HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1981-08-04a.
7507
.
MINUTES OF THE 416th REGULAR MEETING
AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LIVONIA
On Tuesday, August 4, 1981 the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held
111
its 416th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall , 33000 Civic
Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. with approx-
imately forty persons in the audience.
Members present: Daniel R. Andrew Joseph J. Falk Jerome Zimmer
Donna Naidow Robert Morrow Sue Sobolewski
Donald Vyhnalek
Members absent: *Judith Scurto Herman Kluver
Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director; and
Ralph H. Bakewell , Planner IV, were also present.
Mr. Andrew informed the audience that if a petition on tonight 's agenda involves a
question of rezoning or vacating, this Commission will make a recommendation to the
City Council and the City Council , after holding a public hearing, makes the final
determination as to whether a petition is approved or denied. If a petition for a
waiver of use is denied , the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision.
Mr. Joseph J. Falk, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition
81-6-3-4 by Curtis Building Company requesting the vacating of a
portion of a public easement located on the north side of Orangelawn
between Farmington and Stark Roads in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33.
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy, is there any correspondence in the file relating to
this petition?
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter dated July 6, 1981 from the Engineering Division
stating that there are no engineering problems in connection with
this proposal and recommending that should this petition result
in an ordinance, specific language concerning the intention of
the ordinance to modify and reduce the limits of the easement
conveyed to the City be included in the proposed ordinance. That
is the extent of the correspondence received in connection with
this petition.
Mr. Melvin Menuck, Curtis Building Company, 25950 Five Mile Road, Detroit : The reason
for this request is that in the future we want to build a structure
on each lot. The way the easements are set out, the widest resi-
dence would be 42' which is too restrictive. With 45' , we have
plans that would fit there and make it more saleable.
Mr. Zimmer: Are you the same Builder that developed Wellington Woods?
Mr. Menuck: We developed Wellington Woods and sold the lots to another building
ILcompany. We did not build at the time the subdivision was developed.
Mr. Zimmer Was this parcel part of your ownership at that time?
7508
1
Mr. Menuck: It was part of our ownership but not part of the plat.
liMr. Zimmer: Was there some talk about coming through to Orangelawn at one time?
Mr. Andrew: At one time, I think so.
Mr. Vyhnalek: Do you own any other lots there that you intend to build on?
Mr. Menuck: One other lot but we have no plans at this time. We may put up a
residence later on.
Mr. Andrew: Are the owners of Lots 149 and 150 present this evening?
The owners of Lots 149 and 150 were not present.
Mr. Andrew: Is there any one else present wishing to speak on this item?
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this petition and Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the public hearing closed on Petition 81-6-3-4.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski , seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted,
it was
#8-130-81 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 4,
1981 on Petition 81-6-3-4 as submitted by Curtis Building Company
requesting the vacating of a portion of a public easement located
IIIV on the north side of Orangelawn between Farmington and Stark Roads,
in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 33, the City Planning Commission
does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 81-6-3-4
be approved subject to the inclusion of the following language in
the proposed ordinance:
"It is the intention of this ordinance to modify and reduce the
limits of an easement conveyed to the City of Livonia and
recorded in Liber 20378, Pages 446 and 447.";
for the following reasons :
(1) No public utility or City department has objected.
(2) The portion of the subject easement proposed to be
vacated is no longer needed to protect existing under-
ground utilities.
(3) The subject area proposed to be vacated can be more
advantageously used for residential building purposes.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper , the Livonia Observer, under date of July 20,
1981 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
7509
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
1‘10 *Mrs. Scurto entered the meeting at 8;12 p.m.
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 81-6-1-16
by Joseph Maiorana to rezone property located on the north side of
Seven Mile Road, east of Shadyside in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3,
from R-2A to P.
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating
there are no engineering problems in connection with this request,
and that is the extend of correspondence in the file.
Mr. Fred J. Armour, 27251 Joy Road, Dearborn Heights, representing the petitioner, was
present.
Mr. Andrew: Is this piece of land split off?
Mr. Armour: This is a split off the R-2 piece; from Ager Building Company's property.
Mr. Morrow: Who owns the home immediately to the west of that proposed parking site?
Mr. Armour: To the north is owned by Mr. McNeill and west of the proposed parking
site is Joe's home.
Mr. Zimmer: Does the proposed parking classifcation coincide with Mr. Maiorana's
ilio
north property line? Does he have a 100' lot?
Mr. Armour: His lot is 100' .
Mr. Zimmer: The man to the north would not share the back yard with parking. It
would all be on Joe's property?
Mr. Armour; Yes.
Mrs. Sobolewski : How many parking spaces will be provided?
Mr. Armour: 109.
Mrs. Sobolewski : Will the parking be for not only Joe' s employees but the Center,
too?
Mr. Armour: His idea is for all the employees from the retail stores and his own
business to park back there and this will give us another 109 parking
spaces for his customers and for the people in the retail building.
Mrs. Sobolewski : What are the accesses to the parking area?
Mr. Armour: It will be strictly from his parking lot. No street exits whatsoever.
Mrs. Scurto: Is the man who owns the house to the north of Mr. Maiorana here tonight?
Mr. Armour: Joe did own it but he sold it to somebody else. I have no idea who they
are.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew,
4 ,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 81-6-1-16 closed.
Q
7510
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted,
it was
#8-131-81 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 4,
1981 on Petition 81-6-1-16 as submitted by Joseph Maiorana to rezone
property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road, east of Shady-
side in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 3, from R-2A to P, the City
Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that
Petition 81-6-1-16 be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed change of zoning to the parking classification
will provide for an approved parking zone much needed for the
existing commercial complex.
(2) The proposed parking zone will provide for better separation
and provide for a buffer between the existing commercial
complex to the south and the planned residential development
to the north.
(3) Parking uses when well planned, landscaped and screened can
be made compatible to adjoining residential uses.
(4) The proposed expanded parking zone will relieve much of the
parking congestion presently occurring immediately nextto the
existing commercial stores and shops.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of July 20,
1 1981 and a notice of such hearing was sent to the Detroit Edison Company,
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, Michigan Bell Telephone Company,
4
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 1
adopted.
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-6-1-17
by Metropolitan Construction & Contracting, Inc. , to rezone property
located on the north side of Five Mile Road between Foch Avenue and
Green Lane in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 13, from P.S. to C-1 .
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating
there are no engineering problems connection with this petition.
That is the extent of the correspondence in the file.
Bruce Weber, 26735 Ross Drive, Redford Township: Mr. Ralph Reis , owner of the property,
entered this petition on behalf of myself. I live about 1/2 mile west
of this location. He is selling and I put in an option to buy based on
rezoning of the property. I would like to turn it into a gift and flower
shop. My shop now is located at 28406 Five Mile Road.
Mr. Zimmer: How do you see any revision in this property in terms of your florist
shop? There doesn't seem to be any parking.
Mr. Weber: I would add approximately nine parking places in the back of the. build-
ing, not going past 20' of the building, There would be a 50' lawn
between that and the residence.
7511
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item. Mr. Andrew,
liChairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 81-6-1-17 closed.
Mr. Zimmer: We had some difficulty with the intrusion of this area as office. I
personally still see that as a maximum activity on this corner with
regard to the residential nature of the area. On that basis, I would
offer a denying resolution for the reasons that it is conflict with the
Future Land Use Plan which recommends office uses, the uses provided
in commercial zoning are incompatible with the residential area, the
commercial zoning would lead to the expansion of this zoning in the
area which would be detrimental to the residential area and there is
already commercial property in the area to accommodate this proposed
use.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer and seconded by Mr. Falk, it was
#8-132-81 „RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 4,
1981 on Petition 81-6-1-17 as submitted by Metropolitan Construction
& Contracting, Inc. , to rezone property located on the north side of
Five Mile Road between Foch Avenue and Green Lane in the Southeast
1/4 of Section 13, from P.S. to C-1 , the City Planning Commission
does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 81-6-1-17
be denied for the following reasons :
(1) The proposed change of zoning is in conflict with the Future
Land Use Plan of the City of Livonia as adopted by the Planning
Commission, which Plan recommends the retention of office uses
iiii;
for this area.
t
(2) The proposed change of zoning would provide for uses that are in-
compatible and not in harmony with the established and adjoin-
ing uses of the neighboring area which are all residential .
(3) The proposed change of zoning would lead to further conversion
and expansion of commercial zoning in this area to the detriment
of the adjoining residential area.
(4) The neighboring area is already adequately served by the com-
mercially zoned lands, a significant portion of which is vacant
and can accommodate the proposed use.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of July 20,
1981 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: Morrow, Scurto, Sobolewski , Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
NAYS: Naidow
ABSENT: Kluver
Mr. Andrew; Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
7512
Mr. Andrew: Mr. Weber, you will be notified of the public hearing which will be
held by the City Council on this petition; probably some time in
September.
tillh9 Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 81-7-1-18
initiated by Council Resolution #587-81 to rezone property located
on the south side of Bretton, if extended, and west of Hardy Avenue
in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 3, from P.L. to R-1 .
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating
there are no engineering problems in connection with this petition.
Mr. Andrew: This is a petition initiated by a City Council resolution?
Mr. Nagy: Yes.
Mr. Andrew: As such, we have to have a public hearing and the purpose is to allow
the School Board to construct some homes on the property. Are there
representatives from the school administration here?
There were no representatives from the school administration present.
Robert W. Clement, 19569 Hardy, Livonia: My question is the article sent to us in
the area shows the area on the map for a home where directly across
the street they have built a home. This has been a school project
which I am not negative to at all . I assumed this is what they plan
to do here but they have shown the whole section all the way down to
my home for residential which would go completely down beyond the
school area.
4
ill; Mr. Andrew: No, the only property being rezoned is the property having diagonal
stripes; 155' on Bretton and 140' deep.
Mr. Clement: It seems to me the whole section is being rezoned to R-1 .
Mr. Andrew: To clear it for the audience, the property being rezoned under this
petition is 155' on Bretton and 140' deep on the north/south avenue.
Ronald Fischer, 19593 Hardy, Livonia: Which way would that house face?
Mr. Andrew: It should face Bretton. There will be two houses. there.
Mr. Clement: Are they planning later on to rezone that whole area for residential ?
Mr. Andrew: We do not know.
Mr. Zimme0 In regard to the question of going further south, in order for that to
happen you would have to extend Hubbard in some way. Is that feasible
to go further south?
Mr. Andrew: I think with this action tonight they have stopped the action further
south of Bretton. It really makes it difficult when they didn't even
show up to tell us what they are thinking of.
4
7513
•
Mr. Fischer: We bought there because it is open land and we are afraid they are
going to build more homes back there. Who started this petition
anyway?
ilie
Mr. Andrew: I assume it was the school board.
Mrs. Scurto: I think it should be brought to your attention that there was a member
of the school board present at the study session last week and there
were no questions to this affect. Mrs. Strom and Mr. Howell were there.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 81-7-1-18 closed.
Mr. Andrew: I think you should know that under the State law we cannot condition
rezoning but even though we may be inclined to tell the school board
not to go any further, we cannot do that.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted,
it was
#8-133-81 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 4,
1981 on Petition 81-7-1-18 initiated by Council Resolution #587-81
to rezone property located on the south side of Bretton, if extended,
and west of Hardy Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 3, from
P.L. to R-1 , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
the City Council that Petition 81-7-1-18 be approved for the follow-
ing reasons:
ii,
;_ (1) The proposed change of zoning is a minor and logical extension
of the existing residential zoning of the area.
(2) The proposed change of zoning will provide for residential uses
at a lot size and at a density consistent with the adjoining
neighboring residential area of Spring Valley Subdivision which
subdivision is zoned and platted consistent with the proposed
R-1 zoning classification.
(3) The Board of Education has determined that the subject public
lands are surplus and can better be utilized in connection with
their residential home construction program.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of July 20,
1981 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 carriedand the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 81-6-2-13
by K-Mart Corporation requesting waiver use approval to expand an
existing fenced-in patio located on the northwest corner of Seven Mile
and Farmington Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 4.
t
7514
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter in the file dated July 7, 1981 from the Engineering
Division indicating that there are no engineering problems in connec-
tion with this petition.
It
Mr. Wayne Popp, 9245 Northhampton, Manager of. the K-Mart Store: The reason for this
is so we can put merchandise inside the fenced area rather than outside.
The City of Livonia has granted us permission to put some stuff out there
but it doesn't look well, plus security. reasons.
Mr. Andrew: I have to assume you will have to increase your merchandise available.
Mr. Popp: No, no additional merchandise. We find it hard to put the existing
merchandise inside the fenced area.
Mr. Andrew: What is the dimension of the new fenced area?
Mr. Falk: 84' x 50' .
Mr. Andrew: I assume there is a physical opening in the wall to allow you to go in
the store from the patio.
Mrs. Scurto; Could you tell me if you plan on using this area all year-round?
Mr. Popp: No, it will be closed off in the fall .
Mrs. Scurto: But it is a permanent structure?
lioMr. Popp: Yes.
Mrs. Scurto: As Manager of the store, do you also have control over the auto repair
d area?
Mr. Popp: Right.
Mr. Zimmer: On the drawing it shows the patio in the back being removed. Is that
correct?
Mr. Popp: Not really.
Mr. Popp approached the Commission and explained his plan in detail .
Mrs. Scurto . Mr. Falk at the study session had concerns about the auto repair area
and maintenance. I have driven by there on four occasions and did not
find it at all ill-maintained. Have you changed something lately?
Mr. Popp: No, but we have a new Manager in that department; that could make a
difference.
Mr. Falk: What I was mentioning was when I had my car serviced -- when you bring
your car in you can park right behind the door. If the weather is
raining and the doors down, the visibility is bad. You have only room
for five or six cars there. You have a traffic jam there but right
across the wallyou can park 100 cars . You could get some semblance
t
of order in there. Also, with the fence, Sears, Roebuck had the same
predicament you have here. They wanted this on the east parking lot.
0
7515
We granted that. But, they have a fence they can take down so that
with the Christmas shoppers they take the fence down to make room for
shoppers. I wonder if you could be entertaining that idea. I get the
feeling you will be selling Christmas trees in the fall .
11:11/640 Popp: No, we have no plans like that.
Mr. Falk: I have never seen you stack up material like that and I have been a
good customer of yours because the price is right but this is a large
area. You keep some things inside.
Mr. Popp: We find it difficult to keep things neat inside and that is why we are
asking for this new area.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the publuc hearing on Petition 81-6-2-13 closed.
Mr. Morrow: With this new patio shop, is there any parking being done away with?
Mr. Popp: About six parking spaces.
Mr. Zimmer: Doesn't this plan need to show some bumper blocks or something?
Mr. Andrew; I don't think anything will change. No angle parking.
Mr. Zimmer: No parking east of the new fence other than up against Farmington Road?
lioMr. Popp: No.
fi
4 On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted,
4 it was
#8-134-81 RESOLVED that , pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 4,
1981 on Petition 81-6-2-13 as submitted by K-Mart Corporation request-
ing waiver use approval to expand an existing fenced-in patio located
on the northwest corner of Seven Mile and Farmington Roads in the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 4, the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 81-6-2-13 be approved
subject to the following conditions:
(1) that the planned use shall be limited to the area as shown on
#4430, dated 7/24/80; and
(2) that the enclosure shall be as specified: a new chaimIlink
fence nine feet high with stained wood slats to conform to
the existing fence to which the new fence will attach;
for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed use complies with Section 11 .03(L) (1) of Zoning
Ordinance #543.
(2) The site has the capacity to support the proposed use.
1
7516
(3) The proposed use will not adversely affect the surrounding
11:111L;
uses of the area nor disrupt the offstreet parking and related
service drives 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.
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 81-7-2-14
by Monaghan K-C Building Association requesting waiver use approval
to hold an August Fest on property located on the west side of
Farmington Road between Seven and Eight Mile Roads in the South-
east 1/4 of Section 4.
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file dated 7/15/81 from the Division of
Engineering stating there are no engineering problems connected
with this petition.
James Molloy, 9421 Harrison, and Terrence Rush, 14858 Ingram, representatives of the
Monaghan K-C Building Association, were present.
Mr. Rush: We would like to have a big top on the south side of the hall next
to the flood plain. Inside will be games of chance for kids. Out-
side will be a moon walk and a dunk tank.
10 Mrs. Sobolewski ; Have you done this project before?
Mr. Rush: No, this is the first time.
Mrs. Sobolewski : Is this for your members or will it be open to the public?
Mr. Rush: It will be open to the public from Friday until Sunday when we will
close about 6:00 p.m.
Mr. Zimmer: Where will you put the parking? That will be a problem. Are you think-
ing of some sort of bus?
Mr. Rush: We are thinking of a shuttle. Using just the north side we would have
about 200 spaces. The hours approximately would be Friday 6-10:00 p.m. ;
Saturday 12-10:00 p.m. ; Sunday 12-6:00 or 7:00 p.m.
Mrs. Naidow: Is there going to be dancing.
Mr. Rush: We plan to have some entertainment and music, maybe some step dances or
something inside the hall .
Mrs. Scurto: Other than the moon walk there are no other rides?
Mr. Rush: None at all .
Mrs. Scurto; The large tent is strictly for games like throwing darts or whatever?
iri; Mr. Rush: Yes,
7517
•
Mrs. Scurto: Will there be two tents?
Mr. Rush: One for beer and food and one for games.
3 Mr. Andrew: Do you need a special license to sell that beer outside?
Mr. Rush: Yes.
Mr. Andrew: I have to agree that the biggest problem will be parking. If there
is a problem on Saturday, it will compound traffic travel on Farmington
Road. Have you talked to any business people at all ?
Mr. Rush: Yes, they have been approached selectively and if you recall
the days of the state fairs, people are remiss to walk about a mile.
Mr. Zimmer: How many do you have on your site?
Mr. Rush:* 200.
Mr. Zimmer: How many normally?
Mr. Rush: 300.
Mr. Zimmer: So you will lose about one-third .
Mrs. Scurto: Who would have been notified about this?
100 Mr. Nagy: Everyone within a 500' radius of the property.
Mrs. Scurto: Including the condos to the north?
Mr. Nagy: Three residences within the condos were notified.
Mrs. Scurto: They have always been so vocal about everything in the area I wondered
if they were aware about what was going on.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the public hearing closed on Petition 81-7-2-14.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted,
it was
#8-135-81 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 4,
1981 on Petition 81-7-2-14 as submitted by Monaghan K-C Building
Association requesting waiver use approval to hold an August Fest
on property located on the west side of Farmington Road between •
Seven and Eight Mile Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 4, the
City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council
that Petition 81-7-2-14 be approved subject to the following con-
ditions:
(1) that the proposed use be limited to the dates as indicated in
the application which are August 28, 1981 through August 30, 1981 ,
1[: and shall consist of the uses specified whch are a food tent , moon
walk, dunk tank and a game tent; and
(2) that it shall be located in accordance with the plan submitted
in connection with the application;
• 7518
for the following reasons:
filsoe. 4 (1) The proposed use complies with Section 11 .03, subparagraph 1
(3) , of Zoning Ordinance #543.
(2) The site has the capacity to support the proposed use.
(3) The proposed use is of such limited duration and of such
location that it will not adversely affect any of the
surrounding established uses of the area.
(4) No reporting City department has objected to the proposed
use.
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.
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 81-7-2-15
by David J. Bloomingburg requesting waiver use approval to operate
an auto bump & paint shop within an existing building located on the
south side of Eight Mile Road between Melvin Avenue and Louise Avenue
in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 2.
> Mr. Nagy: We have a letter in the file from the Engineering Division dated
July 22, 1981 indicating that there are no engineering problems in
connection with this petition.
4
Mr. Andrew: Under the Ordinances of the City of Livonia, when you file a request
for waiver use approval you are required to furnish us with specific
plans. Have you had an opportunity to prepare these and submit them?
David Bloomingburg, 17395 Fenton, Detroit: Yes, they are partially done but I don't
think they are all done.
Mr. Shane: We met with Mr. Bloomingburg today and he brought in an elevation and
site plan. We told him we would be happy to help him put his plans
in order and we anticipate having the plans in order by the next meeting.
Mr. Andrew: We will need a complete set of plans and the staff indicates they will
assist you with them. Can you tell us something about the business you
wish to conduct on the property?
Mr. Bloomingburg: I want to do some minor damage repair to cars; scratches, minor
touch-ups, and some overall paint jobs. That is about the extent of
repair that I want to do. My existing business is located at Ten Mile
and Grand River.
Mr. Andrew: Are you closing that down?
te4Mr. Bloomingburg: Yes, I am.
Mrs. Sobolewski : Why would you chose to close that area?
i
7519
Mr. Bloomingburg: I am renting from a party now who is in the same business and
there are too many conflicts.
Mrs. Sobolewski : You have two parties in one building?
11110
Mr. Bloomingburg,: Yes.
Mrs. Sobolewski : Do you plan to use all the property?
Mr. Bloomingburg; Not the entire property -- parking will be in front . I will store
cars in the back and whatever parts I can't get in the building.
Mr. Vyhnalek: Where will the cars be, on the east and west sides?
Mr. Bakewell ; The staff has been working on the site plan and perhaps I can explain.
Mr. Bakewell explained to the Commission the staff' s suggested plans for Mr. Bloomingburg 's
auto repair facility.
Mr. Falk: Your operation now -- how many cars a day do you service?
Mr. Bloomingburg: That come in and out or that I work on?
Mr. Falk: Coming in and out .
Mr. Bloomingburg: Maybe one or two a day.
1iMr. Falk: How many on hand at one time?
1 Mr. Bloomingburg: Probably five in the building and two outside and that 's it.
Mr. Falk: Mr. Bakewell , how many cars can he stack back there?
Mr. Bakewell : Maybe nine.
Mr. Falk: Are you going to limit yourself to just minor repair?
Mr. Bloomingburg: That 's all I do right now.
Mr. Falk: But I get the feeling you can 't survive on minor repair. I find it
difficult to have a bump shop there when other businesses haven 't been
able to survive on such limited service. I believe you are going to
have to stack cars outside.
Mr. Bloomingburg: There is room inside. I handle one or two a day but you can get more
cars inside. I have never been stacked up as long as I have been in
business.
Mr. Falk: Are you buying this property or do you have an option_ on it?
Mr. Bloomingburg: My mother and father are buying it.
Pete Bloomingburg, 15119 Salem, Redford Township, was present.
0
7520
•
Mr. Falk: If you can't get the zoning, will you buy the property?
ti, Pete Bloomingburg: I have already made a commitment on the property.
Mr. Falk: I think there are places for this business but in another area except
Eight Mile Road.
Pete Bloomingburg: What is your objection to it?
Mr. Falk: When I go down Eight Mile Road or any other street on the perimeter of
the City I am not satisfied with what is happening there. Just because
this is on Eight Mile Road it doesn't mean we should close our eyes and
it doesn't mean it is any less important to us.
Mr. Pete Bloomingburgh approached the Commissioners to show them pictures of the proposed
business operation.
Pete Bloomingburg: He is not going into the full body line. I am in the used car bus-
iness and he does my work for me. Most of the independent dealers are
buying cars you can merchandise soon. I think we are going to have a
good business here.
Mrs. Sobolewski : Are you going to be in this business by yourself?
David Bloomingburg: Yes, I have one helper.
Mrs. Sobolewski : Do you do custom painting?
= David Bloomingburg: Some. I don't do collisions.
4
4Mrs. Sobolewski : What' is the noisiest machine you might have?
David Bloomingburg: A grinder. No big welders or anything like that.
Mrs. Scurto: What is the relative size compared to Zimmerman 's on Joy Road; the build-
ing, I mean.
Mr. Shane: This building is relatively small , probably one of the smallest industrial
structures you might see.
Mr. Andrew: It is 35' x 56' .
Mr. Shane • The parcel is narrow and if he develops as we suggested, what cars would
be outside would be in the rear and the front would be landscaped.
Mrs. Scurto: If he is satisfied with the size of this establishment and if the parking
of cars will be in the back, I certainly hope that we could work with
him.
Mrs. Naidow: Would you have a fence in there?
David Bloomingburg: Yes.
tri'Mr. J. Meister, 20404 Melvin: I believe this is going to make a lot of racket and an
eye-sore,
4
7521
Mr. Andrew: How far south of Eight Mile are you?
Mr. Meister: I am on the corner of Morlock and Melvin , Lot 143.
!iLoMrs. Van Zant, 20505 Melvin: I would object to the cars being in the back because they
would be in our backyard.
Mr. Andrew: When this was a plumbing business, what was in the back yard?
Mrs. Van Zant: Pipes.
Mr. Van Zant: When this building was built, it was under protest because of the
deficient set back.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 81-7-2-15 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Falk, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted,
it was
#8-136-81 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 4,
1980 on Petition 81-7-2-15 as submitted by David J. Bloomingburg
requesting waiver use approval to operate an auto bump & paint shop
within an existing building located on the south side of Eight Mile
Road between Melvin Avenue and Louise Avenue in the Northeast 1/4
of Section 2, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to
table Petition 81-7-2-15 until the Planning Commission study meeting
to be conducted on August 11 , 1981 .
' Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carred and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 81-7-6-5
by the City Planning Commission to amend Section 11 .03 of Zoning
Ordinance #543 to include regulations relating to automotive trans-
mission repair businesses as waiver uses in C-2 Districts.
Mr. Nagy: We have a letter in the file dated August 4, 1981 from the office of
Brashear, Conley and Tangora expressing support of this amendment on
behalf of Mr. and Mrs. George La Forest who are Livonia residents and
business owners.
There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on Petition 81-7-6-5 closed,
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Zimmer and unanimously adopted,
it was
#8-137-81 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 4,
1981 on Petition 81-7-6-5 as submitted by the City Planning Commission to
amend Section 11 .03 of Zoning Ordinance #543 to include regulations
relating to automotive transmission repair businesses as waiver uses
in C-2 Districts , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
11:
to the City Council that Petition 81-7-6-5 be approved for the
following reasons :
7522
(1) The proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment will provide more
flexibility and opportunity to operate certain additional
repair facilites in commercial districts.
(2) The proposed additional types of auto and light truck repair
will not be incompatible with other commercial uses allowed
in the C-2 and C-3 Zoning Districts.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
inthe official newspaper, the Livonia Observer , under date of July 20,
1981 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 81-7-6-6
by the City Planning Commission to amend Sections 2. 10, 11 .02, and
18.59 of Zoning Ordinance #543 to incorporate regulations relating
to mechanical and electronic amusement devices.
Dennis Stoepker, 2000 City National Bank: I have had a chance to review the ordinance
as proposed and have some concerns as to the specific uses that are
permitted pursuant to this ordinance. I have noticed that the use of ,
these mechanical devices as pertains to restaurants is limited to Class
C Liquor Licensed establishments. I would like some comment as to the
reasons for that limitation. It seems you are giving preference to liquor
licensed restaurants as opposed to other type restaurants. These types
of devices have been springing up all over the country in all types of
establishments , especially say, Chuck E. Cheese, a family-type restaurant.
My concern is that you are limiting this to Class C restaurants and thereby
denying other restaurants from using these machines. I don't see the
purpose for that limitation.
Mr. Andrew; I am not really happy about these devices and if I have to limit them I
would try to provide them in shopping centers of 500,000 square feet and
other than that they would be contained in areas where probably children
will not go. But that is my personal feeling. There is no question that
this is a limiting type ordinance.
Mr, Stoepker: Has the Planning Commission observed other communities where these have
been implemented to see what affect they have had? In Warren, after a
great political battle, the ordinance was changed. I think it should be
observed to see if there has been any detrimental affect . I think times
have changed and if they are established in the proper places with proper
restrictions, the problems which you envision can be prevented. I think
you are giving an unfair advantage to the restaurants which have a Class
C License, which is an advantage in itself, and other restaurants cannot
compete.
ILMr. Andrew; I have seen a coin operated amusement device go in an ice cream establish-
ment and quite honestly since they put it in, it drives me up a wall .
There are so many wierd noises., and the supervision is two seventeen-year
old girls.
AI
7523
Mrs. Scurto My objection to this has nothing to do with a bar or gambling. It is
1110 loitering and children being able to enter a business establishment
whose primary purpose is not to entertain children. This ordinance limits
IL that kind of loitering and that kind of unwanted entertainment. I think
some establishments in Westland are prime reasons why I don 't want this.
If this gives an advantage to somebody with a Class C License, that, too, •
is something any business establishment may apply for.
Mr. Stoepker: I represent a client who has had a business in Livonia for the last few
years. He is a restaurant on Plymouth Road. When 1-96 Freeway went in
it drew some of the traffic away from that area and looking at various
studies and records, we have found it would be desirable if the ordinance
adopted for this use would be set up to permit a situation where the rule
would be eighteen years or over or accompanied by a parent, or where they
would divide the game area from the food area.
Mrs. Scurto: Can you name these establishments.
Mr. Stoepker: Detroit limits these establishments to two. Chuck E. Cheese is one
which is a franchise owned by Little Caesar's. I went there and was
amazed to find that it was strictly a family restaurant and I observed
no loitering. My point is that your ordinance is denying other restau-
rants and businesses the opportunity to compete with these businesses .
Mr. Falk: Are you an Attorney?
,: Mr. Stoepker: Yes. I represent a client who is interested by going through proper steps
to take advantage of this use.
Mr. Falk: We studied this many hours with our Legal Department and representatives
of other businesses in Livonia. The lady at Sears did not even want that
in the mall . We even went to one place where the area was carpeted, a
real nice place, and the machines were divided from other areas but that
was an expensive operation. There is no restaurant on Plymouth Road that
could afford something like that.
Mr. Stoepker: I don' t disagree with the attempted ordinance but I am saying that you
are denying other restauranteurs from competing for business.
Mr. Zimmer: I particularly support not limiting these games, which is what we are
attempting to do here by giving them some definition. We still have a
strong feeling and I support the position stated by Mr. Andrew. The C-2
already does that for us by limiting the clientele and that is the reason
why we did this.
Mr. Gledhill , 11021 Cranston: What gives you the right to dictate to anybody what they
can and can 't do?
Mr. Andrew: If you don' t like what the Planning Commission does, you can appeal to the
Council and if you don't like what they do, you can appeal to the court.
Mr. Gledhill : It seems to me that the City is against things to do with kids. I had an
ocassion to call the Parks and Recreation Department and can't get a t
satis-
factory answer from them. Everything you say is negative. You also passed
an ordinance allowing a pin-ball machine in a C-3 District. How many C-3
zones in Livonia?
4
7524
p
Mr. Andrew: I think, one. But that doesn't mean you can't apply for a C-3 zoning.
ILVUnder this ordinance, we can put thirty-five machines in Livonia Mall ,
Wonderland, motels, colleges. So we have allowed for them.
Mr. Gledhill : What if a child lives at Plymouth and Newburgh Roads? He has no access
to those locations.
Mr. Andrew: They could be driven. If you are aggrieved by our decisions, you can
appeal to the City Council .
Mr. Zimmer: We do have a Youth Commission in the City. Have you expressed your feel-
ings there?
Mr. Gledhill : No, I can't even get an answer from the Superintendent over there. If you
people will take the time to go over to Cherry Hill you will see no
loitering. I have gone to Bob-Lo and they have machines, too. And, you
can buy them for your television sets. Just don't stop the kids ' fun.
Mrs. Scurto: I would like you to look at the arcades in areas like Westland and see
what goes on in those places. However, I do agree that there are not a
lot of people who fight for kids in this town.
Mr. Henry Heiser, Vice President of Empire Distributing Company, 11998 Merriman Road,
Livonia: I am also a member of the Southeast Michigan Game Operators
Association. We have read the ordinance and we would like to commend
the Commission. It is a step in the right direction. We are behind you
100%, and believe this will open up opportunities in Livonia.
liL0President of the Southeast Michigan Game Operators Association : We concur with everything
Mr. Heiser has said and feel this will be beneficial to Livonia.
Mr. Scott, Attorney for Union Music Company, 20048 Harper: I have reviewed the ordinance
with my client and believe it is extremely fair. It will limit the use
to persons over eighteen or under adult supervision. I would ask that
this honorable body adopt the ordinance as written.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 81-7-6-6 closed .
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek and seconded by Mr. Zimmer, it was
#8-138-81 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 4,
1981 on Petition 81-7-6-6 by the City Planning Commission to amend Sections
2. 10, 11 .02, and 18.59 of Zoning Ordinance #543 to incorporate regulations
relating to mechanical and electronic amusement devices, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 81-7-6-6
be approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed amendment will provide additional flexibility for
location of mechanical amusement devices.
(2) The proposed language provides for a limited number of mechanical
amusement devices in several different types of facilities.
7525
(3) The proposed amendment provides the City of Livonia the necessary
it; limitations for, and control of, mechanical amusement devices.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was published
in the official newspaper, the Livonia Observer, under date of July 20,
1981 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. Zimmer: I spent two or three evenings at Oscars on Cherry Hill and I also talked
with people like ourselves in Westland . They also were apprehensive about
that establishment and they did not adopt a City wide ordinance. It was
a waiver. I think you have to agree that this ordinance represents an
advancement in the use of these machines. Even though you can buy them
for you television sets, we as parents still want to modify these things.
I think this is not conservative at all . We have an abnormally poor
youth program in Livonia and I have spent a lot of time blocking off streets
for block parties and with Little League activities, all for children.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following :
AYES: Morrow, Sobolewski , Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
NAYS: Scurto, Naidow
ABSENT: Kluver
Mrs. Scurto: I am voting no because I don't think these belong in a shopping center
where the primary purpose is not to be entertained.
IL Mrs. Naidow: l am voting no for the same reason.
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 81-5-2-9
by Roaring 20's requesting waiver use approval to construct a family
restaurant on the north side of Schoolcraft Service Drive between Inkster
and Middlebelt Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 24.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto and seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski , it was
RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 9,
1981 on Petition 81-5-2-9 as submitted by Roaring 20's requesting
waiver use approval to construct a family restaurant on the north
side of Schoolcraft Service Drive between Inkster and Middlebelt
Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 24, the City Planning Com-
mission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
81-5-2-9 be approved subject to the following conditions :
(1) that the Site Plan marked Sheet No. 1 , as revised July 21 ,
1981 , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(2) that the building elevations marked Sheet No. 2 and 3, as
dated 1/12/81 , which are hereby approved shall be adhered to;
i
7526
(3) that the Floor Plan marked Sheet No. 4, as dated 1/12/81 ,
which is hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(4) that the sprinkler and lighting plan layout, as revised,
indicating the parking lot lighting fixture Spec-360 Series
MVD Heavy Duty Flood Lights, Catalog Number ML 4202 as
manufactured by Crouse-Hinds Company, or equivalent , which
is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and
(5) that a revised landscape plan shall be submitted to the
Planning Commission for approval within thirty days (30)
days of the date of this resolution;
for the following reasons:
(1) This proposal complies with all of the specific and general
waiver use standards contained in Section 11 .03 and 19.06
of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
(2) This proposed waiver use will not adversely affect the
established uses in the surrounding area.
(3) The site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed restaurant
use.
(4) The abutting Schoolcraft Service Drive has the capacity to
provide access to and from the proposed site without undue
congestion and interruption of normal traffic flow.
(5) This proposal will provide a unique commercial service for
the surrounding neighborhood and for the City of Livonia as
a whole.
Mr. Andrew: Let the record show that the City Planning Department was presented with
a petition dated July 29, 1981 , signed by approximately 103 people, and
in the opinion of the Chair about 51 families, in opposition to the
petition.
Mr. Morrow: I am going to vote against approval of this petition not because I don't think
they would be a welcome addition to Livonia and not because I don 't think
they will be a good business venture. The problem I have is with the site.
I think putting this waiver use on that particular site is going to be
detrimental to an already over-burdened traffic situation. I do not feel
the sound emanating from within the restaurant will be bad but with 211
parking places I think that will add to an already over-burdened noise
factor to the abutting residential properties. I had an occasion to
observe the site and they are in close proximity to Roma Hall , the race
track, Mitch Housey's and a bowling alley. For these reasons I will vote
no on the resolution.
Mr. Falk: 1 also have to vote against it. I think the site is not suited plus the
traffic. On Saturday it is unbelievable. If they come back with another
site, I will be glad to vote for it . I think the people back there have
been put through enough.
a
7527
Mr. Vyhnalek: I am voting against it because I feel it should be a professional service
in that area with regular business hours. I think it should be P.S. and
the traffic could be accommodated.
titMr. Zimmer: I am opposed to the petition, I am opposed to the interpretation given
by the maker of the motion regarding Section 19.06. I find it not to
be in harmony with the neighbors on the north or east. I still see a
service drive as being relief drives for expressways. And, the traffic.
Cardwell Avenue offers the only exit south and future traffic from the
east of this restaurant would have to go back west and clog up this area.
The lights I believe would interfere with the residential area.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Scurto, Naidow, Sobolewski
NAYS: Morrow, Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
ABSENT; Kluver
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion failed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek and seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was
#8-139-81 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on June 9,
1981 on Petition 81-5-2-9 as submitted by Roaring 20's requesting
waiver use approval to construct a family restaurant on the north
side of Schoolcraft Service Drive between Inkster and Middleblet
Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 24, the City Planning Com-
mission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition
81-5-2-9 be denied for the following reasons :
(.1) The proposed use would be detrimental to and incompatible
with the adjoining uses of the area.
(2) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the
proposed use is in compliance with the general waiver use
standards and requirements set forth in Section 19.06 of
Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
(3) The location and size of the proposed use, the nature and
intensity of the principal use and the site layout will be
such that traffic to and from the site will unduly conflict
with the peace and enjoyment of the places of residence of
persons residing in the adjoining residential neighborhood.
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: Morrow, Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
NAYS; SCurto, Naidow, Sobolewski
ABSENT: Kluver
too'Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
,adopted.
7528
Mr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 81 -4-2-7
by George and Betty Hajal requesting waiver use approval to utilize
an SDD License in connection with an existing party store located
on the north side of Plymouth Road between Cavell and Arcola in the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 25.
tip; On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek and sedonded by Mr. Falk, it was
#8-140-81 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 12,
1981 on Petition 81-4-2-7 as submitted by George and Betty Hajal
requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD License in connec-
tion with an existing party store located on the north side of
Plymouth Road between Cavell and Arcola in the Southeast 1/4 of
Section 25, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to
the City Council that Petition 81-4-2-7 be approved for the follow-
ing reasons:
(1) The proposal complies with all of the specific and general
waiver use standards contained in Sections 11 .03 and 19.06
of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
(2) The subject site has the capacity to accommodate the added
activity created by the use of an SDD License at this location .
(3) The proposed use will be compatible 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 forefoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Morrow, Naidow, Sobolewski , Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
NAYS: Scurto
ABSENT: Kluver
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 81-4-2-8
by Arbor Drugs, Inc. , requesting waiver use approval to utilize an
SOD License in connection with an existing business located on the
southwest conre of Middlebelt and Five Mile Roads in the Northeast
1/4 of Section 23.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted,
it was
#8-14-81 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on May 12,
1981 on Petition 81-4-2-8 as submitted by Arbor Drugs, Inc. ,
requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SOD License in
connection with an existing business located on the southwest
corner of Middlebelt and Five Mile Roads in the Northeast 1/4
of Section 23, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 81 -4-2-8 be denied for the
following reasons:
7529
(1 ) The petition cannot comply with all of the specific standards
irili;' of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended, contained in Section
11 .03(r) thereof.
(2) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the proposed
use is in compliance with the general waiver use standards and
requirements set forth in Section 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543,
as amended.
(3) The proposed use is contrary to the spirit and intent of the
Zoning Ordinance which, among other things, is to promote and
encourage a balance and appropriate mix of uses and not over
saturate an area with similar type uses as is being proposed.
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.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mrs . Scurto and seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek, it was
#8-142-81 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 415th Regular Meeting held by the
City Planning Commission on July 21 , 1981 are approved.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
10 AYES: Scurto, Naidow, Sobolewski , Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer, Andrew
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Morrow
ABSENT: Kluver
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto and seconded by Mr. Falk, it was
#8-143-81 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543,
as amended by Ordinance #990, the City Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 81-7-8-23 by
GM Associates requesting approval of all plans required by Section
18.47 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct a
commercial building on the east side of Newburgh Road between Six
and Seven Mile Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 8, be approved
subject to the following conditions:
(1) that the Site Plan marked Sheet No. SP-1 , dated 8/4/81 , revised,
prepared by GM Associates, which is hereby approved shall be
adhered to;
(2) that the landscaping as shown on the approved Site Plan which
is hereby approved shall be adhered to and all landscape materials
installed on the site shall be permanently maintained in a healthy
le condition;
3
a
4 7530
(3) that the Elevation Plan marked Sheet No. P-2, dated 8/4/81 ,
ii; revised, prepared by GM Associates, which is hereby approved
shall be adhered to;
(4). that the proposed ground sign as shown on the approved Site
Plan, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and
(5) that any additional proposed signage shall be reviewed by
the Planning Commission and approved by the City Council .
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
AYES: Morrow, Scurto, Naidow, Sobolewski , Vyhnalek, Falk, Zimmer
NAYS: Andrew
ABSENT: Kluver
Mr. Andrew: I vote, no because I think the east elevation should be brick.
Mr. Falk: Do you think you could consider making that elevation brick?
Representative of Petitioner: We will take a look at it and if it is not that much
more expensive, we will do it. We want the building to look as nice
as possible.
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted,
it was
t #8-144-81 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission pursuantto the provisions
of Act 285 of the Public Acts of Michigan, 1931 , as amended, does
hereby establish and order that that a public hearing be held to
determine whether or not to amend Part V of the Master Plan of the
City of Livonia, the Master School and Park Plan, so as to delete
property located south of Bretton, if extended, and west of Hardy
Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 3.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of time and place of said hearing shall
be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of
Livonia and a notice by registered United States mail shall be sent
to each public utility or railroad company owning or operating any
public utility or railroad within the City of Livonia in accordance
with the provisions of Act 285 of the Public Acts of Michigan of
1931 , as amended .
Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution
adopted.
Mr. Andrew: We have received a letter from' the Public School System in Livonia con-
cerning a proposed ordinance regarding the use of public buildings for
private use. I would like your feelings on this; would you want to proceed
with the proposed amendment?
Mr. Falk: I say let's move on.
a
7531
1^
Mr. Ziemer: They had the information many weeks ago. I don't know how that is
germane to our activity and I don't see any reason for holding up.
Mrs. Sobolewski : I feel the same way. I think we have just been sitting and waiting,
and very patient about it,
Mr. Vyhnalek: I think we should give them another 45 days.
Mrs . Scurto: I think this is two government bodies and they are both being paid by
our tax dollars. I think they should be given a crack at it.
Mr. Morrow: I would like to get some input from the attorneys. I am amenable to
letting them go a little longer, but not much.
Mrs. Naidow: I just started on the Commission and don't feel qualified to make a
decision on this.
Mr. Andrew: I would like Mr. Garver informed that we will take some kind of definitive
action on this petition on the 22nd of September, and I would like the
school system and the members of the board sent a copy of these minutes.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted , the 416th Regular Meeting
and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on August 4,
1981 was adjourned at 10:55 p.m.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
/// ///
• - / ose r' J. 7: 1 k, Secret y
ATTEST:
Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman
ac