Master Plan - Beverly Hills

Transcription

Village of Beverly
Hills
Oakland County, Michigan
Master Plan
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The participation and cooperation of community leaders, residents, and members of civic organizations in
the preparation of the Beverly Hills Master Plan is greatly appreciated. In particular, we acknowledge the
efforts of the following individuals:
VILLAGE PLANNING BOARD
David Jensen, Chairperson
George Ostrowski, Vice Chairperson
Vincent Borowski
Nanci Freedman
Elizabeth Landsman
Art Liberty
Michele Tillman
Daniel Walter
Bruce Wayne
VILLAGE COUNCIL
Todd Stearn, President
Dorothy Pfeifer, President Pro-Tem
Ron Berndt
Rosanne Koss
Jon Oen
M. Lee Peddie
Hugh Woodrow
VILLAGE ADMINISTRATION AND OTHER RECOGNITION
Renzo Spallasso, Village Manager
David Byrwa, Building Official
Robert Bliven, Former Planning Board Member
LSL Planning, Incorporated, Village Planning Consultant
Thomas Ryan, Village Attorney
Planning Board Adoption: February 28, 2007
Village Council Adoption: March 6, 2007
Village of Beverly Hills Master Plan
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... v
CHAPTER 1 – EXISTING CONDITIONS
Historical Context ............................................................................................................................ 1
Existing Land Use............................................................................................................................ 3
Population and Housing Characteristics .......................................................................................... 7
Community Facilities and Services................................................................................................ 13
Natural Features ............................................................................................................................ 18
Circulation System ........................................................................................................................ 19
Findings and Implications.............................................................................................................. 23
CHAPTER 2 - COMMUNITY VISION AND GOALS
Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 25
Community Vision......................................................................................................................... 25
Goals .............................................................................................................................................. 25
CHAPTER 3 – FUTURE LAND USE PLAN
Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 26
Residential Uses............................................................................................................................. 27
Non-Residential Land Uses ........................................................................................................... 29
CHAPTER 4 – CIRCULATION PLAN
Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 31
County Roads................................................................................................................................. 31
Road Improvement Recommendations.......................................................................................... 31
Repairs and Reconstruction Financing .......................................................................................... 32
Traffic Flow Improvements ........................................................................................................... 33
CHAPTER 5 – COMMUNITY FACILITIES PLAN
Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 34
Recreation Facilities....................................................................................................................... 34
Utilities........................................................................................................................................... 34
Municipal Facilities and Services .................................................................................................. 35
Institutional Facilities..................................................................................................................... 35
Private Facilities............................................................................................................................. 36
Natural Features ............................................................................................................................. 36
CHAPTER 6 – IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Zoning Ordinance and General Ordinances................................................................................... 37
Intra-Community Liaison............................................................................................................... 37
Public Understanding and Support ................................................................................................ 37
Continuous Planning and Cooperation .......................................................................................... 37
Page ii
LIST OF TABLES AND MAPS
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1:
Table 2:
Table 3:
Table 4:
Table 5:
Table 6:
Table 7:
Table 8:
Table 9:
Table 10:
Table 11:
Table 12:
Table 13:
Table 14:
Page
Existing Land Uses, Beverly Hills 1998-2005 ............................................................. 4
Status of Vacant Parcels, Beverly Hills 1998-2005 ..................................................... 4
Population Projections for Selected Communities 1980-2030..................................... 7
Population per Dwelling Unit in Selected Communities 1970-2030 ........................... 8
Population by Age Group, Beverly Hills 2000 ............................................................ 8
Educational Attainment for Residents 25 Years and Older, Beverly Hills 2000 ......... 8
Median Income in Selected Communities, 1979-1999 ................................................ 9
Housing Occupancy, Beverly Hills 1980-1990.......................................................... 10
Median Housing Values in Selected Communities 1970-2000.................................. 10
State Equalized Valuation and Taxable Value of Real and Personal Property,
Beverly Hills 1992-2005 ............................................................................................ 11
Proposed Residential Development, Beverly Hills 2005 ........................................... 11
Year Structure Built, Beverly Hills ........................................................................... 12
Existing Recreational Facilities, Beverly Hills 1997.................................................. 15
Traffic Accidents at Selected Intersections, Beverly Hills 1996-2004....................... 21
LIST OF MAPS
Map A:
Map B:
Map C:
Map D:
Map E:
Existing Land Use ..............................................................................................follows page 24
Existing Community Facilities .....................................................................….follows page 24
Act 51 Map....................................................................................................….follows page 24
Future Land Use Plan ....................................................................................….follows page 30
Circulation Plan.............................................................................................….follows page 33
Page iii
INTRODUCTION
The Village of Beverly Hills is a mature, residential community with many assets including high quality
neighborhoods, schools, infrastructure, natural areas; and convenient access to employment centers and
shopping. The Village is substantially developed and has few vacant areas available for growth within its
boundaries. The maturing process has created the need to identify strategies for preservation, and in some
cases to encourage upgrade or redevelopment of the built environment. A plan of action for the future that
focuses on both preservation and enhancement of the Village’s physical assets will help ensure that the
Village prospers as a vital community into the 21st Century.
There continue to be issues to address to help sustain the high quality of life residents have come to
expect. The Master Plan is intended to provide community leaders with a written philosophy to deal with
these issues. The Master Plan Update has been developed in accordance with the Municipal Planning Act,
Public Act 271 of 1965, as amended. It also meets the requirements of the Michigan Zoning Enabling
Act (P.A. 110 of 2006, as amended), which requires the Village’s Zoning Ordinance to be based on an
adopted plan.
The previous Village of Beverly Hills Master Plan was adopted in 1998. This updated Master Plan
incorporates updated community profile data, updates the visions and goal statements, and provides an
update to the recommendations and implementation of the Plan to respond to current conditions and
issues. In coming years, the social, political, economic, and environmental conditions within the Village
of Beverly Hills will continue to change. The planning process seeks to anticipate the impacts of those
changes. The Master Plan should continue to undergo periodic review and revision to remain a useful
guide for community change.
Generally the Master Plan addresses the following:

A brief Village history that recognizes major Village milestones since the area was settled in the early
1800s. A separate Historical Context section describes the evolution of Beverly Hills as a community
that is primarily residential in character.

An overview of existing conditions in the Village including population, housing, land use,
transportation, natural features, and community facilities information. These conditions are analyzed
with a list of key findings.

A Community Vision is established along with goal statements for key community planning issues in
order to guide decision-making and provide a framework for Plan implementation.

Plan recommendations, which are more specific than the goals, in order to provide direction on land
use, circulation, and community facilities and services.

A description of implementation that will assist the Village in realizing the vision of this important
Plan.
Page iv
CHAPTER 1:
EXISTING CONDITIONS
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Located less than 5 miles from Detroit’s northern boundary, the Village of Beverly Hills is approximately
4.5 square miles in area. The community’s primary natural amenity is the Rouge River, which flows
through the western portion of the Village. The Village of Beverly Hills is predominantly a residential
community. Residents are proud of the community’s residential character and are devoted to maintaining
the high quality of their neighborhoods as the ideal residential environment. Preserving this residential
character has been a goal of residents living in the area since before Village incorporation.
Pre-1900: On November 7, 1807, the Treaty of Detroit was signed by Governor William Hull and the
chieftains of the Ottawa, Chippewa, Wyandot, and Potawatomi tribes. The treaty ceded the southeastern
quarter of the lower peninsula to the United States. This area included Oakland County. In 1820 it was
organized as a county by Territorial Governor Lewis Cass, and Pontiac was designated as the county seat.
In 1830, the area, which now includes the Village of Beverly Hills, was designated as Ossewa Township;
the residents later changed the name to Southfield Township.
A program of road improvement began in 1848. The Plank Road Act authorized private companies to
pave the roads with planks or logs. In return, the builders could collect tolls from travelers, at about two
cents a mile. Planked roads along Woodward Avenue and Saginaw Trail reached Pontiac in 1854. The
planked roads served as a trade route which enabled Oakland County farmers to transport farm products
to Pontiac; and Oakland County prospered as an important agricultural area.
Early 1900s: Through the early 1900s, agriculture thrived in Oakland County’s outlying areas.
However, growing industry in southeastern Michigan created development pressure and real estate
interests responded by developing residential subdivisions in rural Oakland County. The Knight-Menard
Real Estate Company developed subdivisions within the present Village area and named them Beverly
Hills.
1950s: By 1958, the need for local services and regulation directed many Southfield Township residents
in their attempt to incorporate the entire Township as the City of Southfield. However, a substantial group
of residents believed incorporation would threaten the rural character of the area. To avoid being
incorporated as part of the City of Southfield, Beverly Hills was incorporated as a home rule Village in
April, 1958, and adopted the name of Westwood. Residents voted to change the name to the Village of
Beverly Hills in 1959.
1960s:
The newly-created Village developed at a rapid pace in the 1960s. At this time, the Planning
Board and Zoning Board of Appeals were established as separate advisory boards, and the first Village
Master Plan was prepared in 1961. The single-family residential subdivisions of Nottingham, Metamora,
Georgetown, Ronsdale, Westwood, and Sturbridge were platted, and Huntley Square Apartments were
BEVERLY HILLS MASTER PLAN
PAGE 1
constructed. Commercial and office development within the Village included the shopping center at 13
Mile and Southfield, the medical complex at Southfield and Beverly Road, and the Polewach Office
Buildings on 14 Mile Road. Village roads including Southfield Road between 13 and 14 Mile Roads,
Beverly, Pierce and streets east of Southfield Road were upgraded, widened, and/or paved.
1970s:
According to the U.S. Census, the population peaked at 13,598 in 1970. As the Village
continued to provide additional services, the Village Council considered the comparative advantage of
becoming a city. Ultimately, the Village Council decided to retain its Village status, although it did
continue to take on additional responsibilities. At this time the management of Beverly Park was
transferred from Southfield Township to Beverly Hills. In addition, the present Village Hall that provided
office space for both Village and Southfield Township administration was constructed and opened in
1974. Development of the Village continued with the subdivision of the Gravelin Farm at the corner of
Pierce and Birwood to create Williamsburg Row, the construction of the McDonald’s Restaurant on
Southfield Road, and improvements to 13 Mile and Lahser Roads.
1980s: The U.S. Census reports that the Village population declined to 11,598 by 1980. The Village
Council adopted a new Master Plan and Urban Design Plan for the improvement of Southfield Road in
the Village. The Plan was implemented by enclosing storm drains and the construction of sidewalks and
landscaping. With the majority of the Village developed by 1980, infill development and continued
transportation improvements were implemented. The Village Pines condominium project was developed
along Lahser Road. Plans were also submitted for realignment and reconstruction of Evergreen Road,
between Beverly and Riverside. Sidewalks in the eastern portion of the Village were upgraded. A new
public safety building was constructed and opened in 1989. Subsequently, Southfield Township
constructed its own Township Hall immediately west of the Village Hall, on land previously occupied by
the Public Safety Department.
1990s: Because of decreasing household size, the 1990 population further decreased to 10,610. Capital
improvements projects included the dredging and refurbishing of Beverly Pond and the construction of
the Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Retention Basin in the Douglas Evans Nature Area. The CSO
project was part of a regional effort to improve the water quality of the Rouge River. A special election
was also held in 1997 to raise a dedicated millage for infrastructure repairs and improvements. During the
1990s, the Village of Beverly Hills was recognized as one of the safest communities in Michigan, with
the lowest crime rate of any community in Michigan with a population over 10,000 residents.
2000s:
Consistent with the previous decade, the population experienced a slight decline. Since the
housing stock has grown in the past ten years, it is clear that the decline can only be attributed to the
decline in household size similar to the conditions in the 90’s. The Village has continued to thrive and
positively respond to the increasing popularity of this area of Oakland County showing impressive
increases in property values, new higher-end commercial businesses, constant requests for home
expansion and improvements, upgrades to streets, and a significant upgrade to Beverly Hills Park. All are
indicators of a thriving residential community that will continue to offer a high quality of life and is very
desirable.
Sources: Randy Munguia, Historical Committee Chairman, Robert J. Belaustegui, Former Planning
Board Member, Hagman, Arthur. Oakland County Book of History, 1970, and Waddell, Richard Lee. Out
of Small Beginnings, 1976.
PAGE 2
EXISTING LAND USE
One of the first steps in the process of updating a community Master Plan is to document and analyze
existing land uses. The manner in which the land in a community is presently being used is one of the
basic determinants of the general character of the community, and an analysis of the existing conditions
allows the identification of where particular uses have historically occurred, points out changes in land
use from previous surveys, and highlights the places where future development activity or land use
conflicts may occur.
An updated graphic representation of existing land use in the Village is presented in Map A Existing Land
Use. The existing uses of land parcels were determined through a survey of the Village conducted by
LSL Planning and input from Village staff in 2005. The updated existing land use information is
provided in Table 1. Table 2 describes vacant parcels.
Existing Land Use Categories
The land use categories used in Table 1 and on the map are defined as follows:
▪
Single Family Residential: Improved land parcels having one family detached dwelling units.
▪
Multi-Family Residential: Improved land parcels occupied by structures containing dwelling units
for two or more households such as duplexes, apartments, and row houses.
▪
Office: Improved land parcels used for professional services, such as medical and dental centers,
financial institutions, and professional and business offices.
▪
Commercial: Improved land parcels used for wholesale, retail, entertainment or services, plus
related parking areas.
▪
Public: Land parcels and facilities that are publicly operated and available to be used by the public.
Public uses include public schools, government buildings, public recreation facilities and parks.
▪
Quasi-Public: Land areas and facilities that are privately owned and operated and available to be
used by a limited number of people with particular interests, such as places of worship, private
schools, cemeteries and other similar activities.
▪
Private Recreation: Land parcels, used for private or commercial recreational activities, including
private parks, private swim clubs, private tennis and racquet clubs, and similar activities.
▪
Rights-of-Way (Public): Public land used predominantly for transportation, including roadways,
and those utility or communication uses that are contiguously related to the transportation use.
▪
Utility: Improved land containing above-ground utility or communication facilities including electric
and gas generating plants, booster and transformer stations and related storage or service yards.
▪
Water: Areas consistently filled with flowing or standing water.
▪
Vacant: Unimproved parcels not included in one of the other listed definitions.
PAGE 3
Table 1:
Existing Land Use, Beverly Hills 1998-2005
1998
Land Uses
2005
Acres
Percent
Acres
Percent
Single Family
1708.00
66.42%
1717.00
66.77%
Multi-Family
21.23
0.83%
21.23
0.83%
Commercial
22.04
0.86%
22.04
0.86%
Office
11.87
0.46%
11.87
0.46%
Public
165.60
6.44%
165.60
6.44%
Quasi-Public
100.61
3.91%
100.61
3.91%
Private Recreation
12.33
0.48%
12.33
0.48%
Utility
3.94
0.15%
3.94
0.15%
Vacant
27.91
1.08%
18.91
0.74%
Rights-of-way
469.44
18.26%
469.44
18.26%
Water
28.53
1.11%
28.53
1.11%
Total
2,571.50
100.00%
2,571.50
100.00%
Source: Village of Beverly Hills
As illustrated in Table 2, the total number of vacant tax parcels in 2005 is 94. Of these vacant sites, 26
parcels can be built upon to meet current Zoning Ordinance standards. The buildable sites are further
broken down to identify remote owners, who are likely absentee landlords. A total of 68 sites have been
identified as unbuildable because they could not be developed to meet Village regulations. All of the
unbuildable sites have adjacent owners.
Table 2:
Status of Vacant Parcels, Beverly Hills 1998-2005
Vacant Parcels
# of Parcels
# of Parcels
1998
2005
Buildable Sites
- Remote Owners
- Adjacent Owners
29
9
20
26
7
19
Unbuildable Sites
- Adjacent Owners
68
68
68
68
TOTAL VACANT PARCELS
97
94
PAGE 4
Existing Land Use Trends and Analysis
Residential: The dominant character of the Village of Beverly Hills is that of a residential community,
with over two-thirds of its land used for single family homes. These single family dwellings are
assembled in a variety of neighborhoods, characterized by the lot areas in each portion of the Village.
Residential densities generally decrease from east to west in the Village. Residential parcels east of
Southfield Road typically range from 6,000 to 15,000 square feet. Between Southfield Road and
Evergreen Road, lot areas typically exceed 10,000 square feet, generally ranging from 12,000 to 20,000
square feet. The balance of the parcels in the Village varies widely in area with the majority in excess of
16,000 square feet and larger parcels in the two to four acre range.
Nonconforming Lots and Structures: The majority of single family lot sizes within the Village were
well-established before 1940, as confirmed by the age of housing and plat documentation. These lots
were subdivided and developed in accordance with zoning regulations and zoning districts at that time.
More than 40 years later, updates were made to the zoning ordinance and zoning map that established
new minimum lot sizes, setbacks, and new zoning districts throughout the Village. For some
neighborhoods this was a step towards preserving large lots in existing neighborhoods, as discussed in the
next section in greater detail. However, as a result many lots and structures east of Southfield Road and
south of Fourteen Mile Road do not meet the new minimum lot area and setback requirements for the
corresponding zoning districts. In zoning terms, these lots and structures are categorized as
‘nonconforming.’ As such, there are many legal constraints and permit obstacles for homeowners to
expand or re-build homes. Over the past years, these obstacles have created a burden on the
administration, the Zoning Board of Appeals, and property owners.
Large Lot Neighborhoods: Concerns were raised in earlier Master Plans regarding the potential for lot
splits and subdivision development on the large lots in existence in various areas of the Village, especially
on Lahser Road. Historically, these large lots have been maintained as single family homesteads. The
low density of development associated with these lots has provided a significant amount of privately held
open space within the community giving the Village a spacious single family residential character. The
lots have provided an option for individuals who desire to reside in a less urban setting within a
developed metropolitan area. In addition, these lots have helped to maintain the natural beauty of the land
contiguous to the Rouge River.
In the 1980's three condominium projects and one small subdivision were built on former large lots. As
infill construction continues to deplete the supply of vacant property in the Village, the pressure for lot
splits and residential redevelopment is likely to increase. In 1988, the Village adopted the R-A zoning
district that requires 25,000 square feet as a minimum lot area for residential construction for
neighborhoods generally located between Evergreen Road and Lahser Road as a means to protect the
character of these large lot neighborhoods and it is important to maintain this district.
In addition, the Village’s cluster residential development standards established in the Zoning Ordinance
preserve open space and require infill development compatible with the residential character of the
Village. Several new cluster residential neighborhoods have been developed in the Village. Utilization
of the cluster option has encouraged the development of infill sites in existing residential areas where it
may not have been feasible using the surrounding residential zoning standards. A major asset of the
cluster option is that it requires the preservation of private open space. The open space not only is an
amenity that benefits those who purchase homes in the development, but these open spaces also ensure
compatibility with surrounding residential neighborhoods.
PAGE 5
Quality and Character of the Housing Stock: There are a variety of housing styles in the community to
meet different desires, needs, and quality. Because many were built almost 40 years ago maintenance and
revitalization of older homes is a common challenge. First, the cost of maintenance for older homes can
be high because with age there are more problems and similar construction materials and equipment are
more difficult to obtain. Second, the interior floor plan is not always conducive to modern lifestyles that
seek larger kitchens, more rooms, larger garages, and open floor plans. Third, while many desire the
character of the neighborhood, homeowners prefer major renovation or demolition in order to have the
home they desire. While this type of re-investment in the housing stock is important to the community
and should be encouraged, problems emerge when the appearance and/or size of the new home is not
compatible with the neighborhood. The Village should seek to maintain a balance between housing
compatibility in the neighborhoods and supporting individual investment in homes.
Vacant Lots: The map of existing land use includes scattered vacant parcels throughout the Village.
Since 1982, the amount of vacant land has decreased slightly, and in 2005 totaled approximately 18 acres
out of approximately 2,571 acres (or 1% of the total land area). Some of this land is undevelopable due to
natural features such as wetlands and floodplain. The minimal amount of vacant land emphasizes the fact
that the Village is now a stable, mature community whose future concerns will center on maintaining the
existing quality of life rather than growth.
Public/Quasi-Public: As a residential community, it is logical that several sites would be devoted to
public and quasi-public uses and Beverly Hills is no exception with several acres devoted to these uses. It
is extremely beneficial to provide parks, churches, schools, and other community-oriented uses near
neighborhoods because it is convenient for residents and promotes a spirit of community when neighbors
recreate at the same parks, attend the same community events and functions, and even see each other at
religious services. As was identified in prior plans, it can be expected that land use changes, expansions,
alterations, intensification, and modifications will occur on the Village’s public, semi-public and
institutional sites. While the Village will likely face redevelopment of some of these sites in the future,
the longevity and success of these facilities should be supported in order to preserve their locations in the
Village.
Commercial and Office: Commercial and office uses have developed in several nodes throughout the
Village but generally remain separate from each other.
Office uses are located 1) on the south side of Fourteen Mile Road at Southfield, 2) on the south side of
Fourteen Mile Road east of Pierce, 3) at the corner of Thirteen Mile Road and Lahser Road, and 4) on the
east side of Lahser, at Thirteen Mile Road. In addition, a medical office complex is located on Southfield
Road south of Beverly. The intent is to continue to permit office uses, without allowing the expansion of
commercial uses at these locations. Examples of existing office uses include medical offices and clinics,
veterinary clinics, and professional offices such as attorneys and accountants.
Two major concentrations of commercial land use exist in the Village: 1) the west side of Southfield
Road between Beverly and Thirteen Mile Roads; and 2) the northwest corner of Greenfield and Thirteen
Mile Roads. Examples of existing commercial businesses include a specialty grocery store, coffee shop, a
few sit-down restaurants, a few fast food/drive-through restaurants, dry-cleaners, pet store, and a gas
station. Shopping needs of Village residents continue to be adequately met by these commercial facilities.
The quality of the commercial and office buildings and sites has improved in recent years as businesses
see the importance of improving their facilities. This quality will continue to increase with the recent
adoption of site development requirements in the Zoning Ordinance, which was made possible by a
collaborative effort between the Village Planning Board and the Village Council.
PAGE 6
POPULATION AND HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
Population Trends
Over the last 20 years, the population of Beverly Hills has been stable. The Village experienced
tremendous growth during the 1960's. Nearly one-third of all homes in the Village were constructed
during those years. The Village’s population in 1960 (8,633) increased by 57% to 13,593 in 1970.
Housing construction attracted traditional families. The Village household size of 3.58 persons in 1960
and 3.62 in 1970 approached the classic family size of four persons.
Growth and development gradually slowed in the 1970's. The population aged, the birth rate declined and
the baby-boom children of post-World War II moved away. New housing construction slowed
considerably as the vacant land inventory declined. A population loss of nearly 15% occurred during the
decade, leaving a 1980 count of 11,598 residents. The decline was a direct result of the reduction in
average household size at the end of the decade (from 3.62 in 1970 to 2.94 in 1980).
The Village entered a period of increasing stability in the 1990's. The 1990 population of 10,610
represents a decrease of 8.2% from the 1980 U.S. Census. According to Southeast Michigan Council of
Governments (SEMCOG) population estimates in 2005, the population in Beverly Hills had slightly
decreased by 1.8% from 2000 to 2005. However, SEMCOG estimated that the average household size
remained relatively unchanged since the 2000 Census, at about 2.5 in 2005. This growth is the result of
residential development on vacant land remnants.
Table 3 provides comparable population data for the Village of Beverly Hills and selected neighboring
communities. The 1980, 1990 and 2000 census figures are actual U.S. Census Bureau counts. The year
2030 projections were developed by SEMCOG as part of their regional development forecasts conducted
in 2001. As indicated in Table 3, SEMCOG expects these communities to experience a decline in
population between 2000 and 2030.
Table 3:
Population Projections for Selected Communities 1980-2030
Community
Village of Beverly Hills
City of Birmingham
Village of Bingham Farms
Village of Franklin
City of Royal Oak
City of Southfield
1980
1990
2000
11,598
21,689
529
2,864
70,893
75,607
10,610
19,997
1,001
2,644
65,493
75,695
10,437
19,291
1,030
2,937
60,062
78,322
% Change
from 19801990
- 8.2%
- 7.8%
89.0%
-7.8%
- 7.6%
0.1%
% Change from
1990-2000
2030
-1.6%
-3.5%
2.9%
11.1%
-8.3%
3.5%
10,352
17,800
967
2,793
52,233
73,397
Projected %
Change from
2000-2030
--0.8%
-7.7%
-6.1%
-4.9%
-13%
-6.3%
Source: SEMCOG Regional Development Forecast; and U.S. Census
Table 4 compares the average persons per household in Beverly Hills and nearby selected communities.
According to the 2000 Census, the average persons per household of 2.52 in Beverly Hills is slightly
higher than that of several other adjacent communities. According to the SEMCOG projections, the
Village is expected to maintain a higher persons-per-household ratio with only a 4% decrease from 2000
to 2030.
PAGE 7
Table 4:
Population per Dwelling Unit in Selected Communities 1970-2030
Community
City of Birmingham
Village of Franklin
City of Royal Oak
City of Southfield
1970
1980
1990
2000
3.62
3.03
3.61
3.64
3.11
3.43
2.94
2.42
3.25
2.94
2.52
2.55
2.6
2.2
2.4
2.7
2.3
2.4
2.52
2.11
2.31
2.73
2.06
2.27
% Change
1970- 2030
2030
2.42
1.93
2.10
2.52
1.76
2.25
-4.0%
-8.5%
-9.1%
-7.7%
-14.6%
-0.1%
Source: SEMCOG Regional Development Forecast; and U.S. Census
Population Characteristics
A review of the general characteristics of the
population is important to assist in
evaluation of future land use and community
facility and service needs. The U.S. Census
reports that profile these statistics reveal
some interesting facts.

Of the total Village population in 2000,
53% were females and 47% were males,
which is the same breakdown from
1990.
The age group considered “Family
Forming” has declined from 59% in
1990 to 54.4% in 2000 while both
“School Age” and “Senior” residents
have increased from 1990. See Table 5
for 2000 Population by Age Group for
2000.
Non-Caucasian residents constituted
709 people or 6% of the total
population in 2000.
Educational attainment for persons 25
years and older in 2000 was higher than
County and State averages.
Table 5:
Population by Age Group, Beverly Hills 2000
Age
Population
Percent of
Total
Pre-School
Less than 5 yrs
611
5.9%
School Age
5-9
10-14
15-19
832
768
503
8.0%
7.4%
4.8%
Family Forming
20-24
25-44
45-54
55-64
274
2,758
1,692
962
2.6%
26.4%
16.2%
9.2%
65 and over
2,042
19.6%
Group
Seniors
Source: US Census
Table 6:
Educational Attainment for Residents 25 Years and Older,
Beverly Hills 2000
Community
High School
Diploma
College Degree
96.1%
68.1%
Oakland County
89.2%
44.8%
Michigan
83.4%
28.8%
Village of Beverly
Hills
Source: U.S. Census
The percent of Beverly Hills residents
over the age of 25 with high school diplomas was almost 7% higher than in Oakland County as a
whole, and almost 13% higher than within the State of Michigan. (See Table 6)
PAGE 8
Income
In 2000, the Village of Beverly Hills had a considerably higher household income than Oakland County
as a whole. The median household income in Beverly Hills was $90,341 in 1999, as compared to
Oakland County’s median household income of $61,907. The higher proportion of middle and upper
income residents can be attributed to a number of factors. As noted before, Beverly Hills has a relatively
high educational attainment and has a high proportion of professional and skilled employees.
As might be expected, Table 7 demonstrates that the median income ranking by community closely
parallels the community ranking for median housing values depicted in Table 9. In general, the median
income figures are consistent with the housing values data.
Table 7:
Median Income in Selected Communities, 1979-1999
Community
Median Income
in 1979
Median Income
in 1989
Median Income
in 1999
$39,150
$61,941
$90,341
City of Birmingham
$28,661
$57,573
$80,861
unavailable
$107,506
$123,771
Village of Franklin
$50,558
$91,423
$124,014
City of Royal Oak
$22,343
$36,835
$52,252
City of Southfield
$26,451
$40,579
$52,468
Oakland County
$25,323
$43,407
$61,907
Source: US Census
Type of Housing
The Village is predominantly a single family residential community with 90% of the housing units being
owner occupied. As illustrated in Table 8, housing units totaled 4,196, with 111 vacant units in 2000.
Vacant units are those that were unoccupied at the time of the census. According to the U.S. Bureau of
the Census, a vacant unit should fall into one of the following categories: 1) a unit which is occupied
entirely by persons who have a usual residence elsewhere or, 2) a new unit not yet occupied, if
construction has reached a point where all windows and doors have been installed. Renter-occupied
dwellings in Beverly Hills accounted for 320, or 8% of the total occupied housing units in 2000.
PAGE 9
Table 8:
Housing Occupancy, Beverly Hills 1980-1990
1980
1990
2000
Total Housing Units
Owner-Occupied Units
Number
Percentage
4,041
4,166
4,196
3,635
90%
3,743
89.8%
3,765
90%
Renter - Occupied Units
Number
Percentage
311
7.7%
332
8.0%
320
8%
95
2.4%
91
2.2%
111
3%
Vacant Units
Number
Percentage
Source: U.S. Census
Housing Values
Housing values are good indicators of housing demand and affordability. Census data is most useful for
purposes of comparing occupant reported housing values in Beverly Hills to nearby communities, as well
as showing changes in housing values over time. Table 9 indicates that housing values of owner occupied
units in Beverly Hills were comparable to those in the City of Birmingham, but lower than housing values
in Bingham Farms and Franklin, in 1990. In 2000, values in Birmingham also exceeded those in Beverly
Hills.
Table 9:
Median Housing Values in Selected Communities 1970-2000
Community
1970
1980
1990
2000
$42,600
$149,420
$204,779
$270,600
City of Birmingham
$31,900
$123,882
$205,967
$318,000
unavailable
$248,082
$359,122
$381,900
Village of Franklin
$50,000
$220,482
$307,894
$414,400
City of Royal Oak
$21,300
$71,220
$150,900
City of Southfield
$36,000
$105,165
$99, 815
$112,358
$155,500
Source: U.S. Census
Another indicator of stability is the state equalized value (SEV) and taxable value of property within a
community. Table 10 provides the SEV and taxable value of real and personal property within Beverly
Hills since 1992. Since 1992, the SEV of property within the Village has shown a net increase of almost
124%, whereas the taxable value has increased by 64%. This confirms that although Beverly Hills is
nearly fully developed, there has been continuous investment in the community. Since the predominant
land use within the Village is residential, the steady climb in SEV is an indicator of homeowners
investing in their homes and that there are home sales.
PAGE 10
Table 10:
State Equalized Valuation and Taxable Value of Real and Personal Property,
Beverly Hills 1992-2005
Year
Total SEV
Percentage
Change
Total Taxable Value
Percentage
Change
1992/93
1993/94
1994/95
1995/96
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
$324,197,050
$353,331,300
$352,214,150
$387,571,970
$384,364,200
$413,458,150
$460,930,670
$508,403,190
$540,141,960
$599,634,340
$648,525,520
$677,302,570
$704,782,985
$725,926,475
9.0%
-0.3%
10.0%
-0.8%
7.6%
11.5%
10.3%
6.2%
11.0%
8.2%
4.4%
4.1%
3.0%
$324,197,050
$353,331,300
$352,214,150
$360,729,734
$358,590,764
$372,987,074
$388,347,914
$406,391,044
$424,074,874
$450,539,944
$475,630,014
$494,040,639
$516,425,938
$531,918,716
9.0%
-0.3%
2.4%
-0.6%
4.0%
4.1%
4.6%
4.4%
6.2%
5.6%
3.9%
4.5%
3.0%
Residential Construction
Since Beverly Hills is a developed community
that has essentially been built-out, there is only a
limited amount of new residential construction.
However, as of mid-2005, four new single-family
residential housing developments had been
proposed within the Village. Table 11 lists these
newer residential developments, along with their
location and number of units. These projects
were developed using the cluster option provided
in the Zoning Ordinance. All four projects
involve redevelopment of existing single family
areas and preserve substantial amounts of
undeveloped open space.
Table 11:
Residential Development, Beverly Hills 1997-2005
Residential
Development
Charrington
Crossing
Westwood
Commons
Turnberry Woods
Orchard Villas
Location
North of Greenfield
School on Greenfield
Rd.
South of 13 Mile on
Lahser Rd.
Between 13 and 14 Mile
on Lahser Rd.
West side of Lahser Rd.,
south of 14 Mile
Number
of New
Units /
Homes
20
23
11
6
In addition, the Village Building Department
issued over 200 building permits for Source: Village of Beverly Hills Building Department
improvements to existing homes in 2004, with an average cost of improvements of over $44,000 per
permit. The Building Department issued nearly 900 permits for other improvements in 2004 related to
electrical, mechanical, plumbing and fencing. Over this period of time, 5 new homes were also
constructed. The number of permits and estimated cost of the improvements further indicates that while
the aging housing stock requires maintenance, Village residents’ are committed to home investment.
PAGE 11
Age of Housing
Table 12 reveals that over 80% of the homes in Beverly Hills were constructed between 1940 and 1970.
This compares to 41.6% in Oakland County and 40.9% statewide. The condition of housing in a
community is related in part to its age. Traditionally, the need for major repairs or rehabilitation becomes
evident when housing reaches an age of 30 years. Communities where a substantial proportion of the
housing stock is 30 or more years old often initiate programs to encourage reinvestment in the housing
stock. While that age threshold has been met in Beverly Hills, private reinvestment has occurred without
public sector encouragement. In fact, the estimated cost of improvements authorized via building permits
in 2004 was over $9,000,000. This represents a continued trend of reinvestment through rehabilitation by
a significant amount of private dollars.
As depicted in Table 12, approximately 95% of the housing units in the Village have been constructed
since 1940. These residences may require increased investment for repairs, maintenance, and renovation
as these homes continue to age; however, other indicators such as housing values and SEV, as well as the
number of permits issued for improvements to existing homes, demonstrate that the housing stock is
being maintained and upgraded, at the present time.
Table 12:
Year Structure Built, Beverly Hills
Year Structure Built
Beverly Hills
Oakland County
State of Michigan
1990 to March 2000
2.1%
15.8%
14.5%
1980 to 1989
3.7%
14.1%
10.5%
1970 to 1979
6.7%
20.3%
17.3%
1960 to 1969
30.0%
15.7%
14.2%
1940 to 1959
52.2%
25.9%
26.7%
Prior to 1940
5.2%
6.2%
16.7%
Source: U.S. Census
PAGE 12
COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES
Community facilities are those that serve the general needs of Village residents by providing
opportunities for recreation, health, safety, education, and cultural enrichment. A community facility must
be adequate in size, appropriately located within the community, and responsive to the needs of Village
residents. Obviously, the effectiveness and adequacy of any community facility is a function of more than
its physical structure. Variables such as the manner in which a facility meets the expressed needs of the
residents, the community-wide perceptions of the facility and its actual use by residents make the final
determination of the adequacy of a facility. Existing community facilities within the Village are
identified on Map B.
In Beverly Hills, over 91 cents of every dollar in tax revenue is raised from residential properties. In many
municipalities, commercial or industrial tax collections represent a substantial proportion of tax revenues.
Elsewhere the taxes from non-residential land uses underwrite the high costs of construction and
operation of community facilities - facilities that generally benefit the residential population. Such is not
the case in Beverly Hills.
Public, Private, and Parochial Schools
Schools are a major physical and social focal point for the entire community. The quality of education
offered by a school system is, perhaps, the most important quality of life issue that determines the long
term stability of a community. The Village of Beverly Hills is primarily served by Birmingham Public
Schools, although a number of private and parochial schools located within the Village attract students
from an area extending beyond the Village boundary.
The primary factor limiting the opportunities for locating future school facilities within the Village will be
the small amount of available vacant land within the Village. In the foreseeable future, any new or
consolidated school facilities will be located within existing school sites. Opportunities for expansion on
existing school facilities do, however, exist.
Greenfield School serves the eastern section of the Village, Beverly School the central section, and
Bingham Farms School, located outside of the Village, serves the western section of the Village. Some
children residing in the Village attend Covington School, also located outside of the Village. Both
elementary schools within the Village are located in single family residential neighborhoods.
Wylie E. Groves High School is centrally located within its service area, as is the Berkshire Junior High
School. Both of these facilities are located on intermediate thoroughfares, thus minimizing the impact of
the increased traffic congestion generated by their large service area. Families residing in the Village
may also send their children to the International Academy located within Bloomfield Hills. International
Academy serves a consortium of twelve school districts, and at present a maximum of ten students from
the Birmingham school district may attend the school each year.
In addition to the public schools, the three non-public schools located within the Village boundary are
Detroit Country Day School, Kensington Academy and Our Lady Queen of Martyrs. These schools serve
an area larger than the Village. Detroit Country Day School has significantly enlarged their facilities and
has expanded the land area under their control in the residential district south of the main campus.
Kensington Academy is stable in their operations and has no current plans for expansion.
PAGE 13
Library Facilities
The availability of library services to the residents of the community is a significant contribution to the
quality of life. Libraries are an educational resource for both children and adults. The Village is the unit of
government responsible for providing library services.
The Village has contracted with the Baldwin Public Library, located at 300 W. Merrill in Birmingham,
for library services since 1961. The Village’s contractual agreement for use of the Baldwin Library also
gives residents access to the Bloomfield Township library at Lone Pine and Telegraph, although each
library facility is independently operated with its own director.
Recreation Facilities
Recreation has an essential role and relationship to good health and the quality of life for residents. The
need for recreation facilities occurs at all age levels and in all areas of the community. In any community
there should be opportunities for a variety of active and passive recreation that meet the diverse needs and
interests of all residents.
The following is a summary of the park and recreation opportunities available to Village residents. The
public recreational facilities in the Village are shown on Map A and listed in Table 13. Since not all
parks are owned by the Village, the list and descriptions are organized by their jurisdiction.
Village Recreation Facilities: There are four public recreation and nature preserve areas within the
Village. Beverly Park is located on Beverly Road between Southfield and Evergreen Roads and is the
largest park in the Village. Recent improvements to the park allow for year-round recreational
opportunities. Several community and neighborhood events are held at the park and it truly serves as an
important gathering place for residents. Riverside Park offers primarily passive recreational opportunities
for residents and is situated along the Rouge River off Riverside Drive.
Douglas Evans and Hidden Rivers nature preserves serve as valuable open space, although these areas are
precluded from development for structured recreation. Public access to the Douglas Evans nature
preserve is located on the west side of Evergreen Road, between Beverly Road and Old Pond Court.
Public School Recreation Facilities: The Birmingham Public school properties located in the Village
are available to the residents for recreation. The outdoor facilities may be utilized free of charge;
however, most programmed activities have a nominal fee. The gymnasiums and pools located within the
schools are available for use for a small fee. Other indoor programs are held for residents at specific times
as coordinated by the Birmingham Public Schools' Continuing Education Program. Each elementary
school has a Community School Officer who is responsible for scheduling the facility. Each school
operates a latch key program wrapped around normal school hours.
Summer programs of swimming, computers, and arts and crafts have been held in schools and other
public and private facilities within the Village. The school district offers programs for all age groups and
makes them available to both residents and non-residents.
Quasi-Public Recreation Facilities: Although the private schools within the Village have recreational
facilities on their campuses, the majority of these facilities are intended for the use of the institutions’
students or parishioners, and are not open to the general public on a regular basis. Our Lady Queen of
Martyrs Church property contains a playground area, ball diamond, and a gymnasium available only to
PAGE 14
parish members and not to the general public. Detroit Country Day School contains a lighted football
field and other recreational facilities not available for public use. Kensington Academy’s recreational
facilities are also not available for public use.
Private Recreation Facilities: There are private recreation facilities located within the Village that are
available to members only. Several sports leagues are also available to Village residents, and are
typically sustained by fees charged to participants.
Regional Recreation Facilities: A large number of Oakland County parks provide year-round
recreational facilities including camping, boating, swimming, fishing, golf, picnicking, nature study,
mobile recreation, and winter sports. Other regional facilities include the Metroparks which are overseen
by the Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Parks Authority, and State Recreation Areas managed by the MDNR.
The most accessible regional facilities for Beverly Hills’ residents include Kensington, Indian Springs and
Stony Creek Metroparks and Proud Lake, Pontiac Lake, and Highland State Recreation Areas. These
facilities provide extensive recreational opportunities and are accessible to Village residents.
Consequently, these facilities fulfill the regional requirements of the Village recreational system.
Public recreation is available in some communities adjoining the Village of Beverly Hills. Royal Oak and
Birmingham have public park land located within one-half mile of the Village of Beverly Hills, and also
help fulfill recreational needs.
Table 13:
Existing Recreation Facilities, Beverly Hills 2006
Name
Location
Greenfield Elementary Fairfax near Thirteen
School
Mile Road
Acres
Facilities
10.0 (total
site)
14.0 (total
site)
Playground, ball fields, hard surface area,
gymnasium
Beverly
Elementary School
Beverly Road near
Southfield Road
Playground, ball field, hard surface area,
gymnasium
Beverly Park
Beverly Road between
Evergreen and Southfield
Road
35.0
Shelter with restrooms, picnic/pavilion area,
tennis courts, playground, baseball and softball,
sledding, sand volleyball court, jogging path,
basketball court, outdoor ice rink.
Riverside Park
Riverside Drive East of
Evergreen
3.0
Picnic area
Hidden Rivers
Nature Preserve
Rouge River at Northern
Village Boundary, North
of Riverside
14.0
Limited access nature area.
Douglas Evans
Nature Preserve
West of Evergreen
Between Old Pond Court
and Beverly Rd.
18.5
Limited access nature area.
Wylie E. Groves
High School
Thirteen Mile and
Evergreen
48.9
(total site)
Football, baseball, track and field, tennis,
soccer, gymnasium, pool.
Berkshire
Middle School
Fourteen Mile Road
near Lahser Road
24.0
(total site)
Football field, ball fields, soccer, lacrosse,
gymnasium, pool.
Source : Village of Beverly Hills
PAGE 15
Municipal Facilities and Services
The major municipal buildings of the Village are centrally located within the community at Thirteen Mile
Road and Chelton. The site includes the Village Hall, the Public Works yard, Southfield Township
offices, and a Public Safety building. The Village Hall contains the administrative offices of the Village.
The Council room in the Village Hall, with a capacity of 65, is used by the Village Council, Planning
Board and Zoning Board of Appeals, in addition to many community groups for meetings.
The Village’s public safety building is located on Thirteen Mile Road, west of Chelton. The facility was
completed in 1989 and designed to meet both the current and the future needs of the public safety
department. Its vehicle service bays are adequate to handle additional fire fighting equipment. The facility
also includes three holding cells which serve as a lockup for the temporary boarding of prisoners. The
Public Safety Department prides itself on maintaining an average emergency response time of under three
minutes.
The administrative offices for Southfield Township are located west of the Village Hall in a structure
completed and occupied in 1991. Both buildings share a common vehicular access and common parking
area. The Township makes its meeting room, with a capacity of 41, available to the Villages in the
surrounding area.
Village Maintenance Facilities: As the basic infrastructure of the Village ages, more emphasis will be
placed on its maintenance. A service yard is located behind the Village Hall for public service storage and
operational facilities. Most equipment is stored inside a garage; however, outside storage is required for
much of the materials used in providing the services. The area is screened from other uses by a
combination of walls, landscaping, and buildings. The Village solid waste is also handled by a
subcontractor, and curbside recycling was implemented in 1992.
Sewer and water service and road maintenance are performed by Oakland County and private firms under
contract with the Village. Storage of materials in the Public Works yard reduces the contractors’ costs,
which are ultimately passed on to the Village. Other materials such as mulch and/or compost are currently
stored at the Village complex.
Village World Wide Web Site: Village administration maintains a World Wide Web site on the
Internet. The purpose of the Web site is to provide another means of communication with citizens.
Internet access and storage space is provided under contract by a local Internet service provider. The
Village administration maintains a full service website. The address is www.villagebeverlyhills.com.
Quasi-Public/Institutional Facilities
Not all community facilities are owned by the public. Many services are offered through facilities owned
and operated by non-profit entities. The predominantly residential development in Beverly Hills has
fostered several quasi-public and institutional land operations. In addition to the services that are
provided, these land uses benefit residents in several ways.
Quasi-public/institutional facilities are exempt from property taxes, occupy large tracts of land and,
generally, develop their land area to a less dense degree than other uses. The undeveloped portions of the
site provide significant open space and may allow for additional recreational opportunities for the
residents of the Village.
PAGE 16
The Village has eight churches of various denominations located within its boundaries. In terms of access,
all of the churches are favorably located with frontage on an intermediate thoroughfare or collector street.
Each site provides off-street parking and other land use requirements pertaining to their particular uses.
The large open spaces that compliment the site uses are an integral part of the entire site.
Sanitary, Storm Sewer, and Water Facilities
Sanitary Sewer System: All housing units in the Village have the capability of using public sanitary
sewer service within the Village. There are no remaining residences on septic systems.
Storm Sewer System: The current storm water collection system in the Village is a series of subsystems.
The Village is served by the George W. Kuhn, Acacia, Rummel and South Berkshire drains. Each
independent section transports storm water (in some cases combined with sanitary waste water) to the
nearest interceptor (in combined sewers) or to the nearest natural drainage course. Sanitary sewage is
transported out of the Village by means of the Evergreen Interceptor or the Twelve-Town combined
system. Several pumping stations serve as an integral part of the Village sewer system. The Oakland
County Drain Commissioner’s office operates a pumping station on Lahser south of Thirteen Mile Road.
A second pumping station is located at Thirteen Mile Road across from the Detroit Country Day School
site. A third pumping station has been constructed on the west side of the Rouge River at Thirteen Mile
near Stafford.
Water System: The source of the Village’s water supply is the Detroit Water Board; the water supply is
delivered by the South Oakland County Water Authority (SOCWA) through feeder mains in Greenfield
Road, Southfield Road, Thirteen Mile and Fourteen Mile Roads. SOCWA also maintains an elevated
water reservoir at Fourteen Mile Road and Edgewood, tied to the 24" main in Fourteen Mile. The Village
system includes a water feed west and south, from Southfield Road to the Village limits. Improvements
completed in 1997 include construction of a second water feed connection from Lahser and 14 Mile Road
and completion of a new 30" water main on Fourteen Mile Road. These upgrades have substantially
increased water volumes and pressure in the water district, enabling the Fire Department to provide
continuous fire protection. The last two subdivisions in the Village provided public water are located at
Sunnyslope and Norwood and at east and west Kennoway, off of Thirteen Mile Road. These water mains
were funded through a 1996 special assessment; however, homes in these areas are not required to
connect to the public system. With the completion of these extensions, the focus is now on maintaining
and replacing the existing lines where needed.
PAGE 17
NATURAL FEATURES
The following is a summary of natural features conditions and issues in the Village.
The Rouge and Clinton River Watersheds: The Rouge River Watershed is one of the nation’s largest
urban waterways. The river drains about 438 square miles of land in Wayne, Oakland, and Washtenaw
counties in southeast Michigan, and empties into the Detroit River just south of the City of Detroit. The
river’s watershed includes four primary branches, numerous tributary streams, and more than 400 lakes
and ponds. The Main Branch begins in southeast Oakland County and flows generally southward before
it angles in a southeastern direction and empties into the Detroit River. The Upper, Middle, and Lower
branches of the river flow in an easterly direction into the Main Branch.
The Village of Beverly Hills is one of 48 municipalities entirely or partially within this drainage area. It is
estimated that more than 75% of the land within the watershed is developed. Given the importance of the
River and watershed to the region, the Village continues cooperative efforts to sustain the long-term
viability of the Rouge River. Specifically, the Village of Beverly Hills takes part in the Rouge River
National Wet Weather Demonstration Project which is a comprehensive analysis of the entire Rouge
River watershed and the pollutant sources and levels that affect the river’s water quality.
To improve and reduce discharge into the Rouge River, the Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) Retention
Basin was completed in the Douglas Evans Nature Area in 1996. The purpose of the CSO project is to
retain flow from the combined sewer, and gradually release the flow into the Evergreen Interceptor for
treatment at the Detroit Wastewater Treatment Center.
A small area of the easternmost portion of the Village also lies within the Clinton River Watershed, which
covers approximately 760 square miles over portions of four counties (Oakland, Macomb, Lapeer and St.
Clair).
Nature Preserves: The Douglas Evans and Hidden Rivers natural areas preserve a combined total of
over 33 acres of environmentally sensitive natural areas adjacent to the Rouge River. Pockets of natural
areas that are part of a larger natural greenway along a watercourse provide cover and habitat for wildlife.
Foraging, nesting, and raising of offspring commonly take place in these areas, even when surrounded by
urbanized land. The nature preserve areas are heavily wooded, and reserved for wildlife habitat. A past
ecological survey by the Cranbrook Institute of Science documented over 86 species of trees and shrubs
in Douglas Evans Nature Preserve. Access to these sites is limited and use is subject to deed restrictions
placed upon the properties at the time the sites were donated to the Village.
Natural Beauty Road: Although Evergreen Road is an arterial road, the curvilinear stretch between
Beverly Road and Riverside Drive has picturesque features. Dense native vegetation and mature trees
frame the view as one travels along the thoroughfare, replicating the experience of traveling through an
undeveloped, natural area. Vegetation screens the adjacent residential areas, giving this stretch of
Evergreen Road a rustic character. To protect this natural character, the Village designated the portion of
Evergreen Road between Beverly Road and Riverside Drive as a Natural Beauty Road in 1984.
Tree Maintenance: The Village is graced with many large, beautiful trees. The health, vitality, and
replenishment of trees and other plant material are essential to maintaining the Village’s residential
character. Many of these trees are on public property and within public rights-of-way and are the
maintenance responsibility of the Village. A tree nursery is established at Beverly Park to continue
efforts towards tree replacement. Similar to many communities in Southeast Michigan, the Village has
PAGE 18
been impacted by the Emerald Ash Borer, which is a wood boring beetle that has been a destructive force
on ash trees throughout the region. To date, approximately 300 ash trees have been removed from
Village Parks. The Village should continually monitor this situation to reduce impacts and prevent the
loss of additional trees.
CIRCULATION SYSTEM
Transportation and traffic circulation have a significant impact on all aspects of a community. As a
component of the Master Plan, this section provides a brief inventory and an analysis of the existing
transportation system in the Village and surrounding areas.
State Distribution Formula (Act 51)
Map C displays the streets in Beverly Hills as classified by Public Act 51 of 1951. Act 51 is the State
statute that establishes the process for the distribution of gasoline taxes collected at the pump and from
vehicle weight taxes. The State of Michigan established this road classification system, and does not
necessarily reflect planning considerations such as traffic volume, or traditional planning classifications
of roadways.
County Primary Roads: In accordance with the Act 51 Street Classification, there are no state routes
within the Village, but the following are County Primary Roads within the Village. These roads are under
the jurisdiction of the Road Commission for Oakland County and are major thoroughfares because of
their regional importance in moving traffic through communities. The latest traffic volume counts from
2006 are also noted.

Greenfield Road (average daily traffic volume: 13,762)
Southfield Road (average daily traffic volume: 29,803)
Lahser Road (average daily traffic volume: 14,815)
Fourteen Mile Road between Southfield Road and Greenfield Road (average daily traffic volume:
17,128)
Southfield Road is a major north/south traffic route that connects several adjacent communities including
Birmingham to the north and Southfield, Detroit, Dearborn and other Wayne County communities to the
south. Southfield Road is a limited access highway and a major state trunkline (M-39) for most of its
length from south of Nine Mile Road to Fort Street (M-85) in Lincoln Park. The roadway consists of five
(5) lanes within the Village and narrows to two (2) lanes in the City of Birmingham. It reaches its
northern terminus at Maple Road. The RCOC Master Right-of-Way Plan identifies a 120-foot right-ofway for Southfield Road through Beverly Hills.
Greenfield and Lahser Roads are the other major north/south roads crossing the Village under the
jurisdiction of the RCOC. Fourteen Mile between Southfield Road and Greenfield Road is also under
RCOC control. Fourteen Mile west of Evergreen Road to the Village boundary is under Village control.
Major and Local Streets. In accordance with Act 51, The Village of Beverly Hills has jurisdiction over
more than 55 miles of public streets. Of that total, the Village street system includes nearly 11 miles of
Major Streets including the following streets. The latest traffic volume counts from 2006 are also noted.

Thirteen Mile Road (average daily traffic volume: 17,735)
Beverly Road (average daily traffic volume: 2,664)
PAGE 19

Fourteen Mile Road (west of Evergreen Road and a small segment west of Southfield Road) (average
daily traffic volume: 6,442)
Pierce Road (average daily traffic volume: 2,312)
Riverside Drive (average daily traffic volume: 1,762)
Norchester Drive (average daily traffic volume: 564)
Evergreen Road (average daily traffic volume: 11,213)
A continuous route along Bellevine Trail, Hampton, and Hampstead Drive between Fourteen Mile
Road and Lahser Road (average daily traffic volume: 360)
The primary function of a major street is to connect county primary roads to local streets. The rapid
growth in Oakland County has caused major streets to function beyond their intended capacity. Some
streets under Village jurisdiction function as county primary streets. Thirteen Mile and Evergreen Roads
carry high traffic volumes, connect many communities, and serve as sub-regional traffic arteries.
Thirteen Mile Road is the major east-west roadway and the only through-route for east-west traffic
circulation across the Village. Evergreen Road is a route of choice for many commuters between the
residential areas north of the Village and the employment centers in Southfield.
The remaining local streets under Village control represent 44.30 miles of roadway. The local streets
provide road system access for most of the residential areas of the Village. All of the minor local streets
consist of one lane in each direction. The rights-of-way of these streets vary considerably.
Private Roads
The Village has more than a dozen private roads created through lot splits and development projects.
Most recently, Charrington Cross and Orchard Way have been constructed as private roads. Private roads
have historically been a maintenance problem for those who rely on them for access. Since property
owners on a private road expect the same level of services available to those who live on a dedicated and
improved public street and because emergency vehicles must be able to access all buildings, private road
standards established in the Zoning Ordinance require that new private roads meet most engineering
standards normally required of a dedicated public road. This ensures continual access and maintenance
comparable to that of a public roadway.
Natural Beauty Road
As described in the Natural Features section of the Master Plan, the curvilinear stretch of Evergreen Road,
between Beverly Road and Riverside Drive was designated as a Natural Beauty Road in 1984 under
Public Act 150 of 1970.
Traffic Accidents
Traffic problems in Beverly Hills are generally caused by the heavy vehicular load carried by the
roadways during prime driving hours. The number of traffic accidents in the Village decreased between
1996 and 2004. In fact, the number of traffic accidents has decreased at all of the selected intersections
between 1996 and 2004, except for 14 Mile and Evergreen Roads and 13 Mile and Greenfield Roads.
In 1996 there were 150 reported traffic accidents at the selected intersections in the Village; in 2004 there
were 124 reported accidents. The total number of accidents has decreased over the past decade. Table 14
shows the seven intersections with the greatest number of reported accidents in 1996 and 2004.
PAGE 20
Table 14:
Traffic Accidents at Selected Intersections, Beverly Hills 1996-2004
Intersection
1996
2004
% Change 1996-2004
13 Mile and Southfield
51
50
-1.9%
13 Mile and Evergreen
23
9
-60.9%
13 Mile and Lahser
39
28
-28.2%
Southfield and Beverly
19
12
-36.8%
14 Mile and Lahser
5
5
0%
14 Mile and Evergreen
1
4
300%
13 Mile and Greenfield
12
16
33.3%
Total
150
124
-17.3%
Source: Village of Beverly Hills Public Safety Department
Road and Public Right-of-Way Improvements
A primary contributing factor to growth is the availability of vacant land for development. The number of
dwellings expected to be located in a particular service area is a major factor influencing future
circulation decisions in a community. With approximately 1% of land classified as vacant, and barring
large increases in planned and zoned densities, a significant increase in total dwelling units or new
residents is not likely. As discussed in the socioeconomic section of this plan, the Village’s population is
projected to remain stable into the foreseeable future.
For the most part, the Village street system is developed. While a small segment of roads remain
unpaved, the vast majority of the roadways are paved with adequate drainage systems in place. Most of
these roads were constructed by developers with the construction costs borne by the initial property
owners as part of the purchase price of a home. Map G shows the development status of the Village road
system.
In Beverly Hills, with its mature street system, local government bears not only the cost of routine
maintenance, but also the costs of reconstruction. Available gas and weight transfer funds (Act 51) meet
normal maintenance costs; however, as the road system ages, Act 51 funding will not match the needs.
Expenditures for resurfacing and reconstruction become a major component and account for a significant
portion of the Village road budget.
Tri-Party Funding
Various funding sources must be used to undertake the extensive road improvements necessary within the
Village. One method of funding involves use of the Tri-Party Program. The RCOC administers this
special allocation generated from equal contributions from the RCOC, Oakland County Board, and local
municipalities. At present, funding is distributed annually to municipalities throughout Oakland County.
The amount allocated to each municipality is dependent upon a number of factors including population,
number of traffic accidents, and total miles of County roads. Local municipalities are responsible for
directing these funds to community road improvement projects. The Village does not typically spend its
allocation annually, but rather accumulates several years’ worth for larger road improvement projects.
PAGE 21
The Lahser Road-Riverview Drive intersection was also the site of a right-of-way stabilization and
drainage project funded through a joint effort by the RCOC and the Village. The Riverview Drive Culvert
Cleanup project was recently completed at the Rouge River crossing. Erosion control and bank
stabilization measures have been installed to reduce sedimentation of the River that causes obstruction of
the culvert at this location.
Village Road Millage
Since 2001, State funding has steadily decreased due to the slumping economy in Michigan, and without
these funds the Village will struggle to maintain roads. These costs have been supported by a contribution
from the Village’s charter millage of up to one mill annually. In addition, the Village budgets additional
funds for maintenance items on local streets such as concrete repairs, catch basins reconstruction and tree
trimming and removal.
Bridges
A total of five bridges are located within the Village. The bridges cross the Rouge River at various
locations. Bridges are located at Lahser, Thirteen Mile, Evergreen (two locations), and Riverside Drive.
In recent years, all bridges have been replaced, maintained and/or upgraded.
Transit and Paratransit
The Suburban Mobility Authority Regional Transportation (SMART) does provide direct large-bus
service to the Village of Beverly Hills. SMART links the Village with the public mass transportation
service available in the metropolitan area through regularly scheduled lines on Southfield Road and
Thirteen Mile Road. Major service lines are also available in surrounding communities on Woodward
and Twelve Mile Road in the City of Southfield. The service line routes for Beverly Hills are:

Southfield Road between 14 Mile Road and Northland Mall
Thirteen Mile Road and Evergreen Road - runs east to Woodward Avenue, then north to 14 Mile,
where service extends to the east on 14 Mile Road
Paratransit refers to forms of urban transportation provided by small, non-fixed-wheel vehicles designed
to meet individual needs through flexible scheduling and routing. In addition to the large-bus scheduled
routes, the Village is served by a Dial-A-Ride Transit (DART) small-bus service that is available
weekdays. The service is provided generally on-demand on a same day basis within the Beverly
Hills/Birmingham area and by an advanced reservation for trips outside the local service area. Any
resident may use the service. Reduced rates are available for disabled individuals and senior citizens.
Non-Motorized Transportation
Circulation for pedestrian traffic and other non-motorized transportation is provided throughout much of
the Village. The majority of sidewalks were constructed in the 1920's in the subdivisions on the east side
of the Village. The existing sidewalk system has been adequately maintained.
PAGE 22
FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS
Based upon all the existing conditions data presented in this chapter, the following key findings have been
established. These findings provide the basis for the vision statement, goals, and plan recommendations
in the following chapters.
▪
Beverly Hills is a residential community with single-family homes at low densities throughout
the Village. Residential densities generally increase from west to east, with lots ranging in size from
6,000 to 15,000 square feet east of Southfield Road to over 20,000 square feet west of Evergreen
Road. The existing large lots should be protected while the smaller, non-conforming lots require
further analysis.
▪
New residential development utilizes the cluster option development standards in the Zoning
Ordinance. Utilization of the cluster option as defined in the Zoning Ordinance allows for feasible
development of infill sites that had previously not been developed. The cluster option preserves open
space to ensure compatibility with the low density residential character of the Village.
▪
With less than 1% of land within the Village is classified as vacant, most land use changes
within the Village will require redevelopment of occupied sites. There are limited opportunities for
development on vacant land. Consequently, redevelopment or reuse of existing sites will constitute
the majority of development proposals presented to the Village.
▪
Public and quasi-public uses will likely continue to expand or intensify use of sites within the
Village. The impact of public and quasi-public expansions on the Village’s infrastructure is
significant, necessitating continuous coordination.
▪
Commercial and office development continues to be limited in the Village. It is important to
support existing businesses and allow some new development provided it is compatible with the
residential character of the community.
▪
Plan Municipal facilities and services to retain and attract families. The Village has a substantial
number of families and children. Thus, there is a continuing need for recreational opportunities within
the Village. In particular, playgrounds, schools, parks, and indoor recreation facilities and services,
such as facility maintenance, public safety, and recreation programs and events serve this sector of the
Village’s population. Also important is the need to provide linkages between schools, parks, and other
destinations. Sidewalks and pathways may be appropriate to connect groups in the existing system in
consideration of factors such as the character of the area, right-of-way availability, demonstrated
need, safety, and funding. Not only do sidewalks and pathways enable children to safely access
recreational facilities and schools, but pathways themselves also serve as recreational facilities for
pedestrians and those on bicycles, roller blades, and skate boards.
▪
Maintain and enhance the value of the Village housing stock. As previously noted, there is a trend
of significant private reinvestment into the housing stock. The Village should continue to encourage
and accommodate this trend of rehabilitation to existing residences.
▪
Good public policy emerges when the Village and public and private schools share plans. The
Village continues to encourage disclosure of the private schools’ development plans and proposed
improvements to their facilities. Such cooperation between the Village and private school
administration gives the Village the opportunity to offer insight regarding compatibility with
PAGE 23
surrounding land uses. This type of interaction fosters a healthy relationship with Village residents,
many of whom attend their institutions.
▪
The Village continues to monitor the status of municipal facilities and continues to upgrade
existing Village facilities and technology. Many Village facilities have been constructed or
improved during the past decade. All Village facilities are monitored to identify necessary
improvements and opportunities for upgrade.
▪
Current efforts to improve the quality of the Rouge River are showing signs of success. The
Rouge River is a significant resource that has been severely affected by development. The Village
has been a supporter of previous efforts to improve the quality of the river. Citizens and Village
leaders should continue to participate in the protection of the Rouge River and should work to
strengthen awareness of the river as a community resource.
▪
Douglas Evans and Hidden Rivers natural areas are protected to ensure the continuation of
these valuable natural resources. Deed restrictions limit development of the nature preserves for
recreational purposes. As infill sites continue to be developed within the Village, these permanently
preserved natural areas will increase in value as unique community assets.
▪
A comprehensive tree maintenance and replacement program is important to maintain and
enhance the Village’s residential character. The Parks and Recreation Board is taking strides to
enhance Beverly Park through maintenance of an on-site tree nursery. This program could be
expanded to include production of trees for planting at other locations throughout the Village.
▪
Extend future considerations for Village roadways beyond the routine geometrics of
engineering concerns. Focus should continue to be placed on reducing maintenance costs, extending
roadway life, addressing traffic circulation and public safety issues, and incorporating aesthetics for
improving the community image. With so many highly traveled roads under the control of the
Village, an opportunity for community image enhancement rests with the Village.
▪
When improved or reconstructed, streets that carry a higher traffic volume could be curbed
with gutters where feasible. This lessens maintenance costs and eliminates the unsightly appearance
of gravel shoulders. The preparation and installation of streetscapes that include additional
landscaping and beautification measures could be considered along the major traffic routes.
PAGE 24
CHAPTER 2
COMMUNITY VISION AND GOALS
INTRODUCTION
Beverly Hills is predominantly a residential community with high quality neighborhoods, facilities, and
amenities. This residential character is highly valued by Village residents. The following Community
Vision and Goal statements provide the foundation for the following chapters of this plan. The
Community Vision statement defines what the Village is trying to accomplish. Goals are identified as
more specific means of achieving the Vision for the Village. The Vision and Goals of this plan are
intended to be achieved by the recommendations of Chapters 3, 4, and 5.
COMMUNITY VISION
The Village of Beverly Hills will be a safe, aesthetically appealing, fiscally viable, family-oriented
community with excellent educational, social, recreational, and cultural opportunities fostering a
successful and diverse residential and business community with concern for ecological stewardship and
cooperation with other governmental bodies and agencies.
GOALS
Land Use

Maintain and protect the character, quality and value of residential neighborhoods.
Ensure public and institutional land uses meet the needs of residents and are compatible with the
character of adjacent neighborhoods.
Support the success, value, and improvement of commercial and office areas that is compatible with
the strong residential presence of the Village.
Community Facilities and Services

Provide quality, responsive community services in a fiscally responsible and efficient manner.
Maintain adequate park, open space, and recreational facilities for all Village residents.
Provide a reliable, well-maintained infrastructure system including water supply, sanitary sewer and
storm water management.
Circulation

Ensure that the circulation system is well maintained, safe, and sufficient to meet the needs of
residents and businesses.
Natural Features

Increase awareness and participation in the diverse ways to protect the natural environment.
Engage in a pro-active approach to protecting the quality of the natural environment in the Village.
PAGE 25
CHAPTER 3
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN
INTRODUCTION
The Future Land Use Plan for the Village is a guide to assist local, county, and regional agencies and
officials in decisions relating to day-to-day planning, zoning, land subdivision, and public improvement
issues.
From time to time, the Plan should be reviewed and, when necessary, revised to respond to
changing needs of the community.
Over the last twenty years, nearly one-half of the remaining vacant large lot parcels have been developed
with high-value residential dwelling units. Issues of preservation, maintenance, and redevelopment
remain the concerns of the Village and are addressed in this Master Plan update.
Economic, political, environmental, and social climates are constantly changing and these changes impact
the built environment. To be effective, a Master Plan must be based on sound planning principles that
encourage a workable and feasible plan. The Future Land Use Map and supporting text that follow are
based on the fundamental planning principles summarized below:

Long-Range: The Future Land Use Plan identifies and responds to existing and anticipated issues
affecting the Village into the future.

Comprehensive: In the Plan, all major types of land use appropriate to the Village are considered.

Generalized: To avoid detailed or site-specific issues of minor consequence in the context of the
Village Master Plan, the Future Land Use Plan incorporates broad principles of land interrelationship(s). The Plan is not a zoning ordinance.

Regional: Conditions beyond Village boundaries that may have an impact on the Village are
considered in preparation of the Future Land Use Plan.
Identified on Map D, Future Land Use, are generalized areas for development consistent with patterns of
existing land use, limitations due to floodplain areas, future population projections, and the community
vision and goals. Following is a description of each land use classification shown on the Future Land Use
map. These land use designations and their respective characteristics serve as guidelines for questions of
proposed zoning district changes, land subdivisions, redevelopment projects and lot splits.
PAGE 26
RESIDENTIAL USES
Single-Family Residential
With the vast majority of the land area of the Village presently developed for single-family residential
purposes or dedicated for rights-of-way, the pattern of the suburban "bedroom community" is firmly
established in the Village of Beverly Hills. An important aspect of this development pattern is the broad
choice of lot sizes, neighborhood densities, and natural features offered in various areas of the Village.
Generally, the Plan continues the pattern of the smallest parcels (highest densities) located east of
Southfield Road, while the largest lots (lowest densities) are located adjacent to the Rouge River, west of
Evergreen Road, and along Lahser Road.
The categorization of single-family residential parcels in the Village of Beverly Hills into High, Medium,
Low, and Estate Density districts on the Future Land Use map is an acknowledgment of existing
development patterns and an affirmation that retention of these stable neighborhood environments is an
essential component of the character of the Village. The single-family residential categories, Estate, Low,
Medium, and High Density are further defined below:
High Density Single-Family: A High Density Single-Family area is identified on the Future Land Use
map and includes all residential area in the Village east of Southfield Road. Lots generally range in area
between 6,000 and 12,000 square feet, with lot widths between 55 and 80 feet. The planned density for
neighborhood blocks range between 3.5 and 7.0 dwelling units per acre. As described in Chapter 1, many
of the lots in this area do not meet the minimum lot size and setback requirements of the current zoning
designations. To prevent future burden on homeowners and Village administration, and to encourage
housing reinvestment, further research is necessary to develop a specific approach to reducing the number
of lots and structures classified as nonconforming.
Medium Density Single-Family: The area in the Village planned Medium Density on the Future Land
Use map generally includes: single-family residential parcels west of Southfield Road, east of Waltham
and Riverside Drive, and north of Chelton. The majority of lots in the Medium Density Single-Family
Residential areas are 12,000 to 16,000square feet in area, with lot widths up to 100 feet or more. Density
of residential units in this category falls between 2.6 and 3.6 dwelling units per acre. While not as
prevalent as the High Density area, there are some nonconforming lot and setback situations to research.
In addition to large lots accommodating larger homes than the High Density Area, this Medium Density
Area contains a curvilinear street pattern, unlike the more regular grid pattern east of Southfield Road.
Low Density Single-Family: The areas in the Village planned for Low Density Single-Family include:
(1) single-family residential parcels west of Waltham and along Evergreen, (2) single-family residential
parcels west of Lahser Road, and (3) single-family parcels between Thirteen Mile Road and Beverly Park.
These districts include additional subdivisions on both sides of Lahser and Evergreen Roads. Lots
generally range in area from 16,000 to 25,000 square feet, with a density between 2.6 and 1.7 dwelling
units per acre. The street network is similar to the curvilinear pattern found in the Medium Density
residential area; however, cul-de-sacs are also prevalent in those areas.
Estate Density Single-Family: The Estate Density district is generally bounded by Fourteen Mile Road
to the north, Evergreen Road to the east, the Village boundary to the south, and Lahser Road to the west.
Also, included in this district are several distinctive, large parcels (2-3 acres) fronting on the east side of
Lahser Road, south of Fourteen Mile Road. The lot sizes in the Estate Density district are the largest in
the Village, generally ranging from 25,000 square feet upward to several acres in area.
PAGE 27
A contributing factor to the low density character of this particular district is the presence of the Rouge
River, which diagonally traverses the heart of the area. The wetlands and flood hazard areas adjacent to
the river have minimized the intensity of construction, leaving deep single-family parcels and large nature
preserves along its edge. The secluded, more natural environment in this portion of the Village is further
enhanced by the curvilinear street patterns, and the character of the Evergreen Road right-of-way.
Although this thoroughfare is heavily traveled in communities to the south, the character it assumes
through the Village of Beverly Hills is an essential asset to the retention of the residential environment in
the Village.
Multi-Family Residential
Location of multi-family residential development in a community is determined by a number of factors:
availability of necessary utilities, access, compatibility with surrounding uses, and availability of services
and community facilities. Generally, multi-family land uses are "transitional uses" located between
single-family residential and commercial uses.
Because of the established single-family residential character of the Village, including the pattern of
locating single-family lots with frontage on collector or arterial streets, it is difficult to locate multi-family
residential developments without negatively impacting single-family uses. The impacts of higher density
multiple-family uses with the required parking lots, increased pedestrian and vehicular traffic, collective
solid waste storage, and intensified noise is not suitable for parcels that may otherwise have the required
location, access, utilities and area.
There are a number of public and quasi-public uses throughout the Village (schools, churches, Road
Commission building, etc.). If all or a portion of those sites are ever redeveloped, the new use should be
similar to or compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhoods in terms of type and density.
Guidelines for Redevelopment in and Adjacent to Residential Areas
New Neighborhood Development: While opportunities are limited, the Village may experience a few
small scale neighborhood development projects in the future. The following design guidelines are general
parameters for the future development or redevelopment of residential areas of the Village. These general
guidelines should be coordinated with zoning ordinance requirements for the appropriate district.

Although site design flexibility is encouraged, the overall permitted density should not exceed that
permitted by the Zoning Ordinance for the appropriate zoning classification.

Careful protective measures should be mandated in project designs to insure the continued viability of
existing residences and be sensitively folded into redevelopments.

Redevelopment should occur through the assembly and combination of parcels into larger sites. If a
proposed development requires direct circulation access points to a major or intermediate
thoroughfare, the site development area or combination of lots shall be a minimum area specifically
determined to avoid excessive curb cuts.

Interior streets can be public, or if private then constructed in a manner equal to public standards, with
adequate access easements granted to abutting parcels in order to minimize the need for access points
to major, intermediate, and/or collector streets.
PAGE 28

All proposed redevelopment projects should clearly demonstrate that remaining adjacent parcels can
be redeveloped in a practical and coordinated manner.

The Village may require extraordinary on-site and off-site improvements such as constructing
utilities, streets or providing easements to the property line in order to permit future convenient
connections to adjacent parcels.

The protection of undeveloped parcels should be given careful design attention in all land division,
land assembly, or redevelopment plans.

As much as possible, physical connections should be created between projects in order to insure
economy, efficiency of design, convenience for the residents and provide access options for
emergency and service vehicles.

All site features, including circulation, parking, building orientation, landscaping, lighting, utilities,
common facilities and open space shall be coordinated with adjacent properties.

Residential areas developed under the cluster option must maintain densities permitted in the zoning
district, but may concentrate units to preserve larger areas of open space.
New Single Family Home Development: Where a home is being significantly expanded or redeveloped,
it is recommended that design guidelines be established to ensure that homes, attached garages, or
detached accessory structures are compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood.
Compatibility with surrounding homes should be assessed in terms of elements such as home orientation,
garage orientation, scale of structure(s), general structure location on the lot, and the balance of home
versus garage. Due to the diversity of home design styles throughout the Village, it is difficult to regulate
architectural design, thus emphasis should be placed on these general elements set forth in the paragraph.
NON-RESIDENTIAL LAND USES
Office
As a predominately single-family residential community in close proximity to concentrated office centers
outside the of its borders, the Village of Beverly Hills encourages office land uses that are smaller in scale
and less likely to generate high traffic volumes and noise levels which may adversely impact adjacent
residential neighborhoods. The Plan identifies several such office uses throughout the Village; in all cases
such uses are located on a major or intermediate thoroughfare, allowing good vehicular access.
Low-density, non-medical, office uses, such as those of other professionals or local service firms, may
provide an effective land use between major or intermediate thoroughfares and residential areas. When
office uses abut single-family residential parcels, the treatment of the interface must ensure effective
visual and noise separation to allow adequate protection for the single-family neighborhood environment.
Low density office uses, when combined with effective buffers and aesthetic site improvements, may be
designed to have minimal impact on surrounding land if the uses, hours of operation and vehicle volumes
are compatible with single-family uses.
PAGE 29
Commercial
The Commercial land use category includes those retail and service facilities that are neighborhoodoriented, as well as those establishments that serve the larger region. Site locations for commercial
establishments are typically dependent on high accessibility and visibility, and such uses have the
potential to generate high vehicular traffic volumes, glare, heat, noise, and often undesirable visual
confusion. Therefore, proximity to single-family residential land uses is of paramount concern.
To minimize the negative effects of commercial uses on a community, location of such businesses is
planned to be restricted to a concentrated district and not to be permitted to spread and evolve into
commercial strips. Potential negative impacts on residential districts are further planned to be minimized
by providing transitional land uses that serve as a buffer between single-family residential and
commercial uses. In addition, the mix of related retail and service uses could be enhanced if commercial
areas are limited to redevelopment for commercial uses.
Given the total land area of the Village, the population projections, and the proximity of commercial
businesses inside and outside Village boundaries, the need for additional area for commercial
development is limited. The Plan designates two areas for commercial uses. One area is located on the
west side of Southfield Road, from Thirteen Mile Road north to Gould Court. This area accommodates
very limited northern expansion of the existing commercial area. The second planned area for
commercial uses is situated at the northwest intersection of Thirteen Mile and Greenfield Roads.
Public
Included in this land use category are municipal offices, parks and nature preserves, public schools, and
public recreation facilities. The map identifies each of these uses in the Village of Beverly Hills with a
symbol indicating their particular function. If at a future date the Birmingham Public School Board
considers selling or disposing of school property, the Village should receive initial notification of this
action and be given an opportunity to consider community recreation and open space needs through
public discussion and citizen participation. The use of all public sites is generally planned for residential
consistent with the adjacent areas.
Quasi-public
Churches, private schools, and private recreation uses comprise this category, and as with public uses, are
all located within single-family residential neighborhoods. Additional accessory uses and redevelopment
or reuse of these sites is planned to be limited to a similar compatible institutional use or a single-family
residential use of compatible density with surrounding neighborhoods.
Utility
Several parcels on the Future Land Use map are designated for public utilities in the Village. These
parcels are designated for the provision of essential services, specifically sub-station and pumping
facilities supporting transmission and local distribution lines. The use of these parcels is not intended for
other components of utility operations such as service generation, business offices or storage yards.
Current facilities should not generate high traffic volumes or unacceptable noise levels or odor, and are
providing an essential public service. Their location adjacent to residential and non-residential districts is
therefore generally acceptable. However, care should be taken to ensure adequate screening, buffering,
setbacks, and design to prevent negative visual impacts on the public view or on residential, parks and
natural areas. Construction in utility zones is subject to site plan procedures of the Village.
PAGE 30
CHAPTER 4
CIRCULATION PLAN
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Circulation Plan is to protect the Village from the negative impacts of vehicular traffic
while maintaining the circulation needs of the Village, the surrounding communities and the region as a
whole. Since the Village is developed, the vehicular circulation system is established. The focus of the
Plan is on maintaining the current service level and developing solutions to existing problems.
COUNTY ROADS
Certain Village roads are under the jurisdiction of the Road Commission for Oakland County (RCOC).
Routine maintenance responsibilities and planning activities for these roads are administered by the
County. The Village has significant input into improvement and renovation projects on these roads
through the financial cooperation agreements that the RCOC and Village negotiate at the time a project is
proposed. This cooperative effort will be important to continue into the future to ensure that the Village is
not negatively impacted by increases in traffic volumes and road improvements in the region. The
following roads are under the jurisdiction of the RCOC:

Lahser Road
Southfield Road
Greenfield Road
Fourteen Mile Road (from Southfield Road to eastern Village limits)
ROAD IMPROVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
As the Village looks to the future, the following recommendations are provided for the streets in the
Village. These recommendations are organized by their State Act 51 Classifications noted in Chapter 1
and are illustrated on Map E Circulation Plan.
County Primary Roads (Greenfield Road, Southfield Road, Lahser Road and segments of Fourteen
Mile Road): As heavily traveled corridors through the community, County Primary Roads serve as ‘front
doors’ to the Village and leave an impression about the community. In the Village’s efforts to coordinate
any future road improvements with RCOC, it will be important to provide input on the aesthetic
appearance and safety of these roads. There are many ways that a road can positively reflect the image
of a community such as enhanced landscaping, a boulevard, decorative street lighting, and upgraded
directional signage. As part of the Master Plan process, the Village has noted an interest in continuing
such improvements through the preparation of a corridor plan for Southfield Road. Of particular note is
the desire to study and identify strategies to improve the overall aesthetic of this corridor, as well as
implementation of access management techniques to improve safety. The Village has made great strides
in improving vehicle safety throughout the community via the adoption of access management
requirements. These should continue to be enforced and updated as needed.
Major Streets: The following are major streets in the Village:

Thirteen Mile Road
Beverly Road
PAGE 31
CHAPTER 4– CIRCULATION PLAN

Fourteen Mile Road (west of Evergreen Road and a small segment west of Southfield Road)
Pierce Road
Riverside Drive
Norchester Drive
Evergreen Road
A continuous route along Bellevine Trail, Hampton, and Hampstead Drive between Fourteen Mile
Road and Lahser Road
Due to the presence of many homes along these routes, the Village must continue to reinforce their desire
to protect the residential character along these Major Streets. Therefore, road improvements, such as road
widening, must be closely monitored to avoid incompatible changes. Effective methods to calm, or slow,
traffic speeds should be used, where necessary, along major streets that traverse through residential areas.
Methods could include speed tables, small medians and other physical improvements that remind
motorists it is a residential area and to use caution. Multiple stop signs or signals are not viewed as
effective traffic calming methods. The intent is to maintain the safety and character of the area.
Specifically, Pierce Road, Riverside Drive, Norchester Drive, Bellevine Trail, Hampton Drive,
Hampstead Drive, and Beverly Road are more residential in character in comparison to the other Major
Streets.
Village Local Streets: The balance of the public street system within Beverly Hills is classified as
Village local streets. Their residential character and quality should continue to be protected. These roads
are planned to serve the residential uses that abut them and provide the connection through collector
streets to the thoroughfares. They also support on-street parking in many areas. The width and design of
Village local streets must continue to accommodate existing and future traffic flow and on-street parking
where appropriate.
Private Roads: There are a number of private roads within the Village. Private roads are easements that
are privately owned and maintained and function to provide access to individual lots or sites and linkages
to collector, intermediate, and major thoroughfares. While the Village is not responsible for maintaining
such streets, the Village should continue to require that private roads be developed to meet Village
engineering standards.
REPAIRS AND RECONSTRUCTION FINANCING
The major concern for the continued operation of an adequate Village circulation system is the provision
of funds to meet the costs of extended maintenance, renovation, and reconstruction of the street system.
The detailed road study commissioned by the Village in 1997 reveals that the total cost of required repairs
on all Village streets exceeds $5.2 million. Current funding sources were not sufficient to meet these
needs. In response, Village residents voted to approve a community-wide tax levy that would enable the
Village to undertake road repairs on a pay-as-you go basis over 11 years. As this time frame will
conclude in 2009, other funding sources will need to be explored as on-going maintenance needs arise.
All roads within the Village should be required to meet approved engineering and design standards. This
Master Plan recommends the paving of gravel streets as abutting residents petition the Council for the
improvement. Costs related to the improvement of such streets should be borne by the benefiting property
owners.
PAGE 32
CHAPTER 4– CIRCULATION PLAN
TRAFFIC FLOW IMPROVEMENTS
Since the last Master Plan, the Village has adopted access management requirements for all nonresidential development projects. These standards will help to maintain, if not improve, traffic flow along
main routes. These standards must be consistently enforced and updated as needed to keep pace with
changing conditions and new traffic concerns. Generally, these standards address the following:

Vehicle queuing requirements should be taken into account and dedicated areas should be sufficient
to hold the anticipated number of vehicles;

Joint access to parking areas can improve circulation within neighboring sites and reduce the
generation of short trips on main roads by vehicles;

Spacing of ingress/egress points should be sufficient to avoid potential interference with traffic
flows on adjoining streets;

Traffic turning conflicts should be minimized through directional or restrictive posting;

Site distances should be adequate and unobstructed for motorists;

Acceleration, deceleration, and turning lanes should be installed wherever possible to remove
turning vehicles from the main traffic flow;

Access points should use all reasonably available access frontage in order to further the distribution
of traffic flows.
PAGE 33
CHAPTER 5
COMMUNITY FACILITIES PLAN
INTRODUCTION
The provision of adequate community facilities is important to the development of a community. The
parks, schools, and municipal facilities have a direct relation to the desirability and quality of life in a
community. Although the land area of the Village is almost fully developed, pressure to increase,
improve or modify these kinds of services is likely in order to maintain this quality of life.
Limited federal and state funding, grant programs, loan programs, and revenue sharing funds place most
of the financing responsibility at a local level. Therefore, the Village must consider a variety of different
financing options such as user fees, Village property tax revenues, volunteers, public/private partnerships,
or other means. In addition, the consideration of any new facility or improvements to existing facilities
should be studied prior to approval. The Village will continue to take a pro-active approach and determine
community needs through a variety of means such as surveys, website polls, and public meetings, which
could provide the Village with a strong basis for decision making.
RECREATION FACILITIES
Beverly Park is the largest and most prominent open recreation space area within the Village. The
Village Council adopted the Beverly Park Master Plan in 1998 with the assistance of the Park and
Recreation Board. The purpose of this Plan is to provide guidance for redesigning and upgrading
recreational facilities within Beverly Park. Several of these recommended improvements have been
completed. The Beverly Park Master Plan should continue to serve as the guide for improvements.
School sites are important in meeting the Village’s recreational needs, especially on the east side of the
community. The Village should continue to work closely with the School District to identify ways for
improving recreational opportunities on school sites and to ensure that recreational needs continue to be
met in the event that school sites are no longer available.
The Village currently has no plans for acquiring additional public open space. The Village Council,
Planning Board, and Park and Recreation Board should continue to work together to address future
recreation needs. Other ways to satisfy recreation/open space needs should be studied and implemented,
including public/private partnerships and requiring private recreation facilities and open space in
conjunction with new cluster developments.
UTILITIES
One of the most costly community facilities projects facing the Village is the improvement and/or
reconstruction of the Village sanitary and storm water system. These on-going improvements will
continue to have serious fiscal and physical impacts on the Village. Proper planning for these
expenditures in the form of a five-year capital improvements program or other plan is important to the
Village for accurate budget projections and for establishing expectations of residents.
PAGE 34
CHAPTER 5 COMMUNITY FACILITIES PLAN
MUNICIPAL FACILITIES AND SERVICES
As described previously in this document, the major municipal buildings are centrally located within the
Village at Thirteen Mile Road and Chelton Street. This site is easily accessible to Village residents. This
complex includes the Village Hall, the Public Works yard, Southfield Township offices, and the Public
Safety building.
At present, the Village Hall and Public Safety building adequately accommodate the Village’s service
needs. However, the Public Works yard, which is primarily utilized for storage of materials, is relatively
small and now fully utilized. Any increase in planned infrastructure maintenance and repair programs will
likely require the continued use of temporary storage facilities by contractors, with associated cost
implications for the Village.
The additional component to community services that is important in Beverly Hills is community
involvement and awareness. Every effort should be made in the coming years to keep pace with
technology and the desire for residents to easily access and understand information pertaining to Village
matters. As noted in Chapter 1, there are several tools available including office hours, newsletters,
public meetings, helpful brochures, and the Village web-site. The Village should continue to update and
upgrade information resources to increase community awareness of current events, regulations, policies,
procedures, and other data. Techniques to increase the ‘user-friendliness’ of material will increase
community involvement in decisions, activities, and events, thus fostering a greater sense of community
in the Village.
INSTITUTIONAL FACILITIES
The extensive number of school sites and places of worship in the Village require the consideration of a
long-range land use planning policy for two primary reasons. The first relates to expansions to these
facilities. As enrollment or membership to these facilities increases, expansions to structures and parking
lots will be needed. In addition, as needs change, multiple purposes for the buildings may be desired. An
example of this is that many churches offer after school programs, recreation opportunities, day care, and
other weekly operations beyond their typical Sunday services. It is important for the Village to promote
the expanding services offered because they will enrich the lives of residents and can offer services the
Village may not be able to accommodate. However, these changes should be closely monitored through
site plan and special land use approvals to ensure there aren’t any negative impacts to surrounding land
uses or the transportation system.
The second situation to consider is the redevelopment of a portion, or all, of a school or institutional site.
As development pressure increases due to rising property values and diminishing undeveloped land, the
Village may face proposals to convert institutional sites to new uses such as single family residential,
multiple family residential, or even a non-residential uses. In these cases, reuse must be compatible with
the predominant land use pattern of surrounding parcels. For example, if the site is located within a
residential neighborhood, single family homes are appropriate.
PAGE 35
CHAPTER 5 COMMUNITY FACILITIES PLAN
PRIVATE FACILITIES
As indicated in Chapter 1, many recreational and social opportunities are provided by non-public entities
such as swim clubs and other types of athletic clubs. As private entities, residents are provided these
services through membership or user fees. Because these facilities provide valuable recreation
opportunities that currently cannot be offered by the Village, these uses should be encouraged in any way
possible.
NATURAL FEATURES
As summarized in Chapter 1, there are a number of valuable natural resources within the Village
including the Rouge River, nature preserves, wildlife habitat and woodlands. Continued effort to protect
the integrity and long-term viability of these features is a priority for the Village. Likely components of
this effort should include increasing public awareness, education about best preservation practices, new
preservation regulations or policies, cooperation with regional agencies such as Oakland County, and the
Rouge River Watershed Council, and continued efforts to maintain and replace trees throughout the
Village.
PAGE 36
CHAPTER 6
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The purpose of the Master Plan is to give guidance to Village decision-makers. The types of decisions
that the Plan can influence are discussed below, along with the tools and techniques available for the
implementation of the Plan and its proposals.
ZONING ORDINANCE AND GENERAL ORDINANCES
The Village Zoning Ordinance is the principal tool for the implementation of the Plan. The purpose of
zoning is to assist in orderly development and growth. It is also used to protect property values and
investments. Because of the impact it can have on the use of land and related services, zoning must be
related to the Master Plan. Through the process of Zoning Ordinance amendments, site plan review,
special approvals; and flexible tools such as the cluster option, the Village can implement the Future Land
Use Plan, Circulation Plan, and Community Facilities Plan. The adoption of building codes and property
maintenance codes that are part of the Village general ordinance can also protect the long-term value of
property and implement the Master Plan.
INTER-COMMUNITY LIAISON
The planning process will require close liaison with surrounding cities and villages, Southfield Township,
Oakland County, the Southeast Michigan Council of Government, and the Birmingham School Board.
The importance of inter-community cooperation has been strengthened by the amendments to the
Municipal Planning Act which requires notification and involvement from adjoining communities and the
County in developing the Master Plan. The Village has followed these requirements and welcomed input
on planning policies from these jurisdictions.
PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING AND SUPPORT
The necessity of citizen participation and understanding of the planning process and the Plan cannot be
over-emphasized. A carefully organized public education program is needed to organize and identify
public support in any community development plan. The lack of citizen understanding and support can
limit implementation of the planning proposals. The Village must emphasize the reasons for the planning
program and encourage citizen participation in the planning process.
CONTINUOUS PLANNING AND COOPERATION
The Planning Board will continue to review the Master Plan on a regular basis and analyze issues as they
arise. This effort should include periodic information gathering, data analysis, public involvement, and
consideration of alternatives. Finally, the Board can suggest feasible solutions for the Village Council’s
consideration. Since the Master Plan and subsequent implementation efforts will require involvement
from the Village Council, Planning Board, Zoning Board of Appeals, Park and Recreation Board and
other Village bodies, it is crucial that on-going communication, joint meetings, and cooperation occur.
PAGE 37