Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1966-11-01 ff r 4937 14; MINUTES OF THE 227TH SPECIAL MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY PLANNING C0144ISSION OFTHE CITY CF LIVONIA On Tuesday, November 1s 1988 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held the'22/+h Special Meeting and a public hearing at the Livonia City Halls 33001 'P ive 'I4ile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr, Charles W. Walker, Chairman, Called the public hearing to order at 8:40 p.m, with approximately SO interested persons inthe audience. Members Present: Charles W. Walker Raymond W. Tent Mrs,Mimi Singer Harry Wrightman Marvin Moser Donald Heusted Mrs.Myra Chandler John J.W and Donald Pollock Messrs. Don Hull, Planning Director; John J, Nagy, Asst.Planning Director; David Perry, Assistant City Attorney; Daniel Andrew, Industrial Coordinator were also present. Mr.. Walker announced that the first item on the age[da is Petition 66-10-1-30 by William N. Ponder for Donald E. Green and Lloyd J. Dunn to rezone property located approximately 210 feet south of Six Mile and approximately 260 feet west of Middlebelt Road in Section 14 from RUFA to C-2. MMr, Ponder was present to represent the petitioners in the matter, Mr, Walker asked why the petition was being made for C-2 zoning and what plans there were for the use of the property. Mr, Ponder first introduced the first Mayor of Livonia, Jessie Ziegler, to the audience and then proceeded to describe the surrounding property, he stated that there was C-2 to the east and west of the property as well as north of it. He stated that certainly no one would build a residence on this parcel inasmuch as it is surrounded with business, Mr. Walker asked what type of business the petitionersrare in, and' would this be to expand same, Mr. Ponder said the petitioners are in the heating and plumbing business, that the building would be owned by them but leased out, assuring the Commission that it would be a use consistent with C-2 zoning but does' not know right now what it would be as there is no prospective tenant, Mr, Tent asked if the zoning petition is granted, how soon would the petitionellsbuild, Mr, Ponder stated that if the zoning petition were granted by the Commission and Council, which would then have to be put in ordinance form and adopted, probably taking until January or February 1967 before completion, the petitioners would start building in the spring, t + 4938 Mr, Wrightman spoke about the, re3tetiraht business to be built on Middlebelt Road, south of Six Mile Rod which property abuts the land here involved and asked Mri Ponder if the parking arrangement for both businesses couldn+t be worked out together so that these two projects would not turd intO a hedge-page development for the area and both could have egress and ingress from and to both mile roads. Mr, Ponder said their building would be to the front and parking to the rear and he would contact Mr. Moy to discuss this. Mr, Kropf, Mr. Moy's attorney, was in the audience and said that his client anticipated commencing construction early in the Spring and he would contact Mr. Ponder on this matter. Mr. Nagy pointed out on the map that there is a small area of isolated RIF zoning immediately east of this petition and if the Commission favorably considers this petition they might on their own motion consider that isolated parcel to be rezoned to round out the entire area. This piece is north of Mr. Moy's parcel. Mr. Walker asked who owns the property. Mr. Hull said that he did not know at the present time. Mrs. Chandler asked if the owner wouldn't have anything to say about rezoning. Mr. Walker said yes, but this should be looked into and the owner advised of what they are doing with the entire area, Mr. Hull stated that if it is the wish of the Commission, the Department will check into the property for ownership, find out their intent as far as use of same and how the package fits in in the total development. Mr. Walker announced that this matter would be taken under advisement. • Mr„ Walker, Chairman, announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-8-1-24 by Gene Harris Jr. requesting to rezone property located at the southeast corner of Clarita and Farmington Road in.Section 10 from R-1 to PS Mr. Robert Thompson, was present as attorney for petitioner. He stated that Mr, Harris presently occupies a building and carries on an insur'nce business on Farmington Road, south of Seven Mile Road. He stated that the property in question is low land, which would require backfill; there is an unsightly drainage ditch through the property; the depth is only 100 feet which is 20 feet less than the minimum requirement for t r 4939 1110 R-1 zoning; that with the exception of three homes to the south it is isolated from residential homes; that the property to the north is PS and to the west is PS and therefore petitioner feels that this strip of land could also be PS, He further advised the Commission that petitioner's building would be an insurance office and possibly a legal office as well; further, that the building would have a residential appearance and would complement the area, Mr. Wrightman asked why petitioner had not looked at parcels already designated for PS zoning in the City. Mr. Thompson said that when the petitioner purchased his propertyi, the aforesaid surrounding lands were already PS; that all other property so zoned was too high; he stated that petitioner needs 280' in length for the best use of this property. Mr, Wrightman asked when this property was purchased, Mr. Harris stated, approximately one year ago. Mr, Hull stated that the area north of Clarita on the east side of Farmington Road was zoned PS at least 21 years, that it was true that the area on the southwest corner of Clarita was zoned within the last year. Mr. Tent asked about the property across the street, Mr, Thompson said it was not long enough. Mr. Tent stated that he too felt that there was slot of PS zoned property in the City which is not being used as such; in fact only 42% is being used. He stated that too many persons come in for zoning change and when same is granted they do not build and he would therefore rather the petitioner look at another parcel. Mr. Thompson said that Mr, Harris has his office south of Seven Mile Road on Farmington, and many of his customers are in this vicinity which is why he would like to locate in this area, Mr, Wrightman asked Mr. Harris what transpired when he was looking for property - did he look for PS or just buy property figuring on changing the zoning. Mr. Harris stated that there was no other PS zoning in the area which he could use, stating that this was the best available piece of property for his purpose, He further said that'there was commercial property in the area but it was too high priced, he could not afford it, that the property on the west side of Farmington Road was already spoken for when Mr, Harris was purchasing. 4940 Mr. Tent asked what type of business will be on the property. Mr. Thompson stated it will -be primarily an insurance office with the possibility of a law office. Mr. Tent asked how many tenants he would have., Mr. Thompson said Mr. Harris would vacate the office he now has • and occupy the new building, possibly with one tenant, an attorney,. Mr. Ziegler advised the Commission that he owns 440' south of the property in question, there is a 100'ptrtel between his property and petitioners; he stated that he had spoken to Mr.. Harris and advised him that he would be in favor of the entire block going PS.. He stated that with Farmington'Road being widened to five lanes instead of four, and these lots being 20' x 100' in depth, that residential building would certainly not be suitable. He stated that the Commission should possibly consider the entire block for PS zoning,. inasmuch as the property cannot be sold for anything else, Mr. Walker stated that Mr.. Ziegler had mentioned there was a piece of property between his and Mr.. Harris's. 1[0: Mr. Ziegler stated that the owner of that parcel is also interested in having the zoning changed inasmuch as it could not be sold for residential. He stated that he had not contacted anyone south of Pickford, only the block in question which has three houses (which he owns).. Mts. Singer questioned whether this should be PS or Commercial. Mr. Hull said that commercial should have a minimum depth of 200 feet,. He feels that you cannot develop commercial or PS on narrow parcels of land. As an example, he stated, on the southwest corner of Seven Mile and Farmington the people make use of the public right-of-way for parking.. He stated there is inadequate setback._ Mrs. Chandler asked if the depth could be obtained. Mr. Hull stated that they might purchase the vacated land to the east but another serious problem arises along a mile road; he stated'that roads are essentially created to carry large volumes of traffic, when lined with strip commercial or P.S., developments it might cut down on the traffic carrying potential of those roads., The numerous points of vehicular ingress and egress on traffic streets cause a dangerous and hazardous situation. He added that there would have to be a 40 foot setback to be in conformance with the ordinance,. Mr. Hull further stated that each PS development should have adequate location for the building, with off-street parking outside of the public right-of-way. The development should also be aesthetically pleasing.. r Y 4941 d Mr, Wright man asked if Mr. Ziegler had any prospective tenants for his parcel. Mr. Ziegler answered, no, adding that the land is 110' deep plus a vacated alley. Mr. Tent asked why Mr. Deremo had not built on his land. Mr. Hull stated he did not know. Mr. Tent stated he would like to have that land brought back and rezoned to its original classification. Mr. Walker stated that this matter would be taken under advisement. Mr. Walker, Chairman, announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-9-1-25 by William N. Ponder for Felix S. Kubik requesting to rezone property located on the northwest corner of Seven Mile Road and Sunset in Section 2from - R-3 A to P.S. Mr. Ponder addressed the aidience and Commission, representing Mr, Kubik, and explained that this was a 171 acre parcel of land; that they want to rezone the southerly 1300 feet for PS to allow them to put in a con- valescent home leaving approximately 1/4 mile from the edge of the ti property; he advised that Mr. Simpson owns the property to the west whict is also presently zoned for single family residential. He stated that the City proposes to create a park which will take about 17 acres of Mr.S impson's and petitioner's combined property. Mr. Ponder stated that it was pet itioeit's desire to construct professional medical offices along Seven Mile Road and a convalescent home to the rear. Mr. Ponder added that on the City's Master Plan they wish to extend PS, Commercial, etc. for Sr. Citizens Housing and other projects and feels that this request falls within the scope of the plan. He stated that this is an ideal location for a convalescent home because of the access the people would have to the shopping center, transportation for guests, etc. He has discussed this matter with Mr. Simpson who opposes this petition because he feels that his property should also be changed for possible multiple dwellings in the future. He added that there is a great need for convalescent homes in Livonia; the one proposed here would have 105 beds; cost approximately $250p00.00; provide all services; medical needs for all persons; doctor in attendance at all times. Mr. Ponder added that there are beautiful homes all around but that the convalescent home he feels will fit right in and will be beautifully landscaped and an asset to the community. 4942 Mr. Tent asked if there were any other convalescent homes in the immediate area, Mr. Ponder answered, no. Mr. Tent asked if Mr. Ponder was familiar with Mrs. Grande's, which is about 12 miles away from this parcel, He advised him that she had a problem and asked if Mr, Ponder's client would be willing to put up a wall along residential property linea, Mr. Ponder replied that this is a requirement of the law and would be done. Mr, Tent wanted assurance that he would not plead hardship before the Zoning Board of Appeals at a later date so as not to have to put up the wall. Mr. Ponder stated that this was no problem - they would comply with the requirement. Mr. Ponder added that if Mr. Simpson came in now his land might be changed to multiple dwellings also, Mr. Hull reminded him that the wall would be required whether multiple dwelling or residential. I Mr. Ward asked how this was to be zoned in the Master Plan, Mr. Hull stated that it was to'be'neither commercial nor PS, but was to be residential, 80' frontage, 9,600 square foot lot area; further stating tht the density would be higher than that of the adjacent land. Mr. Ward stated that Mr. Ponder felt that this falls within the scope of the City's Master Study, Since the Master Plan actually left this residential, he asked Mr, Ponder how he could feel this way. Mr. Ponder stated that there is slot of PS , Commercial and Industrial land on the study which will be studied from'time to time and changed as the Commission feels it best for the City, adding that the people as well should be considered for changes in certain other areas where they feel it would benefit the City. Mr. John Moore, of 19620 Flamingo, presented a petition with 100 signa- tures requesting that the Commission deny this ratter. He stated that the residents feel that they are being hemmed in with shopping centers, industry to the north,etc, ani , owning nice homes, they do not want any further zoning changes but wish this land to remain residential. This petition is submitted in behalf of Hillcrest Gardens Civic Association. [111 4943 Mr. Richard Doliner, 459 Wimpole, Rochester, stated that Sunset is not a street, that when they moved in they were promised a street by the ' builder when it could be built; later they were told it would cost $2,500.00 for a small section; that they would have to sign a statement that they are willing to pay, etc. He further states that the property is landlocked and that Sunset is a name on a piece of paper, not a street. At this point there was a general discussion about this matter; Mr. Ponder was asked if he would work out an agreement to dedicate a portion of the road. Mr. Ponder stated that if this petition was approved, he would consider putting the street through and the people abutting would have access to same. But, he did not feel it fair to ask him to give up the land if this petition is not approved. Mr. Walker asked if this street is shown on the Master Thoroughfare Plan, Mr. Hull said it is not, that this is what is called a paper street and the Master Thoroughfare Plan only shows major streets. In the past, people could develop subdivisions without improvements but now this could not happen, to install a subdivision nowmeans all improvements as well. Mr. Tent stated that they would only need an additional 30 feet to open up the road since 1/2 is already dedicated. Mr. Walker stated that he felt a very important situation was being discussed at this meeting, Mr. Hull stated that a subdivision could be worked out to open the road. A solution can only be worked out if a person wants to subdivide the property. Otherwise all they have is a half street. Mr. H. T. Rork, 19520 Flamingo, in the Hillcrest Gardens Subdivision, stated that all the property owners in the subdivision had donated 30 feet for this road and the petitioner hereshould dedicate the other 30 feet. They would like to see the road opened up. Mr. Wrightman asked if the Fetitioner would be inclined to dedicate the 30 feet. Mr. Ponder stated that the property is 300 feet wide; it would beimpossible to do what is asked and develop for single family homes; the land would have to lay idle. He suggested that he would give the 30 feet to open Sunset Boulevard so people could use the street if his client can have PS zoning - that way Sunset could be paved. • Li 4943a Mr. Tent asked if Mr. Ponder's client owns the property. Mr. Ponder replied, yes. Mr. Tent asked if, in the event they did not approve PS, would the property owner and the others get together and work out a good subdivision for this property. Mr. Ponder felt this would not work out. Mr. Hull stated that he did not concur with Mr. Ponder that there is no solution to develop the land into residential homes. Mr. Ponder stated that a convalescent home would be better looking and more aesthetic if he were living in the homes to the east than if each lot there had 3 lots back up to it. Mxs. Chandler asked if the owner was planning to run the convalescent home or have someone else do it. Mr. Ponder stated that the owners are in this business; they own and operate another convalescent home. Mr. Walker asked if Mr. Ponder's client would consider dedication and construction of a street in conjunction with approval of this petition rather than putting a street in the center of the land. Mr. Ponder stated there would be no problem of dedication if they get the requested use. Mr. Simpson stated that he has owned the property to the east for 20 years; has tried to sell at one time; had approved use of 60' lots which was arbitrarily changed to 80' lots; came to City Hall, asked five times why this was done but was never given a chance to talk. He stated that Mr. McNamara had advised the Clerk to notify him when this matter came before the floor but this was never done, the next thing he knew it had gcne through the entire procedure; he is now opposed to one strip being approved to PS unless the entire parcel, including his, is changed. Mr. Walker asked if he would go residential. Mr. Simpson answered, yes. 4944 ° Mr, Walker asked what he would consider the best use. Mr, Simpson replied that as it is now he cannot do anything with it and no one will buy it. Mr. Walker asked Mr. Simpson if he would be willing to go into a package deal on this mattes Mr. Simpson answered, yes. Mr. Rork stated that there had been a plan to develop homes opening streets to the east. This had been approved.- Mr. Simpson stated that when lot size was changed to 80' lots, the builders dropped the development. Mr. Walker announced that this matter would be taken under advisement. Mr. Walker announced that the next item on the agenda would be Petition 66-9-1-27 by the City Planning Commission requesting to rezone property located east of Osmus approx- imately 350 feet south of Eight Mile Road in Section 3 from RUFA to M-L. Mr. Walker asked if there were any property owners interested in this matter . Mr. Spencer, owner of lot #30a2, stated that he is opposed to this petition unless he is assured that Mr. Bucci is going to purchase his property as well as the other lots involved in this petition. He said he offered him a fair price and has never heard anything, and the matter is already before Council. Mr. Paulson of the North Central Civic Association presented a petition to the Commission objecting to the Bucci petition, and spot industrial zoning, and asked that this go on record in opposition to same. Mr. Robert Hastings, 20220 Parker, also objected to the petition. He further reminded the Commission that this encroaches on residential zoning and asked about the people across the street, south, west and east of the property and what consideration was to be given them; he added that the Commission had promised this would never happen to them and had promised them a wall which they now say cannot be built. Mrs, Sullivan presented to the Commission an additional petition with 560 signatures, objecting to the petition. Mr. Andrew was asked if he knew why Mr. Bucci or a representative was not present. , 4945 1: Mr, Andrew said no one was present; that the Rocwall Company had renewed the option on lots 29a1 and 42 to February 1st, 1967; that petitioner intended to purchase lots 30a1 and 30a2 if the zoning petition was successful, Mrs. Chandler stated that she did not feel this matter should be discussed any further without a representative for Mr, Bucci, or Mr. Bucci, being present to answer questions. Mr, Walker stated that Rocwall contacted Mr. Spencer, who offered a fair selling price, and asked if petitioner will be prepared to go back to Mr. Spencer if the petition is acted upon favorably by Council,. Mr. Andrew stated that he felt that price has nothing to do with the zoning petition; that price is a matter between Mr. Bucci and Mr, Spencer; the City should not be interested in price. Mrs. Chandler again stated that Mr. Bucci or a representative should be present to speak in his behalf. Mr. Walker stated that petitioner was not concerned about the development until he got the entire parcel of land. As far as being hesitant about acquiring the balance of the land, Mr. Walker suggested that possibly (101 the Commission should ask the Council not to act on its previous re- commendation on Bucci's petition until they know what is going to happen here. He added that he did not feel Mr. Spencer should have been put in this position. Mr. Sullivan stated that one minor point that the Commission is not taking into consideration is that property owners all the way down to Middlebelt had voted against this, Mrs. Sullivan asked if Mr. Isaacson is going to be left there, that he is north, next to Mr. Spencer; that with all the zoning made industrial he is just left sitting there. Mr, Walker stated that the Commission cannot get involved in the business of seeing that land is sold. Mrs, Sullivan requested a copy of these minutes. Mrs. Chandler requested a copy of the minutes of Mrs. Sullivan's Civic Association but was refused but was advised that their meetings were open to the public. Mrs, Chandler then requested that the Commission be notified when their meetings are to be held, Mr. Walker advised that this item would be taken under advisement. 4946 Mr. Walker announced that the next item on theagenda is Petition 66-9-1-29 by James E. Mies, attorney for Byron B. and Lillita M.Lewis requesting to rezone property located on the south side of Six Mile Road approximately 450 feet east of Oporto in Section 14 from RUFA to P.S. - Mr. Mies was present in behalf of the petitioners. He explained theuses surrounding the property in question; the property to the west is residential; there is a boarding kennel; Louise Street would be cut in across the street; a proposed location for a Calvary Church; and he stated that the purpose of their request is for a medical, dental clinic to be constructed by Dr. Zadeh, who is presently located on Six Mile Road west of Inkster Road, He advised the Commission that Dr. Zadeh needs larger quarters with larger parking area; he would build a ranch type building and proceeded to show the Commission a sketch of the type of building proposed, stating that Dr. Zadeh's bulling would be larger. Mr. Mies further stated that they would prefer a few buildings rather than one, something like the professional village located south of Plymouth Road on Farmington Road, which would be spaced adequately and give aesthetic quality. Mr. Mies further advised the Commission that the Doctor's patients are from this general area. Mr. Mies also advised that it was his feeling that this would fit in the general neighborhood as there is C-2 to the east, their's would be a lesser category than C-2 which could be a buffer between the house to the west and the commercial zoning. Er. Mies added that the parcel is 196' wide, whichis the size they need; that he did not feel that there would be a traffic problem. He stated that the proposed building would be 6,000 square feet, feeling that they are not limited as there is ample space. Mr. Wrightman asked when he would start to build. Mr. Mies answered, as soon as possible. Mr. Wrightman wanted to know if building would be delayed once the petition is approved. Mr. Mies stated that after it is finally passed, the plans made and approved, they would be ready. Mr. Tent asked if he would be ready to give a rendering for approval of the architecture. Mr. Mies answered, yes; the architect is making a sketch to be approved by the petitioner and the Commission. i Mr. Pollock asked if the building would face on Six Mile Road.4947 Mr. Mies stated that the building was originally to face Six Mile Road but since they would like to develop and use the property along the lines of a professional village, its position might be altered. Mrs. Chandler asked Mr. Hull if he thought 169' width would be sufficient for a professional village. Mr. Hull stated he believes is is possible. Mr. Wrightman asked if petitioner had investigated any other PS property already in existence in the City. Mr. Mies replied yes, he did not know how many parcels he had looked into but most PS is not this big and he wants this parcel because of its size and the Doctor resides very near it. Mr. Joseph Barfield, 29950 Munger, who owns property to the west of this parcel stated that he could not see why this should abut residential zoning; that there is other acreage available. He wished to go on record as an objector. Mr. Dalessandro, 29970 Munger, also objected to this petition. Mr. Walker stated that this matter would be taken under advisement. Mr. Walker announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-10-2-19 by Harper Cunningham requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to operate a Class C liquor license establishment on parcel 32J located on the south side of Plymouth Road approximately 670 feet east of Levan Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 32. Mr, Cunningham was present and showed a sketch of the proposed building. Mr,. Walker asked if this would be a special type of bar, Mr. Cunningham said it would not be a shot and beer joint; he added that this facility will have an upstairs for meetings; room for banquets; and would hold about 80 people at the most upstairs; downstairs would hold about 90 people; there would be adequate parking space; the building would cost approximately $50,000.00 to build. Mr-. Tent asked if the building would be as that on the sketch, Mr. Cunningham stated there might be a few changes, such as in the gable, and stated he would bring in his architectural plans for approval by the Commission. , a 4948 1[10 Mr. Cunningham was asked if he would come in to ask for rezoning of C-2 at the rear of the property and he said he will use approximately 340 feet and will let the rear portion sit until he can see what is done with the RtF zoning next to it. Mr. Tent asked if he would dedicate 27 feet to the City. Mr. Cunningham stated that he has a setback of 60 feet from the center line of the road and the building setback is an additional 60 feet; there will be some parking in the front and some in the rear. Mr. Tent again asked if he would dedicate the 27-foot right-of-way. Mr. Cunningham stated that it has already been done, about fourteen years ago. Mr. Don Leeder, of 35898 Leon presented a petition to the Commission signed by all property owners in the area. The petition was read into the record. It was also noted that this petition was signed in opposition to the prior zoning petition, not against this waiver use request. Mr. Leeder stated that he felt that strip zoning would effect the overall use of the surrounding property which is mainly residential zoning. He stated that the real estate developer assured them that this would not happen. Mr. Hull stated that this is not in any way applicable to this petition as the property has the zoning and the petition is only for a waiver use. Mr. Leeder stated that this is felt to be a stepping stone and if the petition is granted petitioner will come in and ask for the waiver use on the rest of the property. Mr. Hull advised the audience that the petitioner could come in and build any commercial establishments. Mr. Leeder asked the Planning Commission to outline just what is the general over-all use of this strip along there and what would ultimately happen there. Mr. Hull stated that the reason why the Commission has not acted on the original petition is that it has not had an opportunity to study the land zoned commercial in this aea; the department is now in the process of making this study and hopes to have an over-all plan for the area ready at some future date.. Mr. Tent asked Mr. Leeder if he objects to the establishment proposed here or to the use of the property; ' if Mr. Cunningham were to utilize the property for this type of operation, as shown on the sketch, would the residents be agreeable to this or are they against bars in general. 4949 Mr. Leeder stated that he is still afraid the rear will be used for parking; but he was advised that there is nothing that can be done with the back at the present time. He stated that he felt that a bar would devaluate the property surrounding it and that he would never buy next to a bar and raise his family in sucha neighborhood. He asked if all parking requirements were met including parking for the banquet room. Mr. Hull answered, yes; that it must meet the requirements of the ordinance. Mr. Walker stated that petitioner originally petitioned for front 1/2 of the property to build and the rear for parking; that this was turned down. He added that the present petition meets with all requirements. Mr. Cunningham stated that after the last meeting he had discussed the rezoning with the people in the audience at which time they said he should sell them the back 100 feet of it; however, this he knew the Planning Commission would not approve; he added that, kiddingly, he asked how much they would pay and a lady said $100.00; Mr. Cunningham asked her, per foot? - she said, per lot. He told her that this could not be done. r:r, Tent asked the audience what would a reasonable distance from the back of the property be that they would agree with. Mr. Leeder stated that he cannot speak for all the people living there. Mr, Walker stated that only the front portion of this property is being considered here and advised the audience that their comments would all be taken into consideration and that a study would be made by the Planning Department as to what treatment will be given to this land. Mr. Walker advised that this matter would be taken under advisement, Mr. Walker announced that the next item on the agenda would be petition 66-9-7-11 by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to amend Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master Thoroughfare Plan, by removing all interior roads in the South 1/2 of Section 27, Mr, Walker asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to be heard on this matter. There was no one, Mr„ Walker stated that this matter would be taken under advisement. 4950 Mr. Walker stated that the next item on the agenda was petition 66-9-7-12 by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to amend Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master Thoroughfare Plan, to provide for an east-west road between Farmington Road and Merriman Road in the north 1/2 of Section 27. Mr. Wrightman asked the Industrial Coordinator what the purpose of this petition is. Mr. Andrew stated that it was to open interior land and possibly service a future incinerator and sanitary land fill area; he further stated that Scans Associates and Cast Forge Company had been contacted for access to Farmington and Merriman Road, respectively, and both have agreed to cooperate in this matter. Mr. Walker stated that this matter would be taken under advisement. Mr. Walker announced that the next item on the agenda was petition 66-9-6-I1 by the Planning Commission to determine whether or not to amend Section 18.35(5) of Ordinance No. 543, the Zoning Ordinance to provide for one (1) parking space for each three (3) beds rather than each two (2) beds. I Mr. Walker stated that this matter would be taken underadvisement, there being no one wishing to be heard on same. On a motion duly made by Mr. Pollock, seconded by Mr. Wrightman, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: #11-162-66 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the public hearing held on Tuesday, November 1, 1966 at approximately 11:15 p.m. Mr. Walker, Chairman, called the 227th Special Meeting to order at ' approximately 11:35 p.m. with approximately 20 people in the audience. Mr. Walker announced that the first item on the agenda was Petition No. 66-10-1-30 by W illian N. Ponder for Donald E. Green and Lloyd J. Dunn to rezone property located approximately 210 feet south of Six Mile and approximately 260 feet west of Middlebelt Road in Section 14 from RUFA to C-2. Mr. Walker stated that this matter would be taken under advisement. 4951 Mr. Walker announced that the next item on the agenda was Petition 66-8-1-24 by Gene Harris, Jr. requesting to rezone property located at the southeast corner of Clarita and Farmington Road in Section 10 from R-1 to P.S. Mr. Walker advised that this matter would be taken under advisement; he stated that this and the adjoining parcels should be studied further; and the P. S. property across the street (owned by Mr. Deremo) has not been built on and might possibly be studied for reclassification to its original zoning. Mr, Walker, Chairman, announced that the next item on the agenda was Petition 66-9-1-25 by William N. Ponder for FeLix S.Kubik requesting to rezone property located at the northwest corner of Seven Mile Road and Sunset in Section 2 from R-3-A to P.S. Mr. Walker stated that this matter would be taken under advisement. Mr. Walker, Chairman, announced that the next item on the agenda was Petition 66-9-1-27 by the City Planning Commission to rezone property located east of Osmus approximately 350 feet south of Eight Mile Road in Section 3 from RUFA to M-L Mr. Walker stated that this matter would be taken under advisement, the reason being that a representative was not here to answer questions and the Commission wants to find out if petitioner intends to take an option on the property as was the intent under his original petition. Mr. Ward stated that Rocwall is probably waiting to see what the Council is going to doand feels if the major part of the parcel is approved he will purchase the property. Mr. Tent stated that Rocwall should have already tied Spencer into the package. Mr, Hull felt that the entire matter should be tied up at this meeting. Mr. Walker advised that this matter is taken under advisement. Mr, Walker, Chairman, announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-9-1-29 by James E. Mies, attorney for Byron B, and Lillian M. Lewis, requesting to rezone property located on the south side of Six Mile Road approximately 450 feet east of Oporto in Section 14 from RUFA to P.S. Mr, Tent asked if Dr. Zadeh has an option on this property. 4952 : Mr. Mies stated that he had entered into a purchase agreement; the owners are Mr. and Mrs. Lewis. Mr. Wrightman asked if Mr. Mies felt certain that the Doctor would proceed with the building quickly. Mr. Mies was confident he will proceed as soon as plans are made. Motion by Mr. Wrightman, seconded by Mrs. Chandler, was made to approve this petition. Mr. Hull advised that if this petition is approved now they will not need site plan approval. Mr, Tent stated it should be tabled for further study; .th,ht petitioner should come in with site plan, etc. Mr, Walker agreed with this. Mr. Mies stated he would have the Doctor's architect get in touch with Mr. Hull regarding the layout and submit what i.. necessary; they will do everything the Commission requires and get them whatever information they may want. ILMr. Wrightman requested permission to withdraw his motion to approve the petition. Mrs. Chandler requested permission to withdraw her action in seconding the motion. Permission was granted and the Chairman stated that this matter was taken under advisement. Mr. Walker, Chairman, announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-10-2-19 by Harper Cunningham requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to operate a Class C liquor license establishment on parcel 32J located on the south side ofPlymouth Road approximately 670 feet east of Levan Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 32. Mr. Walker suggested that this petition be approved to cover only petitioner's C-2 property. • Mr. Tent stated he would like to have Mr. Cunningham agree that the architecture of the structure will conform to the sketch brought in at the meeting. Mr. Hull stated he would rather have Mr. Cunningham submit his plans ILfor approval to the Commission at the time he will build. i 4953 On motion by Mrs. Chandler, seconded by Mr. Wrightman, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: #11-163-66 RESOLVED that pursuant to a public hearing having been held on Novenber 1, 1966 on Petition 66-10-2-19 as submitted by Harper H. Cunningham requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to erect and operate a Class C liquor license cocktail lounge on that portion of parcel 32J owned by him and presently zoned C-2, located approximately 660 feet east of Levan Road in Section 32, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 66-10-2-19 be approved, subject to architectural approval by the Planning Commission, for the following reasons: (1) the petition meets the waiver use requirements of Ordinance ##543; (2) the zoning is proper to accommodate this type of use; (3) petitioner's site plan indicates that the proposed development can adequately be accommodated on the existing site; FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet; petitioner and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr, Walker declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Tent asked Mr. Hull if this area could be studied for the residents in the area. Mr. Hull advised the Commission that the Planning Department is trying to get a study made of this area; he further stated that the petition on the balance of the property owned by Mr. Harper should be held pending the completion of the aforesaid study. Mr. Walker, Chairman, announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-9-7-11 by the City Planning Commission to deter- mine whether or'not to amend Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master Thoroughfare Plan, by'removing all interior roads in the South 1/2 of Section 27. 4954 I On motion by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Moser, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: #11-164-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on November 1, 1966 on Petition 66-9-7-11 as submitted by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to determine whether or 'not to amend Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master Thoroughfare Plan, to provide for the removal of all interior roads within the South 1/2 of Section 27, such interior roads identified as McKinney, Bile, Capital, if extended in an easterly direction; Wadsworth, if extended in an easterly direction; Hubbard, if extended in a southerly direction; and Berwick, if extended in a northerly direction, for the following reason: (1) the proposed large scale development in this area will negate the need for an interior road system; AND, having given proper notice of such hearing'as required by Act 285 of the Public Acts of Michigan, 1931, as amended; the City Planning Commission does hereby adopt said amend- meet as part of the Master Thoroughfare Plan, Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, which is incorporated herein by reference, the same having been adopted by resolu- tion of the City Planning Commission,with all amendments there- to, and further that this amendment shall be filed with the City Council, City Clerk, and the City Planning Commission; and a certified copy shall also be forwarded to the Wayne County Register of Deeds for recording. Mr. Walker, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted. Mi. Walker announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-9-7-12 by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to amend Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master Thoroughfare Plan, to provide for an east-west road between Farmington Road and Merriman Road in the north 1/2 of Section 27. On motion by Mr. Wrightman, seconded by Mr. Ward, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: #11-165-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on November 1, 1966 on Petition 66-9-7-12 as submitted by the City Planning Commission on its own motion and pursuant to a request from the Industrial Development Commission as 4955 1 set out in resolution 142-6-66, to determine whether or not to amend Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master Thoroughfare Plan, to provide for an east-west road between Farmington Road and Merriman Road in the North 1/2 of Section 27, the proposed east- west road to be located approximately 900-1200 feet south of Schoolcraft Road, for the following reason: (1) there is a need for provision for an interior industrial road system in this sector of the industrial belt; AND, having given proper notice of such hearing'as required' by Act 285 of the Public Acts of Michigan, 1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission does hereby adopt said amend- ment as part of the Master Thoroughfare Plan, Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, which is incorporated herein by reference, the same having been adopted by resolu- tion of the City Planning Commission, 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 certified copy shall also be forwarded to the Wayne County Register of Deeds for recording. Mr. Walker, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted. Mr. Walker announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-9-6-11 by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to amend Section 18.38(5) of Ordinance No. 543, the Zoning Ordinance, by providing for one (1) parking space for each three (3) beds rather than two (2) beds On motion by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Moser, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: #11-166-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on November 1, 1966 on Petition 66-9-6-11 as submitted by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to determine whether or not to amend Section 18.34(5) of ' Ordinance No. 543, the City of Leonia Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to provide for one (1) parking space for each three (3) beds in lieu of each two (2) beds, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition 66-9-6-11 be approved for the following reasons: (1) the present ordinance requires a parking ratio that is unreasonable and requires land to be paved that can be better used for landscaping and outdoor recreation facilities; 14956 FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonian ' Observer and City Post, under date of October 12, 1966, and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company and Consumers Power Company, City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service, Mr. Walker declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted. Mr. Walker, Chairman, announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 65-12-1-40 by Joseph B. Monaco requesting to rezone property located at the northeast corner of Farmington Road and Lyndon Avenue in Section 22 from RUF to P.S. for construction'of a nursing home, convalescent home or a professional center, or a high rise office building. Mr. Walker stated that this item would be taken under advisement. Mr. Walker, Chairman, announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-7-1-18 by Forest Lawrence requesting to rezone property located approximately 160 feet north of Five Mile Road approximately 600 feet east of Middlebelt Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13 from RTF to P for additional parking space On motion by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Pollock, the following resdution was adopted: #11-167-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on September 6, 1966 on Petition 66-7-1-18 as sub- mitted by Forest Lawrence requesting to rezone property located approximately 160 feet north of Five Mile Road approximately 600 feet east of Middlebelt Road in the Southwest 1/4'of Section 13 from RUF to P for additional parking space, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 66-7-1-18 be approved for the following reasons: (1) it is a logical extension of the existing zoning; (2) the proposed rezoning can be related to an overall plan of the area and will not be in conflict with existing development; FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonian Eit 4957 Observer and City Post, under date of August 17, 1966, and notice of such hearing was sent to the Dettoit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Consumers Power Company, petitioner and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES : Tent, Wrightman, Moser, Walker, Pollock, Ward, Heusted, Singer NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Chandler The Chairman declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted. Mr. Walker announced that the next item on the agenda was the rescinding of resolution #9-148-66 regarding the approval of the final plat for Baloh Subdivision On motion by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Tent, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: #11-168-66 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission hereby rescinds its resolution #9-148-66 adopted September 6, 1966 inasmuch as the financial obligations due from Baloh Subdivision to the City by virtue of Council Resolution 456-65 have not been met. Mr. Walker declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted. Mr. Walker stated that the next item to come on the agenda is a resolution to be adopted regarding the partial platting of two previously approved preliminary subdivision plats, Judson Gardens Subdivision and Renwick Park Subdivision.. Mr. Hull explained that the builders had come to the Planning Depart- ment with this request. The Commission had a general discussion on this matter, the numbering of the subdivis ions, etc; On motion by Mr. Wrightman, seconded by Mr. Ward, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: #11-169a-66 RESOLVED, that pursuant to the request of Rodney Kropf dated October 21, 1966, 'in behalf of the owners of Judson Gardens Subdivision, the City Planning • 4958 i Commission does hereby approve the amended preliminary plat of Judson Gardens Subdivision for the following reason: (1) the partial proposed plat is in substantial conformity to a portion of the previously approved preliminary plat. #11-169b-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the request of Rodney Kropf dated October 21, 1966, in behalf of the owners of Renwick Park Subdivision, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the amended preliminary plat for Renwick Park Subdivision for the following reason: (1) the partial proposed plat is in substantial conformity to a portion ofthe previously approved preliminary plat. Mr. Walker declared the motion carried and the resolutions adopted. Mr. Walker announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-4-7-6 by the City Planning Commission requesting to amend Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, the Master Thoroughfare Plan, by modifying the right-of way width of Wayne Road from Plymouth Road north to the Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad in Section 28 to 86 feet from 120 feet. Mr. Dougherty, President of the Livonia National Bank was present. Mr. W rightman asked him if they are seriously planning to construct a bank in accordance with the site plan submitted. Mr. Dougherty stated they had already entered into an"agreement for_ construction of the building and hope to begin work on it in the very near future, that is 30 to 60 days. On motion by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Moser, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: #11-170-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on May 10, 1966 on Petition 66-4-7-6 as submitted by the City Planning Commission to determine whether or not to athend Part 1 of the Master Plan"of the City of Livonia, the Master Thoroughfare Plan, • p. 4959 by modifying the right-of-way width of Wayne Road from Plymouth Road north to the Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad in Section 28 from 120 feet to 86 feet for the following reason: (1) this action will not seriously interfere with the industrial development of that area; AND, having given proper notice of such hearing as' required by Act 285 of the Public Acts of Michigan, 1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission does hereby adopt said'amendment as part of the Master Thoroughfare Plan, Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, whichis incorporated herein by reference, the same having been adopted by resolution of the City Planning Commission, with all amendments there- to, and further that this amendment shall be filed with the City Council, City Clerk, and the City Planning Commission; and a certified copy shall also be forwarded to the Wayne County Register of Deeds for recording. Mr. Walker, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted. Mr. Hull stated that after this is done, Wayne Road can be eliminated but can never be increased. Mr. Tent asked Mr. Dougherty what type of building they are planning for this location. Mr. Dougherty stated it was a two-story structure with an exterior' of glazed brick; the investment would be between $225,000 and $250,000. Mr. Pollock stated that during the study of this item he was opposed to reducing Wayne Road because of its possible need in that area but was advised by Mr. Andrew that the reduction from 120 feet to 86 feet would not seriously interfere with the industrial development in that area. He would like this to be one of the reasons for recommending approval. Mr. Hull agreed to this. Mr. Walker stated that the next item on the agenda was the election of officers; he advised that this matter would be tabled to the next meeting. A 1 4960 On motion by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Heusted, and unanimously adopted, the City Planning Commission adjourned the 227th Special Meeting held November 1, 1966 at approximately 12:15 p.m. CTI`Y PLANNING COMMISSION • G rry Wrig it-lati21/ Attest: a), ah2-4/e-e79 Char...- 4°A.-44..' es W. Walker, Chairman I