Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1961-03-28 3142 MINUTES OF THE 128TH SPECIAL MEETING ll: OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, March 28, 1961 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held the Special Meeting at the Livonia City Hall, 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Charles Walker, Chairman, called the Special Meeting to order at approximately 8:05 p.m. Members present: Robert L. Angevine, James Watson, W. E. Okerstrom, Robert M. Peacock, Leonard K. Kane, Robert L. Greene, James Cameron and Charles W. Walker Members absent: **Dennis Anderson Mr. David R. McCullough, City Planner, was present along with approximately 6 interested persons in the audience. Mr. Walker, on behalf of the Planning Commission, welcomed Mr. Kane back. Mr. Kane had been absent two months due to a siege of pneumonia. Mr. McCullough: The first item on the agenda is Petition M-218 by Joseph Cyr requesting approval to erect a Catholic school on the north side of Lyndon Road approximately 360 feet West of Farmington Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 21. Public Hearing 3/7/61, item taken under advisement; Regular Meeting 3/14/61, item taken under advisement. Mr. Joseph Cyr was present. Mr. Walker: I have talked with Mr. Cyr and as far as the buses are concerned, they will not be serviced on the school site. Mr. Cyr: Each parish will be responsible for bringing their students to the school rather than having a central bus line. There will be no bus storage upon the property during the day. Mr. Walker asked the Commission if they would like to have thequestions,raised at the public hearing,read to them at this time. It was determined that this was not necessary. Mr. Walker: Mr. Cyr, at the time the plan was originally submitted, I believe you did say that the new school was going to work with the development of the 40 acre park site on the south side of Lyndon. Mr. Cyr: There will be some help for it. There is no policy on this but it has appeared that they will make certain lease arrange- ments with the city to use a portion of this site. I would be in error to say that the Catholic School would be using the site on the whole. . Mr. Walker: We have had quite some time to consider this petition and I believe, we are all acquainted with the pertinent facts of the item. If there are no further questions, the floor is now open for a motion. 3143 1E: Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Angevine, supported by Mr. Greene, it was #3-59-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, March 7, 1961 the City Planning Commission does hereby grant Petition M-218 by Joseph Cyr requesting approval to erect a Catholic School on the north side of Lyndon Road approximately 360 ft. West of Farmington Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 21, with the following recommendation: (1) that the petitioner make efforts to procure additional land since it is highly desirable to have a minimum of 25 to 35 acres for a high school site, 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: Cameron, Peacock, Watson, Kane, Okerstrom, Walker, Greene and Angevine NAYS: None Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is IL adopted. lMr. McCullough: The,next item on the agenda is Petition Z-499 by Gordon- Begin Company asking that the zoning classifications of property located on the Northeast corner of Lyndon and Middlebelt in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 24; the Southeast corner of Middlebelt and Lyndon in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 24 and on the Southwest corner of Middlebelt and Lyndon in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 23 from RUFB and R-1A to PS. Public Hearing 3/14/61, itcm taken under advisement. Mr. Walker: Mr. Gordon telephoned me that they wanted to be here tonight. There is pertinent information that they would like to pre- sent in relation to this petition. They have asked me to inform the Commission of this and asked that this item be held up until they can appear before the Commission. They were unable to appear tonight. Is there any objection to the postponement? Mr. Okerstrom: This petition was taken under advisement because the petitioner wasn't present at the public hearing. Mr. Greene suggested at that time to wait until they could be present in order that some questions could be answered. I feel that we should proceed on this. They have had ample time to present their views. Et: Peacock: I concur with Mr. Okerstrom, I think we should take action. Watson: I go along with Mr. Peacock and Mr. Okerstrom. Mr. Greene: What is the information they wich to submit to us? 3144 Mr. Walker: I did not get the full details. He wanted an opportunity to sit with the commission and discuss this in detail. It is in relation to tie original plattihe of tae land. Mr. Peacock: I think he has had the opportunity to discuss this with the Commission. Mr. Cameron: Weren't there several people from the subdivision objecting to the petition at the last meeting? Mr. McCullough: Yes, several persons are present tonight also. Mr. Watson: I feel it is unfair to hold it up any longer when there are people present who are interested in it. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Watson, supported by Mr. Peacock, it was #3-60-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, March 14, 1961 on Petition Z-499 by Gordon-Begin Company for a change of zoning in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 24; in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 24 and in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 23 from RUFB and R-1A to PS, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-499 be denied for the following reasons: (a) there is an existing clinic within approximately 550 feet which meets the needs of the area; (b) each of the corners is probably too small to accomodate a building with sufficient parking under the recent changes made in the law, and (c) that the petitioner has failed to be present at two consecutive meetings to answer questions, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian, under date of February 22, 1961 and notice of which hearing was sent to The Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. , Michigan Bell Telephone Company, The Consumers Power Co. , City Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr. Walker: Any discussion on the motion. Mr. Okerstrom: Shouldn't the following also be added? "that the new home owners and tax payers in the City have purchased their homes with the understanding that this would be an all residential district" Mr. Walker: I don't feel it is important since the original plats show this area to be residential. Mr. Watson: I would go along with your suggestion, Mr. Okerstrom, but I do not think, as Mr. Walker stated, that it is important. = A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Cameron, Peacock, Greene, Watson, Angevine, Kane and Okerstrom NAYS: Walker Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. e 3145 [ Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-491 by Mike Sinacola, et al, asking that the zoning classification of property located approximately 300 ft. South of Seven Mile Road and 175 ft. East of Middlebelt Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12 to be rezoned from C-2 and R-1B to R-3A and/or PS. Public Hearing 2/21/61, item taken under advise- . ment. Mr. Walker: Mr. McCullough and I have been trying to see if this property in the petition could be developed into a Senior Citizens' Home but I believe the petitioner has now decided to have this property rezoned to R-3. Mr. McCullough: The architect, Mr. Kilgore called this afternoon and asked that this item be postponed. **Mr. Dennis Anderson arrived at 8:25 p.m. Mr. Watson: Are there any interested persons present for this petition? Mr. McCullough: No, we called and told them it was not going to be acted upon. Mr. Walker: The Chair will continue to take this item under advisement. ,, Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-490 by Elwood Manns asking that the zoning classifications on property located on the East side of Middlebelt approximately 250 ft. South of Six Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 13 be rezoned from RUFB to C-2. Public Hearing 2/21/61, advisement. Mr. Harold Rice is present on behalf of Mr. Manns. Mr. Walker: Did we receive a letter from the Board of Health on the matter of the septic tank? Mr. McCullough: Yes, we have. (Mr. McCullough read the letter to the commission. ) Even if the zoning is granted to them, the petitioner will have to acquire the approval from the Board of Health before he will be able to build his funeral home, in relation to the septic tank matter. Mr. Charles Forrest, Assistant City Attorney arrived at approximately 8:30 p.m. Mr. Walker: The Board of Health was concerned with the fact that the lot was too small considering the amount of drainage that would be necessary for this type of business. LMr. Harold Rice informed the commission that the matter has been discussed with Mr. Stock of the Wayne County Board of Health. He felt that this was not a zoning problem and that it will have to be settled with the City' s Building Department be- fore they ,will be permitted to build the funeral home, after the zoning has been approved. 3146 Mr. Peacock: Would you be willing to verbally ask.. to amend the petition Land request a PS zoning instead of C-2 as originally requested? Mr. Rice: Yes, and also I have it in writing. Mr. Rice submitted the request to the commission. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Peacock, it was #3-61-61 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby allow Mr. Harold Rice on behalf of Mr. Elwood Manns for Petition Z-490 to amend said petition to read "RUFB to PS" instead of"RUFB to C-2" as originally requested, and as stated in the letter dated March 17, 1961 and submitted to the Planning Commission confirming said request. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Cameron, Peacock, Greene, Watson, Angevine, Kane, Okerstrom, Walker and Anderson NAYS: None Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and Petition Z-490 is amended. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Peacock, supported by Mr. Cameron and unanimously adopted, it was #3-62-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, February 21, 1961 on Petition Z-490 as submitted by Mr. Elwood Manns for a change of zoning in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 13 from RUFB to PS, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-490, as amended by Res. #3-61-61, be granted for the following reasons: (a) This land faces commercial zoning on the west side of Middlebelt; (b) The PS zoning will be a good buffer between the existing commercial to the north and the residential to the south, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian, under date of February 1, 1961 and notice of which hearing was sent to The Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. , Michigan Bell Telephone Co. , The Consumers Power Co. , City Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the f oregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is the proposed Canbros Buckingham Plaza Subdivision which is a replatting of Outlots A and B of the Buckingham Village Subdivision #2 located on the Northwest corner of Schoolcraft and Inkster Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 24. Submitted by Mason L. Brown & Sons, Inc. , public hearing 1/10/61, item taken under advisement. It was determined that this item would be held further under advisement for the reason that the petitioner has not yet begun to erect the protective wall as re- 3147 quired by ordinance. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a motion by the City Planning Commission pursuant to City Council's Res. #668-60 to hold a public hearing to determine whether or not Section 20.01 should be amended so as to provide that written notice be given to all abutting and adjoining property owners in all rezoning cases initiated by property owners. It was determined that before a motion is made to hold a public hearing on this amendment, that cost figures be obtained in order to determine if this will involve an expense which is presently not appropriated. Mr. McCullough stated this would be compiled and forwarded to the Finance Committee of the City Council. Mr. McCullough suggested that Item #9 be heard now for the reason that there was someone present who was interested in said Item. Mr. McCullough: Item #9 is a discussion on whether or not to hold a public hearing on petition from certain residents on Ann Arbor Trail in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 32 requesting the re- classification of certain commercial property. This is pursuant to City Council's Resolution #132-61. Mr. William B. Williams, 35975 Ann Arbor Trail, Livonia was present. Mr. McCullough read the Council's resolution to the Commission. Mr. Williams was i under the impression that the Council had requested the City Planning Commission to make a motion to hold a public hearing to determine if this property should be rezoned from C-1 to R-1A. The resolution only stated that the Council refers the request from certain residents to the City Planning Commission for its review and a determination as to whether or not the Planning Commission should initiate a zoning petition in accordance with the request. Mr. Okerstrom: Wouldn't it be wise to examine this area first before making any determination? Mr. Walker: Yes, I would say so. Mr. Williams: I represent the home owners in the New Joy Subdivision. We have requested a rezoning of this commercial property. We were misled: at the time we purchased our homes. The developers, Rose-Hill informed us this was all residential. We submitted our request to the City Council for these reasons. One, property value, and two, safety. This section of Ann Arbor Trail has had a large accident rate because of the particularly bad curve at this point. So far this year there have been five (5) accidents. We do not feel that a shopping center would be conducive to any safety. Also, this area is within walking distance to the Andrew Johnson School. No bus service for those within a mile of IL: the school. We have children walking in this area and we feel that this will be a traffic hazard for our children if a shopping center is put into this C-1 zone. Mr. McCullough: What is on the property naw? Mr. Williams: It is a wooded lot with an antique shop and a nursery. It was at one time a private riding club. We have requested 3148 that this area be rezoned to RUFA which would not hurt the nursery on the property. Mr. McCullough: Would you build your house next to a cemetery? Mr. Williams: There is a subdivision opposite to the cemetery and they are doing very good. Their lots back onto the cemetery. Mr. Okerstrom: According to the zoning maps, it has been zoned C-1 since at least 1952. Mr. Watson: You are only interested in that C-i that is across from the subdivision you live in. You are n of concerned with the other next to it? Mr. Williams: We are interested in the C-1 area from Parent Street to the cemetery. It is zoned residential on the south side of Ann Arbor Trail. Mr. Walker: The Commission will examine the area first and then a determination will be made. This item will be taken under advisement until this has been done. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a motion to hold a public hearing to determine whether or not Sections 10.17 and 11.19 of Articles 10.00 and 11.00 respectively, should be amended to increase the commercial setback to 60 ft. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Peacock, supported by Mr. Watson and unanimously adopted, it was #3-63-61 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission pursuant to Section 20.01 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to amend Sections 10.17 and 11.19 of Articles 10.00 and 11.00 respectively as follows: Section 10.17 of Article 10.00: Front and Side Yard Requirements Except as hereinbefore provided, each commercial building in any C-1 District shall have a front yard not less than sixty (60) feet deep and each commercial building on corner lots in any C-1 District shall have a side yard of not less than twenty-five (25) feet deep as measured from the front or side lot line, which- ever is the case; provided, however, that where any such lot or parcel abuts a major thoroughfare having an existing or planned width of eighty-six (86) feet or more as shown on the Master Thorough- fare Plan , the front and/or side yard shall be measured from the outside boundaries of such major thoroughfare as shown on the said Master Thoroughfare Plan. Notwithstanding the above, where there are existing commercial buildings situated within one hundred (100) feet of the proposed building on the same side of the street, then in such instances the required front or side yard, whichever is the case, shall be the average depth of the front or side yards of such existing commercial buildings, but not to exceed sixty (60) feet in the case of a front yard or to exceed twenty-five (25) feet in the case of a side yard. 3149 Section 11.19 of Article 11.00: Front and Side Yard Requirements IL: Except as hereinbefore provided, each commercial building in any C-2 district shall have a front year not less than sixty (60) feet deep and each commercial building on corner lots in any C-2 District shall have a side yard of not less than twenty-five (25) feet deep as measured from the front or side lot line, whichever is the case; provided, however, that where any such lot or parcel abuts a major thoroughfare having an existing or planned width of eighty-six (86) feet or more as shown on the Master Thoroughfare Plan, the front and/or side yard shall be measured from the outside boundaries of such major thoroughfare as shown on the said Master Thoroughfare Plan. Notwithstanding the above, where there are existing commercial buildings situated within one hundred (100) feet of the proposed building on the same side of the street, then in such instances the required front or side yard, whichever is the case, shall be the average depth of the front or side yards of such existing commercial buildings, but not to exceed sixty (60) feet in the case of a front yard or to exceed twenty-five (25) feet in the case of a side yard. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough informed the Commission that two property owners on Plymouth Road had informed him that they were going to ask the City Council to condemn several of their lots and use them for parking facilities to relieve the parking problem along Plymouth Road between Merriman and Hubbard Road in the north half of Section 34. li: Mr. Anderson felt that when the Inspection Department issues a building permit to anyone, they ought to recommend that the petitioner acquire the approval of the City Planner on the parking layout as a requirement to obtaining a building permit. If this is done, there will be no problem of someone not having sufficient parking. Mr. Walker suggested to Mr. Anderson that he submit a prepared resolution in regards to this and after it is acted upon by the Commission it can be forwarded to the Building Department. He stated Mr. Anderson could contact Mr. Forrest, Assistant Attorney, to work something out. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Angevine and unanimously adopted, it was #3-64-61 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the minutes for meetings held on Tuesday, February 21 and March 7, 1961 except for that member who was not present, he abstain from voting. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Anderson, supported by Mr. Cameron and unanimously adopted, it was #3-65-61 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby respectfully request the City Council to transfer the sum of $1200 from the IL: Printing Account (157-20) to the Travel & Education Account (157-29) to cover the cost of sending three (3) Planning Commission members to the ASPO National Planning Conference in Denver, Colorado during the first week in May. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. 3150 Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Peacock, supported by Mr. Watson and unanimously adopted, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the 128th Special Meeting , held on Tuesday, March 28, 1961 at approximately 9:20 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION l () I / /( �i %� oY� W. E. Okerstrom, Secretary ATTESTED: W Cha es W. Walker, Chairman