Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1972-09-26 5112 MINUTES OF THE 246th REGULAR MEETING AND A PUBLIC HEARING __Y__. HELD BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, September 26, 1972, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 246th Regular Meeting and a Public Hearing at the Livonia City Hall, 33001 Five Mile Road, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, called the Public Hearing and Regular Meeting to order at 8:05 p.m. with approximately 75 interested persons in the audience. Members present: Daniel R. Andrew Esther Friedrichs David F. Merrion Francis M. Hand Suzanne Taylor Joseph Falk Herman H. Kluver Charles Pinto Joseph Talbot (arrived 8:12 p.m.) Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV; H. G. Shane, Planner IV; and Robert M. Feinberg, Assistant City Attorney were also present. Mr. Andrew informed the audience that if the petitions on the evenings agenda involve a question of rezoning or vacating then the Planning Commission will recommend to the City Council that certain action be taken whereupon the Council will ultimately decide whether or not to approve or deny a petition. Further if a petition involves a waiver of use approval that is denied, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City Council. Mr. Andrew stated that Item #14 would not be acted upon because the Attorney for that petition was ill and not able to attend this evening's session. Mr. Herman Kluver, Secretary read the first item on the agenda, Petition 72-8-2-24 by Page and Cox requesting to be granted a waiver use approval to construct a recreational vehicle sales and service center on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Yale and Levan in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 32. Mr. Andrew passed the gavel to the Vice-Chairman at this time. Mr. Robert Page of Page and Cox was present and stated that they wished to construct a recreational vehicle sales and service facility on this property. Mr. Hand asked whether they had an option on this property? Mr. Page stated that they had. Mr. Hand asked how many vehicles would be displayed? Mr. Cox stated 75 to 80 vehicles would be displayed, ten across the front and the rest parked behind the front ten. 140 Mr. Falk asked how much lighting would be involved? • 5113 Mr. Cox stated three light poles across the front and two across the back which would be considered security lights. 1LIV Mr. Falk asked the hours of operation? Mr. Cox stated until 9 p.m. every day. Mr. Falk asked whether the vehicles would be new or used? Mr. Cox stated they would be new. Mr. Falk asked what happened during the winter months? Mr. Cox stated they wanted inside display area because they intended to make this a year around sales facility. Mr. Falk asked how long the vehicles were. Mr. Cox stated that 25 feet long was the maximum length of the vehicles. Mr. Kluver stated that he noted that an area was designated for inventory parking and also a five foot wall. Mr. Kluver wanted to know how many vehicles wouldc they keep in inventory. Mr. Cox stated that he could not give a figure because as sales increased so would the inventory. Mr. Kluver asked whether there would be a fence on top of the five foot wall? Mr. Cox stated there would be a six foot barbed wire fence on top of the wall. Mr. Falk asked Mr. Nagy whether the parking spaces were adequate? Mr. Nagy stated they were more than adequate in size and in excess of zoning ordinance requirements. Mr. Falk asked the height of the building? Mr. Cox stated 18 feet. Mr. Merrion asked whether the vehicles would be higher than the earth berm shown. Mr. Cox stated that the earth berm would be 2 to 3 feet high with vehicles higher. Mr. Merrion asked whether provision had been made for a sidewalk? Mr. Cox stated that provisions had been made for a sidewalk. Mr. Merrion asked whether the side walk would go through the berm. Mr. Cox stated it would. IleMr. Merrion asked what was behind the property? Mr. Cox stated there were a row of trees across the property. Mr. Merrion asked whether the trees were on the property line? — 5114 Mr. Cox stated they were on the edge of the easement. Mr. Merrion asked the height of the trees? Mr. Cox stated 8 feet. Mr. Merrion asked Mr. Nagy whether it was possible to build the protective wall on the easement. Mr. Nagy stated that there is an existing wall to the east and they will line up their proposed wall with the existing wall. Mr. Hand asked whether there was any correspondence on this item? Mr. Nagy stated they had a letter on file from the Engineering Department stating • there were no storm sewers readily available. 800 feet of storm sewer will be required and additional right-of-way will be required to make it a 60 foot right-of-way. Mr. Pinto asked what the proposed doing about the sewer? Mr. Cox stated they would put one in. Mr. Pinto asked whether they would display only ten vehicles. Mr. Cox stated there would be ten vehicles across the front of the property. with other vehicles stacked behind. / Mr. Pinto asked how many vehicles would be inside? Mr. Cox stated there would be 12 vehicles. Mr. Pinto asked whether there are that many models? Mr. Cox stated there was. Mrs. Taylor asked whether the site plan submitted was also intended to their landscape plan. Mr. Cox stated that it was intended to be their landscape plan also. Mr. Rueben, 35680 Elmira stated he was against a barbed wire fence. He also wanted to know whether there was anything against dogs as protection. Mr. Hand stated he did not know of any ordinance forbidding dogs. Mr. Nagy stated that barbed wire could not be used in a commercial zone, only in heavy industrial and only for security purposes. Mr. Hand asked whether they had a night security service. Mr. Cox stated that is what they would lean to. Mr. Fenick, 35652 Elmira was concerned about the lighting. i . Mr. Cox stated there would be limited lighting, they were only interested in lighting the lot and not the residences nearby. 5115 Mr. Pinto asked what type of lighting they would have? Mr. Page stated the typical light poles about 20-25 feet in height. Mr. Cash, 35554 Elmira stated there was a violation on the present wall in the past and can you tie a new wall onto one that is in violation. Mr. Hand stated he was unaware of a violation. Mr. Cash stated that the wall is on the property line and not on easement. Mr. Hand stated he supposed he could have the option of doing this. Mr. Nagy stated that the City records would verify whether the wall was located on the property line or easement. Mr. Carr asked whether repair work was going to be done in the building or outside. Mr. Page stated it would be done on the inside of the vehicle. He further stated a place was set aside in their building for repair. There was no one else present wishing to be heard on this petition and the Vice-Chairman declared the public hearing closed on this item. On a motion duly made by Mr. Merrion, seconded by Mr. Pinto and adopted it was, #9-234-72 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 26, 1972 on Petition 72-8-2-24 as submitted by Page and Cox requesting to be granted a waiver use approval to construct a recreational vehicle sales and service center on property located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Yale and Levan in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 32, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table this item to the October 3 study meeting. • A roll call vote resulted in the following: AYES: Falk, Friedrichs , Merrion, pinto, Talbot, Taylor, Hand, ICluver NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Andrew Mr. Hand, Vice-Chairman, declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Hand returned the gavel to Mr. Andrew at this time. Mr. Kluver read the next item on the agenda, Petition 72-8-2-26 by Marvin Chin requesting to be granted a waiver us approval to construct an addition to the existing restaurant located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Harrison and Inkster Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36. ft: Mr. Nagy read a letter from the Engineering Department which stated there were no engineering problems. Mr. Chin was present and stated that he was adding an extension on to his storage locker room and an office. 5116 Mr. Andrew asked whether there would be any additional seating? I: Mr. Chin stated there would not. Mr. Andrew asked whether he would be adding any more employees? Mr. Chin stated there would be two more. Mr. Andrew asked Mr. Nagy whether Mr. chin would be in violation of parking requirements? Mr. Nagy stated that he would not. Mr. Andrew asked Mr. Chin whether he had been contacted by•the Planning Department about the beautification of Plymouth Road? Mr. Chin stated that he had been notified. At this point Mr. Bakewell explained the beautification plan to Mr. Chin. Mr. Chin agreed to the planting of material as suggested by Mr. Bakewell. Mr. Andrew asked whether it was their intent to hard surface the back lot? Mr. Chin stated that they already had a bid in for hard surfacing the back lot. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the petition and the public hearing was closed at this time. At this point Mr. Andrew requested that Mr. Chin affix hissignature to the Site Plan which was submitted. Mrs. Taylor asked whether there was a wall behind the site. Mr. Nagy stated there was a wall along the rear property line. On a motion duly made by Mr. Pinto, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted it was, #9-235-72 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on September 26, 1972 on Petition 72-8-2-26 by Marvin Chin request- ing to be granted a waiver use approval to construct an addition to the existing restaurant located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Harrison and Inkster Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 36, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 72-8-2-26 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed building addition is compatible with the existing development of the site. (2) The site capacity is capable of accommodating the planned addition. with the following conditions: (1) That the unimproved portion of the parking area be upgraded by the installation of hard surface paving to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division. 5117 (2) That the front yard and right-of-way fronting along Plymouth be landscaped as shown on the approved plan which reflects the Plymouth Road Beautification Plan. (3) That the landscaping be installed before the proposed addition is occupied. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 72-8-1-40 by Patrick Duggan, Attorney for Dale Investment Company, re- questing to rezone property located on the southeast corner of Middlebelt and Clarita in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, from RUF to C-2. Mr. Nagy read a letter from the Engineering Department which indicated there were no apparent engineering problems in connection with this site. Mr. Duggan was present and stated that his client wished to construct a commercial building on this parcel. Mr. Duggan did not feel this site was attractive for residential. They would then lease the building to a lamp and furniture store. He also felt this was a proper place for such a shop. Mr. Andrew asked why they were seeking a C-2 and not a C-1 zoning? Mr. Duggan stated that C-2 gave them a little more flexibility. Mr. Andrew asked whether there was a structure on this site? Mr. Duggan stated a structure existed facing Middlebelt and that it would be removed. Mr. Hand asked whether Clarita was paved? Mr. Nagy stated it was a sealcoat road. Mr. Ken Chard, 29223 Clarita was present and stated he did not understand why with the buildings at the Mall and with everything south of Clarita zoned residential this was even being considered for commercial? He stated he moved there because it was a residential area. Mrs. Chard, same. address asked about the difference of C-1 and C-2? Mr. Andrew explained the difference to her. Mr. Duggan stated that his client was not seeking a rezoning on a speculative use but that they would put in whatever is granted. Further land along Middle- belt will not go residential and they feel commercial is just as attractive as Professional buildings. Mr. Duggan further stated that they had no objection to a C-1 zoning. 5118 Mrs. Kenneth Gard, stated that Middlebelt Road is the busiest street in _ A _:ihvog _and traffic will back up into Clarita in an effort to get sway from-busy Middlebelt. There was no one else present wishing to be heard and the Chairman declared the public hearing on this item closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted, it was -2367.72_ RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 26, 1972 on Petition 72-8-1-40 as submitted by _ Patrick Duggan, Attorney for Dale Investment Company, request- ing to reeone property located on the southeast corner of ,_ Niidfdlebelt Road and Clarita in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, from RUF to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby _..__,:_. recommend to the City Council that Petition 72-8-1-40 be denied for the following reasons: _ ____ Zi) The zon*ng classification of C-2, general commercial, would allow uses inconsistent with the land use recommendations of the Livonia Mall Study. _ (2) The zoning classification of C-2, general commercial, would • be detrimental to the surrounding residential areas. Mr. ha_-.- - (3) The proposed zoning change would provide for an increase in „� Lebon ., _ The traffic along a residential street. wit: i:. c --- -_. (4)- To allow commercial uses on the south side of the proposed circumferential drive which is indicated by the Livonia Mall Study, would promote the expansion of commercial use south along Middlebelt Road. (5) There is no need for additional commercial zoning as proposed by this petition for this area. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, _ _ under date of September 7, 1972 and notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Consumers Power Company, City Departments and petitioner as listed in the >, - -_.. . Proof of Service. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. T_he -Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 72-8-1-41 by Milton Lebonbom for Samuel B. Sherer requesting to rezone property located on the northeast corner of Middlebelt and West Chicago 1,`rc - - Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 36, from R-1 to R-7 and C-1 LI 5119 & letter is in the file from Mr. Turner, Chief of Police, who recommended that - no left turns be allowed on Middlebelt. - - ------------ (010 --"--- -- A letter was also read from City Engineering Department stating that Middlebelt was fully dedicated and no major engineering problems were connected with the site. Mr Lebonbom was present and stated that they had conducted a study and decided this Wonderland area did not have a savings and loan type of business anywhere near.- -He went on to say that they had more room than they needed and all the existing trees could be retained. Ph: Andrew. asked Mr. Lebonbom for the name of the proposed company? Mr. Lebonbom-stated-it--would-be-Detroit Federal Savings and Loan. Mr. Andrew stated that the architect had included acreage to the middle of the road. --_ -_ _ - - ----- Mr. Lebonbom stated he was unaware of this. Mr. Talbot asked if the Federal law would allow them to build? Mr. Lebonbom stated- they_were allowed to build residential but not commercial. Mr. Hand asked when. construction would be started if zoning were approved. Mr. Lebonbom stated~:that_under- Federal Law when it is approved you must start within one year. If you do not start, your approval can be revoked. Mr. Hand stated_then_it-was- evident that they have already applied for their approval. Mr. Lebonbom-stated that they already know they can go ahead. Mr. Hand asked whether they would be agreeable to widening the road. Mr. Lebonbom stated they were-agreeable to widening the road. Mr.. Falk-asked the._height of the apartment building. Mr. Lebonbom stated they would be 2 stories. Mr. Pinto wondered about the size of the building in relation to the proposed site_being:133- ft x 332 ft. now perhaps not being large enough to accommodate the7business, in the future if expansion is necessary. Mr. Lebonbom stated that most of the branches do not need to be large any more because of computerization. • • Mrs. Malo, 29525 W. Chicago, stated she was not against the savings and loan 140 but. did wonder what would go in next door. Mr. Lebonbom stated they would be condominiums. Mrs. Malo asked whether the trees would be retained. 5120 Mr. Lebonbom stated that 85% of the trees would be retained: Mrs. Malo asked how many units would be going in. - Mr. Lebonbom stated there would be 36 units. There was no one else wishing to be heard and the Chairman declared the public hearing closed. - On a motion duly made by Mr. Talbot, seconded by Mr. Pinto and unanimously adopted it was, #9-237-72 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on September 26, 1972 on Petition 72-8-1-41 as submitted by Milton-Lebonbom for-Samuel B. Sherer requesting to rezone property located on the northeast corner of Middlebelt and West-=Chicago Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 36, from .R_1_to-- --7 -and C-1,-the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 72-8-1-41 be approved for the following reasons: rte- = - - - (1) The proposed zoning change and the permitted uses of the yrc_:Districts would be compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses of the area. TnC Cr:a rm n (2) The size, shape and location of the area under petition Tne Sezrc:&_: Lean-accommodate the permitted uses of the proposed and LZ ning Districts - _ = _ FURTHER-RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, Tn.E. main=ander date of September 7, 1972 and notice of such hearing was = sent_ tothe Detroit Edison Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Consumers Power acompany,'City, Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 72-7-3-5 by Paul McDonough requesting to vacate an easement located on the east side =es..c_-of .-Hillcrest between Elmira and Robert Avenues in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 35. A letter from the Engineering Department reveals that according to their records there is a=.30 inch storm-sewer and if they run across the sewer they may have to take it out. There was no one else present wishing to be heard on this petition and the chairman-declared the public hearing closed. On-a,motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Hand and unanimously adopted, it was 3 '9-23472 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on September 26, 1972 on Petition 72-7-3-5 by Paul McDonough requesting • to-vacate an easement located on the east side of Hillcrest between Elmira 5121 • and -Robert Avenues in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 35, the fie- y--P�atitt-ing- Commission does hereby recommend to the City - I Council that Petition 72-7-3-5 be approved for the following . _ 1===Y-reasons:=- =- _ --- - - - (1) The City Engineering Division has indicated no opposition "_=- -. - - - to the proposed vacating since the easement no longer is used for utility purposes. However, they advise that --~ - -- the owner should be advised of the abandoned pipe within the easement so that if he encounters the pipe in the process of constructing his garage, it will be his responsibility to remove any portions of the pipe. - -'' 7-=':-7 (2) There is no reason to retain private easements across ---Is-"-I -T're= =property that-serves-no practical purpose. • 7"-L'= == 5122 - -- - o1Mi higan Bell Telephone Company and Detroit - E zc2mpeny_is Xeceivedt.- - The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Chairman advised Mr. and Mrs. Fortin that they would be notified when the Commission receives the recommendations. The Chairman called a brief recess at 9 :45 p.m. - _ _.. - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The meeting was reconvened at approximately 9:55 p.m. with all members present aswere-present- for the initial roll-eall. • The--Secretary-announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 72-8-2-25 by Rev. Herbert Noe, Galilean Baptist Church, requesting to be - - granted a"waiver use approval to erect a school bus garage and a modular classroom building on the church property located itUthe Southeast-corner-of-Seven-Mile-Road-and--Maplewood--in-the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12. On a motion duly made by M . Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Taylor and unanimously adopted it was_,_ ._ - #9-240-72 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held oirSeptember 5-, 1972= on Petition 72-8-2-25 by Rev. Herbert Noe, Galilean Baptist Church, requesting to be granted a waiver use akproial="to-erecta-school-bus garage and a modular classroom building on the church property located at the southeast corner of Seven Mile Road and Maplewood in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table this item to the October 3, Study Meeting. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announcedthe next item on the agenda, Petition 72-6-1-35 by Hope Congregational Church requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Schoolcraft Road, east of Henry Ruff in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 23, from RUF to R-9. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Merrion and adopted it was, RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on August 15, 1972 on Petition 72-6-1-35 as submitted by Hope Congregational Church requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Schoolcraft Road, east of Henry Ruff in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 23, from RUF to R-9, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that petition 72-6-1-35 be denied for- the following reasons: 161:0: =f- _.:={1)= =The uses allowed by the proposed R-9 zoning will be an encroachment into an otherwise single-family residential area. • (2)- The increase in density allowed by the R-9 zoning district will adversely affect the stability of the adjacent single-family- residential subdivision. 5123 FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing 10 was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of September 7, 1972 and a 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. A roll call vote resulted in the following: AYES: Merrion, Hand -NAYS: Falk, Friedrichs, Pinto, Talbot, Taylor, Andrew ABSTAIN: Kluver The Chairman declared the motion failed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Talbot, seconded by Mr. Falk and adopted it was, #9-241-72 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 15, 1972 on Petition 72-6-1-35 by Mt. Hope Congregational Church requesting to rezone property located on the north side of Schoolcraft Road, east of Henry Ruff in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 23, from RUF to R-9, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 72-6-1-35 be approved only for that portion of the petition which lies behind and northerly of the church and denying that part of the petition lying east of the church or specifically the parking lot 10 for the following reasons : i (1) There is a need for additional middle-income senior citizens housing within the City of Livonia. (2) A modest increase in density in this area will not adversely affect surrounding single-family residential subdivisions. (3) A small senior citizens housing development is most appropriate adjacent to the existing single-family residential homes and as a part of an existing in- stitutional use. (4) The R-9 zoning district allows uses which will not substantially increase the incoming and outgoing traffic along Henry Ruff Road when it is finally developed. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above public hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of July 26, 1972 and a notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: IL; AYES: Falk, Friedrichs, Merrion, Pinto, Talbot, Taylor, Andrew NAYS; Hand ABSTAIN: Kluver 5124 The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 72-5-3-3 by William D. Balmer and C. Frank McPhillips requesting to vacate property located on the east side of WEstbrook Drive, south of Mallory Drive in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 17. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Hand and unanimously adopted it was #9-242-72 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 15, 1972 on Petition 72-5-3-3 by William D. Balmer and C. Frank McPhillips requesting to vacate property located on the east side of Westbrook Drive, south of Mallory Drive in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 17, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 72-5-3-3 be denied for the following reasons: (1) The easement should be retained to provide for the pedestrian access to the interior park lands. (2) The established walkway easement provides for the most direct access to the interior park land. (3) The proposed walkway easement and walkway are needed to discourage the otherwise open invitation to have the children of the area approach the parkway by trespassing across the residential lots backing up to the park lands. 1,/1" (4) This walkway should be implemented as part of the planned improvements established at the time the subdivision plat was approved. (5) The City cf Livonia Parks & Recreation Commission is opposed to the vacating of this pedestrian access to the park lands. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of July 26 , 1972 and a notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Consumers Power Company, City Departments and petitioner as listed in the Proof of Service. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 72-7-1-36 by Patrick Duggan, Attorney for Robert Saks Mechigian, to rezone property located south of Seven Mile Road, east of Melvin in the North- • east 1/4 of Section 11, from R-5, R-1A and P.S. to C-2. On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mrs. Taylor and adopted, it was #9-243-72 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Petition 72-7-1-36 as submitted by Patrick Duggan for Robert Saks Mechigian, to rezone property located south of Seven Mile Road east of Melvin in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 11, from R-5, R-lA and P.S. to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend 5125 to the City Council that Petition 72-7-1-36 be approved for the following reasons: — - (1) The proposed zoning change is an extension of the existing C-2 zoning district abutting the area under petition located to the east. (2) The proposed zoning change will provide for uses that will complement the uses of the regional shopping center. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer under date of July 26, 1972 and a 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. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Falk, Friedrichs, Talbot, Taylor NAYS: Hand, Kluver, Andrew ABSTAIN: Merrion, Pinto The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 72-7-2-21 by Rodney C. Kropf, Attorney requesting to be granted a waiver use approval to construct a Big Boy Restaurant on property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between Newburgh Road and Levan Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 17. ()motion motion duly made by Mr. Talbot, seconded by Mr. Falk and adopted it was, #9-244-72 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on August 15, 1972 on Petition 72-7-2-21- by Rodney C. .Kropf, Attorney requesting to be granted a waiver use approval to construct a Big Boy Restaurant on property located on the south side of Six Mile Road between Newburgh Road and Levan Road in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 17, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 72-7-2-21 be approved for the following reason: (1) The proposed use complies with all of the requirements of Zoning Ordinance #543 as well as the conditions of the previously approved site plan for the adjacent shopping center. with the following conditions: (1) That the Site and Landscape Plan #7114, dated 6/21/72, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to. (2) That all landscape elements as shown on the approved Plan shall be installed before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. (3}-__ That building elevation plan dated 8/15/72, which is hereby -- approved shall be adhered to. (4) That the location and design of any signs to be erected, either free-standing or attached to the building, shall besubject to approval by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. FURTHER RESOLVED, that notice of the above public hearing was sent to property owners within 500 feet, petitioner and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service. -4 roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: - - AYES: Falk, Friedrichs , Pinto, Talbot, Taylor, Hand, Kluver NAY 1errion, Andrew- The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. • The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 72-6-3-4 by Krpp-t,,Attorney ,dor, Chester Koppy, requesting to vacate property located between Clarita Avenue and Curtis Avenue, east of Loveland Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10. On a mot on duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted,it was to #9•-245-7i RESOLVED that, pursuant to a public hearing having been held on August 15, 1972 1972 on Petition 72=6-3-4 as submitted by Rodney C. , Ir-opf, `Attorney requesting to vacate property located between Clarita Avenue and Curtis Avenue, east of Loveland Avenue in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table this item to the October 3, 1972 study meeting. _- The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mr. Kluver announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 72-9-8-24P by Havis-Golvinsky Associates requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #988, in connection with the construction of an appliance store proposed to be located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Yale and liayneRoad in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33. On a motion duly made by Mr. Merrion, seconded by Mr. Falk, it was RESOLED that, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Z-oning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #988, the City Planning Commission does hereby deny Petition 72-9.-8-24P as submitted by Havis-Glovinsky Associates requesting approval of all plans in connection with the construction of an appliance store proposed to be located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Yale and 5127 Wayne Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33, for the following reason; (1) The setback of the building is not compatible 1 with the building to the east nor the building to the west. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following; AYES: Falk, Merrion, Pinto NAYS: Friedrichs, Talbot, Taylor, Hand, Kluver, Andrew The Vice-Chairman declared the motion failed. . . On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Andrew and adopted it was, #9-246-72 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance #988, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 72-9-8-24P as submitted by Havis-Glovinsky Associates requesting approval of all plans in connection with the construction of an appliance store proposed to be located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Yale and Wayne Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33 subject to the following conditions : IL (1) That the front yard setback shall be eighty-two feet . (821) as measured from the south line of Plymouth Road as shown on the Master Thoroughfare Plan of the City of Livonia. , (2) That the west elevation of the building shall be brick. (3) That there shall be additional parking spaces shown in front of the building which are not in conflict with the parking stalls as shown on the Site Plan. (4) That a landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval within thirty (30) days from the date of this approval. (5) That all elements of the landscape plan shall be installed before issuance of A Certificate of Occupancy. (6) That the sign attached to the building shall have an overall dimension of 3' x 40' . (7) That the mullions on the north and east elevations shall be •of a bronze color to closely match the brick proposed for the structure. t .. 5128 A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: (I' ArESI Friedrichs, Talbot, Taylor, Hand, Kluver, Andrew NAYS: Falk, Merrion, Pinto 1 The Vice-Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, letter dated 9/8/72 from Harry J. Will requesting an extension of the approval given to Petition 71-7-2-25 by Harry J. Will requesting to be granted a waiver of use permit for a funeral home and undertaking establishment proposed to be located on the north side of Six Mile Road, east of Newburgh Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section- 8. - On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Merrion and unanimously adopted it was #9,247-72 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a request dated September 8, 1972 from Harry J. Will requesting an extension of the approval of Petition 71-7-2-25 by Harry J. Will requesting to be granted a waiver use approval for a funeral home and under- taking establishment proposed to be located on the north side of Six Mile Road, east of Newburgh Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 8, given in Planning Commission Resolution #8-218-72 the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that a one-year extension be granted for the following to reasons: (1) The petitioner has encountered practical difficulty in the implementation of the proposed funeral home. (2) There have been no changes in the petitioner's plans which were previously approved on August 19, 1971. K The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 72-9-5-4 by R. Seeley for Greenfield Construction Company, requesting approval to remove topsoil from property located on the northwest corner of Six Mile Road and Newburgh Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted it was #9-248-72 RESOLVED that, in conformance with Section 18.13D of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance, the City Planning Commission does hereby grant Petition 72-9-5-4 by R. Seeley for Greenfield Construction Company, requesting to remove topsoil from property located at the northwest corner of Six Mile Road and Newburgh Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7, subject to I: compliance with regulations of the Engineering Division and Police Department for the following reason: r (1) It is necessary to grant this petition so that the topsoil stockpiled on this site can be removed. 5129 XTIMIER,=RESOD,_-that__the-appl .cant--shall .have deposited ----- - with- the _ ------_with- the City Clerk a corporate surety bond in an amount .not=less. than $72,000 and a cash bond in an amount not less than -X7,200; such bonds shall be for an indefinite period until released and discharged by resolution of the City Planning Commission;. and further that the applicant shall apply for and obtain the permit herein authorized within 30 days from -- -- -- the date of this letter. The .Chairman declared the motion carried and the- foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary-announced the-next-item on the agenda, letter 9/19/72 from Edward J.-. Pringlemeir, Bel-Men Realty, Inc., regarding landscape improvement on property located on the east side of Farmington C~- - :__ _Road, north of Roycroft- Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted -- ---- -- ---- . _- -- - #9-249-72 RESOLVED thattheletterdated 9/l9/72submitted-by Edward J. Pringlemeir, Bel-Men Realty, Inc. regarding landscape improvement onwproperty-located on the-east-side of Farmington Road, north af:Roycroft Avenue in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15, be kicepted-as meeting the requirement for the submittal of a land- scape:plan for-approval by the Planning Commission. The Chairman declared the-.motion carried and=the foregoing resolution adopted. �z H�DEa_L:. The Secretary announced:-the -next :item-oft-the agenda, final plat approval for Livonia -Mall-Estates Subdivision located on the northwest corner of=Eeven Mile Road-and Sunset, if extended northerly, in the • Southwest 1/4 of Section 2. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hana, seconded by .Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted it was _._ _ _ #9-250-72 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the final plat of Livonia Mall Estates • Subdivision located on the northwest corner of Seven Mile Road -___- sad=Sunset, =if extended northerly, in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 2;.:be_approved for the following reasons : "- rc11 plat `conforms -to -the previously approved preliminary plat. AYES ; _ _- _--_ - (2-) •All the financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor have -been met. C7-117:(3) : The Engineering recommends approval of the final plat. �.. _ iJRTHER RESOLVED, inasmuch as it appears on the records that tentative approval of said proposed plat was given by the City Planning Commission under Resolution i61-5-7l adopted on January 19, 1971; and it further appearing that said proposed plat together with plans and specifications for improvements therein have been • : -__ _ approved by the Department of Public Works, Engineering Division, 5130 under date of October 292 1971i and itfurtherappearing that. the financial assurances required in Council Resolution #35,72 adopted on January 5, 1972 have been filed with the City Clerk as confirmed by a letter dated September 27, 1972,. it would therefore appear that all the conditions necessary to the release of building permits have been met and the Building Department is hereby so notified. The Chairman declared the motinn carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, request for release of bonds filed in connection with Petition 71-1-5-1 requesting to remove topsoil from property located on the southwest corner of Six Mile Road and Newburgh Roads in Section 18. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Talbot and unanimously adopted it was, #9-251-72 RESOLVED that, pursuant to the recommendation and report of the Bureau of Inspection dated September 12, 1972, the City Planning Commission does herein authorize the release of the Bond in the amount of $27,500.00 filed by the General Insurance Company of America for Greenfield Construction Company, 13040 Merriman Road, Livonia, Michigan, under date of September 27, 1968, and the cash bond of $2,750.00, Receipt #04938, posted in connection with topsoil removal operations performed under Permit No. 120, Petition 71-1-5-1, issued to Greenfield Con- struction Company, Inc. , 13040 Merriman Road, Livonia, Michigan; il; it appearing from the above report that all Ordinances, rules and regulations have been complied with and the City Clerk is herein authorized to do all things necessary to the full per- formance of this resolution. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, approval of the minutes of the meeting held by the City Planning Commission on August 15, 1972. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Kluver and adopted it was, #9252-72 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the meeting held by the City Planning Commission on August 15, 1972 are approved. A roll call vote resulted in the following: AYES: Falk, Friedrichs, Pinto, Talbot, Taylor, Hand, Kluver, Andrew NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Merrion The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, approval of the minutes of the meeting held by City Planning Commission on August 22, 1972. On a motion duly made by Mr. Hand, seconded by Mr. Talbot and adopted it was, • #9-253-72 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the meeting held by the City Planning Commission on August 22, 1972 are approved. 5131 A roll call rote resulted in the following; AYES: Friedrichs, Merrion, Pinto, Talbot, Taylor, Hand, Andrew NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Falk, Kluver • The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, approval of the minutes of the meeting held by the City Planning Commission on September 5, 1972. On a motion duly made by Mr. Pinto, seconded by Mr. Hand and adopted it was, .9-254-72 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the meeting held by the City Planning Commission on September 5, 1972 are approved. A roll call vote resulted in the following: AYES: Falk, Merrion, Pinto, Talbot, Taylor, Hand, Kluver, Andrew NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Friedrichs The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The Secretary announced the next item on the agenda, Petition 72-9-8-26P by Wonderland Sales, Inc. , requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance as amended by Ordinance #988, submitted in connection with the construction of a sales and service building for an existing business located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Levan a and Newburgh Roads in Section 29. On a motion duly made by Mr. Talbot, seconded by Mr. Pinto and unanimously adopted it was #9-233-72 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance 1988, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 72-9-8-26P as submitted by Wonderland Sales, Inc. , requesting approval of all plans required by Ordinance #988 in connection with the construction of a sales and service building on property located on the north side of Plymouth Road between Levan and Newburgh Roads in Section 29 subject to the following conditions: (1) That the east and west walls of the service area be 25% shadow block. (2) That the east, west and north elevations of the service portion of the building be painted a compatible color to match the brick. (3) That the landscape plan as shown on Site Plan PC-2721, dated 9/19/72, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to. (4) That the landscape material shall be installed prior • to issuance of A Certificate of Occupancy. • 5132 C5Z That_the. landscape. suaterial_installed shall be. 'Maintained in a healthy condition, (6) That there shall be no signs painted or affixed to the west wall of the structure. The Chairman declared the motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made and seconded the 246th Regular meeting of the City Planning Commissions adjourned ht 11:35 p.m. CITY PLANNING CONNISSION ' I 2ekv.A.A..." Herman H. Kluver, Secretary ATTEST: Daniel R. Andrew,. Chairman i •