Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLANNING MINUTES 1985-10-29 //a4 9473 r • MINUTES OF THE 505th REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD BY THE CITY i PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LIVONIA On Tuesday, October 29, 1985, the City Planning Commission of the City of Livonia held its 505th 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 p.m. , with approx- imately 60 persons in the audience. Members present: R. Lee Morrow Herman Kluver Jeanne Hildebrandt Donna Naidow Michael Soranno Sue Sobolewski C. Russ Smith Donald Vyhnalek Members absent: Michael Duggan Messrs. John J. Nagy, Planning Director; H. G. Shane, Assistant Planning Director, and Ralph H. Bakewell , Planner VI , 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, will hold its own public hearing and decide the question. If a petition in- volves a waiver of use request and the request is denied, the petitioner has ten days 4 in which to appeal the decision to the City Council ; otherwise the petition is terminated. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the first item on the agenda is Petiton 85-9-1 -24 by Naomi R. Clark to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road, east of Fitzgerald in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 5 from RUFC to R-7. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division dated 9/30/85 stating they have no objection to this petition. It also states that it appears that should the site develop as an apartment complex, it may be necessary to enclose and/or reroute the existing natural drainage course which presently traverses the site, and the enclosure of the above drain would require a 48" diameter pipe. Philip R. Ogilvie, Attorney, 104 W. Main Street, Northville: This property is owned by the widow and daughter of Sam Clark now. It was used for years for a square dance barn but there was a fire which destroyed the barn. It was a non-conforming use when it was built about 45 years ago. At that time, we petitioned to change it to commercial to rebuild the barn. There was objection to that. Since that time, this property has been up for sale for single family residential and we have not been able to sell it because of the Seven Mile Road traffic. Mr. Morrow: The piece owned by Mrs. Brown is practically surrounded. Is she opposed to this? 4 ' Mr. Olgivie: She is not against it really. She just wants to live in that house 1 until she dies. There is a agreement between her and Mrs. Clark that if she ever sells it she will sell it to Mrs. Clark. It has been pointed out that if the property is zoned multiple, we have a problem because of the 75' setback. I got a Zoning Ordinance 9474 last week and had met with my client and we reviewed the alternatives. Looking at it with the restrictions, she feels she will be better off if we would ask to have this rezoned to a duplex classification. It sounds more logical and more in keeping with the neighborhood if this were rezoned duplex. People would have bought it if it was zoned for multiple, but not single family. Mr. Morrow: The Engineering letter referred to a drainage situation. Are you aware of that? Mr. Oglivie: There is no problem with that and I don't think we will have to disturb it at all if it went duplexes. Mr. Morrow: Are you saying you want to withdraw the petition? Mr. Oglivie: Can I modify it and asked for an R-6? Mr. Nagy: The hearing can be held on the basis of R-6. He has a right to amend his petition. Mr. Oglivie: I will confirm my request to amend in writing. Mr. Soranno: You plan to put a duplex on each lot? Mr. Oglivie: Yes, three duplexes. One parcel has 64' of frontage on Seven Mile. I told my client if she wanted to she could get a variance because of the 80' frontage required. If we could, we would like to put up four units. 4 Mr. Vyhnalek: Did you get any bids at all in the five years this was for sale? Mr. Oglivie: Only if it was rezoned. Mrs. Vollmer, 36694 Clarita: We signed a petition against rezoning this property. I was involved in circulating that petition. We are opposed to spot zoning and would like to see single family homes in the area. Every- one in Gold Manor we contacted signed the petition that they were against any rezoning of the land because any change here will move to the other side of Fitzgerald. We would like the area retained as it was when we moved in. Mr. Vyhnalek: Are you against it still in light of the amendment to R-6? Mrs. Vollmer: We really want it to stay single family. Would our petition still apply to this R-6 zoning? Mr. Nagy: Yes, it would. William LaPine, 33855 Carl : I am a resident of Windridge. We are opposed basically because this is a prime example of spot zoning. The two-square mile 10 is 99% single family residential homes. We are opposed to duplexes We take the position that there is already property rezoned for apartments and apartments are not built on them so why rezone more property for apartments. If we need a petition, we are willing to go out and get a petition against i . Mary Sorah, 36697 Seven Mile Road: I have tried to selltmy property because my husband is ill . I have a group home next to me. I am opposed to this. I 9475 have tried to sell my home, too, because my husband's income is dropping. 140 Leroy Walker, 36659 Seven Mile: I am opposed to multiple zoning. I moved here because of the single family area. I am opposed to spot zoning. I can sympathize with the owner on the property she owns but I think there is an alternate plan somewhere. There is other property on the west of Lots 34, 35 and 36. If this goes to duplexes, what happens to that property? Chris Heck, 19188 Fitzgerald: I have lived here for thirty six years and I am against this spot zoning. Michael North, 19150 Fitzgerald: I don't feel the residents should subsidize someone else's property. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 85-9-1-24 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mr. Smith and unanimously adopted, it was #10-226-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on October 29, 1985 on Petition 85-9-1-24 by Naomi R. Clark to rezone property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road, east of Fitzgerald in the South- west 1/4 of Section 5 from RUFC to R-6, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-9-1-24 be ` denied for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning is in conflict with the Future Land Use Plan which recommends low density residential use for the subject property. (2) The proposed change of zoning would represent spot zoning which is contrary to established City Planning principles. (3) The proposed change of zoning would provide for uses which are inconsistent with the established 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. Kluver: The petitioner did offer to make an amendment and I would like to offer a tabling motion so that the Commission can have an opportunity to evaluate the amendment. Mr. Kluver so moved but there was no support to the motion and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion fails for lack of support. A roll call vote on the original denying resolution resulted in the following: AYES: Soranno, Smith, Kluver, Hildebrandt, Vyhnaldk, Sobolewski , Naidow, Morrow NAYS: None ABSENT: Duggan pr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing approving resolution •s adopted. 9476 Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 85-9-1-25 by FCA Senior Citizens Housing Corporation to rezone property located on the east side of Farmington Road between Pickford and Curtis in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10 from R-1 to P.S. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating that there are no City maintained storm sewers readily available to the site. Mr. Paul Hendrickson, 35200 Eight Mile Road, Farmington Hills: One of our members are the owner of this property. FCA Senior Citizens Housing Corporation, as a non-profit corporation are petitioning for this on the basis of what the Future Land Use Plan shows. We hope to get it rezoned in order to develop it for professional services. Mr. Vyhnalek: The Future Land Use Plan shows Professional Service? Mr. Hendrickson: The Planning Department showed me a map and a whole strip on both sides allow for professional services. Mr. Nagy: The corridor between Six and Seven Mile is generally indicated for office development but this particular area still shows residential uses for the area. Mr. Morrow: As nearly as we can tell , that particular area would be residential in nature. 4 Mr. Hendrickson: I am sorry. I got the i-pression that that area was professional on the plan. Mr. Morrow: Your corporation is the owner of the property. Mr. Hendrickson: Yes, we are. Mr. Vyhnalek: One of your members sold it to you? Mr. Hendrickson: Yes, about ten months ago. Mr. Vyhnalek: In 1982, the same request was made and it was denied by the Planning Commission and Council . The Future Land Use Plan recommends the retention of residential zoning in this area. I see no reason to change it. Mr. Hendrickson: I don't believe it will be marketable as residential . Mrs. Sobolewski : Why are you changing the zoning. Mr. Hendrickson: As I told you, I don't think it is marketable as residential . Mrs. Sobolewski : If it was rezoned, would you use it for your own use? fir. Hendrickson: Yes. firs. Sobolewski : Would you occupy it yourself? 9477 4 Mr. Hendricks: A portion of it and we would probably lease out a portion. Ronald Kuneman, 18266 Farmington Road: I am opposed to the change. I want it to stay residential . If they put up a building, it will close us right out. Mark Whitman, 18234 Farmington Road: I concur with Mr. Kuneman. It is a good residential 1!: area. I can't see losing the residential integrity by putting in anything else. He doesn't think it is marketable, but I enjoy it and I am definitely against the rezoning. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declaried the public hearing on Petition 85-9-1-25 closed. On a motion by Mr. Vyhnalek, seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt and unanimously adopted, it was #10-227-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on October 29, 1985 on Petition 85-9-1-25 by FCA Senior Citizens Housing Corporation to rezone property located on the east side of Farmington Road between Pickford and Curtis in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 10 from R-1 to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition 85-9-1-25 be denied for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning is in conflict with the Future Land Use Plan which recommends low density residential use for the 11 subject area. (2) The proposed change of zoning would provide for uses which are inconsistent with the established uses in the area. (3) The proposed change of zoning would tend to encourage similar requests on adjacent property. 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 motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 95-9-1-26 by James Jonna, Michael George and Timothy Bush to rezone property located on the east side of Haggerty Road between Eight Mile and Phillips Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 6 from RUFC and M-1 to C-2, and M-1 and RUFC to C-4-11I and P.S. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division stating that due to the size of the outlet storm sewer across the 1-275 Freeway area, it may be necessary to detain drainage on all the sites in question and, in addition, prior to fully approving the rezoning changes it is requested that the petitioner supply their office with projected sanitary sewer flows from the proposed zoning districts. ILThis is requested because the c urrent sanitary sewer extensions along Seven Mile, as well as through the CBS/Fox site, have been designed on the basis of the current zoning north of Phillips Road and this design criteria will have to be re-reviewed in light of the proposed rezoning request. 9478 obert Ziegelman, Attorney: We have an aerial photo to illustrate the site and we have retained the landscape firm of Johnson, Johnson & Roy who made some site graphics for us. Haggerty Road will have to be widened to accom- modate this particular development. We worked with the Planning Director on this plan on the grouping of the buildings. We would develop it with extensive use of landscaping to make you feel when you drive in that you are in a park-like setting. There are decorative ponds and a lake with water generating throughout the hole site. There will be a hotel , and five restaurants in a park-like setting. It will be connected on the first level by a service court with parking under the whole develop- ment. Professional offices are proposed for the corner of Haggerty and Phillips. The development would be enclosed in a mall . The office is proposed to be eight stores of office and hotel on top of a shopping area. Mr. Vyhnalek: Will the five restaurants require Class C Liquor Licenses? Mr. Nagy: The Law Department is pursuing that now with the Michigan Liquor Control Commission. This will be a Class B Hotel License rather than a Class C. Mr. Kluver: With the use of ponds and the quarry, how much of an impact will this development have on the existing storms in that area? Do you have available storms to handle your project? Mr. Nagy: Due to size of the existing pipe handling the drain, no. It has to be developed on top of the ground. The architect has assessed that and I realizes that the ponds and quarry have to stay and are working them into the plan. They have taken a liability and made it an asset. L. Kluver: Is it feasible to handle it in that manner? r. Nagy: In my opinion, yes. Bernard Baldwin: I live in Northville about 1 ,200 feet diagonally across from this site. Our homeowners association has reviewed this and I am authorized to speak on their behalf. I am concerned about the traffic. This is a unique pice of property. The only exit from this property would be onto Haggerty Road and the traffic is a problem on Eight Mile and Haggerty. Haggerty would have to be developed. I don't see how with the high rise you can put this development in. Northville is presently doing studies on the Haggerty corridor. We question how a high-density ten-story complex could go in with the limited access to the property. There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 85-9-1-26 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Hildebrandt, seconded by Mr. Smith and unanimously adopted, it was #10-228-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on October 29, 1985 on Petition 85-9-1-26 by James Jonna, Michael George and Timothy Bush II to rezone property located on the east side of Haggerty Road between Eight Mile and Phillips Roads in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 6 from RUFC and M-1 to C-2, and M-1 and RUFC to C-4-III and P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-9-1-26 be approved for the following reasons: 9479 (1) The proposed changes of zoning are compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding existing and planned uses in the area. f (2) The proposed changes of zoning are in compliance with the recom- t mendations found in the Future Land Use Plan and with the Planning Commission's development goals and policies for the 1-275 Freeway corridor area. (3) The proposed changes of zoning will allow for a variety of facilities that will provide additional jobs and enhance the City's tax base. 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 motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 85-9-1-27 by John Allie to rezone property located on the west side of Middlebelt, south of Norfolk, in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 2 from RUFA to C-l . Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division indicating that there are no engineering problems associated with this proposal . John Allie, 19500 Gary Lane: We own the property immediately north of the home which we purchased about a year ago. We hope to add on to the building, and leveling the property and using it as parking for the most part. We also plan to add to the existing building. II;r. Vyhnalek: Is this a spec building or do you have a specific use. How many stores? r. Allie: At this time it is speculative. There will be two stores, possibly three. Mr. Vyhnalek: There are additional walls and one that should come down. Mr. Allie: It has been our experience to definitely cooperate 110% with the neighbors. Mr. Vyhnalek: You would not seek a waiver of the walls? Mr. Allie: Definitely not and we would have no quarrel with putting up a wall . Mrs. $obolewski : How much further south of the proposed property is Clarenceville? Mr. Allie: About three lots away from Clarenceville. Layford Wilson, 20250 Fremont: I am not in opposition as long as be builds a wall . Mr. Vyhnalek: He indicated tonight that that is what he would do and that he would not seek a waiver, here was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, clared the publichearing on Petition 85-9-1-27 closed. • 9480 On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski , seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, t was X10-229-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on October 24, 1985 on Petition 85-9-1-27 by John Allie to rezone property located on the west side of Middlebelt, south of Norfolk in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 2, from RUFA to C-1 , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend that Petition 85-9-1-27 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning represents only a minor extension of an existing zoning district. (2) The proposed change of Zoning will be compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. (3) The proposed change of zoning will provide for uses which are compatible with the developing land use pattern 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 motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced that the next item on the agenda is Petition 95-9-1-28 by Siegal/Tuomaala Associates/Harold Beznos to rezone property located on the north side of Plymouth Road, west of Middlebelt in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 26 from M-1 to C-2. Ir. Morrow passed the gavel to the Vice Chairman at this time. '.r. Nagy: A letter from the Engineering Division notes that Plymouth Road has not been dedicated to its fullest extent in accordance with the City's Master Thoroughfare Plan and that the future public street along the westerly limits of the site should be reviewed by the Michigan Department of Transportation as it relates to left turn movements, traffic signal- ization, etc. , along Plymouth Road. Mr. Siegal : I represent the petitioner. The owner owns the property to the north also which would remain industrial . it is my understanding that the Builders Square has made arrangements for a road to go north and come back down along the westerly line. It is our position that the C-2 zoning is more appropriate in view of the uses from the Builders Square. This rezoning would be consistent with that rezoning. We would propose something somewhat different than a Builders Square and I suppose we classify it as a strip center. We were responsible for the center at Seven Mile and Farmington. We propose to do this in a fashion that would interface with Builders Square on the east and compliment one another. It does remove slighly less than nine acres of industrial but there still is industrial remaining on the north. Mr. Vyhnalek: What are your plans for the M-l? Siegal : Presently, there are no definitive plans. There has been a preliminary plat laid out in the past. I think the development of that would occur around the road. • 9481 Mr. Vyhnalek: We don't want the M-1 landlocked back there. Do you have a time- table for the development of the M-1? Mr. Siegal : No, but what kind of timetable are you speaking of? t Mr. Nagy: There was a commitment that with the construction of the Builders Square to put in the site improvements for the industrial area. Mr. Siegal : As opposed to developing it simultaneously we could have all the engineering done but hold off on putting the improvements in until there has been a relatively good absorption of the lots. Mr. Vyhnalek: I think this is something that we would not want to get into right now. One of the things that turned this Commission around was the concurrent development of the site on Plymouth Road with the develop ment of the industrial behind it. We were hoping your clients would take hold and development your industrial also. Mr. Siegal : I think we could work with this developer cooperatively and share costs and then commit with certainty to proceed with improvements at such time as two-thirds of the building permits have been issued on the site. Mr. Kluver: We are looking at the preservation of the M-1 as a favorable need not only to existing business but also to the City. 110 There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Smith, Vice Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 85-9-1-28 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt and unanimously 46, adopted, it was #10-230-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on October 24, 1985 on Petition 85-9-1-28 by Siegal/Tuomaala Associates/Harold Beznos to rezone property located on the north side of Plymouth Road, west of Middlebelt in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 26 from M-1 to C-2, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-9-1-28 be denied for the following reasons: (1) The proposed change of zoning is in conflict with the Future Land Use Plan. (2) The subject property represents one of the last significantly large parcels of industrially zoned property remaining with the industrial corridor of the City and therefore it is not in the best interest of the City of Livonia to eliminate any additional industrial zoning. (3) The proposed change of zoning would provide for additional commercial uses which are not needed in the area because of the major expansion of Wonderland Center and the resultant IL; additional retail floor area. (4) The proposed change of zoning would permit uses that will increase the traffic congestion experienced along Plymouth Road in this area. of the City. • 9482 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. Smith, Vice Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. The gavel was returned to Mr. Morrow by the Vice Chairman at this time. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 85-10-1-30 by Hart & Leidal to rezone property located on the north side of School- craft Service Drive, west of Ellen Drive in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 21 from R-2 to P.S. Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from the Engineering Division indicates they have no objection to this petition. Charles Tangora, Attorney representing Hart & Leidal : Development on the south side of Schoolcraft at Hubbard Road has been completed. The petitioner has attempted to meet with adjoining residents to explain what the petition is. He has met with them and showed tham pictures of Hubbard Office Center. (Mr. Tangora distributed pictures of the Hubbard Office Center to the Commission members) . We feel the proposal to professional service will have less impact on the sub- division than any other type of development. A one-story office is planned compatible with the professional services directly to the east. The petitioner is very cooperative and will cooperate withthe residents in making this a very desirable type development and one that will have very little impact on the subdivision. 1[10 Robert Santer, 35132 Scone: I was at the meeting when Mr. Leidal explained the plan. 46 Certain concerns were voiced at the meeting regarding traffic, location of the dumpster, building and driveway. He indicated a willingness to work with the people and if that still holds, I have no objection at the present time. Mr. Morrow: Although the petitioner is not required to meet with the property owners, we like to get positive feedback that he has done that, however, our determination tonight will be whether or not this is a proper zoning for the area. The site plan will come back if the rezoning is successful . Michael Simco, 35148 Scone: As Mr. Santer said, we do have a number of concerns regard- ing parking and traffic. Mr. Leidal has shown a willingness to cooperate and with that cooperation we will have some input into his site plan and I have no objection at this time. Stanley Lambert, 35164 Scone: Mr. Leidal is very cooperative and I have been living here since 1971 behind a house that is an eye sore. Sometimes there are old cars parked there and six or seven people coming and going and they don't cut the grass, and I would love a change. Mr. Tangora: I can guarantee you that he will continue to work with the resi- dents on the site plan. He is just that type of individual . There was no one else present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 85-10-1-30 closed. 4110 On a motion duly made by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mr. Smith and unanimously adopted, 9483 it was #10-231-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on October 24, I!: 1985 on Petition 85-10-1-30 by Hart & Leidal to rezone property located on the north side of Schoolcraft Service Drive, west of Ellen Drive in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 21 from R-2 to P.S. , the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-10-1-30 be approved for the following reasons: (1) The proposed zoning district will provide a buffer for adjacent residential uses from the heavily traveled Schoolcraft Freeway traffic noise. (2) The proposed zoning district is compatible to and in harmony with the surrounding uses in the area. (3) The location of the proposed zoning district is consistent with the Planning Commission's adopted goals and policies for office type development. (4) The proposed zoning district is consistent with the developing character of the Freeway frontage properties. 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. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 85-9-2-37 by Fred Armour requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to an existing restaurant located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Milburn and Flamingo in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 27. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division which states they have no objection to this request. Fred Armour, 27251 Joy Road, Dearborn Heights: Basically, the owner wants to build a garden-type operation to his restaurant so that he can compete with everybody else. We have acquired property in the rear. We are short eleven parking spaces but the Zoning Board of Appeals has approved that. At this time, I think we will be able to do a real nice job. Mr. Vyhnalek: Any other variances granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals? Mr. Armour: No, that is all . That is all we asked for. Mrs. Naidow: Is there lighting in the new section? Mr. Armour: At the present time, only what is on the building. There is no additional lighting proposed. Mrs. Sobolewski : Any additional signs? Mr. Armour: The sign that is there now will remain and If you saw the elevation, on the front there is an "A" built into the building and in the center of that will be a sign "Archie's". 9484 Mr. Smith: If you drive down Plymouth Road, you will see the results the City is getting through the Beautification Program. The signs are lower now. The merchants on Plymouth Road hesitate to cooperate I!: with us but now they see that the signs are very attractive. would like to see you encourage your client to consider that. Mr. Armour: The sign was there and we just ignored it, but I think we can do something about it. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman declared the public hearing on Petition 85-9-2-37 closed. On a motion duly made by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mrs. Sobolewski and unanimously adopted, it was #10-232-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on October 24, 1985 on Petition 85-9-2-37 by Fred Armour requesting waiver use approval to construct an addition to an existing restaurant located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Milburn and Flamingo in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 27, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-9-2-37 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan dated 7/31/85, prepared by Affiliated Engineers, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that the 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; a (3) that the Building Elevation Plan dated 8/3/85, prepared by Affiliated Engineering, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; for the following reasons: (1 ) The proposed use complies with all of the specific and general waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 11 .03 and 19.06 of the 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 surround- ing uses in 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. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 85-9-2-38 by Robert Carinci requesting to operate a restaurant and delicatessen within an existing building located on the south side of Plymouth Road between Merriman and Denne in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 27. Mr. Nagy: A letter in the file from the Engineering Division indicates they have no problems with this petition. 9485 Robert Carinci , 14085 Blackburn: We plan to put in a delicatessen with approximately thirty-two seats. We will have ice cream and pastries. We will be open from 9:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. We have a change to obtain I!: one of the other units here which is larger. Mr. Morrow: How will this affect his petition? Mr. Nagy: The legal description takes in adequate property. Mr. Carinci : We are not increasing the table count; only the seats. Mrs. Sobolewski : Is this your first business? Mr. Carinci : We have a store at Cherry Hill and John Hix which we have had for six years. Mr. Vyhnalek: Will you have beer and wine: Mr. Carinci : No, just coke and deli products. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 85-9-2-38 closed. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Sobolewski , seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, it was #10-233-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on October 24, 1985 on Petition 85-9-2-38 by Robert Carinci requesting to operate a restaurant and delicatessen within an existing building located on the li; south side of Plymouth Road betwene Merriman and Denne in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 27, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-9-2-38 be approved subject to compliance with all of the conditions imposed by the Planning Commis- sion Resolution #4-82-84 in connection with the previously approved Site Plan under Petition 84-4-8-13, for the following reasons: (1) The proposed use complies with all of the specific and general waiver use standards and requirements set forth in Section 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 surround- ing uses in 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. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. Mrs. Naidow, Secretary, announced the next item on the agenda is Petition 85-9-2-39 by Baigrie Service requesting waiver use approval to operate an auto repair service within an existing building located on the north side of Plymouth Road, west of Mayfield in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 27. Mr. Nagy: There is a letter in the file from the Engineering Division which 9486 indicates there are no objections to this request. 10 Richard Powell , 32580 Plymouth Road: We want to use this for an auto repair. It was a gas station. We want to offer a larger variety of service to the City. Mr. Morrow: Have you presented any plans to the Planning staff? Mr. Powell : Yes, but we just found out yesterday that we need some kind of landscape plan. Mr. Morrow: In the absence of the plans, we will go forward with the public hearing. Chances are we will table it until the staff has an opportunity to review the plans. Mr. Smith: Are you a new owner of this property? Mr. Powell : Of the business; the building is still owned by the previous owner. Mr. Smith: So you are a leasee of the property. Did you work there when it was a gas station? Mr. Powell : No, I am a good friend of the owner's son. We decided to buy the business. Mr. Smith: Is the owner aware that the underground storage tanks have to be removed? Mr. Powell : I am sure he is. There is gas in them but it is strictly for personal use. Mr. Smith: Are you going to be certified mechanics? Mr. Powell : Yes. There was no one present wishing to be heard regarding this item and Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the public hearing on Petition 85-9-2-39 closed. On a motion by Mr. Soranno, seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt and unanimously adopted, it was #10-234-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a Public Hearing having been held on October 29, 1985 on Petition 85-9-2-39 by Baigrie Service requesting waiver use approval to operate an auto repair service within an existing building located on the north side of Plymouth Road, west of Mayfield in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 27, the City Planning Commission does hereby determine to table Petition 85-9-2-39 until the Planning Commission's Study Meeting to be held on November 19, 1985. 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 the public hearing on Petition 85-9-2-39 closed. li, ' On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, 4 it was #10-235-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to a letter dated 10/7/85, the City Planning • 9487 does hereby approve a one-year extension of time to complete Conditions No. 3 and NO. 4 contained in Planning Commission Resolution #5-83-82 in connection with Petition 84-4-2-10 by Tony Piccirrilli and John Morano requesting waiver use approval to operate an auto repair and body shop within an existing building located on the east side of Merriman Road between Schoolcraft and Plymouth Roads in Section 26. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mrs. Hildebrandt and unanimously adopted, it was #10-236-85 RESOLVED that, pursuant to Section 23.01 (b) 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 amend Section 18.50E, Sign Regulations for Commercial Districts, of Zoning Ordinance #543, relating to the location of signs in the C-1 , C-2, C-3 and C-4 Zoning Districts. AND FURTHER that, notice of the above hearing shall be given in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.05 of Zoning Ordinance #543, as amended. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. li; On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Smith and unaimously adopted, it was #10-237-85 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Petition 85-10-8-22 by John A. Gargaro/J. Anthony & Co. , requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.58 of Zoning Ordinance #543 submitted in connection with a proposal to construct an office building on the north side of Schoolcraft between Newburgh Road and Richfield Avenue in Section 19, subject to the following conditions: (1 ) that Site Plan #4173, Sheet 1 , dated 9/21/85, prepared by Thomas W. Kurmas and Associates which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Elevation Plan #4173, Sheet 3, dated 10/28/85, prepared by Thomas W. Kurmas and Associates which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (3) that the Landscape Plan prepared by Basney & Smith, Inc. , which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (4) that the landscape materials as shown on the approved Landscape Plan shall be installed on the site prior to building occupancy and thereafter maintained in a healthy condition. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. 9488 On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, I: it was #10-238-85 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-10-8-23 by Daniel Redstone for the City of Livonia requesting approval of the site plan for the proposed addition to the Police Headquarters building located on the west side of Farmington Road, south of Five Mile Road in Section 22, be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan prepared by Louis G. Redstone & Associates, Job #2503-00, dated 7/1/85, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (2) that the Building Elevation Plan, Job #2503-00, dated 8/2/85, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, it was #10-239-85 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-10-8-24 by LPR Properties requesting approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to erect a four-story office building on 1[040 the west side of N. Laurel Park Drive, north of Six Mile Road in Section 7 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan #1152, Sheet P-1 , dated 10/18/85, prepared by Siegal/Tuomaala Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Elevation Plan #1152, Sheet P-5, dated 10/18/85, prepared by Siegal/Tuomaala Assocaites, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (3) that Landscape Plan #1152, Sheet P-2, dated 10/18/75, prepared by Siegal/Tuomaala Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to and all landscape materials shown on the plan installed on the site prior to building occupancy. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. *Mr. Duggan entered the meeting at 9:45 p.m. On a motion duly made by Mr. Kluver, seconded by Mr. Soranno and unanimously adopted, it was #10-240-85 RESOLVED that, the City Planning Commission does hereby approve Permit Application #2234 requesting approval to erect a wall sign on Eli 's Party Shop located at 28760 Plymouth Road subject to the following conditions: (I) that Sign Permit Application #2234 by Eli 's Party Shop which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and 9489 (2) that the existing non-conforming roof sign shall be removed before the approved wall sign is erected on the building. IL Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made by Mrs. Naidow, seconded by Mr. Vyhnalek and unanimously adopted, it was #10-241-85 RESOLVED that the City Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council that Petition 85-10-8-25 by Alfred DiMatteo request- ing approval of all plans required by Section 18.47 of Zoning Ordinance #543 in connection with a proposal to expand an existing restaurant located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Parkville and Weyher in Section 1 be approved subject to the following conditions: (1) that Site Plan #1705, Sheet 2, dated 10/24/85, prepared by Clifford N. Wright Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (2) that Building Elevation Plan #1705, Sheet 4, dated 10/24/85, prepared by Clifford N. Wright Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; (3) that Landscape Plan #1705, Sheet 1 , dated 10/24/85, prepared by Clifford N. Wright Associates, which is hereby approved shall be adhered to; and (4) that all landscaping be installed on the site prior to building occupancy. Mr. Morrow, Chairman, declared the motion is carried and the foregoing resolution adopted. On a motion duly made, seconded and unanimously adopted, the 505th Regular Meeting and Public Hearings held by the City Planning Commission on October 29, 1985 was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. CIT LANNING COMMISSION 44-4. )-L-- - fi__.A-:-tit-e--tr— Donna J. Naidow, Secretary ATTEST: ��� R. Lee Mor ow,Chairman ` '"l� ac