MONDAY, MAY 15, 1995 AT 8:00 p.m. EDT




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


Council pledged allegiance to the flag.



ROLL CALL: Council Members Crawford (present), Mason (present), Mitzel (present), Pope (absent/excused), Schmid (present), Toth

(present) and Mayor McLallen (present)


Present (6) Absent (1-Pope)





ALSO PRESENT: Edward S. Kriewall - City Manager

David Fried - City Attorney

Dennis Watson - Assistant City Attorney

Joe Kapelczak - JCK & Associates

Tony Nowicki - Department of Public Services

Brandon Rogers - City Planning Consultant

Les Gibson - Director of Finance

Brenda Evans - Library Board

Paul Black - Library Board

Geraldine Stipp - City Clerk




Mayor McLallen advised all present that Councilman Pope's condition was unchanged and he would continue to need everyone's prayers. She said he was still at the University of Michigan Hospital and Council would appreciate everyone continuing to think positive thoughts for him.





Councilman Crawford added Item 1A for discussion of the Fuerst

property for possible action. An executive session was requested to be scheduled for Item 16 following the meeting for park land acquisition.


Councilwoman Mason added vehicle policy to executive session.


Councilman Mitzel asked if with the Fuerst property an action item would Council consider discussion on the 11 Mile and Wixom site he felt they were related.


Councilman Crawford said his intent was not to have a real detailed discussion.



Councilman Mitzel added an item before 1A which was the status of Council's offer to purchase park land at 11 Mile and Wixom Rd.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid


That the agenda be approved as amended.


Yes (5-Crawford, Mason No (1-Toth) Absent (1-Pope)

Mitzel, McLallen

Schmid) Motion carried




1. Municipal Clerks Week - May 7 through May 13, 1995


Mayor McLallen stated although it had passed Council still wanted to note that it was Municipal Clerks Week. She said our Municipal Clerk was outstanding and Municipal Clerks around the state were what kept us together and made sure all the paper work was moving in the right direction.



WHEREAS, The Office of the Municipal Clerk, a time honored

and vital part of local government exists throughout the world; and



WHEREAS, The Office of the Municipal Clerk, the oldest among

public servants, provides the professional link between the

citizens, the local governing bodies and agencies of government at other levels; and



WHEREAS, The Municipal Clerks have pledged to be ever mindful

of their neutrality and impartiality, rendering equal service

to all; and



WHEREAS, The Municipal Clerk serves as the information center

on functions of local government and community; and



WHEREAS, The Municipal Clerk continually strives to improve

the administration of the affairs of the office of the

Municipal Clerk through participation in education programs,

seminars, workshops and the annual meetings of their state,

province, county and international professional organizations;




WHEREAS, It is most appropriate that we recognize the

accomplishments of the Office of the Municipal Clerk.


NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that the Mayor and City Council of the City of Novi, do hereby declare May 7-13, 1995 as MUNICIPAL CLERK'S WEEK in Novi.


BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED that the Mayor and City Council

applaud all of the fine work achieved by the Municipal Clerks

throughout the State of Michigan and especially recognize our own City Clerk, Gerry Stipp, for the vital services she performs and her exemplary dedication to the City of Novi for the past 36 years.



2. Motorcycle Awareness Month



WHEREAS, the City of Novi has many citizens who are concerned

about motorcycle safety for touring, recreation, and economical transportation; and



WHEREAS, May is the nationally recognized month motorcycles

become more prevalent on our streets, and the need to be aware

of their presence is of the utmost urgency; and



WHEREAS, an overwhelming number of car-motorcycle accidents could be avoided with due regard, respect, and awareness of motorcycles on the streets and intersections of this City; and



WHEREAS, the inclusion of motorcycle awareness as a distinct part of the driver education curriculum and motorcycle rider education programs will help to promote safe driving and motorcycle riding practices; and



WHEREAS, it is in the interest of our community and the

citizens of Novi to note the increase in the amount of motor-

cycle traffic, as we enter the warm weather months, to enable

the reduction of accidents and injuries involving motorcyclists.



NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED that the Mayor and City Council of the City of Novi, do hereby proclaim May as MOTORCYCLE AWARENESS MONTH in the City of Novi.



BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED that the Mayor and City Council

encourage all citizens to be aware of motorcycle traffic

throughout Novi and in surrounding areas, and practice safe

and courteous driving as automobiles share the streets with




3. Police Memorial Day Proclamation


Mayor McLallen stated that it was National Police Memorial Day and in the last year there were nine members of the police across the State of Michigan who gave their lives in service of protecting its citizens.



Mayor McLallen stated the Novi Police Department held a ceremony in honor of all of the police members in the communities throughout Michigan and Governor Engler gave an excellent speech.




WHEREAS, the Congress and President of the United States have

designated May 15 as Peace Officers Memorial Day, and the week

in which it falls as Police Week; and



WHEREAS, the members of the law enforcement agency of the

City of Novi play an essential role in safeguarding the

rights and freedoms of the citizens of Novi; and



WHEREAS, it is important that all citizens know and understand

the problems, duties, and responsibilities of their police

department, and that members of our police department recognize their duty to serve the people by safeguarding life

and property, by protecting them against violence or disorder, and by protecting the innocent against deception and the weak against oppression or intimidation; and



WHEREAS, the police department of the City of Novi has grown

to be a modern and scientific law enforcement agency which

unceasingly provides a vital public service.



NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Council

of the City of Novi, do hereby call upon all citizens to observe the week of May 15-21, 1995 as Police Week with

appropriate ceremonies in which all of our people may join in

commemorating police officers, past and present, who by their faithful and loyal devotion to their responsibilities have rendered a dedicated service to their communities and, in doing so have established for themselves an enviable and enduring reputation for preserving the rights and security of all citizens.



I FURTHER call upon all citizens of Novi to observe Monday,

May 15, 1995 as Peace Officer Memorial Day in honor of those

peace officers who, through their courageous deeds, have

lost their lives or have become disabled in the performance of



Mayor McLallen offered the Novi Police Officers Council's thanks for an outstanding job done all year long.





Mayor McLallen stated this item had been held over to June 5, 1995 when a whole class of fire protection officers would be welcomed to the City.



PUBLIC HEARING - 1995-96 Budget including Truth in Taxation Hearing

in the following funds:


1. General Fund

2. Police & Fire Fund

3. Parks and Recreation Fund

4. Library


Mr. Kriewall said the City Administration presented a balanced budget to City Council in late March early April. He said the goal in preparing the budget for the community was to attempt to keep the taxes at the prior years rate. He said fortunately they had been able to do that for six or seven years in a row in terms of keeping the milage levy at the same rate that it had been or reduced from prior years.


Mr. Kriewall said that had been accomplished by a couple of things that work in tandem to allow that to be done. One was many of the bond issues that are outstanding in this community that had paid for facilities such as the Civic Center, Police Station, four Fire Stations, etc. are being retired by the growth that moved into the community. He said they normally finance these facilities for 15 to 20 years and residents and businesses that move into town over the next 15 or 20 years help pay for those facilities.


Mr. Kriewall said the other benefit that had been exercised over time was to take advantage of growth and development as it affected the operating side of the budget. He said by adopting budgets at the Truth in Taxation level historically we have capitalized on the growth of the community to cover the inflationary costs of running the City and we had benefitted from that. He said sometimes the residents ask what they get from all the new growth that was taking place, from the Twelve Oaks Mall, Vic's Market, Expo Center and all the new homes being built in Novi. He said what they had received was the ability to keep their tax bills the same or actually have it reduced from the City perspective, by the growth that had come to the community. Mr. Kriewall said the inflationary cost of operating the Novi City government over the past several years had been covered by the growth as it emerged in the community.


Mr. Kriewall said what they had found historically in Novi to take place was that some of the extraordinary needs of the community could not be covered by the growth that Novi was experiencing. He said there were demands and services that had not been provided or kept pace with over time that needed to be dealt with either through bond issues or special operating milages. He said most of the capital needs had been addressed with voted bond issues where they had come up operationally short and that was primarily in the areas of police and fire protection. He said they had gone to the community through a citizens committee and voted in special police and fire milages that had provided enhanced services as Novi had grown.


Mr. Kriewall said there were two major premises that had come out of the budget development and study sessions. He said the first was, based on a presentation by the Police Chief Doug Shaeffer, that we are not keeping up with demands for police personnel that had become very apparent through statistics presented to City Council. He said they had maximized a few years ago their ability to add additional police and fire personnel with the special police and fire milage and they had run out of gas. He said for the first time in several years the specially voted police and fire milage was tapped out. He said they had to go to the General Fund to subsidize the Police and Fire Fund to the tune of $200,000; it become very apparent in the budget study process this year that they were having problems keeping up with police and fire personnel.


Mr. Kriewall said that being the case the City Council had determined that they really needed to charge a subsequent police and fire citizens committee to study police and fire needs again as we did several years ago. He said the intent was to have this committee reconvene to look at the demonstrated police and fire needs and come back to City Council within the next 90 days or so with a recommendation as to the potential of readdressing the specially voted police and fire milage and to see if it should be restored to its original value.


Mr. Kriewall said what happened over time with the Headlee Tax Amendment and the Truth in Taxation Tax Legislation the milage had become rolled back. He said under the Headlee Tax Amendment cities are allowed to increase their milages or maintain certain milages to provide for the cost of living of operating government. He said this was a very auto oriented society and the labor unions follow the patterns of the auto industry in terms of wage increases and we have to address those needs. He said it was an inflationary cost for the community and we had to deal with that. He said under the Headlee Tax Amendment cities could preserve a certain amount of their milage and roll it up to address inflationary needs. He said they had not done that in the past several years and they had really kept taxes at the same level and that was called the Truth in Taxation level. He said Truth in Taxation meant that for any inflationary increases in the value of the tax base of this community that occur annually the City Council had to announce any roll up in taxes over and above a full roll back to compensate for the rate of inflation. He said in other words there was a bench marking process that took place with the adoption of city and other governmental budgets that made them announce to the public an actual tax increase of any sort. He said this would include an inflationary pace keeping increase of the milage.


Mr. Kriewall said later this evening they would identify some proposed tax levies that go above Truth in Taxation to address community needs and that would be identified specifically for the citizens.


Mr. Kriewall said the idea of the Truth in Taxation part of the hearing was to talk in terms of the identified tax increase that was being proposed and show the citizens what that meant in actual dollars and cents.


Mr. Kriewall said the first part of the presentation would deal with just a general summary of the General Fund Revenue that comprised the budget.


Mr. Kriewall explained the revenue and expenditure side of the budget. He said the total revenue side of the General Fund Budget was projected at $14,014,659.00.


Mr. Kriewall explained the key indicator chart in terms of expenditures in the community as they presented their budget to City Council. He said this was really the bench mark in terms of where we are going expense wise because the utility costs and other costs of operating government increase incrementally each year. Mr. Kriewall said they pay a lot of attention to changes in personnel counts because this was where the tax dollars really end up. He said it was funding personnel that was really the name of the game. He said they had prided themselves along with City Council over the years in maintaining one of the lowest personnel counts in Oakland County per population and they had demonstrated that historically. However, with the continued growth at a rate of at least 1,500 people per year coming to this community and looking at changes in personnel they really had not added any personnel significantly for four or five years. He said there were changes being mandated by growth in the community and the expectations that City Council and City Administration had to deliver services. Mr. Kriewall said there was a total of 6.5 people being added at this point. In addition, carried in a separate fund a recreation coordinator would be added in the Parks and Recreation Department.

He said that was being demanded by the burgeoning parks and recreation program with the very successful bond issue well under way and the expansion of the recreation program caused mainly by increased growth in the community.


Mr. Kriewall explained the summary of the milages that City Council would consider levying in the proposed 1995-96 budget. He said the total milage proposed for 1995-96 was 10.4723 and that was only up slightly from 1994-95 of 10.3543.


Mr. Kriewall said the State Equalized Valuation of the community was proposed from the Assessor's Department at $1,477,000.00. He said this increased 7.97% for the next fiscal year.


Mr. Kriewall explained the impact of the proposed tax rate with a comparison from year to year.


Mr. Kriewall explained Truth in Taxation and the crux of the hearing that had to do with Truth in Taxation. He said the proposed milage that the City Council and the City Administration were talking about levying this year was 4.1367 mills. That was an increase above Truth in Taxation of .2652 mills and that would yield an increased amount of revenue in the amount of $385,000.00. The money would be used to fund the re-computerization of the community.


Mr. Kriewall said the bottom line was if everything that was proposed was done in terms of going over Truth in Taxation if you have a $200,000 home in the 1994 tax year your tax bill would only go up $25.40.





Mayor McLallen said the Council did have before them a resolution regarding this which the Council could act on if it chose to. She said when the Council voted on a Municipal Budget they needed a majority of five votes in order to appropriate money. She asked Council if they were ready to take action on the budget.


Councilwoman Mason questioned Mr. Kriewall regarding his example of the tax bill for a $200,000 home. Mr. Kriewall explained.


Councilman Mitzel asked if Council was planning to have a budget wrap up session.


Mayor McLallen said that was her question to Council.


Councilman Mitzel said he saw on the Consent Agenda there was a proposal for a Thursday evening interview meeting and stated it could be combined with the budget wrap up. He asked if that would be possible or were the interviews scheduled fairly heavy.


Gerry Stipp, City Clerk said there were quite a few interviews.


Mr. Kriewall said the earliest a budget study meeting could be held was May 30.


Councilman Schmid said it was his understanding that this would not be voted on and there would be a budget wrap up and then it would be brought before the public to be voted on.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That a budget wrap up session be scheduled for May 30, 1995.


Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried



SPECIAL REPORT - Preservation Novi - RE: Fuerst Property Buildings


James Antosiak spoke representing Preservation Novi. He said when he spoke to Council in January they proposed to fund the property assessment on the Fuerst Farm buildings. He said that assessment was nearly completed and the final property assessment reports were expected by the end of the month. He said Council would be provided with copies as soon as he received them. Mr. Antosiak said the preliminary reports that had been received were included in Council's packets.


Mr. Antosiak stated that Preservation Novi engaged Dean Johnson, a registered architect and teacher at Lawrence Tech and Ferris State Universities, to conduct the property assessment. He said they had also engaged a profession engineer, George Eller to conduct a structural review of the buildings.


Mr. Antosiak said they were very happy to report that the preliminary property assessment was very optimistic and indicated that the buildings could be easily renovated. He said the report stated that there were no major structural deficiencies in the Fuerst Home and it could be easily renovated. He said many of the details and trim were in place and are original only showing signs of normal wear and tear. Mr. Johnson discovered that parts that appear to be part of the original house on that property foundation, doors and molding still remain. He said it was believed that the original house dated perhaps from the 1830's.


He said the home did need some work. There was water damage on the second floor which indicated that the roof probably needed replacing and Mr. Johnson said there might be some additional support needed for the roof. He said one foundation wall needed some partial rebuilding and the rear porch entry might require repair. He said overall the conclusion was that the house was in good condition for its age and for its lack of recent use. He said that the findings were fairly consistent with the findings of Mr. Kirk who did a report for the school board about two years ago.


Mr. Johnson and Mr. Eller also looked at the four barns and generally found them to be in good repair.


Mr. Antosiak said the old barn nearest the house needed the most work. It needed support for the loft and floors and bracing for a wall. He said they indicated that the north barn needed only foundation repair and could be used with no additional stabilization. The south and east barns needed only minor repair except that there was a lean to that should be removed.


Mr. Antosiak said they also engaged Robert Switzer a teacher of historic preservation at Eastern Michigan and the University of Toledo, co-authored the book America's Favorite Homes and on the advisory board of the periodical American Bungalow.


He said Mr. Switzer concluded that the exterior integrity of the home was intact and provided an excellent example of the 1920's farm house. He believed the home was remarkably well preserved and if renovated would capture a slice of rural farm life quickly being lost.


Mr. Antosiak said they received a report from a Veterans Organization that indicated that Scott Dunham who was a son of previous owners of the Fuerst Farm was likely the only Novi resident killed in WW I. He said it was quite possible that the farm had more than just general historic interest but also have interest specific to Novi.


Mr. Antosiak stated that the renovation of the house and the barns was feasible. He said Preservation Novi was a group with finite resources and did not have the funds to acquire the Fuerst property for themselves or for the City. However, because of the findings and the general community interest they believed that the City should be able to find the funds to acquire the property. He said they did not have immediate funds available to renovate the building but had a desire among the members to see the Fuerst Farm made usable again. However, if the City did agree to acquire the Fuerst property Preservation Novi was willing and prepared almost immediately to undertake a fund raising drive for renovation of the home. He said it could be started as soon as next month when they had tentatively scheduled their 1995 annual meeting. In addition to their own fund raising they were prepared to investigate any other potential funds for renovation.


Mr. Antosiak said the final issue was the future use of the property. He said given the uncertainly and speculation about ownership, timing and availability it was difficult to find a group who would commit to using the property. He said they understood that meeting space for various community organizations was at a premium and they believed that the Fuerst House might help some of those concerns be alleviated. He said Linda Wickert would speak about the Novi Theater Group who had identified specific needs which they believed could be met by one of the barns on the site for a community theater organization.


Mr. Antosiak said Preservation Novi was asking that the City open negotiations with the school board about the terms of acquiring that property because of the May 31 deadline.


Linda Wickert said because she was employed by the Parks and Recreation Department she stated she was speaking on behalf of Preservation Novi and not for herself although she was a resident of the City.


Ms. Wickert said that Preservation Novi approached her and asked if she could use one of the barns as a theater. She told them that she could. She said the Novi Theater had begun in 1991

by the Novi Parks and Recreation program and herself. They started with two plays a year for ages 13 and up and two years ago they added a children's annex performance group which was ages 7-12. Ms. Wickert said because they are a Parks and Recreation Program their focus was to serve the children and young adults that come to them. She said she would love to place everyone that auditions and last year they did 6 plays. Ms. Wickert said she quit her daytime job so she could do this because there was so much talent showing up for auditions. She said much of the success of the program was due in part to the Parks and Recreations total commitment to the arts. She said it was very rare that Parks and Recreation Departments devote time to the arts as usually it was all given to sports.


Ms. Wickert said this past year 4 performances had been added to some shows depending on its popularity. She said every performance was now selling out before it opened. The last two plays were completely sold out before opening.


Ms. Wickert said she would like to be in a position when children come to audition to have room for everybody because there are X number of programs. She said they were very happy with their theater at the Civic Center and Parks and Recreation had been wonderful and whatever she had asked for they had given. They support the program 100% and she loved it at the Civic Center but they had outgrown their little theater. She said they couldn't open anymore walls because of the blower system and they didn't have mikes. She said the problem was space and they had outgrown their space as far as sets and costumes.



Ms. Wickert said a barn theater would mean that everyone who wanted to be in theater could be. She said they wouldn't have to turn people away at the door because they are sold out and they would finally be able to add an adult performing group. They would have space to store and build sets and their very large costume collection. Ms. Wickert said she thought that the City of Novi had made a commitment to the arts by offering the program in the first place and they would like actors to find a place to perform as often and whenever they need.





John Beach representing the Willowbrook Community Association wanted to address Agenda Item #3 and would like to do so during discussion on the item.


Diane Davies was present regarding the children who presented signatures to save the Fuerst Farm. She had previously presented 400 signatures of adults and children and had obtained another 800 signatures to give to Council for a grand total of 1,200 signatures. She said if there had been time they could have gotten many more signatures. She said she had kept track of people who had chosen not to sign the petition and it amounted to about 1%. She said people felt very strong about this issue and it had caused people to go out to the farm and see it for themselves and come back in horror with the thought that it could be torn down. She said people want to save all the buildings and utilize them with things such as the summer concert series.


John Walk, 24841 Joseph, Leslie Park Sub. wanted to discuss Item #3 on the Agenda which was Willowbrook Farms Subdivision. He said he had lived in Novi 11 years and thought the project was premature. He felt the Council needed to consider the health, safety and welfare of the people that live in the Leslie Park Sub.

He said Joseph Drive and Brenda Lane are dirt roads that are approximately 20 feet wide. Joseph and Brenda residents do not have City water, sewer nor sidewalks. He said currently the condition of the streets was marginal and with moderate rain the streets become poor rapidly. He said one of the Leslie Park traffic issues was when residents bought homes in the sub it was a dead end street and it attracted them to that area. He said since the City had opened Brenda to the east the quiet sub had become a through street to 10 Mile. He said if the proposal was approved he had figured out using the traffic information provided at the Planning Commission meeting, Leslie Park Sub generates about 140 traffic trips a day with 14 houses. He said when they opened up Camborne Place to the east that sub generated another 165 trips a day through Leslie Park. He said if the new proposal went through a 155 more trips a day would be generated through Leslie Park and would bring the total to about 460 traffic trips a day on the already burdened dirt roads. He said with no sidewalks their children use the street to get around and in the winter they have no choice but to use the streets. He said the streets could not take the use as they were currently constructed and the two other subs generate more traffic then his own subdivision.


Mr. Walk said the Brenda Lane information was never made available through the Planning Commission meetings. He said they just changed the plan after the plan was submitted during the Planning Commission meeting itself. He didn't think any of the Leslie Park Sub people were contacted or even still understand how the one way Brenda Lane would operate and help them manage the traffic down their dirt streets. He felt when a proposal came in it should stand on its own value and not be changed after audience participation was over. He felt that the north and south end of the new sub should find its own entrance. He said past Council's had defeated the same proposal and he felt that it needed to be defeated again.


Joyce Stickley, Leslie Park Sub said her sub had been there for 45 years and would like Council to take a hard look at the situation. She presented Council with three letters for consideration. She said they protested in 1992 and are still protesting. They wanted to keep it as it was and to be left alone.


Margaret Schmidt, 25377 Wixom Road said the Fuerst Farm was an emotional subject for her. She said she read in the paper that Novi one of the fastest growing communities, had no farms left. She said she was doing programs at the Orchard Hills school with the kindergartners and one of the little boys thought that he lived on a farm because he lived in Chase Farms Sub. She found that funny and also very sad. She said it was going to be a real shame if these children grew up thinking because a subdivision was named Chase Farms they lived on a farm. She stated she would like assurance that the Fuerst Farm would be there in the future for the children. She said the children collected signatures for the petitions and their parent were right behind them and there are many people prepared to go to work on that farm including herself. She asked Council to look favorably on the report from Preservation Novi and go to the school board and bargain with them.


James Korte, Shawood Lake said some 90 days ago the Taft Road issue came up and the north end bounded at the situation and committees were to be set up. He said 60 days later nothing was going on and no meetings had happened and at that point in time he said because of City Management they would not do anything. He said 60 days are gone and nothings happened.


Mayor McLallen said they had interviewed for the committee and they are having continuous interviews so there was progress being made.


Mr. Korte asked when their first meeting was.


Mayor McLallen said they were interviewing applicants for the committee.


Mr. Korte said they only had 90 days and 60 are gone that means 30 days are left and if Council takes another 30 days nothings left.


Mr. Korte said some 60 days ago he complained because they had an issue regarding City property near the corner of Duana about which he discussed with Mr. Bugbee. He said last year these people took over the City piece of property not an easement or stub street it was City property and they had taken it as their own. He said this subdivision chose to have Walled Lake frontage and after more than 60 days the fences are still up. He said they were tagged once and Bruce Jerome decided that after the person that put the fences up took the tags off that they didn't have to come off. He said if this City was going to allow that subdivision lake frontage on Walled Lake then he was present representing Shawood/Walled Lake Heights and they would like their hunk of Walled Lake too. He said he didn't know why it was so difficult to get these people off of City owned property. He said if he built a fence on the Civic Center front lawn the City would take it down and he would be arrested. He said he talked with Mr. Fried also. He said they burn fires on the property and when someone falls into that fire who would be liable when it was City property. Mr. Fried assured him that wasn't so but Mr. Korte wanted to remind him of City property and a near electrocution and $17 or $19 Million. He said there was a big problem going on there and if the City was not going to solve it he wanted his share of the pie.


Mr. Korte said Douglas Shaeffer, Police Chief, City employee and executive gave a lovely speech today and he was not arguing anything regarding police day and the awful things that our policemen go through. Mr. Korte said our City Charter said non-partisan. He said the man was so politically oriented today, so Engler, so Republican and that was illegal. He said he was not arguing Engler and that he voted for the man and had been Republican all his life. He stated the City Charter said non-partisan and if the Chief were present he would chastise him publicly. He said he had talked with Councilman Pope many times on his republicanism publicly. He said it was against City Charter and asked if the Charter was like an ordinance, was that not a ticketable issue like a misdemeanor. Mr. Korte said the man was illegal by City Charter and that could not be accepted. He said he would like the man ticketed and would like him to answer the question of why he went against the City Charter. He said he wanted it researched because if the City could do it to him he was no different he had to abide by the law also.


Milicent Davies, 24826 Jamestown who was 9 years old spoke about the Fuerst Farm. She said if the Fuerst Farm were torn down what would happen to the soccer field next to it.


Mayor McLallen said they would have to look into it.


Becky Staab, 41887 Cherry Hill Road said as a citizen she wanted to thank Council for listening to Preservation Novi and reading their reports. She said as a citizen of Novi she would like to encourage Council to take a positive step forward to open discussion with the school board. Ms. Staab said she didn't want Council to write them a blank check or exchange deeds with them she just wanted them to sit down and talk. She said there was a door that needed to be opened and if it wasn't opened now the chance might be lost.


Ms. Staab said as co-chairman of the Fuerst Farm Advisory Committee for the school board she would like to remind Council of a couple of facts. She said Ruby and Iva Fuerst probably could have written the new book that's out called First Things First because they knew exactly what life was all about, to live, to love and to leave a legacy. She said these ladies lived in Novi and they took care of their property and they loved where they were. She said when talking about the Fuerst sisters and love its talking about love for the City. She said they would walk into the library and ask what they needed and write the check. They never said no to people who really wanted something from them and truly out of friendship and love for the City they were willing to give what they had. She said legacy was a little harder. She felt sure that the Fuerst sisters thought they were leaving a legacy when they sold their property to the school board. She had no doubt of that and no doubt that they didn't think their legacy would be to bulldoze the property and build a kindergarten area. She knew they didn't think their legacy was going to be to sell it at a great profit to some major restaurant chain and she was sure they didn't want it to be a parking lot. She said what they wanted was for the kids to play soccer on a patch of grass. She said the money they left to the school board, $600,000.00, was now in a scholarship fund and the $600,000.00 that was left to the City of Novi was building fields. She said these ladies left a legacy to the senior citizens, to the children and to the citizens of Novi and she was asking Council to simply open a door.


Mr. Avagian addressed Council as a private citizen. He said during his 32 years in the classroom prior to retirement, he was always sensitive to the feelings of his students because he taught 11-12 graders in American Government and Law. He said they all came from homes with political persuasions of one sort or another taking Mr. Korte's comments into perspective but what we all needed to do in a non-partisan form of government was to turn up a couple of notches the degree of sensitivity for our fellow citizens.


Mr. Avagian said last November, 1994 the first lady came to Novi and she was not greeted by any City Official or the Mayor. He understood there were some extraordinary reasons for this and there weren't any formal invitations given. He said this was not a democrat or republican issue it was a people issue. He said he was a citizen of the community and his politics made no difference at all. He said when he brought to a City Official his comment that he felt that Police Memorial Day had become politicized by the kind of speech that the Chief had to give he was told that there were no democrats in Novi anyway. He said he now understood that it was prepared text and given to him to read, so that might in part explain the situation and the source of unhappiness on the part of some. However, he took exception to that and stated that this was a non-partisan City government and asked that a higher level of sensitivity be shown for peoples personal beliefs be it religion, politics or whatever it was.


Glen Now, Brenda Drive stated he was opposed to Willowbrook Subdivision and hoped that City Council did what they did last time and stopped it.


Kathy Mutch., 24541 Hampton Court, presented photographs taken at the Historical Re-enactment Weekend that kicked off Michigan History Week in Novi sponsored by the Novi Historical Commission. She said it was well attended and wanted Council to see the kinds of activities that took place. She said she wanted to point out the number of activities spanning the history of the State of Michigan from the Native Americans, French Canadians, Colonial Americans, British and on up through the Civil War era. She said what she tried to capture in the pictures was the interaction that took place and the demonstration of skills and crafts people were able to observe and have a hands on participation in the event.


In addition, Ms. Mutch showed Council a picture taken at the Novi Road Cemetery showing the marker for Scott H. Dunham, Co. H 126 Infantry, 32nd Division. She said he was 25 years old when he fell in action on October 15 in the Argon Forest.


Ms. Mutch said it was fitting to know with Memorial Day approaching the Mr. Dunham was not only the only Novi person that was killed in action in WWI but he was also a hero. She said he carried dispatches above and beyond the call of duty numerous times. She said as the picture came around to Council Members they would have a picture of Scott Dunham in his uniform. She said when it got to Councilman Toth she would like him to have this particular button because he had a record of supporting veterans in this community and thought this would be one that would be fitting for him to wear.


Ms. Mutch said that the Fuerst property not only had in its history the rural nature of the Fuerst Farm and the first town meeting that was held in Novi in the house but the WWI era was also represented in a way that many of us have not had to deal with which was the loss of a loved one giving more than any other family in Novi gave in that particular effort.


Mary Jane Case, Leslie Park, said the Singh Development bought the property knowing it was landlocked. She said they said there was no property available to take them out to Grand River but for the right amount of money they could buy the property either way. She asked that they just leave them alone.


Deborah Bundoff, 12 Mile Road, asked Council to pull Item 7B off the Consent Agenda as it concerned her and at this time it might be premature and unnecessary.





1. Approval of Minutes Regular Meeting of April 10, Special

Meeting of April 10, Special Meeting of April 6, Special

Meeting of April 13, Regular Meeting of April 24, Special

Meeting of April 24, *Special Meeting of April 27 and *Regular Meeting of May 8.

2. Schedule Special Meeting for Interviews Thursday, May 25 at

7 :00 p.m. (Taft Road Committee, Police & Fire Committee and

Planning Commission)

3. Award bid for Underground Storage Tank Upgrading at the Municipal Garage to Hawkins Equipment Co. in the amount of $40,500 and Resolution - Budget amendment 95-10 for same.



NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the following 1994-1995

budget amendment is authorized to provide for the additional

funds needed for the underground storage tank upgrade.





MUNICIPAL GARAGE (Capital outlay- $15,500


Building Improvements)


CONTINGENCIES (New balance $146,774) (15,500)


4. Acceptance of Water & Sewer Easement and Bills of Sale - Maxim



5. Ordinance 95-108.03 - Dangerous Animals Ordinance - II Reading




6. Ordinance 95-23.15 - Anti Graffiti Ordinance II Reading

7. Condemnation Resolutions - Novi Road, 12 to 12 1/2 Mile

A. Toltec Structures, a Michigan Co-Partnership and E & M

Inc, a Michigan Corporation




WHEREAS, present conditions in the City of Novi, Oakland

County, Michigan, necessitate the widening of Novi Road

between Twelve Mile Road and Twelve and One-Half Mile Road

in the City of Novi;



WHEREAS, proposed plans showing said relocation and improvement have been prepared; and



WHEREAS, it has been determined that said relocation and

improvement is necessary for the use and benefit of the public; and



WHEREAS, in order to construct said improvement, it is

necessary that the City acquire the fee in real estate

described in the original minutes of the Council.


B. Deborah Ann Bundoff


8. Award bid for Fuel Contract to M & L Petroleum, Inc. for

$.0090 over rack price (Municipal Garage)

9. Award bid for Trophies to Awards & Specialties, Inc. based

on unit prices

10. Award bid for DPW office Conversion to David L. Mielock

Associates, Inc. in the amount of $5,200 (Water and Sewer)

11. Approval to seek bids for painting at stations 1,2 and 3

12. Approval to enter into option for part of parcel 12-200-003

(Warner Family Trust) and approval to exercise option after

provisions of the agreement have been satisfied.

13. Resolution - Budget Amendment 95-11 - Settlement of POAM




NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the following 1994-1995

budget amendment is authorized to provide for the additional

funds needed for the POAM contract settlement.





POLICE DEPARTMENT (Personal Services) $ 79,000

CONTINGENCIES (New Balance $67,774) (79,000)


14. Formal approval of settlement agreement - R. Maroudis v. City

15. Resolution - Acceptance of Highway and Utility Easement -

Mary Bosco - Sec. 20 - $1.00



WHEREAS, present conditions of the City of Novi, Oakland

County, Michigan, necessitate the improvement of Eleven Mile

Road in the City of Novi; and



WHEREAS, proposed plans showing said improvement have been

prepared by the City Engineers; and



WHEREAS, it has been determined that said improvement is

necessary for the use and benefit of the public; and



WHEREAS, in order to construct said improvement, it is

necessary that the City acquire Highway and Utility Easement

over the parcel described in Exhibit "A: attached hereto,

premises situated in the City of Novi, County of Oakland,

State of Michigan.



NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City purchase said

easement, a copy of Highway and Utility Easement Agreement is

attached hereto as Exhibit "A", for the sum of $1.00 and the

special conditions as set forth in Exhibit B of said agreement.

16. Approval of a Tri-Party Agreement between the City, Boston

Chicken and Aetna Life Insurance Co. for improvements to

Crescent Blvd. within the Town Center.


Councilwoman Mason removed Item #2 and Item #7B.


Councilman Mitzel removed Item #6.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid


That Consent Agenda Items 1, 3, 4, 5, 7A, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16.


Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried







1A. Levy Property - Delta's Property on 11 Mile


Councilman Mitzel stated he received a letter listed as #6 under correspondence stating that Delta Trucking was electing to terminate Council's offer of purchase for the park land at 11 Mile and Wixom Road. He asked if there was any way the deal could be salvaged because it was an ideal site for park land and what steps would the Council or Administration have to take.


Mr. Kriewall said he had discussed this with Mr. Hauser and his supervisor at the Levy company and they were going to meet with him on May 31 to discuss alternatives. He said he had also discussed it with Mr. Bugbee and his opinion was that they should resolve the title issue on the property even if it would take some time so that we could move ahead with the State on this particular site. He said all of the alternatives would be looked at during the next week or two and that they were not giving up on this site. It was just their reaction to having problems with it. He said they indicated that they would provide us with an alternative site in the same vicinity if this could not be worked out. He said it was their intention to pursue the same site.



1. Ordinance 95-101.05 - Cable Transfer Ordinance and transfer







It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Toth


That Ordinance 95-101.05 a Cable Transfer Ordinance and Transfer Agreement II Reading - AN ORDINANCE TO ADD ARTICLE V TO CHAPTER 9 OF THE NOVI CODE OF ORDINANCES, TO CONDITIONALLY








Councilwoman Mason wanted to verify that this would only transfer the contract that the City now had with MetroVision over to the company that was buying MetroVision. She said this would not extend the contract and did not mean anything was being negotiated.


Ms. Collins said that was correct. She said they were starting the renewal process and closing the transfer process.


Councilman Crawford said this did not concern the renewal process only the transfer process. However, the two coincided but we are in the process of starting the negotiations for renewal. He said this only addressed the transfer.


Councilwoman Mason asked if other cable companies were being looked at or were they staying with MetroVision.


Councilman Crawford said that was an issue to be decided and that it was not being renewed only transferring at this point. He said Councilwoman Mason's concern about other cable companies or anything else was an issue to be taken up at a later date.


Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried






Councilman Crawford felt that it would be appropriate, based on the preliminary report that looked very favorable, that Council take some sort of action in contacting the School Administration or School Board as to what the Council's intent might be. He said that might be directing the City Manager to write a letter based on information tonight and that there would be a final report June 5 with more detail on funding and restoration. He said perhaps Council could recharge the committee that met a few months ago consisting of a couple Council Members and a few School Board Members and Administration to discuss some preliminary thoughts on how the property could be saved or transferred.


Mr. Kriewall recommend that the second of the alternatives be followed and the Fuerst Property Joint Committee be recharged because he thought there was a dialogue that developed with school representatives through that particular committee. He said if Council chose to move that along he thought the same committee should follow through on it.


Councilman Crawford said Council was under a dead line imposed by the School District and would hate to have anything happen to that property because of lack of communication.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid


That the Fuerst Property Joint Committee with the School Board be recharged and that the Administration initiate a discussion with information coming back to Council within two weeks.





Councilman Mitzel said his concern about having another committee was that it was more time being eaten away. He said the report made it clear that the buildings were in good condition but the longer Council waited the worse condition they would get in. He said the Committee that acted last October, November and December basically finished the work and the School District's position was fairly clear; either the City was interested or not by May 31 and that they were interested in a land swap for a possible school site. He thought those issues had been worked out and that an appropriate action to take would be to notify the School District that Council was interested in acquiring the site and then have City Administration start working out the details on what had to be done. To eventually work toward getting all 8 acres with all the barns.


Councilman Schmid said as a member of that Committee he recalled that the school was not interested at that time in selling part of the property along the driveway and a couple of the barns. He said part of the discussion was contingent upon the City buying land that was just mentioned prior to this discussion. He said part of that discussion was that the preservation of those buildings had to have some indication of how they would be financed. He said that was part of the charge that was the dead line for the 31st of May. He thought Councilman Crawford had a good idea to try to go back into that Committee because the decisions already been made unless the Committee could come up with ideas on how to fund it and how to maintain it once it had been funded. He thought this would be thousands and thousands of dollars when talking theaters and using it for public use. He said it would be major dollars to get the buildings ready for the public. He said the liability was tremendous. He said he supported the project but felt that funding had to be found.


Councilman Schmid said he would recommend that the committee reconvene and somebody should talk to the school board. He said the City did not commit to buy that land and that there were other provisions and they had not been met based on the last committee report.


Councilman Toth said Councilman Schmid had raised some good points. He said the property was owned by the school system and the cost of the property had never been fully resolved nor had it been resolved that the school would even sell the property or even donate it. He felt the School Administration should be contacted and it should be found out if they were willing to enter into any agreement. He said if not there was not much the Council could do as it was their property.


Councilman Toth said another thing was there was some cost and the Preservation Novi would complete their assessment by the end of the month. He said he served on the Committee for the Fuerst property for the school systems. He said the big problem they had was to bring that site up to meet current standards and that was going to cost a pretty penny. He said the preliminary estimates were around $300,000.00 and that was just to improve the property. He said to meet ADA standards and fire department standards would be a tremendous cost. He said some of the rough figures should be assembled by the staff before it was pursued much further. He said if the School Board was not willing to enter into any process to obtain the property that cuts us off at the pass. He said there should be some rough figures from the Administration as to what the total project would cost and then the funding would have to be available. He was all for preserving it but just didn't know where the money would come from. He said if the school system wanted $300,000 for the property and it cost $300,000 to renovate it that was $600,000. He asked where would that kind of money come from. He said those were just numbers he was tossing out and he thought that a fairly good set of numbers should be provided by the City Administration as to what was needed to bring it up.


Councilman Crawford said a lot of those numbers would be received by the end of the month as to potential cost of refurbishing that property, potential sources for that and even if it was not immediately obtainable he felt it was important to preserve that property by obtaining it. He said there are a lot of people in the community that said they would work on it and fund raise for it and there are other potential sources. He said in response to Councilman Mitzel's concerns he thought that was one of the reasons to make contact again with the School District. He said they, on the surface, explored a lot of the possibilities of acquiring that property. He thought perhaps they could get into a little more detail and get into a position to act on it rather soon. He felt Councilman Mitzel's concerns would be addressed with the recharging of the committee.


Councilman Mitzel said the School District had already shown their interest in swapping, exchanging or selling land. They had given Council an ultimatum that by May 31 Council told them they were interested in having the property or they wanted to tear down the buildings because they don't want to maintain them. He said the School Board had already spoken. He said the figures for the cost to renovate and eventually have whatever use could be on going for a long time. If Council waited to nail down those costs to finalize everything they were losing more time that the buildings were deteriorating.


Councilman Mitzel said it was time for the City to say they were interested in the 5 acre site and to open up talks with the School District, whether through a Committee or Administration to finalize whatever mechanism that land would be acquired through.

He thought it was time to act on that and the worst that could happen would be that the City acquired the land and decided not to preserve it and it became an extra area for the library. He said the best that could happen would be that the Farm site would be saved and used for the community.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That the motion be amended that the City Council notify as soon as possible the School District of their intent of interest in acquiring the 5 acre site and the whole 8 acres if they are interested.





Councilman Crawford said he would vote against the amendment not because he didn't want that to eventually happen but he felt it was premature. He thought by starting a dialogue with the School District within the next week or so that very item would be discussed. He said to make it such a definite condition at this point was a little premature and might hamper other negotiations.

Councilman Schmid said he would not support the motion because it was premature to make an offer to buy the land. He thought this could be worked out but it would take a lot of effort by a lot of people to find the money.


Councilwoman Mason said it was her understanding that Councilman Mitzel just said the School Board had said they had to have an answer by May 31 or else they would consider taking everything down. She thought just a letter was needed saying the City was interested in acquiring the property.


Mayor McLallen said to clarify it she thought everyone was in the same church which was still juggling the pews around. She said Council just wanted the School Board to know that the Council had an interest in keeping the properties. She said still at a loss for some of the details Council would still like to move forward as quickly as possible.


Mayor McLallen asked Councilman Mitzel to restate his amendment.


That the motion be amended to say that Council should respond to the School District by May 31 in writing that the City was interested in acquiring the property.





Councilman Toth said he thought Council should charge the committee first. He said if Council drafts a motion now it sounded like Council was willing to pay any price. He said in theory he supported the idea but did not support the amendment.


Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Fried if in any way the amendment he offered committed the City to any price for that property.


Mr. Fried said absolutely not.


Vote on the amendment.


Yes (2-Mitzel, Mason) No (4-Crawford, Toth,

Schmid, McLallen)


Absent (1-Pope) Amendment defeated


Mayor McLallen asked Councilman Crawford to restate the main motion.


That Council recharge the Fuerst Farm Advisory Committee made up of Councilman Crawford and Schmid, School Board Members and Administration and that the City Administration set up a meeting before May 31.





Councilman Mitzel asked that the Administration let Council know at the May 25 meeting whether the School District insisted upon having a yes or no answer on May 31. He said he would support the motion just so it would move forward.


Vote on the main motion


Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried



2. Proposed Zoning Map Amendment 18.533 - Request by Hughlan

Development - East side of Meadowbrook, South of 13 Mile



David Lanciault, representing Hughes Properties, put up a concept plan for his project. He read into the record their letter to the Mayor regarding the rezoning of the property:


"Our three zoning requests for the 40 acre parcel of land located along Meadowbrook between 12 and 13 Mile Roads was not recommended by Novi's Planning Commission on April 10, 1995. On behalf of Hughlan Meadowbrook Limited Partnership we would like the City Council to consider the following issues pertaining to why we feel this zoning request should be granted.


There is a practical difficulty in developing the property as presently zoned because of its unique configuration and location of wetlands and woodlands. If developed as presently zoned without any variances or special consideration by the City the maximum density would be approximately 10 residential sites for the entire 40 acre parcel. The proposed rezoning would not have any adverse impact on the surrounding land uses due to the unique natural characteristics of the site. The property is surrounded by a school to the north, the Vistas to the west and 20 acres of wetlands woodlands buffered through the south. The existing single family subdivision located to the east would only be minimally impacted by the R-3 zoning because of the overall low density of less then 1 per acre.


As mentioned above the property is unique because it is adjacent to a proposed elementary school and across the street from the Vistas of Novi PUD. Therefore, agricultural, live stock, dairy and or very large residential lots would be inappropriate. A residential zoning of R-3 would be more appropriate and transitional. In addition an R-3 zoning would be more likely to have young families with school age children.


The City has a number of examples of R-2 zoning and higher zoned property adjacent to school uses. The R-3 rezoning with an overall density of less than 1 dwelling unit per acre will provide a logical and sound transition between the Vistas which has the approximate density of 3. units per acre and location of the proposed Walled Lake Elementary School on the north property line.

Because of the site, significant amount of wetlands and other natural features the total development for R-3 zoning would only be approximately 37 homes assuming a wetland crossing permit granted by the DNR. This density on 40 acre properties will still maintain an RA character of less then one dwelling unit per acre. If rezoned to R-3 the character of Meadowbrook Road would not be significantly impacted because of the unique shape of the property. The R-3 zoning will not have a negative impact on the sites woodlands or wetlands or other natural amenities because all of the home sites would be located in a open and fairly level area. The property will be serviced with sanitary sewer and City water which would have significant impacts on the property if developed versus large lots developed on individual well and septic fields. The very density of the present RA zoning would make the installation of sewer water impractical.


The City of Novi RA Residential Agricultural District Section 300 states that "the RA Residential Agricultural Districts are intended to provide areas within the community for agricultural uses until such time as the land may eventually be developed into other uses pending proper provision of utilities. Transportation and other facilities have to provide for a particular living environment characterized by large lot, low density single family dwellings."


R-3 zoning should be approved with the installation of public utilities along Meadowbrook Road. Walled Lake Elementary School located to the north and the recent approved amendment for the Vistas PUD.


Mr. Lanciault said the Planning Commission didn't recommend this and Brandon Rogers wouldn't recommend this. He said he was present because there was a lot of speculation by the City consultant as to what could happen if they would also use a wetland factor that got thrown in to give them even greater density than what they were showing.


Mr. Lanciault said if this was looked at from a common sense perspective he thought everyone would recognize that this district, this area was changing. He said Mr. Kriewall said earlier there was 1,500 new residents in Novi a year which had amazing growth. He said they didn't want to get into a big battle about this. He said it was definitely not spot zoning. He said they did have a school, they did have the other uses, there's a mobile home park at the corner and if Council looked at it from that perspective what they were trying to accomplish was not outrageous.


Mr. Lanciault said he agreed with Councilman Schmid and that it was probably a difficult plan to implement. He said there were other plans that could be implemented there that were a little less dense and something that made sense. He said he didn't think it made sense and didn't think anyone present would agree that it made sense to build 9 lots on what was 40 acres of land given that part of it was a wetland. He said there must be some other way they could develop the site that made sense, that could allow them to install sanitary sewers and water to the individual houses rather than to tap into the aquifer and use wells and septic fields. He said he didn't think that was the intent of the City when they zoned these things. He said it was clear from the paragraph he read that essentially the RA District had been used as a holding zoning until other kinds of services were available. He said at this time those other kinds of services are available and there would be a school on that parcel.



Mr. Lanciault said they had taken a look at a couple of different configurations that this site could possibly be utilized for. He said something less dense, something more in keeping with the neighborhood and something that would give them a more transitional feeling between the PUD of the Vistas, the school use, mobile home park and the rest of the things that were in the neighborhood. He said it was not an unreasonable request and they would even agree if it went to an R2 zoning in lieu of the R3 zoning. He said that would be an acceptable compromise if it was possible. He said they would be willing to discuss waiving the potential wetland credits that could be available. He didn't think it was clearly defined what the credits were but he thought it was somewhere around a 20% credit that they could get based on the 20 acres of wetlands that were there. He said they were not trying to pull a fast one saying "OK we are going to come in with an R2 but we get a 20% increase or effectively were up to an R3" or something like that.


Mr. Lanciault said that was why they wanted to be present and discuss it with Council and come up with a reasonable zoning that everyone could agree upon.


Mr. Rogers said his position was that the area including the school site was uniformly zoned and uniformly planned. He said subdivisions to the east, south east and south and isolated home sites along Meadowbrook were all at least one acre or more in size some of them 5 acres. He said he fully recognized Vistas across the street and the character of Meadowbrook Road and the school site. He said there were other school sites in the City abutting R1 on 9 Mile and 11 Mile and Taft are RA/R1.


Mr. Rogers said the preservation option can't use regulated wetlands for credit. He said it could include upland woodlands, wetland buffer areas, habitat areas and certain meadows. He said he had been told by Bob Gibbs, one of the other planners that this petitioner had used, that possibly up to 17% of the site would be preservation credits. He said it would reduce the size of an RA lot by plus or minus 17%. He thought if Council looked at the overall development, the City had made provisions for small lot zoning, planned development projects, mobile home parks. It was his considered opinion this particular property fronting on Meadowbrook Road, requiring a development plan with an extensively deep culdesac would be unwise. He thought when the applicant bought it he knew the constraints on the property. He said there was talk about linking the site to property to the north of the school site that he was told the petitioner owned also and maybe tying it in around the school site. He said that apparently was not in the picture.



Councilwoman Mason asked what the first zoning on the Maples was.


Mr. Rogers said it was RA same as today and as the zoning map showed it still was RA.


Councilwoman Mason said it was an overlay density, how did that go.


Mr. Rogers said PUD and the project was approved as an overlay of RA just like the Vistas.


Councilwoman Mason asked how that came about.


Mr. Rogers said by joint meetings with the Council and the Planning Commission back seven or eight ago and then the area plan was ultimately approved by the City Council.


Councilwoman Mason asked if he disagreed with that when it was done.


Mr. Rogers said no he recommended the Planned Unit Development. He said they did not recommend the woodlands permit.

Councilwoman Mason said in that area there was RA overlaid with high density for the Maples, a mobile home park at 13 Mile, and PUD in the Vistas. She asked him if he was buying a $400,000 home would he buy it on the east side of Meadowbrook in RA with what was all around the property.


Mr. Rogers said he couldn't make a comment on that. He said there were homes of considerable value adjacent to the east and south. He said maybe there was a border line on Meadowbrook Road.


Councilwoman Mason said it should never have come to this point the way it was around that area. She said she couldn't see where RA fit into everything else that was in that whole entire area.


Mr. Rogers said he agreed there were pressures with M-5. He said there was the existing residential pattern in the section that happened to be of an RA character and the attempt that if the integrity of the RA neighborhood was to be preserved that the line on the zoning should be held.



Councilman Schmid said he was disappointed that this was before the Council. He said the land had been designated large lot, RA for a number of years. He said the area had many homes with one acre and most of which were up to 12 acres in this particular area. He said there was nothing wrong with a City having RA Zoning, one acre lots or more. He said it was healthy, controlled density and it was prime prospect for homes of $400,000, $200,000, $150,000 or a million dollars. He said it really didn't matter. Councilman Schmid said one of the biggest dreams of the American people according to study after study, they want to come out in the area and buy large lots. He said for some reason the developers didn't like to build large lots because they couldn't maximize their profits and he didn't blame them for that. He said the City of Novi should take a stand that there was room in the community for large lots. He said this area had been designated for large lots forever, there's a precedent there and it should be retained as a large lot of 1 acre or better subdivision. He said he would hope the City Council didn't waiver on this particular site. He said when M-5 went in, the discussion around the City Council was that they would retain this area for large lot subdivisions and Novi would be unique and develop as a quality community. He said Novi would have something a little better then some of the other communities that had gone down hill. Councilman Schmid said Council had to build a City that would stand the test of time and have some quality and not maximize every piece of land for homes. He said across the street from this the Vistas would be building 1,300 to 1,500 homes. He said the whole area would be inundated with traffic. He said if for no other reason we should retain large lot subdivisions to control the traffic problems in the northern north east part of Novi.


Councilman Schmid said the Planning Commission voted unanimously against rezoning this land. The Planning Department had indicated unanimously they don't think this should be rezoned because it was part of the Master Plan and it should be upheld. He said the planner himself had indicated strongly in all the packet material that this land should not be rezoned to something less than RA zoning. He said it was a unique piece, it was west of Meadowbrook and south of 13 Mile Road and Council could hold it and he was confident that Council would do that.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That proposed Zoning Map Amendment 18.533, requested by Hughland Development for the East side of Meadowbrook, south of 13 Mile Road be denied.





Councilman Crawford asked if it were rezoned anything over RA would it qualify for cluster and if half that land was sensitive.


Mr. Rogers said it might qualify for cluster.



Councilman Crawford said if it was rezoned R3 as the petitioner requested how many cluster homes could be put there.


Mr. Rogers under the present Cluster Ordinance, and that was being readdressed in the zoning ordinance update, all the wetlands could be included for density computation.


Councilman Crawford asked how many homes would it support.


Mr. Rogers said it was 40 acres plus or minus and R3 would be 2.7.


Councilman Crawford said there could be approximately 100 homes supported on the remaining buildable land if the cluster was granted.


Mr. Rogers said there could be attached or detached. He said he doubted if that many could be detached on that land. He said a good half of the land was not developable.



Councilman Toth said whether this was zoned RA, R1, R2 or R3 it looked as though only one street could be put through there.


Mr. Rogers said that was correct unless a deal could be cut with the School District.


Councilman Toth said essentially the buildable property they had, to stay out of the wetlands area, was one street that could be put through there whether it's RA, R1, 2 or 3.


Mr. Rogers said it appeared there would be a single loaded culdesac coming up. He said if the land were deeper from the north it might be possible to loop a road system around. He said he had not looked at it to see if that was possible. He said it looked like a culdesac would be needed because the land was so shallow. He said the distance would be about 1,400 feet and the maximum length of a culdesac was 800 feet.


Councilman Toth said the information in the packets showed the general plan that was displayed.


Mr. Rogers said it was the plan that was submitted a year ago when they petitioned for R-4 and then withdrew the petition.



Councilman Toth said in reading the minutes that had been supplied it seemed that the majority of the residents that lived near by especially to the east, were interested in securing water and sewer services from the property if possible.


Mr. Rogers said he recalled some discussion on that.



Councilman Toth said he had not attended the meeting but he thought the petitioner mentioned if it was R3 he could put 37 homes. He asked if it went to R2 how many homes could be put in.

Mr. Rogers said he thought it would be about 20 or 25.


Councilman Toth asked what would be wrong with putting R2 in this area.


Mr. Rogers said R1 was explored by the petitioner. He said if it was kept RA with a minimum of one acre lots, and some may be larger, it wouldn't need to be municipal water and sewer; it could be well and septic.


Councilman Toth said he preferred to have it on City water and City sewers and go R2 and the petitioner had indicated he could probably live with R2 and develop that property. He said he didn't have a particular problem because everything he saw whether RA, R1, 2 or 3 it's one street. He said the same thing would be visible driving by on Meadowbrook whether it was RA or R3; there would be an entrance to a subdivision.


Mr. Rogers said Applecrest site condominium was just approved on 8 Mile where the lots are an acre or acre and a half with water and sewer. He asked if that same scenario could happen on this property.


Councilman Toth said this was a 40 acre site and if they were going to put 30 or 35 homes in there the density would be more than 1 acre per dwelling. He thought that was a fair compromise.


Mr. Rogers said if it was zoned R2 with the preservation option let's say reducing the R2 lots 18,000 by up to 17% it would end up with lots close to R3.


Councilman Toth believed the petitioner mentioned that he would not exercise the preservation option under R2.


Mr. Rogers said he didn't know if that was binding and he could still elect to do that if he got the rezoning. He said he had not addressed these individual site plans on the cost to provide the utilities, the number of lots, the percentage of credits upland/woodlands. He said he looked at it more as a land use issue than a development issue but there are options. He said the hearing on this particular case was established for rezoning from RA to R3 or other suitable classification. He said Council did have the right to go to an R2 if they wished.


Councilman Toth said Council could do less dense zoning in there.


Councilman Mitzel said wetland credits were only good on the cluster option and the preservation option only allowed credit for upland woodland or small wetlands that were not regulated by the State with special conditions.


Councilman Mitzel said Applecrest down by 8 Mile and Haggerty had been brought up which was RA. He asked if it was about a 40 acre site also.


Mr. Rogers said that was correct and the northerly 20 acres that was left was woodlands.


Councilman Mitzel said that was the woodlands area that was environmentally sensitive and that was preserved and it all complied with RA zoning.


Mr. Rogers said yes and two lots used to come out Cambridge.


Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Fried if in the intent of the RA Zoning District the petitioner read the first part of the intent and the second part had a comma in it and it ended "and to provide for a particular living environment characterized by large lot, low density, single family dwellings." He said from a practical standpoint of that intent both the first and the second part have equal weight do they not.


Mr. Fried said absolutely it was not a holding ordinance.


Councilman Mitzel said that was one part of the intent and the other part of the intent was to provide for "a particular living environment characterized by large lot, low density, single family dwellings" and that's valid intent.


Councilman Mitzel asked Councilman Schmid if his motion was to deny Zoning Amendment 18.533 per the Planning Commission recommendation, Planning Department recommendation, consultants recommendations and also that it was against the Master Plan. He asked if this was correct.


Councilman Schmid said that was correct.


Councilman Mitzel said he would support the motion and he believed that RA was appropriate for the area.



Yes (4-Mitzel, Schmid, No (2-Mason, Toth) Absent (1-Pope)

Crawford, McLallen) Motion carried






3. Request for tentative preliminary plat approval - Willowbrook Farm Subdivision (FKA Willowbrook No. 4)


Mayor McLallen advised Council of letters from residents on Mill Stream and LeBost who were in opposition to the project, its road and the impact on that road. She said there were two written comments from the Willowbrook Community Association and from Joyce

Stickley from Leslie Park.


Councilwoman Mason asked if this was the same developer that came before Council the last time this plan was presented.


Mr. Jetke said he was a new person.


Councilwoman Mason said so the original person had access through Grand River.


Mr. Jetke said they didn't have access to Grand River.


Councilwoman Mason said Mr. Jetke purchased it from someone else recently. She said the first group of people had access to Grand River through a piece of commercial.


Mr. Jetke said they never exercised that option; they owned no land on Grand River.


Councilwoman Mason said Mr. Jetke was absolutely correct she was just saying the owner of the property in the beginning had a piece of property that went out to Grand River that did not come through Willowbrook and did not go over Joseph Drive. She said Mr. Jetke purchased this from the other developer and she wanted to know if he owned the piece that went out onto Grand River.


Mr. Jetke said they did not and that they had only purchased the rear 6.7 acre residential portion.


Councilwoman Mason said the original developer still owned the piece that went out to Grand River.


Mr. Jetke said that was correct.


Tom Jetke, Singh Development Company stated they were present seeking tentative preliminary plat approval for the 31 Lot Willowbrook Farms Subdivision.


Mr. Jetke said this appeared before Council in previous years as two separate subdivisions - Country View Subdivision and Mockingbird Subdivision. He said they had since assembled and purchased both parcels and were now proposing putting them together and were proposing their development. He said after purchasing the properties they met with the homeowners association a couple of times and appeared before the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission requested that they investigate a couple of situations which they did. He said the Planning Commission sent a letter dated March 16 which was in Council's packets and they were the issues raised in the first Planning Commission meeting. He said they had since received on April 19 a positive recommendation from the Planning Commission for approval of the plat based on five conditions. He said they were in agreement on four of the five conditions most of them being engineering and traffic issues. He said he would like to address the conditions and any questions Council might have.


George Norberg said a couple of questions that came up at the Planning Commission meeting dealt with the drainage issues along the existing property lines. He said there would be catch basins placed at every other lot and any existing drainage problems that occur along the property lines should be corrected by those catch basins. The City ordinance requires that one catch basin be placed at every other property line.


Mr. Norberg showed Council where the detention basin would be and that it would outlet to Bishop Creek. He said storm water generated from the site went into the basin first and then went through two oil and gas separators before it entered the creek, and it was designed according to City requirements for 10 year storm.


Mr. Norgerg said they were requesting a waiver from the Design and Construction Standards for the 230 foot radius that he asked for this section. He said they felt that by bringing in and having it stop first and then continue would help to slow down traffic for this section. He said it was something that occurred at several locations throughout the City; it was not uncommon and they were requesting a waiver from the Design and Construction Standards from the 250 foot radius.


Jon Crane said he was employed by C & W Consultants, Rochester, MI and was a traffic engineer. He said they were asked by Singh Development to look at the project and to make some proposals for recommendations. He met with Mr. Arroyo, City Traffic Consultant and reviewed the plan and concurred with the recommendations of Mr. Arroyo, Singh Development and their civil engineers.


Mr. Crane said starting at the west end there was a stub street; rather than have the 230 foot radius they ran it off at a 60 degree angle so that there could be a traffic control placed there at a future time. He said there was an eyebrow design in the turn area that provided turn around for the fire and police protection. He said there were stub streets going off to Joseph in the subdivision to the east and then they had Border Hill changed with a boulevard approach with an excel and passing lane designed into the intersection approach.


Mr. Crane said the safety improvements to the Ten Mile intersection would adequately handle both the traffic from the new subdivision as well as the existing 24 home subdivision to the west. He said the dual lane 24 foot pavement surface was more than adequate and would allow right and left turn entrance and exit simultaneously.


Mr. Crane said as far as the proposals for Brenda to have a one way so that it didn't go out onto Joseph Drive the gravel streets he felt it wasn't necessary in the long run but would go along with it. He said it did provide additional access into the adjacent subdivision for emergency protection both to and from this project as well as the adjacent property. Mr. Crane said they reviewed the capacity analysis for stop sign control and with this design believe it would be adequate and actually safer and more reasonable than the existing design in which Border Hill comes in directly into Ten Mile. He said they were changing Border Hill, running it into Willow and then having it turn to go into the intersection.


Mr. Crane said they believed the subdivision would create approximately 310 additional trips per day at 155 in and 155 out. He said during the morning there would be approximately 20 additional trips onto 10 Mile from the new subdivision. He believed it was a reasonable design, a very good design and the amount of improvements to 10 Mile at the intersection would improve traffic flow as it approached 10 Mile as well as on Ten Mile Road.


Brandon Rogers, Planning Consultant said the Planning Commission in this case did have a split vote. He said he recommended approval of the development. He said this land comprised two former plats that just didn't seem to work together. He said by tying them together the street system and the utility extensions apparently are possible. He said the drainage issue had been resolved by the engineers and the stub at the north end led westerly into a potential development as yet unknown on the Weiss property. He said the other two stubs, one being Brenda which leads into Joseph and the other stub was on an identical line with a stub in Camborne Place Subdivision called Harris. He said when the gentleman who had the farm wished to subdivide the road would connect directly through to Harris and provide another means of cross access.


Mr. Rogers said the length of the culdesac without connection to Brenda was at least 1/4 mile long in excess of the 800 feet. He fully appreciated the condition of Joseph Drive and Brenda Lane. He said Brenda was a right-of-way that led up to the subject property. He said if he was not mistaken there was a requirement that it be tapped into if adjacent property was subdivided and the stub was there. He said the traffic was a concern on the condition of the road. He said it didn't have much in the way of ditches and no sidewalks and it floods. He said the people who live there had become used to it but it was not well improved. Mr. Rogers said that was the idea at the Planning Commission meeting and it came in at the last minute to make Brenda one way west from Joseph Drive. He said this would still permit fire department access going east and west if needed. It would then mean all traffic from this subdivision leaving the subdivision, would have to go south to Ten Mile. However, it would also mean that people coming home at night could come in on Grand River down Joseph and into the subdivision because Brenda would be one way west. He said it was not a perfect solution but he believed the fire department was in harmony with it.


Mr. Rogers said in summary he supposed it was left over land and someday may tie into the Weiss property but it was sort of the residual between two subdivisions off of Ten Mile except for the farmstead. He said there was a church and there would have to be a lot split and part of the land would be used for the road purposes at the rear of the church property.


Councilman Crawford asked if the property required a lot split.


Mr. Rogers said it did and pointed out where it would be done and also a formal split from the Glendis property to the north.


Councilman Crawford asked if that would conform with the lot split ordinances.


Mr. Rogers said he had no reason to believe it wouldn't. He said it would be another split possibly where the retention basin was. He said they had been discussed and reported in his report that they would have to be affected.


Councilman Crawford said there had to be certain dimensions of the lots that are split and would they conform.


Mr. Rogers said it would on the engineering plans and could be made a condition on Council's approval of the tentative preliminary plat.


Councilman Crawford said this looked exactly like a flag parcel and that was not allowed. He said it had a very narrow parcel of land that fronted on a mile road and then it went back into a flag lot.


Mr. Rogers said obviously flag lots are not allowed. He said what was happening here was a fully dedicated 60 foot right-of-way that was being brought in from 10 Mile and all subsequent lots to the north would have full frontage on the street right-of-way. He said he did not construe that to be a flag lot.


Councilman Crawford asked what the frontage was on 10 Mile.


Mr. Rogers said none of the homes in the subdivision were using 10 Mile as the front yard or the lot width. He said they were bringing in a dedicated street but if they were not bringing in a dedicated street and one person wanted his house back off of the long slender throat coming in from 10 Mile that would not be permissible.


Councilman Crawford asked what the difference was.


Mr. Rogers said this was a public dedicated street that was being platted to the back area and each lot would have at least the 80 foot lot width at the 30 foot building setback line.


Councilman Crawford said we already own a portion of the street. He said Border Hill was the western portion of that boulevard so they are proposing the eastern portion of that boulevard which was 40 foot wide.


Mr. Rogers said they were blending the two parts together to put in the boulevarded entrance.


Councilman Crawford asked if it required any vacation of City property or transfer of City property.


Mr. Rogers said no he thought the portion of Border Hill that they were using would remain as a right-of-way. He said he could stand corrected on that and there was no vacation of any street.


Councilman Crawford asked if the City owned any property to the east of Border Hill.


Mr. Rogers said he was not certain.


Councilman Crawford said that was a City street and asked what the typical right-of-way was beyond the actual pavement.


Mr. Rogers said it would be a 60 foot right-of-way and he assumed that was what it was today.


Councilman Crawford said his point was there was City property involved that would have to be either vacated or sold to the developer in order to put in that proposed boulevard.


Mr. Crane said the project would not involve any vacating of City right-of-way. He said the 60 foot right-of-way would be combined with the 70 foot of access that the subdivision had for a total of 130 feet of right-of-way at 10 Mile.


Councilman Crawford asked if it would border 10 Mile.


Mr. Crane said it would.


Councilman Crawford asked if he was saying that the City owned no property to the east of the pavement of Border Hill.


Mr. Crane said no he was saying that the City had a 60 foot right-of-way coming down into 10 Mile.


Councilman Crawford asked how he proposed to build on part of the City's 60 foot right-of-way.


Mr. Crane said he would be building a City street at their expense.


Councilman Crawford said that was fine but it was City property and asked how he could build on City property without permission. He asked if this was a question that had to be addressed. He said it sounded like the assumption was that they were going to build on City right-of-way and give the City back the street.


Mr. Crane said that was basically what would happen. He said there would be improvements made, appropriate bonding made and contractors hired at their expense just as they were going to be building on 10 Mile.


Councilman Crawford said he would need an appropriate affirmative vote from the City Council in order to build on City property or purchase City property.



Mr. Crane said absolutely but they did not intend to purchase the property. He said it was part of the plat and part of the improvement.


Councilman Crawford said he must be missing something and asked how he could plat on City property.


Mr. Norberg said Singh Development purchased the 70 feet east of the existing right-of-way to make a total combined width of a 60 foot wide existing City right-of-way and then a 70 foot wide piece of property parallel to that. He said they would then combine the 60 feet and the 70 feet and come out with a total of a 100 foot right-of-way plus a small park on the east side. He said as opposed to coming in perpendicular they are coming in parallel to the existing right-of-way and then reconfiguring it for a boulevard entrance with a center turn lane.


Councilman Crawford asked if they would be building part of their road on City right-of-way.


Mr. Norberg said exactly yes.


Councilman Crawford asked Mr. Rogers if this was a flag lot.


Mr. Rogers said it was not in his opinion but would defer to Mr. Fried if he thought he didn't make the right call.


Mayor McLallen said there were apparently several issues, one being the definition of a flag lot and the other the issue of building on City owned property.


Mr. Fried said he could not address the front flag lot because he was not familiar with the problem that was raised. He said he could address the expansion of the City street. Mr. Fried said as the engineer pointed out, there was nothing wrong with that and it was always done. He said if a developer develops property adjacent to a City street they have to improve that under our current design standards.


Mr. Fried said there was one other problem that had not been resolved as yet and that was whether one of the lots in Willowbrook Subdivision was going to be used for street purposes. He said if there was a restriction in the covenants that the lots in that subdivision could only be used for single family residential purposes that might be a problem if it was going to be part of the street. He said that had to be investigated and reviewed to determine whether that was a problem or not. He said if Council was going to approve this it had to be subject to Council determining whether there would be a violation of any covenants as a result of putting in a City street in Willowbrook Subdivision.


Mr. Fried said the question on the flag lot would have to be reviewed. He said obviously there could not be a lot split that created a flag lot.


Councilman Crawford said based on the explanations and what he had in front of him he still needed more detailed information on what the lot split consists of, if it was a creation of a flag lot and he still was not satisfied with the explanation of expanding on City property or building on City right-of-way. He requested a more detailed diagram and description.



Mr. Arroyo, Traffic Consultant said he would touch on some of the key issues contained in his April 12 letter. He said in comment number 3 they talked about the issue of Border Hill and Brookside and the way that intersection was proposed to be configured. He said they essentially saw it as a policy decision for City Council to make to determine whether or not they preferred this alternative or if they would prefer that Border Hill remain the intersection with 10 Mile and have the new road intersect with Border Hill. He said it could be done either way.


Mr. Arroyo said regarding the proposal before Council it provided improvements to the intersection which included a boulevard approach with two lanes in and two lanes out. He said it also included modifications to 10 Mile Road that they thought were advantageous because they would have a center turn lane constructed to provide for left turns in from 10 Mile Road. He said he did see some advantages to the proposal but once again it was not a requirement that this be done and he saw it as a policy decision for Council to make.


Mr. Arroyo said they had mentioned previously the center turn lane. He said originally the applicant proposed a passing lane and he thought the center turn lane made more sense and he believed the applicant had concurred with that. He said he would note that as proposed there would be no additional driveways or curb cuts made to 10 Mile Road. He said essentially Border Hill was there now and if this was approved it would be reconstructed and there would not be an additional access point. He said also, as required by the subdivision regulations the applicant was making connection to Brenda Lane and there was also a future stub street a little south of that that would connect to the east.


Mr. Arroyo said that covered the comments regarding the traffic flow. He said there was one other issue that came up during the Planning Commission in relationship to the eyebrow and the turning radius at the north end. He said the fire department had indicated a preference for the design as proposed on the plan which included the eyebrow area for fire trucks to turn around. He said they had indicated that the design as proposed did not meet the Design and Construction Standards in the area of the north end where the turn occurs. Mr. Arroyo said there was an alternative sketch developed called the Hybrid Sketch when the Planning Commission was addressing it that incorporated both components. He said it was in Council packets as an 8 1/2 by 11 handout. Mr. Arroyo said it included the 230 foot center line radius for that turn as well as an eyebrow area so the fire trucks could have a turn around area. He said this would meet the ordinance requirements whereas what was proposed would not and would require a Design and Construction Standards Waiver.


Mr. Arroyo said they are recommending approval subject to the items that were mentioned in their letter of April 12.



Councilman Schmid said on 10 Mile near Border Hill immediately to the right of the road now was a bridge and he asked if there were any plans for that bridge if this was approved.


Mr. Arroyo said because there was a center turn lane and modifications proposed to 10 Mile it was likely that there might have to be some modifications to that area.


Councilman Schmid said if another 310 trips are added making right turns on 10 Mile Road it would be virtually impossible.


Mr. Arroyo said they anticipated there would be a split going north and south and it might be more in the neighborhood of 150 to 200 trips onto 10 Mile and the remainder going to the north depending on the access configuration to the north.


John Beach representing the Willowbrook Association gave Council a packet of information. He said he had given Council the history of the proposed development in the area over the past five years. He said it continued to be defeated and was defeated at the Planning Commission at its April meeting. However, the Planning Commission couldn't come up with a negative recommendation to send to Council so rather than doing that they came up with some recommendations. He said they gave a list of five recommendations to be presented to Council.


Mr. Beach said one of the things the Planning Commission brought up was this temporary westbound Brenda Lane. He said it was mentioned earlier that Brenda was going to be one way in only. He said that meant three quarters of the trips had to go out; it was not a 50-50 split. He said they also recommended that Border Hill shall maintain its name and identity and it should be tied into Brookside Drive and that would now replace Border Hill's identity at 10 Mile Road. He said they also asked for other things regarding design and construction of the radius of the subdivision. He said when people move into a community such as the people that moved into Willowbrook some 40 years ago they probably knew someday something would be built behind them. Mr. Beach said the land behind them sits 2 to 3 feet higher than what it was in Willowbrook.


Mr. Beach said the neighborhood concerns are that the neighborhood identity would be lost. Also, the loss of the privacy that they presently have because that little country lane pretty much acts as a street that goes no where. He said they were also worried about the increase in flooding and erosion from the new design. He said Willowbrook subdivision had ditches and the new proposal was curb, sidewalk and drainage basins. They are concerned about the retention basin being behind 3 lots and as Council recalled they had two ten year floods over a period of 2 years. He said that whole area of Coral Lane and Bishop Creek was 15 foot deep and some of the residents along that area of Bishop Creek lost as much as 6 foot of their rear yard because of that flooding. He said with the additional water that would be going into Bishop Creek at 10 Mile and 10 Mile acts as a dam to maintain the level of water in Bishop Creek for both downstream and upstream, they were also concerned downstream about that additional water going in. He said they had tremendous flooding at the last 3 hour rain storm where the streets in Willowbrook II were flooded. Mr. Beach said they also had safety concerns going onto 10 Mile Mr. Arroyo said the increase would be 155 to 200 more trips. He said the increase in the size of the opening of the boulevard design entrance would put Border Hill or that street closer to Ripple Creek. He said Ripple Creek was part of sub 3 and it encompasses 3/4 of the homes and there was over 120 homes in that part of the subdivision alone. He said getting out on Ripple Creek onto 10 Mile was a problem with that deceleration or

acceleration lane that would have to go past Ripple Creek. He said it was an increased concern to them about that. Mr. Beach said they were proposing a park location at an intersection. He said there were islands all around their subdivisions that they maintain and they don't need a park and don't want it. He said they were losing a lot of trees, brush and bushes along there that was a part of the scenic view. He said those trees were over 40 years old in some cases. He said the developer said he would replace about 14 trees out of 24 affected. He said they didn't want 1 or 2 inch tree replacements that wasn't what they were asking. They were asking that they maintain their identity.


Mr. Beach said homeowners were concerned with the bus stop locations because they were going to be changed. He said the homeowners indicated that it took 3 to 5 minutes to get out. He said the initial plan that was in the newspaper and presented to the Planning Commission over a year ago was for over 200 plus a sub also going on the Weiss property to the west of this location. He said that traffic had to go somewhere too and if the proposal goes through possibly that would be developed later on.


Mr. Beach said they had come before Council and the Planning Commission and are before Council again. He said they had expressed their feelings and have had many members of the Planning Commission agree with them about their concerns. He said they realized that they are concerned and they were not just doing this because they are building a subdivision behind them as they had expected that for years. He said they would appreciate it being built correctly so that it did not take away the identity of their neighborhood.


Mr. Beach read Council the goals of the Planning Commission as he was not able to copy them. "The City of Novi shall encourage all types of housing to meet the needs of its residents having varied lifestyles, family size and income. Housing distribution should recognize the environmental conditions, neighborhood identity, infrastructure availability and create a design to allow a high standard of development." Mr. Beach said he did not think this plan met at all.


Councilman Mitzel said Mr. Rogers had mentioned the old Country View and Lone Tree Subdivisions which were proposed back in 1992. He found in the Council minutes of March 16, 1992 the Council then voted to deny both the subdivisions because they could not stand on their own. He said it was mentioned that the north half would be one of the subdivisions and the south half was going to be the other. Therefore, unless they were both built at the same time the wouldn't have the needed access.


Mr. Rogers said Country View was dependant on Lone Tree for access of the utilities from the south and Lone Tree was caught because it had no outlet. He said it didn't go up to Brenda and the two proprietors of those plats couldn't seem to get together because the Glenda Cagle family only came down south to the bottom end of Country View.


Councilman Mitzel said then neither subdivision could meet the standards of our ordinance at the time.


Mr. Rogers said there was a discussion regarding Lone Tree to come across on Harris from Camborne place and they tried very hard to get an easement across but it didn't materialize.


Councilman Mitzel said on September 13, 1993 the proposal came forward again to the Council to discuss street layout and at that time they were proposing the access from Border Hill and the minutes reflected there was no comment and the Mayor stated there seemed to be consensus on the road alignment. He asked if that was an accurate statement of evolution of the process.


Mr. Rogers said the 1993 scenario was a discussion.


Councilman Mitzel asked if the current proposal met the standards of our zoning and subdivision ordinances.


Mr. Rogers said it met the zoning ordinance standards for lot width, area, sidewalks. Mr. Rogers said except for the engineering he felt it did. He said it connected up with an existing right-of-way stub, the culdesac length was not excessive, internal sidewalks throughout the area, street right-of-way was 60 feet, 28 foot country curb and gutter, and lots all met the width and area requirement. He said that was why he recommended it.


Councilman Mitzel asked if a development had property that abuts the City public right-of-way do they have the right to connect or did the City have the right to deny connection to that right-of-way.


Mr. Fried said if they adjoin a public road and they were going to improve the public road in accordance with City standards they could do that.


Councilman Mitzel said this situation arose in Orchard Hills Subdivision when their stub left and the developer with adjoining property came in and wanted to connect to the public road system. He said Mr. Watson said at that time that the developer had the right to utilize the public road system.


Councilman Mitzel said his other question concerned the one way sign. He said that would have to be a traffic control order from the Council.


Mr. Fried said absolutely.


Councilman Mitzel said if this had not been a subdivision with recommendation the Planning Commission would have no authority to impose that restriction if it had been a site condo or some other development.


Mr. Fried said that was correct.


Councilman Mitzel said it seemed the issue arises if the subdivision were to connect with Border Hill or the public right-of-way away from 10 Mile then it seemed that they would not have to do any improvements to their intersection at 10 Mile.


Mr. Fried said that would be a question for the traffic engineer to determine.


Councilman Mitzel said he thought it would be a legal question too. He asked if their plat would still extend to 10 Mile. He said the way it was written in the packet was if they were to connect with Border Hill up 50 feet from 10 Mile then 10 Mile was an off site.


Mr. Fried said then they would not have to improve it.


Councilman Mitzel said but if their plat were still to extend down to 10 Mile but the road connection was still up further . . .



Mr. Fried said if part of 10 Mile was included within their plat then they would have to improve 10 Mile.


Councilman Mitzel said Council should get clarification on that boundary because there was that 70 foot land strip that came down. He said if they were to do a different road configuration that might affect whether their plat was on 10 Mile or not.


Mr. Fried said he didn't want to answer that on an if.


Councilman Mitzel said he didn't want an answer at this point but he was saying that it was probably an issue that was going to be resolved. He said the way he was looking at it there were some outstanding issues that needed to be resolved. He said one was whether they could use part of a lot for a road purpose. He was trying to put out other questions that needed answers before Council took action.


Councilman Mitzel said in Leslie Park Subdivision it was gravel road and if that was to ever be improved he understood it would have to be through an SAD process or the City would have to pay for it.


Mr. Fried said absolutely.


Councilman Mitzel asked if there was a way that if the developer of this property were to agree that this subdivision could be included within some sort of contract SAD to help pay for that.


Mr. Fried said if it was a voluntary agreement by the developer that he wanted to contribute to the improvement of that road that would be fine but Council could not condition the approval of the plat on it.


Councilman Mitzel said it would be a way if the developer wished to do that on his own neighborly intention he could approach that aspect.


Mr. Fried said absolutely.


Councilman Mitzel said his comment on the Border Hill entrance was it seemed that they probably didn't need two lanes in and two lanes out with a real wide boulevard. He said there were many other subdivisions in town that have a subdivision entrance without a boulevard. He said that was what was currently proposed in the plan as recommended by the Planning Commission. He said it seemed that some sort of road improvement up from 10 Mile would probably be needed to provide the proper safety and access and bring the sidewalk up from 10 Mile to at least a point where Border Hill and the new road would split apart. He said that way it would be an added safety feature for the children but it seemed if they didn't put in a boulevard entrance more of the character of that area could be preserved and it would still provide for an adequate inbound and outbound subdivision road for a smaller subdivision. He said he would like this option explored.


Councilman Schmid said he had studied the material on this and the more he looked at it there were several problems with this. He said there were similar problems the last time they were before Council. First, there was the issue of the culdesac. Mr. Rogers suggests that it was more than a quarter mile long. He said if Brenda Street was utilized it would cut down that length. However, he could not 2 or 3 years ago and cannot today support this subdivision exiting or entering out of Joseph Drive the way Joseph Drive was presently constructed. He said it was a narrow gravel road with homes quite close to the road and it was not suitable for another subdivision coming in or going out. He also questioned whether a one way street was feasible either. He said the lot split concern had to be looked into. Finally and most important, are two issues. First, he thought this would be a tremendous safety problem coming out of the sub and increasing the traffic by another 30 or 40 homes or 150-200 trips trying to get out on 10 Mile Road and trying to make a right hand turn. He said the problem was no acceleration lane for the right hand turn and there couldn't be because of the bridge. He felt they had to come in with a better plan on how they were going to utilize 10 Mile Road, how they were going to get out of that sub and he would like to see them get an exit out on Grand River other than Joseph street.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That the request for preliminary plat approval for Willowbrook Farm Subdivision be denied based on various comments made by Council and safety problems.





Councilwoman Mason said she wanted to remind Mr. Rogers and Mr. Arroyo that several times it said in the material that 10 Mile Road would be a five lane road.


Mr. Arroyo said his letter said it was proposed to be widened and that was one of the alternatives. He said the construction date was uncertain and preliminary engineering dollars approved. He thought all those facts were facts and they were all true. He thought it was being studied and the 5 lane was one of the proposals, the construction date was uncertain and the preliminary engineering dollars have in fact been approved. He said he didn't think there was anything incorrect about that.


Councilwoman Mason said what she wanted to know from the developer was were they led to believe that they were going to have this 5 lane highway to bring the boulevard into soon.


Mr. Norberg said no but he did say that they did propose acceleration tapers, deceleration, and they are all shown on the drawings. He said he would like to elaborate on them at another meeting or perhaps provide supplementary data. He said the alignment as it sat now was not satisfactory for this development. He said they looked at alternatives that did not impact Border Hill bringing Willow into Border Hill and letting Border Hill stay as a two lane road out to 10 Mile and it did not work. He said what was needed was a higher level intersection design and that was what they proposed. He said they proposed a three lane cross section, turn lanes, acceleration and deceleration tapers and including if necessary renovation of the bridge. It was all proposed as part of their project. He said when their original design came in it showed a passing lane that did not lend itself to a 5 lane cross section should it eventually happen. He said they were asked to shift so that they had a turn lane and that was the only change they made. He said there was a center turn lane; when coming from the west the cars would be able to go around and the center turn lane would be able to turn left into the site. He said basically all the widening of the road would be on the north side with the configuration that they finally resolved.


Mr. Norberg addressed Councilman Schmid and said they were proposing for safety sake substantial improvements. He said there would be almost $200,000 worth of improvements to 10 Mile right in front of that intersection.


Councilman Schmid said the map did not reflect that.


Mr. Norberg said he could provide him with the engineering drawings and the proposals, etc.


Councilman Schmid asked if they were proposing to remove the bridge and widen that.


Mr. Norberg said he didn't know that they would remove it but they would be making some changes.


Councilwoman Mason said she wanted to remind Council that the original developer and owner of that property had a piece of property that went out to Grand River and didn't want to use it because it was commercial. Therefore, this situation where exit was through 10 Mile and through Border Hill was something that the developer did himself. She said she assumed that the developer didn't buy the property that it was contingent upon what the City did.


Mr. Norberg said they purchased it.


Councilwoman Mason said it was all done and they didn't get a right-of-way out to Grand River.


Mr. Norberg said that was correct.


Councilwoman Mason said that was a serious problem for them.

She asked if they had gotten anything from the church.


The Applicant said the lot split that had been in question had in fact occurred. He said there was a land swap with the church that provided the access into the southern portion of the subdivision and secondly their Counsel advised them that there was no indication that they couldn't provide that road through that lot split. He said they would be happy to provide the City with that information.


Councilwoman Mason said that the storm detention was very bad because they had no storm drains in Willowbrook or Leslie Subdivisions and it would create a problem. She said on the east side of Border Hill there was a section that belonged to Oakland County.


Councilman Toth said he found it ironic that everybody was worried about this one street. He said if looking on the south side of 10 Mile, Willowbrook and some of the other streets they extend 1/2 mile down and they have homes on both sides. He said they don't have a boulevarded entrance. He said this was a rather small operation with 31 homes and he personally felt that they did a nice job in designing this entrance with a boulevard entrance. He said Willowbrook and the other entrances that are on the streets on the south side of 10 Mile don't have a boulevard, they were not wide enough and they get on and off of 10 Mile and make left turns and right turns. He said he did have concerns about Brenda Lane and going out to a gravel road. He didn't see why the recommendation didn't come in to have a break away gate there for the fire department and just keep it closed and run all the traffic to 10 Mile. He said the traffic basically could go to 10 Mile and not affect Border Hill at all. He said they had 70 feet of right-of-way and that gave them enough footage to build a road parallel to Border Hill to go to 10 Mile. He said the City had them integrate this into a rather nice design so all the traffic makes use of a larger area and a larger entrance and exit from the sub. He thought it had been well thought out and well planned. He thought it was the best plan he had seen for the area and thought it would work real well. He had no real problem with it except for the sidewalks and he felt they should extend further up Border Hill and with that one addition he could support it. He said to simply deny it he thought was premature.


Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Fried if he said earlier that the City could not deny them access to Brenda or Border Hill if their property abuts that right-of-way.


Mr. Fried said no it was a public street and they ought to have access to it. He said one of the things Council had to decide was if the access would be reasonable safe access.


Councilman Mitzel said before Council was tentative preliminary plat approval and his understanding was that was lot layout and street layout only. He said engineering for storm water came at a later stage and some of the other issues came at a later stage and that at this point it was just street and lot layout.


Mr. Fried said that was correct.


Councilman Mitzel said then in order to deny them tentative preliminary plat approval Council would have to find criteria within the ordinance that they do not meet.


Mr. Fried said that was correct.


Councilman Mitzel said Mr. Rogers stated that they met the standards as set forth in the zoning ordinance and the subdivision restrictions.


Mr. Fried said what Mr. Rogers was commenting on was did they meet the subdivision restrictions regarding the lot size but he didn't think he was commenting on street layout.


Mr. Rogers said he was not commenting on the design of the streets or the boulevarded entrance. He said there was a new angle put in tonight that should be researched that being the use of part of Willowbrook Subdivision for street purposes and that little park. He said what he was commenting on was the lot widths, orientation, lots radial to the center line of the road.


Councilman Mitzel said what he was after was whatever consultant reviews the site plans for compliance with the subdivision ordinance and the zoning ordinance to comment whether or not the site plan complies with the subdivision and zoning ordinances for tentative preliminary plat approval.


Mr. Rogers said for the layout he said it did comply.


Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Fried if layout was what tentative preliminary plat was.


Mr. Fried said Mr. Rogers was saying he was approving the street layout and it was a safe street layout.


Mr. Rogers said he would defer to the traffic engineer.


Councilman Mitzel said he was trying to get an answer from the consultants.


Mr. Arroyo said as he indicated the configuration of Border Hill and Brookside from his perspective in terms of meeting the ordinance could go either way. He said that was a decision for Council to make and he thought Council was not necessarily tied down to one or the other. He said he didn't see any significant differences from an ordinance standpoint. He said the ordinances that he reviewed between the two of them he thought there were some advantages of one over the other but it was something for Council to consider.


Councilman Mitzel said the only other issue would be the north curve.


Mr. Arroyo said that was correct.


Councilman Mitzel said he thought denying this was an inappropriate action and thought it sounded like they met the standards and criteria for the most part. He said there was some question that Mr. Fried had from a legal aspect about a lot in Willowbrook Subdivision which needed to be researched. Also, there seemed to be a couple choices on the design or alignment of Border Hill, Brookside and Ten Mile Road. He said there were different choices but as Mr. Arroyo pointed out either way they met the criteria ordinances. He said he preferred to see action to postpone this until there are answers on those because he didn't think there were grounds to deny the entire plan.


Councilman Crawford said he thought Council had before them a project that was a self imposed hardship. He said the developer had purchased virtually a land locked parcel of land and then proposed to destroy the quality of life of people on either end of it, the people on Joseph and Border Hill, to get access to that land. He felt that was a major concern that Council needed to address and over and above that there were a lot of technical issues. He didn't think the street layout was technically proper and still would like answers on the potential of that being a flag lot on the use of City property or the vacation of City property. He said he had not seen answers on that. Councilman Crawford said Mr. Fried brought up a question about the use of a lot in the Willowbrook Subdivision, and there's the eyebrow at the north end that didn't meet City standards. He said there were a lot of questions to be answered and he would certainly support the motion. He said this was not a subdivision to be approved under these circumstances.


Councilman Schmid said he believed that there were sufficient items on this particular project that should cause Council to deny it. He said in his way of thinking and more importantly a safety matter of getting out on the highway from the subdivision. He thought it was absolutely a matter of the safety and welfare of the community. He didn't think it would work and felt there were other alternatives for this land to be used and one of which would be to get off onto Grand River. He felt perhaps another would be to wait for the farm down the street to develop and go through and combine the properties. He felt there were sufficient issues to deny.


Vote on motion to deny.


Yes (3-Schmid, Crawford, No (3-McLallen, Mitzel, Toth)

Mason) Absent (1-Pope)

Motion failed


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That the request for tentative preliminary plat approval for Willowbrook Farm Subdivision be postponed to a date uncertain until such time as Council could be provided with answers to concerns that were discussed at the table.


Yes (4-Mitzel, McLallen, No (2-Crawford, Schmid)

Mason, Toth) Absent (1-Pope)


Motion carried




4. Request for design and construction standards variance -

Aspen Woods Condominium - Re: width of culdesac


Mr. Ray Cousineau, Tri-Mount Development, said it was a very simple straight forward request. He said the site plan had been approved by the Planning Commission subject to receiving some variances one of which was the reason they were present this evening. Mr. Cousineau said it was a request to reduce the diameter of the culdesac on the south end of the site. He said they were proposing to reduce the culdesac from a 58 foot radius which was required by the City to a 47 foot radius which was the dimension used by the Oakland County Road Commission for public roadways. He said the roads in the development would be private roads and would not be public roads but they are still required to meet the standards of the City of Novi for public roadways. He said it was his understanding that the City was reviewing this particular perimeter and it might be revised to coincide with his request. He said the variance had been reviewed by the Planning Commission and consultants and was recommended for approval. He said the reason for the request was that it allowed them to minimize the intrusion of the development into the sensitive lands in the area. Mr. Cousineau said it helped them preserve upland woodland trees and also helped them to stay outside of the wetland and the wetland buffer in the area.


Mayor McLallen advised Council their packets contained a letter from JCK stating support for the reduction of the culdesac width.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That the Design and Construction Standards variance from 58 foot culdesac width to 47 foot be granted for Aspen Woods Condominium based on the fire departments consent and JCK's recommendation.





Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Cousineau if the reason for the variance was to save some trees.


Mr. Cousineau said that was correct. He said it was something they proposed after various reviews by the Planning Commission. He said the Planning Commission asked them to review all the alternatives to minimize the intrusion into the sensitive lands, specifically the woodlands. He said they felt it was a reasonable proposal because it didn't compromise the design integrity of the roadway system considering they would end up with the geometrics of this roadway that would comply with road standards for the Oakland County Road Commission.


Councilman Schmid asked if the stub street went somewhere.


Mr. Cousineau said it tied into Lochmoor Village.


Councilman Schmid said he didn't care if this was lowered but asked why there was an ordinance that said every time someone came in Council would change it.


Mr. Arroyo said it was his understanding the request for the variance came out of some discussions with the Planning Commission about trying to preserve some additional woodland/wetland areas as part of the overall plan. He said the proposal was consistent with road commission standards. He said another important point was that the staff of the City and the consultants were in the process of re-evaluating the entire Design and Constructions Standards to make recommendation to Council for a number of changes. He said this was one area they were looking at since the fire department had indicated that they felt they could turn around their fire trucks within the 47 foot radius. Mr. Arroyo said they were considering making a recommendation along with JCK that this be the new adopted standard for the City. Although it was not a done deal yet the primary reason for that radius at the end of the bulb was for fire trucks to turn around. He said if the fire department was comfortable with that and it was consistent with county standards then it might be an appropriate way for the City to go.


Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Rogers if there was any truth to the story if there was a smaller culdesac more houses could go around it.


Mr. Rogers said he thought there would be fewer because if it was a larger culdesac there would be more frontage opportunity for lots.


Councilman Schmid said the frontage wasn't necessary at the street line, lot line. He asked what if it started out real narrow and then went out rather quickly.


Mr. Rogers said it was a cluster plan it was not a subdivision plan. He said let's say it was a subdivision plan or site condominium and it's an R-3 or R-4. He said the setback was 30 feet so it's measured back on both side property lines 30 feet and strike a cord. He said that had to be 80 or 90 feet wide and if it's pie shaped the 80 or 90 foot width wouldn't be possible at the 30 foot setback line.


Councilman Schmid asked how much land the 10 foot variance was.


Mr. Rogers said for the record they had eliminated two sites before they had 3 more units. He said what they were doing was reducing the number of lots around. He said the staff approved 33 units, the Planning Commission ended up approving 29. He said then the parties came together and accepted 31.


Councilman Schmid said under the standard subdivision they would have built 16.


Mr. Rogers said that was true because under the cluster plan they can take the whole site for density computation.


Councilman Mitzel asked if all the roads including the culdesac would have sidewalks on both sides.


Mr. Cousineau said that was correct and point of clarity, they don't pick up any additional lots with the reduction.


Councilman Schmid said he knew and it was woodland they'd pick up.


Vote on motion


Yes (5-Mason, Toth, No (1-Schmid) Absent (1-Pope)

Mitzel, Crawford,

McLallen) Motion carried



5. Approval of Escrow Agreement with Singh II Limited Partnership

9 Mile Sewer Extension and approval to seek bids


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That the Escrow Agreement with Singh II Limited Partnership for the 9 Mile Sewer Extension and the approval to seek bids be approved.





Councilman Mitzel said the Council had not adopted the Sewer Master Plan and he was concerned that by default Council might be adopting the Sewer Master Plan.


Mr. Fried said Council would be locking themselves into a Master Plan that eventually they would adopt because what was being approved would have to be a part of the Master Plan. He said his concern was a good concern.


Councilman Mitzel said that last summer when the Master Plan was presented to Council Mr. Fried recommended that it not be adopted so a developer couldn't say the City would provide sewer to that point. He said right now it was just a proposed or unofficial concept Master Plan. He said with this one, Council would be doing an over sizing of the sewer to provide a service area in a certain area.


Mr. Fried said when and if the Master Plan was adopted Council would be locked into what had already been approved.


Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Kriewall if what was being proposed to be approved tonight included payback ordinances.


Mr. Kriewall said yes it was part of the approval that the Public Service Director was seeking. He was recommending that upon approval of this document this evening, this agreement and concept that the City Attorney be directed to develop a payback agreement.


Councilman Mitzel said he still had concerns over payback agreements. He said he supposed he needed to ask Mr. Kriewall to supply him certain information that would show him that payback ordinances work. He said at this point he would not support it because of the concerns he had regarding payback ordinances.


Councilman Schmid said the agreement was made some time ago and he did not agree with the agreement back in 1992 which cost the City hundreds of lot sizes. He read a portion of a letter to Mr. Fried "when the July 12, 1993 amendment was circulated our consulting engineers had estimated the additional cost to be $19,500. It was later determined that a complete estimate cost for the sewer extension was $150,000. Consequently, agreement participants were asked to reaffirm their commitment to the project and reaffirmations had been received with the exception of two parcels. Singh Development Company had upon approval of Council and with the execution of the company agreement committed to fund the proportionate share of these two parcels." He asked Mr. Fried if he knew what that meant.


Mr. Fried said when the project was originally developed these two parcels were part of the project. He said the two parcels wouldn't go along, and as a result Singh agreed to get back the cost of the two parcels. He said all that was before Council tonight was to approve the agreement allowing Singh to escrow the money that would have come up from the other two parcels had they been a part of this project.


Councilman Schmid said the impression was that they were going to fund this totally, maybe not, but now when the price went up to $150,000 from $19,000 they were going to fund their proportionate share. He asked what the other shares were.


Mr. Fried said it was all going to be funded by developers. He said none of it would be funded by the City. He said these two parcels would not go along with it because of the increase in cost.


Councilman Schmid asked if they would go along with it now.


Mr. Fried said no Singh would cover their cost.


Councilman Schmid said the $150,000.00.


Mr. Fried said that was the number coming from JCK and he assumed it was a good number.


Councilman Schmid said assuming that was the right number who would pay the total cost.


Mr. Fried said this would cover the total cost.


Mr. Fried said the proportionate share was reflected in the agreement. He said the Bosco parcel was $23,518 and the Roux parcel was $7,157.


Councilman Schmid asked who was paying that.


Mr. Fried said Singh was paying it.


Councilman Schmid asked if this would cause Council to provide additional zoning.


Mr. Fried said it would not.


Councilwoman Mason said Singh would pay for it and the payback would be to Singh Development.


Mr. Fried said that was correct.


Yes (5-Toth, Crawford, No (1-Mitzel) Absent (1-Pope)

Mason, Schmid,

McLallen) Motion carried



6. Approval of Lease Agreement - Roller Dek Hockey (See revised copy in packet)


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That the Lease Agreement with Goal Scorer Sports, Inc. be approved.





Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Fried if he was comfortable with the lease as presented to Council.


Mr. Fried said that he was.


Councilman Schmid said he would support the motion but he assumed that they would meet all ordinances.


Mr. Fried said absolutely and that the agreement provided for that.


Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried unanimously



7. Request for revised preliminary site plan approval - Fretter,

Inc., PD-3 Option


Terrence Jolly, representing Fretter appliance, stated there were company officials present. He said they were before Council a few weeks ago when there were some concerns raised about some land banking, landscaping, breaking up the lot and other varied concerns. He said they were going to address all of those through the engineer and the architect. He said Marv Singer from Fretter Superstores and General Counsel Stuart Garson were present. He asked that this long standing project be moved along so this parcel could be added to the tax rolls of the City of Novi.


Stuart Garson, General Counsel and Vice-President of Fretter, said a couple of weeks ago there was a meeting before the City Council for preliminary site plan approval which didn't go very well. He said he appreciated the opportunity to present it again. He felt a brief history of what had transpired would be in order so everyone would know how it got to where it was today and hopefully end up with preliminary site plan approval from City Council.


Mr. Garson said in 1984 the City Council approved a Phase I development of the existing Fretter Building for a 16,275 foot building in an RC designated area. The concept was that Fretter would agree to a second building of 32,000 feet subject to there being adequate parking and architectural compatibility with the existing Fretter building.


Mr. Garson said between 1984 and the current time two things happened. One, the City asked for and they deeded over land for Karavich Drive which significantly reduced the usable land area of their property. Secondly, the City Council adopted the Dobbs Amendment. He said the Fretter building as an appliance store had significantly less parking requirement then other retail uses as do furniture stores. He said when the Dobbs Amendment came about there was a realization that if land was developed for an appliance store or furniture store and met just the parking requirement for that later on it would be difficult if the use was changed without having adequate parking. He said they came across the concept of land banking. He said both of those things resulted in the inability of Fretter to construct a 32,000 foot second building on the lot and meet the parking requirements.


Mr. Garson said in 1985 Fretter agreed to post a $100,000 bond with the City to be used by the City to landscape the vacant parcel if they were unable to find a user to develop it. He said they had been at least 4 or 5 times before City Council where they had various extensions and modifications to that agreement. He said all during this time Fretter attempted to find a user for the site and develop it as they proposed in 1984. He said there had been 3 separate deals on the project. He said there was a deal with Home Design Furniture Store in 1990 and they got all the way through City Council preliminary site plan approval. He said that particular use was for a building in excess of 30,000 feet. When Home Designs bailed out Party Giant came in and they were proposing a 25,000 foot building. He said that project began in early 1992 and by the end of 1992 Party Giant felt they could move more quickly on a different site on Orchard Lake and 13 Mile Road and did so.


Mr. Garson said the City Council was concerned that there were deals coming and going and yet the property was still not being developed. He said Computer City came along and asked if they could do a deal on the site. He said notwithstanding that they were competitors of Fretter, they felt an obligation to continue the development of the property. Fretter struck a deal with Computer City whereby Fretter would build the building for them in the rear and lease it to them. He said that started in Mid 1993 and in 1994 Fretter felt that Computer City wasn't moving the project along and the City was giving Fretter pressure to complete the process so they entered into a transaction with Computer City whereby they would flip the deals around. He said Fretter would actually develop and occupy the property in the back and Computer City would take the property in the front. He said that was essentially where they were today. Fretter was asking for site plan approval for the building in the back and to lease the building in the front to Computer City.


Stuart Garson said their deal with Computer City, while all the wrinkles were not ironed out because of the flipping of the properties, gives Computer City the opportunity to take a second look and determine what they were going to do with the front building. He said that was for two reasons first, they wanted to make sure that Fretter had the ability to develop the property in the back and secondly, Fretter told them that the buildings had to be architecturally compatible and they were not exactly certain what the City Council would require with respect to the renovations of the building in the front. He said that Computer City didn't take the deal in the front and that's OK because he received phone calls once a week from people interested in the building.


Mr. Garson said they had already received preliminary site plan approval from the Planning Commission for a total of 36,225 sq. ft. under the PD3 Option. He said there was a landscaping deficiency in the rear which was made up with landscaping in the front and it was approved by traffic, fire department, City landscaping and Brandon Rogers. Then they came to the City Council a couple weeks ago for preliminary site plan approval from the Council. He said they were told the City was concerned that they hadn't land banked the excess parking; that they had essentially created parking consistent with another retail use. In other words the 1 to 125 sq. ft. ratio for the entire site versus their use which had a lower parking requirement and City Council preferred they land bank and reduce the parking first.


Secondly, that there be a tie in between the two buildings through landscaping or some kind of architectural interest to make the buildings appear to comport with one another.


Thirdly, their new prototype buildings contain a lightening bolt on their new buildings, which was their logo, and the City Council didn't particularly care for the lightening bolt.


Fourth, there was an issue related to the monument sign between Karavich Drive and Novi Road. He said with respect to the monument sign that transaction went back to 1985 when they deeded the land over for Karavich Drive to the City. He said there was an agreement that they could maintain the existing monument sign where it was and that they would have an easement to go over to that property to maintain the monument sign. He said the property for the right-of-way was given to the City for $96,000 and at the same time Fretter gave an easement to the City to allow sewers for the West Oaks Development in the rear. He said all they asked for was the right to maintain the monument sign and the easement to get to it. Mr. Garson said apparently at the most recent City Council hearing there was a question regarding what was to be done with the monument sign. He said they had attempted to address each of those concerns through a revised site plan. He said they were not asking for approval for the renovation of the Fretter building in the front and understood that was a separate matter but they did want to give Council an idea of what they had in mind because they had to be architecturally consistent.


Clif Seiber outlined the changes that were made to the site plan. Mr. Sieber said some parking spaces had been land banked. Previously there had been 255 spaces proposed and there were now 198 spaces proposed. He said they were land banking 57 spaces.


He said the parking that was given up had allowed them to expand along the southerly portion of the parking area and a row of parking was eliminated. He said the landscape area had been expanded due to the elimination of the spaces. They also eliminated additional parking to provide additional landscaping through the middle of the parking lot. He said paver bricks had been provided to provide a connection between the existing Fretter building and the proposed Fretter building. He said landscape areas had been provided along the westerly and easterly sides of the building. In addition, landscape islands had been increased in size at the north west and north east corners of the building.


Mr. Sieber said Brandon Rogers had suggested that two more spaces be eliminated at the front of the building at the main entrance just adjacent to the concrete sidewalk entry area. He said if the Council saw fit to that proposal they would have no objection to that.


Mr. Sieber said in essence what they had done was land banked the 57 spaces and provided additional walkways and park benches and some additional decorative site lighting.


Michael Bogio said the top rendering Council saw on the easel was the proposed elevation for the new Fretter store less the red lightening bolt. He said basically they proposed that all sides of the building would be constructed of brick and drivit material for the facade. He said the brick was a neutral buff color and the drivit would be two colors, ivory and blue which are the Fretter corporate colors.


Mr. Bogio said they had installed windows along the facade so that there was interest to the architectural elevation as well as running some of the drivit columns and things down to the grade. He said even though it was a "big box retail" they tried to do some detailing within the facade to create some interest on all four sides of the buildings.


He said the rendering on the floor depicted an aerial view of the entire site with the new Fretter building and the existing building that they were proposing to renovate the exterior of. It showed the parking lot and depicted the trees and things that were between the buildings and on the periphery of the site. He said they had proposed and had turned in some exterior concept eleva- tions for the existing store to remove the existing metal facias and do a similar drivit facia, to paint the brick in a similar color as the proposed store. He said there would be separate identities to the two buildings in that there would be a different corporate color as an accent to the front building. He said they had suggested a gable at the entrances rather than just a squared off canopy. He said on the new building they had tried to create some interest and maintain the compatibility between the two buildings so the entire site would appear as one. He said he also had some samples of the materials if anyone would like to see them.


Mayor McLallen said Council had a letter from Mr. Rogers in their packets that had seven issues that needed to be addressed.


Mr. Rogers thought that many of them addressed the concerns that Council had a month or so ago on the development and he thought they had come a long way. Mr. Rogers said there was one correction on what Mr. Seiber mentioned. He said the plan before Council a month ago had the same plaza area in the front and what's being suggested is that the plaza area which was 20 feet deep and 46 feet long be expanded 18 feet in each direction and moving the handicapped parking correspondingly east and west. He said this would double the landscaping in the front of the building. Mr. Rogers said they had introduced the landscaping along the west and east sides and on the south side. He said what that would do would be to increase the deferred parking from 57 spaces to 61.


Mr. Rogers said he thought the seven items in his letter were self explanatory.


Mayor McLallen said there was a positive letter from Mr. Arroyo regarding traffic.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That Site Plan 95-16A Preliminary Site Plan, PD3 Option with the waiver of the 50,000 sq. ft. requirement subject to the ZBA variance, subject to the approval of land banking of the parking by the Planning Commission and the renovation of the existing Fretter Store to meet the facade ordinance and all the conditions of the consultants letters be approved.





Councilman Mitzel said both buildings were part of the site plan. He asked if that was correct.


Mr. Fried said absolutely.


Councilman Mitzel said the renovation of the existing Fretter store could be included as part of the site plan approval. He asked if that was correct.


Mr. Fried said it was.


Councilman Mitzel said there was a letter in the packet that the ZBA granted a variance for the Fretter ground mount sign to remain on Novi Road. He said if Fretter's moving their building to the back would that variance still hold.


Mr. Fried said the variance dealt with the property itself, the easement on the property. He said the variance was still in effect but Council could condition their approval of this by the removal of that sign.


Councilman Mitzel said he was concerned that they could move anywhere in town and the sign could stay there because of the easement.


Councilman Mitzel said back in December Council approved a motion that stated that the previous Computer City site plan had to be under construction by a week ago today or the Administration would take action to use the landscaping escrow and landscape the site. He asked if this motion passed was it appropriate to rescind that former motion.


Mr. Fried said he would suggest Council do that if it was Council's desire.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That the motion be amended to include a condition of removal of the ground post sign on Novi Road.





Mayor McLallen asked if Councilman Crawford was the support of the main motion. Councilman Crawford said he was not.


Councilman Schmid asked if it was added to the main motion.


Councilman Mitzel asked if he could put it in with the main motion.


Councilwoman Mason said that was fine.


Councilman Crawford said one question was what was the status of the monument sign and it looked like that would be addressed in either the amendment or the motion. He said as far as the land banking of the parking that still left 190 some parking places around the Fretter store or was that a combined use with the potential user.


Mr. Rogers said it was substantially around the new Fretter store because the parking on Novi Road of the old Fretter store remained pretty much the same.


Councilman Crawford said it looked like it would be less than that based on the renderings. He said it still seemed like a lot to him and asked if it could be reduced further.


Mr. Rogers said they could.


Councilman Crawford said he was assuming that would be agreeable to the petitioner; they might feel they needed 200. He said also when talking about land banking it meant the spots were available to be developed if needed, was that it.


Mr. Rogers said yes and they would have to delineate them when they come before the Planning Commission to meet the criteria.


Councilman Crawford asked if there were some way Council could reduce it even further.


Mr. Rogers said it could go down to 142 but keep in mind that this building, the old Fretter store, was likely to be an out and out retail store.


Councilman Crawford said they would share some of those spots.

Mr. Rogers said yes they would.


Councilman Crawford said he would rather see some more green space, islands or plantings and reduce it even further if possible.


Mr. Rogers said it could be reduced up to another 50 but he didn't know whether Council would want to do that until they saw the nature of the tenant. He said if this was another furniture or appliance use it could be reduced even further. He said Council didn't know what was going in. Computer City apparently wasn't committed.


Councilman Crawford asked if there was any way it could come back to Council when the other use was determined.


Mr. Rogers said it would be his interpretation that if a retail use came in that was permitted in the RC District all they would need if they didn't change the facades and they met the sign ordinance, would be an occupancy permit.


Councilman Crawford asked if it was Mr. Rogers recommendation that they might need those spaces and that they should not be reduced any further.



Mr. Rogers said he wanted to hold out for retail and that it would very likely be a retail store like Circuit City or Comp USA.


Councilman Crawford asked how many spaces were around the existing Fretter store.


Mr. Rogers said he didn't recall.


Councilman Crawford said based on the renderings it looked like at least 100. He asked if there would be close to 300 on the total site. He said there were already 200 in the new site.


Councilwoman Mason said her question on the sign before Councilman Mitzel changed it was whoever came into the now Fretter building would be able to use the same sign because the square footage would match the sign dimensions.


Mr. Fried said he was sure whoever came in would want to use the sign but he thought Councilman Mitzel's motion was that Council would grant the PD3 Option based upon that condition.


Councilwoman Mason said before Councilman Mitzel added the amendment she wanted to ask because she knew how expensive those signs were. She said Council was asking them to take out a $2,000 or $3,000 actual permanent structure when another name could be added by just taking the glass out.


Mr. Fried said he didn't think the motion was made for the purpose of the name. It was made because aesthetically that sign was not appropriate for that area.


Councilman Mitzel said that was the intent of the motion.


Councilwoman Mason asked what happened; did the sign go up and didn't belong there.


Mr. Fried said no, they had the right to put the sign up, they had a variance for the sign and they had an agreement that the sign would be maintained. He said that was part of the original site plan and now the site plan was being changed and the PD3 Option was being changed and Council had the right to attach conditions on it.


Councilwoman Mason said she would not support the removal of the sign.


Councilman Crawford asked if Councilman Mitzel included that in his motion or was it an amendment.


Councilman Mitzel said he would do whatever the Mayor deemed appropriate.


Mayor McLallen said Councilwoman Mason did grant Councilman Mitzel the ability to amend his original motion because she was the original supporter. She said his motion as permitted by Councilwoman Mason, was to exclude the sign. She said now that Councilwoman Mason's understanding had been clarified she was no longer in support of the motion but the motion still stood.


Councilman Toth said under the PD3 Option they were required to have one single structure of 50,000 sq. ft. or more.


Mr. Rogers said that was correct.


Councilman Toth said that he was proposing now two separate structures of far less then 50,000 sq. ft.


Mr. Rogers said which was what the site could support.


Councilman Toth said he understood that but Mr. Rogers was proposing two structures rather than one structure. He said the original program Fretter brought in in 1984 proposed one structure. He said now they are being allowed to have two structures.


Mr. Rogers said that was why they needed the exception from Council to do that.


Councilman Toth said he would not vote for that. He said, secondly, Fretter had been allowed to make a profit on this area with a substandard size building for over 11 years. He said they had been allowed to make money at the expense of everybody else in the area that complied with the regulations of 50,000 sq. ft. He said now Fretter had come in with a second structure which he thought was not correct and they want to relocate their business into a new building. He said he wasn't sure that it fit into the PD3.


He said he personally found this a big fiasco, this had been going on since he was on the Planning Board and the Planning Commission and now on the Council, it's more hilarious every time they come back before Council.


Mr. Rogers said he agreed it was before his time also.


Councilman Toth said it had been one silly time after another with this and he personally felt that Fretter should comply as close as possible to the PD3 and then bring it back to the Council. He said with two structures they were not complying anywhere near close to the 50,000 sq. ft. requirement under one single structure. He said they had had enough time to sell the property ten times over. He said there was never a financial incentive placed by the previous Council to make sure it would be costly for them if they continued to go on with this fiasco. He stated he would vote against the motion.


Councilman Schmid said he supported the motion in general. He said the facade of the buildings he assumed, would have similar extensions to the front.


Mr. Rogers said the facades were in Council packets.


Councilman Schmid said he assumed that the entrance would be widened and there would be landscaping there.


Mr. Rogers said yes and they were introducing the drivit and the pediment to break up the box like affect with the same color and type of materials.


Councilman Schmid said he would like the paver extended a little more to make it pedestrian friendly. He asked how wide the paver was.


Mr. Rogers said at one point it flared to 12 feet wide otherwise it was about a 5 or 6 foot sidewalk in brick.


Councilman Schmid said he agreed with Councilman Toth to some degree but thought the error was made back in the 80's when Council allowed the original Fretter. He felt that this could be turned into a rather attractive development particularly with the Fretter facades and the improvement of Fretter. He said he would support the motion.


Councilman Mitzel restated his motion:


That Site Plan 95-16A Preliminary Site Plan, PD3 Option with the waiver of the 50,000 sq. ft. requirement subject to the ZBA variance, subject to the approval of land banking of the parking by the Planning Commission and the renovation of the existing Fretter Store to meet the facade ordinance, removal of the ground post sign and all the conditions of the consultants letters be approved.



Yes (4-Mitzel, Schmid, No (2-Mason, Toth) Absent (1-Pope)

Crawford, McLallen) Motion carried






Warren Jocz, 10 Mile Resident, said once again he was in front of the Council asking for a clarification regarding the proposed road improvements to Ten Mile Road between Novi and Haggerty Roads. He said his confusion stemmed from what he read as mixed signals being delivered by the City of Novi. He said at the February 12 Council meeting Council amended the MDOT contract which authorized JCK and Associates to begin preliminary engineering services. In doing so they added three amendments, two of which are very important. First one being all alternatives to a five lane roadway were to be pursued before the necessary engineering work began. Secondly, JCK was to provide monthly status reports.


Mr. Jocz said with the amendments he felt the City was truly listening. He said they were told that by no means was it a foregone conclusion that 10 Mile Road was to be widened to five lanes. He said they were assured that the City had not already made up its collective minds as to the future of the residential segment of 10 Mile Road. In fact, these items amended to the contract were done so as to alleviate these concerns. However, actions speak louder than words. Recent City actions or in some cases lack of actions had convinced him that the City of Novi was not totally committed to this position.


Case in point: tonight Council reviewed a tentative preliminary plat approval request by Singh Development. As part of their plan access onto 10 Mile Road was required and in assessing potential effects of this access point the City of Novi traffic consultant was required to provide his expert opinion. As stated in his written and oral communications and documented in the minutes of the Planning Commission meetings, his direction was based on making consistent the future widening of 10 Mile Road to five lanes. He said in more than one case his communications to Singh stated five lanes. These statements were made within two months of Council's position that there was no preconceived notion or direction regarding 10 Mile Road. He said in fact, these statements were made even before JCK began its engineering feasibility study.


Mr. Jocz said according to JCK the engineering feasibility study began at the end of April. He said already JCK had surveyors working on 10 Mile Road assessing land 90 feet either side of the 10 Mile center line. He said this work was required to perform environmental impact studies and right-of-way assessments. He said none of these efforts are required to look at a no build solution or reduction speed limit, options that were supposed to be looked at prior to five lanes. He said it seemed like a lot of work, so soon, if all avenues had already been examined.


In fact, JCK estimated a July completion of environmental impact studies with possible MDOT review in August. He said if this time frame was correct the City Council received a single status report regarding all the options on 10 Mile Road and these were supposed to be monthly reports. He said it was not much of an opportunity to discuss alternatives. He was asking the Council to please alleviate his concerns that the actions set forth on February 12 are indeed happening and that the ball was not already running inappropriately.





8. Request for increase in Taxi Cab Rates



WHEREAS, Section 35-17 of the City Code provides that rates

and fees for taxicabs and vehicles for hire be set by

Resolution of the City Council;



NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the rates to be charged

by taxicab owners in the City of Novi shall be as follows:


Minimum Fare $3.00

First thirteenth of a mile 1.50

Per Mile 1.50

Per Hour of Waiting Time 15.00



It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That the request to increase Taxi Cab rates be approved.


Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried unanimously








It was then,


Moved by Councilwoman Mason

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That Ordinance 95-45.21 - Amendment to Subdivision












Councilman Schmid said he would not support this because he thought it was a ploy to get another years extension without reasoning.


Yes (4-Crawford, Mason, No (2-Toth, Schmid) Absent (1-Pope)

Mitzel, McLallen) Motion carried



10. Ordinance 95-64.02 - Reduce Membership of Beautification



It was then,


Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That Ordinance 95-64.02 - Reduce Membership of Beautification Commission I and II Reading AN ORDINANCE




Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried unanimously



11. Request to seek bids for water and sewer - Main Street Project


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That the request that bids be sought for the construction of the water and sewer on the Main Street project be approved.


Yes (4-Schmid, Toth, No (2-Mason, Mitzel, Absent (1-Pope)

Crawford, McLallen Motion carried


12. Approval to seek bids for Main Street Streetscape (all Phases)


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That the request that bids be sought for the Main Street

Streetscape (all Phases) be approved.





Councilman Schmid said he would like to ask Mr. Wahl a couple of questions regarding this. He asked Mr. Wahl what they were doing.


Mr. Wahl said they were approving to seek bids for the entire streetscape, the project would advertise for bids over a period of three weeks. He said they would get the bids back for the entire streetscape project with the exception of the concrete sidewalk immediately adjacent to the buildings which would not be included for construction reasons. He said they would be done at the time of the construction of the individual buildings.


Councilman Schmid asked if they would be concrete sidewalks because he thought they were going to be brick pavers.


Mr. Wahl said there would be brick pavers throughout the project.


Councilman Schmid asked if the brick pavers would be in front of the stores.


Mr. Wahl said he thought it was only at the intersections.


Councilman Schmid said what he was concerned about was that this was a major, major commitment to the Main Street project, several millions of dollars. He said this had never been before the Council to discuss. There had only been overtures as to what it was. He said he also belonged to the Town Center Steering Committee and he didn't think they had ever seen anything that indicated exactly what kind of lights, pavers or other amenities that this streetscape was supposed to contain. He said now they want to pass it through like it was nothing and he was very, very concerned.


Mr. Wahl said the brick pavers shown on the illustration, which they had for a period of time, are primarily at the intersections.


Councilman Schmid said then there are pavers at the end of the block and a few along the way; that's the streetscape.


Mr. Wahl said the design showed the amenities including the landscaping and the lighting fixtures, which were the same fixtures that were at Vic's Market. He said it also had brick pavers and several features including the intersection at the corner of Main Street and Market Street as well as the entry way tower at the corner of Grand River and Market St.


Councilman Schmid asked about the other tower.


Mr. Wahl said that had not been resolved with Vic's Market as to whether that would be a tower or some other amenity at the intersection. He said money was to be put into escrow for that particular improvement.


Councilman Schmid said it was far less than he expected from a streetscape design for downtown Novi. He said downtown Plymouth was going through a major renovation and they were knocking out all the cement sidewalks and putting in pavers. He said it cost them several hundreds of thousands of dollars to do it plus they were heating the sidewalk. He said he wouldn't expect heated sidewalks but he did expect far more than this. He asked Mr. Wahl if going out to bids would slow the project. He said he would like to see more detailed information about the brick scape and all the amenities that are supposed to go in this and would also like to see a presentation.


Councilman Schmid said he didn't know how many lights there were if it was 4 or 12.


Mr. Wahl said it was in his packet and that there were approximately 80 lights.


Councilman Schmid said he didn't want to spend 5 minutes at 1:00 a.m. to be told these things and to be handed a list of things.


Mr. Wahl said that was the reason they had a walk through work shop that all of the Council and Planning Commission members attended.


Councilman Schmid said he was at the workshop and he walked through and no one said a word except when he asked a few questions. He said if there was a workshop it seemed to him there should have been a presentation.


Mr. Wahl said there had been several presentations.


Councilman Schmid said he thought that Council had stuck their neck out a long way and it was not a quality project.


Councilman Toth said why not move to table until the first

meeting in June for a presentation.


Councilman Toth left the meeting at 1:10 a.m.


Councilman Schmid said he asked if this would slow the project.


Mr. Wahl said it would slow the project down. He said they did come before Council prepared to give a complete presentation of the project on April 10 with essentially the same design and project. He said there were no questions or comments, no request for presentation at that point. However, there were some concerns or suggestions that they wanted to guarantee that the entire streetscape was going to go forward. Council wanted to be sure that there wasn't just going to be a Phase I and then perhaps the rest might not get built because there wasn't a commitment to do that. He said subsequent to that meeting, in which positive action did take place, they did go back and talk to the bond attorney and had further discussions with Evergreen III. He said they determined that they could come back and bid out the entire streetscape with the exception of just the immediate areas in front of the buildings. He said the engineers advised them they could not go forward and build all of the project in 1996 and then have a building come along further in the phasing two years from now and not have to tear out substantial parts of the streetscape. Therefore, what they came up with was a $1,200,000 project which accomplished about 95% of the construction in this whole area. He said essentially what was left was the immediate area in front of the building.


Councilman Schmid asked if there was written criteria for the streetscape for each building that was going to be built.


Mr. Wahl said in terms of conformance to the Town Center design development requirements as a TC-1 Ordinance. He said it was in the ordinance as well as in the design plan. He said when they executed the contractual arrangements with the developer and when the final special assessment bond resolution and all the legal documents were brought before Council those requirements would be handled in that documentation. He said this was just an action to bid out the design of the project as it had been put together. He also pointed out that based on the bond review provided by Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone there were some upper limits on what could be put into the special assessment district and have the project financially feasible. He said they could not pave the entire streetscape in bricks even if they wanted to and the consultant didn't recommend it because it was cost prohibitive.


Councilman Schmid asked if he could tell him the difference in cost between a cement walk and a streetscape walk in front of the building.


Mr. Wahl said it was 4 or 5 times as expensive at least.


Councilman Schmid said he would not support it because he was concerned that it was meeting what the project should be.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That the Main Street Streetscape (all Phases) request to seek bids be tabled until the next regular meeting of Council June 5 and that it be brought back with a full presentation.


Yes (5) No (0) Absent (2-Pope, Motion carried unanimously




14. Ordinance 95-81.13 - Amendments to the Traffic Code pertaining

to Drunk Driving - I and II Reading - AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTIONS 33.275, 33-276, 33-277, 33-278, 33-282, 33-283 AND




It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That Ordinance 95-81.13 - Amendments to the Traffic Code



Yes (5) No (0) Absent (2-Pope, Motion carried unanimously




15. Claims and Accounts - Warrant No. 439


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel


That Claims and Accounts - Warrant No. 439 be approved.


Yes (4) No (1-Mason) Absent (2-Pope, Motion carried




16. Schedule an Executive Session for property acquisition and

vehicle policy.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason



That an Executive Session for property acquisition and

vehicle policy be scheduled after the Council meeting.


Yes (5) No (0) Absent (2-Pope, Motion carried unanimously









Mayor McLallen said the Council had asked to put a hold on Committee, Manager and Attorney's reports unless there was something exceedingly important.


It was then,


Moved by Councilwoman Mason

Seconded by Councilman Crawford


That a meeting be scheduled for May 25 for interviews for Boards and Commissions.


Yes (5) No (0) Absent (2-Pope, Motion carried unanimously







6. Ordinance 95-23.15 - Anti Graffiti Ordinance II Reading - AN





Councilman Mitzel removed this to ask the City Attorney if based on the comments in the newspaper this ordinance would apply to public property such as school districts or Oakland County.




Mr. Fried said parts of the ordinance would apply to that but the parts requiring them to remove graffiti would not apply to them.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford




Yes (5) No (0) Absent (2-Pope, Motion carried unanimously





7B. Condemnation Resolution - Deborah Ann Bundoff


WHEREAS, present conditions in the City of Novi, Oakland

County, Michigan necessitate the widening of Novi Road

between Twelve Mile Road and Twelve and One-Half Mile Road

in the City of Novi;



WHEREAS, proposed plans showing said relocation and

improvement have been prepared; and



WHEREAS, it has been determined that said relocation and

improvement is necessary for the use and benefit of the

public; and



WHEREAS, in order to construct said improvement, it is

necessary that the City acquire the fee in certain real

estate as described in the original minutes of the Council.


Councilwoman Mason removed this so she could vote no on the condemnation.


Councilman Crawford said he would have removed it too because Ms. Bundoff apparently had a concern and he would like to know what it was.


Mr. Fried said that this was not to condemn the property it was to make a offer to purchase the property. He said all the resolution did was allow the City to make an offer to purchase the property. He said if the offer was not acceptable to sell at that price and Council couldn't arrange for sale then they would be back with another resolution authorizing procedures for condemnation.


Councilwoman Mason said she was uncomfortable with the fact that she had talked with Ms. Bundoff and she felt that Ms. Bundoff should get some legal advice.


Mr. Fried agreed.


Councilwoman Mason said she didn't think Ms. Bundoff was getting things in a timely fashion.


Mr. Fried said he didn't understand.


Councilwoman Mason said things in a timely fashion having to do with the resolution, condemnation and her situation.


Mr. Fried said everybody should get legal advice.


Councilman Crawford said Ms. Bundoff asked that it be pulled and he wanted to know if she had any comments and if so if she would tell Council what they were.


Ms. Bundoff said in September when the public hearing was held about the widening of the road it was run down as to the procedures that would be happening. She said unfortunately the City had not quite followed the procedures. She said everything that she had understood in the last 3 weeks was this "fast rush." Ms. Bundoff asked where the "fast rush" was in September when she had questions, asked them of the engineers that designed the project, asked JCK that she had the right to be notified when an appraiser was coming out so that she would have the opportunity to speak to that person. She said she was not afforded that opportunity until after the appraisal had already been done.


She said she had questions and concerns over specific items that involved her property and had gotten none of the answers until the last 3 weeks when she found out the appraisal had been done. She said she asked in September of the City, the engineers and JCK's office to be notified. She said she continually asked what the status of the project was and had been to City Hall numerous times in the last 6 months only to find out that they totally disregarded the fact that she existed until now.


Councilman Crawford asked what she would like Council to do.

Ms. Bundoff said on Friday she received numerous phone calls at work because now all of a sudden everyone was willing to talk to her fortunately because she asked that somebody do something before this happened. She said she was asked if she was willing to go ahead, and without any action of the City, go through and discuss the appraisal and the situations as to what she felt. She said then all of a sudden the appraisal was done and here was the offer.


Councilman Crawford said she hadn't had a chance to do that yet.


Ms. Bundoff said in the last week everyone told her that she couldn't talk to Council. She said today she talked to Mr. Watson who was going to schedule a meeting so that the issues could be discussed.


It was then,


Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason


That the Condemnation resolution regarding the Deborah Bundoff property be tabled until Ms. Bundoff had a meeting with Council and got her questions answered.






Councilman Crawford asked if that would be by the June 5, meeting.


Mr. Fried said that he would hope so.


Mr. Kriewall said he saw no reason not to make an offer even if she didn't like it. He said it was just a formality in terms of the process the attorneys had to go through to acquire real estate.


Councilman Crawford asked if there was a reason this couldn't wait 3 weeks.


Mr. Kriewall said it would take two more weeks of nothing happening. He said this was not the condemnation resolution it was just a good faith offer.


Mr. Fried said along the lines of what Mr. Kriewall was saying obviously there was an appraisal. He said he would hope that it was a good appraisal. He said he didn't care what Ms. Bundoff said whether she agreed with the appraisal or not made no difference. If Ms. Bundoff said she wanted to make a counter offer obviously they would come back to the City and say she didn't want to accept the offer but counter offered and the City wouldn't accept it.


Councilman Crawford said that would be by June 5 anyway.


Mayor McLallen said this resolution was necessary in order to make an offer.


Councilman Crawford said maybe he didn't understand the situation. He said he wanted to make sure she got her concerns addressed and that business was done efficiently. He said what was being said was that if this was approved tonight she could still get her concerns addressed, she didn't have to accept the offer and it would still be back before Council.


Mr. Fried said absolutely.


Ms. Bundoff said some of her concerns were regarding how this was appraised.


Mr. Kriewall said that could be dealt with.


Ms. Bundoff asked if their offer was an accurate appraisal because she didn't have the opportunity to speak with the appraiser to bring up points that he might not have been aware of when he did his comparisons and appraisal.


Councilman Crawford said she could still do that.


Ms. Bundoff said she should have had the right to do it before the appraisal.


Councilman Crawford said she was absolutely right but to facilitate this he thought Council could probably approve this tonight and Ms. Bundoff would still get her questions answered. He said if Ms. Bundoff didn't like the offer she could not approve it.


Councilwoman Mason said the situation was once Council did a resolution of condemn that meant . . .


Mr. Fried asked Councilwoman Mason if she had read the resolution. He said it was just a resolution authorizing the City Manager to make an offer to purchase the property.


Councilwoman Mason asked if it said if Ms. Bundoff didn't accept the offer it would go to condemnation.


Mr. Fried said no.


Councilwoman Mason asked why it was called a condemnation resolution.


Mr. Fried said because it's preparatory to a condemnation resolution. He said if Ms. Bundoff didn't accept the offer then they'd be back before the Council with a resolution authorizing Council to condemn the property.


Councilwoman Mason said her point was if Ms. Bundoff sat down with someone and agreed to take what was offered for the property then Council wouldn't have to do any of this, is that correct.


Mr. Fried said he couldn't argue with that kind of logic.


Councilwoman Mason said that was because it's logical. She asked if Ms. Bundoff was related to Mr. Bugbee.


Mr. Fried said he didn't know but they might be third cousins.


Councilwoman Mason said her understanding was her mother and Mr. Bugbee's mother are sisters, is that correct.


Mr. Fried said he had no idea.


Councilwoman Mason said she thought he should check on it because Mr. Bugbee worked for Mr. Fried's law firm and that makes her real nervous.


Mr. Fried asked Councilwoman Mason if she thought that because he was related to her he'd do her out of the money.


Councilwoman Mason said it was the very fact that Mr. Fried's law firm was taking care of this and it made her very nervous. She said she was sorry she had to say it now in public but it should have been taken care of one or two months ago when everybody in town knew what was happening with Ms. Bundoff.


Mr. Fried said he didn't know what was happening with Ms. Bundoff and maybe Councilwoman Mason knew more than he did.


Councilwoman Mason said apparently she did.


Mr. Kriewall said his concern was that he knew City Council was concerned that the project get constructed or at least construction was started this year. He thought a two or three week delay might be very critical at this point in time. Mr. Kriewall said all of Ms. Bundoff's rights were protected and she would be dealt with, answered, met with and whatever it took to satisfy her concerns. He thought there were timing concerns in terms of moving the project along and thought Council should move ahead.


Councilman Crawford said he would like to withdraw his motion.



It was then,



Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid


That Condemnation Resolution - Novi Road, 12 to 12 1/2 Mile Road be approved and an appointment be set up with Ms. Bundoff to answer any and all questions that she had.


Yes (3-Schmid, No (2-Mitzel, Mason) Absent (2-Pope, Toth)


Crawford) Motion carried



Councilman Mitzel said during the Fretter discussion he had asked Mr. Fried about the landscaping motion that Council had in the past and Council had said when they extended the last site plan it had to be either constructed or landscaped by May 8. He said he had talked with Mr. Fried and based on the fact that it was an amendment to the extension of the former site plan and they had come forward with the new site plan it was null and void.





Gerry Stipp, City Clerk announced that Mark Sturing and Larry Czekaj had been appointed to the Building Authority.



Mark Sturing 3 - Schmid, Mason, Mitzel

Larry Czekaj 5 - McLallen, Mitzel, Schmid, Crawford and Mason

Jeanette Snyder 2 - McLallen, Crawford

David Ruyle 1 - Schmid


Jim Chen came forward to address the Council. Mr. Chen was speaking for Evergreen III and said that the schedule for the Main Street construction was at a critical point. He said if Council did not approve to seek bids at this meeting it would set the bonding process and would make Main Street completion this year almost impossible.


Mr. Chen said why the Main Street had to be connected to the streetscape was because of the bonding situation. He said they tried to separate construction from the streetscape so there was more time to deal with it. He said the bonding attorney said they had to go together as one bid and Phase I and Phase II all had to go out at the same time. He said therefore JCK had to be authorized to seek bids in order to get construction going.



Mr. Chen said what had happened was without any site plan being proposed to the Council he thought they would agree with how the connection between the sidewalk and the building would shape up. He said the site plan was not ready to be presented because they just determined the formula of calculating the parking. He said the Catch 22, something had to come first. Therefore, the City initiated a meeting and they participated with all the City consultants. They came to the general conceptual agreement that the best way would be to construct the streetscape only approximately 5 or 6 feet from the back of the curb. He said beyond that point would be implemented at a time when the site plan was presented. He said when Council saw the Main Street site plan it would clearly indicate to Council the sidewalk from 5 feet beyond to the building and how it would be done. He said it would be handled then when they could further define what the building would look like.


Mr. Chen said in terms of pavers and so forth there were two things there. One was cost and second they were looking at some other cities throughout the United States and the use of what they call cover concrete. He said it was concrete but it was covered and shaped just like the pavers and that would create some possibility. He said from the building they would probably go one step further and put the marble in there because they had some high end of the retail users and they want to have that kind of versatility to do whatever they want to do.


Mayor McLallen said due to the late hour and due to the fact that the Council did table this until June 5 she asked him to bring his discussion then and Council would try to get Mr. Chen on at a reasonable hour that evening.


Mr. Chen said he was asking Council to reconsider their vote during this meeting. He said JCK was supposed to seek the bids about a week ago and they had to postpone it.


Mayor McLallen asked if Council had any interest in reconsidering the earlier motion not to act on this and table it until June 5. She asked if there were any votes to bring this forward.


Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Kapelczak when they were going to send the bids out for the sewer.


Mr. Kapelczak said it was going to go out in a total package.

He said the sewer was going to go with the streetscape and everything was going to go so there would be only one contractor.


Councilman Schmid asked if they were going to have one person do the sewer and the streetscape.


Mr. Kapelczak said one prime contractor that's correct.


Councilman Schmid asked when they were going to send those out.


Mr. Kapelczak said if it had been approved tonight they would have been advertised by the end of the week.


Councilman Schmid asked if all the specifications, etc. were ready to go.


Mr. Kapelczak said everything was ready to go.


Councilman Schmid asked how long it took.


Mr. Kapelczak said they would advertise and then take bids in three weeks. He said they would advertise for three weeks and at the end of the three week period the bids would be received by Geraldine Stipp.


Councilman Schmid asked if he was saying he had all the specifications for all that streetscape written out in detail all ready to go.


Mr. Kapelczak said he did. He said they did not do the detailed specification; Beckett Raider did the streetscape but they are going all in one bid package with their bid documents.


Mr. Fried asked who checked the specifications to see if they were in accordance with what the Council wanted.


Councilman Schmid said he didn't want to delay this project because it had had enough problems.


Councilman Mitzel said if they were ready May 30 there was a Budget Wrap up and if they could do it in 15 minutes that would be a possibility. He said another option was on May 25 there was a meeting for interviews and that would be another possibility or June 5. He felt it needed to be presented better.


Mayor McLallen said there was no support on Council to revisit the question tonight.





1. Letter from Road Commission for Oakland County Re: the Grand

River/Haggerty, Ten Mile/Haggerty, Grand River/Vic's Market

entrance and Novi Road Signalization

2. Resolution from Birmingham in support of SB119

3. Notice from Liquor Control Commission of denial of request for

new 12 months Resort Class C license - Port Papadapolis

4. Letter from Barbara Macek Re: Briarpointe Veterinary Clinic







There being no further business to come before Council, the meeting was adjourned at 1:40 a.m.













Date approved: