Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1983-01-18 k4 7834 �, i ' i MINUTES OF THE 447th REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY 44 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, January 18, 1983, the City Planning Commission of the- City of Livonia ft: held its 447th 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 fifty interested persons in the audience. Members present: Daniel R. Andrew Lee R. Morrow Sue Sobolewski Jerome Zimmer Herman Kiuver Donald Vyhnalek Joseph J. Falk Judith Scurto Donna Naidow Members absent: None Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director; and Ralph H. Bakewell , Planner IV, were also present. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning or a vacating request, this Commission only makes a recommenda- tion to the City Council who in turn holds a public hearing and decides the question. If a petition involves a waiver of use request which is denied, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City Council . Otherwise the petition is terminated. ILMr. Falk, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 82-11-1-17 by Christopher B. Ziomek to rezone property located on the northwest corner of Wayne and Joy Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 33, from RUF to P.S. Mr. Nagy: We have a letter in the file dated December 3, 1982 from the Engineering Division noting that Joy Road has not been dedicated to its fullest extent in accordance with the City's Master Thorough- fare Plan, and a letter dated January 6, 1983 from the Wayne County Road Commission indicating that both Wayne and Joy are County primary roads and that the ultimate requirement for Joy Road dedica- tion according to the County's Right-of-Way Master Plan is 120' in in width. Also, a permit would be required prior to the start of any construction within the road right-of-way. Christopher Ziomek, 7100 Michigan, Detroit: This rezoning is requested because we would like to construct a funeral home on the property and, if approved, will construct in June. Mr. Andrew: Would there be any difficulty in dedic@ting the 27' in compliance with the Wayne County Road Commission requirements? Mr. Ziomek: No. Mrs. Scurto: Is this property essentially on a hill and is that going to interfere with the parking? Mr. Ziomek: It is a• hill and it will not interfere with parking. i 3 'rV . , 4 ' 7835 . . S . . • ,i' Mrs. Scurto: I got one phone call and the caller said that all funeral parlors have a crematory. Is that true, Mr. Nagy? 4 ILMr. Nagy: No, this is not true. Mrs. Scurto: Is parking determined differently for a funeral home than for an office building. Mr. Nagy: It has its own parking standards determined by the number of square feet in the viewing rooms with a minimum of 75 parking spaces. Mrs. Scurto: How large do you anticipate this to be and how many viewing rooms? Mr. Ziomek: 8,000 square feet with three viewing rooms. Mr. Morrow: You have a going business now? Will you discontinue that or will this be an expansion? Mr. Ziomek': I have a business now at 7100 Michigan Avenue and this will be an expansion. Mr. Vyhnalek: How many parking spaces are required? Mr. Nagy: One parking space for every 50 square feet of viewing room or 75 minimum. Mr. Vynalek: Have you thought about buying or renting the property north of you if the parking is not sufficient? 1[140 Mr. Ziomek: The site plan shows 78 spaces. Future expansion would be desirable some day if we could get the next door lot. Mr. Andrew: Will there be a caretaker always present at the funeral home? Mr. Ziomek: At our present location, it is attached to an apartment building and there is a caretaker. Our new location has no apartment designed but there will be a caretaker there from 9:00 to 5:00. Mr. Zimmer: Do you own the property in question? Mr. Ziomek: No. Mr. Zimmer: Is the zoning line the same as the property line? Mr. Nagy: Yes. The zoning lines are coterminus with .property lines. Mrs. Sobolewski : How many curb cuts will you have and where will they be located? Mr. Ziomek: There will be two, one on Wayne Road and one on Joy. Kenneth Schreufnagle, 8889 Wayne Road: My concern is that my property is being boxed in. The value of my property is at stake. to Mr. Andrew: How long have you owned the property? Mr. Schreufnagle: Four years. I have RUF now and it will be tough now to sell with all the commercial . ' v , ' 7836 4 Mr. Andrew: The commercial property to the north was already there four years ago. Mr. Schreufnagle: Yes, to the north of me. 1: Mr. Andrew: Are you objecting to the funeral home or professional zoning? Mr. Schreufnagle: Yes, that would be my objection -- having a funeral home next to me. I do have a family. Mr. Andrew: If the rezoning request is successful , at the time of the site plan approval he would be required to show and construct a wall on his north property line. Do you have a wall on your north property line now? Mr. Schreufnagle: Yes. The value of my home would go down if this goes up. Who would want to buy a home next to a funeral home? Joseph Gillen, 35042 Joy: I also have a concern about this being a funeral home. Can I sell in the future next to a funeral home or if it is zoned com- mercial? Mr. Andrew: That is a difficult ,question to answer, but to my way of thinking, we are better off as a community if we can entertain a rezoning request for professional service as opposed to heavy commercial . I think we have less traffic and less activity with professional service and there is no reason why a funeral home can 't be designed to blend in aesthetically with residential . From that- standpoint, I would look at this favorably. On the other hand, there is a nega- tive thing about funeral' homes. He will be required to construct a protective wall on the north property line. I think it will have a minimal impact on the residential from a resale standpoint and value. Charles Meyers, Attorney representing Mr. Walker, 35020 Joy Road: He is talking about two cuts. Everybody knows that everybody going east on Joy has to turn either right or left. This will cause a large problem with people turnirq. Death is something I don't like to deal with on an everyday basis. Is there any specific reason that my client has to settle his kids down with music playing? Do they have to be careful what they say because something is going on next door? The only wall that would do any good will have to be about twenty feet tall . Also, the parking spaces will not adequately handle this. Mr. Andrew: Parking is a legitimate question at the time we review the site plan. Mr. Meyers: If that space were dedicated to commercial , we would have 150 parking spaces. Mr. Andrew: The architect has developed 78 parking spaces. That is probably close to Ordinance requirements. Mr. Meyers: What if he has a 100-car funeral . Where will they park? Mr. Andrew: The question before us tonight is whether or not the property should tri be rezoned whether or not a funeral home is ever developed on the site. There could be doctors ' offices on the site. t V . 4 • . . 7837 Mr. Vyhnalek: How long has your client lived there? / Mr. Meyers: He built the house but I 'm not sure how many years ago. Mr. Vyhnalek: Has this property been vacant for quite a while? Mr. Nagy: Yes. Mr. Morrow: Could you respond to the noise factor that was alluded to. Mr. Ziomek: It is very, very quiet. The organ music he mentioned are chimes on tape and the noise is subdued; hardly any at all . Mr. Morrow: Would you say the sound of the music would emanate outside the building? Mr. Ziomek: No. Mrs. Scurto: Would you equate the organ, should the zoning be effected, to an organ in a home or church? Mr. Ziomek: It is all taped; we do not own an organ. Mr. Zimmer: Our Future Land Use Plan designates this as commercial? Mr. Nagy: Yes, since 1974. `. Mr. Zimmer: P.S. zoning is the least use in the .commercial field in terms of our Land Use Plan? Mr. Nagy: Yes, it is less intensive and more restrictive. Mrs. Scurto: Is your property higher than Mr. Meyers' client 's? Mr. Meyers: Yes, it is higher. Bradley Schelske, 8854 Roslyn: What is the construction of the wall and how do we come to terms as to how the wall will be built? Mr. Andrew: That is an Engineering decision. It would probably be a continuation of the wall behind Ten Yen. He will be required to build the wall along the north and west property lines. As to the type of the wall , that will be taken up at the time he is here for site plan approval should the rezoning be approved. Mr. Gillen: How many cars are involved in a funeral procession? Mr. Ziomek: About fifteen to twenty cars. Mr. Meyers: Do you think that is a positive or negative letter from the Wayne County Road Commission? to Mr. Nagy: I think the County took a stand neither for nor against but they are letting us know that they are going to have to meet certain standards and need additional right-of-way in the event they are to widen Joy Road. II k . 4 ' 7838 • • Mr. Morrow: P.S. is a less intensive use on this corner than commercial and professional uses can be blended into a residential environment as opposed to commercial . As one Commissioner, I see P.S. as a /1: good zoning for this corner. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-11-1-17 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted, it was #1-1-83 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January 18, 1983 on Petition 82-11-1-17 as submitted by Christopher B. Ziomek to rezone property located on the northwest corner of Wayne and Joy Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 33 from RUF to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-11-1-17 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning complies with the Future Land Use Plan of the City of Livonia as adopted by the City Planning Commission. (2) The uses that are permitted by the proposed change of zoning will be compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding established uses of the area. (3) The proposed change of zoning is in compliance with the adopted IL goals and policies of the Commission for land use as the proposed change of zoning will provide for a good buffer separating the established residential neighborhood to the west from the adverse affects of the heavily travelled thoroughfare of Wayne Road. (4) The nature of the proposed use and the hours of operation and the traffic that would be generated thereby will not adversely affect the surrounding established uses of the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. 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 82-12-1-19 by Bokos, Jones & Plakas for Burce C. & Toni Mette to rezone property located on the east side of Arcola, north of Plymouth Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 25, from R-1 to P. Mr. Nagy: We have a letter in the file dated December 21 , 1982 from the Engi- neering Department stating that the improvement of the existing alley should be considered in connection with improvement of the proposed parking area and that the Engineering office would object to the construction of a protective wall along the east line of the proposed parking area due to the location of an existing sanitary sewer within the vacated alley. 7839 Angelo Plakas, Attorney representing Bruce and Toni Mette, 8623 North Wayne Road, 1[0 Westland 48184, was present. Mr. Andrew: How long has your clients owned this property? Mr. Plakas: Six months. Mr. Andrew: Is there any other property in the vicinity under his ownership? Mr. Plakas: I understand he owns three stores there. There is no offstreet park- ing on Plymouth there and they need this for parking purposes. Mr. Zimmer: Is the alley vacated? Mr. Nagy: Just the north/south alley. Mr. Zimmer: He couldn't put a wall then on his half of the alley? Mr. Nagy: Correct. Mr. Zimmer: How long has the petitioner owned the business in question? Mr. Plakas: Six months. This is all new. Mr. Zimmer: Is there any legal parking on the current property? IL Mr. Nagy: There is some limited parking but well under the Ordinance require- ment. Mr. Zimmer: And there is three separate businesses. Do you park on this property now? Mr. Mette, petitioner: Yes. There was no one in the audience wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-12-1-19 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it was #1-2-83 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January 18, 1983 on Petition 82-12-1-19 as submitted by Bokos, Jones & Plakas for Bruce C. & Toni Mette to rezone property located on the east side of Arcola, north of Plymouth Road in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 25, from R-1 to P, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-12-1-19 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed zoning district will provide for uses which will be compatible with the neighborhood and, at the same time, will serve adjacent commercial uses for offstreet parking purposes. 1; (2) The proposed change of zoning is consistent with the Future Land Use Plan. f 7840 . (3) The proposed change of zoning is consistent with similar changes of zoning previously approved for the general area. IL (4) The location and size of the subject property, and the require- ments of the existing residential zoning district leave the subject property deficient and substandard. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. 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 82-11-2-39 by Robert German requesting waiver use approval to erect a building for general office use on the west side of Farmington Road between Seven Mile Road and Clarita in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9. . Mr. Nagy: There is a letter dated December 3, 1982 in the file from the Engineering Division indicating that there are no engineering problems in connection with this proposal . Robert German, 31660 Bobrich, Livonia: At the present time the zoning is P.S. I am constructing an office building. Under P.S. , only a couple uses are permitted. I filed the petition so I could possibly get general office uses and open up to real estate offices, insurance offices, etc. With the economy the way it is, it will be easier for me to get professions other than medical . . 4 There was no one in the audience wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-11-2-39 closed . On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski and unanimously adopted, it was #1-3-83 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January 18, 1983 on Petition 82-11-2-39 as submitted by Robert German requesting waiver use approval to erect a building for general office use on the west side of Farmington Road between Seven Mile Road and Clarita in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 9, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-11-2-39 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that the building and site will be developed in accordance with the previously approved site and building plans 'approved for the subject property in connection with Site Plan Petition 82-11-8-29 by Planning Commission Resolution #11-215-82; and (2) that the site shall be fully developed and landscaped in accordance with all approved plans before issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy. tofor the following reasons: (1) The proposed use complies with Section 9.03(a) of Zoning ' Ordinance #543, the specific and general standards that relate to the proposed use. r . 4 7841 • (2) The site has the capacity to support the proposed use. (3) The proposed use will not adversely affect the surrounding and established uses of the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. 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 82-11-2-40 by the Southland Corporation requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD License in connection with an existing business located on the northeast corner of Middlebelt Road and Roycroft in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13. Mr. Nagy: . There is a letter in the file dated December 3, 1982 stating that, the Engineering Division finds no engineering problems in connection with this petition. There is also a letter dated January 17, 1983 from Mr. and Mrs. Roger L. Adams stating their objection to the requested liquor license. David Cornell , 14111 Farmington Road, 'representing the Southland Corporation: Some of the other party stores have a license and if we want to remain com- petitive we must have a license. ILMr. Andrew: At the present time you have a beer and wine license?. Mr. Cornell : That is correct. Mr. Zimmer: How long have you had beer and wine? Mr. Cornell : Since it was built. Mr. Zimmer: Do your hours of operation change with a liquor license? Mr. Cornell : It doesn't change the hours of operation. The State restricts the hours you can sell . Mr. Zimmer: Do you have to do anything physically inside the building when that hour arrives? Mr. Cornell : We would do some remodeling in the inside if the license is granted. Mr. Zimmer: Do you have any other liquor sales operations? Mr. Cornell : Yes, on Nine Mile and Farmington which is a self-serve operation. Mr. Zimmer: Has your volume increased on account of that? Mr. Cornell : Dramatically, yes. to Mr. Zimmer: Do you feel that any of these are potentially vacant building without the license? Mr. Cornell : I wouldn 't go that far. M 4 • . , 7842 s Mrs. Sobolewski : How many parking spaces? LMr. Cornell : I am guessing fifteen. There was no one else in the audience wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-11-2-40 closed . On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted, it was #1-4-83 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January 18, 1983 on Petition 82-11-2-40 by the Southland Corporation requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD License in connection with an existing business located on the northeast corner of Middlebelt Road and Roycroft in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-11-2-40 be denied for the following reasons: (1) 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. (2) The location and size of the property, the nature and intensity of the proposed use in conjunction with the existing uses, the site layout and its relation to the street giving access to it will be such that traffic to and from the site will be hazardous to the neighborhood. 1[1; (3) The existing site layout and 1_imited site capacity represent the minimum requirements necessary to accommodate the established permitted uses only. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. 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 82-11-2-41 by the Southland Corporation requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD License in connection with an existing business located on the west side of Wayne Road, south of,Ann Arbor Trail in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 33. • Mr. Nagy: We have a letter in the file dated December 3, 1982 from the Engineer- ing Division indicating that there are no engineering problems connected with this proposal , and we have a petition addressed to the Planning Commission dated January 4, 1983 from homeowners in the Kirsh Sub- division who strongly oppose the granting of approval to utilize an SDD license in connection with this existing business. David Cornell , 14111 Farmington Road, representing the petitioner, was present. 2 I 7843 • • Mr. Andrew: I assume you know that according to the Ordinance of the City of Livonia there has to be a 1 ,000' separation between liquor licensed establishments. However, that can be waived by the City Council . ° There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-11-2-41 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mrs. Naidow and unanimously adopted, it was #1-5-83 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January 18, 1983 on Petition 82-11-2-41 as submitted by the Southland Corporation requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD License in connection with an existing business located on the west side of Wayne Road, south of Ann Arbor Trail in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 33, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-11-2-41 be denied for the following reasons: (1) 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. (2) The proposed use fails to'comply with Section 11 .03(r) (1) which requires a minimum 1 ,000 foot separation of a proposed SDD Licensed establishment from an existing SDD Licensed establishment. (3) The existing site layout and the limited site capacity repre- sents the minimum requirements necessary to accommodate the established permitted uses only. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. 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 82-11-2-24 by the Southland Corporation requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD License in connection with an existing business located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Joy Road and Grandon in the South- west 1/4 of Section 36. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter dated December 3, 1982 in the file from the Engineering Division stating that there appears to be no engineering problems in connection with this proposal . David Cornell , 14111 Farmington Road, representing the petitioner, was present. Mr. Andrew; Again we have a problem with the 1 ,000' separation and also another Ordinance requirement which requires that an SDD licensed establish- ILment be located at least 400' from an existing church. Mr. Hembrough, representing his mother, Bessie Hembrough who lives at 9012 Middiebelt, Livonia: Since my mother moved into this vicinity the area has been going down. She is having to suffer from the effects of a 7-Eleven Store next to 4 7844 her which is a general nuisance to her. The addition of a liquor license will add to the problems and the traffic. 1[0 Mike Misajlovich, 17700 Francavilla, Livonia: I own the Mid-Joy Party Store and I think this is a little bit too close. I am opposed. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-11-2-42 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, it was #1-6-83 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public hearing having been held on January 18, 1983 on Petition 82-11-2-42 as submitted by the Southland Corporation requesting waiver use approval to utilize an SDD License in connection with an existing business located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between Joy Road and Grandon in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 36, the . City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-11-2-42 be denied for the following reasons: (1) 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. (2) The proposed use fails to comply with Section 11 .03(r) (1) IL which requires a minimum 1 ,000 foot separation of a proposed SDD Licensed establishment from an 'existing SDD Licensed establishment. (3) The proposed use fails to comply with Section 11 .03(r) (12) which requires a minimum 400 foot separation of a proposed SDD Licensed establishment from an existing church structure. (4) The existing site layout and limited site capacity represents the minimum requirements necessary to accommodate the established uses only. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. 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 82-11-2-43 by Harry McManus requesting waiver use approval to operate an auto repair service within an existing building located on the southeast corner of Schoolcraft and Eckles Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 19. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter dated December 13, 1982 in the file from the Engineering Division stating that it is noted that Eckles Road has not been dedicated to its fullest extent and the additional right- of-way should be taken into account as it relates to proposed park- ing or landscaping requirements. IL V . 4 7845 • • Harry McManus, 46271 West Ann Arbor Road : As indicated in the application, sales and service of automobile engines is what I want to do here. IL Mr. Andrew: When you say the sale of automobile engines -- are they used? Mr. McManus: New and used. Mr. Andrew: Where are the engines tested? Mr. McManus: They are pretested in the companies that sell to me on contract. At the pretesting, the engines are removed and then shipped to me. Mr. Andrew: Do you have an operation already like this? Mr. McManus: Yes, at First and Junction. The lease expired and it was not renewable. I have been in two other locations also. Van Born is one. Mr. Andrew: How many engines would you store on the site? Mr. McManus: Probably about fifty to seventy-five. Mr. Andrew: All inside? Mr. McManus: Yes. They are always inside at both of my other locations, on shelves. Mr. Andrew: If I come in and buy an engine, who will put it in my car? Mr. McManus: A company in Plymouth installs engi,ies for us. When I was in Van Born we could do that. I would like sales and service here. It is 0 a clean, quiet operation; not like brake jobs or hammering on axles. Mr. Andrew: Do you have a purchase agreement to buy subject to this approval? Mr. McManus: I signed a lease with option to lease for two more years. Mr. Andrew: If we deny you, what happens? Mr. McManus: I need a place. Mr. Andrew: You have already signed your lease and have a problem. Mr. McManus: Yes. Mr. Kluver: Your operation is that you take engines and clean them without re- building them? Do you do any physical work on that engine in this facility? Mr. McManus: No. We get engines already pretested to be good. It is not as feasible to do that as to buy one the way we do now. Mr. Kluver: Do you do anything physical to that engine at all? Mr. McManus: Just what is necessary to make sure it is clean but I would like to get a permit that if a customer wants us to put it in we could put it in. I would have a man do that; I wouldn't do it. I: , .. I • 4 7846 Mrs. Scurto: Do you perceive storing anything at all outside the building structure? Mr. McManus: No, absolutely nothing at all . One or two trucks, maybe. IL Mrs. Scurto: No un-engined cars or parts of engines? Mr. McManus: No, absolutely not. Mr. Zimmer: When you remove the old engine and put in the new -- what do you do with the old engine? Mr. McManus: It is put on a truck and shipped to the next company when the truck goes. Mr. Zimmer: You don't store it until you get a call to rebuild it? Mr. McManus: I don't rebuild. , Mrs. Scurto; How many parking spots legitimately are on this for cars? Mr. Nagy: He needs 9 spaces and there is easily available 9 spaces for parking. Mrs. Scurto: Could I assume that the driveway in front could accommodate any patronage he may have. Mr. Nagy: Yes. L Mrs. Scurto; How many people come to your facility in one day? . Mr. McManus: The maximum I have soldi.n one day is six. Eight people at the most on any given day. The average is 1 , 2 or 3. Philip Gerard, 34651 Schoolcraft: We need this man to keep the building filled up so it doesn't run down and to keep the landscaping up. Jack Gatewood, 16750 Yorkshire, was present, and stated he was the new owner of the property. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 82-11-2-43 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Morrow, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted, it was #1-7-83 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January 18, 1983 on Petition 82-11-2-43 as submitted by Harry McManus requesting waiver use approval to operate an auto repair service within an existing building located on the southeast corner of Schoolcraft and Eckles Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 19, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 82-11-2-43 until the Planning Commis- sion 's Study Meeting to be held on January 25, 1983. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. twMr. Falk, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 82-12-2-44 by Richard Schuster requesting waiver use approval for storage of 4 . 7 y • 4 7847 contractors equipment on property located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Merriman and Osmus in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 3. 1[ 'Mr. Nagy: There is a letter dated December 21 , 1983 from the Engineering Division stating that there appear to be no engineering problems in connection with this petition. Richard Schuster, 31675 Eight Mile Road, petitioner, was present. Mr. Andrew: Mr. Schuster, do you own this property? Mr. Schuster: No, we lease. Mr. Andrew: How long have you been in the building? Mr. Schuster: Since about December 25th or 26th. Our business is we sell and rent contractor's equipment to building contractors. We are not contractors. Mr. Nagy: The occupancy permit prohibits any outside storage. Even though he is in the building, he intends to store outside. He needs a waiver of use approval because he intends to store outside. Mr. Kluver: How many pieces will .you store outside? Mr. Schuster: Forklift trucks up to five to six thousand pound capacity. It may be seven or eight. We also have concrete conveyors. Other items would ILbe scaffolding for renting. ,They will be dismantled. We are not in the contracting business but sale and rental of equipment to contractors. Mr. Kluver: Do you have any cranes? " Mr. Schuster: No, we have smaller equipment like water pumps and these will be stored outside. Mr. Kluver: The largest things would be scaffolding and forklifts and these would be stored outside? Mr. Schuster: Yes, and perhaps a portable mortar mixer, not big mixers. In the business to sell and rent, we need to keep the equipment neat and orderly so we certainly intend to keep it more presentable than a contractor's yard. Mr. Kluver: What would be the total number of equipment stored outside? Mr. Schuster: Probably fifteen or sixteen. Mr. Vyhnalek: These pieces are rented for a month or two at a time? Mr. Schuster: A lot of them are rented like that but could be a day or two. Mr. Vyhnalek: What about maintenenace? Would they be started up outside? { Mr. Schuster: Maintenance would be performed in the shop. The forklifts would be started outside to be brought into the shop. Any work would be done in the shop. 3 M 4 7848 Mr. Falk: How long have you been in business? ILMr. Schuster: Since August of last year. This the first location for this company. Mr. Falk: Are you new to the business? Mr. Schuster: We have experience in the business but not as the owner of a company. Mr. Falk: What would you do if business picks up? Mr. Schuster: If business picks up, there would be less in the yard because it would be rented out. This does not present an eye-sore. It is difficult even to see the yard from Eight Mile Road. There is a galvanized fence on the property line. Mr. Falk: You are asking that the wall on the south be waived? Mr. Schuster: The landlord put in the request to waive the wall because the lots behind are vacant. Mr. Falk: Who owns the property to the south? Mr. Nagy: Naldo Bucci & Associates. Mr. Schuster: Mr. Bucci does not own the property we are leasing. He sold it to someone else last September. Debbie Mroz, 20333 Osmus: The property located to the. west has two semi trucks stored on it and it is very unsightly. L - Mr. G. Isaacson, 30540 Osmus: I have been living here for thirty years and nothing has been done. I don't know how the City of Livonia can put up with this -- right across the street from this there is a pool company and it is a beautiful building, all landscaped and all . Why can't the City of Livonia clean up this mess, at least cut the grass. Mrs: Scurto: Do you see a possibility for trees in the back by the fence as being injurious to your storing. There are some very nice homes along there and I don't think we've been able to do a lot and I can see a need for some kind of screening. I would like to see a precedent to require some type of landscaping to shield that area. Mr. Schuster: We are leasing the building. He purchased the property. He put in the petition to waive the wall . I wish I could speak for him but I can't. I think it falls back on him as to what he would be willing to do. Mr. Morrow: Do you know when the petition is going to be before the Zoning Board of Appeals? Mr. Nagy: No. Mrs. Scurto:I: If the residents here want something done, I would suggest that you go to that meeting. If you don't want a cement wall , they can certainly do something green. v4 7849., . . • / Mr. Andrew: Mr. Nagy has pointed out that a twenty foot greenbelt is required between outside storage of equipment and residential property. If L we approve this petition a greenbelt will be required. Robert Hastings, 20220 Parker: This area has always been unsightly and what is going to be done to prevent rats. They come when you pile lumber. Mr. Schuster: We won't have any lumber. No wood at all . Mrs. Hastings, 20220 Parker: I think the building looks bad from the back. I travel along here all the time. And, we don't need any additional noise. In the summer you can't sleep with the windows open. Mr. Andrew: What are your hours? Mr. Schuster: Eight to five. Mrs. Sullivan: I am a director of the association and I feel that when a piece of property is sold they should be made to put up the wall separating the industrial from the residential property. Michael James, 29009 Eight Mile Road: I thought it difficult to see in the back of the yard from Osmus, and you really can't see going father than Osmus. This particular building is in good shape and well maintained and it is landscaped. There was no one else wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 82-12-2-44 closed . IL On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto and seconded by Mr. Falk, it was RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January 18, 1983 on Petition 82-12-2-44 as submitted by Richard Schuster requesting waiver use approval for storage of contractors equipment on property located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Merriman and Osmus in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 3, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 82-12-2-44 until such time as the Zoning Board of Appeals has taken action on the landlord 's request for the waiver of the required protective wall . A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Scurto, Naidow, Falk NAYS: Kluver, Morrow, Sobolewski , Vyhnalek, Zimmer, Andrew Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the resolution fails. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, it was #1-8-83 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January 18, 1983 on Petition 82-12-2-44 as submitted by Richard Schuster requesting triiwaiver use approval for storage of contractors equipment on property located on the south side of Eight Mile Road between Merriman and Osmus in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 3, the City Planning Commission does 1 V . ,p 4 • p . , 7850 , hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-12-2-44 be approved subject to the action of the Zoning Board of Appeals regard- IL ing the waiving of the protective wall as requested by the landlord, and to the following conditions: (1) that a landscape plan showing landscape materials in a twenty-foot wide area with two rows of live plant materials along the rear property line in conformance with Section 16.11 of Zoning Ordinance #543 shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Department staff; and (2) that the landscaping, to the extent that is presently established on the property, shall continue to be maintained in a healthy and vigorous condition. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, • as amended. 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 82-11-6-7 by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Section 23.01 (b) of Zoning Ordinance #543 to amend Section 18.42 of Ordinance #543 to incorporate regulations pertaining to the location and height of television & radio towers, satellite discs, etc. , within the City. There was no one present wishing to be heard 'regarding this item and Mr. .Andrew, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 82-11-6-7 closed. I, . . On a motion duly made by Mr. Zimmer, seconded by Mrs. Scurto and unanimously adopted, it was #1-9-83 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on January 18, 1983 on Petition 82-11-6-7 by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Section 23.01 (b) of Zoning Ordinance #543 to amend Section 18.42 of Zoning Ordinance #543 to incorporate regulations pertaining to the location and height of television & radio towers, satellite discs, etc. , within the City, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 82-11-6-7 be approved for the following reasons: (I) The proposed language will provide reasonable requirements relative to the location of antennas and antenna structures on private property. (2) The proposed language will provide the City of Livonia with adequate control over the location and nature of antennas and antenna stu ctures. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above Public Hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 4 i y • 7851 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted, it was r #1-10-83 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Council Resolution #846-82, the City Planning Commission, having reviewed plans for the final location of the satellite antenna and the screening of same submitted by Tandem Computers, Inc. , does hereby recommend to the City Council that the attached Plan dated 1/18/83 be approved subject to the approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the location of the sturcture in the front yard area and subject to the following conditions: (1) that the landscape materials as shown on Plan dated 1/18/83 and signed by the petitioner shall be installed on the site no later than June 1 , 1983; (2) that the antenna dish shall be placed on the site as shown on Plan dated 1/18/83 as approved and made part of this resolution; and (3) that the antenna dish shall be repainted an earth tone color to harmonize with the color of the building. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Scurto, seconded by Mr. Falk and unanimously adopted, it was #1-11-83 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 446th Regular Meeting and Public L Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on December 14, 1982 are approved. Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted, it was , #1-12-83 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 82-12-8-30P by Emmanuel Dania] requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended by Ordinance #1630, submitted in connection with a proposal to construct an addition to and remodel an existing building located on the south side of Plymouth Road, east of Levan Road in Section 32, subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan 82-297-D. Sheet 1 , dated 1/7/83, prepared by Sheppard Engineering, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that building elevations as shown on Plan 82-297-D, Sheet 2, prepared by Sheppard Engineering, Inc. , which are hereby approved shall be adhered to; (3) that a trash enclosure constructed of masonry on three sides with a gate shall be located on the site; and I (4) that a detailed landscape plan shall be submitted for Planning Commission approval within thirty (30) days. 3 V . , 4 7852 Mr. Andrew, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. ILOn a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 447th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on January 18, 1983 was adjouned at 11 :05 p.m. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION /, L,.. / GZG'- Jose,, J. 'al .ecretary ATTEST: c-i�� • Daniel R. Andrew, Chairman ac