Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1985-09-24 9448 Minutes of the 503rd Regular Meeting and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia On Tuesday, September 24, 1985, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 503rd Regular Meeting and Public Hearings in the Livonia City Hall, 33000 Civic Center Drive, Livonia, Michigan. Mr. R. Lee Morrow, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm, with approxi- mately 70 interested persons in the audience. Members Present: C. Russ Smith Donald Vyhnalek Jeanne Hildebrandt Donna Naidow Herman Kluver Michael Soranno R. Lee Morrow Michael Duggan Sue Sobolewski Members Absent: None Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H G Shane, Assistant Planning Director; and Gary Clark, Assistant City Engineer, were also present. Mr. Morrow informed the audience that if a petition on tonight's agenda involves a rezoning request, this Commission only makes a recommendation to the City Council who, in turn, hold their own public hearing and decide the question. If a petition involves a waiver use request and the request is denied, the petitioner has ten days in which to appeal the decision to the City Council in writing; otherwise 110 the petition is terminated. If a petition involves a Preliminary Plat approval, this Commission is the only group who hold a public hearing and their recommendation is then forwarded to City Council who make the final decision as to whether or not the Plat is approved or rejected. Any action taken at tonight's meeting will take effect in seven (7) days. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda as Petition 85-8-1-21 by Joseph & Esther Crenshaw to rezone property located north of Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt and Inkster Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 1 from C-1 and R-1 to C-2. Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from our Engineering Division which reads as follows: Reference is made to our letter dated August 16, 1985 relative to the above referenced petition. Based on survey in- formation submitted to this office recently by a representative of the petitioner, this office has delineated the approximate location of the flood plain across the site in question (see attached map as prepared by Wright Associates). You will note that the flood plain encumbers nearly all of Bureau of Taxation parcel MM1. Therefore, any filling in this area (in connection with landscaping) as well as the placement of fencing should be prohibited since it is contrary to the provisions of Ordinance 1625 as amended (Flood Plain Ordinance) . Engineering Division's letter of August 16, 1985 indicated "that Seven Mile Road has not been dedicated to its fullest extent (60 ft.) adjacent to Bureau of Taxation Parcel MMI in accordance with the City's Master Thoroughfare Plan. In addition, it appears that the designated flood plain for the Upper Rouge River in this area encumbers portions of the lots on the east side of St. Francis Avenue. (The exact extent of the flood plain over these lots would have to be determined by survey) . That is the extent of our correspondence. _ 2 _ 9449 Robert Crenshaw, The reason for this petition is to meet the City in 19621 Purlingbrook: its Ordinance regarding improvements. We would like to improve the appearance and our parking facilities at the Bushel Mart. We think this will look very well, a new roof, new lighting, changing the location of the entrance and a relocation of the parking facilties. This would eliminate some of the congestion and confusion along Seven Mile Road. Mr. Shields prepared a Site Plan, and we have been working with him on that, and Mr. Winegarden has done some preliminary work on the layouts and elevation plans. Mr. Morrow: Mr. Crenshaw, did you hear Mr. Nagy read his letter from Engineering Division regarding the flood plain as it relates to your project? Mr. Crenshaw: Yes, we are aware of the flood plain in this area, but it is not included in any of the portion we wish to improve. Just that portion we are now working on and have permission from the City to use. There are some rearrangements we would like to make, but nothing that would be detrimental to the whole area. Mr. Morrow: Mr. Crenshaw, do you know how your neighbors feel about this proposed new project? Has anyone objected? Mr. Crenshaw: No, as a matter of fact, I have four letters from people in the neighborhood who do not oppose this at all. Some of them have been here even before the Bushel Mart was established, and they indicate their approval of this. I also have a letter from the DNR who are totally aware of the project and have indicated that li; no permit would be required on any of the lots 127 thru 131. All I really want to do is make some rearrangements, put in some landscaping, rearrange the parking to a more desirable location. Mr. Smith: If this project is approved, would you come back with a petition to vacate St. Francis? Mr. Crenshaw: No. I would be unable to do that; Lots 122 thru 126 are owned by another individual, and he prefers not to sell them. I have already approached him. Mr. Smith: Do you lease your lots? Mr. Crenshaw: No, we own these lots, also lots 135 thru 138; on the east side of St. Francis we own all the way back to the Rouge River. Mr. Vyhnalek: Between lots 126 and 127 would you put up a barrier of some kind? Mr. Nagy: A wall is required. Mr. Crenshaw: We show that on our plan. Mr. Vyhnalek: How long have you been there? to Mr. Crenshaw: Since the early 1960's. I have been involved in this business since I was 12. Not so much early on, but the last five years. After my brother and I were drafted to Vietnam, we were able to continue as a family business. Since 1972, when we got back, my brothers and I have been in the business. - 3 - 9450 • Mr. Morrow: Any other comments or questions from the Commission? Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? 1[1; Joyce Ward, I certainly would like to see this improvement go through. The 19119 Angling: neighborhood needs some upgrading, and I am sure this would do the trick. Since there was no one else wishing to be heard on this petition, Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on petition 85-8-1-21 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt and unanimously adopted, it was #9-205-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on September 24, 1985 on Petition 85-8-1-21 as submitted by Joseph and Esther Crenshaw requesting to rezone property located north of Seven Mile Road between Middlebelt and Inkster Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 1 from C-1 and R-1 to C-2, the City Plan- ning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-8-1-21 be approved for the following reasons: 1) The proposed change of zoning will provide a zoning district which is compatible with the existing use of the property; 2) The proposed change of zoning would provide an opportunity for the subject property to be improved by removing its non- conforming use; and li; 3) The proposed change of zoning is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the above motion carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, then announced the next item on the agenda as Petition 85-8-1-22 by Krsto Djordjevic to rezone property located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between West Chicago and Joy Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 36 from P. S. to C-3. Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from the Engineering Division, and they indicate there appears to be no problems connected with this petition. That is the extent of our correspondence. Mr. Vyhnalek: Mr. Nagy, how many C-3 districts do we have in the City? Mr. Nagy: There are two others at the present time. The permitted uses are the same as those in C-1 and C-2. Waiver uses would be needed for restaurants, auto wash, new and used car sales lots. to Mr. Morrow: Any comments or questions from the Commission? Is the petitioner present? Mr. Nagy, did we hear from the petitioner - is he going to be present at this meeting? - 4 - 9451 IL Mr. Nagy: I cannot explain his absence. Mr. Morrow: Is the petitioner the owner of the property, or does he have an option to purchase? Mr. Nagy: He claims he is the owner, gave his address as that in Dearborn Heights. Mr. Morrow: Well, we will proceed with the Public Hearing. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak either for or against this petition? Mrs. West, It seems that they can put anything they want in there; anything 29136 Grandon: goes, anything commercial. That is a very unsightly part of the neighborhood and we certainly don't need any more of those types of uses to be put in there. Mrs. Zimmermann, I resent this lady calling this part of the neighborhood 29009 Grandon: unsightly. If it's unsightly, it's because the owner does not keep up the appearance of the land. The grass does not get cut and the litter never gets picked up. I think I speak for everyone in my area when I say we are definitely opposed to this. The area has a lot of kids, and the situation with the traffic becomes almost uncontrollable. You know that a fast food restaurant will increase the traffic and that would just create more problems that we really don't want. We are basically opposed. 1100 Stephen Belsley: I just want to reinforce what this lady has already said. 29174 Westfield We are new to the neighborhood, I guess most of the people here have been here for some time. We came in from another community hoping this would be a good place to live. The weeds on this lot grow up to your waist, and it takes six weeks after we call before we can get the weeds cut. Dolly Hughes, I am not new to the neighborhood, have been there for over 30 years 29172 Grandon: and would like to see the neighborhood stay residential. We have a lot of trouble with speeding cars, and you know a fast food restaurant would increase the traffic. I want to go on record as being definitely opposed to this. N. Caldwell, We live on the only through street in the neighborhood; we are 29057 Grandon: also on the. bus route, the fire route, and you can see that this gives us a lot of traffic. Some of the homes there might look rundown and dowdy, but some of the people are improving their houses. Kids coming and going to Emerson are going pas t this area every day and we certainly don't need any more distractions. Mr. Morrow: In the interest of time, I would ask if there is anyone in the audience wishing to speak for this petition. This is a public hearing, and everyone should have a chance to speak, but we are getting the thrust of what you people desire in this area. Mr. Crockett, I live in this area, and my brother lives about a block and a 28973 Grandon: half away, and I think this came up on the floor quite a few years ago, but you people said that you would try to keep this area as it is now, with professional buildings. Mr. Morrow: Yes, the Future Land Use Plan does call for P. S. zoning. _ 5 _ 9452 1[ Mr. Duggan: As far as the weeds not$eing cut, that is a good reason to call City Hall. Citizen: Earlier this year, for three nights in a row, the trash bins next to the professional buildings were set on fire. Do you know what they are going to build there? Mr. Morrow: Tonight's meeting deals with simply the question of rezoning. When these people ever do decide to put up a professional building, they will have to come back to this Commission with a Site Plan. Since there was no one else wishing to be heard on this petition, Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 85-8-1-22 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mrs. Naidow and unanimously adopted, it was #9-206-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Septem- ber 24, 1985 on Petition 85-8-1-22 as submitted by Krsto Djordjevic requesting to rezone property located on the east side of Middlebelt Road between West Chicago and Joy Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 36 from P. S. to C-3, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-8-1-22 be denied for the following reasons: 1) The proposed change of zoning would be incompatible with the (11; surrounding uses in the area; ' 2) The proposed change of zoning is in conflict with the Future Land Use Plan which recommends general office use for the property; 3) The proposed change of zoning would represent spot zoning as the subject property is surrounded by offices and residential zoning and uses; and 4) The proposed change of zoning would encourage similar requests on adjacent property causing strip commercial development to permeate the area. 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. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the Agenda as Petition 85-8-1-23 by Robert A. Rainko requesting to rezone property located on the east side of Farmington Road, south of Eight Mile Road, from R-3A to P. Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from a neighbor advising that since he will not be able to attend the meeting scheduled for September 24, he would like to go on record as expressing an objection to this parking lot expansion. He advises that he has never seen the existing parking lot full and consequently objects to further expansion. This letter is dated September 20, 1985 and signed by John P. Thayer of 20285 Shadyside, Livonia, Michigan 48152. - 6 - 9453 Mr. Nagy: We also have a letter from our Engineering Division advising 1[10 "that there is currently a restriction in the storm sewer outlet for the present parking lot (outletting to Shadyside Avenue). Any additional parking areas developed as a result of this petition will tend to detain surface drainage for limited amounts of time due to the above restriction. This office will review a proposed parking lot plan in light of the above restriction. That is the extent of our correspondence. Mr. Rainko, I would like to move the berm back to the end of the property 38552 Northfram, and keep the landscaping the way it is. Would put in a Farm Hills: fencing addition on the north side, and would like to extend. the parking area. The land back there now is of no use to me. Would like to increase the parking capacity by another 50 cars. Mr. Morrow: Mr. Rainko, in the letter that Mr. Nagy read, he mentioned that you do not use the entire parking lot now, why increase it? Mr. Rainko: That is not true, especially on Friday and Saturday nites. Mr. Morrow: Part of this petition has to do with getting a grant from the Zoning Board of Appeals? Mr. Rainko: I am looking for another 80' of property to be put inside the berm. Mr. Morrow: Isn't there a time limit on grants from the Z.B.A.? Mr. Nagy: Yes, the Z.B.A. limits the petitioner to 2 years, 4 years. 110 Mr. Smith: What is your seating capacity? Mr. Rainko: 220 to 230, with 120 to 130 parking spaces. Mr. Smith: What is the parking requirement? Mr. Nagy: Parking requirements are 1 for every two persons, so with a seating capacity of 220 to 230, parking spaces needed would be 110 to 115. Mr. Smith: Mr. Rainko, you are already over by 20 spaces, do people come into your restaurant by themselves? Mr. Nagy: He also needs one parking space for each employee. Mr. Morrow: Maybe he has people come in who have already parked but they have to wait for a table. Mr. Rainko: Yes, that is so, on a Friday or Saturday nite, we have as many as 50 people waiting for a table. Mr. Vyhnalek: How much room does he have behind the restaurant? Mr. Shane: The lot back there is 153' deep. Mr. Rainko: I would like to push the berm back all the way to the east property line. That would be about 125 to 130 feet from the houses. - 7 - 9454 Mr. Vyhnalek: What's on the south side of your property? What's that narrow strip? Mr. Rainko: Am trying to negotiate with the owner to the south, would like to buy about 5 or 6 feet for more parking. Mr. Vyhnalek: What about the drainage problem? Mr. Rainko: There are two drains there that fill up. The storm sewer on Shadyside fills up with something, I don't know what; but I am looking for another 80 feet. I think there is .a catch basin there, but I am going to move the berm back. Mr. Morrow: Rather than a berm, I believe a wall is required. Mr. Rainko: No problem, I can go along with putting up a wall. Mr. Morrow: Mr. Nagy, Mr. Smith raised the question on the property that Mr. Rainko is looking for to the south of his property; is that going to have to be rezoned? Mr. Nagy: That area is under petition, it is used now for landscaping. If this petition is approved, that strip plus what is looking for in the back will provide him with sufficient room for more parking. Mr. Soranno: What type of lights are you planning on having, the same as are they now? 1; Mr. Rainko: Yes the same as those that are there now, they are very similar to those that the City has in their parking lots. Robert Wyman, I am definitely opposed to this expansion of the parking lot 20321 Shadyside: because of the drain and the sewer problem. All the runoff water drains into one storm sewer and then comes up in my front yard. Most of the water is coming off of his parking lot. There also is something seeping out of his dumpster. I have lived here since 1968 and there used to be three rows of apple trees back there, now there are only 4 trees. The landscaping he has put up does look real nice, but I hate to see it come all the way back to the end of the lot. Mr. Smith: If his expanded parking lot is for 50 more cars, then he will have to move his landscaping, will that effect the drain in any way? Mr. Wyman: Yes, there will just be more water coming off the parking lot. Plus the fact I can hear the cars coming and going half the nite. And what about that garbage seeping out? Mr. Rainko: I have called for that to be repaired, There was a crack in the compactor, but that will be fixed right away. James Muir, 20200 Shadyside We were here before you people a couple of months ago when Mr. Rainko wanted to put an addition to this building. President, North At that time we emphatically requested that you take a long 4 Central Civic Assn. look at the fact that he would not require any more parking. I live right up to the back of that parking lot, and I have never seen it filled to capacity. - 8 - 9455 Mr. Muri: I also want to take issue with the property along Eight Mile Road. 1[10 This is a residential neighborhood and we really would like to see this whole area remain residential. ' William Dixon, I moved to Livonia before it became a city. The storm sewer 20307 Shadyside: is definitely overloaded. Every time it rains my whole yard is flooded. The driveway is sometimes 4" deep with water. Mr. Soranno: Mr. Clark, could you address this storm sewer problem? Mr. Clark: The storm sewer sitation in that area hasn't changed over the years. When the sewer was extended to Shadyside, we indicated that a 12" restrictor should be put in, but even to this day there is only a 4" restrictor. Any overflow of water draining into the parking lot creates a "dished out" effect. I would say the elevation problem is one of the reasons for the slow drainage. Mr. Rainko: Why couldn't I tap into the storm sewer on Farmington Road? Mr. Clark: That sewer is for road drainage only, does not extend across any private property. If this petition does ultimately get approved, our office will have to look at these problems a little more closely. Water Juras, I think it's quite obvious what's wrong here. Let's face it, 36039 Scone: we all know what to do. Instruct the Council to get somebody 1[0 out there and fix that storm sewer. It looks to me quite an antiquated system and nobody wants to do anything about it. Since there was no one else wishing to be heard on this petition, Mr. Morrow, Chairman, closed the Public Hearing on Petition 85-8-1-23. On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt and unanimously adopted, it was #9-207-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Septem- ber 24, 1985 on Petition 85-8-1-23 by Robert A. Rainko requesting to rezone property located on the east side of Farmington Road, south of Eight Mile Road, from R-3A to P, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-8-1-23 be denied for the following reasons: 1) The proposed change of zoning would represent the encroachment of a non-residential zoning distrct into a residential area; 2) The existing off-street parking facilities are sufficient to serve the existing restaurant; and 3) The proposed change of zoning would provide for the intensification of non-residential land uses in the area. 11110 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. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. 9 9456 • Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the Agenda as Petition 85-9-2-33 1[10 by James Blain requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to an existing office building located on the northeast corner of Schoolcraft and Levan Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 20. Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from Engineering Division indicating no problems in connection with this petition. James Blain, The Pfeister Company who are the owners of this parcel need to Architect, expand. They knew that at the time they put up the first building, 31800 NW Hwy. consequently we did allow for an increase in parking. They are overcrowded now and do not want to move out of the city. Will be adding approximately 4900 square feet on the first floor with space for 9 more parking spots. All materials will be the same as the new building that was just completed last year. Shoulder courses of brick, excellent landscaping. Mrs. Sobolewski: Mr. Blain, are you saying that the materials will be so much identical to those already there that anyone driving down the road won't even know there has been an addition put on. Mr. Blain: Yes, that is so, that is the way the Pfeister Company wants it. Mrs. Sobolewski: Will there be any trees removed? Mr. Blain: Yes, there will be trees removed from the area where the addition is going. 1[10 Water Juras, I live directly behind this building. I will admit these people 36039 Scone: have a nice building, and I can't complain about that, but some- times when I drive through I see signs that say "Parking for Employees only". Since they put up that new building, they have more cars now than they ever did. One spot says "Claims Filed here". But there always a lot of cars in that parking lot. Mr. Blain: The Pfeister Company is the kind of business where 4 days out of five the parking is not a problem, but on the fifth day - Friday j all their salesmen come in from Toledo, Grand Rapids, Saginaw for a general sales meeting. Sometimes they even have to park their cars in Madonna College's parking lot. They are considering moving these meetings to somewhere else - out of this particular building. Mr. Juras: What about that big box in the back? Dumpster or whatever? Mr. Blain: That will be moved to the side of the building. These people do try to keep the area looking good. Geo. Cadovich, If they plan on removing some of their parking spots, where are 14000 Levan: they going to park? On both sides of the driveway like they do now? As of last Friday, they are double parked everywhere. Mr. Blain: I indicated that they will be adding space for 9 more parking spots. Plus the fact they indicate they will be moving these big sales meetings to another area. - 10 - 9457 ILMr. Soranno: Mr. Nagy, how do they stand with their parking requirements? Mr. Nagy: They do meet the parking requirements for their size building. Since there was no one else wishing to be heard on this petition, Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 85-9-2-33 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski and unanimously adopted, it was #9-208-85 RESOLVED that pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Septem- ber 24, 1985 on Petition 85-9-2-33 as submitted by James Blain requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to an existing office building located on the northeast corner of Schoolcraft and Levan Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 20, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-9-2-33 be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1) that the Site Plan marked Sheet 2 dated 8/30/85, prepared by James Blain Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; 2) that the proposed landscaping shown on the approved Site Plan shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition; (10 3) that the Building Elevation Plan, marked Sheet 5 dated 8/30/85, prepared by James Blain Associates, Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; for the following reasons: 1) the proposed use complies with all waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Sections 9.03 and 19.06 of the Zoning Ordinance #543; 2) the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; and 3) the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. FURTHER RESOLVED that, notice of the above hearing was given in accordance with the provisions of Section19.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the Agenda as Petition 85-9-2-34 by Indulis Liepins - Wah Yee Associates requesting waiver use approval to construct a retail sales building on the north side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt and Sears in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 26. - 11 - 9458 110 Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from the Engineering Division, dated September 12, 1985 advising that the legal description that was used for the rezoning of the subject property should be utilized for the current petition. We note that the site plan connected with the subject petition proposes a future street outlet to Plymouth Road in connection with a future industrial development on the northerly limits of the site. This proposed street intersection should be reviewed and approved by the Michigan Department of Transportation. Further, the minimum street rights-of-way through the Builders Square site should be at least 60 feet wide with a greater right-of- way requirement of 86 feet wide through the boulevard areas leading to Plymouth Road. The above right-of-way requirement should be reviewed in connection with the adjacent parking areas connected with the Builders Square site. We also have two letters from the Michigan Department of Transportation outlining certain require- ments needed in connection with this development. That is the extent of our correspondence. Indulis Liepins, I am here asking for waiver use approval for a large commercial 26711 NW Hwy. : building. We have brought with us all our plans, parking, landscaping, and building elevations that you can view. Mr. Duggan: Are you going to be putting in an access road to the industrial part of this site? Mr. Walker; Part of our initial phase of development will be to construct 10 31884 NW Hwy.: this road including all utilities. Mr. Morrow: And this will be concurrent with the development of the Builders Square project? Mr. Walker: Mr. Weatherford, my associate, is not able to be here tonite and he would be the one to talk to about developing the back portion of this lot for industrial purposes. We are aware of the greater right-of-way requirement of 86 feet through the front part of the project. Mr. Duggan: Mr. Walker, when you approached us about the rezoning of this land, you indicated specifically that there would definitely be improvements to the road to the industrial site. Mr. Walker: We have not as yet requested any rezoning for that area in the back, but do intend to provide a roadway access to it with all utilities provided. Mr. Nagy: I think what turned the rezoning request around was that the developer made reference that they were not going for just commercial, professional buildings, retail buildings, but would also develop the land in the rear as industrial and would in fact put in all the utilities needed for an industrial development. Mr. Morrow: The fact that you do not plan on putting this access road to tthe rear of the property in right away comes as a surprise to us. Mr. Walker: We will provide utilities to the point where the industrial develop- ment will begin. We have a tremendous cost connected with this project. - 12 - 9459 Mr. Duggan: At the Study Meeting it was definitely indicated to us that this ILO road would go all the way back with all of the improvements included. We don't want this industrial site to just sit. I remember that statement very clearly. Mr. Walker: We have engaged the Kirkco Company, specialists in industrial development, to provide us with the platting of that property It is not our intention to let this slide, but it will take a certain period of time to ascertain the demand for industrial development at this site. We do intend to proceed with the Builders Square project. We expect that it will take approximately nine months after we receive all approvals. Mr. Vyhnalek: Can we assume then that the platting survey will take place during these nine months, and then how soon will you begin working on the M-1 site? Mr. Walker: As quickly as we can. We have $600,000 tied up in 18 acres with no income, and we would expect that the platting process will only take approximately six months. This is the first phase of our overall project. Mr. Smith: The Department of Transportation has indicated that they want a curb cut at the site? Are you aware of that? Mr. Walker: Yes, we have a copy of their letter. As you know, our Site Plan was revised to provide a driveway in alignment with that across the street. Mr.Smith: I really have no objection to this. However, I do not approve of any retail business on the easterly portion, and I am a little concerned about the landscaping plan. Mr. Morrow: I believe we did request that they delete any retail building on the easterly side from their plan, and we certainly prefer not to see any restaurant go in there just yet. Mr. Soranno: Mr. Nagy, would they have to come back to us for a restaurant site? Mr. Nagy: Yes, a restaurant site would require waiver use aproval. Mike Polsinelli, It looks to me that their access road lines up directly Wonderland Ctr. : opposite the westerly side of the Wonderland Center parking lot. I really have no problems with the development, but I am concerned about the potential traffic problems. What about left turns and right turns at that site, with the access road directly across from one of our entrances to the parking lot. Mr. Nagy: The City has made a request for a traffic study to be made by Wayne County. They have their own criteria. All traffic sig- nalization is administered by the County. Mr. Liepins: I believe a traffic signal has been considered for that inter- section. Mrs. Sobolewski: Do I see on the Elevation Plan that the lightpoles would be 50 feet high? Mr. Shane: They are marked as being 39 feet high, the same as those in the Wonderland Center. - 13 - 9460 Mrs. Sobolewski: What about the mechanical units on top? Mr. Shane: They are almost completely concealed by the parapet. 1[10 Since there was no one else wishing to be heard on this petition, Mr. Morrow, Chairman, ' declared the Public Hearing on Petition 85-9-2-34 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Duggan, seconded by Mr. Kluver and adopted, it was #9-209-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Septem- ber 24, 1985 on Petition 85-9-2-34 as requested by Indulis Liepins- Wah Yee Associates requesting waiver use approval to construct a retail sales building on the north side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt and Sears Roads in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 26, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 85-9-2-34 until the next Study Meeting scheduled for October 1, 1985. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: Ayes: Kluver, Hildebrandt, Soranno, Sobolewski, Duggan, Naidow, Morrow Nays; Vyhnalek, Smith Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda as Petition 85-9-2-35 by Ramon Castaneda requesting waiver use approval to utilize a Class C Liquor License within an existing restaurant located on the southwest corner of Five Mile Road and Harrison in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 24. Ramon Castaneda, We would like to get a waiver use to get a liquor license 29730 Cambridge, for our restaurant. Our place is small, but we would like Flat Rock to be able to sell beer and wine. Mr. Morrow: Mr. Castaneda, you should share your plans with the Commission; you do have some thoughts about expanding your restaurant and then getting a license to sell beer and wine. Is that right? Mr. Castaneda: It might take another year before I can make it bigger, but I would like the liquor license now. I do want to make the dining room bigger and put in an archway to it. I would really like to sell some beer with my mexican food. Mr. Vyhnalek: How many seats do you have right now? Mr. Castaneda: I have 22 right now with 4 employees and would like to put in another seats for 12 people. The Zoning Board says I will need 22 parking spaces. Mrs. Sobolewski: I think your place as it is right now is too small to get a liquor license. I feel you should go ahead as soon as possible with your plans to expand. 1110 Mr. Castaneda: I feel the expansion will cost about $60,000, what is the time limit for this petition to be valid? 1 Mr. Duggan: As everyone knows, I patronize this place quite often and enjoy it very much. Couldn't he come in with his plans to expand at same time as request for a Class C liquor license? - 14 - 9461 Mr. Smith: My recommendation would be to table this particular petition until such time as you can have some architect- come in and discuss your expansion with our Planning staff. Then we could proceed in a more orderly fashion. Mrs. Mesh, I think it is quite obvious where this request is going to go. But 15130 Sunbury: I feel we have too many liquor license in this neighborhood, party stores, restaurants in the shopping center, all the way up to Middlebelt. They sell beer and wine and some of them even sell liquor. We do live in this area and don't need another place to sell liquor. Mr. Duggan: Mrs. Mesh, I must admit that I really do like this particular restaurant even now when they don't sell beer and wine. I drink coke, but no matter how I feel about it, that doesn't mean the rest of the Commission feels the same way as I do. Mrs. Mesh: This place is just too small to have a liquor license, not enough parking. Mr. Morrow: Some of your concerns are they same as those of the Commission, and they will be addressed Since there was no one else wishing to be heard on this petition, Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 85-9-2-34 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt and unanimously adopted, it was #9-210-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Septem- 1[0 ber 24, 1985 on Petition 85-9-2-35 as submitted by Ramon Castaneda requesting waiver use approval to utilize a Class C Liquor License within an existing restaurant located on the southwest corner of Five Mile Road and Harrison in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 24, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 85-9-2-35 until such time as the applicant decides to approach the Planning Department with his plans for expansion of the restaurant. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda as Petition 85-8-6-4 by the City Planning Commission to amend Section 9.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543 relating to side yard requirements in the waiver use section of the P. S. Zoning District. Mr. Morrow: This is a petition initiated by the Planning Commission to amend certain sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Is there anyone present wishing to speak either for or against this petition? Since there was no one present wishing to be heard on thie petition, Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on Petition 85-8-6-4 closed. 1110 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Hildebrandt, seconded by Mr. Duggan and unanimously adopted, it was 4 - 15 - 9462 #9-211-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Septem- ber 24, 1985 on Petition 85-8-6-4 by the City Planning Commission to amend Section 9.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543 relating to side yard require- ments in the waiver use section of the P. S. Zoning Districts, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-8-6-4 be approved for the following reasons: 1) that the proposed Zoning Ordinance language amendment will provide additional regulations so as to more properly control the placement of proposed office buildings; and 2) that the Zoning Ordinance as currently written does not provide proper setback requirements in the P. S. Zoning Districts.. 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. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the Agenda as Preliminary Plat approval for Sheffield Estates Subdivision #2 proposed to be located on the north side of Curtis Road, east of Wayne Road in Section 9. Mr. Nagy: We have a letter from Engineering which reads as follows: "In accordance with your request this office has reviewed the preliminary plat for the above referenced subdivision. This office has no objections relative thereto. We will require that the developer resubmit the engineering plans for the subdivision for our review and update since our original approval in 1980. In addition, it IL will be the developer's responsibility to update all permits relative to the sanitary sewer and water systems as well as a permit (F.P. 1899) issued by the Department of Natural Resources in connection with the flood plain area at the easterly end of Curtis Avenue." Correspondence from the Department of Public Safety, Fire Division advises that the plans as submitted do not indicate streets or utilities and because of that, their approval would be contingent on approved roadway and water supply. Our correspondence from the Department of Public Safety, Police Division indicates that this proposed subdivision appears to be compatible with vehicle traffic patterns currently existing at and near the proposed site. That is the extent of our correspondence. Mr. Vyhnalek: I am looking at Lot 30 on the map, just how wide and how deep is that lot? It does look like it is approximately 100 x 150 with the lots in the proposed subdivision being 90 x 130. Mrs. Hildebrandt: Weren't we supposed to get some updated plans? Do we. have those yet? Mr. Nagy: No, not yet. This petition deals with the Preliminary Plat approval; the next step would deal with engineering plans in accordance with with the requirements from the Engineering Division. Jerry Gottlieb, For four or five years now, I have had this approval for a 30135 Summit Dr., new subdivision. I know I let it slide what with the Franklin: crunch in the market. And I failed to continue with the approval. As you all know, this is a lovely piece of property surrounded by many beautiful homes. A good job was done by the other builders in the area. I know the Commission and some of the neighbors are concerned what kind of restrictions will I place on this property? I just want everybody to understand that they will be exactly the same as those covering Sheffield Estates Subdivision #1. - 16 - 9463 Mr. Morrow:111, Do we know what the deed restrictions for Sheffield Estates #1 state? Mr. Nagy: I have not examined them, but normally they cover minimum dwelling size, whether they are one-story or story-and-a-half, accessory uses, garages, setbacks, that sort of thing. Mr.Gottlieb: I know it would be in my best interests to make these same restrictions. Wm. Seder, If he develops that land, who would pave the road in front 18202 Wayne Rd. : of my house? Mr. Gottlieb: I believe this question came up the last time in the same manner. Those two neighbors, Mr. Cedar and his neighbor to the south, Mr. Forsyth, their lots will become fully enriched by this new subdivision. Mr. Cedar: Well, I don't know, I think that 90' lots are a little small for a 2500 square foot home on it. Mr. Nagy: They would meet all of the side and rear yard requirements with a 2500 square foot house on it. Mr. Smith: Mr. Cedar, I notice that your home faces Curtis, yet you have a a Wayne Road address. Would you have to change your address to Curtis. IL Mr. Cedar: There is no street in front of me right now, and when I bought my house this is the address that they gave me. Mr. Smith: It is interesting to note that you are unique in that you will move from one street to another without really moving your house. Barkey Toorongian, I live on Lot 30 and would like to straighten you people out. 35195 Lancashire: My lot is 150 feet deep and 100 feet wide. And as a property owner in this area, I would like to address some of my concerns to this Commission. I would like to know if this man is going to actually be the developer and if so, what kind of elevation plans does he have for these houses, will they be the same as those in Shieffield Estates #1. Mr. Gottlieb: No I am not going to develop this myself, I will probably sell these lots off to some other builder. Every builder that I have contacted, or who is considering building here, is fully aware of the restrictions being the same as the previous subdivision. All homes will be of the same character. Mr. Toorongian: I would like some assurances as to just what type of home will go in there. 110 Mr. Gottlieb: The land is already zoned for this development, I am not asking for another type of zoning, the zoning is already there. I am just asking the Planning Commission to approve my plat for this R-4 district. ' Mr. Morrow: Mr. Toorongian, he has assured us that he will meet all the require- ments of the R-4 District. - 17 - 94 64 Mr. Toorongian:1[10 From the plans, I notice that the grade levels across our back property line differ by as much as 4 feet. We all know that this will definitely disturb our landscaping development. Mr. Clark: Since 1980 there really hasn't been any more utility work done in that area. There are some utilities along Curtis Road to the extent of the storm sewer running along the southwest corner, going south into the PL land. Mr. Toorongian: So what happens to our trees when they develop these lots with a grade level lower than ours. Mr. Clark: The trees will probably come out. Mr. Toorongian: What about our property values? Mr. Soranno: Do you have side entrance garages in your subdivision? Could they be so built in this new subdivision? Mr. Nagy: I would say YES to a two-story home, but I don't know about a ranch. Mr. Smith, I really hate to see our back property lines distorted; 35367 Lancashire: the electrical boxes are in, telephone boxes are in, cable TV is in, don't you feel that this new subdivision would disturb the facilities that are already there? I also feel that the catch basin back there is probably the 160 best we have in Livonia. Why disturb it? Mr. Clark: We will be providing a storm drain on the north side of Curtis, but we have no existing sewer or water taps there right now. We do intend to continue the storm sewer along Curtis Road. Mr. Smith: The size of the homes concerns me also. If there isn't something put in writing, what ever this man says means nothing to me. Couldn't the minimum size requirements of the homes be incorporated in the approval of this petition? Mr. Clark: In accordance with the approval made back in 1980, there will be a T turnaround provided, not a full fledged turnaround, but a T turnaround, all the way to Laurel Avenue. That is one of the concerns of the Fire Department. There must be enough room for a fire truck to get in and out while still remaining on the public right-of-way. Since there was no one else wishing to be heard concerning this petition, Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the Public Hearing on the Preliminary Plat approval for Sheffield Estates Subdivision #2 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Smith and adopted, it was #9-212-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on Septem- lh '; ber 24, 1985 on Preliminary Plat for Sheffield Estates Subdivision #2 proposed to be located on the north side of Curtis Road, east of Wayne Road in Section 9, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the Preliminary Plat be approved, for the following reasons: - 18 - 94 65 • 1) the Preliminary Plat is drawn in conformance with the Zoning 10 Ordinance and the Subdivision Rules and Regulations; and 2) the Preliminary Plat provides for lot sizes that are comparable to the existing lots in the area, with the following condition: 1) that the deed restrictions covering Sheffield Estate #2 do indeed conform to the deed restrictions as outlined for Sheffield Estates Subdivision #1. 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. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Kluver Vyhnalek, Sobolewski, Duggan, Naidow, Smith, Morrow NAYS: Soranno ABSTAIN: Hildebrandt Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. At this time, Mr. Morrow declared the Public Hearings closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Naidow, seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt and unanimously IL adopted, it was #9-213-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 27, 1985 on Petition 85-8-2-30 as submitted by Wendy's International requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to an existing building located on the west side of Middlebelt Road between Seven Mile Road and Clarita in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 11, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-8-2-30 be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1) that the Site Plan dated 8/2/85, revised, prepared by Henry W. Andres, R.L.S., which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; 2) that the Building Elevation Plan marked Sheet #2, dated 11/13/85, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; for the following reasons: 1) the proposed use complies with all waiver use requirements set forth in Sections 11.03 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543; 2) the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; and 3) the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. 1[, 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. Morrow, Chairman, declared above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. - 19 - 9466 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Hildebrandt, seconded by Mr. Duggan and unanimously 10 adopted, it was #9-214-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on August 27, 1985 on Petition 85-8-2-31 as submitted by Wendy's International requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to an existing building on the south side of Plymouth Road between Middlebelt Road and Harrison in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 36, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-8-2-31 be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1) that the Site Plan dated 8/2/85, revised, prepared by Raymond J. Donnelly Associates, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to; and 2) that the Building Elevation Plan marked Sheet #2, dated 11/13/84, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to for the following reasons: 1) the proposed use complies with all waiver use requirements set forth in Sections 11.03 and 19.06 of Zoning Ordinance #543; 2) the subject site has the capacity to accommodate the proposed use; 3) the proposed use is compatible to and in harmony with the surroun- ding uses in the area. 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. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. 10 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski, seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt and adopted, it was #9-215-85 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Final Plat approval for Bicentennial Estates Subdivision No. 2 proposed to be located on the west side of Gill Road, north of Seven Mile Road in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 4 be approved for the following reasons: 1) the Final Plat conforms to the previously approved Preliminary Plat; 2) the Department of Engineering and Building of the City of Livonia recommends approval of the Final Plat; and 3) all of the financial obligations imposed upon the proprietor by the City have been complied with. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: 10 AYES: Kluver, Hildebrandt, Soranno, Vyhnalek, Sobolewski, Duggan, Naidow, Morrow NAYS: None ABSENT: Smith Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. - 20 - 9467 On a motion duly made by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mr. Duggan and adopted, it was 110 #9-214-85 RESOLVED that, the minutes of the 356th Special Meeting held by the City Planning Commission on September 17, 1985 are approved. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Hildebrandt, Soranno, Vyhnalek, Sobolewski, Duggan, Naidow, Morrow NAYS: None ABSENT: Smith ABSTAIN: Kluver Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Duggan and adopted, it was #9-215-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 23.01 of Zoning Ordinance #543, the City Planning Commission does hereby establish and order that a public hearing be held to determine whether or not to rezone property located on the southeast corner of Haggerty and Phillips Roads in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 6 from M-1 to RE. A roll call vote on the foregoing resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Hildebrandt, Kluver, Soranno, Vyhnalek, Sobolewski, Duggan, Naidow, Morrow NAYS: None ABSENT: Smith IL Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, it was #9-216-85 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Permit Application #2044 as submitted by John Damiani requesting approval for a roof-mounted satellite disc antenna on the Farmers Insurance Building located at 16013 Middlebelt Road, subject to the following condition: 1) that the Site Plan and specifications submitted with Permit Application #2044 by John Damiani, which are hereby approved, shall be adhered to. On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. Soranno and unanimously adopted, it was #9-217-85 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Permit Application #2113 as submitted by BAT, Ltd. requesting approval to relocate a satellite disc antenna located on the Bench Pub building located at 33653 Five Mile Road, be approved subject to the following condition: 1) that the Site Plan and specifications submitted with Permit Application #2113 by BAT, Ltd. , which are hereby approved, shall be adhered to. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. 2 9468 1 - • 1[0 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Hildebrandt, seconded by Mr. Smith and unanimously adopted, it was + #9-218-85 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the application of B. Wright requesting approval to erect one wall sign on the Village Green Florist buiding located at 33239 Eight Mile Road be approved, subject to the following condition: 1) that the sign graphics, marked Phase I-A, dated 9/85, which are hereby approved, shall be adhered to. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Smith and unanimously adopted, it was #9-219-85 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that the application of Beatrice Wright requesting approval to erect one ground sign on property located at 33239 Eight Mile Road be approved, subject to the following condition: 1) that the sign graphics, dated 9/95, which are hereby approved, shall be adhered to. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. IL On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Soranno and unanimously adopted, it was #9-220-85 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-8-8-19 as submitted by Michael Downes requesting approval of all plans required in connection with a proposal to construct multiple family dwellings on the northeast corner of Seven Mile and Merriman Roads in Section 2, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) that the Site Plan dated 8/26/85, marked Sheet Ia prepared by Michael J. Downes and Associates, Inc. , Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to. 2) that the Landscape Plan dated 8/28/85, prepared by Calvin Hall and Associates, Landscape Architects, is hereby approved and that the landscape materials shal be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and thereafter permanently maintained in a healthy condition; and 3) that the Building Elevation Plan marked Sheet #3, prepared by Michael J. Downes and Associates, Inc., Architects, which is hereby approved, shall be adhered to. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared above motion carried and foregoing resolution adopted. - 22 - 9469 On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 503rd Regular 1[00 Meeting and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission was adjourned at 10:45 pm. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION S:=1-7(----vLA / . Donna Naidow, Secretary .9.\''.5"---- ATTEST: CR ig °47--) R. Lee Morrow, Chairman pds