WESTLAND AREA COMMISSION
JULY 15, 1998
The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm. Present were
Daniel Province, chair, Betty Balthaser, Jerry Billman, Hank
Canello, Ron Cooper, Virginia Frank, Mike Hurd, Dorothy
Jantzen, Brian King, Jim McCormick, Carol Makar, Tom Morris,
Jan Province, Bill Saxton, and Gary Wills. Also present were
Police Sgt. David Eing, Fred Simon, and many homeowners.
Wilder and Wotring were excused.
Saxton moved to approve the June minutes. Canello seconded.
Approved.
Province reported that police officers were distributing
copies of precinct maps.
Zoning Committee (Saxton): Saxton called for a
representative to speak regarding the rezoning request for
495 Doherty Road. There was no response.
Saxton introduced rezoning request Z98-056, for the property
located at 5939 Hall Road. The applicant is the Aspen
Company, represented by Fred Simon. The owner of the
property is Margaret E.W. Worthington. The existing zoning
is R, and the request is for rezoning to R-2.
Simon distributed maps of the proposed site.
Simon said that, since WAC has decided not to meet in August,
WAC moved Simon up in the schedule. Therefore, Simon has not
yet had an opportunity to meet with Traffic or with Parks and
Recreation. When he meets with them, he is sure he will have
some additional changes to the plan. The plan he is showing
us tonight, therefore, is almost conceptual. It will be
subject to change, only as to the configuration of lots and
the locations of streets. The zoning request will remain the
same.
The site is located off Hall Road, between the Epernay
development and Galloway Road. The applicant proposes two
zoning classifications, R-2 and SR. SR consists of 60' lots,
and R-2 is 50' lots. The SR lots will be along the
perimeter, which would abut the existing residential
development. The interior lots would be R-2. There would be
a total of 174 units, of which 44 would be SR, and the
remaining 130 would be R-2. Of those R-2, 90 would be 50'
lots, 13 would be 55' lots, and 27 would be 60' lots, in
addition to the regular SR. Those numbers, except for the
regular SR, would be subject to change, depending upon what
Traffic Engineering and Rec and Parks end up telling them
what to do.
Traffic Engineering has already told them that they will have
to give up 50' of right-of-way from the center line of Hall
Road and that they will have to install a left-turn lane on
Hall Road. They are also concerned about access off Galloway
Road, which is opposite the intersection of Old Galloway
Road. There may be some changes made at that intersection.
They are proposing minimum 1200 to 1800 square foot
residential structures. There would be attached garages.
They anticipate that 90% of the houses will have two-car
attached garages. 90% of the houses will have basements.
(In actuality, the developers have found that 95+% of houses
will have two-car attached garages and basements. However,
they do want to leave the option open for the occasional
empty-nesters who want houses without them).
Saxton asked Simon to repeat the numbers of the lots of
various sizes.
Simon repeated that the plan currently calls for 90 50' lots,
13 55' lots, and 71 60' lots. That is the plan that has been
submitted to the city.
Saxton asked for the square footages of the ranches.
Simon said that they will be a minimum of 1200 square feet.
They could go as high as 1800.
And the two-story houses could go as low as 1200?
Yes.
Saxton asked Simon whether he is aware that that does not
meet WAC's minimum standards.
Simon said that he is aware of that, and he thinks they don't
meet their minimum standards. Those just are numbers he
obtained this afternoon when he called and asked for the
minimum sizes they intend to build. The principal builder
will be MI Homes, and he doesn't think they have a 1200
square foot two-story.
Saxton asked what percentage of the houses will have
basements.
They are asking 90%. At least 90% of the houses will have
two-car garages.
Province said that, on the map, the interior road does not
match up with the Galloway easement.
Traffic Engineering will probably make them change that.
Is the corner of Hall and Galloway being zoned now?
No, Simon has nothing to do with that.
You have done a lot split, then?
Yes.
Cooper asked, even if the interior street lines up with the
road right-of-way of the existing Galloway Road, it looks as
if there will still be access on a curve.
Right. Traffic Engineering will be looking at this plan, and
they will be making some changes.
Cooper said that it doesn't appear that any point in that
corner of the subdivision would give access to a straight
stretch of road. This will create a safety hazard, pulling
out onto Galloway Road from this subdivision.
Cooper asked whether Simon will carry back to MI Homes our
minimum standards.
Simon said that MI Homes has built enough in the Westland
area, that they are aware of WAC's minimum standards.
Is there any plan by MI Homes to install a traffic signal at
the intersection of Hall and Galloway?
Simon said he doesn't know. Traffic Engineering didn't say
anything to him about the question. He can see that,
eventually, there will be a need for one.
Wills asked for the zoning of the property immediately to the
east of the site.
Province said that it is SR. Most of the houses to the south
are SR, also.
Province asked whether the developer will be dedicating some
parkland.
Simon said that he will be discussing that with Parks and
Recreation. The developer will undoubtedly be donating
either some land or cash. Simon hasn't met with them yet.
A neighbor asked Simon whether the builder will be
MI/Dominion for sure, and not Fritsche Homes.
Simon said it definitely will not be Fritsche. The owners
have never done business with Fritsche. At this point, the
plan is that the builder will be MI.
Will the school system be Columbus or South-Western?
It will be Columbus.
Epernay is in the South-Western school system, though
developments on either side will be in the Columbus system.
Can Epernay do something to be "rezoned" into the Columbus
school system?
No.
Another homeowner asked whether the larger houses will be
build adjacent to the existing homes.
Simon said yes.
The intersection of Galloway and Hall is already a dangerous
place, and this development will only make the problem more
serious. It should be addressed pro-actively.
Saxton replied that the issue before WAC is the rezoning of
the property, and that WAC has no control over Traffic
Engineering.
Simon said that the matter should be brought before Ray
Bouchard, 645-7890. (John Circle is not the person to
contact).
A resident asked what is looked at, in connection with a
rezoning, if not traffic?
Province replied, "Highest and best use of the land." We try
to tell the city what we think is the best use. The
applicant usually tries for the highest use.
What are WAC's minimum standards, regarding square footages?
Saxton replied, 1200 square feet on ranches, 1600 square feet
on two-story residences, and one-third of the lots have to
have 60' frontages, and one-third must have 55' frontages.
The other one-third can be 50'. All houses must have
garages.
Two-car garages?
No. Just garages.
Wills asked why the property can't be completely SR, in order
not to devalue the adjacent houses.
Province said that, looking from Norton Road, we have
commercial development, then apartments and condominiums,
then R-2, and then SR. Now, the applicant is asking to drop
back to R-2 again.
Simon replied that the corner of Hall Road and Galloway is
probably being held back for commercial development. If that
happens, R-2 is the proper zoning.
What are the plans for that corner? A gas station, or a
convenience mart, or what?
Simon said he doesn't know. It is not included in this
application.
Saxton said that, whatever is done, the matter must come
before WAC first.
We don't need a convenience mart. A park would be nice.
How long will this process take?
About six months.
When will a final plan be available?
Simon replied that they will have one after they meet with
Traffic Engineering and Park and Rec.
When will they go before the Development Commission?
September 10, Simon thinks. The final plat will be done
before then.
Province explained to the crowd that, after WAC votes on this
issue, we make a recommendation to the Development
Commission. Everyone is welcome to attend that meeting, to
voice concerns. It is at 1250 Fairwood Avenue. Province
will provide notices and maps. Each speaker can speak for
three minutes, and no one can repeat what someone else has
already said. Traffic arguments can consist only of requests
for turn lanes, and right-of-way matters. They will report
what Traffic Engineering has decided. You can bring up
issues regarding density. They won't listen to water issues.
Billman said that WAC recommends that the homeowners attend
that meeting. In the past, WAC's opinions have been
disregarded. A large presence at that meeting gets
attention.
Province said he is usually the only person who shows up, and
the Development Commission doesn't think that one person
matters.
Saxton said that WAC has already decided not to meet in
August. However, this issue is too important to put off.
Saxton moved that Simon take this issue back to the
developers, to re-draw the plans according to WAC's minimum
standards, and then return to WAC with a new drawing, that
also shows where the connector will come out onto Galloway
Road. We will have a meeting in August.
J. Province added that Simon should also tell WAC the results
of his discussions with Parks and Rec.
Cooper seconded.
A visitor asked whether the new plan will show a completely
SR development.
Saxton said that it too much to ask. However, we can ask
that they meet our minimum standards. If we ask for SR, we
will probably end up getting pure R-2, with all 50' lots.
Province asked for a police opinion. Is this development
patrollable? He knows that we prefer a development have
three exits.
Sgt. Eing said that he has a concern about the exit on a
curve. However, that road is still in the county, so
Columbus would not have much to say in the matter.
Province said he thinks Columbus has annexed half of Galloway
Road.
What is the date of WAC's August meeting?
It is the third Wednesday, which is August 19.
A member of the audience asked whether the development can be
changed from the Columbus school district to South-Western?
McCormick, as a retired, ex-representative of the South-
Western Schools, said that the Win-Win Agreement created
protected areas, specifying that, when the area is developed,
it would become a part of the Columbus school system. This
is a part of that.
Will buyers of these houses be offered the same incentives
and discounts that were offered at Clifton Chase?
Simon said he doesn't know.
Clifton Chase offered buyers $2200 discounts, which virtually
eliminated their down-payments. Epernay got a raw deal, by
having Clifton Chase next door. No one took Epernay into
consideration when Clifton Chase was approved.
It's surprising that the decisions are based entirely on
money issues, with no concern for the community. There are
no plans for sidewalks on Hall Road. There is no space for
children to play. Epernay is a nice community, and the
people there care about their neighborhood. But the cheaper
homes being built all around are sucking them in.
What the neighbors are doing tonight is what all the
residents need to do. Community involvement makes changes.
When the community does not appear before WAC, the
Development Commission, and City Council, the developers do
what they want to do. If community involvement continues,
changes may occur.
Does WAC have any clout? He lives two houses in from Clifton
Chase, which, after they attached Baytree and Laurel Greene
to it, they have all their traffic coming through their
subdivision, very fast. He was told that there must be five
accidents on that corner before it merits a stop sign. Can
WAC confront anybody about that intersection?
What about speed bumps?
Province said speed bumps are out. He did speak to Traffic
Calming, and learned that that area is currently fifth on the
list for study of traffic calming measures, which could
include stop signs, or a planter in the middle, or something.
WAC is working on this matter.
Saxton asked Province to arrange a meeting between these
residents and the Traffic Calming people.
Province said he is already working on that.
They did have that trailer that tells drivers how fast they
are going. It was there for a weekend.
Simon took names of residents with whom he can drop off
copies of the final plat plans.
Saxton called for the question.
Cooper asked for the motion, again.
Saxton said he moved that this rezoning request be
resubmitted back to the developers, so that they can re-draw
the plans to meet our minimum standards, with at least one-
third of the lots measuring 55', at least one-third being
60', ranches having at least 1200 square feet, and two-story
houses measuring 1600 square feet, and the access onto
Galloway road being addressed, and that all houses have
garages.
J. Province added that the parkland dedication issue be
addressed.
Saxton said the Parkland Dedication Ordinance has been tabled
for six months.
The motion was approved.
Cooper asked whether there will be a separate Zoning
Committee meeting in August.
Province said that, since so many homeowners are concerned,
he thought it better that we have the issue confronted all at
once.
Cooper asked, "Then what's our standard?"
Province replied that it is to have the Zoning Committee
meet, and then bring their opinion before the full
Commission.
Then we are adopting a non-standard procedure for this
zoning?
We could have a meeting at 6:30.
"August. You just arranged for a special regular Commission
meeting in August. We don't need a zoning committee meeting
in August, either, then."
We have already heard it.
You are going to hear it again, with revisions.
Saxton said, that if it will satisfy everybody, we will have
a WAC Zoning Committee meeting, the Tuesday night prior to
the regular Wednesday night WAC meeting, at 7:00, and then we
will come back on Wednesday night for the regular meeting.
Cooper said he was just asking a question about what we were
doing. He doesn't necessarily want a zoning committee
meeting. He was just asking if we need one.
Province asked the Zoning Committee how they feel about the
matter, and then he suggested the Zoning Committee meet on
Wednesday at 6:30, just prior to the regular WAC meeting.
Province isn't sure that, at this late date, we can reserve
the meeting room for Tuesday. However, there is no problem
if we meet at 6:30 on Wednesday.
Cooper asked how this will affect future meetings.
Province replied that, as in this month, when the second
Tuesday immediately precedes the third Wednesday, the Zoning
Committee has been choosing to meet on the same day as the
regular meeting. WAC voted on that, once before. Tonight,
to accommodate all the visitors, we met at 7:00 instead of
6:30. What we did tonight was abnormal.
Cooper said he is just trying to get his calendar set up. He
has another meeting to attend tonight.
Province ruled that the WAC Zoning Committee will meet at
6:30 on August 19. The regular meeting will begin at 7:00.
Province will notify everybody of that.
Saxton asked whether a representative is present to speak
about the Doherty Road zoning, Z98-057. If not, then the
matter will be heard on August 19, since it is scheduled to
be heard downtown on the 10th, also.
Who is the representative?
It's Countrytime, out of Grove City. The property owner is
Carl Raymond Fisher. The attorney is Michael Shannon.
Recreation and Open Spaces Committee (Wills): Wills asked
whether the city has accepted the pond, yet?
Province said no. They are up to 1994, checking on funds
that have been donated.
Wills said donated funds have nothing to do with the pond.
Right. Province talked to her last week, and nothing had
been done about the pond issue.
Billman asked whether WAC is pursuing the matter of asking
the city to install baseball diamonds at Bolton Field.
Province said that the city has a 100-year lease with the
port authority. It is up to the port authority to decide
what to do with their property.
Who did we talk to about soccer?
That was the port authority.
Province said they reluctantly agreed to let soccer continue.
They were worried that softball facilities would be more
permanent.
Province said we should be supporting the Parkland Dedication
Ordinance. We are over 130 acres short of parkland, using
the city's model of 5.5 acres per 1000 population. We have
only one 7 acre park and one 17 acre park in all of Westland.
These figures do not include the proposed development on Hall
Road.
Is there land available on Clime?
The city keeps saying they just bought all that land on
Wilson Road. They intend to lease the land to a senior
center, and the senior center, in its lease, will pay for the
development of some baseball diamonds there. They say it
will be a regional area.
Province said he doesn't believe anyone in the room would
send children, on bicycles, to Wilson Road to play softball.
(Laughter).
Adults need facilities for softball, too.
The city says we have Berliner.
Is the issue of open space of any concern to anyone except
us? Does the city pass judgement on the density that the
developers are recommending? Do they take that into
consideration?
Province said that, under the present law, the city cannot
demand that the developers give up parkland; they can only
request it. The developer doesn't get a tax credit, unless
the farmer who sold it to him gave up the land ahead of time.
That's what we are fighting with the Parkland Dedication
Ordinance.
Shouldn't we have a dedicated park area, before all the land
is gobbled up?
Province announced that he received a telephone call today
about the new Westland Area Plan. The city is working on it,
and they plan a public meeting for August or September. We
must make sure a demand for parkland is included in the
Westland Area Plan.
Aren't we supposed to be working on that plan with them?
They are working on our plan for us?
They are working on the plan they think will pass. They will
bring it to us so that we can make minor adjustments, and
then they will present it to the public. But we will not
have much input.
They ignored the first one, so why should we be worried about
this one?
J. Province said that they were here, and they told us they
intended to create the plan and then present it to us for our
approval. We complained to City Council and to the
Development Commission about that, that we want input into
the entire process. They replied that they are very pleased
that we are so concerned.
D. Province said that he spoke with a member of the school
board last week. The Columbus Schools don't have room in
their present schools to accommodate the students from our
area. They are going to have to build a new school in our
area. He was wondering how he was going to present that idea
to the Columbus school board. But, he can't find a reserve
out here that is big enough for a school.
Cooper said that it's not like they don't have a commission
sitting out here, meeting on a monthly basis, with experience
in zoning and development in this area, that would just love
to give them suggestions on how to put a plan together, just
as we did last time. We put a plan together last time, and
they decided they didn't like our plan, after they had
approved it, so they decided we needed a new plan. Now, they
are going to put a new plan together, and they decided we
don't need to have input into the new plan.
Right.
I hear a train whistle.
The city is run by developers.
Who owns the property where they tore up Norton Road, by
Bolton Field? Does the city own that?
The port authority owns that property, too.
Does the port authority own Bolton Golf Course, too?
No. There have been negotiations to sell, but there isn't
enough space to build a nine-hole golf course. The original
lease was to Norton Road. They gave an easement for the
dogleg to be taken out, but they still own that land. The
lease has only about 94 more years to run.
We do have some clout, if the neighbors stand behind us, and
are will to make telephone calls to City Hall, to say that
they don't like what's going on. Call 645-7380. Michael
Coleman is a councilman to call. Richard Sensenbrenner is in
charge of Parks and Recreation. Water questions go to
Jeanette Bradley. Coffey works for Bradley. Mary Ellen
O'Shaugnessy is in charge of traffic issues.
Province reported that the two junk houses on Norton Road
have finally been demolished.
When will Norton Road be widened?
At the present rate, barring delays, the first shovel will
turn in 2002 or 2003. The project should be completed by
2005.
Will it be three lanes or five?
Five, all the way from Hall Road to Broad Street.
Yes, a few people will lose their front porches. Literally.
City Council also decided that Sullivant Avenue is more
important than Hall Road, regardless of what the Westland
Area Plan said, and they intend to widen Sullivant Avenue
before they do anything to Hall. Sullivant Avenue is ninth
on their priority list, while Hall Road is twenty-seventh.
Province asked that Hall Road be widened first, since all the
new construction is being planned for Hall Road. However,
the wise people at Traffic Engineering said that they are
smarter than we are, and Sullivant Avenue has name
recognition.
How wide will Norton Road be?
100 feet from center line.
Will there be sidewalks?
Yes.
That would be better.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:50pm.