HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1986-09-23 t
9754
MINUTES OF THE 524th REGULAR MEETING
AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LIVONIA
411 '440
On Tuesday, September 23, 1986, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia
held its 524th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000
Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan.
Mr. C. Russ Smith, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Members present: C. Russ Smith Herman Kluver Donald Vyhnalek
Donna J. Naidow Sue Sobolewski Michael Soranno
R. Lee Morrow
Members absent: Jeanne Hildebrandt
Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director;
and Ralph H. Bakewell, Planner IV, were also present.
Mr. Smith informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a
rezoning request or a subdivision, this Commission only makes a recommendation to
the City Council who, in turn, will hold its own public hearing and decide the
question. If a petition involves a waiver of use request and the request is denied,
the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City Council;
otherwise the petition is terminated. The Commission holds the only public hearing
on a preliminary plat. Planning Commission resolutions do not become effective
until seven days after tonight.
li:
Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petition 86-8-1-34
by the City Planning Commission pursuant to Section 23.01(b) of Zoning
Ordinance #543 to rezone property located on the west side of Osmus,
south of Eight Mile Road in Section 3 from M-L to R-1 & R-3A, and on
the east side of Osmus, south of Eight Mile Road in Section 3 from
M-1 to R-1 & RUFA.
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division
stating they have no objection to this proposal. Also, there
is a letter from James A. Muir, President of the North Central
Civic Association, stating that the Executive Board of the Civic
Association held a meeting with the residents of the Eight Mile/
Osmus area and as a result of that meeting requested that the
Zahn property be rezoned to R-3 rather than R-1 because the size
of the property very nearly meets the size requirements of the
R-3 classification. They also request the erection of a protec-
tive wall to shield the Zahn's property from the adjacent indus-
trial property on the north. They request that a wall be con-
structed also on the boundary of the properties owned by Mr. Glen
Isaacson and Demmer Electric. The Civic Association requests
that a general study be made of the area bounded by Parker on the
west and Merriman on the east for the purpose of enforcing pro-
tective wall requirements in the area.
= Mr. Vyhnalek: When did we get the letter?
a
1
9755
Mr. Nagy: On 9/23/86, at 6:45 p.m.
Mrs. Zahn, 20535 Osmus: I have a petition from neighbors three blocks over in regard
Ill't to this matter. A lot of them are aware of the difficulties we
have been having regarding our property. I took pictures to show
what we are dealing with. (Mrs. Zahn submitted the petition and
the pictures to the Commission). Our properties have been
residential since 1952. Mr. Isaacson has been there longer than
me and his property has never been used for commercial either.
This property is surrounded by commercial property. The patio
you see in the picture is not very attractive in terms of trying
to maintain a home for themselves and their grandchild. Our main
purpose in having the property rezoned is having a barrier wall.
We have children and there are children down the street. They
have pallets on the property which come onto our property.
Mr. Smith: How long have you been in your home?
Mrs. Zahn: Almost ten years.
Mr. Smith: And it has been this way since then?
Mrs. Zahn: Yes, we have called out the Inspectors and they do their job but
they can't do much regarding these pallets. We put a $15,000
addition on our house and I would like to be blocked out of this
mess.
Mr. Smith Why wasn't there a wall here before?
liMr. Nagy: The zoning line in that area is an arbitrary 360' . The zoning
' line actually extends over the property line. The Ordinance
requires a wall where you have residential abutting industrial.
Because the zoning extends beyond the property line, there is
no requirement for a wall.
Mr. Mike Zahn, 20535 Osmus: We moved in about ten years ago. The property next to
us is not finished or occupied yet. The building next to us
was built two or three years ago -- a dual purpose building.
The Pool Company parks their vehicles next to our property.
They are nice neighbors but when they break up their pallets
it creates problems for us. The property between the company
and our property is used for breaking up pallets. Our front
yard is full of nails and plastic and children in the area have
been climbing on the piles with the nails and we don't think
it is a very safe situation.
Mr. Smith: The plant is already there and they would not be required to
build a wall; just any new company. It would have to be done
cooperatively.
Mrs. Sobolewski: You are telling us there is nothing we can do?
Mr. Nagy: We can only appeal in a neighborly sense to them to build a
wall but there is no Ordinance requiring it.
Mr. Vyhnalek: We have it down here as R-1 but they want R-3.
9756
Mr. Nagy: The basis for the R-1 on the east of Osmus is because it is a
60' lot and to go to R-2, the prevailing residential zoning,
would require a 70' wide lot. The rationale for the R-1 zoning
was because of the size of the lots. On the other side of Osmus,
the lots are not quite R-3 but are contiguous to R-3 zoning.
R-3 would leave them with a requirement requiring a lot larger
than they have and they will be left with a non-complying situ-
ation. It is to their advantage to have a zoning classification
that fits the lot.
Mr. Vyhnaklek: If we go to R-1, R-3A and RUFA, we can't do anything about the
wall. It is up to the residents and business people?
Mr. Nagy: We can, in the interest of community relations, try for the wall
but unless we can appeal to their good will, they just don't
have to build a wall.
Catherine Sullivan, 20285 Milburn: We have been aware of Mr. Isaacson's property
for a long time. We feel it would be beneficial if the property
were rezoned and the electric company would put up a wall. We
have tried to get a wall but all we ever got is that it's in
court and they couldn't do anything about it. Mr. Isaacson
keeps his property neat and is a credit to the City of Livonia.
He has tried to maintain his property.
Mr. Smith: All we can do is suggest that they put up a wall.
Mrs. Sullivan: They have had no roof on part of that building for years and
no one ever does anything about that. If is very discouraging
to Mr. Isaacson.
Mr. Smith: If the zoning is approved tonight, we will do everthing we can
to get a wall constructed.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-8-1-34 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted,
it was
#9-248-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 23,
1986 on Petition 86-8-1-34 by the City Planning Commission to rezone
property located on the west side of Osmus, south of Eight Mile Road in
Section 3 from M-L to R-1 and R-3A, and on the east side of Osmus, south
of Eight Mile Road in Section 3 from M-1 to R-1 and RUFA, the City Planning
Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-8-1-34
be approved ror the following reasons:
(1) The proposed changes of zoning will provide zoning districts
that are consistent with the current uses of the subject
parcels.
(2) The proposed changes of zoning will move the existing zoning
lines so that they are contiguous with property lines.
9757
(3) The proposed changes of zoning are consistent with the Future
Land Use Plan.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance
with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
i
Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-8-2-30
by John C. Hammer requesting waiver use approval to construct a chapel/
mausoleum on property located on the south side of Five Mile Road
between Farmington and Fairlane in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 21.
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division
indicating they have no objection to this proposal.
John C. Hammer, Architect representing the petitioner, was present.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-8-2-30 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski and unanimously
adopted, it was
#9-249-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 23,
1986 on Petition 86-6-2-30 by John C. Hammer requesting waiver use
approval to construct a chapel/mausoleum on property located on the
south side of Five Mile Road between Farmington and Fairlane in the
Northeast 1/4 of Section 21, the City Planning Commission does hereby
recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-6-2-30 be approved
subject to the following conditions:
(1) that Site Plan, Sheet C-3, dated 8/25/86, prepared by Harley
Ellington Pierce Yee Associates, Inc. , which is hereby approved
shall be adhered to; and
(2) that Building Elevation, Sheet A-1, dated 8/25/86, prepared by
Harley Ellington Pierce Yee Associates, Inc. , which is hereby
approved shall be adhered to;
for the following reasons:
(1) The subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use.
(2) The proposed use is in compliance with all special and general
waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 6.03
and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543.
(3) The proposed use is compatible and in harmony with the surround-
ing uses of the area.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance
with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
. 9758
Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-8-2-31 by
Armen Garbooshian, Architects, requesting waiver use approval to con-
struct an automobile collision facility on the west side of Merriman
41110 Road between Plymouth Road and Schoolcraft in the South 1/4 of Section 27.
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Fire Department stating they
have no objection to this proposal. A letter from the Engineering
Division indicates that there are no City maintained storm sewers
readily available to service the subject site, the closest storm
sewer being under the jurisdiction of the City is Livonia Drain
No. 1 which is located under the pavement areas of Merriman Road.
Mr. Vyhnalek: Does that mean the drainage will have to go out on Merriman Road?
Mr. Nagy; They will have to bear the cost of tunnelling to the storm sewer
or breaking of pavement and trenching to the storm sewer in
Merriman Road.
Mr. Smith: Mr. Garbooshian, did you hear anything in the Engineering Depart-
ment's letter that is a surprise to you?
Mr. Garbooshian: I wasn't aware of the storm problem but this is something my
client will address. The Commission raised some concerns at the
study meeting which we have addressed. Screening of roof-top
equipment. All equipment will be put inside a parapet wall.
Mr. Vyhnalek: That screening is four-sided?
-, Mr. Garbooshian: Yes, four-sided. The only equipment we could foreseeon the roof
is a small air conditioner. There will be a dumpster to contain
$ the trash and any auto body parts would be put into a trailer and
carted away. There is a closed in area with gates. Paints will
be stored within the building and carted away by a special service.
We have added substantial landscaping to the site, especially
along the wall separating the building from the parking lot. It
will be irrigated with the exception of the piece in the back.
We have also added a sign.
Mr. Smith: Any light standards.
Mr. Garbooshian explained to the Commission the lighting standards proposed for the site.
Mr. Garbooshian: I believe that addresses the physical aspects of the plan.
Mr. Vyhnalek: Is there any landscaping around the foundation?
Mr. Garbooshian: Within the frame time we had, we have put together a preliminary
plan but we would want to do more than that. I think there is a
reasonable amount of landscaping.
Mr. Vyhnalek: We would want that landscaping or bushes shown on the plan within
thirty days. Landscaping is very important, especially on Merri-
man Road.
Mr. Soranno: Would there be a wall required on the north?
4
•
9759
Mr. Nagy: No. It is zoned industrial even though it is not used for
industrial. No wall is required.
4
Mr. Soranno: What about that flat bed trailer?
George Jehoviak, San Antonio, Texas: It is normal flat bed trailer and I fill it with
waste sheet metal and it is picked up. There would be no sheet
metal laying around the shop.
Mr. Soranno: How often would it be emptied?
Mr. Jehoviak: About once a month.
Attorney representing David Anyan, 4843 Forestglade Ct. Stone Mountain, Georgia:
My client would like his objection to this proposal put
on the record. We haven't had time to really look into it but in
addressing siome of the concerns, we all know Merriman is a main
thoroughfare and I don't know that a body shop would be in keep-
ing with Merriman Road and I don't know about stacking parts on
the property. Mr. Anyan lives in Atlanta. He bought this property
for an investment and plans on developing it for some kind of com-
mercial. We heard some talk about landscaping and we would be
interested in landscaping to the north. I am going to ask the
Board to reserve its judgement and give us time to consider it
and this man time to revise his plan and then everybody come back.
Mr. Vyhnalek: Your client wants to develop this for commercial?
i
Attorney: It is my understanding he bought it for investment purposes. The
house is now rented out. He has no exact plans.
Mr. Vyhnalek: This is M-1 and this is a usable use in an M-1 zone. Some Com-
missioners don't think it is the right purpose and some do
but I don't see how we can hold it up just to see what the
property owner on the north plans to do in the future. I don't
go along with tabling this.
Attorney: I think an issue is what will be done to buffer this in the future
if it is developed into a body shop. I don't know ewhat we are
talking about in the line of buffering. If you drive down Eight
Mile Road, you will see the effects of body shops.
Mr. Morrow: Your client wants to establish a commercial use here?
Attorney: I can't comment on that with any specificity except he plans to
develop it is some type of use. It is my understanding it will
be commercial but when I say commercial, I am not exactly sure as
to what he plans to do. I think his intention is not to keep it
residential down the line.
Mr. Morrow: If he wants to develop commercial, he will have to rezone the
property.
Attorney: I would have to withdraw that statement becuase I don't know how
he wants to develop it.
i
4
•
9760
Mr. Soranno: What type of painting or operation will be going on there?
Mr. Jehoviak: I am opening a body shop but it is costing a half million dollars.
It will not be your conventional body shop with parts laying all
over the place. I have owned eight body shops befiore. Every-
body always has the same concern. I will buy spraying equipment
that will spray cars in a booth and exhausted through a stack in
the roof. I design it to make it look like a nice professional
place. All body shop parts will be in the back where there will
be a place for it. I don't get into a lot of frame work or
insurance work that keeps a car sitting there for weeks. It is
more like a production body shop than your average body shop.
Mrs. Soboklewski: Will the entire shop be air conditioned?
Mr. Jehoviak: No.
Mrs. Sobolewski: That means the doors will be opened?
Mr. Jehoviak: More or less we will be doing some sanding work but most of the
businesses on Merriman Road have more exhaust than we do.
Mr. Morrow: Does your type of operation require a major mile road exposure?
Does you clientele come to you because they know you or do you
require the exposure.
Mr. Jehoviak: By being on a main road increases my business 30 to 40 percent.
Mr. Soranno: How many cars would be waiting?
Mr. Jehoviak: In the evening, all cars would be parked inside.
Mr. Soranno: Is there a parking problem with these cars?
Mr. Nagy; Our analysis of the operation shows that the parking require-
ments are being complied with.
Attorney: My client has done substantial work on the house so we are look-
ing at a building that is not going to be used as a residence
even though it is used as a dwelling place now. The more I hear,
the more I think it would be fair to my client to give us a thirty-
day hold for us to consider the plans which we haven't seen yet.
All we are looking for is a little understanding.
Mr. Kluver: By what means would you be removing panels?
Mr. Jehoviak: Pneumatic chisel.
Laura Putman, 11975 Merriman: What about the fumes from the north? How much fumes
would there be?
Mr. Jehoviak: OSHA has standards for that and the operation is OSHA approved.
Iv Mr. Smith: The Federal government controls the amount of fumes and whatever
those requirements are, he will meet those requirements.
4
4
9761
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr Smith,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-8-2-31 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver and seconded by Mr. Morrow, it was
t
#9-250-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 23,
1986 on Petition 86-8-2-31 by Armen Garbooshian, Architects, request-
waiver use approval to construct an automobile collision facility on
west side of Merriman Road between Plymouth Road and Schoolcraft in
the Southeast 1/4 of Section 27, the City Planning Commission does
hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-8-2-31 be denied
for the following reasons:
(1) The petitioner has failed to affirmatively show that the pro-
posed use is in compliance with all of the general waiver use
standards and requirements set forth in Section 19.06 of Zoning
Ordinance #543.
(2) The proposed use will be incompatible to and not in harmony with
the surrounding uses in the area.
(3) The proposed use is detrimental to the continued development of
the industrially zoned property in the area for uses which are
in the best interest of the City of Livonia.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance
with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following:
o
AYES: Kluver, Morrow, Soranno, Sobolewski, Naidow, Smith
NAYS: Vyhnalek
ABSENT: Hildebrandt
Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-6-3-5 by
the City Planning Commission to vacate an easement located on the
north side of Six Mile Road between Carol Drive and Deering in the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 12.
Mr. Nagy: There is in the file a copy of a letter addressed to the City
Council from Christopher and Judith Quayle requesting that this
easement be vacated because upon their purchase of the property
it was discovered that a building addition located on the rear
of the property had been built on a drainage easement. A letter
in the file from the Engineering Division indicates that there
are no City maintained utilities within the subject easement area.
It also states that it appears from a field review that surface
drainage for the lots along Six Mile Road is not confined to the
original platted 12 ft. easement. It appears, further, that there
is positive natural drainage for the general area and that an
easement for surface drainage serves no realistic purpose at the
present location. The letter states they have no objection to
the vacating of the subject easement.
• 9762
Mr. and Mrs. Christopher Quayle, 27946 Six Mile Road, petitioners, were present.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 86-6-3-5 closed.
4 On a motion duly made by Mr. Kiuver, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted,
it was
#9-251-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having beenheld on September 23,
1986, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that Petition 86-6-3-5 by the City Planning Commission requesting
to vacate an easement located on the north side of Six Mile Road between
Carol Drive and Deering in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 12, be approved
for the following reasons:
(1) The subject easement is no longer needed to protect any public
utilities or equipment.
(2) The subject easement will no longer serve any public purpose.
(3) The subject easement can be more properly used and maintained
in private ownership.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance
with the provisions of Section 12.08.030 of the Livonia Code of Ordinances.
Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 86-8-6-2 by
the City Planning Commission to amend Sections 2.08, 10.02, 11.02 and
30.04 of Zoning Ordinance #543 by incorporating language pertaining
to the location and operation of adult businesses in the City of
Livonia.
There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Chairman,
declared the public hearing on Petition 86-8-6-2 closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kiuver, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted, it
it was
#9-252-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 23,
1986 on Petition 86-8-6-2 by the City Planning Commission to amend
Sections 2.08, 10.02, 11.02 and 30.04 of Zoning Ordinance #543 by
incorporating language pertaining to the location and operation of
adult businesses in the City of Livonia, the City Planning Commission
does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 86-8-6-2 be
approved for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed language amendment was recommended and is
supported by the Department of Law.
(2) The proposed language amendment will allow the City of
Livonia to more properly regulate adult type businesses
in the future.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance
with the provisions of Section 19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended.
• 9763
Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat
approval for Heart Subdivision proposed to be located on the south
i side of Plymouth Road, west of Newburgh Road in Section 30.
Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from residents living on Alois
stating they are in opposition to the City's changing this street
to anything but an 86' wide right-of-way. A letter in the file
from the Fire and Engineering Departments indicate they have no
objection to this subdivision plat.
Mr. Nagy: The function of the road will change from a major thoroughfare to
serve as a local residential street. As a result, there is no
necessity to have excessive right-of-way. Sixty feet is adequate
to serve as a residential street. Seventeen feet only is needed
to make it serve as a residential street and the plat therefore
is in compliance. We appreciate the residents' concerns, but there
is no need to have it that wide.
Lynn Mills, 38415 Plymouth Road: Eighty six feet is much wider than necessary and we
want to keep in line with other streets.
Doug Mills, 38415 Plymouth Road: I have looking forward to those houses going in for
quite a while. I think it is a good solid investment for the
neighborhood. A widened road would interfere with those homes.
I would like this street in line with ours.
Frank Kenel, 11667 Alois: Every house on the east side of the street objects to narrow-
ing the street to sixty feet. I called the City Engineer when I
i
saw them digging for the footings and I asked when a hearing was
held regarding the narrowing of the street. When was that done?
Mr. Smith: It hasn't been held yet. Why would you want a subdivision street
eighty six feet wide?
Mr. Kenel: I lived on a street like this before, Burt Road, and it is one of
the reasons I bought this house. The people I bought from said
it would be an 86' street. I like the wide street. There is a
retaining wall that would have to be relocated. The homes on
the west side are $100,000 or more and I am sure they would want
the wide street. This road was dedicated as a half-mile road and
a half-mile road is 86' .
Mr. Nagy: It changed when the City adopted a Master Thoroughfare Plan for
the City. That plan evaluates the City's needs. Alois was down-
graded many years ago from a major street. It is no longer needed
for a collector road.
Alan Meier, 9913 Shadyside: I am in favor of the subdivision being approved. Does
approving he subdivision also have anything to do with street im-
provements? If you approve the subdivision, will the street be
improved on account of the traffic?
Mr. Nagy: The Engineering Division will establish a fair share cost and will
4
• 9764
put money in escrow and will initiate a paving program so that the
subdivider and all who share the benefits will share the cost of
the improvement.
Mr. Meier: What is the depth of the lots?
Mr. Nagy: 126 feet.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on the Preliminary Plat for Heart Subdivision
closed.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted,
it was
#9-253-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 23,
1986, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that the Preliminary Plat for Heart Subdivision proposed to
be located on the south side of Plymouth Road, west of Newburgh Road
in Section 30 be approved including the waiving of the open space
requirements set forth in Section 9.09 of the Subdivision Rules and
Regulations, for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed Preliminary Plat is drawn in conformance with
all applicable Ordinances and regulations covering the platting
of land in the City of Livonia.
(2) The proposed Preliminary Plat utilizes the subject land area in
the most efficient manner compatible with surrounding development.
(3) The proposed Preliminary Plat will provide for lot sizes commensurate
with other similar development in the area.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was sent to abutting
property owners, proprietor, City departments as listed in the Proof
of Service and copies of the plat together with notice have been sent
to the Building Department, Superintendent of Schools, Fire Department,
Police Department and Parks & Recreation Department.
Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Preliminary Plat
approval for Bobrich Circle Subdivision proposed to be located north
of Six Mile Road, west of Louise Avenue in the Southeast 1/4 of
Section 11.
Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from the Fire Department indicates they have
no objection to the plat.
William Roskelley, 15126 Beech Daly, developer, was present.
There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith,
Chairman, declared the public hearing on the Preliminary Plat for Bobrich Circle Sub-
division closed.
' 9765
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Morrow and unanimously adopted,
it was
#9-254-86 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 23,
1986, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City
Council that the Preliminary Plat for Bobrich Circle Subdivision pro-
posed to be located north of Six Mile Road, west of Louise Avenue in
the Southeast 1/4 of Section 11, be approved including the waiving
of the requirement for open space as set forth in Section 9.09 of the
Subdivision Rules and Regulations, for the following reasons:
(1) The proposed Preliminary Plat complies with all applicable
standards and requirements covering the subdivision of land
in the City of Livonia.
(2) The Preliminary Plat provides a means whereby the subject
land area can be effectively utilized.
(3) The Preliminary Plat represents a continuation or expansion
of an existing subdivision in the area.
FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was sent to
abutting property owners, proprietor, City departments as listed
in the Proof of Service and ciopies of the plat together with
notice have been sent to the Building Department, Superintendent
of Schools, Fire Department, Police Department and Parks and
Recreation Department.
li: Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
3
Mr. Smith; That concludes the public hearing portion of the meeting. We will
now progress to the regular meeting portion.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Naidow and unanimously adopted,
it was
#9-255-86 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 523rd Regular Meeting held by the City
Planning Commission on September 9, 1986 are approved.
Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski, seconded by Mr. Soranno and unanimously,
it was
#9-256-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve the
Final Plat for Northfield Estates Subdivision proposed to be
located on the north side of Northfield Avenue between Hix and
Knolson Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 31 for the follow-
ing reasons:
(1) The Final Plat is drawn in compliance with the previously
approved Preliminary Plat.
1[10 (2) The Department of Engineering/Building recommends approval
of the Final Plat.
9766
(3) All of the financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor
by the City have been complied with.
t
Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Soranno and unanimously adopted,
it was
#9-257-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve
Petition 86-8-8-51 by Yops & Wilke, Architect, requesting approval
of all plans required by Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with
a proposal to construct a commercial building on the north side of
Plymouth Road between Farmington and Newburgh Roads in Section 28,
subject to the following conditions:
(1) that Site Plan #4286, Sheet P-2, dated 9/19/86, prepared by
Yops & Wilke, Architects, which is hereby approved shall be
adhered to;
(2) that Building Plan #4286, Sheet P-3, dated 9/19/86, prepared
by Yops & Wilke, Architects, which is hereby approved shall
be adhered to; and
(3) that a detailed Landscape Plan shall be submitted for Planning
Commission approval within thirty (30) days.
Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
li: On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Kluver and unanimously adopted,
it was
#9-258-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve
Petition 86-9-8-54 by Fred J. Armour requesting approval of all
plans required by Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a
proposal to construct a retail complex on the northwest corner
of Wayne Road and Ann Arbor Trail in Section 33, subject to the
following conditions:
(1) that Site Plan #86D-650, Sheet 1, dated 9/17/86, prepared
by Affiliated Engineers, Inc. , which is hereby approved
shall be adhered to;
(2) that Building Plan #86D-650, Sheet 3, dated 9/6/86, prepared
by Affiliated Engineers, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall
be adhered to;
(3) that Landscape Plan #86D-650, Sheet 1, dated 9/17/86, prepared
by Affiliated Engineers, Inc. , is hereby approved with the
added condition that a sprinkler system shall be provided for
all sodded areas; and
(4) that the landscaping shall be installed on the site prior to
building occupancy and thereafter maintained in a healthy
condition.
L
Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
9767
On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Soranno and unanimously adopted,
it was
41 #9-259-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve
Petition 86-9-8-55 by Hassan Haravci requesting approval of all
plans required by Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a
proposal to erect a pump island canopy at an existing service
station located on the northwest corner of Six Mile and Inkster
Roads in Section 12, subject to the following conditions:
(1) that Site Plan B-6155, dated 9/18/86, prepared by
Richard A. Zischke, Architect, which is hereby approved
shall be adhered to;
(2) that Building Plan B-6155, Sheet A-1, dated 7/30/86,
prepared by Richard A. Zischke, Architect, which is
hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(3) that the Canopy Plan by TFC Canopy Company, which is hereby
approved shall be adhered to;
(4) that the landscaping as shown on the approved Site Plan shall
be installed as per plan with the added condition that the
freeze-proof hydrant shall be installed in the sign island
instead of on the building wall as indicated;
(5) that the new landscaping shall be installed on the site
before the site is open for business and thereafter
permanently maintained in a healthy condition; and
li:
Mr. Smith, 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
#9-260-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend
to the City Council that Petition 86-9-8-56 by Bi-Con Construction
Co. , requesting approval of all plans required by Zoning Ordinance
#543 in connection with a proposal to construct an accessory build-
ing on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt Road
and Parkville in Section 1, be approved subject to the following
conditions:
(1) that Site Plan #445, Sheet 1, prepared by Robert J. Domke,
Architect, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to;
(2) that Building Plan #445, Sheet 2, prepared by Robert J.
Domke, Architect, which is hereby approved shall be
adhered to;
(3) that Landscape Plan #445, Sheet L-1, prepared by Robert J.
Domke, Architect, which is hereby approved shall be
completed prior to occupancy of the new building; and
9768
(4) that the wall proposed to be constructed on the site
shall be of matching material and of the same height
as the existing wall.
Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted,
it was
#9-261-86 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve
Permit Application by Spectrum Satellite, Inc. , requesting
approval to install a satellite dish antenna on property
located at 29859 Plymouth Road, subject to the following
condition:
(1) that the Permit Application by Spectrum Satellite, Inc. ,
for a six-foot diameter disc antenna at Wonderland Shopping
Center, 29859 Plymouth Road, which is hereby approved shall
be adhered to.
Mr. Smith, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted.
On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 524th Regular Meeting
and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on
September 23, 1986 was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
;a14--pk—A9
Donna J. Naidow, Secretary
ATTEST: 67 ' Azi-<2--)
27'''156-4
C. Russ Smith, Chairman
ac