HomeMy WebLinkAbout` 5581
MINUTES OF THE 205th REGULAR MEETING AND
A PUBLIC HEARING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA
On Tuesday, May 13, 1969, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 205th Regular Meeting and a Public Hearing at the Livonia City Hall.
Mr. Raymond Tent, Chairman, called the Public Hearing to order at approximately'
8:20 p.m. with approximately 40 interested persons in the audience.
Members Present: Raymond W. Tent Robert Colomina Harry Wrightman
Donald Heusted Marvin Moser Joel LaBo
Charles Walker Frank Santo
Members absent: None
Messrs. Don Hull, Planning Director; John J. Nagy, Assistant Planning Director;
and Robert Menzies of the City Planning Department; Harry Tatigian, City Attorney,
and Gary Sackett, Assi. tent City Attorney were present.
Mr. Wrightman announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-2-7
by the Simone Corporation requesting to be granted a waiver use
permit to builj a home for the Armenian aged on property located on
the west side of Middlebelt Road, south of Wentworth Avenue in the
Southeast 1/4 o Section 14.
Mr. Tent stated that there is a letter on file from the Chief City Engineer
dated March 17, 1969 which indicates the city water and sanitary sewers are
available on the west side of ilic._lebelt; that the main problem is the storm
drainage which is presently inadequate. A 20' storm drain easement has been
signed for this.
Mr. Tent stated that everything else is in order and called the Petitioner to
make his u:-esentation,
Mr. Ernest Dyer, c,f the Simouc Corporation, 15800 W. McNichols Road, Detroit
was present and made the presentation adding that the Commission has the
drawings of what is proposed to be built.
Mr. Tent asked if anyone in toe audience is interested in this petition; there
was one person Tait;•. property ac ocs the street who stated she was in favor of
this petition,
Mr. Tatigian at this time wanted the record to show that the rear portion of the
property owned by she petitioner which is not part of this petition but is the
rear portion of the land in quest-on is designated as part of the Master Park
Plan and that repreatives of the petitioner have been cooperative in executing
an option to purchase 7:: the City; w:,i.ch purchase has already been at:"hor;s<ed
by the City Council, anf� to sell the property at the appraised valuation.
Mr. Dyer stated the home will look like the Armeniaa church in Northland, i.e.
it will have the gold roof, He further advised that there would be no sick
people as this would be strictly n home for retired pe rso s, c cc ialo scent
home,
5582
Mr. Tent asked if there is a question of dedication of Middlebelt Road.
Mr. Nagy advised there was no right of way needed; the property had already
been dedicated.
Mr. Hull advised the Commission that there are no problems.
Mr. Talker referred to the land to the west of the development as vacant and
asked if there were future plans to purchase more land.
Mr. Dyer said, no; no present plans, but that would be up to the home.
Mr. 'lrightman asked if the quantity of land in the petition will suffice.
•
Mr. Hull answered, yes.
Mr. Tent asked if anyone was present who wished to be heard. There was no one.
Mr. Tent, Chairman, stated the item will be taken under advisement.
Mr. Wrightman announced the second item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-2-8 by
Herbert L. Grosberg requesting to be granted a waiver use permit
to construct a restaurant on property located on the south side
of Plymouth Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36.
Mr:. Tent read the letter in the file dated March 28, 1969 from the City Engineer
setting forth three problems; (1) it will be necessary to tap the 7' diameter
storm sewer along the north side of Plymouth Road for a storm sewer outlet for
this property; (2) there are no wye locations available from the sanitary sewer
along the southerly portion of this site; and (3) it will be noted that the
ultimate development of Plymouth Road necessitates the acquisition of additional
right -of-way.
Mr. Tent asked if the petitioner was present.
Mr. Harvey F. Tennen, 1161 First National Bank Bldg. , Detroit, attorney for
Ranch House of America, Inc. and Herbert L. Grosberg, petitioner, approached
the commission. He explained that the petition is for a family type restaurant;
a franchise operation which is new to the Detroit area and different from other
franchises. Their organization originated in the Florida area with home offices
in Ft. Lauderdale; they have 40 units in Florida and are called the "Ranch House
Restaurants", there are no tables - all booths and stools - carry a complete
menu, reasonably priced, to attract family business. Theirs would not be an all
night restaurant; 7 a.m. to 1 a.m. , freshly cooked and baked goods daily fur-
nished by a commissary. He further advised that Mr. Vecos, executive V.P. of
Ranch House of America, Inc. was present. Mr. Tennen presented the drawings to
the Commission.
Mr. Tent asked if the company has an option.on the property.
Mr. Tennen answered, no; an offer to purchase subject to approval of the City.
He stated that the investor would build and petitioner would lease from the
investor.
•
5583
Mr. Tent asked if there had been a market survey made as to whether there is a
necessity for a restaurant, advising that there are 10 restaurants within a
1/2 mile area; in fact the Livonia Beef House, one of them has closed down.
He asked if this is on speculation to see if it will go in the Detroit area.
r
Mr. Vecos stated that most of the ten restaurants referred to can be excluded
from this discussion because they are drive-ins, take-outs or a spaghetti
house; he advised that they will have primarily a specialty of charcoal foods
and fish items.
Mr. Vecos added that noc of the restaurants in the immediate area conflicts
with them. Tee fact that the others do so well shows it is a reasonably
healthy area for restaurants.
Mr. LaBo stated that 3 of the 10 restaurants are sit-down restaurants.
Mr. Tent asked if there is any connection between them and the Ranch House
already operating,
Mr. Tennen said, no; it is of another franchise; the closest similarity to
their type of operation would be appearance. Further, he feels that they can
compete favorably.
hlr. Santo asked how the franchise worked and if this one restaurant is enough
to support a commissary.
Mr. Tennen stated that it is a territorial franchise for Metropolitan Detroit
held by a local group with sone stock also held by the home office in Florida.
He added that the commissary would service all their restaurants, there is one
already in Troy and they hope to have 20 to 30 in the Metropolitan area (5
counties; all serviced by the sane commissary.
1
Mr. Vecos also stated the restaurants in the 5 counties would be owned and
operated by local residents,
Mr. [Iri.;htman stated that he was cencer.ned with the density of the area where
rea';aurants are concerned. He felt that building across the street from an
industrial center of the city was drawing power but not of family type business;
he asked if petitioner did not think the location should be in a residential
area if it was to ae a family typo restaurant.
Mr. Tc ma n stated that it is the intent to hay family type restaurant but they
would need :core than a 5 p,r., to 7 r,,m, dinner hour restaurant so it is
necessary tc put it on a :::Lin thoroughfare to take care of the upkeep.
Mr. Ual)= said the point in question is whether they will approve the location
and repeated the list of restaurants in the area, one of which was torn down
to put up a gas station, lie wondered what the effect would be on existing
b2sinesses, E3 adued that he i,s not convinced that this is a good location
and not convinced that any research had been made by the petitioner.
Mr. Tennen stated that they would not make an investment of over $100,000, if
1!:: they didn't har-e ecniddcncc in the operation again saying that it is not like
a Daly Drive-in, '_'e paid that Mr. Vecos and other representatives have gone
through the area and feel they can successfully operate and that the restaurant
would be an asset to Livonia.
5584
Mr. Tent reminded that the question asked was whether a market survey had been
made, explaining that other petitioners for estaurants, etc. had had such surveys
made.
Mr. Vecos asked if this is a zoning change.
Mr. Tent advised that it is a request for a waiver of use permit; that the
Commission in this way can control what is brought into the City so as not to
saturate an area.
Mr. Vecos stated he had not been informed of the market survey - that in all
their restaurants in Flirida it was not necessary to have a professional survey
made, therefore they do not have any.
Mrs. Parker, from the audience, stated that her address is 25845 Plymouth Road,
that the reason some restaurants are taken by gas stations is that they are
large operations and competitive with one another. She felt that this is a
good spot for a restaurant because of the Fisher plant.
Mr. Tent asked if she lives in the area.
Mrs. Parker stated she is in business - real estate business.
Mr. Tent asked if she has an option on this property.
Mrs. Parker stated no, she is working as a representative for the seller and
that is her connection.
Mr. Tent asked if there was anyone wishing to be heard in the audience. There
was no one.
Mr. Tent, Chairman stated that the item will be taken under advisement.
Mr. Urightman announced the third item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-1-6
by Arthur Bottrill requesting to rezone property located on the
northeast corner of Rayburn and Farmington Road in the Southwest
1/4 of Section 15, from R-3 to P.S.
Mr. Tent advised that there is a letter from Consumers Power stating no objection
to this petition; one from the City Engineer indicating no engineering problems.
He further added that there are no site plans submitted for this petition.
Mr. Bottrill, the petitioner, was present and made his presentation to the
Commission, reviewing the surrounding zoning.
Mr. Tent asked if ha wanted the zoning change for speculation.
Petitioner replied, no,
Mr. Tent advised petitio::ar that 50% of the property in the city which has been
rezoned has not been built on; that the Commission appreciates it when a
petitioner comes in for a change with some kind of site plan. He asked what
the petitioner plans to do because with the zoning in its present form the tax
dollar is in his favor.
Mr. Bottrill stated he has lived here for 33 years, is now retired; that
Farmington Road is no longer a residential road; that he has a firm
5535
commitment if the rezoning goes through for P.S.
Mr. Tent suggested that petitioner bring in his people so they can go over
1110 plans, etc. •
Petitioner stated that the prospective buyer is Keim Realty4 Mr. Bottrill
stated he felt the commission is probably tired of seeing real estate people
come in and his, buyers suggested that he personally petition for the change of
zoning.
Mr. Moser stated that Mr. Bottrill should know that he is requesting lots la
and 20 to be rezoned and that nothing has gone that deep in the neighborhood,
that to go into lot 20 would be going into a residential area and even if he
brings in a prospective buyer the commission is opposed to going in that deep.
The petitioner discussed the surround area stated that Lot 20 was to be used for
parking purposes only. He compared it to the medical center at Six Mile and
Farmington Roads, adding that he did not feel it would be objectionable and
no density of traffic would be caused.
Mr. Tent stated that this land is not proposed for P.S. in the Master Plan and
the zoning change requested here would be too great for this area.
Mr. Santo commented with regard to the remarks made by Petitioner with
reference to the Six Mile and Farmington Roads medical center stating that as
a past President of the Burton Hollow Civic Center he knows that the residents
did feel this to be a nuisance if only for the vandal light due to the depth.
IL ,
He added that the people in their subdivision had spent a great deal of money
beautifying their property and the medical men at the center had let the
grounds of the medical center go without sufficient care.
Mr. Tent stated that this petition is for rezoning and the Board is familiar
with the Farmington Road situation, adding that the Commission had enough data
to make a decision on this petition.
There was no one else in .the audience wishingto be heard on this petition.
Mr. Tent, Chairman, stated that the item will be taken under advisement.
Mr. Urightman announced the fourth item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-1-7
by David Perry, attorney for Elias Brothers Restaurant, Inc. ,
requesting to rezone the property located on the southeast
corner of Vassar and Middlebelt Road in the Southwest 1/4 of
Section 1 , from C-1 to C-2.
Mr. Tent stated that there was a letter from Consumers Power, showing no
objections; a letter from the City Engineer stating that no sanitary sewers
or storm sewers are available to the property in question; and that no plans
had yet been submitted by petitioner.
Mr. Hull stated that the petitioner has a presentation he is going to make tonight.
Mr. David A. Perry, 31250 Plymouth Road approached the commission, representing-
IL the petitioner stating that he had alerted petitioner regarding the sewer
problem and felt this would be no problem.
5586
He read and presented to the Commission a letter- from Donald L. Wentzel,
Asst. to General Manger of Shopping Center, Inc. , dated March 19, 1969
ti complimenting Plias Brothers and indicating that they are looking forward to
having them in the Genessee Valley in Flint.
Mr. Tent asked if he had a letter from the Mall.
Mr. Perry •answered, no; but that he was sure they did not object.
He further stated that with regard to the zoning, C-1 is spot zoning and that
C-2 would give it continuity. He added that petitioner plans to save as much
land as noss_ble for future offices, that the southerly 90 feet would be saved
in conjunction with property to the rear eventually all to be used for offices.
Mr. Tent asked if the Elias Brothers restaurant at James Couzens and Six Mile
which was torn down is the same to be built in Livonia.
Mr. Gabriel Kassab, Executive Vice President of Elias Brothers stated that the
location referred to was the franchise which they took over but had no bearing
on the proposed building.
Mr. Tent asked i. this is a Bt Boy.
Mr. Kassab answered, yes, but that it was a family-type restaurant - not a
drive-in.
Mr. Perry said they wcu' d incorporate the name Big Boy but as far as having the
I[:
image as on. Plymouth 2c.ad, no,
Mr. Walker asked if architecturally the building would be like that located at
Eight Nile cnj Farmington Roads,
Mr. Kassab stated, to. It will be early American.
Mr. LaBo asked the dimension' petitioner is interested in changing.
Mr. Perry answered approximately 300' on Middlebelt.
Mr. LaBo added and y,-;,.1 are going to use all but 90' . He stated that with re-
gard to the proposed office^ only 1 parcel is listed in the petition, not the
other to the rear, =. „ Barr" _ id they would not be the ones to build the
offices, the developer would retuirc. the part to the rear build and lease same.
Mr. i?rightman asked if a survey had been made as to the area and the number of
restaurants in the vicinity.
Mr, Perry stated with the exception of the Mall there are approximately five
and mostly of a drive-in nature; the Palace being the only one similar to their
proposed building and, that is every crowded.
Mr. Tent advi_aed him that there are 16 restaurants in the general area, the
franchise type retaurants are coming before the Commission in great numbers.
1110 Mr. Perry stayed that their particular franchises sold for $15,000 last year
atld are now up to ;20,3CO, not a small investment to be made on speculation.
5587
Mr. Colomina asked if he was aware there was a restaurant going up about 4 blocks
north of their land, already approved and partially constructed.
Mr. Kassab said they had checked the area out, theirs isnot a new franchise
company but one which .i_: been in business over 25 years, and that they are sure it
is a good area.
Mr, Lano felt there is a need for good restaurants but not across from the Mall,
which is prim, eromerty, The Master Plan shows this to be PS . zoning and high-
rise buildi_ns,
Mr. Perry advised that this is the only property they have been able to get and
would co^:nty with the Master "?_an as much as possible. Their investment would
be about $250,000 and provides tax base for the City.
the
Mr. LaBo node/suggestion, why not build a restaurant on the first floor with
additional floors devoted to offices.
Mr. Perry stated the petitioner -,1'_y has a lease to build a restaurant.
Mr. Tent asked if any one in the audience wished to be heard on this petition.
Mr. Melvin Sachs, 28630 Southfield, Lathrup Village 48075, read a letter addressed
to the Commission from the Livonia Office Pavilion stating that if the Big Boy
restaurant -.7a;,- to b: a "typical Big Boy" restaurant they object, that the Master
Plan should be adhered to in the best interest of the City. He commented that
another pets.::ion. had Lire turned do.ac for a food restaurant for the same reason.
Mr. Tent accented the letter adding his appreciation for the comments regarding
the Master Pian,
There wes no ore c.1ae wi. hi:-.,; to be heard on this petition in the audience.
Mr, 'fent, Chairmen, :.tatid that the item will be taken under advisement.
Mr, Wrighi:;an r•nncunc^-.d f =',:i, item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-1-8 by
hilus Wilson requesting to rezone property located on the south-
east corner of Hugh and Norfolk Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of
Section 2, iron ?1_.F to R-4,
Mr, Teens st ted a Thtter -2ro:r the Consumers Power Company stating no
objection to th:'.a netntio_i; letter from the Chief City Engineer indicating a dis-
crepancy in the legldescription which must be e,,,nged.
Mr. Hull advised that petitioner is present,
Mrs. Mae Wilson, of 202flr 'Hugh ^venae, stated she needed the rezoning and lot
split to sell her pr^_ssnt home which is too small for her family and to build a
larger home on the southerly portion on Lot .9,
Mr. Tent states' ti. t by changing the southerly portion of the lot from RUF to R-4
would necessitate a lot split anJ that would leave a non-conforming lot.
Mrs, Wilson sad she weuld like it all to be rezoned, not only the southerly
portica LLI p,eition,
5588
Mr. Urightman asked if it was petitioners intent to divide the lot into two
lots in the R-4 category.
Mrs. Milson answered, yes and to build a home on the southerly portion.
Mr. Tent asked how this change would conform with existing zoning in the area.
Mr. Hull said it would not be compatible.
Mr. Walker asked if there are any dedication problems,
Mr. Hull answered, no.
Mr. Wrightman asked if it would be possible to get a lot split without a zoning
change,
Mr. Hull answeredl yes, if the Council would do this. He added that this would
only make equal portions of the lot and this would not permit her to get a build-
ing permit, that the possibility that the Zoning Board of Appeals might grant the
use of the land even though insufficient in area is questionable. He felt that
the land should be rezoned into the category intended for.
Mr. Wrightman asked if the Commission would not be creating a non-conforming use
which would go to the Board of Appeals anyway.
Mr. Hull stated that since the house was built (relating to the northerly portion
of the lot) it was up and a physical entity and there would be no action on it.
{
Mr. Tent asked if anyone in the audience wished to be heard.
Mrs. Robert McCallum, 20271 Hugh Street, stated she lives directly across the
street from petitioner's property. She wished to be assured that with new zoning
more than one house could not be built on the southerly portion and none could be
built on the northerly portion in addition to the home already there. She does
not object to the change for the purposes desired by Mrs. Wilson so long as more
homes are not permitted.
Mr. Wrightman advised that if rezoned to R-4 petitioner can only build the one
home and the lot cannot be split any further.
Mr. Aho, who lives directly south of the property has no objections to the 1251
split but that petition had come out as 90' to which he did object.
Mr. Tent asked if the Commission goes ahead with the changes are they creating a
future problem.
Mr. Hull stated that the additional zoning will identify the use of the area. He
believes that if it is the desire to favorably acquiesce to petitioner's request
they should have an entire study of the area made to rezone in conformance with
the existing land use.
Mr. Tent stated that if this change is going to effectuate further lot splits
and increase the density, this is something they should oppose.
Mrs. Wilson stated that the property across the street has the same amount of
houses on it as she desires and wonders how they were able to do this.
5589
Mr. Tent advised that the zoning was different at that time or the owners had
gone to the Zoning Board of Appeals. He asked if petitioner could expand the
home she now has to meet her needs.
ILPetitioner stated she had already built on to the original home and would like
a new, larger home.
Mr. Faven, of 20263 Hugh, stated he lives across the street and has no objection
to the 125' lots.
After short discussion regarding the remaining vacant land in the area which
might request splits.
Mr. Hull stated that the problem is the fact that most of the land as is presently
being used is at a different dehsity than it is zoned for; that 80% of existing
lots are actually undersized that they would conform to R-4 or R-5 District and
it would seem reasonable that those non-conforming lots in the area should be
zoned in the category to fit the existing land use.
Mr. Tent stated he would like this matter to go back to a study for further
consideration with the possibility of including other lands.
Mr. LaBo stated that this would delay petitioner's request approximately 1 month
but petitioner said this would be acceptable to her.
There were no other persons in the audience to be heard on this petition.
Mr. Tent, Chairman, stated that the item will be taken under advisement.
t
Mr. Wrightman announced that the sixth item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-1-9
by Emerson Building Company of Detroit requesting to rezone property
located on the west side of Alexander between Sunnydale and Broadmoor
in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13 from RUF to R-1.
Mr. Tent advised that he had a petition signed by the neighbors on Alexander
Street approving the change of zoning; also a letter from D. L. Shill concerning
1/2 pavement on Alexander Street, the type and value of the homes to be developed.
There is also a letter from Mr. Kanat, petitioner, stating that he could not be
present.
Mr. Tent asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to be heard in this
matter.
Mr. Hodge, 28995 Sunnydale, wondered what effect this change would have on his
property.
Mr. Hull stated that the RUF zoning is the most restrictive category in the
Zoning Ordinance as far as residential zoning is concerned. It must have a
minimum of 1/2 acre in size. He advised that the petition requests a change from
the highest category to the lowest - from RUF to R-1 which calls for lots 60'
wide, 7200 square feet in area.
Mr. Hodge asked how deep.
to Mr. Hull said it was hard to say - one corner 68' x 170' but he contemplates lots
to front on Alexander.
Mr. Hodge asked how far west the lots will go.
5590
Mr. Hull gave a description of the property, being on Sunnydale about 68' Uwest
from the present west line of Alexander and jogging 170' from the southerly right
1!: of way line of Sunnydale South, and jogging an additional 70' Nest and 260' South
and back approximately 140' to'Alexander Avenue.
Mr. Tent stated the question seemed to be RUF vs R-1 - what is the depth.
He added that R-1 would be the smallest lots possible in area.
Mr. LaBo stated that this would mean about 5 lots instead of 1/2 of that as it is
now.
Mr. Hodge stated that he owns Lot 225 which is 300' deep and wondered if he would
be rezoned too.
Mr. Douglas Cool:, 15862 Alexander, owner of Lot 4, stated that since the petition
was signed the petitioner has solicited the people to sell back acreage of their
lots and he wondered if he gets this could he put a street through to Alexander
Avenue,
There was a dicussion about an established agreement between property owners to
run a water line across one anothers property and the fact that the water line is
now in jeopardy and may result in sizeable expense to persons who cannot afford it.
The question of builders obligation to pave remaining 1/2 of Alexander to
Sunnydale was discussed. Mr. Hull explained the builders responsibilities with
respect to paving bond, etc, and stated the builder would only have to improve
as it relates to his subdivision and probably not include any extensive improvement
along Sunnydale or Broadmoor.
Mr. Douglas Coo':, stated he thought builder would have to pave both sides of the
street.
Mr. Tent stated that they have not been approving homes on 1/2 paved streets;
when a developer comes in for such a street, the people across the street have to
share in the payment of the street. He further discussed the size of the lots
stating that the City Fathers would rather have a minimum of 80' lots. Mr. Cook
stated that if the Commission feels it should go to 30' lots (R-3), he agrees.
Mr. Tent stated that there is no correspondence in the file from the Engineer or
the Water Department. The only thing in the file is about the RUF zoning, that
no provisions were made :or this type of development in the engineering of the
proposed • the ,...t.._ fee was paid.
Mr. Cook stated he would rather see the property vacant adding that there are
no playgrounds for t'.Le children in this area. After the discussion at this meet-
ing and the eossiblility cf a street being put through, etc. he is not in favor
of this potiti.ou - he had signed the petition only as it was originally presented.
Tyr Tent s tatLA he would like to take this matter back to a study session as the
Commission is not satisfied with some of the statements brought up at the meeting
and would li.e to ask questions relative as to what the petitioner intends to do.
Leonard R. Spas lives at the corner of Sunnydale and Sunbury and wished to object
to the R-1 zoning change and said he too would approve the R-3; he stated that
11
he was u,:aware c= the purchase of the back acreage; he also questioned would the
house on Sunnydale have to pave that part of Sunnydale?
5591
Mr. Spas and Mr. Cook stated they would want comparable homes with basements,
with all improvements, i.e. curbs, etc.
Mr. Tent sugested that a study session be held with interested persons present.
There were no other persons in the audience wishing to be heard.
Mr. Tent, Chairman, stated that the item will be taken under advisement,
Mr. Wrightman announced that the seventh item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-1-10
by Michael Berry and Vivian C. Berry requesting to rezone property
located on the north side of Ann Arbor Trail , east of Lawrence Drive,
in the southeast 1/L of Section 32, from C-1 to R-7 ,
Mr. Tent stated there ware letters from the Consumers Power Company showing no
objection; and the City Engineer stated there were no discrepancies; as well as
a letter from Kathleen Kegler, 35800 Ann Arbor Trail in favor of the petition.
Mr. Pat Duggan, 32f0) Five Mile Road, represented the petitioners and advised
this change was requestd for the purpose of coming up with an acceptable site
plan for this and the adjacent area already zoned R-7. He stated that this
parcel would be for par.cirg p''rpos•.:3 only.
Mr. Tent stated that commission was aware that this parcel had been included in
the overall layout of the site plan.
There was no one in the auJience wishing to be heard on this petition.
Mr. Tent, Chairman, advised that this item will be taken under advisement..
Mr. Wrightman announced that the n.:xt item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-1-11
by Burton-Share, Inc. , Ply-Van Corporation, requesting to rezone
property located on the west side of Levan Road, north of Plymouth
Road, in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 29, from C-2 to M-1.
Mr. Tent stated there is a letter from the Engineer advising there are no
problems but a 10' ic',e sanitary sewer easement for purposes of extending sanitary
sewer should be obtained.
Mr. Tent asked if the Commission approved the petition as they have it would the
easement be a problem°
Mr. Hull stated that he believes that the problem that would exist is that he
would have trouble servicing the proposed gas station on the northwest corner.
There was no one in the audience wishing to be heard on this petition.
Mr. Tent, Chairman, adv sed that this item will be taken under advisement.
Mr. Uright n announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 69-4-7-3 by
the City Planning Commission on its own motion to determine whether
or not to amend Part V of the Master Plan of the City of LiVo nia, the
Master School and Park Plan, so as to provide for the incorporation of
ILproperty located on the east side of Eckles, south of Five Mile Road,
in t:c :iorthwc.st 1/4 of Section 19.
5592
Mr. Tent stated that a meeting had been held a few weeks prior with regard to
this land acquisition and he has a letter from Mr. Dufour dated May 13, 1969
stating that Sc,^tion 19 has need for park lands, being the section in the
City with the least amount of lands for parks.
4 Mr. Hull stated that he had a discussion with the Mayor and Mr, Dufour and the
consensus of opinion is that they would like to get the maximum quantity of
land they can in this area and would make every effort to purchase the land, apply
for federal funds, etc, They would like it held as long as possible and if it
cannot be purchased they will reconsider; they would like it placed on the park
plan now.
There was no one in the audience wishing to be heard on this petition.
Mr. Tent, Chairman, advised that this item will be taken under advisement.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Walker, seconded by Mr. Moser, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#5-58-69 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the
Public "Hearing held on May 13, 1969 at approximately 10: 55 p.m.
.: k * k * .. :. * * x *
Mr. Tent, Chairman, called the 205th Regular Meeting to order at approximately
11: 03 p.m, with approximately 40 interested persons in the audience as were
present for the public hearing.
Mr. Wrightman announced. the first item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-2-7 by the
Simone Corporation requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to
build a home for the Armenian aged on property located on the west
side of Middlebelt Road south of Wentworth Avenue in the Southeast
1/4 of Section 14,
On a motion duly made by Mr. La'3o, seconded by Mr. Wrightman, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#5-59-69 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on
May 13, 1969 on Petition 69-3-2-7 as submitted by Simone Corporation,
requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to build a home for the
Armenian ^;ed on property located on the west side of Middlebelt Road
south of Went=t4 Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14, the City
Planning Commission dons hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 69-3-2-7 be approved subject to the following conditions:
(1) That the architectural and building plans be adhered to.
(2) Th t the site plan, as approved by the Commission, be adhered to.
(3) That a detailed landscaping plan be submitted to the Planning
Commission within six months of this date.
(4) That the lendscanin , as indicated on the approved landscaping
nl;,_,, Le installed within one and one half years after the
building permit is applied for.
5593
Mr. LaBo read the foregoing conditions aloud and the commission indicated full
agreement to the conditions.
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, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution
is adopted.
Mr. Wrightman announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-2-8
by Herbert L. Grosberg requesting to be granted a waiver use permit
to construct a restaurant on property located on the south side of
Plymouth Road in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36.
On motion duly made by Mr. Colomina, seconded by Mr. Heusted, it was
#5-60-69 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on
May 13, 1969 on Petition 69-3-2--3 as submitted by Herbert L.
Grosberg, requasting to be granted a waiver use permit to construct
a restaurant on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road
in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36, the City Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 69-3-2-8 be denied
for the following reasons:
(1) There are numerous facilities of this type in the area and
there is no need to duplicate the service.
(2) This type of Us?. is a relatively high traffic generator
and will conflict with the movement of transient traffic
along PlyTouth Road.
(3) This type of facility would adversely effect the development
potential in adjacent areas and could detract from the
stability of P1-;Teouth Road,
(4) The proposed use would not be in harmony and appropriate with
the or:' rly development of the surrounding area.
(5) The location and size of the proposed use, the nature and
intensity of the principal use end accessory uses, the site
layout and its relationship to streets giving access, shall
be :'ueh that the tra g ie to and from the use and assembly of
persons in conjunction with the use, will be hazardous and
ineonvc:Iint to the Brea and could conflict with the heavy
traffic volume of the area; and
(6) The location of the building and its accessories will be such
that the proposJ use could have a detrimental effect upon
the neighboring property and the neighbcring area in general.
It mal impair -the v .lue of the neighboring property and
disco'.iraf;e the apo ropriate development and use of the adjacent
land or building.
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°
mw
5594
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Walker, Tent, Wrightman, Heusted, Colomina, Santo
NAYS: Moser, LaBo
ABSENT: None
Mr. Tent declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution is adopted.
Mr. llrightman announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-1-6
by Arthur Bottrill requesting to rezone property located on the
northeast corner of Rayburn and Farmington Road in the Southwest 1/4
of Section 15, from R-3 to P.S.
A Motion was made by Mr. LaBo to approve this petition stating he would not want
to live on Lot 20, it would be a poor place for a residence, a parking lot would
be submitted for approval.
The motion failed due to the lack of support.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Walker, seconded by Mr. Moser, it was
#5-61-69 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
May 13, 1969 on Petition 69-3-1-6 as submitted by Arthur Bottrill
requesting to rezone property located on the northeast corner of
Rayburn and Farmington Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15,
from R-3 to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 69-3-1-6 be denied for the follow-
ing reasons:
(1) There is no indication of specific need for this rezoning
at this time.
(2) The easterly portion of the lot petitioned for should remain
residential because of its proximity to adjacent residential
neighborhood.
(3) This type of development could adversely effect the stability
of the adjacent residential development to the east.
(4) Rayburn Avenue should continue as a residential street, non-
residential use fronting on Rayurn could be detrimental to
the residential u_aighborhood,
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was
published i.n the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer under
date of April 23, 1969, and notice of such hearing was sent to
the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company,
Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Consumers Power Company and City
Departments as listed in the Proof of Service.
5595
Mr. LaBo suggested that the matter be sent backifor further study.
Mr. Colomina suggested that petitioner come in at the next meeting with his prospective
purchaser.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Walker, Tent, Heusted, Moser, Santo
NAYS: Colomina, LaBo, Wrightman
Mr. Tent declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Wrightman announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-1-7
by David Perry, Attorney for Elias Brothers Restaurant, Inc. ,
requesting to rezone property located on the southeast corner
of Vassar and Middlebelt Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 1,
from C-1 to C-2.
Mr. Spiro approached the Commission without being recognized. Mr. Tent reminded him
that the public hearing on this item had been conducted and that his petition had been
previously denied; that this was not a proper time for further discussion. Both Mr.
and Mrs. Spiro insisted upon being heard. A short discussion with the Commission re-
garding the denial of his waiver use petition for his property known as parcel 36A4
located on the south side of Plymouth Road was conducted. The Commission suggested
that he appeal to the Council inasmuch as the Commission's action at this time was
final but it was in the power of the Council to either sustain or reverse the recom-
mendation of the Commission. They further added that the property is already zoned
commercial, which means that he has many uses for the property and it can be developed
in many ways.
On a motion duly made by Mr. LaBo, seconded by Mr. Wrightman and unanimously adopted,
(110 it was
#5-62-69 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
May 13, 1969 on Petition 69-3-1-7 as submitted by David Perry,
Attorney for Elias Brothers Restaurant, Inc. , requesting to rezone
property located on the southeast corner of Vassar and Middlebelt
Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 1, from C-1 to C-2, the City
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 69-3-1-7 be denied for the following reasons:
(1) This development proposal is in conflict with the goals of
the Master Plan for the Livonia Mall area.
(2) This type of use could adversely effect the development
potential of the adjacent lands.
(3) This development proposal only makes provision for partial
development of the parcel.
(4) There are engineering problems connected with the development
of this parcel; there is no sanitary sewer available to the
site; the Wayne County Road Commission will not allow any
surface drainage from the site to Middlebelt Road, and the
storm drain problem will not be solved until 1970.
(5) There is also a question of the improvement of Vassar Avenue
adjacent to the site which is presently unimproved.
1
1 (6) There are numerous restaurants within the Livonia Mall area
and there is no need to duplicate this service.
IL
1
l
i
i
1
5596
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was
published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under
date of April 23, 1969, and notice of such hearing was sent to
the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company,
Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Consumers Power Company and
City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service.
Mr. Tent, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution is
adopted.
Mr. Urightman announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-1-8
by Bailus Milson requesting to rezone property located on the
southeast corner of Hugh and Norfolk Avenue in the Northeast 1/4
of Section 2, from RUF to R-4.
Mr. Walker made a motion to approve this petition, the division of the lot in
question to be made into 2 parcels, each being 130' x 125' , and further recommend
to the Chair that the City Planning Department bring back on its own motion at a
public hearing a petition for the rezoning of the northerly portion of the lot
and at that time Mr. Walker asked the Department to advise the Commission what
other property should be included in the petition. The motion is to approve the
rezoning of the southerly portion only, RUF will remain on the northerly portion.
Mr. Wrightman advised Mrs. Wilson that if approved, the remaining portion of the
property would remain RUF for future study to put it in another category.
Mr. Nagy stated it should be clarified to Mrs. Wilson that she must go before
the City Council to get a lot split; that if sold the property would have to be
t14.7 recorded as a legally approved lot split.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Ualker, seconded by Mr. Urightman, it was
#5-63-69 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
May 13, 1969 on Petition 69-3-1-8 as submitted by Bailus Milson
requesting to rezone property located on the southeast corner
of Hugh and Norfolk Avenue in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 2
from RUF to R-4 be approved, to rezone only the southerly portion
of the property, approximately 130' x 125' for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed division of land would be consistent with
the land use pattern of the general area.
(2) The proposed zoning is adjacent to high density zoning.
(3) It is reasonable to allow the petitioner to zone and
divide his property so he may create a lot that is con-
sistent with the other lots in the general area.
AND FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Planning Department bring
on its own motion a petition for the rezoning of the northerly
portion of the lot covered in Petition 69-3-1-8, said petition
also to include other property the Department feels should be
considered for rezoning;
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was
published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under
date of April 23, 1969, and notice of such hearing was sent to
5597
the Detroit raison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company,
Michigan De'_J. Telephone Co77.oany, Consumers Pour Company and
City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service.
i
A roll call vote on ten forego . . r ::oluticn resulted in the following:
AYES: Wall:=, T/ri t..,-,:., re s .:ed, i•iOser, Colonina, Santo, LaBo
NAYS: Tent
Mr. Tent declared the r_,`;tion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Tlrightman annou :c d that the next item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-1-9
as submitted by Emerson. =3rildirig Company of Detroit requesting to
rezone property located on the -rest side of Alexander between
Surnydale and 3roadeoor i_n the. southwest 1/4 of Section 13, from RUF
to R-1
Mr. Tont - .7. to the ,,_ohlema raised by persons present at the public
hearing, and the dnci4 "on 3_' :e Conmission t.iat this matter be brought back to
a study meeting to which those snrsons a- a, invited, this item will be taken under
advisement and referred to a at-ndy meeting,
Mr, L7rightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-1-10 by
Michael Perry- 11-7 Vivian C, Berry roar, sting to rezone property
located on north side of Ann Arbor Trail , east of Lawrence
Drive i_,. the Southcaa : ' �' of ^c.ction 32 from C-1 to R-7.
On a motion duly mn(7o. iio er, .conded by Mr. Wrightrnan, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#5-65-69 RDSCLVT._ t.__t, _=___,__t to a Public Hearing having been held on
May 13, 16 on Petition 69-3-1-10 as submitted by Michael Berry
and Vivian C. Peri- : recucstir f to rezone property located on the
north side of fn.. Ar-bor Trail, east of Lawrence Drive, in the
southeast J./-:- of Secion 32, from C-1 to n.-7, the City Planning
Commission ::: _.:c1.-:end to the City Council that Petition
69-3-1-12 bo_ app:rov :cr the following reasons:
(1) This is a '_ogi_c.ol rezoning to logically round out the
zoning p.tt:--.=n of the a a,
(? ... _ .i ._ �! :r deve1ooment in this
sector of the C_t; „
(3) The intrusion of commercial -coning into this multi-family
ccnl-' .t �',-e d w,lopeent,
(4) The e:-_i:tins C_•1 cc-:i:rc_al zoning would constitute spot
zc .ie_'. b�� au,ne isiia=-. -- ia. of unrelated zoning
that Serres no uorL._vhiil p no o,
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was
published in the orrici_a_ newspamor, the Livonia Observer under
date of April. 23, 1959 and noise of such hearing was sent to
the 1.et o i.: _ . son Co ✓ :en obe a Ohio Railway Company,
Michigan Bell Tel.ahon: ;ca. e'r,y, Consumers Power Company and
City Depa a-tnar is co1 i.s in the Proof of Service.
5598
Mr. Tent, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
16; Mr. ?lrighttnan announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 69-3-1-11 by
Burton-Share, Inc. , Ply-Van Corporation, requesting to rezone
property located on the west side of Levan Road, north of Plymouth
Road, in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 29, from C-2 to M-1.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Walker, seconded by Mr. Wrightman, and unanimously
adopted, it was
#5-64-69 RESOLVED, that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
May 13, 1969 on Petition 69-3-1-11 as submitted by Burton-Share,
Inc. , Ply-Van Corporation, requesting to rezone property located
on the west ;-_de of Levan Road, north of Plymouth Road, in the
Southwest 1/4 of Section 29, from C-2 to M-1, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
69-3-1-11 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) Industrial zoning is a logical continuation of the zoning
pattern of the area.
(2) There is no additional potential for industrially-oriented
commercial zoning in this area.
(3) It is in the best interest of the City to encourage industrial,
rather than comme,cial zoning within the industrial corridor.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was
published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer under
date of April 23, 1969, and notice of such hearing was sent to
the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company,
Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Consumers Power Company and
City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service.
Mr. Tent, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 69-4-7-3 by
the City Planning Commission on its own motion to determine whether
or not to amend Part V of the Master Plan of the City of Livonia,
the Master School and Park Plan, so as to provide for the incorporation
of property located on the east side of Eckles, south of Five Mile
Road, in the northwest 1/4 of Section 19.
Mr. Tent stated that it should be noted that petitioner be informed that the
intention is to secure the property and to go ahead with the program.
Mr. Hull said it would be done.
On a motion by Mr. Colomina, seconded by Mr. Heusted, and unanimously carried,
it was
•
5599
#5-66-69 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the provisions of Act 235 of the Public
Acts of Michigan, 1931, as amended, the City Planning Commission
of the City of Livonia having duly held a public hearing on May 13,
7 1969 for the purpose of amending Part V of the Master Plan of the
City of Livonia, entit - " "Master School and Park Plan, the same
is hereby amended so as to include 17.81 acre parcel of land located
on the east side of Ecicles, south of Five Mile Road, in the Northwest
1/4 of Section 19, as a park site (27.94 acres) for the following
reasons:
(1) There is a great need for park and recreation facilities within
this sector of the City because of the relatively high population
density and because there is only a limited amount of open space
within this areae
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
School and Park Plan of the City of Livonia, which is incorporated
herein by reference, the same having been adopted by resolution 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 Register of Deeds for the County of Mayne for record-
ing.
Mr. Tent, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Wrightman announced the nest item on the agenda is Petition 63-4-1-15 by
Donald C, Dereio, attorney for Dr. Otonas Vaitas, requ'- ring to
rezone property located on the north side of Orangelawn, west of
Farmington Road, in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33 from RUF to PS.
On a motion duly made by Mr, Moser, seconded by Mr. Colomina and unanimously
carried, it was
#5-67-69 RESOLVED that pursuant to a public hearing having been held on May 21,
1968 on Petition 63--4-1-15 as submitted by Donald C. Deremo, attorney
for Dr. Otonas Vaitas, requesting to rezone property located on the •
north side or Orargel-un, 1'7est of Farmington Road, in the Northeast 1/4
of Section 33, from au7 to PS the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 68-4-1-15 be approved for
the followir,7; reasons:
(1) There is a need for this type of facility in this sector of
the City,
(2) The development proposal for this parcel of land is of sufficient
calibre and quality to justify approval.
(3) This is a continuation of the zoning pattern of the area and will
not adversely effect adjacent development,
(4) The proposed zoning is consistent with the land use pattern
of the area,
5600
FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was
published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer under
date of May 5, 1)65 and notice of sech hearing was sent to the
Detroit Edison Company, Cheaspea'_ce & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan
Bell Telephan C_r:o ;a , _o';ouners Power Company p� � and City Departments
as listed in the Proof of Service.
Mr. Tent, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Urightman annoi:riced the next i.tc.m on the agenda is Petition 69-2-1-3 by
David Perry, attorney -:or Douglas E. and Rosal i ne D. Winfield
requesting to rezone -)roperty located on the north side of Plymouth
Road between Faruirgcon ,arid F':-)bard in Section 27 from C-2 to M-1.
The Commission had a short di.scursi.ca on the co: moo= should petitioner after
receiving zoning change to M-1 be denied the waiver by the Zoning Board 'of
Appeals.
David Perry assured the commission that the petitioners would build as planned.
On a motion duly m.7.0 1-;T I . '7 ;_ -, n ccac-.ded by Mr, Santo and unanimously
carried, it was
#5-63-69 RESOLVED that, p'..rauanc :o a Public Nearing having been held on
April 1 , 1969 on Petition 69-2-1--3 as submitted by David Perry,
attorney for fico' Jt t tr_C; Rosallne D. ini i .1d requesting to
rezone propert;, located en the ncr_thside of Plymouth Road between
Farmington And Hubbard in Section 27 , from C-2 to M-1, the City
Planning Conmi.ss;on does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 69-2--1-3 b. cp roved for the following reasons:
(1) There 's a need to < ccoiamodate the intended use within our City.
(2) The inc'u tr.ia.l. corridor i.^ the orly lo,;ics l location for the
intended
(3) Additiena= iedus ~_ai zoning in this area is consistent with
the Master Plan of the City which envisions the majority of the
land b.-::....en c _ c ;d _ ; c ,+L: ', is converted to In-
dus tr :l_ u._ ,
(4) Inius`r el zea_nc- in ih: s area will not adversely effect the
adjecer_t (':ea'e'•epna^t ;r:.7 it in consistent with the creation of
an indusr l cerror sitoir this general area.
FURTHER REDCL= that, notice of the above pablic hearing w
published in the officio' no.wapaper, the Livonia Observer under
date of March 12, 1-36 r.i r)ti.oc of such hearing was sent to the
Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake "r. Ohio Railway Company,
Michigan Bell `eleohone Co:span;-, Consumers Power Company and City
Departments as listed in the Proof of Service,
Mr, Tent, Chairman, declared 'ae ,mor__ou carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
• 5601
Mr. Wrightman announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 69-2-1-4
by Melvin Sachs requesting to rezone property located on the north
side of Ann Arbor Trail east of Nix Road in Section 31 , from R-1
1to R-7.
A short discussion was held by the Commission regarding the right of way deeds.
On a motion duly made by Mr. LaBo, seconded by Mr. TIrightman and unanimously
carried, it was
#5-69-69 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on
April 1, 1969 on Petition 69-2-1-4 as submitted by Melvin Sachs
requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Ann
Arbor Trail east of Nix Road in Section 31, from R-1 to n-7, the
City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 69-2-1-4 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) This rezoning constitutes a logical addition to the zoning
to the east and rounds out the zoning pattern of the area.
(2) This rezoning would allow for logical development of the
existing R-7 zoning to the east.
(3) Multi-family zoning is logical becr ,se of the location of
the site. The proximity to the park will offset the slight
increase in density generated by multi-family zoning in this
ILarea.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was
published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under
date of March 16, 1969, and notice of such hearing was sent to
the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company,
Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Consumers Power Company and City
Departments as listed in the Proof of Service.
Mr, Tent, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Wrightman announced that the next item on the agenda is the final plat
approval for Dover Courts Subdivision No. 2 located in the Southwest
1/4 of Section 7.
Mr. Tent asked if petitioner had met all his obligations.
Mr. Hull stated, yes, everything is in order, that preliminary plat and
financial obligations have been met.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Colomina, seconded by Mr. Wrightman, and unanimously
carried, it was
#5-70-69 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
IL to the City Council that the final plat of Dover Courts Subdivision
No. 2, located in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 7, be given final
approval for the following reasons:
. 5602
(1) This final plat is consistent with the previously approved
preliminary plat.
11:4
(2) All the financial obligations of the City have been met.
FURTHER RESOLVED, inasmuch as it appears on the records that
tentative approval of said proposed plat was given by the City
Planning Commission under Resolution #11-136-68 adopted on
November 12, 1968; and it further appearing that said proposed
plat together with plans and specifications for improvements
therein have been approved by the Department of Public Wotks,
Engineering Division, under date of March 12, 1969; and it further
appearing that the financial assurances required in Council Resolution
#350-69 and 428-69 adopted on March 261 1969 have been filed with
the City Clerk as confirmed by lettet dated May 6, 1969 from Addison
W. Bacon, City Clerk, it would therefore appear that all conditions
necessary to the release of building permits have been met and the
Building Department is hereby so notified.
Mr. Tent, Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution
is adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Moser, seconded by Mr. Colomina, and unanimously
adopted the City Planning Commission adjourned its 205th Regular Meeting held
on May 13, 1969, at approximately 11: 37 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
I
. _
Harry UriVi.
tman, Sec ary
ATTEST:
/6
Raymon riff. nt
Te Chair �n