Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1958-10-21 2231 MINUTES OF THE 96TH REGULAR MEETING AND A PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION II] OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On October 21, 1958 the above meeting was held by the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia at the City Hall, 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Chai. rman Robert L. Angevine called the Public Hearing to order at approximately 8.05 p.m. Members present: Robert Peacock, Dennis Anderson, Leonard Kane, Charles Walker, Robert Angevine, H. Paul Harsha and Wilfred Okerstrom, and **Robert Green Members absent : William R. Robinson Mr. David R. McCullough, City Planner and Mr. Rodney Kropf, Assistant City Attorney were present along with approximately 250 interested persons. Mr. Leonard Kane acted as secretary in the absence of Mr. William R. Robinson. Mr. Angevine stated that he wished to clarify a few points in relation to the proposed Ri, RU and RUF zonings and their uses. In RL, RU and RUF districts if the land in question is in excess of one half acre, fowl and rabbits may be raised and kept for the owner's consumption only. This right can be transferred to a buyer if the minimum area remains the same. In RU and RUF districts, if the land in question is in excess of one acre, two horses may be kept for the owner's use only. In RU and RUF districts if the land in question is in excess of 2 acres, 2 horses and 1 cow or 3 horses may be kept. Similarly dog kennels may be operated and fowl and rabbits may be raised for sale. Mr. Angevine stated that the master pattern as presented is a result of a two year study by a planning consultant. We are holding these public hearings for one purpose and that is to obtain the viewpoints of the property owners. There will be no decision made this evening. This item will be taken under advisement as it will take considerable time to combine all the details before deciding the rezoning. We have asked you here this evening for information only. A form has been submitted to you which we ask you to fill out and return to us this evening. Mr. Angevine stated that Item #1 was Petition Z-321 by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to determine whether or not to rezone Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 28, 29, 30 and S 1/2 of Section 16, in accordance with the zoning indicated on the Proposed Master Pattern of the Re-evaluation of Zoning Study. As to Section No. 4: Mr. Angevine stated this section takes in the area from Farmington Road west to approximately what would be Wayne Road if continued, and extends from Seven to Eight Mile Roads. The easterly half of this section is proposed RL zoning which is a minimum of 9600 ft. The west half is proposed to be RU Which is a minimum of 15,000 ft. 1[40 1 Mr. Angevine inquired i f there were any persons in the audience interested in Section 4. Stated that there/approximately 13 sections to be discussed and he suggested that each section be limited to 15 minutes. Mr. P. D. Barrett,, 19630 Gill Road representing the Livonia Urban Farms Association stated that he is submitting a letter signed by approximately 60 persons who live Page Two 2232 in Section 4, who object to the proposed rezoning to RL and RU. Stated petition also lists their reasons for objecting. Mr. Barrett stated that after hearing the objections of the property owners, he urged the Planning Commission to reconsider and to not change the present zoning. Mrs. Debuchassechere, 5046 Hereford, Detroit 24, stated she did not object to re- zoning except that she would prefer it to be rezoned to R1. Mr. Lester Hatch, 34905 Norfolk, stated his property was 110 x 300 frontage. If this area is rezoned and the new homes are not set back as far as his (80 ft.) it would spoil the neighborhood and would put him so much farther back than the others. The question was asked why have the commercial zoning districts in the center of residential sections. Mr. Angevine stated that if the commercial districts were on the busy intersections that it would create traffic problems. Stated also there would be a buffer between the commercial and the residential property. There was no one in the audience who wished to speak in relation to Section 5. Mr. Angevine stated the next section would be Section 6 which lies between Seven and Eight Mile Road and between Newburgh and Haggerty. The proposed change is from AG to RU. The question was asked what this would mean to a developer. Mr. Angevine stated it would reduce the minimum lot size to 15,000 sq. ft. The question was asked what was the purpose of this. Mr. Angevine stated it is felt thatit would best suit the needs of the community. Stated further that the terrain II: would have to be taken into consideration, that the contour of the land would decide the size of the property. **Mr. Greene arrived at approximately 8:30 p.m. Mr. Maurice Kenney, 39000 W. Seven Mile Road and Mr. James McLeod, 38445 W. Eight Mile Road both stated their objections to proposed rezoning. Mr. Angevine stated the next section was Section 7 which lies between Six & Seven and from Newburgh to Haggerty Road. Mr. Robert B. Delaney, Attorney for Mr. Fred Kingon, 17300 Haggerty stated his objection to removing the commercial area from Six Mile and Haggerty. Submitted a petition outlining their reasons against the proposed master pattern. Mr. Angevine stated the next section is Section 8 which extends from Newburgh Road east to Wayne Road and is located between Six and Seven Mile Roads. Mr. Charles Adams, 18675 Wayne Road, stated his objection to rezoning to RU. Felt that an individual could petition for a smaller rezoning than RU, after the RU has been decided - which would put the larger lots in minority. Mr. Angevine stated a property owner could petition for rezoning to R1, whether it 1[40 would be granted or not is something that can not be foretold. Mr. Angevine stated that the next section is Section 17 from Newburgh to Wayne Road if extended, and between Five and Six Mile Roads. It is proposed to change the zoning from AGB Sod B1 to RL. Page Three 2233 Mr. Delaney, representing John and Albert Schroeder, stated they were against the proposed master pattern, would prefer to have zoning remaining as is. Stated further that the needs and desires of the property owners should be considered. The removal of the commercial areas from the interesections to the center of the sections would only add to a traffic hazard rather than delete it. Mr. Angevine stated the next section is Section 18, bounded by Five and Six Mile Roads and by Hix and Newburgh. Mr. Delaney, representing property owners in this section objected to the proposed change. Mr. Angevine stated that the next section is Section 19 bounded by Five Mile and Schoolcraft Roads and by Newburgh and Eckles Road. Mrs. H. Strebbing, 14835 Eckles, Plymouth, objected to any change and would submit her •. cbjection in writing after the meeting. Mr. A. Greene, representing approximately 345 acres in Section 19, stated that approximately 2/3 of this area has already been platted and approved by the Planning Commission for R1A. Mr. Angevine stated that the next section to be discussed is Section 20 which is bounded by Five Mile Road and Schoolcraft Road and by Newburgh and Wayne Road (if e Landed). ll: There was no one in the audience who wished to speak in relation to this section. The next section to be discussed is Section 21, bounded by Schoolcraft and Five Mile Road and by Farmington and Wayne Road (if extended). Mr. C. C. Neynaber, Jr., 15040 Fairlane, representing several property owners on Fairlane stated that they all objected to proposed zoning because the uses permitted under the present zoning would not be allowed under the proposed R1 zoning. Mr. Barlow, 14875 Fairlane and Mr. & Mrs. Garvin stated their objections also. /15945 Aurburndale/ Mr. Milton Holley, 15821 Farmington Road, submitted a letter which he asked Mr. Angevine to read to the audience. Mr. Angevine complied with Mr. Holley's request. Mr. Holley further stated that he wished to object to the R-3 proposed zoning on the Master Pattern. Mr. Martin Agegian, 10102 Puritan, stated his objections to the proposed new zoning. Mr. Palmer Priest, 14116 Stark Road, objected to the R-3 proposed for the Northeast 1/4 of Section 21. The question was asked if the property owners will be notified before a decision is made. Mr. Angevine stated they would not, but that the Council would have a hearing after the recommendation from the Planning Commission is forwarded. Mr. Angevine stated the next section for discussion was Section 28 which is bounded by Schoolcraft and Plymouth and Farmington and Wayne,(if extended). 1[40 Mr. Joseph Vanzo, 12066 Boston Post Road, President of the Tri-Sub Civic Assodation objected to the R1T (Transitional) penetrating into the present residential area. Stated further that the average lot size in this area is approximately 1/3 or 1/2 acres per lot, suggested a RU zoning rather than the proposed Rl. Page Four 2234 Mr. Beverly Poole, 12838 Stark Road, stated he felt that the property owners in the Northeast and Northwest 1/4 of Section 28 were confused because of the several types of zoning located in that area. Mr. W. G. Donaldson, V. President of the Tri-Sub Civic Association stated he felt that if there were to be several different types of zoning that there should be a buffer between the residential and the industrial. Asked if the proposed industrial road would act as a buffer. Mr. Angevine stated that the road would not act as buffer. Mr. Donaldson stated they were also objecting to the M-1 (Light Industry) east of Stark Road as proposed on the Master Pattern. Mrs. Anne Schemansky, 34.118 Plymouth Road objected to the R1 being proposed in the presently zoned commercial area on Plymouth road east of Stark and west of Farmington. Mr. H. Halvor Barrown, 3970 Kipling Avenue, Berkley, Michigan stated he wished to submit two letters in relation to Lots 1 - 7 inclusive which has been sold on land contract to Dr. S. R. Purvis and wife, on which they have established a professional . office and veterinary hospital and also in relation to Lots 76, 77, 78 and 79 which he owns and which m presently zoned C-2. Objected to the proposed rezoning for both areas. Any//rom a-2 zoning would be detrimental to Dr. Purvis and his profession. Mr. Barrows further stated that he felt that this area is unsuited for RUFB develop- ment because of the surrounding industrial development. Mr. Angevine called recess at approximately 10:00 p.m. The Chairman called the Public Hearing to order at approximately 10:15 p.m. with all those present now who mere present at the time recess was called. Mr. Angevine stated the next section to be discussed is Section 29 bounded by Plymouth and Schoolcraft and by Newburgh and Wayne Road, (if extended). Mr. Wm. H. Bassett, 36789 Schoolcraft objected to the rezoning South of Schoolcraft. Mr. Weld S. Maybee, Jr., 23675 Ivanhoe, Redford Township, objected to the rezoning from C-2 to RUFB on the Southwest corner of Schoolcraft and Levan. Mr. Angevine stated the next section to be discussed is Section 30 bounded by Plymouth and Schoolcraft and by Newburgh and Eckles Roads. Mr. John Sweda, 37850 Grantland stated his objection to proposed rezoning of M-1 because of the proposed school and park site in this section. Felt that these two sites might be eliminated if M-1 was so close. Mr. Angevine stated that the school and park site indicated on the master pattern were only designated as a possible need. Mr. McNeil, 37607 Schoolcraft stated that the master pattern indicates four different types of zoning in approximately 1100 ft. Felt that there was not sufficient area for so many differenttypes of zoning. Would prefer industrial I[: area up to Schoolcraft. Mr. A. L. Greer, 37829 Schoolcraft stated he would prefer industrial zoning from Schoolcraft to the railroad. 2235 :Mr. George Hisle, 13175 Newburgh stated he felt that the zoning should conform with their subdivision restrictions; preferred RUF than what it is proposed to be ___ rezoned. Mr. William Hanke, 38141 Schoolcraft preferred to have it remain industrial; Mr. Steve Agdorny, 38061Schoolcraft concurred with Mr. Hanke. Mr. Angevine stated that the next and last section to be discussed is the South half of Section 16. There was no one in the audience who wished to speak in relation to Section 16. Mr. Angevine stated that he wished to thank all of those present on behalf of the Planning Commission and that this item would be taken under advisement until further study could be made. Mr. McCullough announced the next item on the agenda was Petition Z-310 by Joseph and Henrietta Armstrong asking for a change of zoning on parcel of land located on the West side of Fremont approximately 200 ft. South of Norfolk in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 2 from RUFB to R1A. Mr. & Mrs. Armstrong were present. The members of the commission examined the plat book to determine the zoning in the surrounding area. There was no one in the audience who wished to speak either in favor or opposed to petition. 110 Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Walker, it was #10-309-58 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Petition Z-310 by Joseph and Henrietta Armstrong for a change of zoning in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 2 from RUFB to R1A, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-310 be granted, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian, under date of October 2, 1958 and notice of which hearing was sent to The Detroit Edison Co., Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co., Michigan Bell Telephone Co., The Consumers Power Co., City Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Okerstrom, Greene, Peacock, Anderson, Walker, Marsha, Kane and Angevine NAYS: None The Chairman declared the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCullough announced the next item on the agenda was Petition Z-313 by William 1[911.o. J. and Ruby M. Smith asking for a change of zoning on parcel of land located on the North side of Pickford Avenue between Maplewood and Brentwood in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12 from RUFB to R1B. Mrs. Smith was present. Mrs. Smith was asked if she would be willing to verbally amend her petition to read R1A since the majority of the homes in the surrounding area were of a R1A classification. Mrs. Smith stated she would agree to amending her petition. 2236 Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Walker, supported by Mr. Okerstrom and unanimously adopted, it was #10-310-5C RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby grant Mrs. Smith permission to verbally amend Petition Z-313 from R1B to R1A. The Chairman declared that Petition Z-313 is verbally amended. There was no one in the audience who wished to speak in favor or opposed to petition. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Walker, supported by Mr. Okerstrom and unanimously adopted, itwas: #10-311-58 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Petition Z-313 as submitted by William J. and Ruby M. Smith for a change of zoning in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12 from RUFB to R1A, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-313 be granted, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian, under date of October 2, 1958, and nal; ice of which hearing was sent to The Detroit Edison Co., Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co., Michigan Bell Telephone Co., The Consumers Power Company, City Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service. The Chairman declared the motion is carried and petition is granted. 110 Mr. McCullough announced the next item on the agenda was Petition Z-314 by Merlin K. and Marjorie Gaut are asking for a change of zoning on a parcel of land located on the South side of Puritan approximately 900 ft. West of Middlebelt from RUFB to R1B in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14. Mr. Merlin K. Gaut was present. The Commissioners examined the plat book to determine the present zoning in the surrounding area. Mrs. Phillls, 29747 Puritan stated she was in favor of the rezoning. Mr. Peacock stated that a public hearing has just been held on a proposed rezoning in the north half of this section. He felt that if it is zoned R1B it would not be in conformity with the surrounding area. Mr. Sheldon Futernick, builder and representative for Mr. Gaut stated that there ka4 been splits made on several of the parcels of land in the neighborhood. They were not built upon as yet, although the Building Department would allow them to build. Stated if Commission did not agree to R1B that he felt Mr. Gaut would be agreeable to amending his petition to R1A. Mr. Peacock stated he would like to see this item taken under advisement until further study can be made because of the controversy in that section. Mr. Gaut stated he would like to verbally amend his petition from R1B to R1A. 1[40 Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Kane and unanimously adopted, it was #10-312-58 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby grant Merlin K. and Marjorie Gaut permission to amend Petition Z-314 from R1B to R1A. 2237 Mr. Angevine stated the foregoing resolution is adopted and petition will be taken under advisement. Mr. McCullough announced the next item on the agenda was Petition Z-315 by Nelson Dembs, d/b/a/ Nelson Homes, Inc., is asking for a change of zoning on parcel of land located on the East side of Hillcrest Avenue between Seven Mile Road and Pickford Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 11, from RUFB to RD. Mr. Dembs who was present, stated he would like to amend his petition from R1B to R1A. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Walker, supported by Mr. Peacock and unanimously adopted, it was #10-313-58 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby grant Nelson Dembs d/b/a/ Nelson Homes, Inc., permission to amend Petition Z-315 from R1B to R1A. Mr. Angevine stated the foregoing resolution was adopted. There was no one in the audience who wished to speak. Mr. Dallas Hay, who was present stated that there was a slight discrepancy from Lot 95 to 97 in the legal description. Mr. Kropf stated petition could be granted subject to the dimensions being re- checked by Engineering. Mr. Walker stated he would prefer to have this item taken under advisement because of the proposed park site in area. Mr. McCullough stated that to the east of the proposed rezoning the parcels of land were quite large. Mr. Angevine stated that this item would be taken under advisement. Mr. McCullough announced the next item on the agenda was Petition V-36 by certain residents asking that the East and West alley located between Gillman on the West, Floral on the East and between Pickford on the North and Curtis on the South in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 12 be vacated. Mr. McCullough submitted a letter dated 10/7/58 from the Engineering Department and a letter from Detroit Edison dated 10/15/58. No letter had been received from Michigan Bell Telephone Company. The Commissioners examined the plat book to ascertain the proposed vacated alley. There was no one in the audience who wished to speak. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Peacock, supported by Mr. Kane and unanimously adopted, it was 1[10 #10-314-58 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on October 21, 1958 on Petition V-36 as submitted by certain residents in the Sunningdale Park Subdivision in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 12 for the vacating of alley located at the rear of Lots 40-53 inclusive and Lots 157 and 158, the City Planning 2238 Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition V-36 be granted subject to a 20 ft. easement being created for the full width and subject to the approval of the Michigan Bell Telephone Company, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian under date of October 2, 1958 and notice of which hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Co., Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co., Michigan Bell Telephone Co., The Consumers Power Co., Dity Departments, petitioner and abutting property owners as listed in the Proof of Service. The Chairman declared the foregoing resolution adopted: Mr. McCullough announced the next item on the agenda was Petition V-38 by William P. Lindhout on behalf of the Livonia Methodist Church asking to vacate alley located between Woodring and Loveland, running east and west, approximately 100 ft. South of Seven Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10. Mr. McCullough aubmittad a letter dated October 7, 1958 from the Engineering Dept., and a letter dated October 21, 1958 from the Detroit Edison Company; no letter had been received from Michigan Bell Telephone Co. Mr. W. Lindhout was present representing petitioner. Mr. LaVerne Schraeder, Engineezi ng Department stated that a more thorough survey would ha ve to be made before eliminating the easement as requested by the petitioner Mr. Lindhout had stated they would prefer to have the alley vacated without creating I: 20 ft. easement in order that this property could be used for parking. After a brief discussion it was determined that ptetioner should acquire a written consent from the property owners of the abutting property owners, namely Lots Nos. 370-373 inclusive and Lot 374 to close the entire alley between 'Loveland and Woodring as requested by petitioner, Livonia Methodist Church. Mr. Angevine stated this item would be taken under further advisement until Mr. Schraeder of the Engineering Department submits a recommendation in relation to eliminating the entire easement. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Walker and unanimously adopted, it was #10-315-58 RESOLVED that, this Public Hearing be duly adjourned at approximately 11:30 p.m. on October 21, 1958. Mr. Angevine called the 96th Regular Meeting to order at approximately 11:32 p.m. with all those present now who were present at the end of the Public Hearing. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Okerstrom and unanimously adopted, it was #10-316-58 RESOLVED, that, Resolution #5-114-58 adopted by the CityPlanning Commission on May 20, 1958 is hereby amended to read as follows: 1[40 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the provisions of Act 285 of the Michigan Public Acts of 1931, as amended and the City Planning Commission having duly held a Public Hearing on May 6, 1958 on 2239 Part II of the Master Plan for the City of Livonia, entitled Civic Center & Central Business Center, and the Planning Commission having given proper notice of said notice as required by law, does hereby amend Part II of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia so as to include therein that area and property hereinafter described: That the property effected and hereby included in said Part II and a detailed description of said property is contained in the attached map prepared by Albe E. Munson, Planning Consultant and made a part hereof by this reference; that the following described property is hereby reserved for public purposes and that said Part II of the Master Plan of the City of Liv'nia is hereby amended to include: Part of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 22, Town 1 South, Range 9 East, City of Livonia, Wayne County, Michigan, described as: Beginning at a point on the West line of Section 22, distant South 1 degree 25 minutes 00 seconds West, 1319.98 feet from the North west corner of said Section 22, and proceed thence South 88 degrees 29 minutes 00 seconds East 198.00 feet; thence North 1 degree 25 minutes 00 seconds East, 30.00 feet; thence South 88 degrees 29 minutes 00 seconds East 102.00 feet; thence North 1 degree 25 minutes 00 seconds East 129.98 feet; thence along the South 1 degree 25 minutes 00 seconds East 129.989; thence along the South and East boundaries of land owned by the City of Livonia, three courses as follows: thence South 88 degrees 29 minutes 00 seconds East 720.00 feet; thence North 46 degrees 28 IL: minutes CO seconds East 211.95 feet; thence North 1 degree 25 minutes 00 seconds East 450.00 feet; thence South 88 degrees 29 minutes 00 seconds /East 808.29 feet-to the center line of Brook- field Avenue; thence South 1 degree 16 minutes 00 seconds West 1257.40 feet; thence North 88 degrees 29 minutes 00 seconds West 1981.58 feet to the West line of Section 22; thence North 1 degree 25 minutes 00 seconds East 497.40 feet along said West Section line to the point of beginning; that all prior resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict herewith are hereby rescinded only to the extent necessary to give this resolution full force and effect; that this resolution shall be recorded on said map by the identifying signatures of the Chair.; man and Secretary of the City Planning Commission; and that an attested copy of this amendment to Part II of the Master Plan shall be certified to the Council and to the Register of Deeds for the County of Wayne. The Chairman declared the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. McCullough announced the next item on the agenda was the approval of minutes for July 1, July 15, July 22, August 19, August 26 and September 2, 1958. Mr. Harsha stated that he felt there was a discrepancy in the handling of the resolution of Petition M-107b adopted at the July 15, 1958 meeting. He edited that Resolution #7-177-58, pages 2104 and 2105 of the July 15, 1959 meeting, had been I recorded in the minutes before the provisions included in resolution tad been discussed pertaining to Petition M-107b (Drive-in Theatre). He felt that the discussion should be recorded first and then be followed by the resolution as adopted. ., 4 2240 Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Harsha, and unanimously adopted, it was #10-317-58 RESOLVED that, minutes of Meetings, July, 1, 1958, July 22, August 19, August 26 and September 2, 1958 be approved, and that minutes of July 15, 1958 be approved as corrected, pursuant to Mr. Harshsts suggestion, except that for such meeting a member was not present that he abstain from voting. The Chairman declared that the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Okerstrom and unanimously adopted, this 96th regular meeting was duly adjourned at 12:10 p.m., Wednesday, October 22, 1958. er......4,..01 Gfin.e Leonard K. Kane, Secretary, pro tem ATTESTED: ,//;‘,,„izGe. Robert L. Angevi e, Chairman