Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1960-04-05 2804 MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE 115TH SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ‘1[1: ' CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, April 5, 1960 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held a Public Hearing and the 115th Special Meeting at the Livonia City Hall, 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Angevine, Chairman, called the Public Hearing to order at 8:10 p.m. Members present: Robert L. Angevine, William R. Robinson, H. Paul Harsha, Robert M. Peacock, Robert L. Greene, Charles Walker and Wilford Okerstrom. Members absent : **Dennis Anderson and Leonard K. Kane • Mr. David R. McCullough, City Planner was present along with approximately 250 interested persons. Mr. Angevine: Mr. Robinson, will you be act as Secretary in the absence of Mr. Kane? Mr. McCullough: The first item on the agenda is Petition M-194 by James Klink for the Country Homes Swim Clubwhichis requesting permission to build a swimming pool on property located on the East side of Levan Road between Parkdale Avenue and Middle Rouge Parkway in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 32. Mr. Lewis Boehms, 35611 Minton is present, representing petitioner. & Levan Road Part of this property is in the path of West Chicago/as designated on the Master Thoroughfare Plan. Mr. Angevine: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes co speak? Mr. Robert Davy: I am speaking for a group as a non-commissioned party. I am a 36084 W. Chicago) resident in the area of the swimming pool. My property is adjacent to that which they have chosen for this purpose and it has created a considerable emotional disturbance in our neighborhood. Our stand is as stated in our petition of protest. Mr. Davy read the objections to the commissioners and audience. *IsjIr. Dennis Anderson and Mr. Charles J. Pinto, Assistant City Attorney arrived at 8:15 p.m. Mr. Davy: We are in complete opposition to any pool or recreational area on either of the two parcels selected. Mr. Angevine: Is there anyone else in the audience who wishes to speak? Mr. Boehms: Approximately fouidmonths ago a few neighbors talked about a community swimming pool. We7a few meetings with the Country Homes Subdivision and we have since talked with various people who were interested in it. We also went to people who already had built a pool. The Kendallwood Sub- division in Farmington is one and the C & B Swi_rring Club in Compton Village in Livonia is another. We talked with several people who were adjacent to the pool in Kendallwood. They thought it had added to their property. We have talked with Mr. H. Cunningham of the C & B Swim Club, where they have a full membership of 300 and a waiting list of 75. They do not feel that it devaluates their property. Mr, '-tkerstrom: Are you a resident of this area, Mr. Boehms? 2805 ( Mr. Boehms: Yes. Mr. Lawrence A. Waterhouse: The residents who are in favor of this pool, do they 35883 W. Chicago) live near the location of the pool or are they in the surrounding area? This i s first time we've heard of it. Mr. Boehms: We have not polled the residents as yet because we have not purchased the land, only have an option on it. I did not publicize this by leaflets. Mr. Maurice Hoffman: I was the first one to get the idea of the swimming pool. I 35667 Minton) got in touch with the immediate neighbors. I felt that the idea of the swimming pool would be one of the most valuable things in the neighborhood in view of the advantages it offers to the women and children. Three or four of us started it and after we had it rolling, we were going to have a mass meeting of the entire sub- division and present it to them. Mr. Eugene Coursineau: We are concerned about the traffic problem which will result 35949 Pinetree) for our children. This is our objection to it. Mr. E. Delany : Will this pool be strictly limited to the residents of the 35880 W. Chicago) subdivision? Mr. Hoffman: For the present time. Mr. Boehms: I would like to add to this. In our by-laws, it is stated that this is for the people of the Country Homes Subdivision. These people will be offered membership in this first. If we are able to get 300 within these boundaries, that is it, but if we get only 250 we intend to go out of the subdivision. Mr. Delaney: You said you would go outside the Country Homes Subdivision? JAr. Boehms: Yes, but these people would first have to be approved by the Board of Directors. Mr. Milton Holley: I'd like to ask the City Attorney a question, can this be restricted 14821 Farmington) to a private membership club? Hr. Pinto: In our ordinance it is the Planning Commission that makes the decisicn. Mr. Bill Kremer: A majority of those in favor are a good safe distance from the noise 35960 Pinetree) and traffic from the pool. We took a petition up in the neighborhood of the people who would be harmed by a peel of this type. Mr. Boehms: There has been a good deal said on the intent of the people who live on Minton Street. At first we did try to purchase the land adjacent 1[0 to the school but found this was impossible. We wanted this pool to be close to the subdivision so that the wives and children could walk over. If this pool is to be successful it must be in the neighborhood because it is for the women and children in the summer. Mr. Davy: I am the spokesman for the opposition. When we first met with these gentlemen Sunday evening on the site of the proposed pool to examine 2806 it and to see their sketch, they recommended some pools around the Livonia area that we might go and see and get their opinion. We did I[: so. There is only one adjacent to a residential area. The others are isolated from the residential area. All of them had access through other main thoroughfares rather than the subdivision area. This is one of our main objections to this pool. Mr. Boehms: This pool is intended for the residents here and I do not know of any way without going in front of someone's land. West Chicago has to be used in this case. Mr. Walker: We have heard quite a bit pros and cons from the audience and I agree it is a hard parcel to get private entrance into. Our planner has recommended we should acquire a right-of-way from the petitioner for Levan Road. Looking at the map, Levan Road would go nowhere as it heads right into the Edward Hines Parkway. I can not see any benefit in acquiring this right-of-way. I would like to go on record that I have been in favor of any kind of recreation in the City. I think you will find that the Planning Commission is quite willing to cooperate in any type of recreation that can be provided for the people whether it is this type of recreation or any other means of private enterprise but we do have certain obligations to the general public that we cannot allow any type of recreation that may benefit a few but yet hurt other people. Mr. Greane: Can we take a poll on how many are for it and how many are against it? 1[1r . Angevine: Those in favor of the swimming pool, please raise your hands. There were approximately fifty hands raised in favor. Mr. Angevine: Those opposed to the swimming pool. There were approximately fifty hands raised in opposition. The remark was made by a property owner in the audience that those in favor of the swimming pool did not live adjacent to the proposed pool. It was also stated that almost 100% of the people in the immediate area are against it. They feel it would decrease the value of their homes. Mr. Davy presented a sketch of the area surrounding the proposed pool with the lot numbers of those property owners who objected to it. It was determined that there were property owners on Richland and Pinetree who were opposing the pool in addition to those on W. Chicago. Mr. Angevine: Is there anyone in the audience who lives on any of these lots, namely Nos. 564 through 582 and 621 through 624, who is in favor of the pool? There was no one in the audience in favor who was listed on the sketch. 1[Mor. Peacock: I would like to have this taken under advisement for further study. fir. Walker: This parcel of land is quite well locked in as far as ingress and egress. Do you have a method of getting another ingress and egress? Mr. Boehms: I have spoken with Sgt.Thorne of the Police Department. He made one or two suggestions. 2807 Mr. Walker: In lieu of taking this under advisement, I would like to see a plot plan of the parking area provided and I would like to obtain the necessary information as to the exact location of the people that IrL: are protesting and those who are in favor. The question was raised from the audience that it was understood that there was to be a proposal made tonight to make West Chicago a through street to Levan Road. If so, this would make W. Chicago a major thoroughfare with cars coming from Plymouth Road down Levan Road, south, to West Chicago to cut through the subdivision in order to get to Wayne Road. It was determined that there were a number of people present who would protest to West Chicago being cut through to Levan Road. Mr. James Igristan: I live in this area just south of Plymouth and it is pretty 35136 Elmira) well controlled as to the traffic cutting through from Plymouth. Mr. George Anderson: If someone were to build on this property, would they not be 35787 Minton) able to open these roads? Mr. Angevine: Yes. It was stated by a property owner in the audience that too much emphasis is being put on traffic. There will be objections other than traffic, such as noise, lights, etc. one Mr. Wm. L. Wilson: Cur/interest is to keep W. Chicago closed. 35464 W. Chicago) E Mr. Maurice Kelley: I am a member of the Board of Directors. We set out to find out 35655 Minton) how to build this pool to meet with the approval of the subdivision. Unfortunately, we did not know until too late that there was so much opposition. We want to make it a benefit to the community not a detriment. Mr. Davy: We know this is your basis for building the pool. If Chicago Road were opened for residences, we could not find objections to this, but a recreation and community pool would be a nuisance in view of the fact this is going to have tennis courts and shuffle boards. Mr. Anderson: This is a private corporation? No connection with the subdivision directly? Mr. Boehms: No connection. Mr. Anderson: How many homes in the subdivision? Mr. Boehms: About 700 and we are planning to sell 300 memberships. We anticipate 300 to start with. If we have more we would make a larger pool to accomodate the additional people. Mr. Kelley: We have had a notice of this pool in the community paper. Until we had more specifi,' plans though, we felt we could not publicize it. ILMr. Angevine: This item will be taken under advisement for further study. 2808 1[0Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition M-191 by the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company who is requesting permission to construct and operate a Firestone Sales and Service Store with gasoline sales, located on the North side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and Haller, approximately 500 feet East of Middlebelt Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 25. Mr. C. W. Zimmer of the Real Estate Department of Firestone, Akron, Ohio and Mr. Loucks, 10006 Cranstone, Firestone Company are present for the petitioner. Mr. Peacock: What is the "common drive" shown on the plat? Mr. Zimmer: The "common drive" is set up_•for service vehicles to get to the rear of the building. Mr. McCullough: This petition is for approval of the filling station. There will be no outdoor sales. Mr. Peacock: You will have only tires displayed on the outside? No appliances, etc? Mr. Zimmer: This is correct. Mr. Okerstrom: I am concerned with the right hand turn off Plymouth coming from the East and going North on Middlebelt. I feel we should have the turning barrier like on the. Southwest and Southeast corners of Middlebelt and Plymouth. IE: Mr. McCullough: We can suggest this to the Traffic Commission. Mr. Angevine: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak? Mr. Zimmer: The State Highway Commission controls the ingress and egress for state Highways. We have permission from them for the two curb cuts. Mr. Harsha: There is no present deceleration lane to approach this property. There was a brief discussion relating to a deceleration lane and a right turn curve for the corner. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Harsha, it was #4- -60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, April 5, 1960 the City Planning Commission does hereby grant Petition M-191 by The Firestone Tire & Rubber Company re- questing permission to construct and operate a Firestone Sales and Service Store with gasoline sales, on the North side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and Haller, approximably 500 feet East of Middlebelt Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 25, sub- ject, however, to the approval and recommendations of the State Highway Commission and the Traffic Commission of the City of Livonia, IL Mr. Okerstrom: Could you recommend a right turn curve in this resolution? Mr. Harsha: I feel that our Traffic Commission and the State Highway Department can work this out. Mr. Walker: Would you reconsider and insert in the resolution that • • 2809 the Planning Commission recommends a deceleration lane if it is approved by the State Highway Department. At least they would know what our thinking would be on this. Mr. Harsha restated his motion, which was supported by Mr. Walker, and it was #4-57-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, April 5, .1960 the City Planning Commission does hereby grant Petition M-191 by The Firestone Tire & Rubber Company requesting permission to construct and operate a Firestone Sales and Service Store with gasoline sales on the North side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt and Haller, approximately 500 feet East of Middlebelt Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 25, subject, however, to the following: (1) Approval and recommendations of the State Highway Department and the Traffic Commission of the City of Livonia, and (2) The City Planning Commission does hereby recommend a deceleration lane, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as 1 isted in the Proof of Service. Mr. Okerstrom: What happens to the remaining 125 ft. on the corner? I[: Mr. McCullough:It may be for the right hand turn. It is not feasible for another gas station. A roll call vote on Resolution #4-57-60 resulted in the following: AYES: Greene, Walker, Harsha, Peacock, Okerstrom, Robinson and Angevine NAYS: Anderson Mr. Angevine: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition M-195 by Dr. Warren M. Strong who is requesting permission to build a veterinary clinic on property located on the North side of Five Mile Road between Middlebelt and Cavour in the Southwest 1/4 of Section . 13. Mr. Donald Deremo was present for the petitioner. Mr. Deremo: This is the third petition Dr. Strong has had before the Planning Commission for a veterinary clinic. His first was denied due to the number of ojections from adjoining property owners and also due to inadequate sewer facilties. There doesn9t seem to be any objections from property owners in relation to this petition and there are adequate sewer facilities. The second was denied due to insufficient parking facilities and also due to the objections from residential owners. We feel that we have an ideal site and sufficient off-street parking for this present petition. ii 2810 At this time the following letter was read into the minutes from Mr. Wilford E. ii: Okerstrom, the contents of which had previously been divulged to the press. April 5, 1960 TO MY FELLOW PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: RE: PETITION M-195 Gentlemen: This petition involves land owned by me. Moreover, the petitioner has twice been denied his requests to operate a veterinary clinic on other land in the City. I voted against permitting him to do this on both occasions for valid reasons. The possibility that he might later seek to use land owned by me had nothing to do with my vote on previous occasions. Having made a public disclosure of my interest in this matter, I[] I should like to emphasize that I seek no special consideration because of my being a member of this Commission. In like manner I do not feel that I should be penalized because of this status. I shall, of course, abstain from voting on this matter. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully yours, W. E. Okerstrom 140:ea cc: Planning Commission Members (9) File 1[41 , t 2811 faMr. McCullough: How near is the nearest resident? Mr. Deremo: Approximately 600 ft. Mr. McCullough: It should be a matter of record that there is going to be a useful public entrance at the rear of the building, to comply with the revision of section 4.37 (e). Mr. Angevine: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak? Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Peacock, supported by Mr. Greene, it was #4-58-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, April 5, 1960 the City Planning Commission does hereby grant Petition M-195 by Dr. Warren M. Strong who is requesting permission to build a veterinary clinic on the north side of Five Mile Road between Middlebelt and Cavour in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Greene, Walker, Harsha, Peacock, Anderson, Robinson and Angevine NAYS: None I NOT VOTING: Okerstrom Mr. Angevine: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-437 by the City Planning Commission on its own motion, pursuant to City Council's Resolution #44-60 to determine whether or not Section 4.05 of Article 4.00 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia should be amended so as to include Section 21 amongst those sections of the City in which lots may be platted with an area of 7200 sq. ft. and a minimum width of 60 ft. Mr. Angevine: I have before me a petition with approximately 50 or 60 signatures of property owners who are objecting to a change from 70 to 60ft. lots. Any questions from the commissioners? Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak? Mr. Milton Holley, 14821 Farmington: We did not have time to contact all the people in this area to sign our petition of protest against the 60 ft. lots. Many of the owners who signed the petition approving the 60 ft. lots thought they were signing a petition in protest to the 60 ft. We do not want the area over crowded. I feel that the property owners in the newer subdivisions do not understand the reason for the public hearings. [Mr. Palmer W. Priest: We are objecting to the 60 ft. width lots for this area. This 14116 Stark Road)area is the same that the developer once tried to rezone to multiple dwellings. We objected to that also. Mr. Holley: What is the date of the petition presented which does not object 2812 to the 60 ft. lots? Mr. Angevine: It is dated September, 1959. Mr. Holley: That is the one that many people thought they were signing approving 70 ft. lots. Mr. Angevine: This item will he taken under advisement for further study. There will be a ten minute recess at this time, 9:30 p.m. ************** Mr. Angevine called the public hearing back to order at approximately 9:45 p.m. with all those present now who were present at the time recess was called with the exception of Mr. Charles Pinto. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-438 by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to determine whether or not Section 4.32 of Article 4.00 Ordinance No. 60 should be amended. (Dwelling size) There is one letter of objection dated April 1, 1960 from Howard Middlewood, 19936 Farmington Road, Livonia. Mr. Middlewood is present. Mr. Angevine: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak? Mr. Middlewood: I would like to have my letter read to the commissioners. Mr. McCullough complied with Mr. Middlewood's request. (4 Mr. Middlewood questioned whether the City would be allowed to deny Certificate of Ao Occupancy after a house is built because it lacked a few square feet in floor area. It was suggested that the language "deny a Certificate of Occupancy" be changed to "deny a building permit". The statement was made that private restrictions would determine the type and size of the home in a subdivision. Mr. Robinson: They would protect the subdivision but someone else could build on property not included in the subdivision and the private restrictions wouldn't apply to them. Mr. Angevine: Scattered lots would not be under private restrictions. Mr. Charles Pinto returned at approximately 9:50 p.m. Mr. Middlewood: This ordinance might be suitable for larger subdivisions but not for isolated homes. Also, it would be hard to enforce, since you do not have the right to go on a person's lot to measure his house size. Mr. Anderson: Your basic concern then is the policing of this ordinance? Mr. Middlewood: This is only one of the problems. 1[40 Mr. Pinto: If you are going to require the applicant for a building permit to find out the di ensions of other homes in the area, on property that he does not own, you are imposing a burden upon him which legally he cannot comply with. lie is trespassing on other people's property and you are subjecting him to what might happen to any • 2813 trespassers. 1[70 Mr. Harsha: We are encouraging trespassing if we let this go through. We have no legal right to do so. I do not think that the size of the house is that important.A 800 sq. ft. home can cost as much as a 1,5C0 sq. ft. home. I feel that the 800sq. ft. and 1,000 sq. ft. minimum in the ordinance is sufficient. Mr. McCullough: Can the applicant secure this information from the Assessor's office? Mr. Pinto: I do not know if the records would be available to the public. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Anderson, it was #4-59-60 RESOLVED that, pursuan%ntoea.Pubbli�9-Heearing having been held on Tuesday, April 5, 1960 as submitted by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to determine whether or not Section 4.32 of Article 4.00 of Ordinance No. 60 should be amended, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-438 be denied for the following reasons: (1) it would require the applicant to make a trespass upon someone else's property in order to secure the existing house size; (2) that the existing ordinance insures the public, health and safety morals and therefore, this is in excess of our , legal auttigity under the police power; (3) that the/standard size joist, and standard construction problems arise when a few extra square feet are added to a house plan, and (4) that it is felt that no Court would allow a City to deny a Certificate of Occupancy because a few square feet are lacking in floor area after a house is built, and FURTHER REfOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian, under date of March 16, 1960 and notice of which hearing was sent to The Detroit Edison Co. , Chesa- peake & Ohio Railway Co. , Michigan Bell Telephone Co. , The Consumers Power Co. , City Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr. Greene: I am still in sympathy with the original purpcse. of this proposed ordinance and I would like to see it approved in some legal manner . It might not be practical in its present form but I would like to go on record that I go along with the original purpose of it. Mr. Pinto: We can certainly try to execute the ordinance in abetter fashion than it has been done. Mr. Walker: Now that there is an idea of rewriting this ordinance, I would like to make a motion to table this petition. Mr. Angevine: There is a motion on the floor. Mr. Walker: I think that a motion to table is in order. Mr. Angevine: Yes, that is so. 2814 Mr. Robinson: I will withdraw my motion to deny. Mr. Harsha: If you do, I will make the same motion to deny. li1 Mr. Anderson: When did we start on this? Mr. McCullough: The motion to hold a public hearing was made on February 16, 1960. Mr. Anderson: I am in favor of getting it off the agenda and after it is rewritten, have it brought back. I will not withdraw my support. Mr. Angevine: Mr. Robinson, will you please call roll on Resolution #4-59-60? AYES: Harsha, Peacock, Anderson, Robinson andAngevine NAYS: Greene, Walker and Okerstrom. Mr. Angevine' The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition M-196 by Dr. Howard A. Dawson who is requesting permission to operate a veterinary clinic on property located on the South side of Plymouth Road between Milburn and Middlebelt Road, known as 30499 Plymouth Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 35. Dr. Howard A. Dawson, 14141 Livonia Crescent, Livonia was present. It was determined that the nearest resident was located approximately 500 ft. away from the proposed veterinary clinic. Mr. Angevine: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak? Mr. McCullough: The kennels will all be indoors. Nothing will be outside. Upon a motion made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Walker, it was #4-60-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, April 5, 1960 on Petition M-196 by Dr. Howard A. Daweon requesting permission to operate a veterinary clinic on property located on the South side of Plymouth Road between Milburn and Middlebelt Road, in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 35, the City Planning Commission does hereby grant Petition M-196, provided, however, that there will be no outdoor kennels, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Greene, Walker, Harsha, Peacock, Okerstrom, Anderson, Robinson and Angevine li: NAYS: None Mr. Angevine: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Walker, supported by Mr. Peacock, it was • 2815 #4-61-60 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the Public Hearing held on Tuesday, April 5, 1960 at approximately 10:15 P.M. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Greene, Walker, Harsha, Peacock, Okerstrom, Anderson, Robinson and Angevine NAYS: None Mr. Angevine: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. Angevine called the 115th Special Meeting to order at approximately 10:16 p.m. with all those present now who were present at the time the public hearing was adjourned. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a resolution to reduce the topsoil bond in relation to Application TA-60 which was approved on Tuesday, March 15, 1960 in accordance with the suggestion made by the Topsoil Committee. The topsoil committee has suggested an amendment to the original motion to approve to require a cash bond in the amount of 10% and the balance in a surety bond. As it is now, it might be a hardship on the petitioner. Mr. Walker: As far as the reduction of the cash bond is concerned, we never agreed to an exec,: figure. If they would meet certain conditions, I would be willing to consider a reduction. Mr. McCullough: The 10% figure is the figure the Council now uses for Engineering 0 for utility bonds. Mr. Greene: Is this setting a new precedent on topsoil bonds? Mr. Walker: The amount of the bond should be based on the general area and the condition of the surrounding area and from past experiences in the area. One reason we insisted on this cash bond was because it is close to a school and to a subdivision. We have had unfavorable conditions in this area after the removal of topsoil and sand. I would not feel the same In an isolated area . We certainly want to be assured of some method of control so that the same thing won't happen again in this area. We should provide ourselves with adequate control in lieu of a cash bond. Mr. Peacock: I would like to ask Mr. Harsha or Mr. Anderson to give. an opinion on how much it would cost per acre to level and grade an acre of ground if it was left in an unfavorable condition. Mr. Harsha: This would be hard to do because we do not know if more dirt would have to be brought in to fill in the holes. Mr. Okerstrom: I am concerned with sand blowing in the ycards. This will exist if ere a temporary tence of it is exposed. Could the petitioner/ scme kind in the back by the homes until some seed is put in so that sand does not blow by these homes? L Mr. Walker: I believe this is all taken care of in the topsoil ordinance. I would like to offer an amendment to the original resolution to reduce the cagibond required to 25% and 75% be put up as a surety bond. , r 2816 Mr. Peacock: I will support Mr. Walker's amendment. I There was a general discussion on whether or not the cash bond should be 25% or some other figure. Mr. Walker: If the Commission feels 20% is sufficient, I will go along with it. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Walker, supported by Mr. Peacock, It was #4-62-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a request by the petitioner, P. L. Kozub to reconsider Resolution #3-49-60 adopted at the 113th Regular Meeting in relation to TA-60, the City Planning Commission does hereby amend said resolution by Establishing a cash bond for 20% of the total and a surety bond for the remaining 80%. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Greene, Walker, Harsha, Peacock, Anderson, Robinson and Angevine NAYS: Okerstrom Mr. Angevine: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a request dated March 16, 1960 from Slavik Builders, Inc. , that the approved preliminary plat of Burton Hollow Estates No. 3 be segregated into two subdivisions; namely Burton Hollow Estates No. 3 and :Burton Hollow Estates No. 4. This item was discussed at the 114th Special Meeting 3/22/60 and was taken under advisement. Mr. McCullough explained the turnaround at the southern termini of Burton Hollows Sub. No. 4. There was a general discussion between the Commissioners and Mr. Slavik as to the necessity of the turnaround and who would maintain it. It was determined that some way would have to be made to route the traffic back as approval could not be granted with the streets stopping into a dead end at the south end of No. 4. Mr. Harsha: I feel that it would be up to them to maintain it, until such time that the Planning Commission releases it. Mr. Slavik: It might be years before this subdivision is completed. Why can't the City maintain this since I am paying the cost to put it in. I am confident that by the time I have the improvements in my plat, the other party Aho owns the property to the south of No. 4 will come in to develope his property and continue the streets. Mr. Harsha: We have a right to agree to a street that will dead end with a length of 600 ft. The greatest length of these streets in this plat is 615' 6k". This is approximately 16 ft. over what is permissible. Lfr. Slavik: There was a suggestion at one time for a cul-de-sac at this point but Mr. Hiltz objected to this. He'd rather see a turnaround or a 30' easement. Mr. Waller: Do we have a letter from Engineering in relation to this ? Mr. McCullough: No, but I have spoken to them and this is accurate. 2817 Mr. Harsha: You would put this temporary gravel road in accordance with the instructions of our City Engineering Department? Mr. Slavik: Yes Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Walker, supported by Mr. Anderson and unanimously adopted, it was #4-63-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to request dated March 16, 1960 from the Slavik Builders, Inc. for permission to segregate Burton Holbws Subdivision No. 3 into two subdivisions, namely, Burton Hollows Subdivision No. 3 and Burton Hollows Subdivision No. 4, in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 16, the City Planning Commission does hereby grant said request, subject, however, to the following: (1) That a temporary turnaround road be established at the south termini cf turtcn Hollows Subdivision No.. 4, said read to be approved by the City Engineering Department. Mr. Angevine: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Anderson and unanimously adopted, it was #4-64-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to request dated March 10, 1960 from David Lewis, for a one year extension on the balance of the Bai-Lynn Park Subdivision, Nos. 6, 7 and 8 located in the South- west 1/4 of Section 23, the City Planning Commission does hereby grant said request. L. Angevine: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is the approval of minutes for meetings held on February 16, 1960, March 1, 1960, March 15, 1960 and March 22, 1960. Mr. Anderson: I have a correction to be made. On Page 2795 of the minutes for March 15, 1960, it was left out of the minutes that Mr. Pollack had agreed to create an easement along the property including where the retention basin was located as shown on the Rosemor Manor Subdivision plat approved that night. It should be on record that he did agree to it. Mr. Angevine: On February 16, 1960, on Page 2756 , I feel that Mr. Hugh Wood was quoted incorrectly as to the location of the existing fence. Also, there is a necessity of correcting a number of typographical errors throughout the minutes. Upon a resolution duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Anderson, it was #4-65-60 RESOLVED thatorthe City Planning Commission does hereby approve minutes as corrected / meetings held on February 16, March 1, March 15 and ir- March 22, 1960 except for that member who was not present, he abstain from voting. 141 roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Greene, Walker, Harsha, Peacock, Okerstrom, Anderson, Robinson and Angevine. 4 2818 NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Peacock for March 15th, and Anderson for March 1st. Mr. Angevine: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: Mr. John Fowler has asked that the City Planning Commission rezone property located on the Northeast corner of Gill and ^choolcraft in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 2ihirom RUFB to R-2. He repre- sents the Camp Happy Hollow and/Ire Koping to use this property as a child-caring agency for children with mental, emotional, and/or physical handicaps. Since this is a worthy cause, Mr. Fowler wondered if the Planning Commission would rezone this for them. Will you permit me to do so? Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Walker and unanimously adopted, it was #4-66-60 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby permit D. R. McCullough, City Planner, to provide for a public hearing to rezone property on the Northeast corner of Gill and School craft in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 21 from RUFB to R-2, said property to be used as a child-care agency for children with mental, emotional and/or physical handicaps. Mr. Angevine: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. ;There was a general discussion as to whether or not the present zoning map is correct, in relation to the dimensions as shown thereon. Mr. Robinson stated that Mr. Albe Munson, Planning Consultant, had corrected quite a number of mistakes when he first made up the map and made the dimensions from the center of the road. Mr. Angevine remarked that some of them were not changed. Mr. Anderson stated that he felt it was only logical to make the dimensions from the center of the road. Mr. Angevine further stated that the original map stated it was not from the center of the road. Mr. Pinto stated that the dimensions are to be read from the outside boundary of the right-of-way on the master thoroughfare plan. Mr. McCullough stated he would investigate this further and after this is done a public hearing could be held to amend the zoning map. Mr. McCullough informed theCommissioners that a Mr. Edwin Lachman, 29548 Transcrest, has asked permission to erect a building of steel and which will not be a permanent structure on the Northwest corner of Five Mile and Middlebelt Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14. This building is smaller than what is presently allowed in the City. Section 11.15 states no building can be erected having a first floor area of less than 400 sq. ft. unless approved by the City Planning Commission. Mr. Lachman is contemplating operating the "Little Chef" Restaurant on this property. He stated it was to be baked enamel on the outside and stainless steel on the inside. Mr. Walker asked what happens in talation to sanitary conditions if this building is ever moved. 'fir. Lachman felt that this point would be made part of the lease. sir. Walker asked if the City could require a legal agreement on this property in re- ation to the rehabilitation of the property when the building is removed? Mr. Pinto stated it was definitely the property owner's responsibility. Mr. Harsha asked if the petitioner understood he must have sufficient off-street •� r 2819 for his customers? Mr. Lachman stated he did. 1 lMr. Harsha was excused at approximately 11:25 p.m. for the remainder of the meeting. After a brief discussion in relation to the undersized building, it was determined that Mr. McCullough and Mr. Lachman would study this further and that a decision would be made at the next scheduled meeting. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Walker, supported by Mr. Robinson and unanimously adopted, the 115th Special Meeting was duly adjourned on Tuesday, April 5, 1960 at approximately 11:30 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION William R. Robinson, Secretary pro tem ATTESTED: ilfW / L. An evhainiotto 'ertgin ' IL