HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1960-09-20 MINUTES OF THE 119TH REGULAR 2976
MEETING AND A PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
.. II: On Tuesday, September 20, 1960 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held a Public Hearing and the 119th Regular Meeting at the Livonia City Hall, 33001
Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Charles Walker, Chairman, called the meeting
to order at approximately 8:00 p.m.
Members present: Robert L. Greene, Leonard K. Kane, Robert M. Peacock, Wilford E.
Okerstrom, William R. Robinson, Dennis Anderson and Charl=es W.
Walker
Members absent : Robert L. Angevine
Mr. David R. McCullough, City Planner and Mr. Charles J. Pinto, First Assistant
Attorney were present along with approximately 5 interested persons in the audience.
Mr. McCullough: The first item on the agenda is Petition Z-470 by D. R.
McCullough, City Planner, to determine whether or not Section
4.45 of Article 4.00 of the Zoning Ordinance should be amended by changing the type
of protective wall required by the existing provision of the Zoning Ordinance.
I have been informed by the Engineering Department that the
existing wall provision has the following disadvantages:
(1) it means a costly drainage problem on each wall
(2) it is costly to repair, and
(3) it is necessary to tunnel underneath it to tap into
sewer.
(4) cost nay be prohibitive
The Bureau of Inspection and Engineering seem to be in accord
with this type.
Mr. Peacock: Have you come across any cost compared with the concrete
wall erected at Inkster and Warren?
or reinforced concrete
Mr. McCullough: For hardburned brick/it would cost approximately$11.00 per
lineal foot. This new type would cost about $4.50 a lineal ft.
Mr. Walker: This new wall shows a space of d" underneath it. Would this
cause a nuisance to t he abutting residences?
Mr. Anderson: I feel it would. If this is to be a protective wall, it should
do just that, and be reasonably good looking and easy enough
to maintain. I would hate to see it in anything but concrete
blocks.
Mr. Peacock: I don't feel that this amount of space is necessary for
drainage.
lij Mr. McCullough: Mr. Middlewood of the Bureau of Inspection was going to try
and be here tonight in order to discuss this with the com=
mission. This new type of wall would not prevent trash from
blowing underneath it.
Mr. Anderson: The wall at Wonderland is on the property line and it is
constructed of concrete block.
a
2977
Mr. Robinson: I would like to hear what Mr. Middlewood has to say before
making any decision.
Mi. Walker: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak?
Mr. H. Eskovitz: I live in the subdivision behind the sbonninawktg center at
17157 Delores) Inkster and Schoolcraft. They have the weave type of wooden
fence around the shopping center. I am glad that I do not
liv immediately behind the shopping center. I would object
to this type of fence.
Mr. J. Vanzo: In relation to the wall for Star Nursery on Plymouth. I
12066 Boston Post Rd.) understand that a different type of wall has to be erected
in this area because of the lack of drainage.
Mr. Walker: Yes, that i- true, there is a drainage problem.
Mr. Vanzo: In other words the building should not have been built here.
Mr. Walker: The building is built too low.
Mr. Vanzo: An eight inch opening or space at the bottom would create
quite a nuisance. When it is winter the papers are blown
all around and in the subdivision.
Mr. Walker: This item will be taken under advisement until later in the
1 li: evening until Mr. Middlewood arrives.
Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a petition by the City Planning
Commission on its own motion to determine whether or not
Part VI of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, that is,
the Master Fire Station Plan, should be amended so as to
designate for future public purposes certain property.
This plan meets with the approval of the Fire Department.
Mr. Peacock: I still feel that the legend, "Operative-Temporary" should be
changed to "Active Fire Station to be relocated"
Mr. Walker: Anyone in the audience who wishes to speak?
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Kane, it was
#9-199-60 RESOLVED that, ?urcuant to the provi-ions of Sections 6, 7 and
of Act 2... of the Public Acts of 1'931, as amended, the City Planning,
Commission of the City of Livonia having, duly held a public hearing
on Tuesday, epte:abe1 20, 1960 for the purpose of revising and
amending, PartVl of the Master Plan of the Cit) of Livonia, entitled,
"Master Fire Station Plan" the same arc hereby revised and amended
at this time so that the certain property hereinafter will be
designated on such plan for future purposes in order to promote
the health, safety and general welfare of the community,
C
RESOLVED further, that having given proper notice of such hearing
as required by said Act 285, as amended, the Planning Commission
does hereby adopt said amendment so as to designate for future
public purposes all of that property shown on the proposed revised
Part VI of the Master Plan dated August 19, 1960 and identified by
the signatures of the Chairman and the Secretary of the City Planning
2976
Commission and reference is expressly hereby made to the map con-
taining descriptive and other matter intended by such Commission
to form a part of such Master Plan and said described property is
designated thereon; and
RESOLVED further, that said revision and amendment is in the best
interest of the City of Livonia and this resolution shall be
recorded on the said map which describes Part V of the Master
Plan by the identifying signatures of the Chairman and the Secretary
of the City Planning Commission, and an attested copy of said amend-
ment to Part V shall be certified to the City Council, City Clerk
and the City Planning Commission and to the Register of Deeds of the
County of Wayne and the following certification shall appear thereon:
1°We certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a
meeting of the City Planning Commission held on Tuesday, September
20, 1960 by the following vote:
AYES: Peacock, Greene, Robinson, Anderson, Kane, Okerstrom
and Walker
NAYS: None
Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is the petition by the City
IL: Planning Commission on its own motion to determine whether
or not Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, that is, the Master
Thoroughfare Plan, should be amended so as to reduce the proposed width of Henry
Ruff Road in the North half of Section 14 from 66 ft. to 60 ft.
At the present time the road is not improved, but I have
been informed that the City has agreed to gravel it
temporarily after this amendment has been approved.
Due to the topography of the area it would not be economical
to put the road through. It is not probable that Henry
Ruff north of Five Mile Road would go through due to the
school being situated on the west side of Henry Ruff and
Five Mile Road.
After a brief discussion it was determined that a dedication of 17 ft. should be
made on the West side of Henry Ruff, north of Puritan, for road purposes, which
along with the presently dedicated 43 ft. on the East side of Henry Ruff would make
a total of 60 ft. It was discovered the dedication would only involve two property
owners.
Mr. Pinto: If you have 43 ft. on the east side of Henry Ruff and only
17 ft. dedicated on the west side - this would move the
centerline of Henry Ruff from where it is presently designated
on the Master Plan. Does the Engineering Department agree
to this?
Mr. McCullough: Yes; they are agreeable to this.
Mr. Walker: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak?
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Anderson,it was
#9-200-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the provisions of Act 285 of the Public
2979
Acts of Michigan, 1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission
of the City of Livonia having duly held a public hearing on
Tuesday, September 20, 1960, for the purpose of amending Part I
of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, entitled, "Master
Thoroughfare Plan" the same is hereby amended so as to
(1) reduce the width of Henry Ruff in the north half of
Section 14 from 36 feet to 60 feet,
for the reason that the present width of Henry Ruff Road in said
section is excessive and unnecessary for the health, safety and
general welfare of the community and that said width would not
carry out the intent and purpose of the Master Plan, and having
given proper notice of such hearing as required by Act 285 of
1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission does hereby adopt
said amendment as part of the Master Thoroughfare Plan of the
City of Livonia, which is incorporated herein by reference, the
same having been adopted by resolution of the City Planning
Commission under date of April, 1951, with all amendments thereto;
and further that this amendment shall be filed with the City
Council, City Clerk and the City Planning Commission ; and a copy
shall be forwarded to the Register of Deeds for the County of
Wayne with the following certification contained thereon:
"We certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adnnted at a
meeting of the City Planning Commission held on Tuesday,
September 20, 1960 by the following vote:
AYES: Peacock, Greene, Robinson, Anderson, Okerstrom and Walker
NAYS: None
NOT VOTING: Kane
Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-471 by D. R.
McCullough to determine whether or not Ordinance No. 60
and the zoning map made a part, thereof, shall be amended by changing the zoning
classification of certain properties to C-3.
It was determined that no action could be taken upon this Petition until action
is taken upon Petition Z-459, C-3 District Regulations. This item is on the agenda
for the 119th Regular Meeting to be held after the public hearing tonight.
Mr. Walker: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak?
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Peacock, supported by Mr. Okerstrom and unanimously
adopted, it was
#9-201-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
on Petition Z-471, the City Planning Commission does hereby
table this item until the 119th Regular Meeting is held later
in the evening.
Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Peacock and unanimously
adopted, it was
#9-202-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
2980
on Petition 2-470, the City Planning Commission does hereby
table this item, until the 119th Regular Meeting is held later
in the evening.
Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Peacock, supported by Mr. Okerstrom, it was
#9-203-60 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn
the Public Hearing held on Tuesday, September 20, 1960 at approx-
imately 3:35 p.m.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Peacock, Greene, Robinson, Anderson, Okerstrom, Kane and
Walker
NAYS: None
Mr. Walker called the 119th Regular Meeting to order at approximately 3:36 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 request dated September 9,
1960 from the Bureau of Inspection for the release of the
Topsoil Bond for Applications TA-28 and TA-44 by H. E. Edwards. The area involved
is in the north half of Section 16.
It was determined that the operation has been completed in said area.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Peacock, it was
#9-204-60 RESOLVED, that pursuant to the report and recommendation of the
Bureau of Inspection dated September 9, 1960, the City Planning
Commission does herein authorize the release of the bond dated
September 16, 1957, in the amount of $45,000.00 by the Standard
Accident Insurance Company posted with the city in connection with
topsoil removal operations performed under Permits Nos. 43 and 51,
(Applications TA-28 and TA-44) issed to H. E. Edwards; it appearing
from the above report that all ordinance provisions and rules and
regulations have been complied with; and the City Clerk is herein
authorized to do all things necessary to the full performance of
this resolution.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Peacock, Greene, Robinson, Anderson, Kane, Okerstrom
and Walker
NAYS: None
Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
1: Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition M-205 by S. & L.
Construction Company requesting permission to operate a
drive-in restaurant on property located on the triangular piece of property between
Eight Mile Road and Grand River and west of Inkster in the Nortleast 1/4 of Section
1. Public Hearing 9/13/60, item taken under advisement.
Mr. McCullough: The petitiorc:r has informed me that he is willing to erect
2981
curbs in the parkins lot; also that he has increased the parking
II: spaces by 50 ears.
Mr. Peacock: I believe that it was suggested at the last meeting that a
four foot wall be erected between the gasoline station and
the drive-in.
Mr. Walker requested Mr. Okerstrom to read a letter dated September 19, 1960 from
the property owner of the property in the petition. This was in relation to
the additional parking spaces.
Mr. Robinson: The curbs will separate the businesses, why erect a wall?
Mr. Peacock: The wall is to separate the drive-in from the gas station. I
said that the parking area came up to the gas station. The
petitioner said there was at least 20 ft. between the gas
station and the property line. This is not so. I would like
to see a protective wall so as not to have an eye sore for
this business. I am quite sure that the petitioner would
agree that it would look better than being able to see old
cars lying about and it would also prevent a customer coming
in too fast running into this station.
Mr. Robinson: If the petitioner has trouble with the gas station, then he
can build a fence.
Mr. Walker: The parking will be 42 ft. from the gasoline station. The
petitioner has agreed to erecting curbs along this area.
Mr. Okerstrom: Isn't this a health situation having a gas station so close .
to the drive-in?
Mr. Walker: The building is still further from the gas station.
Mr. Okerstrom: But, you have the people who might consume this food near the
gas station.
Mr. McCullough: I believe that the petitioner will have to comply with all
Wayne County health regulations.
Mr. Anderson: The wall would make a better separation but we have never
requested a wall between two commercial enterprises in the
. past. I do not feel it is under our jurisdiction. A safety
curb is all we can ask for.
Mr. Peacock: Has the petitioner objected to erecting this wall?
Mr. McCullough: They feel the wall is too expensive.
Mr. H. Eskovitz: We do not feel it serves any purpose.
Mr. Anderson: You do agree to putting in the curbs?
II]
Mr. Eskovitz: Yes, we do.
Mr. Peacock: What about outside music or outside speakers?
Mr. Eskovitz: No, we do not plan on any.
2982
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Anderson, supported by Mr. Kane, it was
#9-205-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held
on Tuesday, September 13, 1960 the City Planning Commission does
hereby aant Petition M-205 by S. & L. Construction Company
requesting permission to operate a drive-in restaurant on
property in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 1, subject, however, to
the following:
(1) applicant will install curbs along the west property line,
(2) applicant will not have outside music,
(3) all lights will reflect away from surrounding residential properties,
(4) applicant will develop the additional parking spaces shown on
the site plan dated September 20, 1960 and marked Exhibit "A"
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.
Mr. Okerstrom: This isn't a drive-in restaurant. This is a carry out
restaurant.
Mr. Pinto: It was determined that this would be classified as a drive-
1[40 in restaurant. If it is not, the petitioner does not have
to come before the Planning Commission, because restaurants
do not need approval by the Commission.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Peacock, Greene, Robinson, Anderson, Kane and Walker
NAYS: Okerstrom
Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and theforegoing resolution is adopted.
Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is the proposed 3iltmore Estates
Subdivision submitted by Biltmore Building Company and
situated on the North side of Schoolcraft Road and South of Lyndon Avenue and
approximately 1400 feet East of Levan Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 20. Public
Hearing 9/13/60, item taken under advisement.
Mr. Norman Cohn was present for the petitioner.
Mr. McCullough: At the last meeting there were two objections to the sub-
mitted plat. The proposed greenbelt along Schoolcraft and
the lots backing into the proposed park site. The petitioner
has submitted two new schemes, namely "C" and "D''. Scheme
"D" shows how the plat could be made so as not to lock in
the undeveloped property along Schoolcraft. It was my
understanding that the petitioner was going to submit a letter
from the property owner stating he would never be sub-
dividing his property.
Mr. Cohn: There are two pieces of property not included in our plat.
A Mr. Romano owns the property along our Fairway Drive. He
has adequate access to the property in back of his house.
The other property owner sold the land in the proposed plat
29u3
t ) the petitioner other than the portion he now uses for his house
and garden. I do not think the property owner will ever develop
I[: this remaining portion of his original parcel because be has a culti-
vated garden in this portion.
It was sug ,ested taht a road be designated $4 as not to lock in this property in the
future. It was also suggested that a street is needed to connect the Madonna Estates
recently approved with the Biltmore Estates Subdivision. It was pointed out that the
access drive should be cut through at the western end and that the house on Lot #60
should face Schoolcraft and not side on Schoolcraft. It was agreed that walkways
should be kept at a minimum because they were a nuisance to the property owners bor-
dering them. Because of this it was suggested that one walkway was sufficient in
this plat and that the other one should be eliminated.
Upon a notion duly made by Mr. Peacock, supported by Mr. Anderson, it was
#9-206-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Haring having been held on
Tuesday, September 13, 1960 the City Planning Commission does hereby
give approval to the preliminary plat, dated September 19, 1960 and
known as Sketch "C"1 of the Biltmore Estates Subdivision, located
in Section 20, subject, hoover, to the following conditions:
(1) that the developer attempt to procure the necessary dedications
to extend the access road westerly across the two excepted parcels
to Fairway, and if successful then the developer agrees to bear all
costs for installing the access drive across these two properties;
If: (2) that the balms on Lot #80 shell front on Schoolcraft;
(3) that the pedestrian right-of-way between Lots 134 6 135 be eliminated;
(4)thet if the developer is unable to procure the dedication specified
in the first condition, then his engineering drawings shall show the
access road connecting 'with Schoolcraft on Lot 47 in a manner acceptable
to our Engineering Department,
(5) that the City Planner will change certain street names
FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was sent to the abutting
property owners, proprietor, City Departments as listed in the Proof
of Service and copies of the plot together with notice having been sent
to the Building Department, Superintendent of Schools, Fire Department,
Police Departient, Parks 6 Recreation Department and Members of the Plat Com.
ii roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Peacock, Greene, Robinson, Anderson, Kane, 0kerstrom and Walker
DAYS: None
Mr. Walker: The notion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
The Chairman called a recess at approximately 9;15 p.m.
Mr. Walker caged the Regular Meeting back to order at approximately 9:22 p.m. with
all those present now who were present at the time recess was called.
It was decided at this tine to take up Items 11, 12, 13 and 14 on the agenda at this
time in order to be able to discuss Items 8, 9 and 10 more fully at the end of the
meeting.
Mr, McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a request dated September 15,
1960 asking for a one-year extension on the preliminary
approval for Castle Gardens Subdivision located in Section 19.
2984
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Kane and unanimously
adopted, it was
#9-207-60 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to request
dated September 15, 1960 from the Stout Home Developers, does
hereby grant a one-year extension on the remaining portions of
Castle Gardens Subdivision located in Section 19, subject to
any conditions prevailing.
4r. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
•
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by M . Kane and unanimously
adopted, it was
#9-208-60 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission,pursuant to request
dated September 15, 1960 from Burt Homes, Inc. , does hereby
grant a one-year extension on the preliminary plat of Meri-
Lynn Farms Subdivision 5 through 9 located in the Southeast
1/4 of Section 22, subject to any conditions prevailing.
Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a request from the Firestone
Tire & Service Sales requesting a modification on the
set back required in the resolution of approval granted April
5, 1960. They wish a reduction in the set back from 40 ft.
to 35 ft. They stated that Goodyear located to the east
of their proposed building is act back only 35 ft. and they
are requesting the same right.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Kane, it was
#9- -60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the 119th Regular Meeting held by
the City Planning Commission on Tuesday, September 20, 1960,
the City Planning Commission does hereby permit the Firestone
Tire & Rubber Company to procure their building permit under
the same circumstances that Goodyear received their permit.
There was a brief discussion, after which Mr. Robinson stated he would like to
amend his previous motion.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Kane, it was
#9- -60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the 119th Regular Meeting held on
Tuesday, September 20, 1960, the City Planning Commission
does hereby request that the Firestone Tire & Rubber Company
be allowed to procure their building permit in the same
manner as Goodyear Company was allowed and that they be
permitted to build on the same set back as Goodyear Company.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Robinson, Anderson, Kane
NAYS: Peacock, Greene, Okerstrom and Walker.
Mr. Walker: The motion is not carried, therefore the resolution is
not adopted.
2985
I: Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Kane, it was
#9-209-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the 119th Regular Meeting held on
Tuesday, September 20, 1960, the City Planning Commission
does hereby grant the request from the Firestone Tire & Rubber
Company for a modification on the required set-back, reducing
said set-back from 40 feet to 35 feet.
Mr. Peacock: I would like to hear Mr. Okerstrom's counter proposal.
Mr. Okerstrom; I was going to suggest that the petitioner bring in a plot
plan showing the relationship of his building to the already
existing Goodyear building to our next meeting.
Mr. Anderson: Mr. Chairman, I request that we have a roll call on the
motion made by Mr. Robinson and supported by Mr. Kane.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Robinson, Anderson, Kane and Walker
NAYS: Peacock, Greene and Okerstrom.
MI . Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Robinson and unanimously
adopted, it was
t
#9-210-60 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to request
from Gordon-Begin, Inc. does hereby grant a one-year extension
on the preliminary plat of Belle-Mar #2 located in the Southeast
1/4 of Section 23, subject to any conditions prevailing.
Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
Mr. McCullough: The next three items, which are related to each other, are
Petitions Z-457 (C-1), Z-453 (C-2) and Z-459 (C-3). Public
hearing for these petitions was held on August 16, 1960.
At the last meeting the commission requested that a list of
permitted uses be made for all three districts and forwarded
to the commissioners by mail.
After a lengthy discussion as to the various uses, it was suggested that"public
utility buildings"be deleted from C-1 and C-2; that"dry cleaning plants" be allowed
in C-1 and deleted from C-2; that "food lockers" and "pet shops* be allowed in
C-2 and in turn that "pet shops" be deleted from C-3; that"skating rinks and arenas"
and "dance halls" be a permitted use in C-3; that"cold storage* be a prohibited use
in C-3 and that "store and shops for the conducting: of a service or retail business"
be deleted from C-2 since it was already a permitted use in C-1.
Mr. McCullough stated that copies of the revised proposed ordinances would be
II:
written up and forwarded to the commissioners by mail for their examivatiou.
Mr, Walker: These three items will be taken under advisement until the
next meeting.
Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-471 which was
tabled at the public hearing held earlier in the evening.
F , T
2986
This petition is to determine whether or not Ordinance No.
60 and the zoning map should be amended by changing the
zoning classifications of certain properties to C-3.
After a brief discussion it was decided that instead of designating the C-3 zones
at this time it would be advisable to wait until the C-3 ordinance has been sub-
mitted to the City Council for their examination. If the C-3 ordinance is approved
by the City Council, the various properties could then be zoned C-3.
Mr. Walker: This petition will be taken under advisement until the C-3
ordinance has been forwarded to the City Council for approval.
Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-470 which was also
taken under advisement at the public hearing held earlier
in the evening. This was in relation to an amendment to
Section 4.45 of Article 4.00 of the Zoning Ordinance which
pertained to amending the type of protective wall required
under said ordinance.
Mr. Middlewood has not arrived as yet.
)r. Okerstrom: I suggest that we take this item under advisement until
such time that Mr. Middlewood can be present.
(Mr. Anderson concurred with Mr. Okerstrom)
Mr. Walker: This item will be taken under advisement.
Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a proposed ordinance relating
to R-M District Regulations. This would make the minimum
lot area in the R-M district not less than 8400 square feet
and a minimum width of seventy (70) feet at the property
line.
After a brief discussion it was decided that the front yard depth should not be
less than 30 feet in depth, and that the side yard requirements should be increased
by one foot.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Kane and unanimously
adopted, it was
#9-211-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 20.01 of the Zoning Ordinance
of the City of Livonia, Zoning Ordinance No. 60, as amended, the
City Planning Commission at this time on its own motion does
hereby provide for a Public Hearing to be held to determine
whether or not to amend the Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance No. 60,
by adding thereto Article 5.25 - RM District Regulations,
FURTHER RESOLVED, that a hearing be held and that notice be
given as provided in Section 20.01 of the Zoning Ordinance,
Ordinance No. 60 of the City of Livonia and that there shall be
a report submitted and recommendation thereon to the City Council.
Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
Mr. McCullough: It will also be necessary to amend the Subdivision Rules
andRegulations as to the protective wall requirement.
2987
j
Upon a motion duly made by Mir. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Anderson and unanimously
adopted, it was
#9-212-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 14, of Act 285 of the Public
Acts of 1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission on its
own motion does hereby determine that there shall be a Public
Hearing to determine whether or not Section 4.10 of Article IV
of the Subdivision Rules and Regulations adopted by the City
Planning Commission of theCity of Livonia on January 9, 1952,
should be amended by adding thereto the following:
(c) Protective Wall. A protective wall may be required
by the City Planning Commission where residential side yards or
rear yards adjoin or are contiguous to any property zoned for
commercial uses. Where required, the owner shall provide a
continuous unpierced and reinforced poured concrete, masonry
or hardburned brick wall not less than five (5) feet nor more
than seven (7) feet in height to adequately protect and screen
such residential property from adjoining commercial property
and/or uses. Such wall shall be constructed on either the
property line or the easement line, in the discretion of the
Engineering division of the Department of Public Works.
Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
IL: Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Robinson, supported by Mr. Okerstrom and unanimously
adopted, it was
#9-213-60 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 14, of Act 285 of the Public Acts
of 1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission on its own motion
does hereby determine that there shall be a Public Hearing to determine
whether or not Article V of the Subdivision Rules and Regulations
adopted by theCity Planning Commission of the City of Livonia on January
9, 1952, should be amended by adding thereto the following:
Section 5.04. Rehearing. In cases where new evidence is
presented subsequent to the disposition of the matter the Planning
Commission shall have the discretion to permit a rehearing of the
matter if it can be shown said new evidence was unavailable at the
time of the first hearing and would have materially effected the
disposition of the cause.
Mr. Walker: The motion is • _:. ied and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
Mi. McCullough: There are two sections left from the Master Patern which
have not been acted upon in relation to Petition Z-331.
A copy of the proposed rezoning of these two sections,
namely, Section 12 and Section 13 is before the commission
now. After these two sections have been acted upon, the
Ire Planning Commission's recommendation will' be forwarded to
the City Council.
It was determined that the commissioners would take the maps home and examine
them further. Until that time, the item will be taken under advisement.
Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Greene, supported by Mr. Okerstrom and unanimously
298
adopted, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the 119th Regular Neetini,.
held on Tuesday, September 20, 1960 at approximately 10:40 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
if
()), e, 0
W. E. Okerstrom, Secretary
ATTESTED:
/1 � -- /fit
Chart- W. Walker, Chairman
1