Z-102 by Daniel Bzovi asking that Section
4.09, Zoning Ordinance, No. 60 be amended to allow Outdoor Theaters to be
erected and operated in the City of Livonia and that he be allowed to erect
an Outdoor Theater and swimming pool on Parcel A2 and B and portion of
Parcel Alb located on the Southwest corner of Schoolcraft and Middlebelt Roads
in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 26. The secretary read letter dated
March 29, 1955 from Marie W. Clark, City Clerk. Mr. Nandino Perlongo,
320 South Main Street, Plymouth was present representing petitioner.
Zt
Mr. Perlongo requested letter dated July 15, 1955 from George E. Harmon,
Chief Livonia Police Department be reread.
Mr. Perlongo stated the proposed location is across the street from the race
track and that they believe this is a good location for Drive-In Theater if
this commission decides to amend ordinance. Asked commission how many of
these same objections were in evidence when Olds was running his gas buggy.
Stated he did not think Livonia should build a wall around itself like China.
Stated in a large city like Livonia it is hard to understand why a Drive-In
Theater could not be properly located.
Mr. Greene asked Mr. Perlongo why he thought this a good location when there
is an existing traffic hazard with race track. Mr. Perlongo stated School-
craft is four lanes and it is best highway in entire city to carry traffic.
Mr. William Birkett stated petition previously submitted also pertains to
this petition.
Mrs. Kenneth Crawford stated if there is a major change in the ordinance
as proposed by Petitions No. Z-109,56a and No. Z-102, it should be voted
upon by the people.
Upon a motion duly made by hr. Steinhoff, seconded by Mr. Lepo and
unanimously carried, it was
#7-257-55 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
on Petition No. Z-102 as submitted by Daniel Bzovi asking
that Section 4.09, Zoning Ordinance, No. 60 be amended to
allow Outdoor Theaters to be erected and operated in the City
of Livonia and that he be allowed to erect an Outdoor Theater
and swimming pool in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 26, the
City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that Petition No. Z-102 be denied, and
FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published
in the official newspaper, The Livonian under date of July 7,
1955 and notice of which hearing was sent to The Detroit
Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan
Bell Telephone Company, The Consumer Power Company, City
Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service
The Chairman declared the foregoing resolution adopted.
The secretary read opinion dated July 20, 1955 addressed to Marie W. Clark,
City Clerk from George D. Haller, City Attorney regarding Garofalo Drive-In
Restaurant located on Lot 36, Liverance Estates Subdivision.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Hay, seconded by Mr. Lepo and unanimously
carried, it was
#7-258-55 RESOLVED that, opinion dated July 20, 1955 addressed to
Marie W. Clark, City Clerk from George D. Haller, City
Attorney regarding Garofalo Drive-In Restaurant located
on Lot 36, Liverance Estates Subdivision be spread in
the minutes.
f.
Addressed to: Marie W. Clark From: George D. Haller
City Clerk City Attorney
Dated: July 20, 1955
This is in response to your communication of July 14, 1955, regarding former
opinion of this office, relative to Garofalo Drive-In.
The suit of Garofalo vs. Livonia, Chancery #525-398, resulted in a decree by
Judge Moynihan, giving plaintiff an order for injuction, which was subsequently
issued by the Wayne County Court. This bars the City from "interfering in any
manner with the construction of the building" on the lot mentioned.
- The file in this office does not indicate the disposition of the other action
mentioned by Mr. Ashmore, but Garofalo's attorney, Judge Perlongo, assures me
that his client also prevailed there.
According to the building application, the premises are located in a C-2 zone.
Uses permitted therein are those allowed in C-1, plus others specified in C-2.
In C-1, restaurants are permissible uses; by incorporation, this is also true
in C-2. Mr. Ashmore evidently regarded a drive-in as not a restaurant, but
rather a "food sales" enterprise, requiring certain approvals under 10.02 (c)
or possibly as an "open-air sales" enterprise, also requiring Planning
Commission approval.
A restaurant or cafe is a place where the public eats. It usually includes
kitchens where the food is prepared and dining rooms or other space where it is
consumed. The term has no definite legal meaning, unless fixed in some
statute. In foreign cities, and occasionally in this country, we find what
is called a "sidewalk cafe". There is such a place at St. Clair Metropolitan
Beach. In the case of a "drive-In" the enterprise is aplace where the public
eats. It includes a kitchen where food is prepared, sometimes a counter indoors
where food is consumed, more usually an area of privately-owned parking space,
where food is consumed in the customer's cars. While some food may be pur-
chased, and taken away to be eaten elsewhere, this is also frequently true of
ordinary restaurants.
A prior Livonia Council has provided for restaurants to operate under license
prescribed by Ordinance #9. In that Ordinance, restaurant is defined to in-
clude "sandwich stand" -- "and all other eating or drinking establishments, as
well as kitchens or other places in which food --- is prepared for sale on the
premises or elsewhere." If the Council so defined a restaurant in 1950, it may
be presumed that it intended the same meaning in 1952 when it enacted the Zon-
ing Ordinance. The definition would seem to bring a "drive-in" under restaurants
rather than under the enterprises mentioned in Section10.02 (c).
If this view is correct, it would follow that the owner will apply for licence
under Ordinance #9; and that the City Planning Commission has no jurisdiction.
However, the greenbelt provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would apply. As a
consequence, I am compelled to disagree with Mr. Ashmore's conclusion that
Garofalo is not entitled to a license to operate, unless and until he gets
Planning Commission approval.
A"%
The Chairman drew to commission's attention that the scale drawing as requested
July 19, 1955 from Manuel Plaskove, Michigan Floor Covering Company for sign `r
located at 27675 Grand River Avenue has not been received.
It was established that the sign has not been erected; therefore the commission
would give Mr. Plaskove further opportunity to comply.
Mr. Ventura stated a request has been made by Rev. E. C. Crandall, 20251 Osmus
whether or not he has to have the approval of this commission under Section
5.02 (b) or any other section of city ordinance for his wife to care for four
children during the day. Mr. Ventura asked Mr. Haller what category he would
classify this under.
Mr. Haller stated there is the home occupation category in Section 6.02 (f).
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Hay, seconded by Mr. Lepo and unanimously
carried, it was
#7-259-55 RESOLVED that, request for clarification by Rev. E. C. Crandall,
20251 Osmus whether or not he has to have the approval of this
commission under Section 5.02 (b) or any other section of City
Ordinance for his wife to care for four children during theday
be referred to the City Attorney for a written opinion.
The Chairman declared the foregoing resolution adopted.
There was a lengthy discussion regarding the use of Registered, Certified and
Regular Mail for Planning Commission Notices of Public Hearing.
The Chairman read portion of Section 125.45, Act 285, of the Public Acts of
1931, as amended "...Notice shall be sent to the said address by registered
mail of the time and place of such hearing not less than five days before the
date fixed therefor. Similar notice shall be mailed to the owners of land
immediately adjoining the platted land, as their names appear upon the plats
in the county auditor's office...."
Mr. Haller stated this section states "similar notice" and not "similar Method"
Mr. Ventura suggested that commission change its method and send registered
mail to those whose name appear on plat and regular mail to adjoining property
owners.
The secretary read opinion dated July 18, 1955 from George D. Haller, City
Attorney.
Mr. Haller stated ordinance and statute were written before the existence of
Certified Mail. Registry would cover certified if certified gives a record
of the delivery of the letter. Stated he thought any court would intend
register to cover Certified Mail.
Mr. Hay stated the people are entitled to the additional security of Registered
Mail.
Mr. Greene stated Registered Mail could be used where it is specified and that
Certified could be used when it is a fringe notice.
a
Mr. Robinson stated he saw no need to compromise in view of the opinion of
rlr. Haller.
Mr. Robinson made the following motion which died for lack of support:
RESOLVED that, matter of use of Certified, Registered and
Regular Mail be left up to the discretion of the Chairman
Mr. Greene asked Mr. Haller whether court would uphold this commission if
commission decided to substitute certified mail for registered mail. Mr. Haller
stated the courts would say that the intent of the statute had been followed.
Mr. Ventura stated that as Mr. Hay inferred, perhaps this commission should go
beyond law.
Mr. Lotz asked Mr. Haller whether it is his understanding that Certified as
well as Registered Mail is delivered to the home and that therefore there
would not be pilfering of mail boxes. Mr. Haller stated that that was his
understanding.
Mr. Hay stated he would agree to change of procedure if certified is delivered
to the home and not left in the mail box.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Hay, seconded by Mr. Miller and unanimously
carried, it was
#7-260-55 RESOLVED that, matter of use of Certified and Registered Mail
be tabled untilMr. N. P. Rocheleau, Asst. Postmaster has an
opportunity to further explain this type of service.
The Chairman declared the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. George Haller left meeting at approximately 10:50 p.m.
The secretary took the following poll to determine whether or not there
should be an election of officers.
AYES: Greene, Hay and Harsha
NAYS: Miller, Lotz, Lepo, Steinhoff and Robinson
NOT VOTING: Ventura
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously carried, this Public Hearing
of the City Planning Commission was duly adjourned at approximately 10:55 p.m.
July 26, 1955.
William R. Robinson, Acting Secretary
ATTESTED:
(;777.ZZ,/,- G
Peter A. Ventura, Chairman