Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1961-02-06 3382 MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING AND THE - IL 141ST SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, February 6, 1962 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held the public hearing and the 141st Special Meeting at the City Hall, 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia. Mr. Charles W. Walker, Chairman, called the public hearing to order at approximately 8:09 p.m. Members present: W. E. Okerstrom, Leonard K. Kane, James Cameron, James W. Watson, Jr. , Arthur Samuels and Charles W. Walker Members absent : Robert L. Angevine, #Dennis Anderson and ft Robert L. Greene Mr. D. R. McCullough, City Planner was present along with approximately twenty (20) persons in the audience. Mr. McCullough: The first item on the agenda is Petition Z-541 by D. Newman asking for a change of zoning on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road approximately 714 feet West of Newburgh in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 30 from RUFB to C-2. There is no correspondence. IrM: • Mr. D. Newman was present. Mr. McCullough explained that the corner is presently zoned C-2 for approximately 700 ft. Mr. Newman is asking that the C-2 be extended for approximately 240 ft. Mr. Newman stated they were proposing to build a shopping center on this property which would include the property the auction house is situated upon. This auction house would be replaced with brick buildings. Mr. Walker asked if these would be individual stores or one development? Mr. Newman answered that there was to be a super market along with six or seven small service stores such as a drug store, shoe store, etc. It was ascertained that there were a few homes on the north side of Plymouth Road and further west of the property in question on the south side of Plymouth Road. Also the nearest community development was a little more than a half mile east of the property. Mr. Walker asked if they were going to be able to use ingress and egress off of Hines Drive? Mr. Newman stated that they would not be able to use the parkway. Mr. Robert L. Greene arrived at approximately 8:12 p.m. Mr. Walker asked if Mr. Newman if he had made any study of the need for commercial - IL in this area due to the closeness of the industrial area and the parkway to the south which would curtail the building of residential homes. He felt that the area did not seem to lend itself to any additional increase in the development of homes. Mr. Newman stated they were aware of this but they had a very valuable corner and they had been approached by a few super markets who were interested in this area if additional property could be rezoned in order to have a larger development. They would not be interested if it could not be expanded. 3383 Mr. Watson asked if there was going to be a discount store in this shopping center? That is, on the order of Shopper's Fair. Ira: Mr. Newman ans-i_red that this was hard to say. The trend today is that the discount houses are becoming general department stores. They are much more elaborate than they were several years ago. They were intending to have retail stores although at the present time they had nothing in writing. Mr. Ckerstrom asked if it would be possible to use a C-1 zone? Mr. Newman answered that they had an option to purchase property subject to the property being rezoned to C-2. If it were rezoned to C-1, they would not consider the shopping center. Mr. Walker stated that under the C-1 regulations, no more than 5 employees were allowed for one store. A C-2 zone would be necessary in the case of a super market or discount house. Mr. Newman informed the commission they did not have in mine a gasoline station or a drive-in restaurant for this corner. #Mr. Dennis Anderson arrived at 8:20 p.m. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak? Mr. Greene asked if the Planning Commission had received any indication from the Traffic Commission as to the ingress and egress? If not, it might be wise to wait until we have heard from them. Mr. Walker answered that no recommendation had been received from that department. IraMr. McCullough stated that the County would prohibit using Hines Parkway and the City would prohibit using Newburgh Road so that the ingress and egress would have to be on Plymouth Road. Mr. Kane could not see any reason for not acting upon this petition tonight. He felt that the rezoning would not hurt the area and that the development of the property would enhance the area. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Samuels, it was #2- -62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Petition Z-541 as submitted by D. Newman for a change of zoning in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 30 from RUFB to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-541 be granted, for the following reasons: (a) this is a mile road intersection on which we ordinarily encourage commercial development; (b) the applicant has indicated that he will develop this into an intergrated shopping center with a number of stores and the present four acres seem insufficient for this purpose; (c) the demolition of the existing auction building will greatly improve the aesthetics of the area. I:: Mr. Walker asked if there were any comments on the motion to approve petition? Mr. Greene stated he was in favor of the rezoning but felt that a recommendation should be received from the Traffic Commission first before acting upon the rezoning. He would, therefore, have to vote against this motion with prejudice. Mr. Anderson concurred with Mr. Greene. 3384 • Mr. Newman stated he would like to have action taken tonight due to the expiration 11, date of the option. Mr. Okerstrom asked Mr. Greene if Mr. Kane would amend his motion for approval by making it subject to the approval of the Traffic Commission, would he then approve of it? Mr. Greene stated he felt the Traffic Commission should not be disregarded in this due to the peculiar location of the property. Mr. Kane stated he would like to amend his motion to approve as follows: #2-23-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Petition Z-541 as submitted by D. Newman for a change of zoning in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 30 from RUFB to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-541 be granted, subject, however, to the following: (1) that the Traffic Commission approve all entrances and exits of the proposed shopping center; and FURTHER that, the approval is granted for the following reasons: (a) this is a mile road intersection on which we ordinarily encourage commercial development; rmi (b) the applicant has indicated that he will develop this into an intergrated shopping center with a number of stores and the present four acres seem insufficient for this purpose; (c) the demolition of the existing auction building will greatly improve the aesthetics of the area. FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian, under date of January 17, 1962 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. Mr. Samuels stated he would support Mr. Kane's amendment. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Samuels, Cameron, Greene, Watson, Anderson, Kane and Walker NAYS: Okerstrom Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition M-234 by Kenneth S. Cox requesting permission to operate open air sales in conjunction with florist shop on property located on the west side of Merriman approximately 240 feet north of Schoolcraft Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 22. I: Mr. Kenneth Cox was present. Mr. McCullough asked Mr. Cox what kind of stock did he propose to sell on the outside? Mr. Cox answered he would have annuals, perennials, roses, evergreens and shade trees. Mr. Cox was asked if he would have trucks on his property and sell from these trucks? 3385 Mr. Cox answered there would be no trucks. He also stated that there would be a chain link fence around his property. 1:: Mr. Walker stated that some of the members were concerned about the kind of items sold in conjunction with florist shops, items like wheelbarrows, fertilizers, gravel, topsoil and others. He felt that these items ould be more objectionable around a residential area. Mr. Cox stated he was primarily in the florist business. He had an area of approximately 45' x 100' for the display of plants, evergreens, etc. , and that this will be on a small scale in conjunction with the store. Mr. Okerstrom asked what was the frontage of his property? Mr. Cox answered his lot was 80' x 123' and there would be a 40 foot set back. The nursery sales would be located to the south of his building between the building and the gas station presently located south of his property. Mr. McCullough stated Mr. Cox would be able to have 8 cars parked on his property. Mr. Cox stated that most of his sales would be cash and carry or telephone orders. He felt the maximum number of cars that would be parked at one time would be three. Mr. Walker stated that this commercial area has no wall between it and the residential area surrounding it. This is due to small portions being sold off from the original parcel. None of these smaller portions reach the outside boundary of the commercial area. This means that these individual owners do not have to build the required protective wall because there is still commercial property between their particular portion and the residential property. Mr. Walker questioned who is going to build the protective wall? Mr. McCullough suggested that the owner of the commercial area be called to determine what arrangement could be made. Mr. Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak? Mr. David L. Lemon, 31422 Scone asked Mr. Cox if he intended to be open nights with relation to the open air sales? Mr. Cox answered he would probably be open until 8:00 P.M. and that during the spring and fall he would have lights. Mr. Lemon asked if permission is granted, is this granted to the present tenant only? Mr. Walker stated that if this use is permitted it will go on from one occupant to another. He pointed out that there were many uses allowed in C-1 that did not require the approval of the City Planning Commission. In the case of open air sales, approval is required by the City Planning Commission. Mr. Lemon objected to this use with relation to additional traffic which will result from the business. He stated they did not object to the florist shop only the outdoor sales. Mr. Watson asked about the protective wall? Mr. Anderson stated he did not see how the Planning Commission could hold this petitioner responsible for a protective wall when there was additional commercial property between his and the residential area which he did not own. 3386 • Mr. Okerstrom felt that the owner of the remaining property should be notified of the feelings the Planning Commission has in relation to the protective wall for this IsL area. Mr. Greene asked Mr. Forrest if there was anything the Planning Commission could do to forestall what the owner is doing. Mr. Forrest answered that the only limit would be the square foot limit on the commercial property. A commercial lot has to be a certain size. He could not see how the Planning Commission could restrict him otherwise. Mr. Greene stated that it seems that until that property adjoining the residential is used, nothing could be done to require him to erect a wall. Possibly it may work itself out - when the property adjoining the residential is built upon, then the wall will be put up. Mr. Watson asked what if the owner uses the land other than 75 ft. from the residential property line and leaves it undeveloped? Mr. McCullough stated that the value of commercial land would prohibit him from doing that. Mr. Cameron felt that this had nothing to do with the petition before the Planning Commission. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Cameron, supported by Mr. Anderson, it was #2-24-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Irme Tuesday, February 6, 1962 the City Planning Commission does hereby grant Petition M-234 by Kenneth Cox asking permission to operate open air sales on property located on the west side of Merriman Road approximately 240 feet north of Schoolcraft Road in the South- east 1/4 of Section 22, subject, however, to the following: (a) that the petitioner erect a four foot chain link fence from his building southerly to his south property line. The fence is to be located 120 feet from the centerline of Merriman Road; and (b) that any lights erected be directed away from the residential areas (c) that no loud speakers shall be permitted; (d) that the area of sale shall be limited to that shown on the site plan dated 2/2/62 and further limited to those uses the petitioner represented at the public hearing; 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: Samuels, Cameron, Greene, Watson, Anderson, Kane, Okerstrom and Walker NAYS: None irMr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. 110. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Watson, supported by Mr. Okerstrom, it was #2-25-62 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the Public Hearing held on Tuesday, February 6, 1962 at approximately 8:55 p.m. 3387 A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Samuels, Cameron, Greene, Watson, Anderson, Kane, Okerstrom and Walker NAYS: None Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the public hearing is adjourned. * * * * * * * Mr. Walker called the 141st Special Meeting to order with all those present now who were present at the time the public hearing was adjourned. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Samuels, supported by Mr. Watson and unanimously adopted, it was #2-26-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, January 9, 1962 on Petition Z-533 by Edward Stulberg on behalf of Kaufman and Broad Building Company for a change of zoning in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 2 from R-1A to R-3, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-538 be denied for the following reasons: (a) that a R-3 district is ordinarily created between c ommercial and residential in a systematic scaling down of uses and not completely surrounded by single family residential uses, as in the case here, and (b) -that a retiree development should have commercial uses located 1[10 close to it, which ' would not ordinarily be encouraged by us except at mile road intersections, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian under date of December 20, 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 petitioners as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. Walker called a recess at 9:00 p.m. * * * * * * * Mr. Walker called the 141st Special Meeting back to order at approximately 9:10 p.m. with all those present who were present at the time recess was called with the exception of Mr. Arthur Samuels who asked to be excused for the balance of the meeting. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-536 by John Uznis who is requesting that the zoning be changed on the property located on the east side of Levan Road approximately 750 ft. south of Five Mile Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 20 from R-1A to PS. Public Hearing 1/16/62, item taken under advisement, in order to study it further at a study meeting: Mr. John Uznis was present. Mr. Uznis was asked if he could use a different zoning than PS such as R-2 or R-3? 3388 Mr. Uznis felt that R-2 or R-3 would not be good because of the parking lot on Irs the west side of Levan. It has the commercial aspects even though it is not zoned commercial. He suggested that perhaps the area could be reduced in size and include the portion eliminated into his subdivision. This would extend one of the streets in his subdivision so that there would be two outlets to Levan rather than one. This could be reduced to 568 feet instead of the 900 feet as requested and this PS would abut the present C-1 zone. Mr. Anderson asked if the houses would be siding on Levan or fronting on Levan? Mr. Walker stated that the Planning Commission has approved both kinds in the past, usually trying to determine first what is already in the area. In this particular case, there is nothing to go by., Mr. Uznis stated that he would be having a 25 foot side yard on the lots siding on Levan Road. Mr. Greene asked what plans have been made as to what will be built upon this land? Mr. Uznis answered it would be something in the line of a medical clinic. He had no specific plans to date. Mr. Anderson asked if R-2 or' R-3 would be better than R-1 for the portion removed from the original request. Mr. Uznis stated he would rather take a chance on R-1 instead of R-2 or R-3. 1[40 W. Greene asked Mr. Uznis what his feelings were with regard to R-2 and R-3? Mr. Uznis stated he felt there was not enough market for R-2. Mr. Greene stated he meant because of the proximity to the hospital. Mr. Uznis stated he understood that the hospital was going to have their own housing. Mr. Kane stated that the Planning Commission has been allowing PS as a buffer between residential and commercial and in this case it just fits the picture. He felt that the original request was for too large a piece of property but since Mr. Uznis is willing to cut it down, he felt this was satisfactory with him. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Watson, supported by Mr. Greene and unanimously adopted, it was #2-27-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, January 16, 1962 on Petition Z-536 submitted by John Uznis for a change of zoning in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 20 from R-lA to PS, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition Z-536 be granted, insofar as it relates to the northerly 568 ft. only, of the original 937 ft. re- quested, for the following reasons: (a) that this will serve as a transitional use between the C-1 area to the north and the residential area ir: to the south, and 3389 FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the IL: official newspaper, The Livonian under date of December 27, 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 foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Woodcreek Farms Subdivision located in the west half of Section 15 on East side of Farmington Road approximately 650 ft. north of Rayburn. Submitted by James Bonadeo. Public hearing 1/16/62 item taken under advisement. Mr. James Bonadeo and Mr. Norman Cohn, his attorney, were present. Mr. McCullough submitted a petition signed by property owners surrounding the proposed subdivision which indicated their only objection to the plat is that they would like all lots on the north boundary to be one-half acre lots with 120 ft. frontage. It is zoned RUFB north of the section line. Under the ordinance they are only required to have a frontage of 1/4 of the depth of the lot. Mr. Anderson asked what group did these people represent? Mr. McCullough answered they were property owners on Loveland and north of the 1[0 Bell Creek in the Bell Creek Farms Subdivision. Mr. McCullough informed the Commission that two years ago there had been a vacating petition to vacate Woodring. At that time it was tabled until the petitioner could obtain the approval of the surrounding property owners to vacate said street. The petitioner never did anything about it and it has been tabled since then. To date Woodring is a dedicated street. If it should be vacated, Mr. Bonadeo could run a street down to Shadyside instead of Woodring. Mr. Walker asked . if the developer was going to acquire the necessary land for the full development of Loveland up to Myrna. Mr. McCullough answered that Loveland is dedicated for thirty feet. The developer would have to acquire it. Mr. Cohn stated that it would be included in the plat as dedicated. Mr. McCullough stated that Mr. Bonadeo and several land owners had had a meeting last week to discuss various matters. Possibly they could inform the commission of the results. Mr. Cohn stated they had been invited to the home of Mr. A. Bruckert for the purpose of obtaining their views on some revisions that were suggested for the plat. At the meeting they were informed by the property owners that all the lots bordering Bell Creek were at least 100 ft. wide and accordingly the proposed plat should con- form with the general pattern of the neighborhood. Mr. Cohn continued by stating that they had examined some recorded plats, one being for Greenbrier Farms. This plat, he stated, would tend to refute the claims made at the meeting.Several of the I: lots had frontages of 50 ft. This is true for several lots on the west side of Farmington also. Mr. Cohn concluded by stating that Bell Creek Farms Subdivision was recorded in 1943 at which time lots were sold for $1,500. He felt it was unfair to follow what was done in 1943, and that the plat presented is a very attractive one which would contribute quite a lot to the welfare of the neighborhood. Mr. Walker stated that it seems the conflict is the difference of three lots along the ravine and the fact that there had been six lots backing up to one lot which is 3390 -• in line with Loveland. The developer has decreased these six lots to four lots. I: Mr. Cohn stated that Dr. Stewart had asked that only four lots back up to his property. There are four backing up and one siding in•the new scheme. Mr. Bonadeo stated that it was his impression Dr. Stewart did not know when he was going to build upon his lot, but he is siding against their plat also. The land is very expensive to them They want to install all utilities underground with no poles visible. If they are made to lose three more lots, they will have lost so much money that they would not be able to put the utilities underground and Edison would have to be given permission to cut a swatch of 32 feet in order to erect the poles for their power lines. This would eliminate most of the trees and they would like to take advantage of as many trees as possible. Mr. Walker asked if it was possible to get more out of a 100 or 120 foot frontage lot than an 80 foot lot? Mr. Bonadeo answered that if he felt that by increasing the lot frontage it would reduce his costs, he would make as few lots as he could. Mr. Greene asked if this proposition was presented to the people and what was their reaction? Mr. Cohn answered that it was difficult because they were in the middle of two different neighborhoods, the one to the north and the one on their south side. IroMr. Bruckert stated that the petition presented tonight had been signed by five people in the one subdivision north of the ravine and also by Dr. Stewart. They would like all 120 ft. frontage lots on the ravine which would conform with the minimum of what is presently on the north side of the ravine. This property is zoned RUFB. Mr. Bonadeo is platting Outlot A which is in our subdivision and which is a part of the dedication of the Bell Creek Subdivision. These people would like to have larger lots on the ravine and preserve the trees along the ravine. Mr. Okerstrom stated that no one is allowed to build in the ravine, thereby the trees would not be harmed. Mr. Bruckert felt that the lots backing up to the five lots on the ravine should have a minimum of 120 ft. frontage which would only reduce the number of lots along this area by three lots. Mr. Greene asked what was his reaction to the plan of having the utilities under- ground? He felt that this would be more advantageous than to have Edison come in with their poles. Mr. Bruckert stated that the Edison Company put in poles in their subdivision without cutting down trees. The same was true in the Greenbriar Subdivision and others along the ravine. Mr. Greene stated it seemed to him that it would be much better looking than the Ir: other plan. Mr. Anderson stated he concurred with Mr. Greene. Mr. Bruckert stated this would not influence their decision in wanting larger lots. Dr. R. Stewart stated that he felt that anyone would agree that no one would go into the expense of what he has the past few years if he had no intention of building 3391 • upon the lot. He felt that his lot would not detract from the proposed plat, and 1:: that no one would spend $20,000 for three acres if he did not intend to develop it. Mr. Cohn stated he thought that Dr. Stewart had purchased his lot four years ago at which time this area was zoned for 60 foot lots. Mr. Greene stated that this discussion took him back several years when the Planning Commission had the same identical situation when Burton Hollow Estates was being built across the road. He stated that at that time the argument was hot and furious and Burton Hollow Estates was going to be a duplicate of Bell Creek or else, but, he thought, Burton Hollow is a nice subdivision. He continued by stating that the Planning Commission can not forget that as the city grows and the land values go higher, they have to protect the people already living here and yet they can not be so strict that the others cannot build upon their land. This particular area was zoned for 60 foot lots but today it represents a very acceptable compromise, particularly in view of the fact that the creek area is very heavily wooded in the summer and it is not like an open street. Also, the lots to the north are larger, but the lots to the south of the proposed subdivision are smaller. This proposed plat represents a great compromise of what this piece of land was the last time it was platted for 60 foot lots. It is a tremendous improvement. Mr. Greene concluded by stating that who gives the most he did not know but the present plat is not a bad plan. Mr. Bruckert stated that one of the things that have been learned about the Burton Hollow Estates is that the people who live there wish they had wider lots of 120 ft. or 150 ft. It had been approved for 60 foot lots but the developer is putting in Ir. 80 foot lots because the people are demanding it. He concluded by stating that if the lots along the ravine were approved with 120 foot frontages they could almost guarantee them all sold. Mr. Greene suggested that a purchaser could buy two lots of 80 ft. each and then he would have his 160 ft. frontage. He asked Mr. Bonadeo if he agreed with what was said about the 120 foot lots? Mr. Bonadeo replied if the size determines the value of the lot he would make them 200 ft. wide. If you exceed 80 ft. you are going to lose money because of the cost of improvements, the width does not determine the value of the lot. Mr. Okerstrom stated he hadangamined the plat carefully and all the lots caaform with the zoning in the area the ingress and egress seem to be proper. If there were no more questions, he would like to make a motion. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Watson , it was #2-28-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, January 16, 1962 the City Planning Commission does hereby give approval to Scheme "B", dated February 2, 1962 of the preliminary plat of the Woodcreek Farms Subdivision located in the West half of Section 15, subject, however, to the following conditions: (a) that all lots north of the quarter section line be made one-half acre in area on the final plat; I: (b) that certain street names be changed on the final plat; (c) that the Master Thoroughfare Plan be amended to reduce the size of Myrna from 86 feet to 60 feet in the West half of Section 15; and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was sent to the 3392 abutting property owners, proprietor, City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service and copies of the plat together with notice having been sent to the Building Department, Superintendent of Schools, Fire Department, Police Department, Parks & Recreation Department and Members of the Plat Committee. Mr. Anderson asked if Mr. Bonadeo intended to locate the utilities underground? He knew that the Planning Commission had no control over this but was this Mr. Bonadeo's intention? Mr. Cohn stated that this is for the record, they were going to submit the plan to Bell Telephone and Detroit Edison for this type of service. They are willing to pay for this type of service but they cannot make a guarantee that the utility companies will accept their offer. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution, #2-28-62, resulted in the following: AYES: Greene, Watson, Cameron, 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 Petition Z-531 by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to determine whether or not to rezone certain property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Ingram and Blackburn Streets in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 34 from C-1 to P-i. Public Hearing 11/21/61, item taken under advisement. Petition to be withdrawn due to change in parking requirements. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Cameron and unanimously adopted, it was #2-29-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, November 21, 1961 on Petition Z-531 as submitted by the City Planning Commission for a change of zoning in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 34 from C-1 to P-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition Z-531 be withdrawn for the reason that the parking requirements have been amended since this effort was conceived and thereby partly remedies the problem, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonia City Post under date of November 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 Company, City Departments, and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition Z-497 by the City 1[40 Planning Commission to determine whether or not Section 4.32 of Article 4.00 of Ordinance No. 60 should be amended by increasing the dwelling size in Zones A and B. Public Hearing 2/21/61, item taken under advise- ment. Petition to be withdrawn in order to readvertise. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Watson, supported by Mr. Anderson and unanimously adopted, it was 3393 #2-30-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a P.blic Hearing having been held on Tuesday, February 21, 1961 on Petition Z-497 as submitted by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not Section 4.32 of Article 4.00 of Ordinance No. 60 should be amended by increasing the dwelling size in Zones A and B, the City Planning Commission does hereby withdraw Petition Z-497 with instruction to the City Planner to advertise a new public hearing on setting up a minimum house size, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian, under date of February 2, 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. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried aid the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Watson, supported by Mr. Anderson and unanimously adopted, it was #2-31-62 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission pursuant to Section 20.01 of the Zoning Ordinance of1the City of Livonia, does hereby establish and order that a oublice 4hearigabetheldetaoedetermine whether or not to• amend Section 4.32/ new minimum nouse size o 1100 sq. ft. in area, which shall apply only to the area north of Five Mile Road and West of Farmington Road and would apply only to those plats which receive final approval after the effective date of the proposed new ordinance. The City Planner is instructed to request the Department of Law to prepare the proposed ordinance for publication, and FURTHER RESOLVED, that a hearing be held and 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 sub- mitted and recommendation thereon to the City Council. 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 Department of Law for a determination whether or not certain lots in the Grennada Park Subdivision should be acquired by the City in relation to the 40 acre park site located on the west side of Farmington Road and south of Lyndon in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 21. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Watson and unanimously adopted, it was #2-32-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the 141st Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on Tuesday, February 6, 1962, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that all necessary land be acquired in order that the forty (40) acre park site at Farmington and Lyndon Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 21, which is designated on the Master School and Park Plan, may be fully developed for use by the Citizens of Livonia. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. 3394 Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is a request from the Department 1:: of Law for a determination whether or not Harrison Road should be opened and widened for a distance of 240 feet north of Joy Road in the South half of Section 36. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Watson, and unanimously adopted, it was #2-33-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the 141st Special Meeting held on Tuesday, February 6, 1962, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Harrison Road be opened, widened and improved immediately north of Joy Road in the South half of Section 36 and that such improvement is necessary in order to avoid traffic congestion and maintain adequate traffic safety standards. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Kane, supported by Mr. Okerstrom and unanimously adopted, it was #2-34-62 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the minutes for the meeting held on Tuesday, January 9, 1962 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. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Kane and unanimously adopted, it was #2-35-62 RESOLVED that, final plat of the Fairway Farms Subdivision #4 located in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 17, 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 on February 3, 1959; and it further appearing that said proposed plat together with the plans and specifications for improvements therein have been approved by the Department of Public Works under date of July 20, 1960; and it further appearing that a surety bond in the amount of $9,900.00 and a cash bond in the amount of $1,100.00 to cover the installation of improvements have been filed in the office of the City Clerk under date of February 5, 1962; such bonds having been approved by C. J. Pinto, City Attorney on February 5, 1962 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. Mr. McCullough: The next item on the agenda is Petition V-41 submitted by Picture Homes, Inc. , and Edward Carlson to vacate a certain dead-end portion of Woodring Street in the Brightmoor Homes Acres Subdivision situated in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15. Public Hearing 3/17/59, item tabled at that time until it could be determined whether or not Woodring Avenue might be used as a means of access to the property north of said street. 3395 It was determined that Petition V-41 could not be given approval due to the fact IL that Woodring Avenue is necessary as an access street to the Woodcreek Farms Sub- division given approval earlier in the evening. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Watson, and unanimously adopted, it was #2-36-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Tuesday, March 17, 1959 as submitted by Picture Homes, Inc. , and Edward Carlson for the vacating of a portion of Woodring Street in the Brightmoor Homes Acres Subdivision in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition V-41 be denied for the reason that the street is needed for access to the adjoining property to the north, and FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was published in the official newspaper, The Livonian under date of February 25, 1959 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, petitioner and abutting property owners as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. 1[40 Mr. McCullough informed the commission that at the meeting held on Tuesday, January 16, 1962 a motion was made to hold a public hearing to amend the Master Fire Station Plan by deleting a certain site and designating another. Under the provisions of Section 5.2998 of the Michigan Statutes Annotated it is necessary that at least six members of the Planning Commission vote on whether or not to hold a public, hearing to amend said Plan. Because there were only five members present at the last meeting, it will be necessary to rescind the resolution adopted at that meeting and adopt another resolution to hold a public hearing. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Watson and unanimously adopted, it was #2-37-62 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby rescind Resolution #1-19-62 establishing a public hearing to determine whether or not to amend the Master Fire Station Plan for the reason that sufficient members were not present to adopt said resolution under the state law. Mr.•Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Anderson, supported by Mr. Kane, it was #2-38-62 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the provisions of Section y, 7 and 8 of Act 285, Public Acts of Michigan of 1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia does hereby establish I: and order a public hearing to be held in the City Hall of the City of Livonia to determine whether or not Part VI of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, entitled, "Master Fire Station Plan of the City of Livonia" adopted on June 19, 1956 and amended from time to time and revised on September 20, 1960 and thereafter certified to the City Council and filed with the Wayne County Register of Deeds in accordance with law and it appearing that 3396 certain property hereinafter described should be deleted on such plan, the City Planning Commission on its own motion does hereby order and establish a public hearing to be held in the City Hall of the City of Livonia to determine whether or not Part VI of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia should be amended so as to delete fire station site in the area of Newburgh and Five Mile Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18 and designate the following described property for future public purposes: "The South 175 feet of the West 300 feet of the South 15 acres of the North 30 acres of the South 50 acres of the West 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17, except the North 30 feet thereof. . ." IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the time and place of said public hearing be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Livonia and that a notice by registered mail be sent to each public utility or railroad company owning or operating any public utility or railroad within the City of Livonia in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.2998 of Michigan Statutes Annotated and in accordance with the provisions of Act 285 of the Public Acts of Michigan, 1931, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Greene, Watson, Cameron, Anderson, Kane, Okerstrom and Walker NAYS: None Mr. Walker: The motion is carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted. Upon a motion duly made by Mr. Okerstrom, supported by Mr. Kane and unanimously adopted, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the 141st Special Meeting held on Tuesday, February 6, 1962 at approximately 10:30 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION (,v/ Cf. di."76g-- 66-71 W. E.Okerstrom, Secretary ATTESTED: QL-14) a), Charles W. Walker, Chairman