HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1966-12-06 4994
MINUTES CF 228TH SPECIAL MEETING AND
PUBLIC HEARING CF THE CITY PLANNING
CCHM SSION CF THE CITY CF LIVCNIA
On Tuesday, December 6, 1966 the City Planning Commission of the
City of Livonia held its 228th Special Meeting and a public hearing
at the Livonia City Hall, 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr, Raymond W, Tent, Vice Chairman, called the public hearing to order
at 9:10 p,m, with approximately 30 interested persons in the audience.
Members Present: Harry Wrightman Marvin Moser
Raymond W. Tent Donald Pollock
Mrs. Myra Chandler Mrs. Mimi Singer
Members Absent: Charles W. Walker
John J. Ward
Donald Heusted
Messrs. Don Hull, Planning Director; JohnJ, Nagy, Assistant Planning
Director; David Perry, Assistant City Attorney; and Daniel Andrew,
Industrial Coordinator, were also present
Mr. Tent announced that the first item on the ageeda is Petition 66-10-1-31
by R.P.M. Investment Company requesting to rezone property located on
the southeast corner of Loveland and Plymouth Road in the Northwest 1/4
of Section 34 from R-1 to P.S. to use existing building for profession-
al services.
Mr. Tent asked if the petitioner or a representative was present in the
audience, who could give the background on this petition.
Mr. Russell Meyers, petitioner, was present and advised the Commission
that he is requesting change of zoning from residential to P.S. which is
what most of the property is along Plymouth Road, further advising the
zoning of the surrounding neighborhood, i.e, commercial; industrial across
the street; the new library next to it, etc.
Mr, Tent asked what the petitioner intended to use this for.
Mr. Meyers stated that he had no clients or tenants at the present time,
it was his intention to lease to professional people such as a doctor or
dentist.
Mr. Tent stated that this petition was then speculative,
Mr, Meyers answered, yea, that he would need the zoning before he could
rent,
4 995
Mrs. Singer asked if there is a building on the property and is it occupied.
Mr, Mayers answered,yes,
Mr, Wrightman asked if the owners are the ones who are leasing the house.
Mr. Meyers advised that he is the owner and that he is leasing it on a month
to month basis,
Mr, Wrightman asked if petitioner felt that the lot size is adequate
to be used for professional service.
Mr. Meyers answered, yes,
Mr, Wrightman asked if petitioner could comply, with parking regulations,
Petitioner replied, yes.
Mr, Wrightman felt that usually P.S. land use is applied to greater pieces
of land. -
Mr, Meyers stated that the building is about 1000 square feet and the land is
approximately 8000 square feet,
Mr. Tent asked if petitioner had checked into any of the land presently
ned P.S. which is available throughout the City.
Mr, Meyers answered, no, inasmuch as he owns this property along with others
in the area and feels that this zoning would improve the property.
Mrs, Singer asked if there were residential homes on lots 1552, 1553, etc.
Mr, Meyers stated there are, adding that he owns lots 1629 through 1638 south
of the property in question, on which there are also residential homes.
Mr. Tent asked petitioner how soon he would build if this petition is granted.
Mr, Meyers stated as soon as they get a tenant,
Mr. Tent asked if the present building would be used,
Mr. Meyers replied, yes.
Mr. Tent asked if anyone in the audience wished to be heard on this matter,
Mr, Charles Allen, 32015 West Chicago, Livonia, past president of the Civic
Association, stated that these lots are restricted by deed to residential use,
4996
Mr, Meyers stated that the developer stated that he will not stand in the
way of this petition.
Mr. Allen insisted that the deed restrictions run with the land and the
lots must be used for homes,
Mr, Meyers stated he is nottamiliar with the deed restrictions,
Mr. Tent asked if the deed restrictiora had been checked out,
Mr. Perry stated that they would have to check this on the original plat;
the County would enforce it, not the. City, He stated that the petitioner
should investigate this before wasting any time and money,
Mr. Tent stated that this would be taken under advisement.
Mr, Tent announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-11-1-32
by Livio Ottino and Frances E. Ottino requesting to rezone property
located on the west side of Farmington Road approximately 525 feet
north of Seven Mile Road from RIFA to R-7 in the east 1/2 of
Section 4, for erection of multiple dwellings.
Mr, Livio Ottino, petitioner, was present and spoke to the audience and
Cogimission, explaining their intention to construct 15 to 18 unit multiple
dwellings. He stated that a map had been presented to the Commission of
their intentions,
Mr. Tent asked petitioner if he was asking for the rezoning to sell to a
developer.
Mr. Ottino replied, yes; it would be sold immediately and the builder would
proceed with the construction.
Mr, Tent asked who would be building,
Mr, Ottino replied, Mike Zangary, who is also the person buying the land,
Mr. Tent asked if the purchaser has had any experience along this line,
Mr. Ottino stated that he owns a cement business and has been managing
an apartment for fifteen years,
Mr, Tent asked what makes them feel they can be successful and what will
they offer that is different,
Mr. Ottino stated he could not answer that question, He said they are
planning to build 2&3 room apartments.
-,
4997
( Mr. Wrightman asked what quality apartments would they be.
Mr. Ottino stated that they would rent for $100 to $115 per month.
Mr. Wrightman felt that Mr. Ottino could not speak with authority on
the apartment intended to be built.
The Commission had a general discussion regarding the economics, etc.
Mr. Tent asked petitioner if he felt this type of development is good
for the City.
Mr. Ottino stated that the development could be altered if requested by
the Commission,
-Ir. Tent advised the petitioner that he only had li acres of land and
to put up the quality required might be too expensive to construct.
Mr. Moser asked if there is a house on the property.
Mr. Ottino replied, yes; there is a garage and a building in which he
lives and which will be torn down,
I Mr. Moser asked if this would be a two-story apartment,.
Mr. Ottino stated that the apartment will be two-story, with partial
basement.
The petitioner was asked where the Commission might view another development
of this nature.
Mr. Ottino stated he did not know.
Mr. Wrightman asked if petitioner knew of an apartment the proposed
builders have built which the Commission could look over.
Mr. Ottino advised that they do most of their work in Ann Arbor but
was unable to tell the Commission just where.
Mr , Johnson, 19191 Westmore, objected to the petition stating that
it would downgrade the neighborhood and the traffic which would result
would be hazardous.
Mrs. Chandler stated that she felt the petitioner had come up with a
request with a lack of knowledge to enable him to answer pertinent
questions.
Mr. Richard Norman, 18932 Norwich, stated that in studying zoning plans
for the northwest section of the city he realizes that this does not fit in
with the plans and feels his association will object, suggesting therefore
irli that the entire area be studied before action is taken on this petition.
4998
Mr. Johnson stated that he had spent $16,000 to come here from Detroit
and after settling down would not like to see this multiple dwelling
constructFa in the neighborhood.
Mr. Tent, concurring with Mrs. Chandler, stated that Mr. Ottino should
come to the Commission on such a request with much more knowledge than
he has at this meeting.
Mr. Tent stated that this matter would be taken under advisement.
Mr. Tent announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-9-6-12
by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Council Resolution
No. 923-66 to determine whether or not to amend Section 19.08 of
Article XIX of Ordinance No. 543 relative to Council action on
Waiver Uses
Mr. Hull stated that the ordinance now specifically states the conditions
under which the Commission and Council may grant waiver uses; they can
only grant what is concretely set forth in the zoning ordinance; the
proposed amendment interjects changes into the ordinance that would allow
the Council to grant waiver uses that do not conform with the strict intent
of the ordinance as set forth at the present time; i.e. a petitioner may
request a cocktail lounge which should be 1000 feet away from the nearest
cocktail lounge and if it is less than the 1000 foot requirement and Cou
feels it is "okay" and fits into the overall plan they could grant the
• waiver use if it conformed to the spirit of the ordinance requirements.
Mr. Tent, after a brief discussion, stated that petitioners could then come
in to the Commission with the idea that the requirements of the ordinance
could be "bent".
Mr. Hull stated that the Commission is duty bound to conduct the public
hearing but they do not have to agree.
Mrs. Chandler asked if they do not agree with this will they be over-ridde~?
Mr, Perry advised the Commission that the proposed ordinance amendment
leaves no flexibility in the Commission, that they are bound to the origInnl
ordinance; that the Council would be the only body to have flexibility„
Prior to this petitioners could go to a Zoning Board of Appeals for a
variance, if this is passed there are some instances of real hardship which
could be waived by Council.
Mr. Tent stated that the petitioners in such a case could come before
the Commission knowing that they cannot be approved, but feeling that they
might be approved by the Council.
4999
Mr. Donald Rigo, 17371 Bell Creek Lane, Livonia asked if this in any
way precludes a public hearing should a petitioner go to council to
have them pass on a matter without Commission approval.
The Commission. replied, no.
Mr. Hull stated that in a case such as a gas station, the Commission
cannot give approval unless people within 400 feet Sign off; in that
case they could reject it or give approval; however, Council could
grant it even though that specific requirement of the ordinance has not
been met.
Mr. Perry stated that Council would have a public hearing.
Mr. Hull stated that the Council conducts hearings on waiver uses, adding
that they can, however, grant waiver uses without conducting public hearings
but cannot now grant waiver uses which do not comply with the specific
requirements attached to the waiver uses. The public hearings held by
Council are usually on waiver uses which receive negative recommendations
from the Commission.
Mr. Taut stated that this matter would be taken under advisement.
Mr. Tent announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-11-2-20
by Marathon Oil Company, requesting to be granted a waiver use
permit to construct a service statim on a portion of property '
located on the northwest corner of Seven Mile Road and Newburgh,
in Section 6.
Mr. Robert Abraham, attorney for Marathon Oil Company, spoke to the
Commission regarding the size of the property (170' frontage on
Seven Mile Road, 152' on Newburgh), the proposed colonial building to blend
in with the surrounding area, etc. Mr. Mike Bowers, an engineer, was also
present to answer any questions;
The question was raised of whether residential property owners within 400'
of the property in question bad given consent in writing to the petitioners.
This was not done.
Mr. Tent brought up the fact that there are several Marathon stations
which are vacant.
The Commission had a general discussion with the petitioner regarding
vacant stations, zoning requirements, etc. during which conversation
Mr. Abraham advised the Commission that the present station was to be a
super-station.
5000
Mr. Tent raised the question also of the stations conducting businesses
other than that of a gas station, in violation of the zoning ordinance -
which is being done by one of their stations.
Mr. Abraham stated that the City should contact them with complaints
of this nature, that they thought the City was protected against this
by its zoning ordinance.
Mrs. Singer asked if the petition is granted when they would build.
Mr. Abraham replied, next year.
Mr. Hull brought up the fact that this development comprises only a
portion of the ownership and asked what is intended with the remainder
of the parcel.
Mr. Abraham stated that they had no present plans for the balance but
that this was the usual practice.
Mr. Wrightman expressed concern over the vacant land, stating that he
did not like the idea of the Commission not knowing what it would be used
for, that they should know what they are approving. He cited as an
example the gas station which was constructed at Seven Mile and Farmington
about 5 to 10 years ago, stating that this was a choice piece of land
which has been empty for quite a while and this is the type of situation
they are concerned about.
Mr. Abraham stated that the development of such land would be under the
jurisdiction of the Commission.
Mr. Tent asked if petitioner had an option on the land and if it was
tentative on approval of this petition.
Mr. Abraham answered, yes; the option is conditioned at their ability to
obtain building permits.
Mr. Wrightman asked petitioner how soon the project would be completed
if the petition is approved.
Mr. Abraham stated in the Spring of 1967 they would commence construction,
adding that the Commission could condition the approval so that it would
be constructed as aforesaid.
Mr. Stanley Smith, 37500 Seven Mile Road, stated he cannot see why a '
station should be constructed there for the reason already brought up,
there are enough vacant stations in the City.
(6; Mr. Joseph Phillips, 19255 Bethany, objected for the same reason.
5001
} A general discussion was had and it was found that the audience
did not object to a gas station being erected on the corner but they
did not want one which would only be open part of the time.
Mr. Pollock asked petitioner if he would like to return before the
Commission makes its decision on this matter with the answers to the
problems which were raised at the meeting.
Mr. Allen speaking as agent for a property owner, stated that there
is only one station on the north side of the street in Livonia and
that is at Farmington Road - it is so small you cannot turn into it -
and added that a gas station of some kind is needed in that area.
Mr. Tent asked what good is a station if it is not open - that is the
present concern - the Commission wants to make sure that what goes
in will stay open. He offered to show petitioner a market survey from
Mr. Driker, Planning Consultant.
Mr. Tent stated that this matter would be taken under advisement.
Mr. Tent announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-11-2-21
by Charles R. Walker requesting to be granted a waiver use
permit to construct an insurance office on Lot 5 of Brightmoor
Home Acres Subdivision located on the east side of Farmington
Road approximately 70 feet north of Roycroft in Section 15,
Mr. Jack Leh, 19830 James Couzens, Detroit, was present and explained
that the purpose of the waiver use is to construct an insurance office
for which they have a tenant, the building is roughly 1570' and the lot
is approximately 8500' ; the tenant is All-State Insurance Company.
Mr. Wrightman asked how soon the building would be constructed if approved,
Mr. Walker stated it would be built immediately.
Mr. Tent asked if he would build exactly the type of building shown to
the Commission and was advised the building would meet All State Insurance
Co. specifications and City requirements.
Mr. Pollock asked if it would be similar to their office at West Chicago
and Telegraph.
Mr, Walker stated it would be similar to the office at West Road in the
City of Trenton across the Trenton Highway, and went on to describe the
appearance of the building.
Mr. Tent asked how many employees they would have.
5 002
Mr. Walker stated they would be starting out with 6 with space for 15 cars;
and eventially there would be 13 employees.
Mr. Tent asked if this is large enough for such an expansion program.
Mr. Walker replied, yes.
Mr. Hull advised that they meet the requirements of the ordinate.
Mr. Walker advised the Commission this would be a branch sales office.
Mrs. Singer asked who would maintain the green area.
Mr. Walker stated that they would maintain same.
Mr. Hull stated that if the Commission is in agreement with the petition
they could grant approval conditionally on the plans before them at this
meeting and if any variations occur by the time the building permit is
applied for, they would have to come back for another approval.
Mr. Wrightman asked if any road dedications were necessary.
Mr. Hull stated that they would need dedication across the front of the
property and the City Engineer is negotiating with the County Highway
Commission in this regard.
11:I
Mr. Walker stated they are going to dedicate 7 feet and that this is already
considered in the site plan.
Mr. Hull stated that it should be dedicated.
Mr. Pollock asked if thisshould be done prior to approval.
Mr. Hull stated that this is up to the Commission.
Mr. Tent asked if petitioner would be willingto dedicate this and was
advised that the County deal has been closed for several months.
Mr. Tent stated that if the right-of-way has not been dedicated they could
approve the petition subject to the aforesaid dedication.
Mr, Tent farther stated there was nothing in the file from'the Police '
Department, Engineering Department, etc. regarding ingress, egress, etc.
and was advised by Mr. Hull that the Engineering Division has had this
site plan before them from the beginning.
Mr. Fred Wilson, owner of Lot #6 asked, regarding the ultimate plan to
have 13 employees, will they lease out the space meanwhile and was advised by
Mr. Walker that there would be no sub-leasing.
5003
Mr. Kemp, 15531 Westmore, stated he was interested in the size of the
building, plot, landscaping, and fencing in back part of the property
inasmuch as he owns the property to the rear. He stated he has no objection
to the planned occupancy, provided there is no change in the future; and
would like something to divide his property from petitioner's.
Mr. Walker stated that the ordinance takes care of this.
Mr. Tent advised Mr. Kemp that it is a requirement that a masonry wall
be erected.
Mr. Tent stated that this matter would be taken under advisement..
Mr. Tent announced that the next item on the agenda is the Preliminary
Plat approval of Westland Industrial Subdivision located in the South-
west 1/4 of Section 27.
Mr. Murray Nadler of Dale Investment was present and explained that they ow:_
property contiguous to this acreage and explained what is proposed here.
Mr. Tent referred to a letter in the file from Lt. Thorne regarding the
roadway which is 32' wide.
I
Mr. Hull stated that this subdivision must at least meet the minimum
requirement of the Plat Ordinance, No. 500, which stipulates development
standards.
The Commission had a general discussion regarding the roadway, easement,
sidewalk treatment, etc.
Mr. Hull stated that the sidewalk treatment bad not been discussed but
at times this requirement is waived in industrial subdivisions.
Mr. Tent asked what is the feeling of sidewalks; if it is a requirement
what would this petitioner do
Mr. Nadler stated that he agrees with Mr. Hull's comment that as a rule
they are not used in industrial subdivisions, it is a great expense and
does not add to the beauty of the subdivision.
Mr. Wrightman asked what mailcarriers would do
Mr. Nadler stated they would go right up the road but stated that most
industrial firms go to the post office for their mail.
Mr. Tent referred to a letter in the file from the Fire Department
regarding recommendations of fire hydrants, water main, etc.
Mr, Hull stated that this information should be transmitted to the
Council not the Planning Commission at this time,
5004
Mr, Tent asked Mr. Andrew if he had any comments.
Mr. Andrew felt this subdivision met with his approval.
Mr. Tent stated that this matter would be taken under advisement.
On motion duly made by Mr. Wrightman, seconded by Mr, Moser, the following
resolution was unanimously adopted:
#12-178-66 RESOLVED that the City Planning Commission does hereby
adjourn the public hearing held on Tuesday, December 6,
1966 at approximately 10:45 p.m.
Mr. Tent, Vice Chairman, called the 228th Special Meeting to order at
approximately 11:00 p.m. with approximately 10 interested persons in the
audience.
Mr. Tent announced that the first item on the agenda is Petition 66-10-1-31
by R.P.M. Investment Company requesting to rezone property
located on the southeast corner of Loveland and Plymouth Road
in the northwest 1/4 of Section 34 from R-1 to P.S. to use
1 existing building for professional service.
Mr. Moser asked if petitioner should be given a chance to check the
restrictions on this property. After a short discussion, Mr. Wrightman
stated that this was still strip zoning.
On motion by Mr. Pollock, seconded by Mr. Wrightman, the following
resolution was unanimously adopted:
#12-179-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been
held on December 6, 1966 on Petition 66-10-1-31 as submitted
by R.P.M. Investment Co. requesting to rezone property located
on the east side of Loveland Avenue between Plymouth and
Orangelawn, Lot 1639 of Rosedale Gardens No. 9in the
Northwest 1/4 of Section 34, from R-1 to P.S., the City
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 66-10-1-31 be denied for the following reasons:
(1) this is an encroachment into an existing residential
neighborhood and the stability of this neighborhood
could be effected;
(2) this constitutes strip development along a mile
road which would tend to increase the points of
vehicular ingress and egress and adversely effect
the movement of transient traffic;
5005
(3) the site is small and it is questionable as to
whether adequate site development could take place
to provide for off-street parking and landscaping
around the building;
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was
published it the official newspaper, the Livonian Observer
and City Post, under date of November 16, 1966, and notice of
such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, the
Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone
Company, Consumers Power Company, petitioner, and City
Departments as listed in the Proof of Service.
Mr. Tent advised that the motion was carried and the resolution adopted.
Mr. Tent announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-11-1-32
by Livio Ottino and Frances E. Ottino requesting to rezone
property located on the west side of Farmington Road approx-
imately 525 feet north of Seven Mile Road from RUFA to R-7,
in the east 1/2 of Section 4 for erection of multiple
dwellings.
On motion by Mr. Wrightman, seconded by Mr. Moser, the following resolution
was unanimously adopted:
#12-180-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been
held on December 6, 1966 on Petition 66-11-1-32
as submitted by Frances and Livio Ottino requesting
to rezone property located on the west side of Farmington
Road approximately 525 feet north of Seven Mile Road in
the Southeast 1/4 of Section 4 from R-U-F A to R-7, the City
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 66-11-1-32 be denied for the following reasons:
(1) it is in conflict with the overall development study of
of the northwest sector of the City;
(2) it is completely surrounded by land that will ultimately
be used for commercial purposes, thus decreasing the
desirability of this site for residential use;
(3) the site is too small to accommodate calibre multi-
family development;
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing
was published in the official newspaper, the Livonian '
Observer and City Post, under date of November 16, 1966,
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison
Company, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company, Michigan
Bell Telephone Company, Consumers Power Company, petitioners,
and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service.
5006
I
Mr. Tent stated that the motion was carried and the resolution adopted.
Mr. Tent announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-9-6-12
by the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Council Resolution
No. 923-66 requesting to amend Section 19.08 of Article XIX of
Ordinance No. 543 relative to Council action on Waiver Uses.
On motion by Mr. Moser, seconded by Mrs. Chandler, the following resolution
was unanimously adopted:
#12-181-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been
held on December 6, 1966 on Petition 66-9-6-12 as submitted
by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Council Resolution
923-66 to determine whether or not to amend Section 19.08 of
Article XIX of Ordinance No. 543, the City of Livonia Zoning
Ordinance, as amended, the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend that Petition 66-9-6-12 be denied for the following
reasons:
(1) the existing requirements set forth in the waiver
use section of the Ordinance are reasonable and
are in the best interests of the City;
(2) this would constitute a slow eroding of the effective-
ness of the Zoning Ordinance as originally adopted;
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing
was published in the official newspaper, the Livonian
Observer and City Post, under date of November 16, 1966,
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison
Company, Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company, Michigan
Bell Telephone Company and Consumers Power Company, and
City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service,
Mr. Tent advised that the motion was carried and the resolution adopted.
Mr. Tent announced that the next item on the agenda isPetit ion 66-11-2-20
by Marathon Oil Company requesting to be granted a waiver use
permit to construct a service station, at a portion of property
located on the northwest corner of Seven Mile Road and
Newburgh, in Section 6,
Mr. Tent stated thatthis matter would be taken under advisement.
5007
Mr, Tent announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-11-2-21
by Charles R. Walker requesting to be granted a waiver use
permit to construct an insurance office on Lot 5 of Brightmoor
Home Acres Subdivision located on the east side of Farmington
Road approximately 70 feet north of Roycroft in Section 15.
Mr. Wrightman suggested that if approval is given it he subject to
architectural desigtand site plan approval as submitted at this meeting,
Mr. Hull stated that the petitioner could go to the Building Department
and get a permit; if, however, the plans are different from those approved
he would not receive the permit.
Mr. Wrightman stated he was concerned about the dedication of land.
Mr. Hull suggested that this be added into the resolution.
On motion by Mr. Wrightman, seconded by Mrs. Singer, the following
resolution was unanimously adopted:
#12-182-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having
been held on December 6, 1966 on Petition 66-11-2-21
as submitted by Charles R. Walker, requesting to be
granted a waiver use permit to construct an insurance
office on Lot 5 of Brightmoor Home Acres Subdivision
located on the east side of Farmington Road approximately
70 feet north of Roycroft in Section 15, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 66-11-2-21 be approved sibject to the following
conditions:
(1) architectural approval based on the plans approved by
City Planning Commission at its meeting held
December 6, 1966;
(2) provision be made for road right-of-way;
for the following reasons:
(1) the land is properly zoned to accommodate the use;
(2) the intended use will not conflict with the adjacent
development;
• FURTHER RESOLVED, the notice of the above public hearing
Fid was sent to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner
and City Departments, as listed in the Proof of Service.
Mr. Tent declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted.
04,
5008
Mr. Tent announced that the net item on the agenda is the preliminary
plat approval for Westland Industrial Subdivision located
on the north side of Plymouth Road east of Farmington Road
in the Southwest 1/1: of Section 29.
On motion by Mr. Wrightman, seconded by Mr. Moser, the following resolution
was unanimously adopted:
#12-183-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having
been held on December 6, 1966, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that the preliminary plat of Westland Industrial
Subdivision located on the north side of Plymouth
Road east of Farmington Road in the Southwest 1/4 of
Section 211, be approved for the following reasons:
(1) it is of sufficient design calibre to justify
Planning Commission approval;
(2) it is a logical; physical plan that coincides with
the overall development of the industrial belt;
FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above hearing was sent
to the abutting property owners, proprietor, City
Departments as listed in the Proof of Service and
copies of the plat together with notice have been
sent to the Building Department, Superintendent of
Schools, Fire Depart-lent, Police Department and Parks
and Recreation Department.
Mr. Tent declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted.
Mr. Tent announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition
66-11-8-3 by Murray Jo Nadler, Dale Investment Co., Inc.
requesting permission to use certain property located between
the Industrial Road and the C & 0 Railroad, east of
Farmington Road, for the purpose of setting up a cement
and crushing plant,
Mr. Hull advised the Commission that petitioner stated he had not been
advised that this matter would be on this agenda and requested that it
be adjourned temporarily.
Mrs. Chandler stated that she wished to go on record objecting to this
adjournment.
Mr. Wrightman stated that inasmuc':: as no one is present at the meeting
i and this matter has been checked into, his personal feelings are that
this petition be denied.
5009
Mr. Moser stated that petitioner was not here because he was not
notified.
Mr. Andrew stated that the petitioner should be given a chance to be
heard, stating that the petitioner is only leasing the property and
has no technical knowledge of the operation.
Mr. Tent stated that he agreed with Mrs. Chandler that someone should
be present to answer questions, that no one was at the public hearing
either, and objected to the adjournment.
After a short discussion, Mr. Tent declared that this matter would be
taken under advisement.
Mr. Tent 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 at the Northwest corner of Seven
Mile Road and Sunset in Section 2 from R-3-A to P.S,
Mr. Ponder was present, representing the petitioner,
Mr. Tent asked Mr. Ponder if he had seen the three schemes showing how
this property • could be handled.
Mr. Ponder stated that he had studied these but would prefer to have the
petition stand as is.
On motion by Mr. Wrightman, seconded by Mrs. Singer, the following
resolution was unanimously adopted:
#12-184-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been
held on November 1, 1966 on Petition66-9-1-25 as submitted
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., tte
City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that Petition 66-9-1-25 be denied for the following
reasons:
(1) the highest and best use for this particular
piece of land is for single family residences;
(2) the addition of a large quantity of P,S,zoning
in this area would tend to cause development of
additional professional and commercial use in an
area where it does not belong;
5010
(3) this is in conflict with the overall Master Plan
of the City;
(4) it is in conflict with the Planning Commission's
Commercial and Professional Study;
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing
was published in the official newspaper, the LMonian Observer
and City Post, under date of October 12, 1966, and notice of
such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, the
Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone
Company, Consumers Power Company, petitioner, and City
Departments as listed in the Proof of Service;
Mr. Tent declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted;
Mr. Tent stated that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-7-1-21
by Gordon-Begin requesting to rezone property located east of
Middlebelt Road and south of Meadowlark Street in Section 24
from R-1-A to R-7 for multiple dwellings;
Mr. Ponder was present, representing the petitioners.
Mr. Pollock made a motion that this petition be denied, which was seconded
by Mr. Wrightman.
Mr. Tent asked if petitioners had met with the residents as discussed at
the last study session.
Mr. Ponder replied, yes.
Mr. Dick Forster, 29241 Meadowlark, advised the Commission that the
Directors of the Compton Village Civic Association had asked him to
indicate to the Commission that they are against the rezoning to R-7.
Mrs. Chandler asked if this is a part of petitioner's present operation.
Mr. Ponder stated that this is on Middlebelt, it does not face on
S choolcraf t,
Mrs. Singer stated that she feels that this land, along with the entire
area, should be considered for something, including the Wilson land.
Mr.• Tent stated that the whole Commission is in agreement on this but the
problem is the petition in question at the moment.
Mr, Wrightman stated that many builders have developed and left outlots
for future development and money-making ventures, adding that a just
and good use has to be found for this area. It is a shame when only
a part of the open spaces are used.
z
5011
Mr. Ponder stated that denial of this petition just leaves the land' idle.
He agreed that a meeting should be had with the Planning Department,
Commission; the owners,residents, etc, to try to work out a plan to please
the people, the City and the owners,
Mr. Pollock stated that he made motion to deny and this is no different
from anyone else who leaves outlots for future money-making ventures,
adding that this is always a problem; people purchase homes in good
faith and then the builder tries to change zoning to use the land for other
purposes. He stated that the Commission would be deriolict in their duty
if they failed to deny this petition.
Mr. Tent asked if the owner could get together with the Planning
Department to get some positive direction, petition for it, something
might result.
Mr. Wrightman stated that this should include Mr. Wilson.
The representative of the Civic Association, Mr. Stanley Martin, 29147
Meadowlark, stated they would be glad to meet with the owner of the property
if th y would discuss what they have in mind.
On motion by Mr. Pollock, seconded by Mr. Wrightman, the following resolution
was adopted:
#12-185-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having
been held on November 15, 1966 on Petition 66-7-1-21
as submitted by Gordon Begin Company requesting to
rezone property located east of Middlebelt Road and
south of Meadowlark Street in Section 24 from R-1-A to R-7,
the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the
City Council that Petition 66-7-1-21 be denied for the
following reasons:
(1) there is already a great quantity of multi-family
zoning in this sector of the City;
(2) it could adversely effect the adjacent residential
development;
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing
was published in the official newspaper, the Li'ronian
Observer and City Post,under date of October 26, 1966
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit
Edison Company, the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company,
Michigan Bgll Telephone Compauyt Consumers Power Company,
petitioner, and City Departments as listed in the proof of
service.
5012
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Moser, Pollock, Singer, Tent, Wrightman
NAYS : None
ABSTAIN: Chandler
Mr. Tent declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted.
Mr. Tent 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 RLFA to P.S.
Mr. Mies was present for the petitioner.
He was asked if he would be agreeable to only utilizing the front 300'
or 1/2 of the existing land being petitioned at this time.
Mr. Mies stated that this was to be developed into a dental and medical
complex and would like to be in a position to develop it on that basis
and this would require that the whole depth be utilized for that purpose.
He stated that the petitioner needs a larger building and the purpose here
is to build more than a building, a complex; adding that this parcel has
the necessary depth as well as C-2 zoning adjacent thereto which is conducive
to this sort of development.
Mr. Hull felt that it was reasonable to grant some limited quantity of
P.S. zoning but to allow so much of it towards Munger in relationship to
residential property will complicate the development of all the land in
the area and could virtually make it impossible to come up with a good
overall plan for the area.
Mr. Mies stated that the petitioner did not want to build the three
buildings at this time; it is an economic fact of life that you have
to know what you can do and what you cannot do.
Mr. Tent raised the question of the fence which would be constructed
as required by law.
Mrs. Chandler asked how the Doctor could place a building and justify
placement of that building with the future in mind unless he knows
where he stands.
Mr. Hullasked how they will know that the Doctor will build the buildings
and felt that the Commission should be very careful in the amount of P.S.
zoning they hand out. He felt that if petitioner is given the 600' depth
the land to the west will also want to rezone, adding that he felt 300'
would be adequate for the doctor's purposes.
5013
Mr. Tent suggested that this matter be tabled for further study.
This was followed by a general discussion on the matter, the question of
possibly approving conditioned upon the buildings being erected, which
the Assistant City Attorney stated could not be done - you cannot condition
change of zoning; the question of the wall was discussed at length.
Mrs. Singer stated that there was no provision made for trees, etc,
Mr. Mies stated that the open areas now shown for parking will have land-
scaping.
Mr. Tent stated that the Commission has no picture of the type of buildings
proposed to be built.
Mr. Mies stated he would bring one in.
Mr. Hull stated that the Commission should realize that if they appro e
such a petition they would have to grant others the same privilege. Be
feels that this pencil-strip type of zoning in a residential neighborhood
does not make sense.
Mr. Tent suggested that this matter be studied further and have Dr. Zadeh
attend the study session.
a Mrs. Chandler made a motion that this petition be approved as submitted
but received no support.
This was taker under advisement, to be discussed at the next Planning
Commission meeting with the possibility of a special meeting being called
following the study session.
Mr. Tent advised that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-9-1-26
by the City Planning Commission to rezone parcel 33Tlal located
north of Ann Arbor Trail approximately 800' west of Wayne Road
in Section 33 from RUF to P.S.
On motion by Mr. Pollock, seconded by Mr. Wrightman, the following resolution
was unanimously adopted:
#12-186-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having
been held on October 11, 1966 on Petition 66-9-1-26
initiated by the City Planning Commission on its own
motion to rezone parcel 33Tlal located north of Ann
Arbor Trail approximately 800' west of Wayne Road in
Section 33 from RUF to P.S., the City Planning Commission
does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
66-9-1-26 be approved for the following reasons:
5014
(1) this is a logical extension of the existing
P.S. zoning in the area;
(2) the additional P.S. zoning can be terminated by
a logical, physical barrier at Oporto;
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing
was published in the official newspaper, the Livonian
Observer and City Post, under date of September 21, 1966,
and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison
Company, the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan
Bell Telephone Company, Consumers Power Company, petitioner
and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service.
Mr. Tent declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted.
Mr. Tent announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 66-7-2-15
by David D. Phipps requesting to be granted a waiver use
permit to build a convalescent home on parcel 33T1a2a2a
located on the north side of Ann Arbor Trail approximately
570 feet west of Wayne Road in Section 33.
On motion made by Mr. Moser, seconded by Mr. Wrightman, the following
resolution was unanimously adopted:
#12-187-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having
been held on August 9, 1966 on Petition 66-7-2-15
as submitted by David D. Phipps requesting to be
granted a waiver use permit to build a convalescent
home on parcel 33T1a2a2a located on the north side of
Ann Arbor Trail approximately 570 feet west of Wayne
Road in Section 33, the City Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
66-7-2-16 be approved subject to the following condition:
(1) Planning Commission site plan and architectural
approval;
for the following reasons:
(1) there is a need for this type of use in this sector of the
City;
(2) all the standards of the zoning district have been met;
(3) this use will not adversely effect adjacent development;
s
5015
tio
FURTHER RESOLVED, 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. Tent declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted.
Mr. Tent stated that the next item on the agenda is a letter dated
11/10/66 from Frank A. Kerby, Chief Inspector, requesting
a bond release in connection with Topsoil Application
#65-9-5-1, Permit No, 103, located in the Southwest 1/4
of Section 29. (Plymouth-Levan Industrial Subdivision)
On motion by Mr, Wrightman, seconded by Mr, Pollock, the following
resolution was Unanimously adopted:
#12-188-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the recommendations and report
of the Bureau of Inspection dated November 10, 1966,the
City Planning Commission does hereby authorize the release
of the bond dated October 15, 1966 in the amount of $15,350.00
by Travelers Indemnity Company, Hartford, 'Connecticut, and Cash
Bond #MR 27436 in the amount of $1,535.00, posted with the
City in connection with topsoil removal operations performed
under Permit No, 103 (Application #66-9-5-1) issued to
George Cummins & Sons, 20945 W. Seven Mile Road , 'Detroit,
Michigan and Ply-Van Corporation, 26711 Woodward, Huntington
Woods, Michigan; further, it appearing from the above report
that all ordinances, rules and regulations have been complied
with the City Clerk and City Treasurer are hereby authorized
to do all things necessary to the full performance of this
resolution.
Mr. Tent declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted.
Mr. Tent stated that the next item on the agenda is a motion by the City
Planning Commission, pursuant to Industrial Development
Commission Resolution 147-10-66, to hold a public hearing to
determine whether or not to amend the Master Thoroughfare Plan,
Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, to provide for
a road pattern in the North 1/2 of Sections 28 and 29 between
Stark and Levan Roads.
On motion by Mr. Pollock, seconded by Mr. Moser the following resolution
was unanimously adopted:
#12-189-66 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 23.01 of the City of
Livonia Zoning Ordinance, No. 543, as amended, and the
koi,
5016
request of the Industrial Development Commission by its
resolution #147-10-66, the City Planning Commission does
hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held
to determine whether or not to amend the Master Thoroughfare
Plan, Part I of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia, to
provide for a road pattern in the North 1/2 of Sections28
and 29 between Stark and Levan Roads;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a hearing be held and notice
be given as provided in Section 23.01 of the Zoning Ordinance
of the City of Livonia, and that there shall be a report
submitted and recommendation thereon to the City Council.
Mr. Tent declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted.
Mr. Tent announced that the next item on the agenda is a motion by the
City Planning Commission to adopt a resolution' in
support of the St, Mary Hospital expansion,
On motion by Mr. Wrightman, seconded by Mr. Pollock, the following
I
resolution was unanimously adopted:
#12-190-66 RESOLVED that, the City of Livonia Planning
Commission does hereby go on record as indicating
their support of St. Mary Hospital in expanding
its facilities to 400 beds plus related facilities; further, the
City of Livonia Planning Commission believes that the
additional facilities are absolutely necessary to
adequately service our ever increasing population of over 170,000
people plus its large non-residential work force will need
this quantity of medical facilities.
Mr. Tent declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted.
Mr. Tent announced that the next item on the agenda is the motion by the
City Planning Commission to hold a public hearing to
determine whether or not to amend the Master School and
Park Plan, Part V of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia,
to include additional pork land in Section 9.
On motion by Mr. Wrightman, seconded by Mr. Pollock, the following
resolution was unanimously adopted:
#12-191-66 RESOLVED, that pursuant to Sectiott 23.01 of the City of
Livonia Zoning Ordinance, No. 543, as amended, the City
5017
Planning Commission does hereby establish and order that
a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to
amend the Master School and Park Plan, Part V of the Master
Plan of the City of Livonia, to include Wayne County
Bureau of Taxation Parcel No. 09D12h, described as follows:
The west 3/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 9 except
the south 1210 feet thereof; also except that part
thereof described as beginning at the W. 1/4 corner of
Section 9 and proceeding thence due south along the
west section line 1435 feet; thence N. 89° 47' 45" E.
910 feet; thence N. 9° 53' 30" W 294.11 feet; thence
N 10° 21' 40" E. 275.30 feet; thence N. 10° 17' 20" W.
171.99 feet ; thence N 25° 50' 32" W. 183.19 feet; thence
N 2° 25' 50" E. 165.13 feet; thence N. 7° 15' 20" E.
166.25 feet; thence N 33° 31' 40" E. 195.27 feet;
thence due north 43.0 feet; thence N. 89° 48' 10" W.
along the E. and W. 1/4 Section line 915.0 feet to the
point of beginning. (37.77 acres)
IT IS FIRMER RESOLVED that, a hearing be held and notice
be given as provided in Section 23.01 of the Zoning Ordinance
of the City of Livonia, and that there shall be a report
submitted and recommendation thereon to the City Council.
Mr. Tent declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted.
Mr. Tent declared that the next item on the agenda was the election of
officers of the City Planning Commission.
All ballots were received, opened and counted; the following officers
having been re-elected to office:
Chairman - - Charles W. Walker
Vice Chairman - - Raymond W. Tent
Secretary - - Harry H. Wrightman.
Mr. Tent announced that the next item on the agenda was the approval of
minutes for the meetings of May 31, June 14, July 12,
August 7, September 6, September 27 and October 11, 1966.
On motion by Mr. Wrightman, seconded by Mr. Pollock, the following
resolution was unanimously adopted:
#12-192-66 RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission does hereby
approve the minutes of the meetings held May 31, June 14,
j
5018
July 12, August 7, September 6, September 27 and
October 11, 1966.
Mr, Tent declared the motion carried and the resolution adopted.
On motion by Mr. Moser, seconded by Mr. Pollock, and unanimously
adopted, the City Planning Commission adjourned its 228th Special
Meeting held December 6, 1966 at approximately 12;20 a.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Harry Wrghtman ecretary
Attest:
Raymo, . W. Tent, Vice hairman