The meeting was called to order at 8:00 PM with Mayor McLallen presiding.


Council pledged allegiance to the flag.


ROLL CALL: Council Members Crawford (present) Mason (present), Mitzel (present), Pope (present), Schmid (present), Toth (present) and Mayor McLallen (present)


Present (7) Absent (0)




ALSO PRESENT: Edward S. Kriewall - City Manager

David Fried - City Attorney

Tony Nowicki - Director of Public Services

Dan Davis - Director of Parks & Recreation

Geraldine Stipp - City Clerk








Councilman Pope said he would like to add an Item #13 which would be Vistas notice of a motion to reconsider.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Toth


That the agenda be approved as amended.


Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried




James Korte, Shawood Lake, said two weeks ago he watched an Elm Court resident drag tree limbs across the ice and dump them in the bulrushes on city property on the backside of Lakeshore Park. Mr. Korte immediately got with the building department and Nancy McKernan immediately got Terry Morrone and they went out to the location. He said there was an investigation and there was new snow, obvious foot prints and drag marks. Mr. Korte said he has been told that there is nothing that the city can do to remove the brush and debris that has been dumped on the backside of the park in Shawood Lake; and that is unacceptable. He said if our wetlands ordinances and laws are so weak that they allow the dumping of that rotting brush that means anyone in this city may legally dump the brush into any wetland without reprisal. He said he was sure if it happened in the nicest subdivisions somebody would do something about it. He said he was very irate over this and letters went to the city. Mr. Korte said if this was not cleaned up by the Pelkies, the rental unit on Elm Court, then he would pull it out of there and personally bring it to and dump it on the Civic Center lawn. He said if that debris is legal to be dumped in Shawood Lake it is obviously legal to be dumped anywhere in this city. He said that was an awful way to get things done but time and time again he brings things to Council and nothing happens.


Mr. Korte said either someone is lying to him at the city level or we have severe problems with our wetlands. He said it is not right morally or ethically to dump anything in those areas. He said someone had to look into this because it will be removed.


Mayor McLallen asked Mr. Kriewall to please note.


Warren Jocz said that tonight Council was scheduled to vote on whether or not to approve the preliminary engineering service contract with JCK for the proposed widening of Ten Mile Road to five lanes. He asked that as Council reflects on their vote to please consider these comments:


"One would assume that by approving $285,000 of taxpayers funds to conduct an engineering feasibility study of a major road improvement project that there was obviously a detailed engineering study which indicated a need for such corrective actions. As you are aware no such study has ever been performed. In place of comprehensive analysis the selection of Ten Mile Road for road improvement was done based on a perceived need as well as a single statistic obtained from the City of Novi Master Plan for Land Use. Even this statistic is overstated by 68% as compared to the most recent information released by SEMCOG. Therefore, how can you justify the expenditure of taxpayer money void of definite need. He asked Council to name a successful business that develops a new product without first determining the need for it in todays market. He said that by approving this contract Council's decision would be based on speculation not fact. Mr. Jocz said even more troubling than this, however, is the mind set by which this proposed project is being pursued. He said every press release from the Department of Public Service begins "briefly the project consists of widening the existing roadway to five lanes". The feasibility assessment phase has not even begun and yet in the minds of nearly every city official the foregone conclusion is that Ten Mile Road will be five lanes wide. He said with this type of thinking how thorough do you think the alternative solutions will be investigated. Mr. Jocz asked where in the project breakdown does one find the topic of alternatives to a five lane proposal; the answer lies in the definition of environmental impact studies. He quoted "such studies evaluate various alternatives to the proposed five lane roadway. It also addresses project need and purpose along with environmental impacts." With that definition in mind review JCK's projected cost break down. JCK has budgeted only $12,450 for environmental topics and this sum is only 4.3% of the total approved engineering operation budget. Think about that only 4.3% of the total feasibility budget is to schedule and look at alternative solutions and environmental impact studies. This tragically small amount compares to $45,000 and $58,000 which are 12.6% and 19% respectively of the total predicted budgets as submitted by two other engineering firms for performing the same task. He asked how thoroughly can alternative solutions and environmental impacts be assessed on $12,000. He said with the city's mind set already convinced that 5 lanes is the solution, $12,000 is probably sufficient. He said that could afford coffee room discussion on the topic but it would not afford engineering evaluations.


Mr. Jocz said in conclusion he was asking and stating that the city had no engineering data which would support initiating such a road widening project using taxpayer money. He said the city cannot accurately assess alternative solutions under the proposed contract but they do have the ability to change that contract. He said it was Council's function to make sure that all options were equally pursued and not given just a cursory glance to satisfy the letter of the contract rather than the intent. He asked Council to remember that the road travels through a residential neighborhood and it divides a well established subdivision and he asked Council to act accordingly.


Jim Metz, Garfield Road, said Wednesday night there was a meeting with the State of Michigan in regards to the wetlands that would be developed off of Garfield Road. He said their proposal was to put in a blacktop road to carry the trucks that would be going up and down. He said they have no intentions of firming the base or any drainage to help with the road in the long run. He said the concern of the residents on Garfield Road is that it is nice to have a blacktop road to hold the dust down but if we are going to be asked to put up with a year's worth of construction going up and down the road with an estimated 8,000 trucks and 400,000 cubic yards of dirt then this road should be built properly right from the beginning. He said then in the long term they would have something to compensate them for what they would go through for the next year.


Mr. Metz said the second thing brought up at the meeting was the speed limit which the residents would like reduced to 25 especially during the construction. He said there would be a lot of trucks and it is designed to start in June when the children are out of school. Mr. Metz said there are approximately 25 children between the ages of 3 and 10 in this area.


Mr. Metz said the third concern is they don't know whether this is going to be turned into a park area. He said they couldn't get a definite answer from the representative of Novi who was at the meeting. He said they would like to know if they would eventually end up with a community park. He said if so they would be stuck with a dirt road not able to handle the traffic and the City of Novi would end up having to pave it. He said if we take this into consideration and do it properly now the cost would be split up very nicely. He said there is also a proposal for the end of Eight Mile and Beck for a school. He said whether it goes in or not he didn't know but they thought it would be good to be thinking long term. If we are going to do this road let's do it right the first time.


Laura Lorenzo said she was addressing the Council as an individual Planning Commissioner and the motion maker regarding the Vistas of Novi project. She said she has supported the project because she viewed it as a better, more innovative and preferable alternative over the approved Sandstone project. She said the recent clarifications regarding the total commercial component and the petitioners present position and request to drastically reduce the no load road was causing her great concern and causing her to question her future level of support for this project.


Ms. Lorenzo said the no load road as intended in her motion and recommended has been in her opinion accurately represented by the Planning Commission Flash Flood that was provided to Council, the contract drafted by the City Attorneys and by Commissioner Glen Bonaventura at a previous Council meeting. She said that she believed that the no load road, as recommended with no units, is a very critical element of this project. She said it brings the Vistas proposal into compliance with the basic intent and required findings of the PUD Ordinance which speaks to the protection and conservation of natural resources and states that "the proposed development shall create a minimum disturbance to natural features and land forms."


Ms. Lorenzo said the reduction of the residential units may very well bring the Vistas of Novi into compliance with the density calculation requirements recently clarified by the City Attorney and Mr. Brandon Rogers.


Ms. Lorenzo said it would preserve a greater portion of a high quality woodland eco-system within a development that has obliterated a quality woodland in Phase I. She said in that sense the no load road serves as compensation for that loss. She said for these reasons she urged Council to maintain the no load road as recommended by the Planning Commission and the woodlands consultants.


Bob McKay, President of Subdivision #2 Willowbrook commented on the Consent Agenda Item #7, Ten Mile Road agreement. He said in September the solicitation of bids from four contractors brought a bid from JCK in the amount of $284,000 which included $19,000 in profit. He said today he found that in the memorandum for this agreement, this profit had been raised from $19,000 to $25,000 and he was wondering how and what they did to reduce the contract provisions to extract more profit out of the contract without reducing the overall cost. He asked if the $6,000 was better spent in additional profit to the contractor than it is in maybe checking out the woodlands and having the environmental impact statement made a little more clear and better discussed.


Resident of Novi living on Ten Mile Road, said she thought the environmental part of this JCK proposal was something that she would like them to spend some time on. She said she has a terrific noise level at her home right now. She said she did not have a large front yard and if a five lane highway goes in they will not have much of a yard at all and the noise level will be louder. She said on Nine Mile and Meadowbrook Road there are berms to reduce the noise level. She said there won't be any room for a berm in her front yard to hold the noise down. She said between the traffic and the noise and the speed limit she felt her house would be almost intolerable to live in. She said the sidewalk across the street from her carries many children and families who walk and bike ride and if a five lane highway goes in these families will not be safe to walk there.


She said she didn't think Council should trade a walk around Town Center that they seem to be striving for and diverting traffic for on Grand River/Novi Road area. She said she didn't think Council should neglect the people that are here that also helped develop this community. She didn't think that the residents should be forgotten or put in jeopardy where Novi families could not enjoy it while people from outside come in and enjoy the Town Center.


Virginia Swinkonas, Ten Mile Road resident, was also concerned about the widening of Ten Mile Road. She said 4 or 5 years ago when the sidewalks were to be put in there was a representative from the City of Novi who came to speak to the Ten Mile residents. She said they said one of the purposes of putting in the sidewalk was because it was going to lead to the Civic Center, Library and the High School. She said it was going to be utilized and they wanted all the traffic going to the Civic Center and the Library. She said they said on the other side of Ten Mile Road there would possibly be a bike path. She said a friend of hers on Meadowbrook was told the same thing. She said, therefore, all of these sidewalks and bike paths would be going towards the center of our Community. She said they have thoroughly enjoyed the sidewalks because now we are able to bike or walk to our neighbors from one subdivision to another. She said they are now a community that is communicating. She said if the widening happens the sidewalks will have to go and they will be isolated and will not be able to walk over to the next subdivision. She said it will take away their community living.


Ms. Swinkonas said the residents of Ten Mile Road asked when they put in the sidewalks what happened if the road was widen and they were told it wasn't a problem and it wasn't going to happen. She said now whoever has a vision of planning Novi their vision is not very long. She said they have already changed and may take away the sidewalks that are already paid for. She said this is not a road you're putting in; it is a highway and her children will no longer be able to enjoy anything on Ten Mile Road. She thought that they are the community and if Council is worried about people going from Farmington to South Lyon they are not the people that are living in Novi and spending their money.


Ann Marie Jocz, Ten Mile Road, stated she was opposed to the widening of Ten Mile to five lanes for the issue of safety for all Novi residents who use Ten Mile. She said Ten Mile was never intended to be a major thoroughfare for east and west traffic. She asked why would the homes have been built so close to the road 30 years ago if it had been. She said she is the mother of 2 and uses the sidewalks daily to stroll, see neighbors and get ice cream cones from the Twist and Shake.


Ms. Jocz said there are 47 access points, driveways and streets, onto Ten Mile Road in a one mile area between Meadowbrook and Haggerty. She said the FHA publishes a recommended road speed based on the distances between driveways and for a typical section of Ten Mile between Haggerty and Meadowbrook driveways should be 230 feet apart to provide safe access onto and off of Ten Mile at the current 45 miles per hour. Ms. Jocz said the average space between driveways now is 85 feet to 105 feet and the FHA recommended speed on Ten Mile at 20 to 25 MPH. She said because of the high number of access points the FHA predicts one accident every 12.5 days. She said both of these FHA report results and recommendations are published in the City of Novi Master Plan for Land Use. Ms. Jocz said the Institution of Transportation Engineers report the following principals which apply to traffic speed:


"Motorists govern their speed by existing road and traffic conditions rather than the posted speed. Traffic accidents are more related to the spread in speed from the highest to the lowest than the average speed. With the proposed widening of Ten Mile to five lanes the following traffic conditions will result:


More traffic will use Ten Mile. This traffic will tend to travel faster then the posted 45 miles per hour therefore increasing the spread in speed. The conclusion, more accidents with greater severity."


Ms. Jocz said using the Master Plan projections from the year 2010, the FHA charts predict one accident every 6.4 days. Novi residents will have to get from 0 to 50 MPH in less then 20 feet just to access from their driveways. She said even her children, restrained in their car seats will not be safe with these odds. The improvement of Ten Mile needed is not widening but speed reduction.


Susan Kelly, new Novi resident, said in all of her travels throughout the west side she had always been impressed with how Novi, Northville and Farmington had preserved the older sections of their cities. She said it was like they had decided to put their residents first and give their cities a family oriented feel. She said this was unlike Livonia where the city seemed to be one big five lane highway. She said these cities, Novi, Northville and Farmington have kept the quality of life and the property values up by making traffic slow down in the older residential areas. She felt that if the decision to widen Ten Mile to five lanes is finalized it would be a move that would be regretted by the whole city later. She said chopping the subdivision in half and making a walk to one of the small shops a dangerous outing for all of the kids and family south of Ten Mile is a bad mistake. She said it would also make the first impression by many of our visitors driving through our city one of pity like many of the streets in Livonia where unfortunate people have had their front yards eaten away by bigger roads just to get people to their destination 2 to 3 minutes faster. She said let's be pro-resident on this decision and preserve the future look of Novi. She asked Council to take a long hard look at this before making a decision that cannot be reversed later.


Patrick Logan, Ten Mile resident, said he liked Novi the way it was and he was violently opposed to the widening of Ten Mile.


Diane Osgood, 40693 Ten Mile Road, said Oakland County turned down the Novi request to widen Ten Mile because the tri-county roads would cost $4.3 billion dollars to repair existing roads. She said the Oakland County Road Commission said more than $9 billion in road improvements are needed including five unbudgeted projects, one of which is Haggerty Road between Eight and Nine Mile to be widened to five lanes at the cost of $3.5 million. She said it was then decided to go to the state with deeper pockets and SEMCOG was petitioned to see the need for this project. Ms. Osgood asked why the City Council was paying JCK $284,000 to do a feasibility study at this time. She said members of the Ten Mile Task Force would be happy to meet with the Council for free and share information that they have obtained that would prove that this decision is not in the interest of Novi residents. She asked Council to be visionaries for the city's interest and not blinded by someone's special interest.


Dennis Swinkonas, 40890 W. Ten Mile Road, said he was also opposed to the widening of Ten Mile Road. He said his issue was safety and presented the Council with debris from Ten Mile Road he referred to as "Exhibit A". He said it was something he picked up in his driveway and he had gotten 6 of these over the last couple of years plus truck mud flaps. He said he has a fenced in yard and they have come over the fence off of Ten Mile Road. He said if this were to hit a baby in a stroller it could do some damage. He said if they can come that far now with the widening they would be in his windows.


Dave Gilliam, 24031 Glen Ridge, Willowbrook III, said he didn't live on Ten Mile but did live close enough to know that he did not want Ten Mile to become a five lane roadway. He said it seemed to him that the preliminary engineering agreement with JCK doesn't make sense from a traffic standpoint, and he didn't think the hard data supported the Council entering into that agreement.

He said he didn't think from a safety, noise or property value standpoint it made any sense. He said the other concern was if Council went ahead and authorized the preliminary engineering agreement he was afraid that this particular issue would gather a momentum in and of itself and then we would not be able to stop it.

He said he understood from a number of the City Administration that this particular project was one that was going to happen sooner or later and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it and that all we can hope to do is slow it down. He said that was troublesome to him as a citizen of the community for 10 1/2 years.


Mr. Gilliam said his concern was if the engineering agreement is entered into then the city would be on the hook for its 20% of the PE funds. He said once we get the 80% from the Federal Government, as far as the preliminary engineering study is concerned, there would be a real strong incentive for the snowball to continue and for the city to go along and not jeopardize the funding we have already received from Federal Government, the funding that has been committed for the project or possibly the risk it would pose to future projects from the city standpoint if we pulled the plug on this one. He suggested that the Council not enter into the agreement but if Council felt inclined to enter into the preliminary engineering agreement set this matter over for a public hearing. He said if the Council enters into the agreement he hoped they would have the courage to stand up and say enough is enough and pull the plug when they realize that this is not what the people of the City of Novi want.





1. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of 1/9/95, Special Meeting of 1/19/95, Special Meeting of 1/23/95, Regular Meeting of 1/23/95, Special Meeting of 1/28/95, Special Meeting of 1/30/95 and Special Meeting of 2/6/95


2. Resolution - Budget Amendment No. 95-6 - Library Fund


NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the following 1994-1995 budget amendment is authorized to provide for the additional funds needed for the payout of unused sick banks.











3. Resolution - Budget Amendment No. 95-7 - Computer Systems Upgrade





GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (Capital Outlay) $ 100,000


CONTINGENCIES (new balance $240,674) (100,000)


4. Award RFP for Network Infrastructure Upgrade to Ideal Technology Solutions in the amount of $130,984.00

5. Award bid for desktop computers to PC Teknar in the amount of


6. Approval of Revised Traffic Signal Cost Sharing Agreement - Grand River at Town Center Drive

7. Approval of Preliminary Engineering Agreement - Ten Mile Improvements, Novi Road to Haggerty Road - MDOT Third Party Agreement No. ND94-2611

8. Schedule Special Meeting to interview applicants for the

Library Board and the Computer Committee for Monday, March 20th at 6:30 PM

9. Approval of the renewal of Arcade Licenses for Town Center Cinema and Mr. B's Farm

10. Approval of new Arcade License for the Hilton Hotel

11. Readoption of Resolution recommending approval of Class C License - Vic-Eat, Inc.

12. Approval of Change Order No. 4 and final payment to B & V

Construction for SAD 132C, 133C, and 134C, Sandstone Special Assessment Districts

13. Resolution to add Iroquois Court to Act 51 list


WHEREAS, the City of Novi did acquire title to Iroquois Ct.


AND WHEREAS, it is necessary to furnish certain information to the State of Michigan to place this street within the City Local Street System for the purpose of obtaining funds under Act 51, P.A. 1951 as amended.




1. That the center line of said street as described in an attachment to the original minutes.


2. That said street is located within a City right-of-way and is under the control of the City of Novi.


3. That said street is a public street and is for public street purposes.


4. That said street is accepted into the City Local Street System.


14. Resolution - Adoption of Parks and Recreation Master Plan

15. Award bid for Aggregate Material to Hayball Transport, Inc.


Councilman Toth removed Item #14.

Councilman Pope removed Item #7

Councilwoman Mason removed Item #1 Minutes of 1/28/95 and Item #11

Councilman Crawford removed Item #1 Minutes of 1/19/95

Councilman Mitzel removed Item #1 Minutes of 1/9/95 and 1/30/95 and also Item #6


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That Items # 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15 and the remaining minutes in Item #1 be approved.


Yes (7) No (0) Motion approved





1. Request for Soil Mining and Filling Permit from MDOT for the M-5 Wetland Mitigation Project and request for waiver of

deposit and performance guarantee.


Mr. Fried, City Attorney, stated that the only thing that can come before the Council is the waivers. He said there has to be a public hearing on the grant of the permit and there has to be notice given to the public. He said that has not been done as yet so the only matter for consideration are the waivers.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That the waivers for the deposit and performance guarantee for MDOT on the M-5 Mitigation be approved.





Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Nowicki if he would clarify the comment that Garfield would be paved as earlier correspondence indicated that it would not be paved.


Mr. Nowicki, Director of Public Services, said initially they had attempted to have MDOT pave that full width paving in accordance with the City standards. He said the cost of the 1/2 mile of pavement was approximately $500,000 and that was rejected by MDOT. He said they had calculated what it would cost MDOT to do annual grading and cloriding of that road to maintain it in a condition that is passable and use those dollars to come up with a paving plan to put a hard surface down at the same cost. He said they conducted a cost benefit analysis and the intent is to put down an asphalt paving in order to reduce the dirt, mud and dust and make it quieter and easier on everyone. He said at the end of the project it would be evaluated by himself and MDOT to see if the road could be kept in place as it is or if it should be removed, pulverized, ground and reshaped.


Councilwoman Mason asked if it would be reshaped asphalt or dirt.


Mr. Nowicki said when it is ground and pulverized it is small like an aggregate and that would be used as the aggregate surface instead of a gravel road.


Councilwoman Mason said then it would always be paved.


Mr. Nowicki said no it depended on the condition of the road. He said if looking at the road after the life of the project and finding that there is significant base failures or other problems associated with drainage or whatever the case may be it may not be cost effective for the city to consistently maintain that road in a fully paved state. He said the state would come back, grind it up and it would be back to its original condition of an aggregate road.


Councilwoman Mason asked if it would ever be a park area and if the mitigation area would be where people would go.


Mr. Nowicki said the mitigation area is intended to be a passive recreational area that would eventually be deeded over to the City of Novi and be used for passive recreation. He said the wetland area would be required to have a conservation easement placed over it so there could be no development.


Councilwoman Mason stated, as the gentlemen said, then there will be traffic going through there all the time because it is a passive park.


Mr. Nowicki said he wasn't sure of the demand for a passive recreational area but it would be an ideal location for people to go out and watch birds and other types of wildlife.


Councilwoman Mason asked Mr. Nowicki to explain the end of the letter from MDOT where it said "furthermore MDOT requests a waiver for all fee schedules prepared in resolution form. The waiver is based on the fact that the department is conducting inspections at the project site." She asked who the "department" was.


Mr. Nowicki said that the letter is from MDOT and they were making reference to themselves as the department.


Councilwoman Mason said then the department is responsible for the mitigation and the department will then check on themselves and monitor the adjacent wells.


Mr. Nowicki said that was correct.


Councilwoman Mason felt that this was a fox watching the hen house type of situation.


Mr. Nowicki said MDOT was constructing a mitigation project in accordance with Council's request that it be constructed in the City of Novi. He said subsequently they've prepared to set up plans in order to construct that mitigation project. He said it had gone through the DNR for reviews and they are required by the DNR to monitor that project. He said the DNR would be there on site to review the project to insure that the outcome is what was intended. He said it was approximately 106 acre wetland mitigation area.


Councilwoman Mason said so it is the State watching the State.


Mr. Nowicki said he thought if she looked at the intent of the soil mining and filling program in with the Ordinance it is intended to watch and monitor an activity that was intended to use the extract resources within the area. He thought that MDOT did the same thing, a little bit different, they are creating a wetland.


Mr. Kriewall said to impose additional inspections on MDOT would be really spending the taxpayers dollars twice. He said they typically inspect probably to a higher standard than we do on all of their work. He said they typically provide full on site inspection and to require that we inspect their work over and above what they do would be a waste of money.


Councilman Crawford said the gentleman in the audience had several questions during audience participation and he wondered by what means his questions would be answered.


Mr. Nowicki said he did have the questions written down and he would be happy to go over them quickly.


Councilman Crawford said he just wanted to be sure that he got some type of response. He said one of his questions that did concern him was the speed limit. Councilman Crawford said he speaks from experience being on Eleven Mile and having that recently paved; there are an awful lot of trucks speeding. He asked that consideration be given to see if the speed limit could be lowered, enforced or whatever.


Mr. Nowicki said they held a public informational meeting last Wednesday, February 22nd and MDOT invited all of the residents of that area. He said this meeting was to inform the residents of the impact of mitigation, what was happening and to introduce them to the people who would be out there. He said they introduced the resident engineer from MDOT, his name and who he is and he is in the audience tonight. Mr. Nowicki said the issue regarding truck speeds was raised and it has to be remembered that it is an unimproved road; the speed limits are 30 miles an hour right now. He said it is a city road and he felt that, at this point in time, there was no need to lower the speed limits. He said should there become a need with the monitoring of the trucks by the Police Department and the Weigh Master then we can make those changes on an interim basis with the authority of the traffic engineer.


Councilman Crawford asked for a copy of the response to the gentleman when Mr. Nowicki responded to him.


Mr. Nowicki said that he would send him a copy of the response.


Councilman Pope asked if a private business was building a wetland mitigation in response to a development would they have to pay the city's fees for inspection.


Mr. Nowicki said he believed there was a process through Site Plan Review where they would be required to have an inspection done by our wetlands consultant.


Councilman Pope said so they would have to pay a fee. He said in this case because it is a public project they are asking to be exempt from those fees.


Mr. Nowicki said that was correct.


Mr. Fried said it should be made clear that there is going to be an inspection made and the work is not going to be done by MDOT. He said it will be done by a contractor.


Mr. Nowicki said that was correct. He said the work would be done by a contractor under contract with MDOT and inspected by MDOT.


Mr. Fried said that MDOT will inspect what the contractor does and that means that the city will not have to do that inspection.


Councilman Pope said it would be helpful for Council to know when public hearings are held so that if Council had an interest they could attend.


Mr. Nowicki said it was in the City Hall Monitor.


Councilwoman Mason asked if when the people were notified if it was direct mail notification to all the people.


Mr. Nowicki said it was.


Councilwoman Mason asked if when the contracts are let out would MDOT be the entity that would listen to the bids and hire the people.


Mr. Nowicki said that is correct.


Councilwoman Mason said she wanted to reiterate again that the people that are hiring the people are watching those people and no one is watching MDOT.


Mayor McLallen said a point of clarification before Council goes to the vote. She said Mr. Fried said in the beginning that on the agenda this evening there was a request for the mining and filling permit. She said that had to be an advertised public hearing so that would not be addressed.


Mr. Fried said that was correct.


Mayor McLallen said that public hearing will take place sometime in March.


Yes (5-Schmid, No (2-Pope, Motion carried

Mitzel, Toth Mason)

McLallen, Crawford)


Councilman Mitzel said that with the public hearing it may be helpful if the Administration brings back some of their comments or recommendations concerning the paving issue; whether the road is paved or not.


Mr. Nowicki said the road will be paved as part of the project. He said it was whether it remained paved that was yet to be seen and he couldn't foresee the conditions of the road after 400,000 cubic yards of material was hauled out of there.


Councilman Schmid said he would like to see when Mr. Nowicki comes back from the public hearing the cost of the paving, what kind of road they plan to put in and the difference between that road and a class residential type road would be.


Councilwoman Mason asked if the city was going to pay for that road.


Mr. Nowicki said it was part of the project and the city will have a contribution to the project.


2. Request for Design and Construction Standards variance - Mass Grading requirements of Section 11-145 of the Code - Tri-Mount Companies - Walden Woods II Site Condominium Project.


Ray Cousineau Tri-Mount Companies, said the request was straight forward. He said they stock piled approximately 3,500 cubic yards of earth on Lot #1 of Walden Woods II anticipating that the earth would be needed to complete the mass grading of the site. He said they just completed the mass grading of the site and did not need the earth. He said it was not a good time of year to be moving dirt out of that location so they were requesting a waiver of the requirement for grading on that particular lot which has been supported by JCK. He said they have also requested that they be given a 6 month time period from the date of the waiver to remove the stock piled earth. He said they intend to begin moving it as soon as weather permits this spring.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Council Toth


That the variance from the Design and Construction Standards be granted including the three recommendations for a period of six month, the restriction of the development of Lot #1 until such time as it is restored to its approved grade and and emersion control and stabilization measures be maintained with periodic inspections from JCK during those 6 months.





Councilwoman Mason asked if six months was how long it would take.


Mr. Cousineau said it would not take that long. He said it would probably take a week or two at the most to have it done and that he asked for 6 months because it seemed like a reasonable length of time.


Mr. Fried said there are other conditions in the JCK letter and he hoped the resolution included those other conditions as well as this one.


Yes (6-Toth) No (1-Pope) Motion carried

Crawford, Mason,

Mitzel, Schmid,



3. Appointments to the Construction Board of Appeals, Beautification Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals





David Byrwa 4 Crawford, McLallen, Mason, Pope

John Kirkish 2 Mitzel, Schmid

Elmer Kingham 1 Toth





Frank Brennan 4 Mitzel, Schmid, Crawford, Mason

James Harrington, 7 Mitzel, Schmid, Toth, Crawford, McLallen

III Mason, Pope


Jill Baty 2 Toth, Pope





Elinor Holland 5 Mitzel, Schmid, Toth, Crawford, McLallen

Barbara Greenberg 5 Mitzel, Schmid, Toth, Crawford, McLallen

Ernest Aruffo 5 Mitzel, Schmid, Toth, Crawford, McLallen

Connie Lake-Noble 4 Mitzel, Schmid, Toth, McLallen,

Katherine Cosentino 5 Mitzel, Schmid, Toth, Crawford, McLallen



Councilman Pope stated for the record that he would not vote for anyone on the Beautification Commission and would encourage Council not to vote for anyone until there are enough people. He felt that Council should have a choice of who would serve and that was why he would not vote. He said it was not a slight to anyone in particular he just didn't think that the Commission should be filled until it is ready to go.


Councilman Toth said he has seen commissions started on smaller than 15 so 5 he felt was sufficient. He said all the members listed as candidates seemed to be well respected in the community and he felt that they would do an outstanding job.

He said he would vote for the 5 and at least they would get started.


Councilman Crawford said there has been discussion about the size of the Beautification Commission and some members of Council thought that 15 was too many. He said the consensus was that it may be too many to have on the commission but let's appoint and get going and we can always have a commission of smaller members. He said that was why Council did not reduce the 15 at the time.


Councilman Pope said that may have been the consensus but he did not agree with the consensus at that time either.


4. Roller Dek Hockey Proposal - Status Report


Dan Davis, Director of Parks and Recreation, reminded Council that back in December, 1994 they had a proposal from the Parks Commission from Mr. Bill Bunn and his wife Lynn on the possibility of leasing a piece of city owned property for the purpose of erecting a roller dek hockey rink which would be a year round operation.


Mr. Davis said they went back after Council direction to research the possibility to find what provisions of the ordinance that this type of operation would fall within and what concerns would come out of that regarding a potential lease between the city and Mr. Bunn.


Mr. Davis said he has met with Greg Capote, Jim Wahl and Brandon Rogers from the Planning Department, reviewed the ordinance and it falls under Section 2508 which is a Commercial-Recreational Zoning Ordinance under an I-1 or I-2 Zoning District.



Mr. Davis said there are 11 items that are a part of that zoning ordinance that criterias are put forth on if a Commercial-Recreation facility would be allowed to enter into an I-1 or I-2 Zoning District. He said out of those 11 he had identified 3 items that are of a concern and would have to go before City Council from the standpoint that they would require the possibility of a variance either by Council or the Zoning Board of Appeals.


Mr. Davis said they wanted to give Council that update, share those items with Council and answer any questions or comments Council might have. He said if it is something that we don't feel that we want to pursue at this time then we can make that decision and stop this process now. He said if it is something that Council feels is still worthwhile then he wanted again to hear Council's comments and again push this issue forward through the normal city channels, the preliminary plat process, public hearings and if necessary the Zoning Board of Appeals.


Mayor McLallen explained the three specific items:


1. The classification of 11 Mile Road

2. The parking and paving of the parking lot

3. The commercial-recreation facility as an interim use


Mr. Kriewall asked Mr. Davis if the sketch considered the future routing of Cresent Drive so that we don't build a parking lot where that roadway is coming through.


Mr. Davis said the site of the proposed area is 260 foot wide by 300 foot deep. He said the routing of Cresent Drive where it rings around falls to the east of the existing Delwal; it does appear that it can be fit in within that 260 foot area. He said it is something they have looked at and should be able to address very easily.


Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Fried if the variances would all be the Zoning Board of Appeals and Mr. Fried said yes. Councilman Mitzel said then this Council would take no action in granting the variances. Mr. Fried said that was correct.


Councilman Mitzel said he saw that the parking lot would be gravel identical to 12 Mile Golf Range and Westbrook Golf and he asked if they went to the Zoning Board of Appeals then to get a gravel parking lot.


Mr. Davis said his information that Mr. Rogers had shared was that you can come in and have a one year variance from having it paved. He said whether those two entities have received a variance under that provision he didn't know.


Councilman Mitzel asked the Administration to check this because they had been there for more than a year.



Mr. Kriewall said Administration was diligently pursuing that now.


Councilwoman Mason said the one on 12 Mile is a variance that they give to business but she didn't know if they did anything about the parking lot and she didn't know about Westbrook.


She said the sketch showed spaces like it was paved but there would not be any striping or anything; it is going to be gravel.


Mr. Davis said they have the number of spaces that are required by the ordinance, which is a minimum of 50, and those are all there and actually there are 54.


Councilwoman Mason said it would not be striped out as 50.

She said it would be like Bosco Field.


Mr. Davis said unless it is brought to the Zoning Board and it is denied then the petitioner would evaluate that and decide if it was still worth pursuing by including the cost of paving.


Councilwoman Mason said the sketch is based on paved.


Mr. Davis said it is not; it is based on actual size of a parking lot space per vehicle.


Councilwoman Mason said it was then just measured out not striped out.


Mr. Davis said that was correct.


Councilman Pope asked if this land was zoned I-1 and was told it was. He said that at some point this should be discussed because he could not believe why that would be zoned Industrial.


Mayor McLallen said it is Master Planned for something else but at the current time it is still Industrial.


Councilman Pope said he didn't have a problem with the variances but did have a question about the parking space. He thought maybe it should be paved. He said maybe as one of the Parks and Recreation Commissioner's mentioned, it is a nine month situation to see how it works and then they may have to go back and pave the parking lot. Councilman Pope said that the city operates the Recycling Center without a paved parking lot.


Mr. Kriewall said they may not need it. He said if they are looking at a temporary use he didn't think it was necessary.


Councilman Pope said the city is using temporary uses that are permanent and we are violating our own ordinance. He said he had no problems and he thought it should continue.


Councilman Schmid said he felt it should not continue. He said it was a highly visible, very expensive piece of land that probably should be brought into proper zoning. He said it should not be I-1 on a major thoroughfare like 11 Mile and felt it should be office or certainly I-2 or some other zoning. He said he wasn't sure what the Master Plan showed for that piece of property.


Councilman Mitzel said the Master Plan showed it as I-1.


Councilman Schmid said he had no problem with the petitioner or the event. He said he had a problem with putting up something that doesn't meet the standards that Council has demanded in the city by individual businessman. He said if an individual businessman would come in and buy that land and want to put up a facility, they would stick to all the ordinances and they wouldn't even be talking about this ordinance. It would have to be done with all the amenities that would be normally used in this kind of facility. He said they would be covered, would be permanent facilities as it relates to restrooms and so on. He said he wondered why if the city has a roller dek rink why not go out on 8 Mile Road and Napier where there are approximately 100 acres or some other area where the land is not nearly as expensive. He said he was wondering why it was in the Town Center Area where everyone else has to put in parking. He said he would be absolutely opposed to this not being paved. He said the experience with the Golf Driving Range had been sufficient to show that that has never been kept up. He said it was a disaster in the City of Novi, it looks terrible all the time. He said they have a flag pole sitting inside of a pipe which he felt was against the ordinance. He said they didn't have proper signage, lighting, facilities and this would just compound the issue.


Councilman Schmid said he realized that the last time this was before Council there was some indication of a time schedule as far as how long this would be in this location. He thought that was 5 years.


Mr. Davis said that they have talked but have not got into details as far as the length of the terms of the agreement but 3 to 5 years had been talked about.


Councilman Schmid said if it is 5 years then we are tying up this land for 5 years that we couldn't sell or develop. He asked what would be the remittance to the city for allowing an independent businessman to use city property.


Mr. Davis said they have not gotten into that yet either. He said they would use Mr. Fried's services in developing that contractual lease if it goes to that point but they thought it would be premature to get into that until there was a clear direction from Council as to whether or not this should be pursued.


Councilman Schmid asked if there was any indication previously about reimbursement to the city. He withdrew the question. He asked if they would pay taxes on this land or any kind of fees.


Mr. Fried said they would have to pay taxes.


Councilman Schmid said he was not opposed to the project and that he thought it had some merit but he was opposed to the location, opposed to tying up the land for 3 to 5 years, opposed that this would not be blacktopped within a year and he was opposed to the looks of the facility without a paved parking lot in one of the most prestigious parts of the City of Novi. He said people would be driving by this facility on the way to the Town Center and at best there would be a trailer there.


Mr. Bunn said it would not be a trailer it was more of a module type home based on the prior conversation with Council that the trailer was going to be an eyesore and a problem. He said it was more of a house type look as opposed to a trailer.


Councilman Schmid urged Council to consider that it would have this type of a building when they consider their vote on whether or not this should proceed. He said developers spend literally millions of dollars building their buildings and we are going to allow this to go on. He said it was not proper or a good idea and there was probably a place for it in Novi but not on this particular site right in the middle of the Town Center area. He urged the Parks and Recreation Department to look at other areas that this could be placed where there could be leniency on the quality of the development.


Councilman Toth said to Mr. Davis that this was the second project of this type that had been brought before Council. He said he had a problem with this; staff time had been used, consultant time and so forth and there have been no fees paid up front on this project at all. He said this was all coming out of the city coffers and the city is paying for this out of city funds. He thought that there should be some kind of preliminary discussion but then it should be taken to the Planning Commission and be projected as a concept and put out for Public Hearing through Planning or Parks and Recreation. He felt there should be some monies collected from anyone bringing up this idea. He said he was willing to pay part of it but city is getting stuck for the whole shot. He said whenever you talk to an attorney or a consultant that meter starts running for the City and he had no idea what had been paid on this project and on the Golf Dome. He said if that was going to take staff time and consultants that have to get paid then he wanted to know what the figures were. He said the Administration should set some point, start some preliminary discussion but if it goes beyond that first step then there should be some money put in by whoever was coming in with the offer. He said then it could go to the next step, hold a public hearing, get input and get all the information in and then bring it to Council.


Councilman Toth said he cannot support these projects. He said nothing had been completed in terms of paved or not paved, the location and he didn't think there had been a public hearing.


Mr. Davis said back in November it was reviewed at the Regular Parks and Recreation meeting and the Parks Commission felt that the idea had enough merit to bring it to Council's attention which was done in December. He said they called out that we knew the location that was being proposed and they also called out for Council's direction as to what steps should be taken to investigate it further. He said before spending more staff time and involving the consultants, Planning Department and starting into the preliminary plat process they wanted to bring it back to Council, for the purpose Councilman Toth expressed, to stop it if it didn't have any validity. He said if it did then it would go through the normal process where the petitioner would submit the appropriate fees for the appropriate reviews.


Councilman Toth said if a developer comes up with an idea they pay and they put money up to look at it. He said there are then monies and fees coming in and these offset costs and we are not spending our time and our staff time without recouping some compensation. He did not feel a blank check should be given to anyone who comes in with an idea. He said if they are willing to come in with an idea he felt they would be willing to pay a nominal fee which should be established by the Administration. He was not saying this could not fit in the city somewhere but he did have a problem in this particular area.


Councilwoman Mason asked Mr. Fried how the taxes could be collected if there were no taxes collected on that property now.


Mr. Fried said if the property is leased out it would be put on the tax rolls.


Councilwoman Mason asked Mr. Davis if there would be a possibility of whatever was received in rent and attach that percentage of what it had cost us in labor, etc. to the rent on the overall annual basis plus a triple net or whatever it would be and collect it that way from the petitioner. She asked if that was possible.


Mr. Davis said Council can make any decisions regarding the lease as they see fit.


Councilman Mitzel said it was his understanding that anyone had the opportunity to come in and ask the City Administration or the Planning Consultant, during his office hours, questions about the city whether it was a developer with an idea or a resident. He said he understood there were no charges for that until there was a formal site plan submittal. He said, at this point, all that had been done are discussions and Council knew about these discussions two months ago. He asked if, based on that, it seemed that they are following the proper channels.


Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Fried if this were a private developer on any I-1 zoned land anywhere in the city they would have the same opportunity to go to the ZBA and ask for variances under that zoning ordinance. Mr. Fried said that was correct.


Councilman Mitzel said that he had no problem with them going forward with the process.


It was then.


Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That Council agrees that this idea can go through the planning process and come back to Council at a future time for consideration and a lease agreement or resolution of issues.





Councilman Crawford said he concurred with what Councilman Mitzel had to say about this project and came to the defense of Mr. Davis. He said Mr. Davis had done exactly what Council indicated their wishes were a couple of months ago. He said the Parks and Recreation Department investigated this project several months ago, brought it to Council a few months ago and Council said to go ahead. Councilman Crawford said they were not given a blank check to proceed as Councilman Toth indicated and this was now before Council before any major funds or staff time were involved just as Council requested, not as indicated by some Council that was not the case. Councilman Crawford said he thought this was an excellent project. He said Council has asked the Parks and Recreation Department to come forward with some ideas and concepts that might provide some revenue to the city and he felt this was an excellent one. He said this looked like it had a lot of potential and encouraged Council to support this concept and hopefully the ZBA will take a favorable position on this concept also.


Councilman Schmid commented on a question Councilman Mitzel brought up. Councilman Schmid said he thought if a private developer came in he wouldn't develop this land and would not be working off that ordinance. He said he doubted that he would get a variance from paving the parking lot if he was putting up a building. He said although Councilman Mitzel's comment may be right they would not have been working off this ordinance and he would have to show a hardship at the ZBA and he doubted that would be the case. Councilman Schmid said Councilman Crawford keeps talking about bring the projects back and it's a good idea; unfortunately not many of the projects that have come before Council have given the city anything. Councilman Schmid said this is a million dollar piece of land that this gentleman will use for a period of 3 to 5 years when in fact it may be for sale in a year or two where we could make a sizable profit.


Councilman Schmid said he hates to see city land in the middle of the downtown area, where Council insists on some of the better standards in the tri-county area, to allow a project like this to come in. He said he understood that the Council might like the pittance that might come from it but that was not what we are looking for. He said we are looking for a tax base that would bring in some major monies.


Councilman Pope said this motion tonight is to proceed with this project in this location. He asked Mr. Davis to respond to the comments that it could be utilized in a different location; specifically the Eight Mile and Napier site.


Mr. Davis said they went through the preliminary plat process on their site plan review for Eight Mile and Napier about a week and a half ago. He said the site was a 72 acre site and it was totally filled to capacity with other recreational uses such as ball fields, soccer fields and other park amenities. He said they would not have the opportunity nor the space to put it at that location.


Councilman Pope asked about the 12 Mile site.


Mr. Davis said at the 12 Mile property, the tree farm property, they are currently into the Master Planning process. He said it was something that they did have on their chart as potential option use along with about 75 other potential uses for that site. He said they have looked at other sites and if that was an issue that came from Council to look for another site, preferably in a park setting, that would be an option for us. He said they would not be finished with the Master Planning of that location for another 6 to 9 months.


Councilman Pope said even if they Master Planned the site on 12 Mile they are potentially going to site, on a temporary basis, a full ice arena in that location.


Mr. Davis said they have also looked at setting aside approximately 15 acres.


Councilman Pope said so that could go as a temporary use in the site that may be held for an ice arena or swimming pool whatever the decision of the voters would be.


Mr. Davis said that was possible.


Councilman Pope said he needed Mr. Fried's advise on how we're proceeding; the motion is that we would send Mr. Bunn through the planning process. He said he would prefer that the lease agreement would be arranged prior to the planning process because there are some issues like the paving of the parking lot, etc. that are going to affect the site. He asked Mr. Fried what he would include in a lease and at what point a lease might begin.


Mr. Fried said the lease would be the most important document that would be entered into. He said if the developer was not interested in the terms that the Council might come up with in the lease then it would be wasting his time and money by proceeding.


Councilman Pope said he agreed with Councilman Schmid and he would not support a 5 year lease in this location either. He said he didn't want to send Mr. Bunn through the planning process and then surprise him with those positions. He said he would not vote for the motion as stated. He would prefer to see a motion that would send him through the lease portion of it and allow Dan Davis to consider the 12 Mile location.


Councilman Toth said evidently Councilman Crawford knew more about the project then he did. He said as far as he was concerned there had been a couple of meetings and it's been discussed with the Parks and Recreation Commission and had a public hearing. He said this was the second time Council had seen it. He said he had no problem with that; his point was that this could go on for 6 months and when we get into these particular projects there should be some kind of cut off point. He realized that this was only a concept and one that should be brought into certain individuals in certain departments. He said he thought this could fit somewhere in the city but he had a concern that they are putting a semi permanent structure in and the idea of 5 year lease was a problem. He said he can't support the project based on what he had heard so far.


Councilman Mitzel said based on Councilman Pope's comments a withdrawal of the motion would be in order so a more appropriate motion could be made. He felt that the drafting of a leasing agreement would be more appropriate at this stage to resolve that issue prior to going through the planning process.


Councilman Crawford seconded the motion and he agreed to withdraw.


Mayor McLallen said she thought that the issue of the length of the lease could be addressed if an opportunity presented itself to the city. She said Council could have a clause in the lease that says with an appropriate amount of time this current activity can be withdrawn quicker than the 3 to 5 year lease. She said there could be an escape clause just like a corporate transfer clause. She said the land is still zoned I-1 and the city had not given anyone in the Planning Department or anywhere else any direction to market or prepare this land for market. She said this was city owned land and what this person was proposing was a recreational opportunity for our citizens on a temporary basis which we can review annually. Mayor McLallen said the fact that, in the long vision, this was a very premiere area is true. She said it was an I-1 use area, heavy duty construction equipment is stored across the street and there is an operating electrical business adjacent to this property and the city DPW is behind it. She said a landscaped roller dek would possibly be the nicest thing in the next 2 years on 11 Mile Road in this location. She did think getting a buyer in will coincide with the 3 to 5 year process and an escape clause if some opportunity presents itself sooner would very much be a possibility. She thought Mr. Davis had operated along the lines that Council asked him to seek all those opportunities to afford recreation at a reasonable cost to our citizens. She felt this was that opportunity and she supported it in the location it was in and did think the lease could very much protect the city if a greater opportunity afforded itself. She felt the time frame was agreeable and concurred that the lease question was very important at this point. She did have an issue as far as do we get this gentleman to agree to lease something; how far do we go into the lease and then the gentleman doesn't know exactly what he is leasing. She asked if this could be a generic idea of a lease or was it going to be a site specific lease. She felt this was solvable and agreed that the city needed to see the lease. She thought with summer coming and so many of our young people needing more opportunities within the city that this was an opportunity that we should look on favorably.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Second not required


That the motion be withdrawn.





Councilman Crawford said he wanted a brief discussion on the present motion. He thought based on the discussion that the gentleman and Mr. Davis had heard that it would probably be incumbent on them to come forward with some type of leasing stipulations before they went through all the planning process. He thought the motion could still stand with that in mind and if they wanted to go through with all the planning and ZBA issues before coming to Council with a lease it would be at their own jeopardy. He said he thought the motion could stand if Council believed in this as a concept; let them proceed as they see fit.


Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Fried what the proper channel was legally at this point.


Mr. Fried said that the motion to withdraw was a proper motion and it needed no second but did need a majority vote.


Mr. Fried said he thought it was beneficial to the developer to determine whether he was going to get fair terms in a lease. He said the developer would spend a lot of money drawing plans and submitting that to the planning department, paying fees on that and he might not agree with the terms of the lease.


Yes (6-Mason, McLallen No (1-Crawford) Motion carried

Pope, Mitzel,

Toth, Schmid)


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That the City Council support the concept that is proposed. That they direct the City Manager and the Parks and Recreation Director to work with the city attorney to provide a lease agreement with the petitioner, and that this agreement would come back to Council prior to going to the Planning Commission on any site improvement. That the City Manager and the Parks and Recreation Director would review the 12 Mile location with both the applicant and Planning Department and present that information back to Council and that information could come back prior to the lease if the Director felt it was important to do that.





Councilman Mitzel said that whatever site was chosen, it took 5 votes to lease the property. He said this may be one of the more important issues at this point.


Councilwoman Mason said that Bonaventura Roller Rink was by a light industrial on Halsted and Grand River. She said that the one in Brighton was in the middle of a light industrial section and she said there was one in Plymouth also. She felt that this was a real nice place for this facility.


Yes (6-McLallen, Mason, No (1-Schmid) Motion carried

Pope, Toth, Mitzel



5. Approval of Agreement for use of Bosco Baseball fields - 1995 Season


Mayor McLallen said that Mr. Bosco had said he would permit his property to be used by the Novi Youth Baseball. She said that this year he did stipulate that there are seven conditions that he would like addressed by the city. She said six of them have been done in the past by the Parks and Recreation Department and the seventh one is the putting in portable sanitary service at a cost of $700.00.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Pope


That the agreement be approved as submitted.







Councilwoman Mason said she had a little problem with this. She said the approval of the agreement for use of the Bosco Baseball Fields for the 1995 Season was not directed to the Parks and Recreation. She said it was directed to Youth Baseball. She said if you read the letter: "This is to inform you that Paul Bosco is giving me approval to inform the Novi Youth Baseball League that he, Mr. Bosco, once again will provide his property to Novi Youth Baseball." She wanted Council to be aware of the fact that Mr. Davis did not get a letter from Mr. Bosco saying that Parks and Recreation could use the field; Novi Youth Baseball did.


Councilwoman Mason said the cost was about $7,015 and the city had always taken care of grading, marking the parking lot, grass cutting, the field chalking, trash containers and liners and the city put signage at the gates. She said the city has never repaired the fence before and were not responsible for that. She said she was willing to go along with this but did not feel that the city should pay the $700.00 for the portable sanitary facilities because Youth Baseball has paid that right along. She said the city does not get any money from this but has certainly worked hard to keep this in effect along with Mr. Bosco until the other fields are ready. She said she could not vote for this unless the $700.00 was paid by Youth Baseball. She said Youth Baseball has over 600 children every year and they collect around $26,000 a year. She said the City of Novi would expend $7,015.00 for .04% of the children who live in this community. She thought that Youth Baseball should put in some money and the city should put money in there and we will have another season at Bosco Field.


Mr. Davis said the only new requirement added was the four portajohns that would be placed out there on a seasonal basis for 3 months.


Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Davis what happened between 1994 and 1995, same fields and the same set of circumstances. He wanted to know why we are taking on that added responsibility.


Mr. Davis said the only thing that has changed is that the proposal that was brought to him in the first week in February from Mr. Bosco's representative was that these were the 7 provisions that he would agree to for the use of the fields for this year. He said he asked if it could operate under the same provisions that we have for the past few years and was told no that the only way the fields would be available would be if this cost was also included with the obligation of the city.


Councilman Schmid said he didn't blame Mr. Bosco because he had provided this field for many years. He asked who paid this before and why it had changed.


Mr. Davis said it was paid by Novi Youth Baseball. He said the only reason why Mr. Bosco has thrown that provision in is basically he wants the city to pay for it as opposed to Youth Baseball. He said this information came from Mr. Bosco's representative, Mrs. Vedro.


Councilman Schmid asked if he had talked to Youth Baseball.


Mr. Davis said he had and as far as he knew this item had not been put before the Youth Baseball Advisory Board in any formal capacity.


Councilman Schmid said Youth Baseball was self funded

and had nothing to do with the City of Novi, is that correct.


Mr. Davis said it is and has nothing to do with the City of Novi other than the support services that are listed in the letter.


Councilman Schmid asked if the city decided not to pay for the portajohns would Mr. Bosco say no. He said if that was the case then he would support paying $700.00.


Mr. Davis said he couldn't say for sure but if Council directed him to go back and indicate that Council said no he would pass that along and see what happened.


Councilman Crawford said he didn't think Council was in the position to look a gift horse in the mouth. He felt that the city was very fortunate that Mr. Bosco had allowed Youth Baseball to use these fields again with some very minor stipulations; 90% of these stipulations we have done in the past. He said it has taken a great burden off the Parks and Recreation Department to provide fields for Youth Baseball and adult softball that might have been a burden to provide this year. Councilman Crawford thought part of the concern with the portajohns is not so much the number of them but that there are adequate ones there. He said in the past there had only been one portajohn and perhaps three would suffice. He said it's talking nickels and dimes to provide a program for the youth of Novi and to allow scheduling of the fields that the city has control of. He said he thought Council was in a very pleasant position to approve this and that Council ought to get on with it.


Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Fried if the agreement was the letter that was submitted with the Novi Youth Baseball letterhead.


Mr. Fried said that was correct.


Councilman Mitzel asked if the format of the agreement was correct.


Mr. Fried said the format didn't mean anything it is the content that counts. Mr. Fried said if the City of Novi commits itself to those expenses the city would get nothing in regard to those expenses. He said it would be the Novi Youth League that would benefit.


Councilman Pope said to Mr. Davis that they had requested a trash dumpster and that was not included and was there a reason for that.


Mr. Davis said when they provide trash can liners at that site they do daily maintenance at that facility for the field marking and chalking and the maintenance staff normally removes those liners and empties those trash cans. He said they then removed the trash off site to a DPW facility so there is not a need for a dumpster on site nor the need to screen the dumpster properly in accordance with the ordinance.


Councilwoman Mason asked how the city could have a contract with Mr. Bosco written on Novi Youth Baseball stationary with the representative of the Novi Youth Baseball the only person he would speak to. She said last year and the year before Mr. Davis spoke to Mr. Bosco. She asked why Mr. Davis could not speak to Mr. Bosco anymore.


Mr. Davis said his conversations with Mr. Bosco earlier on when he was soliciting the possibility of the city working out the same arrangement his response was no. Mr. Davis said subsequent to that Mrs. Vedro had made contact and made the arrangements to get this contract in place as it is presented to Council. He said following his contacts which had a negative result, Mrs. Vedro was able to secure a positive result.


Councilwoman Mason said if we have another citizen that comes in and finds some soccer fields someplace and it only costs us $8,000 to use them the same thing would happen. She said up to this year Youth Baseball paid that $700.00. She said the total amount we are putting out is $7015.00 and asked Mr. Davis if we could afford that and was it in the budget.


Mr. Davis said the extra cost is $700.00 and it is in the budget.


Councilwoman Mason asked what he meant by the extra cost is $700.00.


Mr. Davis said the extra cost that was not planned for within the departmental budget was for the portable sanitary units which is approximately $700.00.


Councilwoman Mason asked about the signage for the entrance.


Mr. Davis said that had been estimated at about $70.00 and that is in the operating cost.


Councilwoman Mason asked about the paint and repair of wooden fence along Beck Road.


Mr. Davis said operating cost and they would use community service workers through Oakland County.


Councilwoman Mason said he didn't want Mr. Davis to say it was only $700.00 because she and Mr. Davis went over this and it is not only $700.00.


Mr. Davis said there is no question that they provide numerous and very costly services for the provision of Novi Youth Baseball to operate at Bosco Field or at any other field within the city. He said the bottom line is it benefits the community and the children of the community. He said his recommendation before Council backs up that it is a benefit that he thinks is worthwhile of the expenditure.


Councilman Schmid said he knew Councilman Crawford didn't do it intentionally but Councilman Schmid's only inquiry was not against Mr. Bosco or whether or not we were looking a gift horse in the mouth. He said the Youth Baseball had paid this expenditure previously and he was concerned because these are city dollars, people pay taxes and we spend their money. He wanted to know what the change was and if Mr. Davis had talked to Youth Baseball to see if they had decided not to pay this or if Mr. Bosco had decided not to pay this. He said that was his intent and if it means fields or no fields, he agreed with Councilman Crawford that it was a good deal. He said we are dealing with an independent business of Youth Baseball who have their own dollars and that was his only inquiry.


Councilman Crawford said Councilman Schmid was exactly right. He said his comment was not directed at any member it was directed at the situation. He thought we were in a pleasant position that we can provide youth baseball and be able to schedule our fields for virtually what we have always done in the past. He said this is not a complicated issue; there are only 7 items here of which we have done the majority of in the past. He said we are not leasing Tiger Stadium we are just doing some maintenance on Bosco Field so we can play some ball this year.


Yes (6-Crawford, Mitzel No (1-McLallen) Motion carried

Toth, Pope, Mason,







It was then,


Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That Item #11, Readoption of Resolution recommending approval of Class C License - Vic-Eat, Inc., be moved from the Consent Agenda to Item #5A of Matters for Council Action - Part I.


Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried



5A. Vic-Eat, Inc. - Class C License



It was then,


Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilman Toth


That Resolution recommending approval of Class C License for Vic-Eat, Inc. be approved.


That the request from Vic-Eat, Inc. for a new class C license to be located at 42875 Grand River, Novi, Michigan, 48375, subject to final inspection and adherence to all Ordinances, be considered for approval.


It is the consensus of this legislative body that the application be recommended for issuance.



Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel


That audience participation be reopened.


Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried






Chris Mc Donough said he could not believe what he was hearing. He was concerned about all the bickering over $700 for portajohns and the approval of a Roller Dek Hockey proposal.






6. Appointment of MML Legislative Coordinator


Councilman Toth volunteered and Council's approval was unanimous.


7. Ordinance 95-18.123 - Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance Re: Street Trees, First Reading


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason




Director of Public Works was changed to Director of Public Services or his designee.


Yes (6-McLallen, Toth No (1-Pope) Motion carried

Schmid, Mason,

Mitzel, Crawford)


8. Claims and Accounts - Warrant No. 432


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That Claims & Accounts Warrant No. 432 be approved.


Question was raised on Check #136, $4,000 to Energy Performance Consultant. Mr. Klaver indicated that we did solicit proposals for a energy conservation program.


Yes (6-McLallen, Mitzel. No (1-Toth) Motion carried

Schmid, Pope, Mason,




9. Resolution - Budget amendment 95-5 - Personnel Changes


It was then,


Moved by Councilwoman Mason

Seconded by Councilman Schmid


That Budget amendment 95-5 be adopted.


NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the following 1994-

1995 budget amendment is authorized to provide for the

personnel changes from July 1, 1994 through December

31, 1994.





ASSESSING (Personal services) $ 12,000

ASSESSING (Other Services and Charges (2,000)

POLICE (Personal services) 35,200

TRANSFER from police and fire fund 45,200


CONTINGENCIES (new balance $266,559) 90,400





TRANSFER to General Fund (45,200)






Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried



10. Ordinance 95-09.02 - Amendment to the Planning Commission

Ordinance to require residency of members - First Reading


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Crawford




Councilman Pope suggested that the term "resident" should be changed to a qualified elector.


Yes (6-Toth, Pope, No (1-McLallen) Motion carried

Mitzel, Mason,

Schmid, Crawford)


11. Schedule Executive Session to follow meeting to discuss

pending litigation


It was then,

Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That an Executive Session be scheduled to follow the meeting to discuss pending litigation.


Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried


12. Appointment of Council Members to City Clerk Selection



Council Members Toth, Crawford and Mason volunteered to serve. It was noted that all meetings of the sub- committee must be properly posted and open to the public.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilman Schmid


That Council Members Toth, Crawford and Mason be appointed to the committee and that the committee follow the direction of the outline provided by Mr. Klaver and if they wish to differ from this outline it must come back to Council for approval.

Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried



13. Reconsideration of the vote by which the Vistas Area Plan was approved.



Councilman Pope said he anticipated providing the Clerk and the City Manger such writing requesting to be placed on Thursday's agenda that Council would reconsider the vote by which the Vistas area plan was approved. He said he was not asking for any action from Council but realizing there would not be a packet prior to that meeting he wanted to make the Council aware of his desire to place a motion to reconsider on the formal agenda as provided under the rules.


Councilman Pope explained that the reason he was asking for a reconsideration was not to oppose the project or delay the project. He said the area plan has had so many changes. He said the biggest question was how the density was calculated and he thought it was better business if Council went back and reconsidered the amendment, reopened the area plan, made the amendments to it as recommended by the Planning Commission and the consultants and make those changes to the area plan. He said right now the only item that is before Council is the contract and that is the only authority, although the area plan is pending the contract approval.

He said it would just be cleaner business if we amend the area plan. He said it was his intent not to derail the process or program but to let the process run smoother. He said that was what he intended on doing and wanted to provide Council that notice because they would not have a packet prior to Thursday.


Councilman Crawford asked if that would have a bearing on how Council conducts the meeting Thursday.


Councilman Pope said in his opinion, in reading the reconsideration rule, his motion to reconsider can simply be put on the agenda. He said it would be put on as an Item on the agenda to reconsider the vote by which the area plan was approved. He said if four people agree with him that it should be reconsidered then he would make the motion at that time. He said if that motion failed, the only thing that could go before the Council was the contract and not the area plan.


Councilman Pope said what his motion would do was simply place a motion to reconsider on the agenda. He said he couldn't just come in on Thursday night and say he'd like to amend the agenda because the rules require that a written notice be provided if it is not in the same or preceding meeting.


Councilman Crawford asked if he was saying that it would not change the purpose of the meeting; it would just be a better format to conduct the meeting.


Councilman Pope said in his opinion that was correct. He said it would allow Council to reopen the area plan to make changes in it recommended by the consultants and the city attorney. He said Council may agree or disagree on those changes but even if we want to make one of those changes it is cleaner to go in and change the area plan rather than dealing with it outside of the area plan.


Mr. Fried said he wanted to make certain that Councilman Pope was referring to the amended area plan.


Councilman Pope said that was correct.


Mr. Fried said new notices would have to go out because it was a Special Meeting and it would have to be made part of the notice.


Councilman Pope said he would provide that Tuesday morning rather than Wednesday if that would be helpful.


Mayor McLallen asked if the issue under which Councilman Pope was concerned had to do with the density.


Councilman Pope said it had to do with the density but it also had to do with the live/work town homes and a lot of the issues. He said that the area plan, as approved, would allow a tremendous amount of commercial in the live/work town homes that he didn't think Council understood. He said there are a lot of questions that he would like to reconsider and they are not just his but also recommendations of the city consultants.










Councilman Toth said after tonight's authorization we have received the funds to purchase the computers. He said they would be taking it to Phase II of their projected program. He said this involved the Police Department and several other departments in the city. He said he would be coming back shortly to identify what they would be doing with those operations. He said there were two major areas that they were focusing on now; one was the engineering application and one was the Police Department. He said the Police Chief was very eager to get moving and would like to spend thousands of bucks but we will see what we can do to hold him down. He said they are progressing and still holding weekly meetings and continuing on with this. He said the committee was doing an excellent job.



Mayor McLallen said Council would be holding interviews soon for the Computer Committee's missing member. She said it had been advertised.




Councilman Pope said he attended the SEMCOG meeting on Thursday, and it was the General Assembly. He said two developments of that was that he nominated Councilman Mitzel, who is currently serving as an alternate to the area Water Board and he is now a full delegate representing not just Oakland Cities but all cities in the seven county region.


Councilman Pope said the other issue often makes him wonder why he goes to SEMCOG and why we belong. He said the cities caucus endorsed a proposal to require a culture tax. He said this meant that if you went to the movies or bought a CD there would be a tax on the product and that tax would then go to support the DIA, DSO and the different culture things that are in Detroit. He said

he was the only no vote of all of the city representatives. He said he liked culture and he was for the DIA but he was not sure a family going to see a movie needed to finance those kind of things. He said that was one of the actions taken.


Councilman Pope said the other issues that Mayor Archer spoke to SEMCOG about were, it was his impression, that he was for regionalization when it benefited Detroit but if it did not he was not in favor of cooperating; like the Water Board, residency or other issues.


Councilman Pope said the elections for Executive Committee would be taking place next month and he would be sending a letter out to Oakland Cities hoping to remain on the Executive Committee. He said the City of Novi has had an uninterrupted 20 year representation and he would like to continue that.




Councilman Crawford said there was virtually daily correspondence from the Executive Director and the consultants. He said the next meeting would be March 6th to discuss our options. He said he had been informed that out of the three requests that were made of our cable providers, which we thought would help us determine whether a transfer should happen, we probably would only receive one of those requests. He said there would be some interesting options to discuss March 6th.




Councilman Mitzel said the Storm Water Committee met the first Tuesday of the month. He said the two main issues discussed were recommending the proposed budget on through the system and the situation with Iva Street, the veterinary clinic and the storm water run off in that area.


Mayor McLallen said as Mayor she went to Lansing with Mr. Hoisington, Mr. Wahl and Mr. Bowman to discuss the possibilities of funding infrastructure in the city and particularly in the Town Center area. She said Councilman Pope was in attendance and there was quite a good turn out and apparently an unusually strong turn out of members of the Oakland County Delegation. She said there were representatives of Mr. Patterson's office and she had received several letters from people that attended the meeting thanking them for the information on what was going on in Novi and how it played significantly into Oakland County.


Mr. Kriewall said he thought there was a meeting Wednesday to pursue the next step in the process. He said they would keep hot on the trail of doing something for Novi and utilizing the lobbyist firm.


Mayor McLallen said the most significant area of possible funding was looking at the Cobo Hall tax and if there was any opportunity currently for other communities to utilize some of that pocket as well as the greater Detroit Convention Bureau funding. She said it was a positive first step and Novi did itself very nicely.


Mr. Klaver said that there is a meeting scheduled for the Consultant Review Committee and if anyone hasn't turned in their forms yet they would like to get them back so they can begin consolidating them and gathering some information.





Mr. Kriewall said the meeting Wednesday is with the attorney from Miller Canfield who wrote the Cobo Hall Tax legislation and the SPEDA legislation. He said he was going to offer some insights as to what we might propose in terms of revising the Cobo Hall Tax to hopefully benefit the City of Novi.


Councilman Mitzel thanked Mr. Kriewall and Mr. Nowicki for responding to a lot of the questions from the last meeting. He asked if Council could get an ice rink status report sometime in the future as it had been several months. He also asked what would be the exit ramps for southbound M-5 at 12 Mile. He said they were all closed right now but the lights had been hung. He said the lights are on wires and the tarps are beginning to blow off. He was wondering how long they would be up there and if they could be taken down if they are not going to be used for a couple years.


Councilman Toth told Mr. Kriewall that he asked for a complete report on the total cost for the Vistas project, the costs that were waived, what impact those had and who they were made to and he had not received anything on that. He said it was with regards to the fact that certain fees were waived for Vistas at the discretion of the Community Development Director. He said Council had received an opinion from the City Attorney on that but it is recorded in the minutes that he requested a complete cost break down on that.


Councilman Toth said Mr. Fried's letter was very good but he had a concern when he said that required fees were waived. He asked if these were city fees.


Mr. Fried said there was no charge made for that; it was not a waiver because there was nothing on the schedule that said these were coming back for re-review.


Councilman Toth said then because it came back and there was no re-submittal fees associated with it. . . .


Mr. Fried said that it wasn't really a re-submittal. He said they were obviously doing some work on it and we concluded as a fee there was no waiver of fees.


Councilman Toth said then if the consultants charged on that project . . . .


Mr. Fried said they cannot charge; there was no charge by the consultants on that.


Councilman Toth said he doesn't know that until the figures come from the city attorney. He asked Mr. Fried for the figures by Thursday.


Mr. Kriewall said they could get him a supplement.


Mr. Wahl said he prepared a report and it was completed but he wanted the City Manager to review the report before it was provided to City Council. He said he couldn't do that at the time because Mr. Kriewall was on vacation. He said there is a report ready. He said he would like to point out that he never said that he waived fees. He said that was never an issue; it was not necessary or required to charge fees and therefore the question had nothing to do with waiving fees.


Councilman Toth said he would go back and check the video tape he had at home and with Councilman Schmid but he was pretty sure that there was a statement made that the fees were waived.


Mayor McLallen said there would be a report forthcoming after the City Manager's review on that issue.


Councilman Pope said he was again startled to recall that the area of the Town Center we are referring to is still zoned Industrial. He asked what the procedure was to do a city initiated rezoning in that area to bring it back to either Town Center or Office or something. He asked if that process was already happening.


Councilman Mitzel said it was Master Planned for Light Industrial.


Councilman Pope asked if the Planning Commission updated the Master Plan.


Councilman Mitzel said it was the 1993 update.


Councilman Pope asked why this area was not included.


Mr. Kriewall said that was a borderline area and could remain I-1 very nicely.


Councilman Pope said he was horrified that a developer could come in and do industrial in that location.


Mr. Kriewall said the city owns the property.


Councilman Pope said not all of it.


Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Kriewall if he thought that was a good spot for I-1 zoning or would that be better suited for Office. He thought Councilman Pope had an excellent idea.


Mr. Kriewall said it was a tough one because it was right on the edge. He said there are industrial uses across the street, a cellular tower across the street, etc.


Councilman Schmid said it amazed him that you would think that we ought to keep an I-1 and I-2 zoning.


Mr. Kriewall said it could go to Town Center zoning but he thought Office would be a bad zoning. He said he thought that the Town Center Committee debated that area as to whether to expand it to the east.


Mr. Wahl said because of several rezoning questions that have come up recently the committee was going to be taking a look at possible city initiated rezoning for what is now TC-1 south of Grand River. He said Council suggested that would be a good idea. He said if Council would further suggest we could expand what it is we are looking at. He said they would be doing that within the next 60 days.


Councilman Pope asked to have this placed on a future agenda for discussion.


Mayor McLallen said we have an opportunity to amend the agenda and have a discussion here or we can move it to another agenda. She said her position would be to move it to another agenda and bring back an educational point on what really can be done in I-1. She said I-1 is not a smoke stack industry zone and it has a lot of opportunity for the city. She thought Council should have a good understanding what can be done in I-1 before Council gets rid of it.


Councilman Schmid said I-1 is industrial through and through without outside storage apparently.


Mayor McLallen said to permit Council to understand more she thought the discussion has obviously come to its time and they would try to present a presentation on it on a new agenda.


Councilman Mitzel said it had been about a year since there had been any joint meeting with the Planning Commission to talk about any planning ideas and this seems to be planning related. He said he was not advocating a joint meeting with them about this but maybe Council should think about having another joint meeting with them to discuss certain long range planning ideas. He said joint meetings used to come more frequently but now it had dwindled down to maybe once a year.


Councilman Toth said he passed a pamphlet to the city attorney which was from the Michigan Municipal League regarding ethics. He said there were a couple comments in there with regards to violation of the Open Meetings Act. He was asking the city attorney to provide some information on it and perhaps comment briefly on it tonight.


Mr. Fried said he would submit something in writing on this.





1. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of 1/9/95, Special Meeting of 1/19/95, Special Meeting of 1/23/95, Regular Meeting of 1/12/95, Special meeting of 1/28/95, Special Meeting of 1/30/95 and Special Meeting of 2/6/95.


Mayor McLallen stated there were four sets of minutes that needed corrections; 1/9/95, 1/19/95, 1/28/95 and 1/30/95.


Councilman Mitzel pulled the 1/9/95 minutes regarding an error on Page 31, 3rd paragraph from the bottom. The last sentence he was talking about a maximum of 21,000 sq. ft. and it read 100,000 sq. ft. He said the correction was given in the details on the table tonight.



It was then,


Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That the January 9, 1995 minutes be approved as amended.


Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried


Councilman Crawford pulled the 1/19/95 minutes. He said it was a meeting he was unable to attend until very late and it showed that he arrived on Page 14 and asked some questions on Page 15 and 16. He didn't know who asked those questions but it wasn't him. He said with those corrections made, he would move to approve the minutes.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That the January 19, 1995 minutes be approved with corrections.


Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried



Councilwoman Mason pulled the January 28, 1995 because on Page 5, Councilman Toth said Councilwoman Mason received the documents from Mrs. Stipp. She wanted to reiterate again that Mr. Toth gave everybody the Council rules that he revised on his computer to all the people except for Councilwoman Mason and Mrs. Stipp. She said she didn't care what he said he did not give them to her or Mrs. Stipp.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That the minutes of January 28, 1995 be approved as submitted.


Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried



Councilman Mitzel pulled the minutes of January 30, 1995 because at the end they said the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 PM and he knew they stayed until about 10:45 PM to categorize the items.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That the minutes of 1/30/95 be approved reflecting the correct adjournment time.


Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried



6. Approval of Revised Traffic Signal cost Sharing Agreement - Grand River at Town Center Drive


Councilman Mitzel pulled this Item to make a comment on the record. He said when the Main Street SAD moved forward that he hoped that they would seriously look at possibly putting the Cantilever style traffic lights at both ends of Main Street to make it more aesthetic and make the whole area look a little better. He said for the meantime this is fine to get the lights up but he thought they should consider that in the process.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That the Revised Traffic Signal cost Sharing Agreement be approved.


Yes (7) No (0) Motion carried


7. Approval of Preliminary Engineering Agreement - Ten Mile Improvements, Novi Road to Haggerty Road - MDOT Third Party Agreement No. ND94-2611.


Councilman Pope pulled this Item. He said he had questions for Mr. Nowicki. Councilman Pope said he could understand the residents concern and fear and what they are going through. He asked Mr. Nowicki if this was preparing a study.


Mr. Nowicki said it was preparing preliminary engineering plans which included an environmental impact statement.


Councilman Pope said this was not approving 5 lanes on Ten Mile Road.


Mr. Nowicki said it was not and explained that there are several subsequent phases to this. He said there was the preliminary engineering stage which included the environmental impact statement, the preparation of right-of-way plans, and a whole host of other things that had to be done to satisfy Federal Highway Administration requirements as well as MDOT. He said the next phase was the right-of-way phase. He said the phase subsequent to that would be construction. Mr. Nowicki said each one of those phases required a separate and distinct contract between the City of Novi, the Michigan Department of Transportation as well as third party agreements between the City of Novi and consulting engineers.


Councilman Pope said before it would go to the right-of-way phase this Council would make a decision on where the path of the road would be. Mr. Nowicki said that was correct. Councilman Pope said one of the things that shouldn't be lost is that every letter to the editor and every individual who had stood up here said there is a problem. He said we all just disagree with a solution. He said some people want tapers, better lights or better speed; would this extensive study be needed to answer those questions.



Mr. Nowicki said they have to go through the various design alternatives which include the various roadway configurations including a no action alternative. He said that had to satisfy the Federal requirements and in addition to that there had to be a public hearing. He said what happens at a public hearing was people are invited to attend the meeting, a brief description of the project and a presentation of the environmental impact statement is made. He said at that time, the public is afforded the opportunity to speak directly to a court reporter. He said the court reporter transcribes the minutes of those meetings and furnishes a copy directly to the Michigan Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. He said we have to respond to each and every one of the comments that are made at that public hearing and the responses have to be sufficient enough to satisfy FHWA.


Councilman Pope said that was a very good technical answer but he would hope that residents would feel comfortable talking to Council too rather than a court reporter.


Mr. Nowicki said Council is invited to attend the meeting, however, in order for it to be an official part of the minutes . .


Councilman Pope said his fear in Mr. Nowicki's response was that that begins that adversarial nature.


Councilman Pope said Mr. Nowicki listed that the options of this study are that it would be a proposed 5 lane road, a no build, below cost capitol improvements which some residents have advocated so they recognize that there is a problem. Councilman Pope said it mentions a 4 or 5 lane alternative and asked if a 3 lane alternative is being considered.


Mr. Nowicki said that was included as well and said that was part of the whole spectrum of the reviews.


Councilman Pope said let's say there are going to be 5 lanes approved; the Council would have to pay 20% of that improvement, is that correct.


Mr. Nowicki said that it was.


Councilman Pope said 20% of a 5 lane improvement would be a considerable amount of money.


Mr. Nowicki said that entire project was estimated at $7,000,000.


Councilman Pope said 20% of the city's share would be $1.4 Million. He said the $1.4 Million couldn't come out of the city's General Fund or the existing road milage.


Mr. Nowicki said he could not make that evaluation now but it would definitely have to be reviewed through the six year road program.


Councilman Pope said in the past we have never made that kind of expenditure out of the road fund for this kind of a project. He said it would most likely be a bonding issue. He said this meant that if this was ever going to come up it was going to be a vote of the public to allow this to happen. He said Council may make a decision on how this was going to be but that decision would have to be ratified by the voters and those issues could be brought out. He said the minor improvements may not go to a vote but if it was a major improvement it would have to go to a public vote. He asked how long would this be in pre-engineering before the report came back.


Mr. Nowicki said they like to be a little optimistic and typically they hope for one year in each phase once the consultants have been given the go ahead. He said they have been finding that they are sometimes a little bit longer and we can anticipate, typically if everything goes well for a project from its beginning to its final beginning of construction is four to five years.


Councilman Pope said he wanted to really stress that this was a study, this information would come back in a year, it would be brought back to Council to make a decision and the voters would have to ratify any major improvement. He said the most important thing was that everybody had agreed that something had to be done. He said even the residents that live there agree there has to be a solution. He said it may not be 5 lanes it maybe something else.


Councilman Crawford said that there are tasks 1 through 9 in packet paperwork and he asked if they were performed in that order.


Mr. Nowicki said many of them were performed in conjunction with each other.


Councilman Crawford said that Task 2 was an Environmental Study, and part of that is the alternatives to be considered. He said that ought to be #1 on the list. He didn't think it would be prudent to do any other of these if the conclusion was no build or 4 lanes instead of 5 lanes, etc. He asked how that proceeds.


Mr. Nowicki said when you understand what the context of an environmental impact statement is you would understand that an extensive amount of engineering is required because the horizontal and vertical alignments must be calculated in order to determine the intrusion in any wetlands areas or sensitive areas. He said a significant amount of engineering would have to be done in order to perform the environmental impact statements.


Councilman Crawford said there is $12,000 that is in the environmental impact study; are there funds from these other areas that would be used to determine the feasibility of widening or not widening or doing something different. He said that $12,000 seemed to be a very small amount to determine what that road needs.


Mr. Nowicki said some of the money would come from the Design Phase and the Right-of-Way Phase because, again, the environmental impact statement covers the design, environmental issues, noise, air and a whole gambit of other issues, wetland, biological nature of it, the critters in the water, the floor and etc. He said if you recall from the Novi Road presentation there was a complete range of information that had to be collected. He said for a consultant to say "the environmental phase of this is $12,000 and that is all it is" no, because it comes from a number of different areas. He said some of the information had to come from the Right-of-Way Phase because the determination would have to be made on the required right-of-way. He said all of it was rolled into one and right now that was JCK's best guess for what the standard environmental issues would run. He said the information contained in the environmental impact statement would come from all tasks included there.


Councilman Crawford asked if the full $284,000 would be expended if Council authorized this tonight.


Mr. Nowicki said that it would. He said the $284,000 is the entire project cost. He said for them to leverage $284,000 that requires a local match from the City of Novi of approximately $56,800.00.


Councilman Crawford said his point was what if the conclusion was no build. He asked why would you spend $284,000.00 and not build anything if that was the conclusion of the survey.


Mr. Nowicki said in order to reach that conclusion you have to go through the majority of the preliminary engineering.


Councilman Crawford said both cover letters speak of "briefly the project consists of widening the existing roadway to 5 lanes", why would you make that conclusion in your cover letters if there are other options available.


Mr. Nowicki said because that is the best case scenario in which to work from. He said it would be interesting to note that if we wrote in the cover letter and all of the grant applications that it would be a 3 lane road and our studies through the preliminary engineering phase turned out to be a 5 lane road it would be difficult for us to go back to the Federal Highway Administration and ask for 5.


Councilman Crawford said he thought they might include all of those options. He said he could understand why everyone jumps to that conclusion and that may not necessarily be the result of all of this. He asked if there had been any consideration of doing something from Haggerty to Meadowbrook and something different from Meadowbrook to Novi Road. He asked if that was a possibility. He asked if it was possible to do 5 lanes from Meadowbrook to Novi and 3 lanes or no lanes from Meadowbrook to Haggerty. He asked if that would be under consideration in this survey.


Mr. Nowicki said that would be dependent on the capacity analysis conducted by the consulting engineers. He said if there was a determination that the design concept or the conceptual plan here would be different when they go through their analysis then by all means we would make that recommendation to FHWA.


Councilman Crawford asked when he would come back to Council or when would the engineers come back to Council with the next report as to where this project stands.


Mr. Nowicki said his best guess would be 1 year.


Councilman Crawford asked if all of these funds would be spent. He said he did not understand why all these funds would be spent if the conclusion was no build or other alternatives.


Mr. Nowicki said if they reach the no build conclusion they still have to go through the phase of the environmental impact statement and come up with at least a close conceptual design. He said, again, that requires horizontal and vertical alignments be determined in order to determine the intrusion into the sensitive areas; there are wetlands there.


Councilwoman Mason said she would not vote for this in any way, shape or form. She said first off you don't spend $284,000.00 and not build a road and not build a road the way you want it. She said this reminded her of the Taft Road Connector that had been done in the back room and nothings happened and now there isn't any money. She said Council looked at East Lake Drive and said let's close it for 2 months and make it 25 MPH and give tickets, that is a residential area. She said we are talking about one of the oldest residential areas in the city. She said that was never meant to be a thoroughfare and that traffic belongs on Eight Mile and 12 Mile. She said if the speed limit is reduced the way it was 20 years ago to 35 MPH it would take that traffic off of Ten Mile. She said that is a residential area and does not need to have 5 lanes. She said she thought that the whole thing had been done sneaky, back handed and it is going, and you can smirk Mr. Pope but that is how we do things. She said Council would agree to do it for $284,000.00 and they are not going to build it and you know it would be like the Taft Road Connector. She said she was not a political person, she loved the city and had been in Novi for 36 years and Council can't take money like that and throw good after bad and tromp on peoples rights. She said she would not support this at all.


Mr. Nowicki said he would like to make a statement regarding back room dealings on this.


Mayor McLallen said we are discussing the issue of funding, not past or future history. She said the issue before us is Ten Mile Road.



Councilman Mitzel said Councilmen Pope and Crawford asked most of his questions. He said with the Novi Road environmental impact statement, he thought it was indicated that part of the study had to be conducted in the spring and that was part of the reason that it took a little longer. He asked if there would be time to get that part of the study done this spring for this project.


Mr. Nowicki said if it was approved, yes. He said the biological reviews and analysis could be done this spring. He said the timing may be compressed somewhat because of seasonal conditions.


Councilman Schmid said he would disagree with Mr. Nowicki just a little bit. He asked what the right-of-way on Ten Mile Road was.


Mr. Nowicki said it varies and he wasn't sure what it was.


Councilman Schmid asked if it wasn't mostly 120 feet.


Mr. Nowicki said approximately.


Councilman Schmid asked how wide a five lane road was.


Mr. Nowicki said approximately 60 feet.


Councilman Schmid said then that would leave approximately 30 ft. on each side of the road even at a 5 lane. He said it was his understanding that this spending of $284,000.00 could be done in phases. He said the first phase was an environmental and traffic projection. He asked if that was accurate.


Mr. Nowicki said no; he thought that he had mentioned it in the discussions with Councilman Pope. He said a lot of the issues have to be done concurrently in order for them to have a complete and approved environmental impact statement; the plans have to be near 90% complete and submitted to the Michigan Department of Transportation. He said the plans generate the intrusions into the other areas and the determination of the impact of the surrounding properties.


Councilman Schmid said then you are saying that you could not take this to environment impact study and projection of traffic on Ten Mile Road today and into the future and bring that back to Council. He said then they could make a decision as to what they might want to do even though we may not want to proceed. He said maybe we are going to spend far less then $284,000.00.


Mr. Nowicki said if Council would like to authorize an investigation into those various aspects Council could do that. He said Council has to be aware that it is non Federal participating . . . .


Councilman Schmid said he was talking about Federal participation. He said he was saying that with Federal participation JCK could go into that area and do an initial first phase study that would include at least part of the environmental impact study and more importantly the projection of today's traffic and a projection of beyond 10 years or in stages then come back to this Council and at that time a decision could be made as to whether to proceed. He said he thought that Federal monies would still be available for that phase. He said if we back out then there may be some ramifications.


Mr. Nowicki said that the contract before Council was for the entire project. He said if Council wished to modify that contract to put in certain provisions, schedules and time tables then they would have to go back and renegotiate that contract in order to have that contract represent the desires of Council.


Councilman Schmid asked if he meant with the Feds.


Mr. Nowicki said with JCK and Associates which is subject to Federal approval.


Councilman Schmid said he was of the belief that some have that it was foolish to spend $284,000.00 to prove that maybe you don't need anything. He said he thought that when they were done they would need road improvements, could be a 3 lane or it could be a 5 lane.


Mr. Nowicki said in 1983, prior to submitting a grant application, the staff planner then, Mike Csapo, had conducted an analysis of this various project. He said the analysis that he used included a number of various engineering aspects and it was basically Oakland County Surface Transportation Task Force Project Priority Ratings System. He said the various communities would fill out this complete form and assign a number of points for accident reduction, accident rates, decrease in accident severity, improvements of the roadway conditions, improved traffic operations, socio-economic conditions, importance of the project and the planning aspects. He said upon that rating system it is submitted to the task force for Oakland County and evaluated, the numbers checked and verified for accuracy. He said it was then compared with other projects within Oakland County. He said this particular project rated #4 in all of Oakland County. Mr. Nowicki said subsequently it was funded. He said there is a belief that there is a need for this roadway on the county level.


Councilman Schmid asked if he had those projections for today and on into the next 5 or 10 years.


Mr. Nowicki said they have the traffic projects that are included in the Master Plan as well as those conducted by Rod Arroyo. He said he didn't have them with him but they could be provided.


Mr. Kriewall asked if we could segment this project any differently or does the State package the first phase of a project such as this in this fashion and that's it. He said, in other words, you have to go from point A to point Z and come up with a design by going through the environmental process.


Mr. Nowicki said they package the projects in three different phases, engineering, right-of-way and construction.


Mr. Kriewall said so there is really no deviation in that regard.


Mr. Nowicki said there had not been in his experience. He said, again, the contract that we use is a standard contract developed by MDOT for all of these projects.


Mr. Kriewall said his recommendation to Council would be to approve the agreement but in the meantime have Mr. Nowicki pursue with MDOT the possibility of terminating that project with Federal participation at some point along the way should it be determined, from preliminary environmental and traffic projections, that that is feasible. He said they may reject that out of hand. He believed there was a standard procedure that had to be followed. He said we may end up with a set of plans on the shelf someday that may be 3 lane, 2 lanes, 2 1/2 lanes or 5 lanes. However, he thought we had to go through that process and put the plans on the shelf before we could go to phase two which is actual construction. He said as Councilman Pope indicated we are probably going to have to vote on anything that we do anyway so he thought we needed to begin studying the issue.


Councilman Pope asked if Mr. Nowicki had met with or done anything behind closed doors with any Council Members on this project.


Mr. Nowicki said no.


Councilman Pope asked if he had any comment regarding that or is that sufficient.


Mr. Nowicki said he would like to add that Council had been aware of this project, as well as the public, as early as 1983. He said it had been provided in numerous updates, reports via the Planning Commission, via the City Council, via the Planning Department. He said it has been up front and everyone had been made aware of it and there had been nothing behind closed doors or secretive with respect to this project.


Councilman Pope said he asked that question because as a Member of Council he would prefer that the debate here at the Council table be restricted to the issue that is before us. He said he felt uncomfortable when it goes off that point and that was why he found the comment inappropriate.


Councilman Crawford said he thought he understood what Mr. Nowicki was saying but was still concerned on why we would go to the full $284,000.00 if the conclusion is something different than a full blown 5 lane road. He said it seemed that there are some things in these different tasks that would not be necessary if we didn't go to that point. He said having said that, for the third or fourth time, is there some way that what Mr. Kriewall suggested could be implemented. He asked Mr. Nowicki if he could speak to Mr. Kriewall's suggestion.


Mr. Nowicki said they could provide Council with a monthly update with the status of the project and the conclusions that have been reached. He said, as we routinely do in our monthly status report, we would just expand it to include a little more detailed information on this particular phase of the project. He said if Council wished to pull it or to have additional information or questions on it then they would be happy to answer that.


Councilman Crawford said everyone agreed there was a problem there; it is the solution that we all seem, especially the residents, to differ on. He said he could understand that when everything they see indicated it would be a 5 lane road and that may not be the case. He said this proposal seemed to expend funds to justify a 5 lane road and that may not be the case. He said if there is something we can do along those lines and at least get the environmental survey which includes the alternatives and he assumed some traffic projections, turn lanes and other alternatives to 5 lanes that was what he would like to see.


Mr. Nowicki said he was specifically concerned with the traffic aspect of it because the environmental impact statement was far, far broader than specifically traffic.


Councilwoman Mason said that she wanted to tell Councilman Pope that she never once said to Mr. Nowicki that he ever met in the back room. She said she likened it to Taft Road that was behind closed doors.


Councilwoman Mason said that the SEMCOG Report directly opposed what the city planner came up with. She thought that that part of it should be provided to members of Council so they can see that this is so far off from what SEMCOG says about traffic in our area. She said it was totally opposite. She said there is a different solution from SEMCOG and she thought Council should look at that and then look at this proposal and say how come we have so much variance between the two before we decide to spend $284,000.00.


Mr. Nowicki said the irony here is that SEMCOG is basically the head of the regional planning authority and they approved this project.


Councilwoman Mason asked what it was that she just read in their booklet showing that all of our projections up Ten Mile and over Haggerty and over Meadowbrook are totally inflated according to what they have through the year 2000 for us. She said they even took into consideration the Connector in their study.


Mr. Nowicki said he was not familiar with the way SEMCOG developed their traffic projections, however, he thought it was the last Council meeting or perhaps the one before that our Traffic Consultant, Rod Arroyo, addressed that specific issue.


Mayor McLallen said the issue before Council was the approval or disapproval of the preliminary engineering agreement for the traffic improvements from Novi Road to Haggerty on Ten Mile.


Councilman Schmid said he was an innovative type thinker and did not believe MDOT was so tied up in their regulations that Mr. Nowicki couldn't do some adjusting as to what they may think or may not think. He said all he was asking was that when Mr. Nowicki got through the first phase of the initial environmental study and the initial traffic projection that he come back to the Council and discuss what he had so far and Council could, if they wanted to, say "forget it". He said he didn't think the Fed's would come down and say you didn't spend their money.


Mr. Nowicki said he would direct JCK and Associates to bring their findings to Council as soon as they are to a point where they have arrived at a conclusion based on a design concept.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Pope

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel


That the Preliminary Engineering Agreement - Ten Mile Road improvements, MDOT Third Party Agreement No. ND94-2611 be approved contingent on the City Manager and his designee providing Council with a monthly update of the progress of the project. In addition, that Mr. Nowicki's comments on when conclusions are reached that that information would also be brought to allow the Council the authority to halt the program if they wished to. This would be contingent also on JCK and Associates providing Council with a letter that would allow termination of the contract.





Mayor McLallen said she had a question, on Page 3 it says "the final engineering agreements to be completed 164 days after the Notice to Proceed." She asked what constitutes the Notice to Proceed.


Mr. Nowicki said the Notice to Proceed comes from MDOT after they have approved the contract.


Mayor McLallen said they are essentially saying rather than a year, which you were indicating, the final draft is basically a five month project.



Mr. Nowicki said no it was a five month working time; there is a difference. He said those are working days and does not include the MDOT delays for submittals and reviews.


Mayor McLallen said that was one of her concerns; that there be a beginning and an end. She said according to this it appeared that for once there was a final beginning and an end.


Mr. Nowicki said they have to tie the consultants down to a number of working days. He said, however, we cannot put in a contract and tie them down and have them work within the specified period of time, say 164 days, if it still required MDOT and FHWA reviews as well as DNR and anyone else that could have potential input. He said that is why it is working days for the consultants in the agreement.


Councilman Mitzel said that what was before Council was a complete contract. He asked Mr. Fried if there were any legal problems with the motion as presented with being able to terminate at any point.


Mr. Fried said as this was being discussed he said to Councilman Toth that Mr. Nowicki would have to give Council a letter allowing us to cancel the contract at any time.


Councilman Mitzel asked if that letter was considered any major change to what was bid out because it could be severed at any time.


Mr. Fried said it would not because it was in line with what Mr. Nowicki had told the Council. He said he just wanted acknowledgement from JCK that Council could do that.


Councilman Pope asked if he could make that part of the motion.


Mr. Fried said that he could.



Councilman Pope made it part of the motion that a letter would be provided allowing Council to terminate the contract.


Councilman Mitzel said he concurred with the comments Councilman Pope made at the beginning of the discussion of this item.


Councilman Crawford asked if Mr. Kapelczak had any comments or concerns about our discussion and the motion. He said he didn't need to make any comments but if he had any he would afford him the opportunity to speak.


Mr. Kapelczak said they would provide the letter and the monthly updates.



Yes (6-McLallen, Mitzel No (1-Mason) Motion carried

Pope, Toth,

Schmid, Crawford)


14. Resolution - Adoption of Parks and Recreation Master Plan


Councilman Toth said he assumed there was a public hearing on this issue and this was officially accepted by the Parks and Recreation Commission.


Mr. Davis said that was correct.


Councilman Toth said there was no documentation that said it was accepted, no vote or anything.


Mr. Davis said the transcripts from the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting were not finished yet and he would provide them to Council at the next meeting. He said it was approved unanimously this past month.


Councilman Toth said he was rather dismayed when he went through this document because he felt that this was an old document and it was just updated; is that correct.


Mr. Davis said it was a 5 year Master Plan originally done in 1993 and with all the new property acquisitions they wanted to make sure that those were inclusive of this document as we prepare for the grant submittals.


Councilman Toth said quite honestly he thought it was ready for major surgery. He said he went through it, and he wouldn't belabor the point and go through everything, but on Page 38 it said that you had only 3 soccer fields existing in 1995 and you only need 3 more. He said there was a capacity of 7 soccer fields and he said we have talked about 20 or 30 soccer fields. He said he started to go through this and felt that it was a rather poor document in terms of a Master Plan that should be their working document. He said the voters have given an awful lot of property to work with and Councilman Toth expected to see a pretty good document.


Mr. Davis said that last year or 1993 Councilman Toth shared some of the same comments. He said they follow guidelines that are set forth by the DNR. He said they use the Standards and Deficiencies Guidelines as put forth by the National Parks and Recreation Association. He said those standards and guidelines do not reflect, a lot of times, individual community needs and that was pointed out in the narrative. He said it was a good example, in the City of Novi, our demographic make up demands that more active recreational facilities be provided because of the demographic make up of the community. He said that is not the guideline standards that we followed with the document. He said when they get into the action plan that is later on in the document we can then individualize and modify to our community needs. He said they have called out the specific needs of the community within the action plan. He said they can then follow through with the action plan within the grant applications submittals that we bring forward.


Councilman Toth said that may be the case but he thought they should have a much better document to work with. He said he was looking for something that Parks and Recreation Commission and Parks and Recreation Department could use as a working document similar to the Master Plan that the Planning Commission has. He said there are some rather poor graphics; some of them hand sketched and do not reflect what should be there. He thought the entire document should be redone. He said he could not support this. He said Mr. Davis talked about the Spirit of 76 Park not having adequate parking. He said that's fine but we don't own that park; it's owned by the school system plus it's landlocked. There's parking down the street from there but we can't put a parking lot out there. He said he didn't understand why those types of things are in this document when you have property that's been secured to plan for new parks, developments and new ballfields and it's not in here. Councilman Toth said to support this document his recommendation was to take it back and redo it and give yourself a working plan that you can work with. He said the document didn't reflect the last two committees he served on in terms of what surveys turned in. He said before we went out for the millage on this park there had been committees that gathered an awful lot of data as to surveys of what the people wanted. He said none of that was attached or included in the document and he felt those were documents that should be looked at constantly as you go through working on this program. He said it needed major work on it and he could not support it.


Mayor McLallen said that the reason the document was before Council was that Council approval was necessary on the Park Master Plan so that they can be considered for any grants that are provided through the Department of Natural Resources. She said that this document was approved by the body that created it.


Councilman Mitzel said in the packet there were two resolutions; one dated February 27th and one dated March 6th. He asked which one Council was to act on because they are also worded differently. He said the one dated March 6th does mention that "the Parks and Recreation Commission acted on February 9, 1995 and we now adopt it." He said the one dated February 27th says "the Master Plan was acted on March 4, 1993 and we now adopt it." He said he thought Council was readopting with amendments; is that correct.


Mr. Davis said that was correct and apologized. He said the Parks Commission on February 9th did adopt the revisions and the document should reflect tonight's meeting. He said when they were preparing it originally as a rough draft they were looking at future Council meetings and March 6th was the preliminary date that they had set aside to bring this forward. He said it was done quicker so they brought it forward as quick as they could. He said it should reflect the February 27th date.


Councilman Mitzel asked if the main changes in the document were just updating some of the projections, the safety path map was amended and a new map had been distributed to reflect the changes and the natural Linear Greenway System Map and references were deleted from this.


Mr. Davis said that was correct as Council action had dictated that.


Councilman Mitzel said after this was adopted by Council isn't it also incorporated by the Planning Commission into the City's Master Plan. He asked if they would need to readopt or reincorporate this.


Mr. Davis said yes, which they have done in the past.


It was then,


Moved by Councilwoman Mason

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That the Resolution be adopted for Parks and Recreation Master Plan dated February 27th as presented:


WHEREAS, the City of Novi is committed to providing public parks and recreation facilities to meet the needs and interest of the entire community, and


WHEREAS, the Novi Parks and Recreation Commission has developed a Recreation Master Plan to serve as a guideline to implement future recreational improvements, and


WHEREAS, this Master Plan has been presented during a regular meeting of the Novi Parks and Recreation commission on March

4, 1993 where public input was encouraged.


NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Novi City Council

hereby adopts the Recreation Master Plan, and


BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this adopted Recreation Master Plan be forwarded to the Department of Natural Resources, Oakland County Planning Department and Southeast Michigan Council of Governments.






Councilman Pope said that he would vote against the Parks and Recreation Master Plan absent any market failure in providing golf course services to the residents. He said he was not convinced that the city should be in the business of providing a golf course which is outlined in this plan. He said he knew most people disagreed with him but wanted people to know that is why he voted against it.


Yes (5-McLallen, Mitzel, No (2-Pope, Toth) Motion carried

Crawford, Schmid,



Councilman Crawford asked if there would be some sort of a mid decade census and did it come before Council for approval.


Mr. Kriewall said normally the legislature would do something to advise City Administration that we are eligible to do it. He said normally they don't do it until 1996.


Councilman Pope said he didn't think they were going to do it and that Mr. Kriewall should find out if they are going to do it.


Councilman Crawford asked if we could do our own or if it had to come from the state.


Mr. Kriewall said if we can't do a mid decade census he thought a liquor license census could be done by itself.


Councilman Crawford said it was mentioned earlier about meeting with the Planning Commission and generally this time of year Council met with all boards and commissions. He asked if they would be doing that this year.


Mayor McLallen said that given the Council's reluctance to schedule extra meetings, and they are booked every Monday from here on out already, the move would be to go to Thursdays. She said there is a great deal of reluctance on Council's part to do that.


Councilman Crawford said he thought it was beneficial to have the meetings once a year at least. He felt it gave opportunities to talk to each other and maybe air some differences and discuss things that they agree on. He said hopefully after the budget sessions Council would consider this.


Mayor McLallen noted that earlier Mr. Wahl was going to give Council an update on the letter in the Vistas packet but in light of Councilman Pope's request to discuss further things at Thursdays meeting she would not call on Mr. Wahl. She said for Council to be aware that there was quite a bit of discussion at the meeting of the consultants and the petitioner on Vistas. She said progress was made and her understanding was that the letters became negative and some of the issues had been solved but there was not enough time to get them redone.


Councilman Crawford said he and Councilman Mitzel had the opportunity to tour the fire stations and that award should be made soon. He said it should be scheduled on an agenda soon for Fire Station of the Year.


Councilman Schmid said he saw some of the differences in the letters and asked if there would be any opportunity for the consultants to bring their letters up to date.


Mayor McLallen said that they would deal with it at the table.

Councilman Pope said he knew there were a lot of meetings but if the plans not ready then he didn't feel a need to hurry to do it. He said if they are going to raise a lot of issues, the consultants at the table, about any written backup we can schedule another meeting.


Councilman Mitzel said when he reviewed the packet it looked like it would not be able to be finalized that night. He said it also looked like it was to the point where there were several items that were really coming to a head. He felt that Council needed to give direction on no load road, density issue, live/work town houses. He said there were several issues they highlighted that all are coming down to what does the Council wish to do. He thought that from what he gathered Council would end up giving them direction on what Council wants and then the documents would be finalized and Council would adopt them on a different night.


Councilman Toth agreed with Councilman Mitzel and felt that it would be an important meeting and that his characterization of it was accurate.





1. Letter from SEMCOG Re: Ozone Action

2. Letter from FEMA Re: County-wide Flood Insurance Re-study

3. Letter from Fried, Watson & Bugbee Re: Robin's Nest questions

4. Letter from Fried, Watson & Bugbee Re: Vistas of Novi Review Fees

5. Letter from Fried, Watson & Bugbee Re: Site Condominium- use of platted land

6. Letter from Fried, Watson & Bugbee Re: Decker Road Closure

7. Letter from Fried, Watson & Bugbee Re: Vistas of Novi - Density

8. Letter from Roberta A. Fox Re: Decker Road, South of 13 Mile


Councilman Mitzel said in the letter from Roberta Fox, regarding Decker Road, he felt it was interesting that someone else was observing the same thing that Council has asked about. He asked that City Administration send a courtesy response to Ms. Fox to explain the situation.


9. Memo from Chris Pargoff Re: Meadowbrook Glens Trees


Mrs. Stipp announced the appointment to the various boards and commissions.


Construction Board of Appeals - David Byrwa


Zoning Board of Appeals - Frank Brennan

James Harrington, III


Beautification Commission - Elinor Holland

Barbara Greenberg

Ernest Aruffo

Connie Lake-Noble

Katherine Cosentino



There being no further business to come before Council the meeting was adjourned at 11:40 PM.









Date approved: