Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1988-02-23 4 10130 MINUTES OF THE 553rd REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, February 23, 1988, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 553rd Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 New Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Donald Vyhnalek, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. , with approximately 45 interested persons in the audience. Members present: Donald Vyhnalek R. Lee Morrow Sue Sobolewski Donna J. Naidow Richard Straub James C. McCann Herman Kluver Michael Soranno William LaPine Members absent: Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director; and Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV, were also present. Mr. Vyhnalek informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and decide the question. If a petition involves a waiver of use request and the request is denied, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City Council; otherwise the petition is terminated. The Commission holds the only public hearing on a preliminary plat and/or a vacating petition. Planning Commission resolutions do not become effective until seven days after tonight. The Planning Commission has reviewed the petitions upon their filing and have been furnished by the staff with approving and denying reso- d lutions. The Commission may use them or not use them depending upon the outcome of the hearing tonight. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 87-12-1-42 by E. Pat O'Connell for Disabled American Veterans Chapter #114 to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Merriman and Auburndale in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 3, from RUFB to C-1. Mr. Shane: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Department noting that Seven Mile Road has not been dedicated to its fullest extent (60 ft. ) adjacent to the petition area. Also, they have been advised by representatives of the Building Department that it may be necessary for the petitioners to seek approval of the Building Code Board of Appeals as well as the Zoning Board of Appeals relative to the use of the existing home in the manner outlined in the petition. There is also a letter from John D. Dinan stating his objection to the rezoning of this parcel but not to the use of the home for a meeting hall. Mr. Vyhnalek: Does Mr. Dinan own the shopping center? Mr. Shane: Yes, he does. Pat O'Connell, representing the D.A.V. , Chapter 114, P. 0. Box 52694, Livonia: The membership of our Chapter would like to make available information about our organization to encourage a favorable vote. We are a national organization. A large percentage of our members are Livonia ` w 10131 residents. We hold monthly meetings on the third Monday of each month. For the past eighteen to twenty years, we have met through the courtesy of the City of Livonia in the senior citizens center. We have had no problems in the past twenty years. It is our desire to use the exist- ing building, with modifications. We plan to have our office and computers there and to store our records and to create an office so our service officers can function. We counsel and assist any veteran `ew who lives in and around Livonia. That is why we have to have an office. We have tried unsuccessfully for the last five years to find a place to headquarter in Livonia. All of our members love Livonia and would do anything to create a better atmosphere in Livonia. We are members of the Livonia Chamber of Commerce. We also conduct an Americanism program in cooperation with the Livonia high schools and we give cheks to needy families at Christmas time and to Veterans when hospitalized. We feel we can be a good neighbor in this building. Our organization includes many disabled veterans and an auxiliary. We are only asking to meet quietly in a memorial home. Mr. Vyhnalek: The building may have to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals and Build- ing Code Board of Appeals. Mr. O'Connell: Yes, we recognize that. We just didn't know what sequence it would be. Mr. Morrow: I would like to ask why this comes before us tonight in the form of a request for C-1 as opposed to some other type zoning. Mr. Vyhnalek: That was brought up at the study meeting and there is no other classi fication for this. Mr. Shane: There are two choices. C-1, but it would be required to follow that with a waiver use approval, or C-2, where it would be permitted. The petitioner was advised that the C-1 is more restrictive and complies with the C-1 on the east. It is a commercial use and that is why it is in a commercial district. There is no other opportunity for this organization unless it was used for an office only. Then it would be professional service, but this is going to be a meeting hall and re- quires either C-1 with a waiver or C-2. Mr. Morrow: One of the things the Planning Commission can't do is condition zoning. When C-1 comes before us, we have to assess all the things in the Ordinance that would apply to that property. Mr. LaPine: It was my understanding at the study session that your organization has purchased the property. Mr. O'Connell: That is correct. Mr. LaPine: At the time you were contemplating the purchase, did you have any idea there would be any problem using the property for this use? Mr. O'Connell: No. We were encouraged and people on the Council had encouraged us verbally. There are a lot of people in City government that know we have been looking for property. I think that what we did, more or less, was take these verbal statements that were made to heart that we wouldn't have a problem. I don't think we would have bought the house if we knew we would have a problem. 10132 Mr. LaPine: I have nothing against the D.A.V. but the problem is this. There is no guarantee down the line that it will be feasible to use the building for this and if it doesn't work out and you consequently decide to sell the property, then it could be used for any commercial use. We have no guarantee that this property will stay in your hands and once we rezone that property it opens up a Pandora's box for the other people who want to rezone. Mr. O'Connell: I have felt since I have gotten into this that maybe this is a situa- tion where permission could be granted with a restriction that would be binding, if that is at all possible, that the D.A.V. could use it for that purpose only and no one else could use it for anything else. Mr. LaPine: Once it is zoned C-1, the zoning goes with the land and if you sell it to an oil company, they would have the zoning for their use. Mr. Soranno: What did you intend to do with the remaining property? Mr. O'Connell: In the summer, we might have a picnic or something like that. If we could only have half the property -- but we can't only buy half of it. What we need really is only the house. Mr. Soranno: When you bought, were you looking at the house or the location? Mr. O'Connell: Well, the location, and being on the main road. It was pointed out that as long as we were on a main road, we wouldn't have too much trouble. Presently, I feel I would like to build something like they have down on Seven Mile some day but that would cost a minimum of $600,000. Mr. Soranno: Have you looked at any other properties that may be able to accommodate you? `" Mr. O'Connell: We would be open to anything but we would like to stay in Livonia. We are one of the largest chapters without a home. Lawrence Schweiger, 36894 Sunnydale: How long has the C-1 to the east been there? Mr. Shane: It was rezoned about ten years ago. Mr. Schweiger: It was rezoned to commercial so the same problem existed than as exists now. My son looked at the house but didn't buy it because it is too commercial. It will never sell as residential property. There is one piece of commercial and what would be the objection to adding another piece. If someone else did it, what precludes us from doing it? Mr. Morrow: I think that was what Mr. LaPine was alluding it. Mr. Vyhnalek: Would a wall have to be put up between the commercial and residential? Mr. Shane: Yes, 175' east and west, and 800' north and south. Mr. Schweiger: We have had many changes there and a special approval at Farmington and Seven Mile Road. They were able to work out a situation where it was agreeable and that is what we are hoping to do -- work out something agreeable. 10133 Raffaele Toppi, 31640 Seven Mile: I own property on Seven Mile and I object to commercial zoning. I think if the commercial expands, I will be pushed out. Boris Petcoff, Farmington Hills: I have been a member of the D.A.V. for twenty years. We are just a bunch of old-timers looking for a place to hold meetings. We had a cursory examination by a member of the City staff and this is a well built structure, suitable for occupancy of the type we are ask- ing for. We are thinking that we could be an extremely good neighbor. slaw We don't have excessive traffic. We are not looking to build a large structure. There are two gravel driveways at the moment and we plan to put in a new driveway. I think the type of use we are looking for will be a modest change in the building. We are looking or a place to have meetings and a service office and, in general, just a place to get together. We are interested in occupancy; we are not interested in the real estate business. We are not interested in selling it to a gas station. Mr. Straub: Unfortunately, from our standpoint, our responsibility is to really separate the issue that you are raising from the issue of rezoning. We have to consider only the issue of zoning and divorce it from what you are guaranteeing as a long-term commitment to the property. I can think of a no more creditable organization in Livonia but we have to consider that an irrelevant aspect of the matter. Mr. Petcoff: I understand that but I think the type of organization we have is what you should be giving some consideration to. Mr. Kluver: The issue is basically zoning and the impact of the zoning in the area. Your organization has made an important contribution to the community and country, however, your purchase of the subject property should have been contingent on the change of zoning. The realtor was not up front with your organization as this is a high impact area and any change creates a ripple effect to the entire quarter section. However, the zoning is the key issue and if changed it will always be there regard- ``w less of your intended use. In the future, when looking for a site, you should consider the impact of change. Jerry Cislo, 31754 Clarita: I object to this rezoning on the grounds that once that is rezoned to commercial, the whole strip on Seven Mile will be re- zoned to commercial. There has been some construction to the east and you can see it just spreading and I don't want to see the over- commercialization of Seven Mile because of the traffic. I have nothing against the D.A.V. but I don't feel that C-1 would do us any good there. Mr. Morrow: Bringing the zoning down to the corner to accommodate this use with the back portion residential could create a buffer all the way around the residential and it would be a minor extension of the C-1 in order to accommodate this use. Mr. Shane: I think that is a compromising solution to be considered but it still increases the amount of C-1 in the area. The north half would still be residential. That is a better zoning situation than to have the whole 3-1/2 acres C-1 but it could send a message to other developers that the City is willing to rezone to C-1. Mr. McCann: If you restrict the amount of C-1, it would make it less advantageous for a future commercial use going in there. Also, what you intend to 10134 put in there is a perfect buffer between the existing residential and the commercial. I would like to ask if Mr. O'Connell would like to consider that or perhaps table the matter. Mr. O'Connell: It isn't something I can give you an immediate answer on but we are open to anything to let us do what we want to do. Mr. LaPine: If you rezone the first 100' , how do you get into the rear of the property? If someone buys it off, how do they get in there? Mr. Shane: It is my understanding that the zoning would go north but leave a strip on the west for access. Dennis Watson, 31625 Seven Mile: Personally, I don't want it rezoned to C-l. If someone looked at the area for residential, they wouldn't want to purchase property next to commercial and so on down the line. I was told at the time that they looked at another piece of property but it was too small for their purpose because there was not enough parking. Now, they are talking that they wouldn't be using the back of this property for parking. I don't want any more commercial there. When I bought my house, the existing commercial was there but I don't want any more. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 87-12-1-42 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. LaPine, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted, it was #2-27-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 23, 1988, on Petition 87-12-1-42 by E. Pat O'Connell for Disabled American Veterans Chapter #114 to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Merriman and Auburndale in the Southeast 1/4 of `a. Section 3, from RUFB to C-1, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 87-12-1-42 be denied for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning will encourage similar requests for changes of zoning on property to the west along Seven Mile Road. (2) The proposed change of zoning represents a further encroachment of a commercial zoning district into a residential neighborhood to the detriment of the residential area. (3) The proposed change of zoning is contrary to the Future Land Use Plan which recommends residential land use for the subject area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 10135 Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 87-12-2-59 by Oil Dispatch, Inc. for waiver use approval to construct a quick oil change facility on property located on the northwest corner of Five Mile and Middlebelt Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14. Mr. Shane: A letter in the file from the Engineering Division states that there are no City maintained storm sewers readily available to service this site. There is also a letter from Philip Bucalo, owner of the Auto Care Center at 37449 Five Mile Road, stating his objections to this petition. Charles Silver, 23400 Telegraph Road, Southfield: Our proposal is to construct a quick oil change facility on this corner. Mr. Soranno: What are the hours? Mr. Silver: 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on week-ends. Fridays and Saturdays are our busiest days. Mr. Kluver: Are there deficiencies in this site for this type of facility? Mr. Shane: There is on the setback from Five Mile and on six parking spaces but they could provide them off site. Mr. Kluver: On the northeast corner of Five and Middlebelt, there is a 76 station. On the southeast, there is an Amoco and there is a Mobil station in the area. We are going back to 1955 if we put a rapid service on every major intersection. We went through a cycle where we improved Livonia. We are going back to 1955 and I think it is wrong. Geo- - graphically and logistically it is wrong. Roy Marcel, 29420 Five Mile: My property is adjacent and including the property we are talking about. The 76 Station is not a full service station. The only full station is the Amoco. The building they plan to put up will definitely improve the property. We have outgrown our business and it is impossible to expand. We would have to shut down. I believe they will be an enhancement in Livonia. I think they will make a nice corner out of it. They have a nice, attractive building with good landscaping and I can't see where that would be a problem. I have been in the service station business for seventeen years. As far as it being too close to another station to make a living, I would have to recommend to the writer of the letter to get his act together if he is afraid of losing business. I have been in Livonia for twelve years and plan on staying here but we need a place to expand our business. Mrs. Jeanne, Franklin Square Apartments: I have lived at this intersection all my life and I would like to say that I would like to see the oil change place come because I don't know what else you would want to put on that corner. If the cake place does move out, the corner will deter- iorate. I think they would be an asset. Mr. Kluver: This petition as it stands cannot be approved by this Commission because it does not meet the requirements of the Ordinance. There are deficiencies in setback, therefore, I don't believe the Com- mission can approve any change unless it meets the Ordinance. fir.► 10136 Mr. Nagy: It is part of your responsibility to determine if there is compliance and if there isn't to either deny it or to table it to give them a chance to correct those deficiencies. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 87-12-2-59 closed. �► On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. LaPine and unanimously adopted, it was #2-28-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 23. 1988 on Petition 87-12-2-59 by Oil Dispatch, Inc. for waiver use approval to construct a quick oil change facility on property located on the north- west corner of Five Mile and Middlebelt Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 87-12-2-59 be denied for the following reasons: (1) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed use is in compliance with the waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543. (2) The proposed use fails to comply with Section 11.09 of Zoning Ordinance with respect to required building setbacks. (3) The proposed use is contrary to the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance which, among other things, is to promote and encourage a balanced and appropriate mix of uses and not over saturate an area with similar type uses as is being proposed. (4) The subject site does not have the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 88-1-2-1 by O/E learning (Motech) for waiver use approval to operate an auto- mobile body school on property located on the west side of Stark Road between Plymouth Road and Schoolcraft Road in the north 1/2 of Section 28. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Department stating they have no objection to the proposal. Bob Henricksen, 8012 Randy Drive, Westland, Director of Motech: We will use this for a separate classroom to train students in auto body work. Mrs. Sobolewski: Is this over and above the one you already have? Mr. Henricksen: Yes. Mrs. Sobolewski: It will be for a classroom only? 10137 Mr. Henricksen: Yes. Mrs. Sobolewski: Do the classes run all year long? Mr. Henricksen: Forty-eight out of fifty-two weeks. There are breaks in between. Mrs. Sobolewski: How big is the staff? Mr. Henricksen: Eight instructors. There will be no more than eighty students in the building at any one time. Mrs. Sobolewski: What are the hours of operation? Mr. Henricksen: 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. , five nights a week. Mr. LaPine: There will be no junk cars on location because I understand this will not be a body shop. Mr. Henricksen: There will be half cars and the like inside the building but we do not work on cars for the general public. We don't do work outside. Mr. LaPine: Where do you get the cars the students work on? Mr. Henricksen: Normally from the Ford and GM crash program. Mr. LaPine: Do you repair them? Mr. Henricksen: No, we cut up the vehicle while taping it and put it together again. Mr. Kluver: All the welding and cutting -- will you be doing any painting? Mr. Henricksen: Yes. Mr. Kluver: Will that meet the OSHA standards? Mr. Henricksen: As far as we are aware. We have no intention of constructing a painting facility on our own. We have a contract with DeVilbis. They would pull the permit and construct the booth. We have spoken to the Fire Marshall about that. We will have ten booths. Mr. Kluver: This also encompasses the use of tools used in a general repair facility. What I would like to see if the petition is approved is is that we have a letter from the various departments in Livonia that are involved in safety matters -- sprinkling, ventilating, the acetylene systems, etc. There could be an explosion there or a serious fire. Mr. Henricksen: We would welcome those inspections because these will be students. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 88-1-2-1 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Straub, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it was 0 10138 #2-29-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 23, 1988 on Petition 88-1-2-1 by O/E learning (Motech) for waiver use approval to operate an automobile body school on property located on the west side of Stark Road between Plymouth Road and Schoolcraft Road in the North 1/2 of Section 28, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 88-1-2-1 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that the Site Plan marked Sheet SD-1, dated 6-16-87, prepared by Thomas W. Kurmas & Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (2) that there shall be no damaged or junk cars or car parts located on the site. for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use complies with all waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 16.11 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. (2) The subject site has the capacity to accommodate the pro- posed use. (3) The proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. '04111' Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 88-1-2-2 by Michael J. Vorgitch for waiver use approval for an SDM License to be utilized within an existing party store located on the south side of Ann Arbor Road between Eckles and Hix Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 31 . Mr. Nagy: The Engineering Department states in a letter dated 1/27/88 that they have no objections to the proposal. Mr. C. R. Charest, Jr. : Mr. Vorgitch owns the commercial property to the east and west of the subject property. He built in 1968 and located within the building a beauty salon, a Quik Pik store and an insurance office. Mr. Vorgitch has recently re-acquired possession of the building after a lease of twenty years has terminated. he intends to develop a party store and would like an SDM License. There was an SDM License there at one time. There has also been an SDD for a number of years. Our concern in coming before the Planning Commission is so there would no question later on. In recent years, there was an amendment to the Ordinance and there had been a transfer of the SDM to another owner and that is why we are before the Planning Commission for a waiver of use. Mr. LaPine: Mr. Vorgitch is going to operate the party store? a,` 10139 Mr. Charest: Yes, that is correct, though I believe his son will conduct the business. The papers are in the process for the transfer of the SDM License to Mr. Vorgitch. Clayton Scholz, 38777 Northfield: On the agenda, it says existing party store but that store has been stripped and the former owner is gone. Is Mr. Vorgitch asking for a new license or a license from the previous owner? fir. Mr. Vyhnalek: I believe it was said that he attempting to purchase it from Mr. George, the former owner. Mr. Scholz: I have a letter which was circulated in our subdivision stating that this would make six stores with beer and wine sales and I question that this is an asset. That store is gone now and five other stores are there that can serve alcoholic beverages. I would appreciate it if the Planning Commission can look into this further to see if there is a better use for this building that would be more beneficial to the neighborhood. This party store has had numerous problems and rob- beries. This letter from the association expresses our feelings and I would like to submit it to the Commission. Mr. Charest: Mr. Vorgitch has had this property for many years before the sub- division was built. This party store has been in existence for at least twenty years. Over the years there have been problems with maintenance of the property. Mr. Vorgitch has gone to court many times for the tenants regarding the condition of the property. The latest tenant has removed the fixtures that were in there. It is Mr. Vorgitch's plan to refurbish and re-establish the party store operation with the SDM. This party store predated other business locations in the area. All the other locations have been approved by this Commission and Council. We are not trying to pack the area with liquor stores. Mr. McCann: I understand from the notes that it is not necessary that Mr. Vorgitch get this approval. He can operate this use. Mr. Nagy: That is the position the Department takes. The mere vacation of the use by a tenant does not show an attempt by the owner to abandon the use. He is trying by this petition to make this non-conforming use conforming. Shaugi Mughannem, 9357 Knolson: There has been nothing but trash on that corner. All sorts of debris and broken bottles. It never has been kept up. We have enough problems as it is. Within a one-mile radius, there are lots of stores with liquor sales. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 88-1-2-2 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mr. McCann and unanimously adopted, it was #2-30-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 23, 1988 on Petition 88-1-2-2 by Michael J. Vorgitch for waiver use approval for an SDM License to be utilized within an existing party store located on the south side of Ann Arbor Road between Eckles and Hix Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 31, the City Planning Commission does hereby 10140 recommend to the City Council that Petition 88-1-2-2 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use is in compliance with all waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 11.03 k and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. (2) The subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. (3) Until recently, an SDM License was utilized at this location for a long period of time, therefore, the proposed use has been established for the subject property. This waiver use will therefore make a non-conforming use conforming. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver: I believe it would be in order to send a letter to the Inspection Department indicating that there has been some areas within that development which could be checked regarding tidiness. We are all in favor of keeping it clean. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 88-2-2-3 by Selectcare for waiver use approval for general office use within an existing building located on the west side of Farmington Road between Eight Mile Road and Norfolk Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 4. Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file indicates that the Engineering Department has no objection to this proposal. Tom Jepsen, Manager, Selectcare, 363 W. Big Beaver, Troy: Our headquarters are located in Troy. We are a tenant of Dr. Nakadar and have been since 1983. We lease two buildings. Since 1983, we haven't been able to use the subject building. We thought our growth would be faster than it has been. We have had the property on the market for two years and we just recently received an offer from a general office tenant to take the property from us. Mr. Vyhnalek: How many years do you have to go on your lease? Mr. Jepsen: Approximately six years. Mr. Kluver: Who is your prospective user? Mr. Jepsen: A Title Insurance Company. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 88-2-2-3 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver and seconded by Mr. Morrow, 10141 #i2-31-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on February 23, 1988 on Petition 88-2-2-3 by Selectcare for waiver use approval for general office use within an existing building located on the west side of Farmington Road between Eight Mile Road and Norfolk Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 4, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 88-2-2-3 be approved subject to adherence to the previously approved Site Plan for the subject site for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use is in compliance with all of the waiver use standards and requirements as set forth in Section 9.03 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543. (2) The subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use. (3) The proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surround- ing uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver, Morrow, McCann, Straub, Soranno, Sobolewski, Naidow, Vyhnalek NAYS: LaPine Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, announced that this concludes the public hearing portion of the meeting and the Commission will proceed with items pending before it. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Straub and unanimously adopted, it was #2-32-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, the City Planning Commission does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to rezone property located on the north side of Five Mile Road, east of the I-96 Freeway in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 18 from R.E. to P.S. AND THAT, notice of the above hearing shall be given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski, seconded by Mr. Soranno and unanimously adopted, it was #2-33-88 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, the City Planning Commission does hereby establish and order that a Public Hearing be held to determine whether or not to rezone property located on the Northwest corner of Five Mile Road and Levan Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17 from C-1 to P.S. err► 10142 AND THAT, notice of the above hearing shall be given in accordance with the provisions of Section 12.06 of Zoning ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, announced the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno and seconded by Mr. Straub, it was New #2-34-88 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 552nd Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on February 9, 1988 are approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Soranno, Straub, McCann, Kluver, Vyhnalek NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Naidow, Sobolewski, Morrow, LaPine Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, announced that Item No. 9 on the agenda, the Final Plat for Willow Woods Subdivision is removed from the agenda and would be taken up at a subsequent Planning Commission meeting. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno and seconded by Mr. McCann, it was #2-35-88 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 88-2-8-4 by Stamford Plaza Partnership for approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning ordinance //543 in connection with a proposal to construct a retail complex on the south side of Seven Mile Road between Farmington and Gill Roads in Section 9 be approved subject to the following conditions: N"' (1) that Site Plan 87-11-6, dated 1/25/88, prepared by Ambit Land Surveyors, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Plans prepared by Thomas W. Kurmas, Architect, which are hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (3) that Landscape Plan 87-11-6, dated 2/9/88, Sheet 1, prepared by Stamford Plaza Partnership, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to and all landscape materials installed on the site prior to building occupancy. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Soranno, McCann, Straub, Sobolewski, Morrow, Kluver, Naidow, Vyhnalek NAYS: None ABSTAIN: LaPine Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. `w. 10143 Mr. Nagy: A letter has just been submitted in connection with Sign Permit Application by Beacon Sign Company. It is from Sue Weaver, Project Manager, Stuart Frankel Development Company, and states for the record that they have been repaving the parking lot at Newburgh Plaza in sections and have done approximately two thirds of the lot to date. It states that it is their plan to continue this program in 1988 which will include the drive by Big Boy. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. McCann and unanimously adopted, it was #2-36-88 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the Sign Permit Application by Beacon Sign on behalf of Newburgh Plaza for a wall sign identifying an interior mini-mall located at 37097-37399 Six Mile Road subject to the following condition: (1) that the Wall Sign shown on the Plan dated 2/2/88, prepared by Fairmont Sign Company, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. #2-37-88 RESOLVED that, following nomination of Mr. Morrow by Mr. McCann, Mr. Straub by Mr. Kluver, and Mr. Soranno by Mrs. Sobolewski, Mr. Morrow is hereby duly elected to fill the vacant Office of Vice Chairman created by the resignation of Mr. C. Russ Smith from the Planning Commission, such term of office to expire on June 21, 1988 at which meeting officers of the Planning Commission will be elected for the term July 1, 1988 through June 30, 1989. Mr. Vyhnalek, Chairman, declared the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 553rd Regular Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on February 23, 1988 was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION :-)LA:Iiirto--- \J� Donna J. Naid , Secretary ATTEST: c A�S L • " 1 tAAA. Donald Vyhnalek, Chairman ac