Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1969-10-28 • • 5725 MINUTES OF THE 251st SPECIAL MEETING AND A PUBLIC HEARING HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY I': OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, October 28, 1969 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 251st Special Meeting and A Public Hearing at the Livonia City Hall. Mr. Raymond W. Tent, Chairman, called the Public Hearing to order at approximately 8:00 p.m. with approximately 25 interested persons in the audience. Members present: Raymond W. Tent Harry Wrightman Robert Colomina Donald Heusted Marvin Moser Frank Santo Charles Walker Members absent: H. Dow Tunis Joel LaBo Messrs. Don Hull, Planning Director; John J. Nagy, Assistant Planning Director; Harry Tatigian, City Attorney; Robert Fineberg, Assistant City Attorney; and Dan Andrew, Industrial Development Coordinator, were present. Mr. Wrightman announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 69-10-2-24 by Car Corporation requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to operate a concept, design and engineering facility including manufacturer's new car parking on property located on the west side of Market Street between Plymouth Road and Commerce in Section 29. W. Tent stated that a letter dated October 20, 1969 from City Engineer in the ' file indicated there are no engineering problems associated with this development proposal and a check of the ordinances indicated there are no violations or right-of-way required in conjunction with this petition. Mr. Tent stated there are letters in the file from Burton & Share, Inc., and Regal Building Company advising the Commission they have no objection to the petition provided adequate landscaping and fencing is provided. Mr. G. McCoy, Vice-President and Director of Sales for Car Corporation, was present representing the President of the firm, Mr. Hurley, and stated that this is a relatively new business in the Livonia area which has moved here from Dearborn. He said they have offices established in this immediate area at Commerce and Market and are primarily a marketing and merchandizing corporation which deals with merchandizing programs with the automotive industry. Mr. McCoy stated they plan to expand activities to include automotive styling, design studios, special design packages and as such they will be using the facility for automotive design production. Mr. Tent questioned how many people will be employed in this type of operation. Mr. McCoy stated that in a matter of a few months there will be 50 to 75 people. Mr. Wrightman requested to know what type of machinery will be involved in the operation. Mr. Phillips of the Car Corporation stated that all light industrial machinery will be involved, no heavy, no stamping of any kind. 5726 Mr. Tent asked how many vehicles are involved as far as storage is concerned. Mr. Phillips stated quite possibly as many as one hundred automobiles but for thW a short period of time, perhaps a couple of days. ti Mr. Tent questioned if when the vehicles are on display, will there be any group showings like an auto show of any type. Mr. Phillips stated no, nothing for the general public at all. Mr. Tent stated that the parking then would entail only the employees but nothing for any large-scale type showing. Mr. Phillips replied, no. Mr. Wrightman questioned if this is all custom. Mr. McCoy replied, yes. Mr. Colomina questioned Mr. Hull regarding the fact that if they are talking about a potential of 70 employees plus one hundred cars do they have enough parking spaces. Mr. Hull stated the variable factor is that they will only be able to park as many cars as they have room for but he thinks they are pretty close. Mr. Santo questioned Mr. McCoy if he is responsible for the Ford drag teams; all of the cars that are put out for shows for Ford Motor and that at times these cars are out in Dallas or Houston and that what is being talked about is when they have a changeover and the cars come back to be restyled before going out r on the road again. Mr. McCoy stated, yes, there is constant turn-over on these vehicles and they are there for very short periods and that he cannot predict that one hundred cars is normally more than they have to be dealing with, but they normally are talking about 40 to 60 cars. Mr. Hull stated it is the Department's opinion that they can accommodate 170 cars on the site. Mr. Tent stated the Commission is concerned with the parking which they believe is adequate but feel the landscaping of the facility should be stressed. He said a plan has been prepared and he believes the petitioner has had an opportunity to review it. Mr. Hull stated that a detailed landscape plan with estimates has been prepared and reviewed by the petitioner and concurred in and the recommendation is that the plant material be installed within nine months if this waiver use is granted. Mr. Tent stated that the storage of material as well as the housekeeping is a concern and that this should be within the confines of the property and the cars not stripped and left along the right-of-way. He questioned how this would be treated. i., Mr. McCoy stated that the standards of housekeeping of their clients has to be far above any normal operation; this would be nothing less than they would desire. He said the whole business is based on its general overall appearance. 5727 Mr. Wrightman asked if there is a controversy over the fence. Mr. Hull stated he doesn't think there is a great controversy over the fence but if there are a large number of cars to be stored there the people in the area would like to see it fenced and obscured and the landscape plan provides for that. He stated that from the petitioner's own standpoint he would like to have the fence so he does not have intrusion from uninvited:guests. Mr. McCoy stated that routine security is the only reason for the fence. Mr. Moser questioned Mr. Hull as to the necessity of the waiver use. Mr. Hull stated there is a provision in the Ordinance that makes reference to this type of use as being a waiver use. Mr. Dan Andrew, Industrial Development Coordinator, stated that he submitted a recommendation to the Planning Commission and stated that if proper screening is provided he would have no objection to the operation. Mr. Phillips has con- tacted adjoining business firms and they have no objection. He stated that garage and repair shops are waiver uses; this is a nebulous situation and as far as they are concerned he stated he suggested it was a waiver use. Mr. Hull referred the Commissioners to Ordinance #678. Mr. Tent stated that the Commission will act on this petition tonight but there are several other items on a study session to be taken up and this matter will be resumed at 10: 00 during the special meeting. On a motion duly made by Mr. Urightman, seconded by Mr. Colomina, and unanimously adopted, it was #10-158-69 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby adjourn the public hearing held on Tuesday, October 28, 1969 at approx- imately 8:30 p.m. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mr. Tent, Chairman, called the 251st Special Meeting to order at approximately 9:15 p.m. with approximately 20 interested persons in the audience. On a motion duly made by Mr. Santo, seconded by Mr. Moser, and unanimously adopted, it was #10-159-69 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on October 28, 1969 on Petition 69-10-2-24 as submitted by Car Corporation requesting to be granted a waiver use permit to operate a concept, design and engineering facility including manufacturer's new car parking on property located on the west side of Market Street between Plymouth Road and Commerce in Section 29, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 69-10-2-24 be approved with the following conditions: (1) That the landscaping plan be adhered to and implemented within nine months of the date of approval. 5728 (2) That the parking lot where the automobiles are to be stored, be obscured. for the following reason: (1) It is a compatible use that will provide tax base to the City and also be compatible with the adjacent development. FURTHER RESOLVED, notice of the above public hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Depart- ments as listed in the Proof of Service. Mr. Wrightman announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 67-7-1-27 by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to rezone a portion of Parcel 17F2, located east of Newburgh Road, south of Six Mile Road in Section 17, from C-2 to R-3-B. Mr. Tent stated the item under consideration concerns the Schroeder property. He said he would like to digress to the beginning of the petition and gave this account! Prior to April, 1966 the City Planning Commission studied the north- west sector of the City and came forth with a master plan for its development. This was reviewed by the City fathers and occupants of the area with a favorable reaction. The plan was adopted and it was intended to develop the area in accordance with it. In April of 1966 a petition was filed by Mr. Schroeder. A public hearing was held for rezoning from R-3-B to C-2. Mr. Kropf informed us that the C-2 zoning was needed for a small shopping center consisting of a A & P and neighborhood facilities. The Council heard the petition and on June 22, 1966 gave favorable action and the rezoning took place. On September 19, 1967 another hearing was held by the Planning Commission on its own motion because during the two-year period much happened to the property; the A & P complex did not materialize. Rumors came about that the property was to be disposed of so the Commission held a hearing on its rezoning. Mr. Kropf stated at this time that there would be no deal on the property relative to a discount store. The Commission took the matter under advisement and the petitioners were told that the Commission still wanted the Master Plan effectuated and would not be interest- ed in having this property rezoned to C-2 for any other use. Mr. Hull stated that Mr. Schroeder's son said he would be here tonight to represent his father. Mr. Tent stated that it is the Commission's understanding that the property has been sold to a Topps operation and based on that there are several interested people in the audience who would like to listen in at this meeting. Mr. Samuel Frankel, President of Fullgreen, Inc. , 2900 West Maple, Troy, Michigan, was present and stated that he has spent the greater part of his life in the real estate business, and that at one time he was instrumental in procurring a large site in the City of Livonia for Allied Supermarkets. More recently, he stated, he has developed a number of large developments, the most commonly known is Somerset in the City of Troy, which has a large apartment complex, a service center and a small office building, and if the Commission would like to see very advanced commercial development there will be an open house on November 5, 1969 and asked the Commissioners to be his guests. Mr. Frankel stated he has been working with a large concern which has stores from coast to coast; in this area they operate under the name of Topps or Fair Stores and are about 90,000 square feet in size. He said with them as principal tenants, they have succeeded with shopping centers. Mr. Frankel said he does not know any of the background on the Schroeder property. A broker brought the property to him and said it was avail- 5729 able, gave him the price, terms and conditions. He had negotiations with the owner, discussed it was was shown a survey and he learned that the parcel is divided into six parts. Of the six parts they retained one and sold him 5, Of the 5 he believed three are zoned commercial. He stated he bought the land under the name of Fullgreen, Inc., and has owned the property since the last week of August. Mr. Frankel stated that what they would like to do is build a modern Topps store with other needed stores to service this area, to provide ample parking to make ingress and egress very acceptable. He said they have developed a site plan which he thinks is very nice, very usable and fits the neighborhood. Topps is not strange to this area, the store at Schoolcraft and Telegraph has been there for ten years. He stated he had some elevations of the upgraded stores to show the Commission but first he wanted them to know that he was not aware of any conditions or any specific commitments about A & P or anything else; that he has learned this since the purchase; that an A & P representative appeared before this Commission for the rezoning but by the same token, that ten acres could not be used solely for any A & P installation. Now he discovers that the other tenant of size was supposed to be W. T. Grant Company, Mr. Tent stated this is one of the reasons why consideration earlier was given to rezoning the land back to residential because of the W. T. Grant. He asked if Topps is considered a discount store. Mr. Frankel stated he does not know what Mr. Tent means by that. Mr. Tent questioned if it has any discount store associated with it. He said Mr. Munger had stated there would not be a deal on this property relating to a discount store without consulting the Commission, and the first the Commission heard about this was through a rumor. Mr. Frankel stated that Topps and himself own this property and he would like to develop this parcel in conjunction with the Commission's thinking; whether or not Commission calls it a discount store. Mr. Tent stated the Commission had the same problem with Yankee Discount Store and they located on Eight Mile Road. This area on Six Mile is choice land and we do not want to flood the area with a large regional shopping center; also, the plan confines it to a neighborhood shopping center. The question of Mr. Schostak having some interest in the property was discussed. Mr. Frankel stated Mr. Schostak has no interest in this whatsoever. Mr. Santo stated he has made a pretty rough analysis and believes that a neighborhood shopping center is something that will serve the people in the neighborhood and whether or not we call this a discount store, it is definitely a type of store that will draw people from many miles. He stated his concern is about how much traffic will be generated bringing in the traffic from surrounding areas; that this is the definition of a regional center. He questioned if this is actually a regional or neighborhood shopping center. Mr. Frankel stated this is neither; a regional shopping center must be bigger and he believes this must be called a community center. He said this would penetrate an area bigger than a neighborhood but it would not be designed to go beyond the limits of Livonia. 5730 Mr. Tent questioned how it would be compared to the Yankee firm; they have a grocery store and drug store which was intended to go at Five Mile and Levan and it was agreed that penetration was to come from surrounding communities. Mr. Frankel stated he thinks Topps is far superior to Yankee, broader in depth and far greater lines of quality merchandise. Mr. Tent informed him that that is the same thing they say. Mr. C. I. Rutledge, 348 Ann Drive, Pontiac, Michigan, stated he can give some background on the sale of this property. Mr. Frankel was interested in some commercial property in the Livonia area. He said he went to the City Hall and picked up records of property that were zoned for commercial knowing that it is always difficult to rezone property, and these properties were presented to Mr. Frankel. He stated he did not know any of this background and he is sure that Mr. Frankel did not. I1r. Frankel selected this particular parcel. Mr. Rutledge stated he then approached Mr. Schroeder about selling it; they negotiated a sale and it was closed. Mr. Tent questioned if Mr. Rutledge had asked Mr. Schroeder whether there were any commitments made concerning the land. Mr. Rutledge replied, no, he understood that they had owned it for many years and the only thing Mr. Schroeder told him was that he had been interested at one time in becoming a participant in a commercial development there and that he felt he should not enter into the retail building and business of a commercial center. He stated that is all the background he knows. Mr. Tent stated there has been a breach of faith between this property and the City of Livonia insofar as what had been planted for the area. He said the homes in the area are pretty high priced and the people moved there to get away Lid from large shopping centers. Mr. Frankel stated he knew none of this at the time of the purchase. Mr. Urightman questioned if he was aware of the City of Livonia's Master Plan for the area. Mr. Rutledge stated no, he was not and he assumed that he obtained the most recent zoning information through the City offices and he doen't believe there has been anything wrong here. He stated he presented the property as it was zoned according to the Zoning Map and on this basis he presented it to Mr. Frankel. Mr. Tent stated he was sure Mr. Rutledge understands the Commission's interest in the property. Mr. Waller stated that about three years ago a Master Plan of the northwest area was prepared and the Commission knew that the City would be faced with the freeway and that it would in this section. He stated the City wants to have a public hearing on small sections of the northwest sector and develop it in harmony with the total plan. The plan was submitted to civic organizations throughout the City and the City fathers. This plan was adopted as the Commission's goals for this area and as such was considered at the time Mr. Schroeder presented himself to this Board wanting to know what he could use the land for because he wanted to get out of the vegetable business. Mr. Walker said the Commission ,et with Mr. Schroeder for about one and one half years and finally concluded a plan that fitted in with the plan for the whole area, 5731 and concern was given to the people who lived in the area because they were vitally concerned. We submitted the plan for this area and then went back to Mr. Schroeder, publicly, advising that this was a plan that would be considered on rezoning, also the neighborhood liked the plan. He submitted not only a site plan but architectural plans and we went along with the zoning and now we are in a position where something does not fit in with the pattern or faith of the people in the area and we cannot consider deviating from this plan unless we retracted all the way. Mr. Walker stated his belief that the Commission has dealt in good faith and perhaps the petitioners they probably were not made aware of all this, but it was made clear to Mr. Schroeder that if at any time he felt that he could not hold to that Plan the Commission themselves would change the zoning and that is why we are here tonight. Mr. Rutledge stated that all of the information available from the City regarding the type of zoning was obtained and this is the basis under which it was pur- chased, Mr. Tent stated the Commission feels they did not have a complete story and now he believes they do. Mr. Cone, 2900 West Maple, Troy, Michigan, stated there has been considerable reference to a Master Plan but as he understands it this property is zoned C-2 and if that is correct, the permitted uses under C-2 specifically provide for a discount store. He stated the site plan applies to any use in C-2 over five acres and they don't find any provision in the C-2 classification against a discount house. When a third party examines your rules and regulations and finds these provisions that we represent, he stated he doesn't see how the Commission can subscribe to them any wrong-doings because recommendations were followed. He stated these petitioners cannot be held accountable to any understanding that 1[ 10 the Commission had with Mr. Schroeder; they only rely upon the laws under the Zoning Ordinance, and it cannot be said to a petitioner that you will rezone his property C-2 provided he uses it for only certain C-2 uses. Mr. Tent stated the property is in excess of five acres so requires site plan approval which means that the property has to conform to what the Commission considers a Master Plan and that a certain section cannot be over-developed; this is germane to this zoning category. Mr. Cone stated they intend to submit a site plan and the Commission would have to find something wrong with the site plan, in the physical layout, not the zoning, in order to authorize this rezoning. Mr. Wrightman stated that the Planning Commission had a site plan approval of a certain project on this property prior to Mr. Frankel's purchase which he had no knowledge of, however, the site plan and the zoning was approved under an agreement between this Commission and the people who were to develop it, and if the Commission was not convinced that this presentation was in the best interest of our citizens it would not have been rezoned. Your site plan is not approved and we had no knowledge of your purchase of the property. Mr. Tent advised that this is not a public hearing but the Commission is going to hear Mr. Frankel's presentation and if they want to petition again at a later date for rezoning, they may do so. Mr. Frankel stated that this property was bought in good faith and they want to develop it in good faith. 5732 Mr. Frankel stated there are twelve acres of land and the plan shows the traffic lanes, row patterns, plantings and screen wall, and to go into greater detail they took the entrance in front to show walks with plants. He stated they have not had a chance to develop elevations as yet. He said the manager of the region for Topps, Mr. Oppenheimer, is a resident of Livonia and is familiar with the objectives of this community; and that the development will not detract from the surrounding area. He also stated he thought it not fair because the work "discount" store is used to pre-judge these people. Mr. Tent tanked Mr. Frankel and stated it is unfortunate that Mr. Schroeder could not be present tonight. On a motion duly made by Mr. Walker, seconded by Mr. Wrightman, it was #10-160-69 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on September 19, 1967 on Petition 67-7-1-27 as submitted by the City Planning Commission on its own motion to rezone a portion of Parcel 17F2 located east of Newburgh Road, south of Six Mile Road in Section 17, from C-2 to R-3-B, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 67-7-1-27 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The conditions in this area have changed and we no longer feel that we can justify this large a quantity of C-2 zoning in this area. (2) The presence of existing C-2 zoning in this area negates the need for an excessive quantity of this type of zoning. (3) C-2 zoning that accommodates an excessively high intensity of use could adversely effect the potential of the entire area and therefore adversely effect existing and proposed development. (4) Six Mile Road has not been improved to the extent that it could withstand the high intensity of use permitted within the C-2 zoning district. (5) There is presently no solution for the storm sewer that bisects this property. The complete solution for the enclosure of this drain should have been resolved prior to this date. (6) A large or regional shopping center would have a detrimental effect on the adjoining neighborhood and area. (7) The subject property, if developed for C-2 purposes, would result- in creating traffic congestion and traffic problems for the area. (8) The City's Master Plan would require the deletion of the subject C-2 zoning for this area of the City. (9) The zoning as proposed to be used for a discount store is not in harmony with the intent of our Northwest Master Plan. 5733 (10) At the time of zoning to commercial, the petition was submitted to the public and City fathers as a total com- plex of a high-class, specialty type store development. 7 (11) The present and future development of land in the area has been predicated on the Schroeder land staying in its originally planned use. (12) Because of many changes in this area over the past two years, and since we have now lost a commercial land use plan that was the cause of changing the zoning, it is in the best interests of the City for this property to be rezoned to R-3-B. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of August 30, 1967, 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 inthe Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Colomina, Santo, Walker, Heusted, Tent, Wrightman NAYS: None ABSENT: LaBo, Tunis ABSTAIN: Moser 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 their 251st Special Meeting held on Tuesday, October 28, 1969, at approximately 10:05 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ie =rry Writ,/ man, Se/tart' ATTEST: / z, Raym• d W. Tent, Chairman