(248) 347-0475


Meeting called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Chairperson Weddington.


PRESENT: Members, Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Piccinini, Watza, Chairperson Weddington




ALSO PRESENT: Planning/Traffic Consultant Rod Arroyo, Engineering Consultant David Bluhm, Assistant City Attorney Dennis Watson, Landscape Architect Linda Lemke, David Wickens Environmental Specialist, Director of Planning & Community Development Jim Wahl, and Planning Assistant Kelly Schuler








Chairperson Weddington announced there were two additions to the Agenda. The first was minutes from the meeting of August 05, 1998 that should be added under Consent Agenda and there was notice of a Public Hearing scheduled for Zoning Map Amendment 18.577 to rezone property from TC to TC-1. At the request of the applicant, the rezoning was rescheduled to September 16, 1998, therefore, she announced if anyone was present for that Public Hearing, action has been postponed. Chairperson Weddington asked if there were any changes or additions to the Agenda? Seeing none she entertained a motion to approve the Agenda.





Moved by Csordas, seconded by Watza, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the Agenda as amended.





Yes: Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Piccinini, Watza, Weddington No: None



Frank Brennan asked the Chair to explain the procedures involved should an applicant who has requested rezoning determine that he wishes to delay the decision after going through the cost and effort to bring it to the Planning Commission.


Chairperson Weddington asked if anyone else wished to address the Commission? Seeing none she closed the Audience Participation and announced there would be a second after the mid point break and a third before adjournment.






(See Correspondence file)















Moved by Mutch, seconded by Churella, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of August 05, 1998 as presented.





Yes: Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Piccinini, Watza, Weddington

No: None








Proposed rezoning of 23.19 acre property located in Section 32, at the northwest corner of Beck Road and Eight Mile Road, from Residential Acreage (RA) to Community Business District (B-2) or any other appropriate zoning district.


Chairperson Weddington re-opened the Public Hearing.


Richard Zyczynski, 22125 York Mills Circle stated he was a long time resident of Novi and reiterated the points made at the last meeting; 1) he stated it was a poor site for such a project; 2) he asked the City to stay with the Master Plan; 3) traffic is predicted to increase by 8,000 cars per day at Eight Mile Road and Beck Road. The affect will be more congestion, air pollution and accidents; 4) two schools are located within ˝ mile from the proposed project; 5) residential homes would allow for some wildlife to remain, however, a Commercial development with 22 acres of pavement would only allow the ants, flies and roaches a chance; 6) Maybury State Park is an educational and wildlife jewel in the midst; 7) the quality of life would be negatively affected by the proposed development; 8) increased crime; 9) a vast majority of the residents do not want or need a large grocery at Eight Mile and Beck Roads. Finally, he asked the Commission not to recommend the voting change to the Council as it is unwanted and unneeded.


Mel Lestock, 990 Glenhill Drive, President of Abbey Knoll Homeowners Association represented 98 homeowners. He stated they live in Northville close to the proposed shopping center. He stated they did not want a shopping center, most of the homeowners have signed a petition or sent a letter to the Commission regarding their displeasure. He stated there was too much congestion and would create a disruption to the residential neighborhoods in the area.


Charles Toussaint, 528 Horton Avenue stated both Northville and Novi have grown over the years because people have enjoyed the location, peace and quiet that the area has to offer. Mr. Toussaint asked the Commission to listen to the Planning Consultant and the request of the residents in the area and honor Novi’s Master Plan and keep the property as it is currently zoned.


Barbara Lucas, 20390 Westview Drive addressed an editorial which was published in the Detroit News. She felt it misrepresented the intentions of the Community that opposes the rezoning petition. It read, "One of the most enduring falsehoods of suburban expansion is that you can move outwards and pull up the drivage behind you." Ms. Lucas emphasized that she was not opposed to the rezoning because she was "anti-development". She stated she supported Commercial development but she felt strongly that it should be located as it is in the Master Plan. She agreed that development was appropriate when there was a definite public need. She stated the lack of Commercial in the area does not prevent people from moving here, it helps to stimulate the growth. She urged the Commission to act on the issue instead of postponing it indefinitely.

Laura Lorenzo, 45995 Galway Drive addressed the Master Plan and the process. She stated the surrounding land has been master planned and zoned residential for many years. The land is being used for either residential, park land, schools or places of worship. The topography and the natural character of the land lends itself to residential. She had a problem with referring the matter to the Master Planning and Zoning Committee and having tax dollars pay for Staff and Consultant time to review the issue. She believed that the petitioner had every right to request a hearing on the rezoning, she also believed that he had a right to receive an answer in a timely fashion, more importantly, she believed that the public had a right to receive an answer in a timely fashion. She expressed serious concern about any attempt to either stall or try to manipulate that answer. The petitioner should be looking to hear and accept the answer no matter what it may be.


Lindsay Schernberg, 46175 North Valley Drive represented the Coalition of Citizens for Responsible Development. She requested that the Commission not allow Mr. Frankel to postpone his rezoning application. She asked that the matter be voted on tonight and that it not be referred to the Committee to review. She stated if the Commission allows the matter to be considered by the Master Plan Committee, she would like to know if there would be a forum for public input on any revisions to the Master Plan before they are implemented.


John Dodge, 47209 Dunsany Court stated the exit to the proposed development would be directly into his backyard. He agreed with the comments of the residents. He stated he moved to the area because of the nature and character of the area. He urged the Commission not to delay the issue but to turn it down.


Carl Jepson, 20250 Beck Road reminded the Commission that since the project is right on Eight Mile Road, 50% of the people affected, live in Northville. He hoped that the Commission would treat the comments of the people from Northville with more consideration. He reminded the Commission that the Township of Northville has indicated that they are against the proposal. Mr. Jepson was opposed to any attempt to delay resolution of the issue.


Lauren Bezak, 21234 Stanstead objected to the proposed shopping center. She stated her family has seen foxes, bats, deer, pheasant, woodchucks, skunks and other living animals in the neighborhood. She did not think the animals should be made to find new homes just because someone else thinks a shopping center is needed. She stated the mall would create more traffic and asked the Commission to do what is best for the Community by voting no.


Laura Van Valkenburgh (10 years old), 45827 Galway Drive did not want to see the shopping area built because it would cause more traffic on Eight Mile Road. She stated it was very hard for her to cross Eight Mile Road when she wants to go to her friend’s house or go downtown Northville. She thought the wetlands and wildlife would be affected if the shopping center is built.


Matt Dietrich, 42691 Savoy Court thought the desire of the residents should be the major consideration. He was opposed to the project because he felt it would affect the Community.


Diane Wilson, 22300 Barclay Drive was very much opposed to changing Eight Mile Road and Beck Road.


Beth Oppenheim, 22271 Erin Circle stated the amount of traffic that would be increased was beyond comprehension. She stated it was not needed in a place like this.


Anne Bright, 47025 S. Chigwidden Drive thought a vote was taken at the last meeting regarding the developers request for postponement and it was denied by a vote of 6 to 3, she asked for clarification of the purpose of that vote.


Chairperson Weddington explained that there was a request to postpone indefinitely which was not supported. Instead, there was a motion made to carry over the Public Hearing to the meeting tonight.


Ms. Bright thought it gave an appearance to the public that it is one more stall technique.


Frank Brennan, 23826 Heartwood provided two color photos of the adjoining neighbors to the Zayti property to the Commission. He provided another 486 signatures of residents opposing the project.

Cindy Gronachan, 21668 Garfield stated the residents respect the opinions of the Commission. She asked the Commission to consider the offer of the gentleman and sell the property to him.


Sallianne Williams, 44751 Roundview Drive was in full support of the opposition of the residents. She expressed concern with the delay tactics she perceived being utilized by the people who were supportive of the project to postpone it. She believed the purpose of the Planning Commission was to back up the current Master Plan and put an end to the issue.


Joan Noonan, 21300 Stanstead Road stated she was born and raised in Northville and has lived there for over 60 years. She stated a shopping mall was not needed on every corner. Residents have a right to trust their municipalities to adhere to the Master Plan. She stated there were no extenuating circumstances involved to justify modification of the Master Plan. Ms. Noonan stated this corner was the least likely that a mega mall should be considered to be constructed. Additionally, if the Zayti property is contaminated, she requested that the Department of Environmental Control look into the matter as many residents are on well water. She did not want her health and welfare to be jeopardized in any way. She read a letter from the Mayor of Northville.

Merrill Zbick, 20164 East Wipple asked the Commissioners why they were voting with Mr. Frankel and against their constituents.


Dave Duhl asked, does Novi not have enough Commercial property? He asked why a Master Plan is developed and what is its’ purpose? He asked who is the benchmark in the Planning and Development Industry?


Tony Kablinski hoped that the Commission would listen to the residents who spoke and hear the message.


Dave Creeden stated, historically the southeastern and southwestern portion of Novi was always discussed as remaining residential and for parks. He stated it should not change, he was opposed to any delays regarding a decision on the matter.


Maria Kamakaris stated she moved to the area three years ago. Currently there are hundreds of cars that travel Beck Road every day. She agreed with the residents and hoped the Commission would listen.


Chairperson Weddington asked if anyone else wished to address the Public Hearing? Seeing no one she closed the Public Hearing and turned the Matter over to the petitioner to make a request.


Stuart Frankel introduced Edward Drugalis who represented the Zayti family.


Edward Drugalis stated Margaret Zayti has owned the property for over 50 years. Prior to her purchase, it was operated by the Twin Pines Dairy. The Zayti family has operated trucks off of the site, in a non-conforming capacity for that period of time. Their current operation has a total of 16 trucks. He stated the traffic problem comes from all of the subdivisions that have been built in the area, it is not from Mr. Frankel or the other Commercial developments. At some point, the City and the Planners, in contemplating the Master Plan, are going to have to accommodate 50,000+ people along with providing goods and services for them.


Mr. Frankel respectfully requested that the application for rezoning be tabled indefinitely, pending the review of the Master Plan.


Chairperson Weddington turned the Matter over to the Commission for Discussion.





Member Watza asked that the residents respect those Commissioners who decide to express their concerns about various different issues even though they do not agree with the majority. Member Watza did not believe that tabling the matter to the Master Plan Committee was appropriate. He believed the appropriate thing to do was to deny it.





Moved by Watza, seconded by Mutch, CARRIED (5-4): To deny the request and send a negative recommendation to City Council on Zoning Map Amendment 18.576 based on the rationale expressed by the Consultants and their option letters and in respect for the letters received from Northville City Council and Northville Township Planning Commission.





Member Capello stated the residents have all made a lot of good points of which he has taken into consideration. Traffic along Beck Road was not a concern to him because he could foresee that Beck Road would be widened and he did not believe that the development would have any impact on Beck Road after it was widened. He stated the Master Plan and Zoning Committee chose to keep the property Single-Family Residential and has made that decision several times. Through the history and studies, Member Capello could find no reason to rezone the property to Commercial or anything but Single-Family Residential. He also saw no reason to postpone the matter because it has been studied and he felt everyone was ready to vote on it.


Member Mutch commented that any decision that the Commission makes is only a recommendation and the City Council ultimately has the final say. He stated in sending the recommendation, he hoped it was clear that the Consultants have outlined a number of reasons for the negative recommendation. He hoped that the motion incorporated all of it. Additionally, he included that the Northville neighbors have indicated that they do not feel that the proposal is in accordance with their Master Plan and he felt those issues should be a part of the Commission’s recommendation.


Member Koneda stated he was one of the Commissioners who voted against continuing the discussion and was in favor of postponing the discussion until after the Master Plan update. He explained that the Master Plan was originally adopted in 1988, it was updated in 1993 and by State Law, it is to be updated every 5 years to take into account, the demographic and economic changes along with what happens with the Community. He stated the Thoroughfare Plan calls for Eight Mile Road to be a major thoroughfare, ultimately going to five lanes. Beck Road has the same plan. The Zoning Ordinance states that a B-2 community district should be located on the intersections of major thoroughfares that serve more than the local community. Member Koneda asked if the zoning was appropriate for the land, he stated it could be developed as residential, it could continue in its existing zoning and it meets the requirements for a B-2. He stated he was in a position to vote on the matter.

Member Watza asked to incorporate the comments of the experts.


Member Piccinini stated she was one of the members who voted to table the matter. She stated she knew that the Master Plan would be reviewed this year. She also stated she knew that Beck Road and Eight Mile Road would eventually expand and she personally did not like to drive into Northville to go shopping, she stated she would like to service the residents in the Novi Community. Member Piccinini thought Beck Road was well screened, she stated it was located 4 to 5 miles away from any expressway and it was not going to be a destination place, it would be a local traffic mall.






Yes: Capello, Csordas, Mutch, Watza, Weddington

No: Canup, Churella, Koneda, Piccinini


Chairperson Weddington noted that the Matter would be forwarded to City Council with a negative recommendation. The decision on rezoning is the decision of the City Council, she stated other opinions need to be addressed to City Council.

Chairperson Weddington announced the Commission would take a brief recess.










This project is located in Section 26, south of Ten Mile and west of Meadowbrook Road. The 15.781 acre property is zoned One-Family Residential District (R-4). Applicant is seeking Woodlands and Wetlands permit approvals.


Jim Wahl, Director of Planning & Community Development stated City Council directed the Department and Consultants to conduct a thorough study of the proposal with specific concern over the road system. He stated the residents were concerned because the proposed subdivision did not have an independent access to a major road. At the request of the residents, there was a concept of the road next to a school that would go out to Ten Mile Road. Further, all of the issues were looked at in relation to the subdivision to the existing Orchard Hills Subdivision. He stated a thorough study was conducted and City Council was provided with a report. The conclusion of that report and the direction of Council was to come back to the Planning Commission and look at the Woodland and Wetland Permits. The conclusion of that report was that the Committee unanimously recommended that a road connection from the proposed Orchard Hills West Subdivision to Meadowbrook Road was necessary, practical and desirable. Mr. Wahl thought the concerns of the residents have been addressed.


Richard Lewiston of Berger/Lewiston Associates Limited Partnership stated the subdivision contemplates the use of about 15 acres of the 60 acres for access, entirely on the use of the public streets in the existing Orchard Hills Subdivision. He stated in 1995 he was asked to consider alternative access methods to the subdivision, at the same time they extended permission to the City of Novi to apply for a grant from the State of Michigan, to acquire the area which had natural resources. Finally, the State of Michigan decided not to grant. The possibilities of access were investigated from Ten Mile Road. The amount of area proposed to be filled to accomplish the subdivision equals about 8/10 of an acre. In addition, the placement of the road involves the placement of several hundred trees. He stated the social impact of the permanent road was modest and the public benefits were great, therefore, the recommended design was that the subdivision be designed with a permanent access road connecting to Silvery Lane from Meadowbrook Road to the new subdivision.


Linda Lemke, Landscape Architect referred to her letter dated December 12, 1997 which referred to the June 09, 1997 letter. She stated the woodlands and wetlands are of significance and quality. She stated to put anything in the area would not be a wise decision. She stated a grant was applied for to put the area into preservation, however it was turned down because of some political implications. The area has been studied by all of the Committees, she stated they consistently agreed with putting a road through. Due to the recommendations from the Study Committee and the subsequent findings from the City, it is the only location acceptable to the subdivision residents and to the City and she recommended approval for the Woodlands Permit. Ms. Lemke stated there were a number of items that will be looked at during the time of Final, one of which will be to keep the profile of the road to a small width and minimum, while keeping good safety considerations. The road crossing is in its environmentally best place, however, there is an open option to stake the road in the field and change it slightly depending on what is found on the site. Ms. Lemke stated the site has been walked many times over the last years and she would be watching it carefully through the development of the road. Ms. Lemke recommended approval with five conditions; 1) items indicated in the June 09, 1997 letter be addressed in the final submittal; 2) payment of bonds and inspection fees as determined by the final engineering drawing review be paid and included; 3) no construction including clearing or grubbing can begin until the protective fence has been inspected and a pre-construction meeting is held; 40 the remaining regulated woodlands which are not platted are placed into a preservation easement; 5) preservation signage is erected.


David Wickens, Environmental Specialist referenced his letter dated May 12, 1998. He stated the plan deals with the southern access road, therefore, his comments deal with the access road. Mr. Wickens recommended approval of construction of the road. Through the findings from the Ad-Hoc Committee report, the discovery process has allowed him to draw the conclusion that there is no less harmful, feasible or prudent alternative to the road. However, the recommendation is conditioned upon the following; 1) mitigation for the amount of wetland area filled would occur at a ratio of 2 to 1; 2) a DEQ permit or letter of no jurisdiction must be obtained prior to City permit issuance; 3) comments from the previous review letter dated February 23, 1995 which dealt with revisions to the proposed sedimentation basins occurring on the actual subdivision site, must also be addressed during Final. Mr. Wickens recommended approval of the wetland plan.


David Bluhm, Engineering Consultant stated the site distance along Ten Mile Road is deficient and would pose a problem for a temporary construction access as well as a permanent roadway to Ten Mile Road. He stated there were a lot of drainage issues that were addressed.


Chairperson Weddington announced she has received a letter from Michael W. Evans, Fire Marshal for the City of Novi Fire Department which states the above plan has been reviewed and approval is recommended with the following items being corrected on the next plan submittal; the spacing between hydrants is still greater than 300 feet (510 feet is proposed). Add an additional hydrant at the northwest corner of the building to comply with this requirement.


Chairperson Weddington announced it was a Public Hearing and opened the Matter to the Public.


Mike Barton, 41635 Chattman raised the question of a temporary construction access road along the route. He stated it was a recommendation of JCK as well as the recommendation that a permanent road did not satisfy the requirements of the Wetlands Ordinance and if there had to be an intrusion, it should be a temporary road. He did not understand why the temporary road issue was abandoned and suggested that the Commission should explore that issue before making their decision.


Linas Orentas, 23247 Ennishore stated the City originally commissioned JCK to study the impact and construction of the new subdivision. JCK findings indicated not to build a permanent access, they recommended at most, a temporary access road. The City recommendation stated that they wanted to build a permanent road, Mr. Orentas did not understand the decisions that were made. He stated there has been no explanation why the river was not being shored up as it is very rapidly eroding the riverbanks and is within 2 to 4 feet from a major sewage drain. He stated he was told that if the sewage basin is ruptured, there will be an incredible cost to the City, monetarily and environmentally. He thought more investigation was needed, he was very concerned.


Tony Marroni, 41608 Chattman stated the Commission has a chance to stop or slow down development growth. He stated the road was not needed, existing roads could be used, smaller trucks could be used, there were numerous ways to access the land. He stated a temporary road was another issue. He requested that the Commission reject the proposal.


Jerome J. Cox, 23214 Balcombe, (not present)


Doug Harrington, 41483 Glyme Drive congratulated the applicant for donating some of the land back to the City. He stated there were ongoing concerns about water quality, and keeping the depth of the lake and the run-off of sand and other sediment from adversely impacting the lake. He stated he would like there to be greater consideration given to the temporary access road due to the impact that the permanent road might have.


Stanley Olkowski, 23303 W. Lebost, (declined to speak)


Terry Croad, AICP, 41861 Aspen Drive, President of Orchard Hills Subdivision. Mr. Croad reiterated some of the concerns of the residents with regard to the woodlands. He asked the Commission if it has considered extending Borchart Drive directly to the west to tie into the loop road as it appeared that it would lessen the amount of vital woodlands impacted. He was in favor of the applicant developing his property for a reasonable return if it does not jeopardize the public health, safety and welfare.


Fred Bea, 23615 Silvery Lane expressed concern with the woodland protection, stating that there wasn’t much left. He stated the water impact affects him as well as some others. He provided the Commission with some pictures of his back yard which showed conditions due to the drainage. He stated when a substantial amount of water falls, the ditch cannot handle the water. He stated he accepts development and growth, however, once wetlands are destroyed they are gone forever.


Unknown citizen stated this drainage took into consideration land impact for 43 homes, not ˝ mile driveway. There was no proposal for a ˝ driveway, therefore, we have no idea what kind of impact ˝ mile of concrete would have on the drainage to Meadowbrook Lake and the existing homes.


Chairperson Weddington asked if anyone else would like to address the Public Hearing? Seeing no one she closed the Public Hearing and turned the Matter over to the Commission for Discussion.





Mr. Bluhm addressed some of the concerns. He stated several facets of JCK evaluated the situation. Engineering from the drainage point of view, a roadway point of view as well as the wetlands issues. He stated the concerns regarding the wetlands were very grave from the beginning and it was very up front and straight forward. It is a significant wetland and woodland area and the intrusions are significant. From a wetlands perspective, a temporary construction access drive would reduce significantly, the amount of impacts in the wetlands, but what wasn’t weighted, was the consideration of a prudent and feasible alternative. He stated if it is allowed to be a temporary construction access drive, this means that the permanent traffic must use Orchard Hills Drive and the existing roads in Orchard Hills on a permanent basis. There were also detriments to accessing Ten Mile Road. Mr. Bluhm thought the letter provided in May by Mr. Wickens was more condensed and concise to evaluate all prudent and all feasible alternatives that the Committee looked at. He clarified that overall, JCK’s recommendations were that the wetlands were of significant concern.


In regard to the drainage, Mr. Bluhm stated the impact that the development has in that area will provide a benefit the existing homes. The ditches will be improved, the drainage will be improved by enclosing ditches and by allowing no detention on the site will help the situation even more.


Member Canup stated anytime there is a development, there will always be someone who doesn’t like it. He stated development was a part of life and it is going to happen.





Moved by Canup, seconded by Csordas, CARRIED (7-1): To grant Woodland Permit Approval and send a positive recommendation to City Council for Wetlands Permit approval for Orchard Hills West Subdivision, SP94-09 subject to all of the Consultants conditions.





In regard to safety between a permanent and temporary drive, Member Mutch asked Mr. Arroyo if it was his feeling that a temporary connection to Meadowbrook Road would create an unsafe situation in the Orchard Hills Subdivision by having the residents access through the existing stub streets?


Mr. Arroyo stated there were some existing problems within the Orchard Hills Subdivision in terms of the road network. He stated there were roads that are less than the current standards of the City, they are narrow, constructed with the ditch drainage system with no sidewalks, and because of the storm water management problems in the area, it has had an impact on the ability of the roadways to stay maintained. He stated the option of the developer separates that traffic and removes it from the road network, he thought it provided for a much safer alternative than access through the subdivision.


Member Mutch expressed concern with Silvery Lane being connected to the permanent road and becoming the thoroughfare out of the subdivision. Additionally, he stated there would be bus traffic on that road. He asked Mr. Arroyo to address the traffic impact on Silvery Lane caused by the connection to Malott?


Mr. Arroyo could not specifically speak to the bus route. He stated the road would actually present a benefit to those who live along the existing road networks that feed out to Meadowbrook because they will see a reduction in volumes from the current. He stated it was likely that there would be an increase in traffic on Silvery Lane, however, they will also have an alternative point of access. Mr. Arroyo expected that the majority of the traffic would use Malott Drive which is proposed to the south.


Member Mutch expressed concern with Silvery Lane, he did not see the benefit of the connection. He stated it seemed that the problem was being spread beyond what currently exists in the subdivision.





Yes: Capello, Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Piccinini, Weddington, Canup

No: Mutch

Absent: Watza





This project is located in Section 14 on the north side of Eleven Mile Road, west of Meadowbrook Road. The 6.168 acre property is zoned Light Industrial (I-1). Applicant is seeking Preliminary Site Plan and Wetlands Permit approvals.


Robert Stine proposed a two story office structure with a gross building area of 37,800+ square feet with a net building are of just over 30,000. There are two entrances to the site with adequate parking. He explained the facade materials and colors.


Rod Arroyo, Planning & Traffic Consultant recommended approval of the Preliminary Site Plan subject to a few items as identified in his letter being resolved on the Final Site Plan. The building requires two loading spaces, one is shown. He suggested that the applicant take two of the parking spaces located towards the west side of the building and stripe them out as a loading area to serve the entrance on the north side of the project, the applicant has agreed to do this and show it on the Final Site Plan. There is an issue regarding landscape berm along Eleven Mile Road, there are some minor Preliminary Site Plan items that are missing.


David Bluhm, Engineering Consultant stated the applicant is proposing public utility extensions, sewer and water are available along Meadowbrook Road east of the site and will be extended to Master Planned sizes to the site and along the frontage of the site. Service leads will be extended into the site. A stub will be left off on the north end, ultimately to cross Bishop Creek to service any development in the future. The property falls generally from Eleven Mile Road back, and then very severely into the Bishop Creek. The Bishop Creek runs west to east. Storm water will be collected in an enclosed storm sewer system. It will outlet to the combined detention/sedimentation/water quality basin located approximately in that area. After detention, the outlet will be directly into the Bishop Creek. The Creek ultimately outlets to a regional basin down stream near Grand River Avenue and Meadowbrook Road. The Bishop Creek has a flood plane associated with it, there is a permit required and the MDEQ will also have to evaluate as to whether they will also have jurisdiction in the area. The applicant will have to apply to FEMA to get a letter of map revision or amendment based on the elevations of the building. The applicant will have to elevate the building above the 100 year flood plane. Additionally, the applicant is proposing to propose one on three slopes in the detention basin. One on five slopes are required and a waiver from City Council will be required to allow one on three slopes. He noted that the plan mentions three additional parking spaces, if it is determined that they are not necessary, he would like to see the applicant expand the basin and flatten out the slopes as much as possible to utilize the three parking spaces. Mr. Bluhm supported the one on three variance because the existing regional basin exists and is currently on line. There are several easements along the Bishop Creek that are necessary to be secured, however, the basin is expected to be temporary in nature. He expected the applicant to design the detention component to be temporary to ultimately be removed, however, the water quality components will remain. He felt a waiver was acceptable. He noted that there were some areas in the parking lot which may need additional catch basin structures. Mr. Bluhm stated he would like to see the applicant maximize the distance from the outlet into the basin, to the outlet into the Creek as a water quality measure. There were a couple of minor details, Mr. Bluhm felt that the plan demonstrated engineering feasibility and recommended approval.


In regard to traffic, Mr. Arroyo believed a two driveway access was warranted primarily for a number of reasons; 1) the significant amount of frontage that the property has on Eleven Mile Road enables the applicant to maximize the separation of the driveways, it well exceeds the driveway spacing standards. He provided a trip generation report. He had a couple of other minor comments and recommended approval.


Linda Lemke, Landscape Architect recommended approval. She stated a number of items have been addressed and there were a number of items that would be looked at during the time of Final; 1) a 36" high berm and buffering along Eleven Mile Road adjacent to parking is required and a 30" high berm along the R.O.W.; 2) she would like to see both additional canopy trees and shrubs used extensively around the basin areas and along the stream and wetland areas. Ms. Lemke recommended approval with the items in her letter being furnished at the time of Final.


David Wickens, Environmental Specialist stated due to the nature of the proposal, it falls under the minor use permit category of the Ordinance and can be reviewed Administratively. He stated the Bishop Creek drains through the center of the property from bottom to top. The applicant is proposing to install a single story storm water outfall to the Bishop Creek. He recommended approval of the plan conditioned upon the fact that the single story outfall must be placed upland and not in the wetland area. Any disturbances to the wetland setback will be reviewed during future plan submittals for restoration and a DEQ and letter of no jurisdiction must be obtained by the applicant. Mr. Wickens recommended approval of the plan.


Chairperson Weddington announced she has received a letter from Michael W. Evans, Fire Marshal for the City of Novi Fire Department which states that the above plan has been reviewed and approval is recommended with the following items being corrected on the next plan submittal; 1) the spacing between hydrants is still greater than 300', 510' is proposed. Add additional hydrant at the northwest corner of the building to comply with this requirement.


Chairperson Weddington announced she has received a letter from Douglas R. Necci of JCK which states that the second facade review of the drawings prepared by Robert W. Stine, Architect, dated July 08, 1998 have been reviewed for compliance with Novi Ordinance 2520. The percentages of materials are shown and the maximum percentages allowed by the Schedule Regulating Facade Materials indicate that there are no Section 4 Facade Waivers required. The drawings are consistent with the previous review and all facades are in full compliance with the Facade Chart. It is therefore recommended that the application is in compliance with the Facade Ordinance and that a Section 4 Waiver is not required.


Chairperson Weddington announced it was a Public Hearing and opened the Matter to the Public. Seeing no one she closed the Public Hearing and turned the Matter over to the Commission for Discussion.





Member Csordas stated he would support a positive recommendation on the project, however, he asked about the sample of building materials and why it was not provided?


Chairperson Weddington asked the applicant if he had a sample chart of materials?


Mr. Stine answered, no. He stated he was not aware that it was required.


Jim Wahl, Director of Planning & Community Development believed the chart of materials to be required at the time of Final.


Member Capello stated he has discussed the issue with Mr. Necci who states it is required for a waiver. Mr. Necci wants the Commission to see the materials so they know what they are waiving to. Normally, unless there is a waiver of the facade materials themselves, the materials are not required.


Member Churella stated the pictures shown by the applicant show yellow brick, the blueprints state red brick. He asked if the Commission was voting on red or yellow brick?


Mr. Stine answered, it was an off-red brick which is classified as red brick. He stated the pictures show more of a tan colored brick because the final brick selection was not made at that time. It was his opinion that on the Final Site Plan, he would provide the actual material samples.


Member Churella asked if the applicant would also provide a color rendering at the time of Final?


Mr. Stine answered, yes.


Member Mutch asked the applicant if there were any plans for development of the rear portion?


Mr. Stine answered, at this particular time, there was nothing definite. He stated if it were developed, it would be another office building.


Member Mutch asked if access would through the front, crossing the Creek?


Mr. Stine answered, yes.


Member Mutch commented on what potential impact it might have in terms of the layout, whether accessing to the rear part of the property and additional development and how it might affect things.


Chairperson Weddington stated if any additional development is proposed, it would have to come back for Preliminary Site Plan approval and it would have to stand on its own.





Moved by Churella, seconded by Capello, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To grant Preliminary Site Plan approval and Wetland Permit approval to Tasmin Office Park, SP98-17A subject to all of the Consultants conditions.


Member Capello did not think the Commission had any control over the color of the brick. He stated the Ordinance sets out the brick, therefore, why make the applicant come back to the Commission? He stated it was not a facade waiver, therefore, the Commission will not have any authority to say yes or no.


Member Mutch asked if it made sense to extend the proposed sidewalks to the bikepath along Eleven Mile Road?


Mr. Arroyo answered, yes. He stated normally it is picked up at the time of Final, however if it is included at this time, he would support it as it is consistent with what has been done with other plans.


Member Mutch referred to the existing drive on the other side of Eleven Mile Road, he asked if it would be a problem?


Mr. Arroyo answered, no. He stated it is a residential driveway not a commercial driveway.





Yes: Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Piccinini, Weddington, Canup, Capello

No: None





Property located in the vicinity of Grand River and Novi Road for rezoning from TC to TC-1.


Chairperson Weddington announced that the applicant has requested that the Matter be postponed to the next meeting of September 16, 1998.





Moved by Capello, seconded by Csordas, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To postpone action on Zoning Map Amendment 18.577 to the next meeting on September 16, 1998.





Yes: Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Piccinini, Weddington, Canup, Capello, Churella

No: None








This project is located in Section 24, north of Ten Mile Road and west of Haggerty Road. The 2.4228 acre property is zoned Office Service (OS-1). Applicant is seeking Preliminary Site Plan approval.


Gerard Madill stated he would like to build a garage to enable storage, there would be a maintenance person to care for the building. He stated he has owned the property for six years and would like to be able to keep up the property by having a permanent person on site to care for it. He stated it would be located behind the dumpster, out of site, it would be of all brick and located next to the Providence property.


Rod Arroyo, Planning and Traffic Consultant stated the application has been reviewed for an accessory structure within an OS-1 zone. It meets the requirements in terms of setbacks and building height. There were some items that needed to be addressed at the time of Final. Some corrections need to be made and some additional information needs to be provided. Mr. Arroyo pointed out that a Public Hearing is scheduled for the next meeting regarding amendments to the Zoning Ordinance that would make uses such as this, approved Administratively rather than coming before the Planning Commission.


David Bluhm, Engineering Consultant stated there were only minor comments with the plan that would be addressed at the time of Final.


Linda Lemke, Landscape Architect stated the plan was not located in the woodlands area and does not come under any landscaping. She asked that the Planning Department refund fees to the applicant.


Chairperson Weddington announced she has received a letter from Michael W. Evans, Fire Marshal for the City of Novi Fire Department which states that the above plan has been reviewed and approval is recommended with the following items being corrected on the next plan submittal; 1) the applicant shall provide the completed hazardous materials survey and inventory.


Chairperson Weddington announced she has received a letter from Douglas R. Necci of JCK which states that the building will be completely brick on all sides and it is recommended that the application is in compliance with the Facade Ordinance and a Section 4 Waiver is not required.


Chairperson Weddington turned the Matter over to the Commission for action.







Moved by Canup, seconded by Csordas, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To grant Preliminary Site Plan approval to Brookside Office Park, SP98-34 subject to all of the Consultants conditions.





Yes: Koneda, Mutch, Piccinini, Weddington, Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas

No: None








Rod Arroyo gave an overview of the Citizen Surveys. He stated 3,000 surveys were mailed out, the names were a random sample from the registered voter list. 402 surveys were returned undeliverable, these were not usable. 746 surveys were returned which gives a 25% return rate, in reality there was a 29% return if the undeliverables were discounted. Mr. Arroyo briefly reviewed the responses to the Citizen Surveys.


Chairperson Weddington thanked Mr. Arroyo and stated a good job was done distilling the information, she announced there was an Economic Summit coming up on Thursday, September 24, 1998 at 5:30 p.m. and the information might be of interest to people attending the meeting.








Jim Wahl, Director of Planning & Community Development stated the update has been underway since 1995. He stated everyone has been doing so well with it, that they originally expected the printing and distribution of the plan to take place in FY 99-2000, but it has actually been budgeted for this year and he was hopeful that the entire Master Plan will be concluded and distributed by July 1999.


Rod Arroyo provided some background information on Master Plans. He stated it is a policy guide to guide the Community growth. It provides direction to developers within the Community who are looking to develop. He stated the Planning Commission has a statutory requirement to prepare and adopt a Master Plan. It is a document of the Planning Commission that is only prepared and adopted by the Commission. Mr. Arroyo briefly outlined the planning process when preparing a Master Plan; 1) basic data collection and analysis; 2) formulating goals and objectives; 3) development of alternatives; 4) selection of the preferred plan; 5) public hearing and adoption; 6) implementation; 7) evaluation and adjustment. Mr. Arroyo provided an adjusted schedule


Member Mutch asked if the Commission was able to get into more detailed planning?


Mr. Arroyo thought the process could give an opportunity to identify areas where some area plans would be a good idea to follow up on. He stated it is not something that is anticipated to be included within this element.


Member Mutch suggested incorporating the impact of development in the surrounding Communities. He stated the types of impacts such as developments in Commerce Township which cause traffic to flow through Novi in order to reach the expressway. Also developments to the West, such as South Lyon and Wixom.


In regard to surrounding Communities, Mr. Arroyo explained when he works on a Master Plan, he always tries to collect all of the Master Plans for the surrounding Communities, aggregate them under one map so he is able to see the what the surrounding Communities are doing.



In regard to Section 4, Member Csordas asked Mr. Arroyo to interpret questions 3 & 4 of open space being reserved by requiring large lots and open space should be reserved by allowing smaller lots.


Mr. Arroyo did not think they were mutually exclusive. He thought it was pointing to the likelihood of favoritism toward different types of development within the Community. Meaning, in some areas it would be appropriate to have large lots, in others, it would be appropriate to have smaller lots, depending on the type of development.


Member Mutch asked about the status of the design build out plans?


Linda Lemke answered Phase I was completed and Phase II was close to completion.


Chairperson Weddington announced there would be an Economic Summit Meeting between the City and the Chamber of Commerce on Thursday, September 24, 1998 at 5:30 p.m. she encouraged the Commissioners to attend.


Jim Wahl, Director of Planning & Community Development announced that the 1997 Annual Report for the Planning and Community Development Department has just been completed. He explained that with the staff turnover in the beginning of the year it was difficult to complete. He felt with the hire of the new Director of Developmental Services it was essential to finish. Mr. Wahl thought it was a good handbook that outlined all of the Planning Commission accomplishments.









Moved by Capello, seconded by Churella, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To adjourn the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission at 11:00 p.m.



Yes: Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Koneda, Mutch, Piccinini, Weddington

No: None




Kelly Schuler - Planning Assistant


Transcribed by: Diane H. Vimr

September 15, 1998

Date Approved: October 07, 1998