View Agenda for this meeting


MONDAY, MARCH 5, 2001 AT 7:30 PM


Mayor Clark called the meeting to order at 7:36 PM.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Brownie Girl Scouts Troop 2308-Novi Woods-

Leaders: Frances Longe, Sherri Ketzer, Alina Muller

Members: Kelsey Longe, Courtney Kelzer, Erika Paliaian,

Emily Banks, Alina Muller, Ashley Papelian, Deepa Etikala,

Alyssa Hayes, Jillian Hilliard, Kelsey Masserant, Olivia

Mayer, Brianne Pieprzak

ROLL CALL: Mayor Clark, Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo, Council Members Bononi, Cassis, Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer

APPROVAL OF AGENDA - (additional communications or petitions)

The following items were added to Mayor and Council Issues:

Item #2 Consultant Evaluation Form – Member Kramer

Item #3 Grant Report – Member Csordas

Item #4 Explore availability of HCD Funds – Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo

CM-01-03-059 Moved by Lorenzo, seconded Csordas; CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY:

To approve the agenda as amended.

Vote on CM-01-03-059 Yeas: Clark, Lorenzo, Bononi, Cassis,

Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer

Nays: None



Member Bononi announced that the first meeting of the Storm Water Management and Watershed Stewardship Committee would be March 13th.

Member DeRoche stated, for SEMCOG, he had a fiscal year 2000-2002 Transportation Improvement Program for southeast Michigan and was marking Novi items for Council Members to review if they wanted to.

Member Cassis reported he attended the grand opening of Unisia, a global Japanese company on Meadowbrook Road. They said Novi impressed them as being safe, clean, and friendly with strong support services, strong schools and the presence of other Japanese companies in the area.








  1. Father Richard J. Elmer, C.S.B, President, Catholic Central High School

Father Elmer stated Catholic Central High School had been given 50 acres of land on the west side of Wixom Road just south of Twelve Mile Road. The property came to them from Frank and Colleen Pellerito. Mr. Pellerito is the owner and President of the Lakeside Oakland Development Company. A feasibility study was being done to determine how to utilize it and make maximum use of the water and the trees that are there. He wanted a naturally beautiful unique campus for a high school. The study would also include how the high school might be able to make positive contributions to the City and its citizens.

Catholic Central is an all boys school established in 1928 and run by a religious community called the Basilian Fathers. Their enrollment is at 1100 students and 98% of their graduates go on to college. They help young men grow intellectually, spiritually and morally, socially and physically. Their demographic studies revealed that Novi has a reputation for excellence, competency, openness and friendliness.

Mayor Clark asked if they had a timetable? Father Elmer said there was no deadline but they wanted to get started as soon as possible. There is a lot of preliminary work to do and they felt once started it would be about 4 years before they could move in. They hoped to get a building permit within a year and a half if the site was compatible with their needs. They have a fundraising campaign just starting for $34 million.

Member Kramer felt it was the beginning of an adventure for Father Elmer and a relationship with Novi.

Member DeRoche noted Catholic Central had an excellent reputation, it was a great opportunity, and he was pleased they were working with the public schools.

Member Cassis felt that Novi’s Walsh College would be an added plus to Catholic Central and they would add to Novi’s character and stature and nothing but good would come out of this.

2. Legislative Briefing - Coordinated Planning Act (HB6124)

Mr. Arroyo responded to Member Kramer who brought attention to this act at the last meeting. The Act was introduced in the last session of the Michigan Legislature and the House, had not had time to go through the various study sessions and evaluations, and would be reintroduced in March or April. It would replace four planning enabling Acts with this one statute that would govern planning, as we know it in the State of Michigan.

The plan recognized Michigan’s strong home rule context in which it had developed over the years, recognized the importance of local government, and continued to work with them.

There are three alternative types of plans, a Future Land Use Plan, A Comprehensive Plan and a Growth Management Plan.




The Future Land Use Plan is more like the plan today in terms of the typical planning, transportation, and land use. One new element is a separate plan for electronic communications within the community. The Zoning Plan would provide for what the community recommended for change in the zoning map over a five-year period. There would be a plan that covered 20 years and a zoning plan that would cover five.

The Comprehensive Plan would include everything in the Future Land Use Plan and an environmental protection component, components related to multi mobile transportation and capital improvements.

The Growth Management Plan would be the broadest and most sweeping of all the plans. It would provide the opportunity to look at the timing of development and where services would be provided.

Under the current State Statute the Planning Commission prepared and adopted the Master Plan. Under this proposal the Planning Commission would prepare and approve the Master Plan but Council would render final approval, which would provide the link between the Planning Commission and Council that many felt was missing in the current Statute. It would also provide for mandatory coordination with adjacent communities, to receive their comments, respond in writing to those comments, and make a good faith effort to address those concerns.

Financial assistance would be included. It was proposed that over the seven year period that communities had to adopt new plans to meet the Act the legislature would appropriate $15 million per year to pay for a portion of the funding. Municipalities would be eligible for a 50% minimum match for planning and if coordinating jointly with another community the financial eligibility could be 65% matching funds.

Mr. Arroyo commented public participation would be strengthened and there were many ways that could occur through this process. There would also be potential money for non-profit groups to be involved through the public participation process.

Mr. Arroyo noted the other key element strengthened by this Act was the Capital Improvements Programming. The idea was to link planning, programming and budgeting and taking long-range plans and tying it to the expenditure of dollars to make certain improvements happen. The Capital Improvements Program was currently a mandate in the State Statute and it said, "if you have a planning commission it shall annually prepare a Capital Improvements Program." This would continue but it would also come before Council for approval. Proposed Capital Improvements would have to be consistent with that program or it would require 2/3rds vote of the Council to spend money.

There are provisions to have coordination with purchase of development rights programs and transfer development rights programs. HB 4346, which is the Development Rights Marketing Act has been introduced and if approved it might allow for communities to develop programs where they would transfer development rights from areas that were environmentally sensitive to areas better able to handle the development where the infrastructure was in place.







Finally, the makeup of the Planning Commission would change. Presently, with a City this

size, there had to be a nine member Planning Commission; with the new Act it could go down to five or still maintain nine. It would also allow two alternates to serve for extended absences or conflict of interest. Two newspaper notices would be required when adopting the Master Plan.

Mr. Arroyo encouraged Council to follow HB 6124 and if they supported it to pass it on to their representative in Lansing. He thought additional dialogue was in order to evaluate some of these issues. The Michigan Society of Planning, involved in the development of this, was actively working with the Michigan Municipal League and the Michigan Townships Associations to address concerns with a variety of interest groups and make this something that would lead to better planning in Michigan.

Member Kramer said Northville set up a symposium on HB 6124 on March 29th and asked if there was anything Mr. Arroyo thought they should ask questions on or pursue? Mr. Arroyo stated he would go with an open mind to listen and discuss the Act and hear what other communities are saying. Member Kramer felt a work session might be needed and Mr. Arroyo agreed.

Member Bononi asked if there were any potential strings attached with regard to the involvement of the State having potential comments, attitudinal changes and variances with what Council might bring forward? She felt this could become cumbersome but was delighted with the emphasis put on the Capital Improvement Plan.

Mr. Arroyo stated he would provide the information before the Northville symposium.

Mayor Clark said the State said they recognized Michigan’s strong home rule philosophy but also encouraged planning rather then mandating it and a lack of a mandate avoided Headlee Amendment issues. Mayor Clark was sure it did and they don’t want to pay for some of the things that ultimately, if read carefully, is what they would mandate. The money their holding out, if spread across the State, would be miniscule. The idea of getting the cooperation, mandatory coordination with adjacent communities and other Federal, State or other local entities could be a nightmare of cooperation getting things done going through one layer of bureaucracy after another. He had no problem with the comments made in reference to impact fees but felt the legislature could have accomplished that with specific legislative. He felt this plan had regional government by the back door written all over it.

Member Cassis said whenever there was one general uniform code or law governing so many municipalities the identity and the uniqueness of the locality would be compromised.

Member Csordas commented he would call Representative Cassis and ask her not to support this Act.







  2. Mr. Helwig offered an invitation to all residents on behalf of the Emergency Medical Services and Fire Services Task Force to participate in a public forum on Wednesday, March 14th at 7 PM in Council Chambers. The Task Force had been meeting twice a week and they would like to report to the community information and key findings to date with the primary purpose being to receive input from the community before starting to compile recommendations.


  4. ATTORNEY - None


Jonathan Brateman, businessman at 42705 Grand River, stated it was in his capacity as the Legislative Affairs Chairman and his position on the executive board of the Novi Chamber of Commerce he addressed Council. He said tonight Council would have the First Reading of the Downtown Gateway Ordinance and he felt there were issues that needed to be addressed at a later date. He thought the ordinance would play a major role in the realization of the potential of Grand River Avenue and looked to Council to make it happen. He said it was an appropriate ordinance, good for the community and everyone involved in the community and the Novi Chamber of Commerce supported this ordinance.

Richard Atto, 2150-B Franklin, Bloomfield Hills, felt the proposed Downtown Gateway Ordinance was very important and supported the intent of the ordinance but felt there were a few issues that needed to be addressed. He had been involved in a similar project in San Diego. He asked if the procedure of reading the ordinance prevented any amendments to it? Mayor Clark said there would be a policy discussion tonight and no affirmative action would be taken. Mr. Atto wanted the area to be developed and to become and remain viable. The long-term viability and whether it could sustain itself was very important especially in a mixed-use development. He said when an ordinance like this was set up it allowed for single purpose development but it was actually designed for multiple uses and the different uses fed off of each other. He felt there were additional uses that would be excellent in this type of use that was missing in this ordinance. He suggested Council add a few of these uses such as shops that sell soft goods, electronics, a hobby shop and pet store. Add under business services, a hardware store, income tax preparation, computer software and repair and a kitchen store. He said he liked the uptown district where there are lofts for people to live and work; it should be specifically addressed.

Mr. Atto also felt that one row of parking on the street side was a problem for retailers. He thought a way around that would be no parking on the street side with the buildings pulled closer to the road and parking on the inside. This ordinance allowed this to be done and if that was the intent then the set backs needed to be changed. He felt the internal roadway was necessary but did not believe the ordinance should dictate the location of it because almost every developer would have to request relief. A crossroad should be mandated but not the



location. Mr. Atto thought the loading and unloading portion of the ordinance was inappropriate for this mixed-use development. A lot of small retailers do not need loading areas and it would waste space. He asked Council to incorporate some of these improvements or not take any action and visit the center in San Diego, at his expense. He felt it would be valuable and critical to see some of the items they implemented, the problems, how it was repaired and what the center looked like today after two generations. This ordinance is so important and Council needed to see what it took to make it successful and give the developer the tools to make it viable.

Member Kramer asked Mr. Atto if he was willing to spend more time with the committee and share his experiences and background. Mr. Atto said absolutely.

CONSENT AGENDA (Approval/Removals)

CM-01-03-060 Moved by Kramer, seconded by Csordas; CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY:

To approve the Consent Agenda as presented.

Roll call vote on CM-01-03-060 Yeas: Clark, Lorenzo, Bononi, Cassis, Csordas,

DeRoche, Kramer

Nays: None

  1. Approve Minutes of:
  1. February 26, 2001
  1. Schedule Executive Session immediately following the regular meeting of 3/5/01 for the purpose of discussing pending litigation.
  2. Request for approval of Final Pay Estimate to Cates Carpentry for Novi Sports Park, in the amount of $47,214.72
  3. Request to authorize the Police Department to make grant application to the Michigan State Police to receive five Preliminary Breath Testing (PBT) devices for local law enforcement.

E. Approval of Claims and Accounts – Warrant No.592


1. Approval of Residential Unit Development (RUD) for Maybury Estates – SP 00-53,

located in Section 32, on the north side of Eight Mile Road between Beck and

Garfield Roads, 134.75-acre site zoned Residential Acreage (RA).

David Siegel of Multi Building Company represented Maybury Park Estates. Mr. Siegel thanked the City consultants for their insight to help create a community that would both preserve the valuable natural assets of the site as well as allow them to create a 106 unit community that would feature quality homes starting at a price point of $650,000. Benefits provided to the City by Maybury Park Estates would be a community with minimal impact to the fragile ecosystem currently on the site. Over 38% of the site would be dedicated to open space and 39 acres of quality woodlands, a majority of which are designated core reserve woodlands, would be preserved. Their preservation, along with their strategically placed plan, would allow for wild life mobility between the State Park to the south and State land to the north.


The planning of the community made significant allowances for wetlands. Portions of the site have been reconfigured and creative ideas implemented at the suggestion of the City’s environmental consultants to eliminate as many wetland intrusions as possible. They are currently seeking approval from the Planning Commission to allow them to perform enhancement to the existing wetlands instead of mitigation. Mr. Siegel said according to City consultants it would allow wildlife a better environment in the areas that are currently their habitat. Also, from an engineering standpoint Maybury Park would be self-sufficient. Water would be extended from a water main stub located in the Bellagio community. The water main was designed specifically for servicing this site. JCK is in the process of compiling information for a study of the City’s water system. If it was determined there was not an adequate amount of water supply or pressure, they would provide the development water by means of wells until the City was prepared to tap into the infrastructure, which they would construct, to provide City water to the homes. It would all be done at no cost to the City.

Mr. Siegal said sanitary sewer was not available to the site and this obstacle could be overcome in one of two ways. To set up a temporary pump station which would force sewage into the Bellagio sanitary sewer system. JCK is currently exploring placing the sewer in an easement, which they are helping to acquire. If the easement is feasible the pump station could be eliminated and immediately it would utilize gravity sewer. It would be financed through a payback at no cost to the City.

They have discussed with City engineers allocating a portion of the property to be used as a regional detention basin in accordance with the City’s Master Plan. It would allow for the management of storm water for Novi, future communities and homes and residents already in the area.

Mr. Siegal introduced Stephen Deak, landscape architect with Robert Leighton Associates, Inc. who worked with the consultants and designed the site. Mr. Siegal said the site was west of Beck and north of Eight Mile Road and predominately ran north/south. The majority of the site

was being used for agricultural purposes. In the terrain areas the topography was gently rolling and allowed for proper overland storm water flows, which primarily flowed to the south part of the site near one of the larger wetlands. There were smaller storm water flows that flowed into the wooded area of the site and east to agricultural and irrigation ponds that have been in place for some time.

Mr. Deak said outside of the agriculture areas the site primarily consisted of medium and light woodlands and contained the highest quality wooded wetlands of the site. Moving south some of the woodlands are of lower quality and there are two larger lower quality wetlands.

Mr. Deak commented, showing Council a map, that there were clear buildable areas on the site that would allow them to stay out of the sensitive areas of the site. Also, on the map he overlaid the road pattern proposed to show how the different areas of development are connected and skirted around the natural features of the site.

Off of Eight Mile, the most eastern entrance is the primary entrance of the project and the secondary entrance was just west of it. It would allow proper circulation within the site. The





site circulates through the buildable areas and skirts around the wooded and wetland areas. They also preserved the "meadow" type areas.

They chose to go with the RUD option because the large areas of open space could only be achieved by reducing a majority of the lots from R-A zoning to R-1. This allowed them to maintain the rural character of the site while maintaining larger lot sizes. It allowed a little more flexibility in placing the home in the buildable envelope on the site, which allowed them safe additional natural features within the lots themselves.

Synopsis: 7-½ essential or regulated wetlands would be saved

9/10 ths of an acre of non-regulated wetlands would be preserved.

19 acres of the medium woods on the woodlands map would be preserved

4.9 Acres of lightwoods would be preserved

16 acres of other upland open spaces in the "meadow" like areas were preserved

Mr. Deak said this totaled 52 acres of open spaces, which is just over 38% of the site and a significant amount of land and an asset to the plan and the community. Also, by reducing lot sizes they were able to inter-combine in the site plan single loaded roads that allowed more public contact or access with the preservation and open space areas. They also, allowed maintenance of wildlife corridors that run north to south through the site. Another benefit, they are working in conjunction with the City for a regional detention basin. They felt this project was a great opportunity under the RUD proposal.

Member Csordas spoke about the issue in Northville Township and the water flow south of Eight Mile. He asked for an explanation and guarantee there would be no water run off problems south of Eight Mile.

Rick Hurth, of Warner, Cantrell and Padmos Civil Engineer for the developer was present. Mr. Hurth said they prepared the preliminary engineering for the project along with the City’s

consultants and engineers to develop a storm water management plan for this project. A regional storm water management system has been proposed in the southern portion of the development adjacent to Eight Mile Road. There are various overland tributaries, not watercourses, streams or drains that drain into a slightly wooded wetland that then became the headwaters to a small stream that began south of Eight Mile Road. There is a pond there that has a weir with a notch in it that held back the water that ran underneath the road through a culvert. It maintained the water level in the pond and then flowed into a natural drainage course that continued through the State Park. Their intention was to provide regional detention for a 100-year storm. It would release at a rate that was acceptable to the City and would not impede upon the downstream quality. In fact, it would probably improve the quality by retaining and providing additional wetland enhancements within the regional retention basin, which would provide additional water quality benefits that might not exist today. The preliminary studies indicated this basin would serve the area very well and continue to serve it with high quality and capacity ability for years to come.

Member Csordas asked specifically where the regional retention basin would be and when talking about "the City" are you taking about Novi or Northville?




Mr. Hurth said the water began in Novi and would be stored there and released at a controlled rate into Northville; that’s where the water flows now. He said they were arranging meetings with Northville Township regarding this. He showed Member Csordas where the retention basins would be. Member Csordas asked what was on the south side of Eight Mile Road and where does the water flow from the southeastern portion of the property and what happened to it south of Eight Mile Road?

Mr. Hurth said immediately south there is an existing culvert that drained under Eight-Mile Road. Immediately south of Eight Mile Road there is a small pond and its elevation is considerably lower than their property and after observing it for almost a year, it did not appear to backup into the property. The property is low and very seldom held water.

Member Csordas asked if there was a need for a drop structure? Mr. Hurth said it was a possibility. The preliminary studies showed they were trying to limit the discharge from the detention basin to the capacity of that culvert and not replace it unless needed for maintenance, etc. The goal was not to touch the culvert and maintain it as is. They proposed to detain in the detention basin which is a low area on both sides of the road that now drains down to Eight Mile Road and floods intermittently both on the Novi side and in the Maybury State Park. Their plan was to build a detention basin to pick up that drainage, pipe it and discharge it through storm water pipes and/or ditches that are in Eight Mile Road to allow them to restrict that flow to the capacity available.

Member Csordas asked if he could guarantee that the south side of Eight Mile Road would not be negatively impacted by the water flow from his project? Mr. Hurth said they would restrict the outflow to the available capacity of the existing structures and would not increase that flow. The majority of the drainage would be retained to the 100-year event. Member Csordas asked Dave Potter of JCK if he concurred?

Mr. Potter concurred and stated they addressed those issues in their review letter for the site plan and they would continue to pursue them. All the ordinances are in place that required them to look downstream for the available capacity.

Member Csordas asked Mr. Siegal to address the existing sanitary sewer stub at the southwest corner and explain the water access and sanitary drainage?

Mr. Siegal said they would tap into the water stub from Bellagio and it would provide water to the site. However, there had been problems with water pressure and supply so until those problems were addressed they were prepared to dig wells to provide water for the homes. When the problems are resolved the infrastructure would be in place to put the homes on City water. The wells would then be used for irrigation so there would be no undue distress on the water system.

He said the sanitary sewer ended on Beck at the end of the Bellagio Subdivision. They proposed to cut a line through and pump waste into the Bellagio’s sewer system, which would travel by gravity. He spoke to Mr. Capel who had agreed to grant an easement to the property so they could use gravity sewer immediately. The engineers at JCK were checking on the feasibility of that easement. The location of the pumping station was still to be



determined and they are working diligently so as not to burden the City with the pump station. They would guarantee through documents reviewed by the City Attorney to maintain the station and prepare it to be abandoned and dismantled when no longer of service. Their hope was to tap into the sewer system without the pump station.

Member Csordas said he knew the City was planning to put a multi-million gallon tank in because of the low water pressure and asked Mr. Nowicki if when it came on line would it have any impact on the water pressure? Mr. Nowicki said the water tank would reduce some of the peaks and spikes in the system at different times of the day as a result of demand. What would help this development as well as the west side of the community would be the second connection on the west side of Walled Lake that went into the City of Walled Lake on the Detroit system coming in to serve Wixom. To bring that main down West Park Drive, which is Phase III as outlined to Council in the past, in addition to a secondary crossing of I-96 near Beck Road. It would enhance the pressures on the west side of the City, improve the reliability of the entire system being served by the 14-Mile Detroit main, increase the pressures and serve as a secondary backup in case the primary main along Novi Road failed.

Member Csordas asked about the financing of the sanitary sewer extension and where the responsibility would lie? Mr. Nowicki said the sanitary sewers were proposed, in 1999, to be funded through connection charges by the various benefiting properties. Member Csordas asked if that was coming from Beck Road? Mr. Nowicki said it would be coming from the new connections that the sanitary line would service. Member Csordas asked if it existed now and if the City was funded to underwrite that? Mr. Nowicki said it did not exist yet and, regarding funding, in 1999 a concept was advanced by Singh Development by which we would partner with them and pursue the construction of that project. The project was stalled when Singh was no longer pushing the project but the concept was that the development would fund it and recover their costs through a payback.

Member Csordas noted the permanent preservation of the open land proposed was 52 acres and asked if that would be a preservation easement? Mr. Siegal responded it would. Member Csordas said that comprised 38% of the total site. Mr. Siegal said approximately, yes and he had no problem with that and the only exclusion would be the area of the regional detention basin and other detention basins because of future maintenance.

Member Csordas said the wooded area being preserved was 24.2 acres and asked if they were looking for increased density of three lots? Mr. Siegal said yes.

Member Csordas said Mr. Arroyo recommended approval for the planning and traffic portions of this. He asked what Mr. Arroyo’s position was on the stub roads? Mr. Arroyo said the City’s Subdivision Ordinance required a stub street every 1,300 feet along the perimeter of the property. There are situations in this development where it is not practical to have stub streets. Obviously, Bellagio was not required to provide stub streets to this site; therefore, it did not make sense for this site to provide stub streets in that direction. Once a site plan was acted upon it would require waivers from Council of the Subdivision Ordinance provision. They provided one stub by a right-of-way that could be a roadway or pathway on the west side of the property. They also explored another one farther to the north to a piece of property located to the west where there was an existing long driveway. The property owner’s were not willing to


grant an easement for emergency access but it could still be a requirement for a stub if the site was developed in the future and Council wished. There could also be stub connections to the east of the property as well. Mr. Arroyo would like to see one connection, at a minimum, to the

west because the property to the west where they are showing the access stub was under the control of a single family developer but west of there it was under the control of the Northville schools. There would probably be a school at the northeast corner of Garfield and Eight Mile Road in the future. One benefit of a stub street would be parents could take their children to that school without going onto Eight Mile Road. Mr. Arroyo said there was property between the Northville school site and this site and a private developer owned it.

Member Csordas asked Mr. Arroyo if he preferred the stub to be constructed and paved to the property line? Mr. Arroyo said yes, or at a minimum a paved walkway be constructed to the property line so that pedestrians have the opportunity to walk through an easement or right-of-way to cross the adjacent property to go to the school. Member Csordas asked if the Fire Department was OK with the depth of the project as far as having enough access? Mr. Arroyo believed they were and thought they were recommending approval.

Member Csordas asked Mr. Potter if they were proposing an eight-foot path along Eight Mile Road? Mr. Potter said it was per ordinance and Mr. Siegal said they concurred. Member Csordas said Mr. Bluhm did not foresee the need for the project to have a pump station and asked Mr. Potter to expand on that. Mr. Potter said they were charged to extend the existing sanitary sewer service from the Bellagio sewer stub south and westerly towards Napier and it

would traverse these properties. Mr. Potter said that was the route they were pursuing and they had three or four alternate routes and might be close to developing an easement to take the sanitary sewer service west to this property. If not, the developers are prepared to construct the pump station and an agreement would have to be developed between the City and the developer to address maintenance of the pump station. Member Csordas asked if he was comfortable with that and he responded he was.

Ms. Lemke, Landscape Architect, said this applicant took the site into consideration first and had been very diligent working with her, the wetland consultants, and JCK to address all of their concerns on the highest quality areas of the site. Where the road crossed they had intruded as little as possible and the area was the less quality area of the site. The biggest impact would be in the front where the regional detention basin would go but it tended to be a lowest quality woodland and wetland area on the site. She was satisfied overall with the intent of the project. She recommended the remaining regulated woodlands and the replacement tree locations be placed into a preservation easement at the north side of the project and some of the hedgerows also. She recommended a positive approval.

Member Csordas asked Aimee Kay, Environmental Specialist, to address the impact of this development on the wetlands. Ms. Kay said they avoided all the major impacts to the wetland area of the site and she concurred with the applicant and Ms. Lemke that the highest quality wetlands on the property were on the north part of the site. The primary impact was on "Wetland X" which was a little under half an acre and was fill for lots 6 and 7. She also recommended approval of the plan and believed there was ample site for mitigation. Ms. Kay said it was a wetland that does not function, low in wildlife habitat and flood and storm event capacity was very low. They were proposing to restore it, enhance it and we would like to see some diversity added to the native vegetation. It would not be the typical mitigation. The City


would benefit by doing it this way because from north to south there was an existing wildlife connectivity, there was an existing thick hedgerow going to the north, and they would like to see it maintained. The developer cooperated with them.

Member Csordas commended the petitioner because they worked closely with the consultants and the City to bring an excellent addition to that portion of the City. It also addressed concerns about urban sprawl as it took a piece of property in its natural state and did not impact the woodlands/wetlands hardly at all and where it did it improved them.

Member DeRoche asked if Lot 107 was addressed at the Planning Commission? Mr. Siegal said Birchler/Arroyo pointed out they couldn’t have Lot 107 as part of the development. Our lots can’t access on to Eight Mile Road so they removed the land from the project and were currently discussing with neighboring residents the possibility of purchasing it or trading for a portion of their property. The residents expressed interest in taking the land and they would be happy to explore that option with them. The neighbor to the east is Brunswick and it is a single family home with a pole barn for storage.

Member DeRoche asked what in the RUD would give the protection to make sure they didn’t come back and build a single house on it in the future? Mr. Siegal said they had considered it. It is an acre in size and it was their belief that if it were to be a lot it would not be an eyesore in anyway and would fit in well with the other homes. Member DeRoche asked if they were interested in reserving the right to do that? Mr. Siegal said it was a possibility and they would

very much like to keep the neighbors happy and work out a deal with them so they could have the land; the issue had not been pinned down yet.

Member DeRoche asked Mr. Potter what they were doing to make sure, if they do a centralized well, that we could plug into the City water system and have it work? They have agreed to construct the water main system to City standards regardless of whether they use individual wells or a community well. Member DeRoche said even if they built individual wells they would still bury the pipe infrastructure for City water and the taps to the houses. Mr. Potter agreed.

Mr. Potter related it to a few years ago when the water moratorium was in effect on the expansion of the City’s water mains and for some of the subdivisions, the infrastructure was constructed, tested and built, however because of the moratorium the houses could not be hooked up. When the moratorium was lifted there were provisions within the subdivision regulations that they were required to tap the main so the homeowners gained access to City water. The same thing was being proposed. If wells were needed they would choose individual wells that could provide irrigation after the taps were done.

Member DeRoche said the sewer funding was set up so that the City paid for the infrastructure and made the money back and then some with the connection fees. Mr. Nowicki said the City didn’t operate at a deficit but didn’t make money to the point where it would be inappropriate. Member DeRoche said these residents would get the same deal as the other residents. He asked if the developer, except for the tap fee, would privately fund the water system. Mr. Nowicki said that was his understanding. Member DeRoche asked if it was currently at $1,050? Mr. Nowicki thought it was.




Member DeRoche did not like hearing that precedence was set with Northville Township regarding Quail Ridge and felt it was an unfortunate situation for the City. He disagreed with the way it was handled and being potentially exposed to liability when the City was not at fault.

He said it was refreshing to hear the lengths that the petitioner went to address the concerns of the consultants and the City.

Member Bononi asked if a regional detention basin was to be constructed who would the decision making body be? Mr. Nowicki said it would be City Council. Member Bononi asked how much it would cost? Mr. Nowicki could not estimate it because he was not familiar with the drainage district or the size that would be required. There was a concept of a regional basin and that concept had been tossed out.

Member Bononi said from the standpoint of re-reviewing our commitment to regional basins there was the possibility that Council could not opt to build a regional detention basin on that site. Mr. Nowicki said, yes. Member Bononi said if Council did alternatively decide to build a regional detention basin who would they acquire the right to use the property from? Mr. Nowicki said from the developer and we would have to pay for that property unless there was a partnering arrangement with them. Member Bononi asked if the developer had come forward or had we offered that the other alternative was for the developer to build an on site basin and other facilities to serve this site alone? Mr. Nowicki believed the concept had been

out there but he did not have detailed discussions with the developer regarding it. She asked if he would recommend it to this applicant? Mr. Nowicki said unless he knew more about the site and had further discussions with the developer he could not offer a recommendation. Member Bononi commented she was asking the question because it was a big presumption that there was no cost available. We would have to acquire the property back and she felt it was an iffy situation in regard to this. She said if talking about a situation that was iffy, pending the decision of Council to go ahead and finance that unknown costed storm water detention basin then we would be looking at the alternative to this applicant. Being this applicant was already looking at alternatives to water provision it was her concern that the regional basin construction was written in stone and she did not believe it was or had to be. She didn’t believe it was the ultimate purpose to suit this development with a regional detention basin and/or to hold up this

development proposal because Council might build a regional detention basin in the future, which this Council had not approved at an undetermined cost. She felt there were too many unknowns for her.

Mr. Hurth attempted to answer Member Bononi’s question about the regional basin as opposed to onsite detention. He said their proposal to the City with the site plan accounted for both cases. The regional detention basin was an issue they discovered during their due diligence according to the Storm Water Master Plan. They also looked at the option of not providing the regional detention basin. The current proposal showed two basins sized to handle their site under a ten-year condition and under the existing outlet conditions for our site and the regional detention basin would not be there. They had discussion with JCK and consultants regarding the feasibility of the detention basin and its effects on the wooded wetland. They believed the effects on the wetland would be driven by the need or the necessity for that regional basin or as developers prepared to help and co-partner with the City to develop that regional detention basin or they are prepared to do detention on the site in




accordance with all of the requirements. In either case this plan would accommodate the requirements fully and they would be amenable to either.

Member Bononi asked if using the onsite detention and the 10 year storm event design what would the estimate of the percentage of increase in run off over pre-development conditions be coming under Eight Mile Road after the units were built? Mr. Hurth said under the current ordinances the discharge rate cannot be greater than exists now under the formula in the engineering standards. The City Ordinance also called for the 10-year storm at 2/10ths of a CFS per acre or the outlay capacity of the receiving waters. They took a worst case scenario based on their preliminary studies of the existing culvert under Eight Mile Road and increased the 100 year storm regional basin and the 10 year basins to account for the limited capacity under Eight Mile Road.

Member Bononi asked Mr. Arroyo about traffic? Mr. Arroyo said during the morning peak hour there was an average delay of 51 seconds per vehicle at the intersection and in the afternoon it was about 28 seconds per vehicle. Member Bononi asked what kind of difficulty would folks exiting east bound on Eight Mile out of the development experience? Mr. Arroyo said at the western most driveway an east bound left during the morning peak hour average delay would be about 8 seconds or Level of Service A. During the evening it would be closer to 10 seconds. On the southbound drive leaving the site would be about 20 seconds or Level of Service C in the morning and 26 seconds or Level of Service D during the afternoon for the west side drive.

Member Bononi said she didn’t see the things in this proposal that were bulleted items of the RUD Planning Requirements Findings Overview and did not see the intent of the RUD Ordinance being met in this proposal. She took issue with the existence of a clear, explicit, substantial and ascertainable benefit to the City on this RUD, the demonstrable need for this proposed use and the effect of the proposed use on adjacent properties. The protected woodlands and wetlands are wonderful but she did not agree with their presumption that the community would use them. She was concerned that Mr. Arroyo felt all the requirements for Council to approve the RUD had been met, as she did not.

Mr. Arroyo said the preservation of a substantial amount of that core reserve was considered to be a benefit to the City. The City had identified it as important to maintain wildlife and habitat and to have it preserved over and above what would happen with a conventional development. He said the environmental consultants agreed there was a benefit to the City for having it preserved.

Member Bononi noted it was a compliment to the applicant with regard to the area of wetland and woodlands that had been proposed to be preserved. However, it begged the question of what was the City’s benchmark? We are congratulating applicants for coming close and that ought to be our standard regarding how we see these standards being met consistently.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo agreed with the previous Council Members. She asked Mr. Hurth if the detention basins were outside the wetland areas? Mr. Hurth said there would be no permanent impacts to wetland A with the alternative of utilizing their own detention on site. It is




probably the plan they would have put forth if the regional retention basin had not been shown on the Master Plan. She would not be in support of utilizing this as a regional detention basin.

She asked what happened to the 100-year storm flow utilizing on site detention? Mr. Hurth said the 100-year storm in the area of that regional detention basin would currently flood Eight Mile Road. He said under their current proposal for developing that as two 10-year storms that condition would continue to occur. They would control the route of the 100-year flood but it would, barring the construction of 100-year basin, not be possible under this plan to retain the 100-year storm. It would continue to go across Eight Mile Road into the pond, which buffers it slightly and then down the natural drain.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked about the impact on adjacent properties? Mr. Hurth said any lots they developed would have a rear yard drainage system that would prevent the water from leaving the site and would provide for the 100 year over land flow to Eight Mile Road. He said there would be swales and easements as the ordinance called for and the water should be routed directly through. Along with the over land swales, in general, the storm sewer system would parallel it so the storm sewers would fill up and come out of the surface of the ground. It would then flow along and as the downstream conditions allowed for more water it would go back down into the sewers.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo said before this came back for final approval of the actual contract she wanted to see more confirmation of the storm water concepts because she wanted more guarantees that yards and Northville Township would not be flooded. She asked if there would be an increase in velocity or amount of water because if there was there would be problems.

She asked if they were preserving part of the wetland in the rear on Lot #6 or if the intention was to fill it? Mr. Hurth said they were proposing to fill it and do mitigation and enhancement.

Aimee Kay agreed and said the wetland had not been there very long. Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo appreciated that they were relocating the wetland.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo said regarding the sanitary sewer cost, she was looking at payback versus SAD and how quickly the City would be made whole by either process. Mr. Nowicki

said it was a funding mechanism that Council would decide whether it would be in the best interest of this community in conjunction with the developer. There had been no real proposal set forth by the developer to partner with the City or how the financial mechanism would be put together other than what was normally done through a payback ordinance.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo assumed it required acquiring easements and felt it should be the responsibility of the developers if they want to extend the sewer. An SAD might be more appropriate than anything else and it was as far as she would be willing to get the City involved. She would not be agreeable to anything other than an SAD and even then would need to see something more formalized as to how it would work.

Mr. Nowicki said it would be a City owned public system that the City would end up maintaining. He wanted to talk with the attorney about it. She asked that it be brought to closure before the contract was brought forward.




Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked Mr. Siegal if he agreed to construct a passing lane on Eight Mile Road? He said he did. She noted that Mr. Arroyo suggested it should be a center turn

lane and asked if he agreed to that. Mr. Siegal said they were exploring it and would finish before they got to the contract.

Member Cassis asked how many square feet each of the homes would be and how expensive would they be? Mr. Siegal said in the vicinity of 3,000 square feet or larger and they were looking at a base price of $650,000. Member Cassis asked if they were cooperating with the Bellagio people? Mr. Siegal said they were and had spoken to them and they were willing to help with anything that was possible.

Member Kramer recommended that Mr. Arroyo explore traffic calming designs for that intersection. Mr. Arroyo said they would explore it to see what might make sense. Member Kramer encouraged Mr. Nowicki to resolve whether we need or want the regional detention basin. He thought either the site-specific detention or the regional basin was appropriate. Whichever solution they decided on he wanted to make it a requirement that approval of the RUD would be contingent upon approval of Northville Township to our Storm Water Plan.

Member Kramer asked whether individual wells were viable at this site? Mr. Potter commented they didn’t know yet but had requested a copy of the water supply study be provided for review. Member Kramer said these could be answers that they bring forward when they come back.

Mr. Siegal stated he had already addressed this issue with Ben Farnum of JCK. He indicated that the environmentally impacted sites in that area are not close enough to affect the site and

the topography of the site was higher and it would not affect the water they would be using. If they have wells they are required by Oakland County to dig test wells to test the water and the flow. Member Kramer said Council needed a confirmed plan before approval of a RUD and asked for more robust documentation. Member Kramer asked if the non-motorized connector to the west was accepted and incorporated in concept with the RUD or was it just a discussion item. Mr. Arroyo said it still needed to be resolved. Member Kramer supported the idea but did not know if it was reasonable as a contingent for an RUD. Mr. Arroyo said it could be addressed at a later time because when the site plan review took place they would have to make the final decision on what type of connection they were proposing. If they were

proposing something other than what the ordinance required they would come back before Council for a waiver from the Subdivision Ordinance for that particular issue. Member Kramer asked if the concept design had land set aside for something? Mr. Arroyo said at that one location but it did not at additional locations. Member Kramer said at the location to provide the non-motorized connection to the school. Mr. Arroyo said there was a potential right-of-way or easement connection provided on the plan. Member Kramer said he would support the motion.

CM-01-03-061 Moved by Kramer, seconded by Cassis; MOTION CARRIED:

To approve the application for the Residential Unit Development

(RUD) for Maybury Estates conditioned upon receipt of the

resolution of the water and sewer issues discussed at the table,

developer to confirm that the final site plan was contingent



upon City code and ordinance requirements for portable water and sewer service and would conform to all the consultants recommendations and all the open items to be resolved and brought back when the contract returns to Council.


Mayor Clark thought the project concept was very good but the most important issues were public health and safety. He said there are no sanitary sewers, no public water, low water pressure, and a contaminated site close to this site and if on the State’s list he wanted to hear from the DEQ before anything was approved. He would not agree to support this on any kind of contingent basis. He said Council did not know what the ultimate impact would be on the people who buy those sites let alone the issues in terms of the water run off into Northville. It seemed we have had a regular run of 100-year storms. Mayor Clark said this should have come before Council clean with these issues addressed rather than asking for conditional approvals. There are too many ifs and too many unanswered questions and it would be a disservice to the community and to any potential buyers of those home sites until these questions are answered. He would not support this.

Member DeRoche disagreed with the Mayor’s comments but shared some of the concerns he had for the details. As a plan this complied and had received positive recommendations from our consultants. It was a very well thought out plan. He was concerned with the sewers and the water but the fact that they would deal with their own sewers at the same time they are making plans to tap into our sewer, if available, was a positive. Member DeRoche said the ordinance stated we would not increase the discharge into Northville and he felt that was all they owed them.

Member Bononi felt this application was premature and said they were not talking about details but about primary planning issues that by ordinance Council had to address. She was putting the interests of all of the residents first by making sure that all the costs of the infrastructure were covered when it was solely to benefit a single applicant, whether or not we are considering regional detention versus on site and this whole plethora of items we have here. She would not want this applicant to go forward on the basis of a judgement of one of our consultants regarding the feasibility of using on site wells. She felt it was the applicant’s responsibility to have an expert determine that to his own satisfaction.

She would look for a letter of satisfaction or intent that we have at least appraised our neighbors of what was intended. She felt the applicant had done a terrific job but in lieu of all the comments that had not been satisfied, she would not support it.

Member Cassis asked Mr. Fisher to enlighten him about what the petitioner was asking him to do at this juncture and what would the following actions of Council be in the future regarding this development?

Mr. Fisher said this was a unique procedure because it was an RUD. The Council was called upon to approve the area/concept plan of the RUD. Assuming the motion passed Council would be called upon to approve a contract that resolved a lot of the issues before Council this evening. Following that contract and the resolution of those issues this matter would move


forward under the site plan review provisions of the ordinance before the Planning Commission.

Member Cassis commented Council should look at these issues again before they approved the project. Mr. Fisher said that was correct.

Member Cassis agreed with the Mayor and assured him they were all concerned with the issues he emphasized. However, if the petitioner was willing to work on those and come to an agreement with Mr. Fisher on all of the concerns and present a clean and final contract to Council they would look at it and judge whether to go ahead or not. This motion to approve the RUD concept was contingent upon all the concerns discussed at the table and from the consultants.

Roll call vote on CM-01-03-061 Yeas: Lorenzo, Cassis, Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer

Nays: Bononi, Clark

2. Request from Evergreen III, Inc. for approval of parking lease agreement for

Assignment of Lease and Extension from 2015 to the year 2041.

Mr. Chen was present representing Evergreen III. Due to the fact that the building is complete and the tenants have moved in and the financing had transferred from construction loan into the mortgage loan, the new mortgage loan had to be secure so the length of the lease for the property had a minimum requirement of 20 years. He asked Council to extend the lease for the next 15 or 20 years so they would not have to keep coming back asking for the extension. He was sure that Main Street would be completed by then.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo had no issue with approving the assignment of the lease agreement. However, she was concerned with extending it until 2041because she hoped Main Street would be successful by 2015. Possibly so successful that, depending on City finances, when the City leased this property to Mr. Chen it would be for more than a token amount. It was leased for the first 20 years for $1.00 and by 2015 maybe the City could get more than $1.00. She would not support going to 2041.

Mr. Fisher noted the legal description should be reviewed; otherwise it is a business decision more than a legal decision.

Mr. Clark said it was the association’s lender who was requiring the extension because given the fact it had taken longer than anticipated for the build out of Main Street it would give them some additional security while they are extending the debt.

Member Bononi asked Mr. Fisher if the legal description was the only legal problem he had? Mr. Fisher said he would have to speak with Mr. Schultz to determine if there were any other issues. If the Council approved this, it should be subject to complete legal description review.

Member Csordas asked Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo if she would insist on the year staying status quo or did she have a number of years in mind?





Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked what the minimum number of years was the bank would accept?

Mr. Chen said it was 20 years and would need to be extended to 2034 at a minimum. Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo said Mr. Chen did not need it until 2015. Mr. Chen said that was not correct. This year financing is 2001 and a 20-year extension would be 2021. However, if they get another building in 2003 they would need another financing and would have to come before Council to ask for another 20-year extension bringing it to 2023. By extending to 2041 it would insure that for the next 15-20 years they would not have to come back and go through the same process again.

Mayor Clark asked if Council could approve extending the lease to the year 2041and review the payment under the lease? Mr. Fisher said it could be done if both parties agreed and suggested there be a standard in the agreement that would trigger either an approval or non-approval. Mr. Chen said if there were increases the bank needed to know. Mayor Clark said if we made it for 20 years to 2041 with the rate of the lease to remain the same through 2021, they would know for the next 20 years the rate would be the same. In 2021 both parties would look at the rate, at that time, for that last 20 years.

Mr. Chen said in 2005 the bank would be looking at what the rate would be up to 2025. So, between the year 2021 and 2025 the rate would be unknown so they would need to come back to find out what the rate would be. He asked that Council approve the lease until 2041.

Member DeRoche suggested an extension to 2025 because it was a ten-year extension and Mr. Chen would not have to come before Council for four years. Mr. Chen asked for 2031, which would give him 10 years of time. Member DeRoche felt four years was reasonable.

Mr. Helwig said this is a very small portion of the surface parking area. An above ground parking structure was coming and would be a much bigger financial issue than this. He was at peace with this realizing that what Council would really have to get creative with was the above ground parking deck. This was very small potatoes compared with what was coming down the road very quickly.

Mr. Chen added that the taxes Main Street had brought into Novi were tremendous and asked for Council’s support to make the project go quicker and there would be more taxes brought to Novi. It would be a win/win situation.

CM-01-03-062 Moved by Csordas, seconded by Cassis; MOTION CARRIED:

To approve parking lease agreement for Assignment of the Lease and Extension until the year 2041 subject to review of the legal descriptions.

Roll call vote on CM-01-03-062 Yeas: Bononi, Cassis, Csordas, DeRoche,

Kramer, Clark

Nays: Lorenzo






3. Policy discussion Re: Proposed Gateway District.

Member Cassis asked to be excluded from deliberation on this issue, as he owned property in this area. Council agreed.

Member Kramer said Mr. Atto, from audience participation, had some interesting thoughts and items, which might not have been considered, and if he had experience doing this type of development Council should receive his input and consider it. He wanted to take a deeper look at landscape and streetscape requirements because he did not think the appearance that the Grand River Corridor recommendations laid out had been achieved. He had concerns about parking behind the buildings and moving the buildings closer to the road and his inclination was that two rows of parking was better. There was concern about how the inter-connection was executed and he felt it was desirable and might need to be through the back parking. He supported the basic concept and thought that the various Grand River Corridor studies resulted in a very desirable streetscape and gateway in the City. This could be a support amenity for Town Center and Main Street.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo thought there were a lot of unresolved issues and the City Attorney raised a lot of valid points. She was not sure whether this should be a zoning district or development option. If it were a development option there would be more flexibility and discretion. The ordinance is looking for a transition and she saw it too much as an extension of TC and Main Street. She wanted to see a transition and a cohesive plan for Grand River

that would stand the test of time. She wanted compatible land use that was not predatory to Main Street, to maximize the tax base on Grand River, architectural diversity and quality, safe efficient traffic flow, preserve natural features and provide visual green space. She felt it should be started with low density in terms of what would be RM-1densities and work our way up the scale in exchange for a high percentage of office, shared access, marginal access roads, preservation of natural features, non predatory uses and low percentage of commercial.

She wanted to see an exchange. If giving density and/or stories then she wanted to see these things.

Member DeRoche thought they were moving in the right direction and hoped to see it moved along more quickly into a viable policy that could be debated for real. He could remember wondering whether this City needed more high-density rental units a couple of years ago and now felt that all of the retail in the area would benefit in a higher density of residential units and office units. He wanted Grand River to be developed but was also concerned about predatory development and wanted this to be a supportive transitionary thing. He felt it would be good to talk with Mr. Brateman, Mr. Atto and other business people or land owners who had never been able to make it viable. He was not opposed to buildings being close to the road in the down town area.

CM-01-03-063 Moved by Kramer, seconded by Lorenzo; MOTION CARRIED:

To forward comments received during Audience Participation and Council discussion on the Proposed Gateway District Ordinance to the Ordinance Review Committee to finalize their work and prepare a



preliminary draft for First Reading and return to City Council as soon as possible.

Member Csordas liked the buildings close to the streets. He asked Mr. Arroyo what the difference was between scenario one and two? Mr. Arroyo said they were to show, because it is a mixed-use district, how the gateway could develop with one being a high percentage of residential development and the other being with more office.

Mayor Clark asked Council to send their thoughts and concerns to Ordinance Review and they would get this back to Council in a format ready for First Reading as soon as possible.

Roll call vote on CM-01-03-063 Yeas: Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer, Clark,

Lorenzo, Bononi

Nays: None

Abstain: Cassis

4. Request for approval of Ordinance No. 2000-150.03-to amend Article V of

Chapter 31 of the Novi Code of Ordinances, to revise the standards for the establishment and use of natural beauty roads within the City of Novi –

II Reading.

CM-01-03-064 Moved by Lorenzo, seconded by Csordas; CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve Ordinance No. 2000-150.03-to amend Article V of Chapter 31 of the Novi Code of Ordinances, to revise the standards for the establishment and use of natural beauty roads within the City of Novi – II Reading.

Roll call vote on CM-01-03-064 Yeas: Cassis, Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer,

Clark, Lorenzo, Bononi

Nays: None


Tony Musu, 19422 Ingram, Livonia, commented on the Tianjin Delegation that might visit the City in April or May. He said the Novi Rotary would give 100% to the participation and delegation of Tianjin. Mr. Dye and Mr. May approached him in November, 2000 prior to

59 Rotarians, including himself, visiting Beijing on vacation and indicated they would like to participate in an educational study exchange program with the City of Novi and particularly with Walsh College and the Novi High School. Mr. Dye, a representative from Tianjin, visited the high school last week and was very impressed with the system and indicated he would like to have government officials from the City of Tianjin and the principal of Tianjin University visit Mayor Clark and the Council Members. It was a good opportunity to promote good will throughout the Peoples Republic of China and a wonderful opportunity for Rotary to promote Rotary Clubs to a country that currently did not have them.

Member Cassis said he has been a Rotarian for many years and had been involved in many activities. He was very proud of Rotary and what it did throughout the world and our communities helping people of any kind, endeavor or cause. Their motto of good will and


understanding is alive and well in over 165 countries. He commended Mr. Musu, President of Rotary, for doing a fabulous job increasing membership and promoting many kinds of events and fundraisers and said they had flourished under his leadership.

Mr. Musu added that currently the City of Novi’s name was in Beroda, India with a medical unit that the Rotary Club established. In Lebanon there is a bus with the City of Novi’s name on it that was provided for blind children to go to and from school and they could also do the same thing with China.


  1. Award bid for Street Trees to Panoramic Landscaping, the low qualified bidder,
  2. in the amount of $53,975.

    CM-01-03-065 Moved by DeRoche, seconded by Lorenzo; CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To award the bid for Street Trees to Panoramic

    Landscaping, the low qualified bidder, in the amount of $53,975.00.


    Member Cassis asked what the obligation was of the developer regarding trees?

    Mr. Klaver said currently the street trees are part of the site plan submittal process. The developer would propose certain species, which are included in the ordinance. Then, the developer had the option of either planting the trees or putting the money on deposit, $350 currently per tree. The requirements are based on the lot size in terms of the number of trees required. The City would plant the trees if the developer chose not to.

    Member Cassis asked what would be done regarding dead trees? Mr. Klaver said over half of the trees to be purchased would be replacements and all trees were guaranteed for one year. Member Cassis asked who would monitor to make sure the trees were planted properly? Mr. Klaver replied the City would and ultimately the City would hire a Forester. He said as they are trimming trees they are identifying trees that are having difficulty and asked that any residents concerned about their trees should call the City and they would be inspected and replaced.

    Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked if the developer was charged for the tree and the administration of the program? Mr. Klaver commented there was a $25.00 per tree maintenance allowance in addition to the actual planting cost. They are not charged for administration. Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo stated the whole program needed to be looked at in the future. Mr. Klaver said for the past four years Council had provided $10,000 for the Tree Funds, which was used to supplement when beyond the guarantee period.

    Roll call vote on CM-01-03-065 Yeas: Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer, Clark, Lorenzo,

    Bononi, Cassis

    Nays: None






  3. Authorization for Toll Brothers, Inc. to extend the Wixom Road Utilities for Fire
  4. Station No. 4 and perform Novi-Lyon Drain maintenance work ($218,854).

    CM-01-03-066 Moved by Csordas, seconded by DeRoche; CARRIED

    UNANIMOUSLY: To authorize Toll Brothers, Inc. to extend the

    Wixom Road Utilities for Fire Station #4 and perform Novi-Lyon

    Drain maintenance work ($218,854).


    Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo was concerned with the brush and tree clearing along the drain banks and asked why it was necessary and if the City was promoting it? Mr. Nowicki said it was not the top it was the side slopes. The banks or slopes would not be devoid of vegetation only the trees that affect the flow. The grass, weeds and other vegetative matter in the ditch channel would remain on the side slopes. Mr. Nowicki said it is a manmade drain that provided drainage through the City. It would be taken down to restore the flow line at the bottom of the channel and would be re-vegetated to prevent soil erosion and further erosion of the drain. It would be stabilized with matter that was consistent with DEQ regulations. Mr. Nowicki said the project was brought to the City’s attention by the developer. They are paying a portion of it and the City would pay the portion that provided capacity for upstream developments.

    Roll call vote on CM-01-03-066 Yeas: DeRoche, Kramer, Clark, Lorenzo, Bononi,

    Cassis Csordas

    Nays: None

  5. Request for approval of the Revised City of Novi Investment Policy.
  6. CM-01-03-067 Moved by Kramer, seconded by DeRoche; CARRIED

    UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the Revised City of Novi

    Investment Policy.

    Roll call vote on CM-01-03-067 Yeas: Kramer, Clark, Lorenzo, Bononi, Cassis,


    Nays: None

  7. Adoption of Resolution and Authorization to make an Offer to Purchase Real Estate

For Twelve Mile Road and Other roadway Improvements Project (SAD 155): Siena

Group, LLC (50-22-11-300-006) for $86,527 and approve Declaration of Taking.

CM-01-03-068 Moved by Kramer, seconded by DeRoche; MOTION CARRIED:

To adopt the resolution and authorization to make an Offer to

Purchase Real Estate for Twelve Mile Road and Other roadway

Improvements Project (SAD 155): Siena Group, LLC (50-22-11-300-

006) for $86,527 and Approve Declaration of Taking.








Member Kramer commented it would either be a taking or purchase.

Mr. Fisher said it was an approval to make an offer to purchase and following a period of time if the offer was not accepted they would return to Council and request approval to commence taking.

Roll call vote on CM-01-03-068 Yeas: Clark, Cassis, Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer

Nays: Lorenzo, Bononi



  1. Tianjin China visiting delegation – Mayor Clark
  2. Mayor Clark commented he met with Mr. Dye, General Manager of T & M United Industries Development Company in Tianjin. Tianjin is the third largest city in China and is 80 miles southeast of Beijing and has a lot of industry, technology and developing. Mayor Clark received a letter of greeting from the President of Tianjin University of Technology and they are looking to partner with educational institutions of higher learning and high schools in the area. They were also looking at an exchange program and had committed in excess of $125,000,000. Ultimately, they would look for future business opportunities and Mayor Clark advised him about Novi’s OST District and the benefits and number of companies from around the world that are already in that district. They were proposing to have a delegation come from Tianjin in April or May and would spend a week or so in the United States with three or four of those days spent in Novi. The Rotary would act as their guide and point out the high points of the area. They had requested a dinner with City Council and Mayor Clark asked Council Members if they would like to host the Tianjin delegation. Their delegation would be made up of educators, engineers, scientists and physicians. Mayor Clark advised them of Providence Park, which they seemed interested in seeing.

    Member Kramer supported the dinner request and suggested inviting Dr. Lippe and a representative of Providence Park. Council concurred.

  3. Consultant Evaluation Form – Member Kramer
  4. Member Kramer advised Council of the Consultant Evaluation Form that was in their packets. The category ratings had been simplified and a few other sections were added to the end. He asked for support of this form.

    Mayor Clark supported the form as is and Council concurred.







  5. Grant Report – Member Csordas

Member Csordas requested this item be added to the next Council agenda under Mayor and Council Issues and that the information be included in that packet.

4. Explore availability of HCD Funds for Road Improvements on North Novi

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo was looking for consensus from Council to explore the availability of HCD Funds. Mr. Klaver said a meeting had been held and he thought it would be an excellent committee. There might be some difficulties of what qualifies because some of the improvements would be off property. They are currently pursuing it and would provide Council with information in a month or so.



1. Letter from Dina Ascenzo Re: Shawood Heights/Walled Lake Estates Subdivision road


2. Letter from Census Bureau regarding release of Census 2000 redistricting data.


There being no further business before Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12:30 AM.





__________________________________ ________________________________

Richard J. Clark, Mayor Maryanne Cornelius, City Clerk




Transcribed by: ____________________

Charlene Mc Lean

Date approved: March 19, 2001