Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1961-06-20 3216 MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING AND THE 128TH REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION II: OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, June 20, 1961 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held the public hearing and the 128th Regular Meeting at the Livonia City Hall, 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Charles W. Walker, Chairman, called the public hearing to order at approximately 8:03 p.m. Members present: Robert M. Peacock, Dennis Anderson, W. E. Okerstrom, Robert L. Angevine, James Cameron and Charles W. Walker Members absent : *James Watson, Jr. , ** Robert L. Greene and Leonard K. Kane Mr. D. R. McCullough, City Planner, was present along with approximately 40 interested persons in the audience. Mr. McCullough: The first item on the agenda is Petition Z-390 by Clarence Charest, on behalf of Lloyd Wilkie, is requesting that the zoning classification of property located on the Northeast corner of Henry Ruff and Joy Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 35 be rezoned from RUFB to C-1. There is no correspondence. Mr. Wilkie, owner of property in Petition Z-390 asked that this be postponed until later in the evening until his attorney, Mr. Charest, arrived. IL: Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-512 by Joe Galli is requesting that the zoning classification of property located on the Southwest corner of Brentwood Avenue and Seven Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12 be rezoned from R-1A to C-1. It was determined that Mr. Galli intended to use this property temporarily for nursery outdoor sales. Later he intends to use it for some kind of a commercial use. The size of his parcel is 125' x 125' . *Mr. James Watson, Jr. , arrived at approximately 8:05 p.m. Mr. Angevine: Isn't this area essentially a residential area? Galli: About a half block away there is a sign shop. Mr. Walker: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak? Mr. Paul Spens: My property adjoins this parcel immediately west of it. My 28515 W. Seven Mile Road) wife has lived at this location for 38 years and we don't want any commercial zone next door to us or anywhere in the vicinity. Mr. Stanley J. Glenda: We live south of this property. We own 135 ft. adjoining his 19017 Brentwood) property along Brentwood. We absolutely refuse to have Mr. IE Galli have any commercial next to us. We bought the place forapeaceful residence and moved here from Detroit. Mr. Karl F. Schneider: I am north of Mr. Gaili's property. I am also against any 28340 W. Seven Mile ) commercial in this area. Mrs. Spens: We have 211 acres adjoining Mr. Galli's property. I do not want commercial next door to me. We have a small child. 3217 There are homes completely surrounding his property. IL: Mr. Spens stated he had contacted others who lived in the immediate vicinity of this property and they were all against the proposed rezoning. These property owners were: A. Z. Root, 28508 Seven Mile Road; Albert Bamford, 28514 Seven Mile Road;and Raymond B. Oldham, 28524 Seven Mile Road. Mr. Walker informed those present that final action is not taken tonight. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council their decision. At the public hearing held by the City Council, the petitioner and the objectors will have an opportunity to be heard again. Mr. Forrest, Assistant City Attorney arrived at 3:15 p.m. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Angevine and supported by Mr. Peacock, it was #6-103-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, June 20, 1961 on Petition Z-512 as submitted by Joe Galli for a change of zoning in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12 from R-1A to C-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-512 be denied for the following reasons: (a) that a change to C-1 would be harmful to the residences in the surrounding area; (b) that this would be spot zoning: (c) that new housing has recently been erected just south of the subject property which negates the argument that it cannot be sold, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian, under date of May 31, 1961 and notice 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. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Cameron, Peacock, Angevine, Anderson, Okerstrom and Walker NAYS: None NOT VOTING: Watson Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition V-59 by David S. Snyder requesting the easement running north/south between Coventry Drive and Five Mile Road in the Coventry Gardens Subdivision in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 16 be vacated. This easement is adjacent to and west of Lots o through 11 in said subdivision. Mr. Arthur Swanson was present representing Mr. Snyder. He stated that the easement as it is presently situated goes 30 ft. into this particular lot and the house cannot be built upon the lot because of the easement. There was a road going through this lot at one time. The road was vacated but the easement was never vacated. The public utilities have already removed their equipment but the easement is still on the 3218 records. Mr. Angevine: When did they remove the utilities' equipment? Mr. Swanson: During the winter. They granted a new easement but the old easement is still there. Mr. McCullough: The present easement is located 30 ft. west of Lot 12. The street was vacated some time ago. He is objecting to his lot line being in the middle of the easement. He wants to move it from the easterly to the westerly 12 ft. just across the property line. The public utilities have already been compensated for moving their equipment. The City wants to be compensated if there is anything which needs to be re- located. Mr. Okerstrom: What is the size of the present easement? Mr. Swanson: Twelve feet. A new 12 foot easement has already been granted. Mr. Peacock: There are only two utilities now? No Consumers Power? Mr. Swanson: No, the gas line is on the street rather than going through this property. Mr. Walker: Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak? I[: Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Anderson, supported by Mr. Okerstrom, it was #6-109-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, June 20, 1961 on Petition V-59 as submitted by David S. Snyder for the vacating of a public utility easement described as the East 12 feet of the East 30 feet of the vacated street, previously known as Derby Street, adjacent to and west of Lots 8 through 11, Coventry Gardens Subdivision in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 16, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition V-59 be granted, provided, however, that a substitute easement be dedicated on the west 12 feet of the east 30 feet of the vacated street, Derby, adjacent to and to the west of Lots 8 through 11 in said subdivision and further that this approval is subject to the following: (a) that the petitioner pay any costs of relocating equipment to all public utilities and to the City of Livonia, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian, under date of May 31, 1961 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, petitioner and abutting property owners I[: as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Watson, Cameron, Peacock, Angevine, Anderson, Okerstrom and Walker NAYS: none 3219 Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-390 by Clarence Charest, on behalf of Lloyd Wilkie, is requesting that the zoning classification of property located on the Northeast corre r of Henry Ruff and Joy Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 35 be rezoned from RUFB to C-1. Mr. Wilkie and Mr. Charest were present. Mr. Charest: I represent Mr. Wilkie. We were here a number of weeks ago with this same petition. In view of the nature of the area, we believe it is possibly desirable to have a professional medical clinic in this location. At that time the neighbors objected to it and in view of that we decided to withdraw our petition. In view of the recent happenings in the area we believe that there would no harm in having a professional clinic according to this proposed layout. (Mr. Charest pre- sented the layout to the commission) If this rezoning is granted, we would have to conform to all off-street parking requirements. We would not be a nuisance in the area. There are no medical services in the area. This would be for doctors and dentists. We do not think the property, due to the immediate surrounding area, is very suitable for residential. If the Planning Commission desires, we would be happy to amend our petition to request a PS zoning instead 1[40 of the C-1. Mr. Wilkie: The house built on this property would be the type that could only be handled by land contract. It would not be in line with what is already built in the area. Because of the size of the lot and the way the house would have to be built upon it, it would be a mistake to build a house of the kind in the subdivision. Mr. Walker: Have you found that you can acquire money on this property for commercial or professional use but not residential? Mr. Wilkie: As residential it is not a saleable piece of prcperty. Mr. Charest: We feel that we can obtain financial aid for professional use but not for residential. The type of home allowed would not be desirable for the area. Mr. Watson: What were the reasons for denial at the time it was before the Planning Commission previously? Mr. McCullough: The same reasons that r_re listed cn tonight's reccrmendations. Since that time the zoning was changed on a piece of property located 900 ft. to the east from RUFB to C-1. Mr. Dick Williams, representative from the Bel Air Civic Association: 30673 Westfield) We have quite a few of our civic association members who reside in close proximity to the property in question and almost uniformly they are very much opposed to any type of commercial or professional services zoning in this area. 3220 If you like, We can give you the names and addresses of IL: those who are present. The present usage of the land is entirely residential immediately surrounding this parcel and especially in view of the location of the new high school, there is a great deal of Concern about the usage of this piece of land under the Commercial zone. The traffic would increase in the vicinity of the new school. We have two schools already in the area, Jefferson and McKinley. With the new high school being built on Hillcrest and Joy Road, it will result in a very large number of children in that area every day. On behalf of the Bel Air Civic Association, we are very much opposed to the granting of any commercial or professional use in this area. Mr. Walker: Did you oppose the rezoning of the property further east on which they are going to build a credit union? Mr. Williams: We felt that this was quite a distance from our area and that it was not our business. We understood that unless we lived within 500 feet of the proposed rezoning we would have nothing to say. None of our civic association members live within the 500 ft. That is the reason we were not in the position to protest at that time. Mrs. Sally Day: I objected to the other rezoning. I live in Bonaparte 8858 Beatrice) Gardens Subdivision. We petitioned to have the other re- zoning denied for the reason that approval would result in a chain reaction of additional commercial along Joy Road. This rezoning was denied by you but it was granted by the City Council. Mr. Carl Rosati: I am a member of the St. Damien's Credit Union. The City 9301 Hugh) Council gave us permission to put up a residential looking building for this commercial use. The ordinance made it necessary for us to erect a wall around the residential building. The petition before us tonight is for a corner which has been vacant for all of its time. It is not a commercial piece of property and the building proposed for this property is a commercially designed building. We were restricted from erecting a commercial type building on this lot. We would like to go on record objecting to the proposed building on this property and also object to the rezoning. Mr. Charest: In the event we were granted the rezoning, we would not object to designing our building as a residential building much the same as St. Damien's Credit Union Building in order to conform to the character of the homes in the area. **Mr. Robert L. Greene arrived at approximately 3:35 p.m. I[: Mr. James E. Crunk, 8891 Henry Ruff, Mr. R. Stewner, o900 Henry Ruff, Mr. Jesse Alcala, 0954 Henry Ruff and Mr. Tom Deyonker, 9075 Henry Ruff Road were all present and objected to the proposed rezoning. Mr. George Thompson, from the Nankin Planning Commission, submitted a copy of a resolution adopted by the Nankin Planning Commission whereby they are in disfavor of the proposal. 3221 Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Angevine, supported by Mr. Greene, it was #6-110-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Petition Z-390 as submitted by Clarence Charest on behalf of Lloyd Wilkie for a change of zoning in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 35 from RUFB to C-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-390 be denied for the following reasons: (a) the request is for spot zoning, the nearest commercial being more than one half mile to the west and 1100 ft. to the east; (b) that any type of commercial or professional services would not be conducive to the peaceful residential character of the area, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian, under date of May 31st, 1961 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 vote: AYES: Watson, Cameron, Peacock, Greene, Angevine, Anderson, Okerstrom 1[40 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 Application TA-83 by A. K. Miller, Inc. , requesting permission to remove topsoil from a a parcel located east of Newburgh Road approximately 2000 ft. South of Six Mile Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 17. Petitioner has requested that this application be withdrawn. He has forwarded a letter with said request. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Peacock, supported by Mr. Okerstrom and unanimously adopted, it was #6-111-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, June 20, 1961, the City Planning Commission does hereby allow petitioner for TA-83, A. K. Miller, Inc. , to withdraw said petition requesting permission to remove topsoil from property located in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 17, said request being submitted in writing for the records. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Watson, supported by Mr. Anderson and unanimously adopted, it was #6-112-61 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the public hearing held on Tuesday, June 20, 1961 at approximately 9:00 p.m. 3222 Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. Walker, Chairman, called a recess at approximately 9:01 p.m. * * * * * * * * Mr. Walker called the 126th Regular Meeting to order at approximately 9:10 p.m. with all those present now who were present at the time recess was called. The next item on the agenda Petiticn .Z-507 by W. Nern for P. Acitelli and R. Videgar for a change of zoning in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 3 from RUFB to M-1, was taken under advisement due to the fact that the petitioner and some property owners who had objected to the rezoning at the public hearing, were going to have a meeting that night in order to determine if something could be worked out to satisfy those who objected. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-503 by Earl Dahlin and others who are asking that the zoning classification of property located on the West side of Henry Ruff Road between Schoolcraft Road and Lyndon Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 23 be rezoned from RUF to RLA. Public hearing 4/16/61; Special Meeting 6/6/61; Special Meeting 6/13/61. Several of the property owners who did not enter in this petition to have this area rezoned to RLAcbjected to the rezoning unless the present width I[: of the property could be maintained. The City Attorney advised them the only way to do this is to have them all enter into a restrictive agree- ment and have this recorded. Mr. Forrest: We can draw this up for these people but they would have to obtain the names and addresses of those who wanted to enter in this agreement. If only 757 of the property owners along Henry Ruff want to do this - it won't work. It would jeopardize their plan. But if there are only a couple of property owners against it, they could not jeopardize the agreement. I would like to suggest that we hold this item up until the information is brought into our office. If a substantial number of the property owners agree, we can draw it up in a very short time. Mr. Walker: This item will be taken under advisement . Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-509 by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to determine whether or not to rezone property located south of Lyndon and North of Schoolcraft between Middlebelt and Hillcrest in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 23 from RUFB to RLA. Public Hearing 6/6/61; Special Meeting 6/13/61. Mr. Menuck already has obtained building permits for those lots in Lyndon #3 included in Petition Z-509. He has stated that for Lyndon #4, also included in Petition Z-509, he will record on the final plat the condition that none of the lots in Lyndon #4 will be reduced, that they will remain as recorded. Because of this, a motion is in order to eliminate these two areas from Petition Z-509. Mr. Walker: This will be in lieu of the fact that Lyndon #4 will have a restriction recorded on the final plat? Mr. McCullough: Yes, Mr. Menuck has agreed to this. 3223 Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Peacock and unanimously If: adopted, it was #6-113-61 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby amend Petition Z-509 submitted by the City Planning Commission to rezone certain property in the South half of Section 23 by eliminating that property in the petition that covers Lyndon Meadows Subdivision #3 and Lyndon Meadows Subdivision #4 from consideration of rezoning for the reasons: (a) that the land owner anticipated the Planning Commission's purpose of preventing the splitting of lots and has obtained building permits for these lots in Lyndon Meadows #3 included in petition; and (b) that the developer has agreed to retain existing lot sizes in Lyndon Meadows #4 and indicated he would restrict himself to this effect on the face of the final plat, and FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Attorney has rendered an opinion that this is an effective means of accomplishing the Planning Commission's intention of preventing the splitting of lots in this area. Mr. Walker: The motion is' carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-511 by Goldman 1E: and Grabow for J. Menuck, Paris Homes Builders who are requesting that the zoning classification of property located on the Northwest corner of Newburgh and Five Mile Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section n18be changed from RLA and R-3 to RM. Public Hearing 6/6/61; SpecialMeeting 6/13/61. The petitioner has requested that he be allowed to withdraw the area zoned R-3 from being rezoned. He prefers to have it remain as it is presently zoned. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Peacock, supported by Mr. Watson and unanimously adopted, it was #6-114-61 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby allow petitioner for Petition Z-511, Goldman and Grabow for J. Menuck, requesting .a .rezoning- of property located on the Northwest corner of Five Mile Road and Newburgh Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18 from RLA and R-3 to RM, to amend said petition by withdrawing that area zoned R-3 from the proposed rezoning, said area to remain R-3 as presently zoned, subject to petitioner submitting request in writing. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Watson, supported by Mr. Peacock, it was #6- -61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, June 6, 1961 on Petition Z-511 submitted by Goldman and Grabow for J. Menuck for a change of zoning in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18 from RLA to RM, as amened by ission doeslutions #6-94-61 hereby recommend and #6-114-61, the City Planning Comm that Petition Z-511, as amended, be granted for the following reasons: 1 3224 (a) that the existence of 1600 60 ft. lots immediately to the south and approximately 1,000 70 ft. lots to the east adversely affects this land owner to the point of discrimination; and (b) that this RM zone will act as a buffer to any future building that would go on adjacent and surrounding property. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Watson, Peacock, Okerstrom and Walker NAYS: Cameron, Greene, Angevine and Anderson Mr. Walker: The motion is tied, therefore the foregoing resolution is not adopted. If there is no alternative motion, this will be taken under advisement until the next meeting. At this time, it was determined that Item #9 in relation to Petition Z-481, would be taken up later in the evening. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a motion by the City Planning Commission to hold a public hearing to determine whether or not to amend Sections 10.02 and 11.02 of Articles 10.00 and 11.00 in relation to advertising signs. After a brief discussion, it was determined that the commissioners would study the proposed amendment to Sections 10.02 and 11.02 relating to advertising signs and bring in any suggestions to the next meeting. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Cameron, it was #6-115-61 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the minutes for meeting held on Tuesday, May 23, 1961 except for that member who was not present, he abstain from voting. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Watson, Cameron, Greene, Angevine, Anderson, Okerstrom and Walker NAYS: None NOT VOTING: Peacock Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Anderson, supported by Mr. Okerstrom and unanimously adopted, it was #6-116-61 RESOLVED that, final plat of Bai-Lynn Park Subdivisions #6 and 1[400 #7 located in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 23 be given final approval, and FURTHER RESOLVED, inasmuch as it appears on the records that tentative approval of said proposed plat was given by the City Planning Commission April 2, 1957 and April 21, 1959; and it further appearing that said proposed plat together with the 3225 plans and specifications for improvements therein have been approved by the Department of Public Works under date of April• 14., 1958 and May 4, 1959; and it further appearing that a cashbond in the amount of $2,000.00 and a surety bond in the amount of $53500.09 for #6, pursuant to Council's Res. #394-61; and a cash bond in-the amountof $2,900.00 and a surety bond in the amount of $6,100.00- for #7, pursuant to Council's Res. #395-61 to cover the installation of im- provements have been filed in the office of theCityClerk under date of June 19, 1961; such bonds having been approved by C. N. Pinto, Assistant City Attorney on June 20, 1961 it would therefore appear that all the conditions necessary to the release of building permits have been met and the Building Department is hereby so notified. Mr. Walker: 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 #6-117-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a request from Carey Homes, Inc. , for one-year extension on the Bretton Gardens Subdivison #2 located in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 2, the City Planning Commission does hereby grant said request, subject, however, to all conditions prevailing on preliminary approval. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. 110 Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Anderson and unanimously adopted, it was #6-118-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a request from Carey Homes, Inc. , for one-year extension on the Melvin Gardens Subdivision located in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 11, the City Planning Commission does hereby grant said request, subject, however, to all conditnns prevailing on the preliminary approval. Mr. Walker: 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 #6-119-61 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a request from Ralph Seeley for one-year extension on the VIV Manor Subdivision located in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13, the City Planning Commission does hereby grant said request, s ubject, however, to all conditions prevailing on the preliminary approval. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-481, pursuant to Council's Res. 190-61 asking that the zoning classification on property located on the south and north sides of Five Mile Road between Yale and Eckles Road in the City of Livonia be rezoned from C-1, C-2 and PS to R-lA. The Council has asked that the City Planning Commission review it previous recommendation. 3226 The Council has asked you review two points, first your previous decision 110 with reference to making the east and.west lines along the north side of Five Mile Road on both sides of Levan uniform; senond, is the possibility of removing one or the other of the larger acreages shown on the map of C-2. As to the first suggestion, Kingsbury Heights has lots backing into the commercial area. The same is true of Lots in Fairway Farms Subdivision and that most of the streets in these two subdivision have already been put in. This would make it difficult to increase the commercial at this location. As to the second, you apparently have already concluded that the con- siderations specified in your previous resolution prevented your recommending the removal of either of these large commercial tracts from the map. After a brief discussion, it was determined that this item would be taken under advisement until action had been taken by the City Council on Petition Z-510 sub- mitted by the Felecian Sisters for rezoning property along Five Mile Road between Levan and Newburgh from R-2 to C-2. Planning Commission has recommended that this petition be denied. Mr. McCullough informed the Commission that the City Council has asked that the Liaison Committees of both bodies be present at a meeting scheduled for the next evening at 8:00 at the City Hall in order to discuss whether or not to include 1[41 credit unions in the professional services district. Mr. Walker asked that all those who could be present to attend this meeting. The secretary was asked to contact Mr. Kane. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Watson, supported by Mr. Cameron and unanimously adopted, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the 128th Regular Meeting at approximately 10:05 p.m. on Tuesday, June 20, 1961. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 66 4 le //- // W. E. Ckerstrom, Secretary ATTESTED: Char -s W. Walker, Chairman