HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1980-12-16 ,
7472
1: MINUTES OF THE 403rd REGULAR MEETING
AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY
ILO PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LIVONIA
On Tuesday, December 16, 1980, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 403rd Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000
Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, called the Regular Meeting and Public Hearings to
order at 8:00 p.m. , with approximately 17 interested people in the audience.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Judith Scurto Donald Vyhnalek Daniel R. Andrew
C. Russell Smith Joseph Falk Sue Sobolewski
Jerome Zimmer
MEMBERS ABSENT: R. Lee Morrow
Herman Kluver
Messrs. John J. Nagy, City Planning Director and H G Shane, Assistant City
Planning Director were also present.
Mr. Andrew then informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves
a rezoning request, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council,
who in turn will then hold their own Public Hearing and decide the question. If a
t
petition onvolves a waiver use request, and the petition is denied by the Planning
Commission, the petitioner then has ten days in which to appeal for relief. Otherwise
the petition is terminated.
Mr. Falk, Secretary announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 80-10-1-31 by
Roy W. Johnson requesting to rezone property located on the east side
of Middlebelt, south of Morlock in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 1, from
RUF to P.S.
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter dated November 13th from Engineering indicating
there is no storm sewer readily available. We have a letter dated
December 15th from David McDowell, Superintendent of the Clarenceville
School District, indicating that they are in support of the rezoning.
Mr. Andrew: How did Colonial Furniture handle storm sewerwater?
Mr. Nagy: There is a retention basin in the back. They do not use all their
property.
Roy Johnson, 20793 Farmington Road, Suite #7, Farmington Hills, Petitioner: I talked
with Engineering regarding the storm sewer water. We are thinking of
a retention basin with dry well. We will run the appropriate perk
tests.
Mr. Zimmer: How many feet of frontage does petitioner have?
Mr. Nagy: 165 feet.
Mr. Andrew: Are there any comments from the audience?
lb
Mr. David Brandon, 20115 Parkville, Livoni.;: I own Lot 390a1 and our rear property
line coincides. I have been here for 15 years and I have been watching
the neighborhood develop. he traffic on Middlebelt is heavy. There
7473
dr
is more access to our neighborhood now. When Dembs-Roth built the
furniture store they did not build the wall. I sent a letter stating
I think a wall should be put up. We have to have a buffer here.
1110 Junior high school or high school kids walk through the neighborhood
and cut through and throw matches. In 1978 there was one fire in
August. In 1979 5 fires and this year there were four. They set
the dumpster on fire too. They finally put a fence around the dumpster
last year and that helped. I would like to see a wall put up.
Mr. Andrew: At the site plan approval we will be required by ordinance to have that
plan show a wall. However, they have a right to appeal to the Zoning
Board of Appeals.
Mr. Nagy: If you condition an approval that "there shall be a wall erected and
if that wall should be waived it cannot preclude property owner from
asking relief from Zoning Board of Appeals. If Zoning Board does
chose to waive wall Planning Commission's original action is null
and void and then petitioner has to come back to Planning.
Ms. Sobolewski: If this case for Colonial Furniture comes up before the Zoning
Board in about three to five years (you could always check when it will
come up for rehearing) I would advise you to go to the Zoning Board
with the same exact story. Those are the people that make the decision
to protect the residents from the nuisance.
•
tMr. Andrew: When was the fence around the dumpster put up?
Mr. Brandon: Last year.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, would you check on that please?
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-275-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
December 16, 1980 on Petition 80-11-1-31 as submitted by Roy W.
Johnson requesting to rezone property located on the east side
of Middlebelt, south of Morlock in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 1,
from RUF to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 80-11-1-31 be approved for the
following reasons:
(1) The proposed change of zoning complies with the Future Land
Use Plan of the City of Livonia which Plan designates the
subject area as commercial, therefore, the proposed office
zoning is even more restrictive in land use than what is
recommended by the Future Land Use Plan.
(2) The proposed change of zoning and permitted uses of the P.S.
District would be compatible to and in harmony with the established
and surrounding uses of the area.
7473A
(3) The site has the capacity to support the proposed change of use.
ILO (4) The site is severely impacted by the established and surrounding
uses of the area which has diminished from the long-term residential
use and enjoyment of the area as is permitted by the present zoning
classification.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper the Livonia Observer, under date of 12/1/80 and
a notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company, Chesapeake
& Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telphone Company, Consumers Power
Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof of Service.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 80-11-1-32 by Ross C.
Edwards to rezone property located on the southwest corner of Seven Mile
Road and Maplewood in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 12, from RUF to P.S.
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from Engineering indicating that Seven Mile has not
been dedicated to its fullest width.
Mr. Andrew: Is 27 feet needed?
tMr. Nagy: Yes.
Mr. Andrew: What is the rear yard requirement in P.S.?
Mr. Nagy: 15 feet.
Mr. Andrew: Effectively we are down to 90 feet in depth on the lot.
Mr. Nagy: 40 feet is required in the front yard plus the additional right-of-way
of 27 feet.
Mr. Andrew: We have about 50 feet of buildable area.
Mr. Nagy: Correct.
Mr. Andrew: The side yard requirement must meet front yard requirement of adjoining
residential district. Is petitioner present?
Ross Edwards, 22422 W. McNichols, Detroit: I am now 85 years old. I bought the
property in 1935 and I was going to build a home. Conditions then
would not permit that. Now it is so chopped up you could hardly
build a home. I would like to have it rezoned and have a building go
on it. I can't get an interested person unless it is rezoned. It is
a small piece and should be used for a small building. Actually it
was 165 feet deep by 330 feet. They took 33 feet off the 165 feet, then
27 feet off that, then 40 feet off that, 10 feet off that. I pay $550
101
in taxes on the place which is hard for me. The purchase price was
only $735.
le Mrs. Scurto: Is anyone living in the dwelling?
Mr. Edwards: It is vacant.
7474
t: Mrs. Scurto: Could you show me exactly where the building would be?
IL, Mr. Shane: The requirements are: 40 feet from each abutting street, side yard on
south, side yard to abutting residential district is the same as RUF
which is 10 foot minimum. Once you provide necessary right-of-way
off Seven Mile which is additional 27 feet plus 40 feet in addition
to the l0 feet on the south the building does not have too much
flexibility in relation to the north-south placement.
Mrs. Scurto: Is the Sutherland Fish and Chips where it belongs?
Mr. Shane: Yes, however, it does exceed the front yard setback.
Mrs. Scurto: The south house then would be surrounded by parking lots.
Mr. Shane: On this site parking would be on the side and rear and a greenbelt
put in front.
Mrs. Scurto: What is the depth from map to lot line?
Mr. Shane: 300 feet.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski, seconded by Mr. Falk, and adopted, it was
1[0 #12-276-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
December 16, 1980 on Petition 80-11-1-32 as submitted by Ross C.
Edwards requesting to rezone property located on the southwest
corner of Seven Mile Road and Maplewood in the Northwest 1/4 of
of Section 12, from RUF to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 80-11-1-32 be
approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed change of zoning is in compliance with the Future
Land Use Plan as adopted by the City Planning Commission.
(2) The proposed change of zoning will provide for a good buffer and
transitional zone separating the adjoining residential neighborhood
to the south from the adverse affects of the commercial develop-
ment and heavy traffic that occurs along the Seven Mile Road
thoroughfare.
(3) The site has the capacity to support the proposed change in use.
(4) The proposed change of zoning which would permit professional
office uses is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding
and established uses of the area.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 12/1/80,
and a notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit' Edison Company,
t
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company,
Consumers Power Company and City Departments as listed in the Proof
of Service.
7475
dr
ilime A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
ILO AYES: Smith, Sobolewski, Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
NAYS: Scurto
ABSENT: Kluver, Morrow
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 80-11-1-33 by Greenfield
Construction Company to rezone property located north of Six Mile Road,
west of Laurel Park Drive in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7, from P.O.
to P.O.II.
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from Engineering stating there are no engineering
problems in connection with this proposal.
Ray Martin: This will be the corporate headquarters from Shobow.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted,
it was
dir
#12-277-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
1110 December 16, 1980 on Petition 80-11-1-33 as submitted by Green-
field Construction Company requesting to rezone property located
north of Six Mile, west of Laurel Park Drive in the Southeast 1/4
of Section 7, from P.O. to P.O.II, the City Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 80-11-1-33 be
approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed change of zoning is in full compliance with the
Future Land Use Plan of the City of Livonia.
(2) The proposed change of zoning is in accord with the Laurel
Park Master Plan.
(3) The proposed change of zoning is to allow only a change in the
height limitations of the P.O. District, not a change in the
land use or use control.
(4) The proposed change of zoning is in harmony with all adjoining
zoning and land uses of the area.
(5) The proposed change of zoning would permit better utilization of
the property so as to maximize on the efficiencies of land use
and energy and user/tenant potential.
(6) The site has the capacity to support the proposed building heights
as would be permitted by the proposed change of zoning.
a
7476
1: FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 12/1/80,
11110 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.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Martin: Could I request a waiver of the 7 days?
Mr. Andrew: Under the condition that you tell the City Council that you
did request it.
Mr. Martin: I will.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and adopted, it was
#12-277a-80 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine
to waive the provisions of Section 10 of Article VI of the Planning
Commission Rules of Procedure regarding the seven day period con-
cerning effectiveness of Planning Commission resolutions in connection
with Petition 80-11-1-33 by Greenfield Construction Company requesting
to rezone property located north of Six Mile Road, west of Laurel
Park Drive in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7, from P.O. to P.O.II.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
t
AYES: Scurto, Sobolewski, Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
NAYS: Smith
ABSENT: Kluver, Morrow
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 80-11-2-28 by Abraham
Jaafar requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD License in connection
with an existing party store located on the south side of Plymouth Road
between Wayne Road and Laurel in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33.
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from Engineering stating there are no engineering
problems connected with this proposal.
Mr. William Ponder, Attorney, 32510 Plymouth Road, Livonia, was present: I am not
going into any more detail as far as the property is concerned as everyone is
familiar with that, You will recall my clients were here three years ago.
It was rejected and we have filed a new petition. Since that time we have
improved the property investing about $50,000 to bring it up to what we
believe to fit with the code of waiver of use requirements. Essentially,
the physical characteristics were a 1,500' addition to the existing building,
paved parking lot put in 60 ft, beyond rear of building and improved in front,
and a landscape treatment on Plymouth Road. My client has had a SDM License
for many years. He has beer and wine and we are wishing to add Class C or
ILpackaged liquor.
Mrs. Sobolewski: The addition that was put on back, is it being used by both printing
and party store?
7477
Mr. Ponder:tre My client owns the printing and party store and I think half will
be used for the party store and half for the printing.
11, Mrs. Sobolewski: This is a solid building. There is no wall separating the two.
Mr. Ponder: There will be a wall on the center.
a
Mrs. Sobolewski: Is there going to be/door access between the two?
Mr. Ponder: There will he an access from the rear.
Mrs. Sobolewski: There will be liquor storage in the printing area?
Mr. Ponder: No, we have a lease with the printing company and that would not
be permitted.
Mrs. Sobolewski: Are there any outstanding violations on this property?
Mr. Nagy: Not that I am aware of.
Mrs. Sobolewski: Do they meet the code and ordinance?
Mr. Nagy: To the best of my knowledge they have.
Mrs. Sobolewski: I notice the landscaping on the plans submitted to be more
extensive than what is actually on the site.
Mr. Ponder: I do not know if the landscaping is more extensive on the plan.
There is no problem. The landscaping was contracted out. We
exceeded in certain things. The landscaping could be resolved
if there is some question.
Mrs. Sobolewski: I also see a little housekeeping problem in the back of the building.
Mrs. Scurto: How long has petitioner owned property?
Mr. Jaafar: Six years.
Mrs. Scurto: Mr. Nagy, would you be aware of any violations against this property
unless you were to check on them, such as civil suits?
Mr. Nagy: I am not aware of any civil suit, but, I could check.
Mrs. Scurto: Are you selling any drug paraphinalia or porno material in your store?
Mr. Ponder: No, at one time we had a problem with offensive literature. There isn't
anything of that nature, marijuana, porno materials. That was taken
out of the premises. They won't be back again.
Mrs. Scurto: I am thrilled to death that Mr. Jaafar has cleaned up that type of
drug merchandise. I was at the site at 10:15 a.m. and again at 1:45 p.m.
There is extensive traffic coming from the Ford Motor Plant and I feel
this use would only intensify that problem. I feel a safety hazard
is involved here and I shall vote against it.
Mr. Ponder: If there is any question in the Commission's mind that we would be
turned down because of the landscape I would respectfully request that
the matter be tabled and give us a chance to straighten that out.
7478
te Mr. Andrew: We can make a resolution subject to compliance with the previously
approved landscape plan.
Mrs. Sobolewski: What is the parking situation?
ILO .
Mr. Nagy: In terms of numbers they do have enough. The majority of the parking
is in the rear.
Mrs. Sobolewski: He has parking for 8 in the front and 5 are shown on the plan.
That driveway is quite wide. He has improved the building and
parking and I feel this waiver use approval should be given.
Mr. Zimmer: I will vote against an approving resolution because of Section 19.06
general waiver requirements state that we should be sure about the
fact that we do not create more problems in regards to traffic. This is
a sure problem in regard to traffic. Plymouth Road is very congested
It is difficult to get in and out at this site. The intensified use
only aggravates the traffic.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski, seconded by Mr. Vynhalek, it was
RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on December 16,
1980 on Petition 80-11-2-28 as submitted by Abraham Jaafar, requesting
waiver use approval to utilize an SDD License in connection with an existing
I: party store located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Wayne Road
and Laurel in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33, the City Planning Commission
does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 80-11--2-28 be approved
for the following reasons;
(1) The proposal complies with all of the special and general standards
contained in Sections 11.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance.
(2) The site has the capacity to support the proposed use.
(3) The location of an SDD Licensed activity in the subject building will
notbe incompatible with, or detrimental to, the surrounding uses of
the area.
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.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Sobolewski, Vyhnalek, Andrew
NAYS: Scurto, Smith, Falk, Zimmer
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Kluver, Morrow
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the resolution foiled.
7479
IL Mr. Andrew: I cannot support a motion to deny because of increase in traffic.
It is my understanding. (the staff can concur or do otherwise) that
IL, across the street there was an old building that horsed a retail shoe
company. It is now a fruit market.
Mr. Nagy: There was a conversion to that effect.
Mr. Andrew: Assuming the fruit market does 50% of the business that Joe's Produce
on Seven Mile does then we have a heck of a traffic increase there.
If you can accept the fruit market across the street how can you
not accept this.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Smith, and adopted, it was
#12-278-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
December 16, 1980 on Petition 80-11-2-28 submitted by Abraham
Jaafar requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD License
in connection with an existing party store located on the south
side of Plymouth Road between Wayne Road and Laurel in the Northwest
1/4 of Section 33, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 80-11-2-28 be denied for the following
reasons:
(1) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposal
complies with all of the general waiver use standards of the
Zoning Ordinance contained in Section 19.06 thereof.
(2) The addition of an SDD License at this location will attract
sufficient amounts of additional traffic as to cause undue
congestion in and around the subject site.
(3) There is no demonstrated need for an SDD Licensed facility
to be located in this area.
(4) The location of an SDD Licensed facility in this location
would be detrimental to the surrounding uses in the area.
_ 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.
A roll call vote on the foregoing reeolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Smith, Falk, Zimmer, Scurto
NAYS: Sobolewski, Vyhnalek, Andrew
ABSENT: Kluver, Morrow
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 80-11-1-34 by Val-Pa
Advertising to rezone property located on the west side of Farmington Road
between Seven Mile Road and Clarita in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9,
from R-3 to P.S.
Mr. Nagy; Engineering states there are no storm sewers readily available in
the area. The closest one is 700 feet south and west.
4
•
7480
(10, Mr. Andrew: Where does the property located at Clarita and Farmington on the
southeast corner connect?
IL, Mr. Nagy: That is the Harris Building. They predate the Wayne County policy
in not allowing a tapping in offstreet storm water from entering
their right-of-way.
Don Duncan: We were not aware of the problem. We will look into it.
Mr. Andrew: This can be very expensive.
Mr. Nagy: There might be a joint effort between the petitioner and the owners
of the property near Seven and Farmington. They plan to develop
the property there.
Mr. Duncan: We are planning to build a small single story building. We will
have outside sales people who will not be in the office. Our office
will be similar to a real estate office but without the traffic.
We will have one or two salesmen in the office.
Mr. Andrew: Will you have sales meetings once a month?
Mr. Duncan: Once a week.
Mr. Andrew: That might create a parking problem if they all showed up.
I Mr. Duncan: The customer does not come to us.
Mr. Zimmer: Is there anything architecturally unusual about your building that
you prefer to build and not lease?
Mr. Duncan: We currently owned one in Redford. We would prefer to own one.
There is nothing unusual in our design.
Mr. Zimmer: Is this property in your ownership currently?
Mr. Duncan: The purchase is subject to the rezoning.
Mr. Zimmer: The property will be purchased by Val-Pak,
Mr. Duncan: My partner and myself will own it personally.
Mr. Smith: All your direct mail program will be mailed from Florida.
Mr. Duncan: That is correct.
Mr. Zimmer: How long were you in Redford Township?
Mr. Duncan: 2 1/2 years. Before that we rented in Livonia on Schoolcraft.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mrs. Scurto, and unanimously adopted,
it was
7481
1[1: #12-279-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
IL, December 16, 1980 on Petition 80-11-1-34 as submitted by Val-Pak
Advertising requesting to rezone property located on the west side
of Farmington Road between Seven Mile Road and Clarita in the
Northeast 1/4 of Section 9, from R-3 to P.S. , the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
80-11-1-34 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed change of zoning is in compliance with the adopted
Future Land Use Plan of the City of Livonia which designates the
entire frontage along the west side of Farmington Road from Seven
Mile south to Clarita as an office district.
(2) The proposed change of zoning to permit professional office
uses will provide for uses that are compatible to and in harmony
with surrounding and established uses of the area.
(3) The proposed change of zoning which would permit professional
office development will provide for good buffer and transitional
uses separating the established residential neighborhood to the
west from the adverse affects of the heavily travelled Farmington
Road thoroughfare.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was
published in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under
date of 12/1/80, 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.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 80-11-1-36 by
Kamp-DiComo Associates to rezone property located on the southwest corner
of Wentworth and Middlebelt Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 14,
from RUF to P.S.
Mr. Nagy: Engineering reports there is a storm sewer extension south of site
extending northerly to Wentworth. The appropriate street improvement
will be required.
Mrs. Scurto: Wentworth is not paved at all.
Mr. Nagy: When the church was constructed it was the request of the residents
not to pave Wentworth Ave.
Mr. Andrew: The proposed ingress and egress would be out to Middlebelt and not
any distance to the interior.
Dr. Robert Sigert, Dentist was present: Kamp DiComo Associates are our architects. I
am purchasing the land for a dental office. Dr. Kelly is my co-partner
and we are presently on Plymouth Road in Detroit before you enter Redford.
Our clientele are moving outthis way.
Mrs. Scurto: Do you anticipate taking your entrance from Wentworth or Middlebelt?
Dr. Sigert: From Middlebelt.
,
7482
There was no one else present wishingto be heard regardingthis petition.
p on.
IL, Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on this item closed.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-280-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
December 16, 1980 on Petition 80-11-1-36 as submitted by Kamp-
DiComo Associates requesting to rezone property located on the
southwest corner of Wentworth and Middlebelt Road in the Southeast 1/4
of Section 14, from RUF to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 80-11-1-36 be
approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Future
Land Use Plan of the City of Livonia as adopted by the City
Planning Commission which Plan designates the subject area for
office uses.
(2) The proposed change of zoning represents a minor expansion of
an already existing professional service district adjoining
the subject area to the south.
(3) The proposed change of zoning which would permit professional
office uses will provide for uses that are compatible to and
in harmony with the established and adjoining uses of the area.
(4) The proposed change of zoning is consistent with the adopted
goals and policies of the Planning Commission which is to
have office uses located along major thoroughfares that can
provide for convenient professional services, the design to
be architecturally compatible to adjoining buildings and serve
as a buffer between more intensive types of land uses and heavily
travelled thoroughfare and adjacent residential uses.
(5) The site has the capacity to support professional office uses that
would be permitted by the proposed change of zoning.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of 12/1/80,
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.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Final Plan approval for Hidden
Creek Subdivision proposed to be located north of Six Mile Road, east of
ILWayne Road in Section 9.
Mr. Andrew: Have all the financial obligations been met?
to Mr. Nagy: Yes.
Mrs. Scurto: Who is the proprietor?
Mr. Nagy: Leo Soave.
7483
IL
.
IL '
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted,
it was
#12-281-80 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approved the
Final Plat for Hidden Creek Subdivision proposed to be located north
of Six Mile Road, east of Wayne Road in Section 9, for the following
reasons:
(1) The Final Plat conforms to the previously approved Preliminary
Plat.
(2) The Engineering Division of the City of Livonia recommends approval
of the Final Plat.
(3) All of the financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor
by the City have been complied with.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Final Plat approval of Ravine of Bell
Creek Subdivision proposed to be located on the west side of Hubbard Road,
north of Myrna in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15.
1[0
Mr. Andrew: Financial obligations have not been met. The Chair recommends a tabling
resolution.
There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and unanimously adopted,
int wa s
#12-282-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
December 16, 1980 on Petition for Final Plat approval of Ravine of
Bell Creek Subdivision proposed to be located on the west side of
Hubbard Road, north of Myrna in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 15,
the City Planning Commission does hereby table petition for the
following reason:
(1) All financial obligations have not been met.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Zimmer, and adopted, it was
IL #12-283-80 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 401st Regular Meeting and Public
Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on November 18, 1980, be
approved.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
7484
fle On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, and adopted, it was-
1[00 #12-284-80 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 402nd Regular Meeting held by the
City Planning Commission on December 2, 1980, be approved.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Scurto, Smith, Sobolewski, Vyhnalek, Zimmer
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Falk, Andrew
ABSENT: Kluver, Morrow
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 80-11-8-24P by H. John
Allie requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of
Ordinance #543, the Zoning Ordinance, as amended by Ordinance #1468,
submitted in connection with a proposal to construct retail stores
on property located south of Norfolk, west of Middlebelt Road in Section
9.
Mr. Smith: At this time I will abstain from discussion and voting for the
reason that Mr. Allie has been a very good friend of mine for many
years. I consider him an outstanding businessman.
Mr. Andrew: Do you have revised site plan?
Mr. Shane: Yes. The plan had several more parking spaces than required. We
1[410
are using less parking and additional landscaping. Secondly, the
commission was concerned about the dumpster location and the fact
that it did not show a gate. It does have a gate now. The traffic
pattern for the servicing drive in back has been changed to a one
way moving in a southerly direction. It will be marked. Also
lighting fixtures are to be both in the rear and around the
perimeter. Petitioner has provided us with thosatypes. Unit will
be at each service door, and a unit will be used under the canopy around
the perimeter. The landscape plan will have/come back.
Mr. Andrew: Are there any other problems?
Mr. Shane: No.
Mrs. Scurto: We asked for the location of the lighting fixtures.
Mr. Shane: Under each rear door. It will be a direct light down and not out.
The others will be located on areas in other parts of the building
under the canopy. Again light will be directed down and not out.
Mrs. Sobolewski: Where will the signage be?
(10 Mr. Shane: It will be located in the landscaped area at the corner of the inter-
section. It will be 10 feet from each intersection and it will be a
11-0 total of 39 sq. ft. It will be 24 feet in height and squared on two
metal poles. Wall signs for each tenant will be used but we do not
have any details on that.
7485
ILMrs. Sobolewski: Will the sign be internally illuminated?
110 Mr. Shane: This freestanding sign would be internally lit.
Mrs. Sobolewski: 24 hours.
Mr. Shane: No time is given.
Mrs. Sobolewski: No floodlights.
Mr. Shane: Nothing except what was indicated on the building.
There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, and adopted it was
#12-285-80 RESOLVED THAT, pursuant to Section 18.58 of Ordinance #543, the
Zoning Ordinance of the City of Livonia, as amended by Ordinance
#1468, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition
80-11-8-24P by H. John Allie requesting approval of all plans
required by Section 18.58 submitted in connection with a proposal
to construct retail stores on property located south of Norfolk,
west of Middlebelt Road in Section 9, subject to the following
conditions:
1[0
(1) that Site Plan Drawing Number 79.02, Sheet Z-1, dated 12/9/80,
as revised, prepared by Ewrin, Architect, which is hereby approved
shall be adhered to;
(2) that the building elevations shown on the approved site plan
which are hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(3) that a revised landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Commission for approval no later than thirty (30) days from the
date of this approval;
(4) that the freestanding sign shown on the approved site plan which
is hereby approved shall be adhered to and, further, that any
additional signage proposed to be erected either on the site or the
building shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for approval
prior to installation;
(5) that any mechanical equipment proposed to be located on the roof of the
proposed building shall be screened from public view by the use of an
architectural material which is similar to and compatible with
that used on the building; and
(6) that this approval shall include the exterior lighting fixtures
(or equivalent) manufactured by Lighting Division, Harvey
Hubbel, Inc. , and wall-mounted fixtures manfuactured by McGraw-
Edison Company as depicted on drawings furnished by the petitioner.
1/0 A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Scurto, Sobolewski, Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Smith
ABSENT: Kluver, Morrow
7486
ILMr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
IL adopted.
Mr. Falk announced the next item on the agenda is Site Plan submitted in connection
with Petition 80-9-2-23 by Friar Tuck's Diet Delite, Inc. , requesting
waiver use approval to locate a sit-down restaurant within an existing
building located at the southeast corner of Plymouth and Middlebelt
Roads in Section 36.
Mr. Andrew: We discussed this in detail last Tuesday and this is identical today.
The landscaping meets the Plymouth Road Beautification Program.
Mrs. Scurto: Where is the awning or canopy going to go?
Mr. Shane: The entire length of the north-south and east-west dimension.
Mrs. Scurto: At the other location it was canvas. Do we have some kind of
control over the condition of the canopy? I am concerned especially
on the west with the sun above the canvas deteriorating.
Mr. Shane: It will be the same location as Smart Alex's and the same direction.
That has stood up rather well.
Mr. Zimmer: Are canopies considered signs?
Mr. Shane:1[ No.
Mr. Zimmer:10
As soon as you write on it it is a sign?
Mr. Shane: Yes.
Mr. Nagy: If the word "Friar Tuck" appears on the canopy it is a sign.
Mr. Andrew: They come back to get approval of the sign.
Mr. W. Brashear, Attorney: We will have to face that.
Mr. Nagy: Your recommendation could address itself to that issue, whether
you approved it as submitted which contains graphics or prohibits
graphics.
Mr. Andrew: Did you bring pictures of the canopies?
Mr. Brashear: I have some here.
Mr. Zimmer: What are the size of the letters on the canopy.
Mr. Brashear: "Friar Tuck" will be script and 8 inches. The other "Diet Delight"
will be block.
Mrs. Scurto: Is this signage on the canopy the only signage.
Mr. Brashear: Yes.
ILMr. Andrew: Does this meet the sign area requirements.
Mr. Nagy: Yes.
1
7487
dr
Mr. Zimmer: You measure only letters on the canopy.
7
Mr. Shane: Yes.
Mr.11 . Zimmer: How about if you nailed a yellow plywood panel with letters on the
building.
Mr. Shane: The whole thing is measured not just the letters then. A canopy
serves the same purpose as a mansard roof and therefore is treated
differently.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski, and adopted, it was
#12-286-80 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on
December 16, 1980 for Site Plan approval submitted in connection
with Petition 80-9-2-23 by Friar Tuck's Diet Delite, Inc. , re-
questing waiver use approval to locate a sit-down restaurant
within an existing building located at the southeast corner of
Plymouth and Middlebelt Roads in Section 36, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
for Site Plan approval be approved subject to the following conditions:
110 (1) that the Site Plan dated 11/25/80, which is hereby approved
shall be adhered to and the landscaping shown thereon shall be
installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
and thereafter permanently maintained;
(2) that the Building Elevation Plan drawn by M. Foley which is
hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(3) that the Floor Plan dated 9/10/80, drawn by the F.D.Stella
Products Company which is hereby approved shall be adhered to;
and
(4) That the signage shall be limited to that contained on the awning
1 as illustrated in a photograph presented to the Planning Commission
dated 12/16/80.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Scurto, Sobolewski, Vyhnalek,Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
NAYS: Smith
ABSENT: Kluver, Morrow
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 403rd Regular Meeting
and Public Hearing held by the City Planning Commission on December 16, 1980 were
adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
110 7
r / 4,e, ,_..,/
. Jose J. 7:lk :ecretar7
• /
ATTEST: /. /R. lir /
Daniel R. Andr- , Chairman / i IP.'