View Agenda for this meeting






Meeting called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Capello.


PRESENT: Members Canup, Capello, Cassis, Churella, Koneda, Mutch, Nagy, Piccinini, and Richards




ALSO PRESENT: Planning/Traffic Consultant Rod Arroyo, Engineering Consultant Victoria Weber, Director of Planning and Community Development and Staff Planner Beth Brock, Façade Consultant Chris Fox, Senior Environmental Specialist Aimee Kay, Landscape Architect Linda Lemke, City Attorney Tom Schultz






Chairperson Capello asked if there were any additions or changes to the Agenda?




Moved by Mutch, seconded by Churella, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the Agenda as submitted.




Yes: Canup, Capello, Cassis, Churella, Koneda, Mutch, Nagy, Piccinini, Richards

No: None
















This church and school facility project is located in Section 32, on the north side of Eight Mile Road and west of Beck Road. The 23.3 acre site is zoned Residential District (RA). The applicant is seeking Preliminary Site Plan, Woodland Permit, Wetland Permit, Special Land Use Permit and Section Nine Facade Waiver approvals.


Ronald Cieslak, architect, represented Our Lady of Victory Catholic Church. The church is currently located in Northville and would relocate to the northwest corner of Beck Road and Eight Mile. He stated the site was designed to meet the city zoning requirements and the proposed use. Our Lady of Victory Catholic Church would seat under fifteen hundred (1500) people. Parish facilities, a social hall and religious education space were proposed for the middle of the building. The K-8 base two-story (2) school would be located in the western portion of the building. He anticipated four hundred (400) to four hundred and fifty (450) students. They proposed a buffer zone to the residential area to the west, for the use of recreation, such as a softball field and playground area. Parking would be located behind the building with an access drive off of Beck Road and Eight Mile. The site plan designated five hundred and twenty-seven (527) spaces, including thirteen (13) barrier free. Mr. Cieslak proposed a berm along Eight Mile, which would stop due to the falling grade area, which he proposed to augment with landscaping. He pointed out two (2) areas on the map in which they were short of a berm due to the wetlands. He proposed to preserve the one (1) existing wetland. He designated the second wetland, determined to be essential, which they anticipated mitigating to another area as shown in the drawing. He agreed provide additional landscaping along the west property line and along the residential acreage for screening. Mr. Cieslak stated that he had met with Birchler Arroyo to work out the traffic issues. He anticipated the vehicular traffic to enter the site at the designated location. He explained that the driveway and walk were sized to accommodate the anticipated bus traffic during the week. He pointed out their efforts to separate bus traffic from those that would be dropped off by parents. He stated the interior sidewalk system would be tied in with the new sidewalk located along Eight Mile and Beck Road. He felt the project met the requirements from an engineering perspective. The proposed footprint of the building is one hundred fourteen thousand (114,000) square foot. Twenty thousand (20,000) square foot was located on the second floor of the school. He indicated this would be primarily for the school but also included a small mezzanine for mechanical equipment. The proposed building would be constructed of stone, brick and shingles. Mr. Cieslak indicated that the ZBA interpreted their spire as falling under the spire portion of the zoning ordinance. He stated that although the shingle percentage exceeded what was permitted in the zoning ordinance, JCK indicated they would recommend a waiver because the roof maintained the residential character of the building.


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


Seeing no one he closed the Public Hearing and turned the Matter over to the Commission for Discussion.


Rod Arroyo, Planning and Traffic Consultant did not recommend approval due to the needed waivers and variances related to berming. He stated if the issues, which Ms. Lemke would give in detail, were resolved through Planning Commission or ZBA he would be able to recommend approval. Mr. Arroyo stated that the applicant had been very cooperative and the remaining issues outside of the landscaping could be resolved at Final.


In regard to traffic, Mr. Arroyo recommended approval. He explained that the applicant addressed the comments and made the revisions after receiving a negative recommendation. Therefore, he stated they now recommended approval contingent upon appropriately revised sheets being substituted in the set originally submitted to the City. He stated there were the two (2) points of access, as indicated by the applicant. He explained the project would improve both Eight Mile and Beck Road by extending the center left turn lane to provide for left turns into the site. There would also be deceleration lanes and tapers for the driveways to separate the right turning traffic. Mr. Arroyo pointed out that this intersection is part of the City’s Road Bond Program, therefore it would be likely to have additional improvements which might include right turn improvements and a signal upgrade. (A computerized traffic signal to respond to the demand.)


Victoria Weber, Engineering Consultant recommended approval of the Preliminary Site Plan in the August 1, 2000 review letter. She explained that the site drained from the southwest area to the northeast area, the location of the wetlands. Two (2) detention basins are proposed for the site. One (1) would discharge to the detention basin and the other would discharge to the wetland area. Storm water flows would go to an existing culvert located under Beck Road. Ms. Weber requested that the applicant provide a drainage easement over the northern portion of the site. She stated there is off-site flow entering the area, which is a proposed regional detention basin according to the Storm Water Master Plan. Water and sanitary is proposed for the site and extensions from existing utilities. Ms. Weber explained that a water study would be completed in mid April to determine if there was adequate water pressure in the area. She suggested that the applicant contact the City of Northville to advise them of the discharge into Northville. She stated they would be examining this at Final to ensure that discharge through that culvert was not being increased.


Linda Lemke, Landscape Architect recommended approval of the Woodland Permit and the landscaping at the conceptual stage of review. In regard to the woodlands, she designated the areas as located at the center of the site, one (1) on the western property line and the remainder on the northern property line. At this stage of her review, she did not find disruption to the woodlands to the northern and the western. However she would be reviewing it closer at Final and there may be a need for some of the wetland mitigation moved south. She described the woodland at the center of the site as approximately a two (2) acre "pile of rubble", consisting of Pioneer Species, Black Locust and Green Ash. The applicant proposed to remove these and would be required to replace them according to the replacement ratio credit in the ordinance. Ms. Lemke stated the replacement trees would need to be relocated on site or bonded in the City’s tree account. Due to the quality of the trees and the area, she pointed out in the aerial photograph that they were scattered, not hardly a continuous canopy. She recommended that the applicant be allowed to do this. She stated there were a number of conditions in her July 28, 2000 letter she would be looking for at final. She explained that the Planning Commission could grant a waiver to reduce or eliminate the required four foot six inch (4’6") berm required along the north and west property line to retain the existing regulated or non-regulated woodland area. Ms. Lemke state the site contained both of the woodland are regulated. The applicant requested that the berm be eliminated in the area of existing vegetation. She added the applicant proposed to provide a berm that met ordinance requirements in the remainder of the areas abutting residential. She required additional Evergreen trees be provided at Final if the waiver is granted. Ms. Lemke gave a positive recommendation for the Planning Commission waiver and recommended approval upon the granting of the waiver.


Aimee Kay, Environmental Specialist located the several wetlands on the site totaling 2.56 acres. Wetland A, .50 acres, non-essential; wetland B, .03 acres, non-essential; wetland C, .33 acres, regulated, essential; wetland D, .99 acres, regulated (>2 acres); and wetland E, .707 acres, regulated (>2 acres) MDEQ regulated. She pointed out the location of the school, church and the parking constraints. She felt if the .33 acres of wetland remained and was surrounded by parking, it would degrade over time. Therefore, it was agreed to have it mitigated. She explained the unusual circumstance of the grading with the detention basin and the existing wetland. An essential/non-essential determination was not needed because the wetland was technically regulated under the ordinance. Ms. Kay stated the wetland continued off the westerly portion of the site and was two (2) acres or greater. The description from the applicant’s wetland consultant and her field visits both described the wetland as in poor condition. She stated the diversity is poor and the hydrology is practically non-existent, however, technically it is a wetland. She gave the advantage of the applicant grading and restoring of the existing wetland located on the parcel and the gaining of area that would have been otherwise lost in mitigation. The result would be increased diversity, plant schemes and most-likely increased hydrology. Ms. Kay felt once the acreage overall was increased it would benefit the city. She recommended approval of the Preliminary Site Plan.


Chris Fox of JCK indicated the July 18, 2000 review letter noted two (2) elevations on the building in which the asphalt shingles exceed the maximum amount allowed by the ordinance. The proposed building is mainly brick and stone, with a fairly steep roof creating large expansive shingles on those two (2) elevations. He indicated the elevation consistency with the remainder of the building, therefore, he recommended a Section Nine Facade Waiver.


Chairperson Capello announced he 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 to be corrected on the next plan submittal: 1) Hydrants shall be provided at 300’ spacing along the new water mains on Beck Road and Eight Mile Road; 2) The following notes shall be provided on the plans: 2a) All weather access roads capable of supporting 25 tons are to be provided for fire apparatus prior to construction above the foundation. 2b) All water mains and fire hydrants are to be installed and in service prior to construction above the foundation. 2c) The building address is to be posted facing the street throughout construction.


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


Tonia Zayti, 21321 Beck Road Northville, asked if she could see the drainage for the site. She was concerned if the project would be disturb the wetland and if some of the foliage would be removed.


Mark Zayti, 21321 Beck Road Northville, stated the location of his mother’s property is immediately to the west of the project. He was not certain if there would be a berm on the west side. He stated his interest in working with the church to ensure the foliage was not removed. Other than this concern, he was in support of the church.


Cathy Amatucci, 47188 Dunsany Northville, expressed her concern of the parking lot lighting. She wanted to know how much light would be emitted and if the lighting would remain on throughout the night. Her property is located east of Beck Road, approximately near the proposed entrance to the church. She requested that the berm along Beck Road be minimized. She asked if there was an accident study conducted? She estimated twenty (20) accidents a year with some resulting in death. She expressed her concern that this project, along with the existing elementary school, would increase the accident rate. She explained there would be students walking to school and she felt that they should construct sidewalks on the east side Beck Road and the north side of Eight Mile Road. She asked if there was discussion of a possible a crosswalk? She did not recall any discussion regarding the soil contamination on the property. She wanted to ensure that the nature level along Beck Road would be preserved. She asked if there would be bell tower constructed and if the ring times it would be limited? She asked if the church would be rented and the traffic impact of this? She asked the height of the church? She expressed her preference of the church as opposed to the previously proposed mega-mall. However, she encouraged the Planning Commission to follow the Master Plan keeping the area residential in all respects.




Chairperson Capello clarified that the height variance was not an issue and if the spire was approved by ZBA?


Mr. Arroyo answered correct. He stated the height conforms to the maximum of the district and the spire was approved.


Chairperson Capello suggested addressing the Special Land Use and if approved, move forward to Site Plan, Woodland Permit and Wetland Permit.


Member Koneda stated that one (1) of the criteria of the Special Land Use was that the use was compatible with the surrounding area, no negative traffic impacts and noise analysis. He asked if the conducted noise analysis included the church bells?


Mr. Cieslak answered that the noise analysis primarily addressed mechanical equipment on the site. He stated currently there were no plans to have a carol on.


Member Koneda clarified that the noise analysis was all of the mechanical equipment and that the applicant met all of the noise requirements for residential?


Mr. Cieslak answered correct.


Member Koneda was satisfied that they met all of the criteria for the Special Land Use.


Member Canup was concerned about the environmental impact statement made. He asked if there was a Phase II environmental study done?


Dave Lobbs of Our Lady Victory Church Stewardship Commission, answered that a Phase II study was done. The result was very modest mediation was required to meet the thresholds for residential in the State of Michigan. He stated CTI did the re-mediation. He explained there remained the potential for some modest migration, in foot measurements, under the current mechanical barn on the site. The same firm would do the sampling when the building is leveled. He added that if there was a need for further re-mediation, primarily petroleum, funding was available to complete this. He explained the core sampling could not be done until it was moved, due to the thickness of the concrete. Therefore, this was a guessed estimate and not a confirmation. He stated that he could confirm the modest amount of re-mediation done. He stated the southwest corner of the parcel and approximately fifty (50) yards in from the corner has been mediated to meet the thresholds for residential usage in the State of Michigan.


Member Mutch asked Mr. Arroyo to address the Beck Road intersection in terms of how it currently operated? He asked what the traffic levels would be at the intersection and if there would be additional improvements he anticipated?


Mr. Arroyo referred to his review letter. He stated the intersection is currently at a level of service F during the PM peak hour and at AM peak hour is at level service C. The level of service ranges from A to F. He explained that if the level were currently at F, it would continue to be F with no improvements when the project and background traffic is added. He restated there would be improvements coming to the intersection. The study indicated that right turn lanes on all approaches would improve level services and the changing of the signal. He stated these improvements were in process and funded through the road bond. He was unable to explain in full extent the lane improvements that would occur, because it would be addressed intersection by intersection. However, he stated there would be a detailed study done. He felt the signal upgrade would significantly improve the intersection and improve the current levels of service.


Member Mutch stated that a Special Land Use, they were comparing a proposed use to the permitted use with the residential subdivision being the permitted use. He approximated that the eighteen (18) to twenty (20) homes would generate ten (10) trips per home and one hundred (100) to two hundred (200) trips per day. He stated the road bond improvements would include City of Novi, Northville Twp., City of Northville, Wayne County and Oakland County. Therefore, he questioned if the improvements would occur at the speed that would coincide with the need with the development of the project. In the event the anticipated road improvements did not occur he suggested requiring the church pay for some of the improvements at this time.


Mr. Arroyo explained the church would be already spending a considerable amount of money on the proposed improvements due to the position of the driveways. He stated that this project would not have the typical passing lane and decel lane. He explained they would be extending the center turn lane along Eight Mile Road along the intersection across the property to the point to serve the driveway. He stated they are also doing the same along Beck Road. He stated this was in addition to the fact that there would be an eight (8) foot bike path along both road frontages. Mr. Arroyo felt confident that the road bond improvements would take place. He added the city was attempting to have the road bond improvements done as quickly as they could be done. He explained that there were only two (2) road jurisdiction issues. These were the county and the city. Beck Road is a city road and Eight Mile Road is a county road. He pointed out another area that was primarily under the control of the Road Commission of Oakland County. He felt the road bond improvement along with the applicant’s improvements would make substantial improvements to the intersection.


Member Mutch referenced the audience participant who was concerned about the lighting effecting the surrounding area.


Mr. Arroyo stated the applicant had provided a photometric plan and projecting light levels. Since the time the applicant submitted their plan, there had been an amendment to the zoning ordinance dealing with exterior lighting. He stated the applicant is already close to meeting the new requirements with their submittal. However, he stated there would be some minor modifications that they would need to address on the Final. He gave the example of the residents adjacent to the property. He stated the light levels generated by the proposed project could not be greater than half (1/2) a foot candle at the property line. (The light of ½ of a candle a foot away.) He stated the lighting level was very modest. The shoebox type fixtures are shielded to direct the light down to the parking lot and does not impact the surrounding areas beyond what is reasonable. Mr. Arroyo felt confident that the applicant would meet the new ordinance with some minor amendment at final and that the lighting levels would be reasonable for the area.


Member Mutch asked if the lighting in the parking lot would be on light standards?


Mr. Arroyo answered, yes. He added the maximum height of the poles adjacent to residential is twenty-five (25) feet for the entire site.


Member Mutch asked if there were any lighting issues with the spire, such as enhancement of effect lighting?


Mr. Cieslak answered that there is a cross at the top of the spire. He anticipated some type of illumination of the cross.


Mr. Arroyo clarified if this would not be the entire spire and only the cross?


Mr. Cieslak anticipated the source of the light to be located at the base.


Mr. Arroyo commented that with the new lighting standards, it would have to be a very focused light, to avoid lighting into the sky. He stated that the applicant would need to provide details on the fixtures and ensure that it is very concentrated on the area to be illuminated.


Member Mutch asked if the building along Beck Road with the seventy-five (75) foot setback was due to the thirty-three (33) foot right-of-way line?


Mr. Arroyo answered, yes.


Member Mutch continued that the future right-of-way line for the Beck Road is sixty (60) feet, leaving the building setback approximately forty (40) feet. He stated it would not be setback the seventy-five (75) feet it would normally be from an adjacent property. He asked if there was a possibility of the building being shifted back to the future right-of-way line? He understood this was a large request if it was not possible.


Mr. Arroyo stated a shift like that would cause a redesign of the site. He suggested the applicant address the related issues associated with this request.


Mr. Cieslak stated a shift like this would almost eliminate the recreation space for the school. He stated this was the reason for the buffer of the residential to the west. He asked the commission to keep in mind the elevation. He stated it was not on the road, instead the building would be back and up. He stated it looked as if it would be close, however, with the grades it might not have the impact that it appears on the plan.


Member Mutch stated this would render that this building would be non-conforming in terms of the ordinance in the future.


Mr. Arroyo agreed that it could potentially be a non-conforming structure when the right-of-way is acquired.


Member Mutch asked if it was anticipated that Beck Road would be widened in the future?


Mr. Arroyo answered, yes, there would be some widening.


Member Mutch asked Ms. Weber if it was correct that she did not require an easement for the regional detention basin in her review letter?


Ms. Weber answered, correct. She added that they could not require or force the applicant to provide an easement. However, she strongly recommended a drainage easement in terms of a regional basin, especially with the off-site drainage coming from the west. The ordinance does not permit a drainage pass or drainage to be blocked.


Member Mutch asked the city attorney if this was something they could require with the Special Land Use?


Mr. Schultz answered, no. He added that the zoning ordinance, permits schools in the RA district.


Chairperson Capello asked if the Special Land Use would apply to only the church? He clarified that if there was not a church, the applicant would not need a Special Land Use?


Mr. Schultz answered correct. If the school stood alone, there would not be the need for a Special Land Use.


Member Koneda questioned if they could require the applicant to anticipate future right-of-way. He stated the applicant was only required to meet the current ordinance requirements. He added there was only one (1) point of the building that would be in violation when the road was widened.




Moved by Piccinini, seconded by Cassis, CARRIED (7-2): To approve the Special Land Use for SP 00-38.




Chairperson Capello expressed his concern with granting the Special Land Use to the church facility. He stated the fact that the school itself, the permitted use, was a large portion of his decision to support the project. He stated the placement of a non-tax base entity, a church, presented him with concerns. He agreed with Member Mutch regarding the increased traffic. He felt this could effect the water supply system. He was concerned that the Special Land Use requires vehicular parking to be screened and the applicant was requesting a waiver from the screening. He stated there was a Catholic Church, St. James, located at Ten Mile and Beck Road, therefore, he did not see the need or use for another Catholic Church.

Member Koneda asked if the waiver of the berming should be addressed?

Chairperson Capello stated this would be addressed when they discussed the Site Plan approval.




Yes: Capello, Cassis, Churella, Koneda, Mutch, Piccinini, Richards

No: Canup, Nagy

Chairperson Capello announced that they would continue with the Preliminary Site Plan, Woodland Permit, Wetland Permit approvals and Section Nine Facade Waiver. He asked that the consultants address the concerns of the residents at this time.

Ms. Lemke stated that the foliage on the north would be preserved along the northern property line. She designated on the map the area that would be preserved and removed. She stated the area of foliage that would be removed would be replaced with a four foot six inch (4’6") berm and heavy screen plantings. The foliage on the west side would be preserved. There would be a wetland enhancement planting plan in the designated areas. There would be plantings along the top edge of the area for the detention basin. She pointed out another area along Eight Mile that would have a berm with plantings on the top portion. In addition to the applicant’s request to preserve existing plant material, Ms. Lemke required heavy Evergreen plantings along the parking lot and another area she designated on the map. She stated the applicant is required to provide thirty (30) inch berm along Beck Road where it abuts the non parking areas. She stated the final grading would be looked at to determine if additional berming could be provided in the area along Beck Road.

Ms. Kay added that along the western area of the existing wetland of the proposed future restoration of the wetland and the mitigation, there is approximately one hundred (100) to one hundred twenty (120) feet where there is not a lot of existing screening. She described this wetland area as predominantly grass. She stated with the enhancement planting, there would be an increase in buffering.

Chairperson Capello asked Mr. Arroyo to address the sidewalk issues.

Mr. Arroyo stated the applicant would be constructing an eight (8) foot safety path along both Eight Mile and Beck Road. He stated they are not required to construct anything off their property on the other side of Beck Road. However, he continued they would be building to the intersection. He stated the issue of crosswalks at the intersection would be evaluated at the time the road bond improvements are made to determine if this would be appropriate. Mr. Arroyo addressed the question related to accident studies. He stated that there was not an accident study required for this project. However, he stated the improvements would include adding auxiliary lanes, which would provide safety when removing turning traffic from the through traffic stream. He added that as traffic volume increases there is typically a corresponding increase in the traffic crashes. At this point he stated the next step would be to make the intersection as safe as possible. He stated these issues would be addressed after the intersection work occurred.

Member Mutch asked if the SCAT signals included crosswalk signals?

Mr. Arroyo answered, yes. He stated generally a pedestrian button is provided.

Member Mutch stated the sidewalks to the east are not in the City of Novi, therefore any sidewalks on the south side of Eight Mile would be the responsibility of Northville Township. Therefore, being outside of the City of Novi’s jurisdiction. He hoped they would move in the direction to provide sidewalks. He was not certain if the Northville School District criteria would apply to the Catholic church. Member Mutch asked if there were plans to extend water service to the area?

Ms. Weber answered, yes. She stated the plans were in process, however, a number of issues were involved. She explained the city of Northville had been contacted to enable the running of sanitary along the east side of Beck Road. She stated there were existing issues with the church site relative to easement acquisition to extend sanitary sewer to the west.

Member Mutch asked if the City Council signed off on extending sanitary sewer to this area?

Ms. Weber assumed that was the case because they had already prepared plans. However, she would check to make sure.

Member Mutch asked if this was also the case with the water services north to the south?

Ms. Weber answered yes, it would be extended on the west side of Beck Road.

Member Mutch clarified if this would be into the existing Novi system?

Ms. Weber answered, correct.

Member Mutch asked if this was the impact the water study would address?

Ms. Weber answered, yes. She explained it would study the water pressures in that area. She explained it was because it is a low lying area.

Member Mutch clarified if there would be a detention basin on the northeast corner co-existing with the wetlands?

Ms. Weber answered no, it would be adjacent to the wetland.

Member Mutch asked if there was a location proposed for the southeast corner that would drain to the northeast corner flowing under Beck Road?

Ms. Weber answered yes. She explained that there is a culvert and the storm water drainage would flow into Northville. She added if it was determined at Final that there was not existing capacity in the culvert, the applicant may be required to over restrict beyond a ten-year (10) storm.

Member Mutch asked if this flows into the ditch on the opposite side of the road due to the subdivision?

Ms. Weber answered, correct.

Member Mutch was concerned about a ten-year (10) flow because of the recent impassible storm water area on Beck Road this past summer. He asked how the basin would handle a 100-year storm?

Ms. Weber stated the ordinance did not require detention beyond a 10-year storm. She explained because the property is adjacent to a subdivision, they are required to demonstrate a suitable overland flow routing for 100-year flows. She stated if they could not demonstrate this, they would have to place 100-year storm flow in their storm pipes.

Member Mutch asked where she would anticipate the overflow going?

Ms. Weber felt it might flow to the wetland area and toward an outlet on Beck Road.

Member Mutch asked Mr. Arroyo to address the dumpster location and its suitability facing Eight Mile and the alternatives of this location?

Mr. Arroyo felt the dumpster may have been placed in relation to the location of the service area of the building. He stated the dumpster would need to be completely screened, and the gates would be required to be opaque. He stated this would be reviewed at final to ensure that the dumpster itself is not visible from Eight Mile Road.

Member Mutch asked Ms. Lemke if the pavement in the parking lot could be broken up with additional islands or landscape features?

Ms. Lemke stated the applicant met the requirements of the ordinance in square footage. She stated there would be room to redesign the parking lot to provide canoe islands, (a longer stretch connecting to the end islands), which would be the preferred method.

Member Mutch asked if she thought that would be appropriate for this site or if it was not possible?

Ms. Lemke felt it might be possible.

Member Mutch stated that he would like this explored as part of the motion for approval. He felt the asphalt was extensive. He stated that he would also like to have the sidewalk on the interior drive extended to the west, to allow pedestrians a sidewalk access to the church verses having it stop half way.

Member Canup asked Ms. Weber if there was a design for a 10-year currently?

Ms. Weber answered yes. She explained that the ordinance required detention to be provided for a 10-year storm. She explained that typically the 100-year storms, particularly adjacent to residential, the applicant would need to demonstrated the routing of the flows over the land or through a storm sewer system. Therefore, this issue will be addressed.

Member Canup clarified that the applicant would need to address the 100-year plan?

Ms. Weber answered, correct. However, she continued they would not be required to detain to a 100-year.

Member Canup asked if they would be required to demonstrate the capability of keeping the water moving to a receiving stream or similar nature?

Ms. Weber answered correct. She explained it was basically the volume.

Member Canup was concerned that there could be a problem created that the tax payer would need to resolve. He asked Ms. Weber if she was comfortable that this would not occur with this site?

Ms. Weber stated that she was comfortable. However, she would be evaluating it more closely in detail at Final. She stated a lot of the issue would depend on the culvert under Beck Road. She explained that the culvert has a certain capacity set and they would not allow the culvert to be over-capacitated. Therefore, she stated the applicant may be required to detain beyond a 10-year storm.

Member Canup sympathized with the audience participant concerned about the water flow. He added there was a large amount of the ground sealed with the large amount of asphalt.

Member Richards asked Mr. Arroyo if the new SCAT signal at Eight Mile and Beck Road would be synchronized with the lights at Seven Mile, Nine Mile and Beck Road? He was concerned if the SCAT light would interrupt the synchronization?

Mr. Arroyo stated that he was not able to give an answer to Member Richards question. He stated it would depend on the investigation for its design. He stated if the ability is available to keep the synchronization, although it would be desirable, it would be the Road Commission to maintain this. He explained that the city did not have control of the timing. Therefore, he was not able to give an absolute answer on Member Richards’ concern. He stated to his knowledge he did not think it was currently tied into the other lights.

Member Churella understood that the SCAT light used a photo system to determine how many vehicles were waiting. It would then allow the green light to remain longer on the side that had heavier traffic. He stated it was a computerized system he was familiar with.

Mr. Arroyo commented that to an extent it would respond to the demand. He stated it would give the lane signal timing. He explained the limitations on the SCAT light. Therefore it would not be completely responsive. He gave the example of the SCAT light giving the priority to the through lanes verses the turn lanes during the peak hours.

Member Koneda referred to the intent to make the basin on the east side a regional basin, meaning out-flow filtering through from other areas, he asked what the impact on the ability of the system? He asked if it would be manageable?

Ms. Weber stated there was no guarantee that the area would be developed as a regional basin. However, she stated if it was, that would be evaluated during the basin design. She added that a regional system is designed to detain 100-year storm flows.

Member Koneda asked if an easement was acquired and it became a regional basin, was this part of the Master Plan for this area?

Ms. Weber answered, yes.

Member Koneda stated if this were to occur, there would need to be reengineering at the City of Novi’s expense to make the basin deeper to retain more water?

Ms. Weber stated this would be a possibility should it be found that there was insufficient capacity in that area to detain all of the drainage area going to the basin.

Member Koneda asked if future site plans, up-stream from this site, would need to have on site detention to regulate the outflow?

Ms. Weber answered, correct.

Member Koneda asked Ms. Kay if it would have a negative impact on the wetlands if the applicant was not able to contain the water in the pipes? He added that the water would not be traveling through a sedimentation basin or water quality standards.

Ms. Kay clarified if it became a regional storm water basin?

Member Koneda answered as it exists currently with a 10-year storm.

Ms. Kay stated currently there exists a flow though stream through the wetland. Therefore, the wetland was already experiencing flashing during spring. She felt that the wetland was already an area that was absorbing water during high floods.

Member Koneda was concerned that the basin could become overfilled.

Ms. Kay stated she was not able to determine where the drainage would flow.

Member Koneda asked if the wash from the parking lot would flow unfiltered into the wetland system?

Ms. Kay stated it is to be directed in to the detention basin. She added that a condition to her letter was to have the water quality feature examined at Final.

Member Koneda asked if it was possible to make the detention basins deeper to hold more water?

Ms. Weber answered, yes.

Member Koneda felt this should be made a requirement. He restated his concern of unusual rainfall.

Ms. Weber stated that these issues would depend on the culvert under Beck Road. She stated if the culvert could accept a 100-year flow, then there would not be a requirement to oversize the basin beyond a 10-year. However, she continued if there is a problem with the sizing of the culvert, the applicant would be required to detain to a 100-year on the site.

Member Koneda restated his concern. He asked when the new sewer system would be constructed?

Ms. Weber stated the issue at hand was with the easement. She stated it is planned to extend the sewer west to service the areas within the district. The sanitary sewer will be on the east side of Beck Road. She explained that the easements would need to be in place before the construction of the sewer. She stated there are currently issues with easement acquisitions with the areas on the church site.

Member Koneda asked if we had easements to bring the sewer system to the church site?

Ms. Weber believed that they had been acquired to bring it to the site, but not further. She stated it would be one (1) package and therefore, they needed to have all of the easements to begin the construction.

Member Koneda asked what would happen if they were unable to get the easements?

Ms. Weber stated an alternative would need to be found. She stated she would do the research to find the alternatives.

Member Koneda regarding the parishioners, if the church would be closed down and vacated?

A church representative stated they would be transitioning.

Member Koneda asked if they were assuming that all of the parishioners would relocated to the new facility.

A church representative answered that he had hoped it would be a hundred percent (100%), however, he was not able to guarantee this.

Member Koneda asked where the current parishioner boundaries were?

A church representative stated that the parish boundaries are roughly estimated to generally Nine Mile, Napier, Five Mile, Six Mile Road and the east side of Haggerty.

Member Koneda stated with these estimates, traffic could be anticipated on Eight Mile and Beck Road. He asked if there were any future plans for a cell tower?

A church representative answered no.

Member Koneda asked if the Master Plan designated the site for a cell tower? He asked if the east entrance off of Eight Mile Road would be posted as a bus service entrance only?

Mr. Arroyo stated it is intended for bus service only. However, they would review the signing details at Final.

Member Koneda asked if the driveway was built to city standards and could it be used as a fire apparatus entrance?

Mr. Arroyo answered, yes. He stated it had to be designed to meet bus requirements, which are very similar. He stated it would be able to maintain fire apparatus.

Member Koneda discussed the issue of the Planning Commission Waiver for the berming. He stated typically the Planning Commission has granted waivers to preserve existing vegetation, especially woodland or wetlands. He felt that this situation was appropriate and was satisfied with Ms. Lemke’s additional Evergreen plantings. Since he felt the planting were not intended to provide audio screening, any plantings would be a positive thing. He was pleased with the 1:1 planting ratio. He was also pleased that the applicant voluntarily did the wetland mitigation and the restoration. He was satisfied with the engineering overall, with the exception to the storm water.


Moved by Cassis, seconded by Koneda, CARRIED (8-1): To grant Preliminary Site Plan Approval, to grand Woodland Permit, grant the Wetland Permit, grant the Section Nine Facade Waiver subject to the Planning Commission Waiver for berm along the north and west sections of the property where the natural resources are in place subject to the consultant’s conditions and recommendations.


Member Piccinini referred to Mr. Arroyo’s December 13, 2000 letter stating the thirty (30) inch berm on the south of the proposed driveway and the thirty-six (36) inch berm on the north of the driveway would not be provided. She asked if this was part of Ms. Lemke’s waiver as well or if this was a separate need?

Ms. Lemke explained it would not be a waiver preserving existing vegetation. She stated from an engineering perspective, they are not able to place a berm along the north of the driveway on Beck Road. She stated this was her main concern and she was attempting to do this.

Member Piccinini clarified that there was no need to make another waiver?

Ms. Lemke answered, no.

Chairperson Capello clarified further that the motion was made without a ZBA Waiver of the berms. Therefore, if approval is granted, he stated the applicant would not go before ZBA to request any waivers.

Ms. Lemke answered correct.

Member Nagy mention her concerns of Quail Ridge to Ms. Weber. She asked Ms. Weber if she had discussed the drainage impact with Northville and if she was aware of what the impact would be?

Ms. Weber stated it would be the applicant’s responsibility to contact Northville to notify them of the site plan and storm water discharge issues. She restated that they would closely review the flows through the culvert to ensure the flows are not over-capacitating it. She explained that the culvert has a set flow capacity and if they exceed it, based the proposed plan, they will be required to detain beyond what is shown on the plan.

Member Nagy asked if this would be at their cost?

Ms. Weber answered, yes.

Member Nagy asked the city attorney what obligations the City of Novi has if the City of Northville objects to the plan?

Mr. Schultz stated at this point, the commission is to determine if the plan meets the City of Novi’s zoning ordinance and engineering requirements. He stated if the site plan meets these requirements, that is what the commission is to base their decision on.

Member Mutch asked what guarantee exists that the other side of the road would not be washed out even if the culvert could handle a 100-year flow?

Ms. Weber stated she would need to verify the information. However, she believed that they would be mainly looking at what would be flowing through the culvert and not necessarily evaluating what would be going on in another jurisdiction.

Member Mutch reminded her of the incident at Quail Ridge. He explained, the project met the standards on the city side, however, because the other side did not do their part, Novi paid the expense of forty thousand dollars ($40,000). He asked if there was a way to evaluate the down stream capacity?

Ms. Weber stated this could be looked at. She pointed out that if 100-year flows travel through the area currently, they would continue to go through the area based on the topography.

Member Mutch felt that although a 100-year flow could travel through an area, he did not agree that it this was always a safe and responsible manner. He asked the motion maker if they would be willing to include in the motion a comment to address the parking lot and attempting to break it up with additional landscaping.

Member Cassis answered, yes.

Member Mutch continued that he would leave it to Ms. Lemke to work out the details with the applicant.

Ms. Lemke stated she understood the concern. She noted there were wetlands to the west and it would depend on the quality of the wetlands and the amount of flexibility.

Member Koneda stated that he would not like the parking lot issue to be part of the motion. He felt the parking was shielded from the road. He stated the road, the wetlands and the trees hide it from the outside view. He was not concerned about the asphalt. He stated although he would like to see it broken up, it is not part of the ordinance requirement and therefore, he did not feel it should be included in the motion.

Chairperson Capello clarified that it was not yet included as part of the motion. He asked what the position and exposure the Planning Commission would have if they gave this plan approval and the easements were not able to be acquired or they were not able to have sanitary sewer?

Mr. Cieslak stated until the property has been finally secured, they could not continue the process. Therefore, there was not a way that an easement could be provided across the property until they have the approval of the plan. He stated they have received preliminary approval from Novi to explore the possibility if water pressure is not available and secure it on a temporary basis from Northville Township. He added that they would obviously need to have water and were exploring the alternatives.

Chairperson Capello stated he did not want to have the pressure to get the water out to the site.

Mr. Cieslak stated they had heard in August that the study would be taking place and therefore began to talk to Northville Township and Novi water department.

Chairperson Capello asked Ms. Weber if she had stated that part of the problem was acquiring easements was on the east side of Beck?

Ms. Weber stated it was only for the church property.

Chairperson Capello asked if there was sanitary sewer up to the property line of the church?

Ms. Weber stated there would be as part of the design.

Chairperson Capello asked if it was physically there now?

Ms. Weber answered, no.

Chairperson Capello asked if there were easements acquired up to the property line?

Ms. Weber stated that she believed that was the case.

Chairperson Capello clarified that it would only be an issue of having it installed up to that point. He continued that Bellagio has sewer at the southern boundary line.

Ms. Weber stated that although that is correct, it is another sanitary sewer district. She explained that the topography falls to the north in that area. She stated there is a topography split there.

Chairperson Capello asked what sewer would service the site?

Ms. Weber stated it would be the Beck Road, north of the site.

Chairperson Capello clarified once the applicant acquired title of the property, they would then give the necessary easement to have the sanitary and water to the site?

Mr. Cieslak answered, yes. He explained that everything was worked out and the site plan approval was delayed and they were not able to complete the process.

Chairperson Capello asked Ms. Weber if the sewer is shown on the plans?

Ms. Weber answered, yes. She referred back to Member Mutch’s question stating that the existing sewer is located on the west side of Beck Road and there would be a cross over.

Member Mutch asked if sewer coming down on the west side of Bellagio?

Ms. Weber answered correct.

Member Mutch asked if this would be a continuation of that sewer?

Ms. Weber answered, correct. She explained that it would continue on the east side of Beck Road because water main would also be there as well. She stated the existing is on the west side and the sanitary sewer will cross over and run along the east side of Beck Road.

Chairperson Capello asked if there were easements for the east side of Beck Road?

Ms. Weber believed so.

Chairperson Capello asked if it would cross back to the west, or if they would have to tap under Beck?

Ms. Weber stated it would cross back over and extend through the church property running east/west. She continued that the water main was expected down the west side of Beck Road because both of the utilities would not fit on the same side of the road.

Chairperson Capello asked if the plans show the sewer lines running east/west?

Ms. Weber answered yes.

Chairperson Capello asked who’s obligation it would be to install the east/west line? He stated that typically with a residential or commercial development, the developer is required to bring the sewer in.

Ms. Weber stated the city has decided to extend the utilities down there. However, she continued if problems arise, it would be the developer’s responsibility to provided water and sanitary service to the site.

Member Mutch stated the plan did not show the sidewalk on Eight Mile extending past the western drive. He asked the applicant to address the issues.

Mr. Cieslak explained that initially there was a grading problem. He stated they would work with the problem if they wanted a sidewalk in the plan.

Member Mutch stated they could place it on the plan. He stated if it was not done, it is typically a Design and Construction Waiver that they would need from the City Council.

Mr. Cieslak stated the issues were the grading off-site due to the ditch.

Member Mutch asked if they were not planning to extend the sidewalk?

Mr. Cieslak stated he hoped there would be an escrow to place the money when the sidewalk was extended.

Member Mutch asked the city attorney if this issue should go before the City Council?

Mr. Schultz answered that the plan should indicate the sidewalk. He continued that if they could not construct it, they would have to go to the City Council for a waiver.

Chairperson Capello stated they have done escrows in the past and he felt it work until the connection could be made.


Yes: Capello, Canup, Cassis, Churella, Koneda, Mutch, Piccinini, Richards

No: Nagy



This project is located in Section 24, on the northwest corner of Ten Mile Road and Haggerty Road. The 3.93 acre site is zoned General Business (B-3). The applicant is seeking Preliminary Site Plan, Special Land Use Permit, and Section Nine Facade Waiver approvals.


Timothy Stoepker represented Ford Motor Land Company. He requested Preliminary Site Plan and Special Land Use Approval for the Jaguar of Novi store. He stated there were a number of issues he wanted to review that were focused on the ordinance, waiver issues and the presented design. Mr. Stoepker expressed his gratitude to the consultants and city staff for their assistance to enable the Jaguar project to make the agenda. He expressed the deadline involved to be able to open the dealership for business by August 2001, which would enable them to time the opening with the introduction of the new Jaguar automobile. He felt this unique dealership project was unlike any other in the United States. He explained that the design would become the prototype for the Jaguar stores across the country and the first of its kind would be located in Novi Michigan. He believed the objectives for the zoning ordinance had been fulfilled relative to site plan approval and special use requirements. He stated he would conclude the presentation with the ordinance requirements for both site plan and Special Land Use after the presentations were made to address the design concept from an engineering and architect perspective.


Nathan Conners, the dealer principle for the proposed Novi store, introduced himself to the Planning Commission. Three (3) years ago, he and Jaguar discussed a new dealership in southeast Michigan and was given the task to find the location. He felt the Novi would be a fine location for what the new concept dealership design of the luxury line Jaguar Dealership. He stated the pleasure of having the Chairman of Ford Premiere Auto Group, Dr Wolfgang Writsler, visit the site and review the plans. Mr. Conners indicated a the third consultant architect firm involved with the project. Mr. Martin Freyer, from London, would be designing the interior to ensure the project maintains its quality. He stated his appreciation of the city, and expressed their zeal to proceed with the project in attempt to open in August 2001. He assured the Commission that he would be a good taxpaying citizen of Novi and he looked forward to the opportunity.


Randy Metz of Grissim-Metz Associates introduced himself as the landscape architect, principle site planner and civil engineer for the project. He introduced his colleague Tony Dellicolli, of Cityscape Architects as the principle designer of the building. He outlined his presentation to point out the unique aspects of the site. Mr. Metz stated the project represented an entirely new concept for dealership design worldwide. He explained this would be the worldwide prototype for Jaguar facilities with unique features. He felt one unique character design was that the building would be close to the road to display the architecture of quality materials. He stated this area was meant to be a gateway to the city. The showroom would be highly visible from the street. He stated it would embody the traditional aspect dealership designs from the past, this being to focus the facility to the community, part of the community and an attractive asset to the community. He stated the building acts as a buffer and a back drop to the plaza and the display vehicles. He pointed out that the building being pushed forward, naturally would screen the inventory parking behind the building. He stated through the process of additional landscaping, it would also completely buffer all of the service parking from view. The customer parking would be in view somewhat, because it would be buffered with lower hedges. He explained this was to give a softened look to the corner. He pointed out the building would be a backdrop to the plaza, which was proposed to run the entire length of Haggerty Road. Mr. Metz explained the plaza would only feature nine (9) vehicles placed on pods oriented to Haggerty Road. He stated the only display lighting would be the lighting on the cars and some accent lighting on the building. He stated in most car dealerships, the cars are maximized on the street under intense lighting. He explained the proposed concept was a completely new aspect. He felt this would be an upscale, quality image reflective of the Jaguar brand. He described the facility as elegant, appealing, simple and welcoming with a focus on a few tasteful displays of the Jaguar products. He felt this project would project a quality image to the community acting as a gateway to Novi at the corner of Haggerty and Ten Mile Road.


Tony Dellicolli of Cityscape Architects introduced himself. He stated being the architect there was an emotional attachment to the project as well as an affinity for his city as he is a Novi resident. He stated the facility was approximately twenty thousand (20,000) square foot. It is primarily sales and a service dealer facility with thirteen stalls housed in the service department. He stated there was a small parts department and service reception area for service write-up. He described the building design as straightforward and simple. He described it as contemporary in style that would stand the test of time. As an architect, he stated he made great attempts to create designs that will stand the test of time. He pointed out some of the special features that were incorporated in the overall look of the design. Mr. Dellicolli referred to the photographs exhibiting the view to the north along Haggerty Road. He pointed out the Rotunda entranceway, thirty feet in height (30) and round in form, that creates a transition space into introduce the customers into the facility. He felt it also created a strong orientation at Ten Mile and Haggerty Road as it was a gateway to those traveling west bound along Ten Mile Road. He proposed the Rotunda entrance way would be a combination of a burnished block until, similar to a stone. The façade at the top would be a synthetic plaster material. Mr. Dellicolli stated another uniqueness was the creation of the serpentine wall, which is oriented directly on to Haggerty. It is designed to act as a backdrop. He stated they relocated the building to the front street to avoid the traditional front line of cars displayed along Haggerty road and created an auto guard. He stated the serpentine wall acts as a canvas to the cars. Mr. Dellicolli designated the area under the round shaped canopy with columns that lead up to the service reception area. He explained that the design allows the customer to drive up under the canopy. Beyond this entranceway, he stated there existed two (2) fully glassed doors recessed deeply into the opening. He explained from Ten Mile, the porte chochere could be seen. He explained the efforts made to eliminate the strong orientation on Ten Mile and avoid the issue of the over head doors fronting on to a major thoroughfare. He stated the difficulty in designing a facility of this sort without having one (1) door opening onto one (1) of the major thoroughfares. He explained it was importance of having the service reception area oriented on Ten Mile is to allow the service customer to find entry into the service area. He stated they have gone to great lengths to enhance the look of it. Mr. Dellicolli stated the way the city ordinance is written, it does not allow the use of a large percent of block material. However, he felt it was important to show the Commission the stone characteristics of the burnished block. He stated the face of the material was actually ground. He stated the matrix and pour of the material incorporates aggregated pieces made of marbles, stones and granite. Therefore he stated it holds the look of a stone material. He felt it was important to point out the unit of material was very large in scale and similar to that of a stone at sixteen (16) inches high and twenty-four (24) inches wide. Mr. Dellicolli explained this burnished block would be used in a staggered pattern, offset running bond pattern to look like a stone product. A four (4) inch horizontal band of a burnished block unit that will run every two (2) courses to break up the look and trait a horizontal appearance to the building. He stated this was to try to set the building on the ground and give the wall some relief. He stated the wall is twenty (20) feet in height and did not have any penetrations, however the serpentine shape would give it character. He felt it was important to show the difference of the burnished blocks. He displayed a sixteen (16) block unit, like that on a Home Depot or K-Mart. He referred to a photo in which the left photo depicted the burnished block they were proposing to use and on the right side would be a standard 8x8 burnished block. He stated although it was the same material on the face, in terms of scale, it looks like a block unit. Mr. Dellicolli expressed his desire to create a stone look in an affordable way. He explained that Burnished block was not more economical than using a brick. He stated they have opted to a larger modular unit to create a sense of stately-hood and a sense of permanence. He felt if the Planning Commission could have the opportunity to study the model, they would come to the same conclusions.


Tim Stoepker restated his request for Site Plan approval and Special Land Use. He pointed out Section 2516 B and C. He stated the first criteria under 2516 B 1 related to approval for Site Plan purposed. He read whether the use proposed is permitted within the district and complies with the applicable requirements under the ordinance and other codes. He stated this project is a use permitted with approval in the B-3 zoning district. He stated this was discussed at the time of the rezoning. In reference to the applicable code requirements, he believed upon the waivers, they were seeking under the ordinance, that the intent of the ordinance and the Master Plan for this area…(tape ends) ….he believed they would comply with the code requirements and they were a permitted use. He referred to subsection 2 of the ordinance addresses vehicular access to and from the site. He stated the submittal of the rezoning and a traffic study prepared by Recoli, indicated that there are no traffic impairments or difficulties from this site. Mr. Stoepker stated the site was previously intended for an OS-2 Development with more traffic intensity. He stated the traffic for the Jaguar site was low intensity and it is designed for vehicular access. He stated at the time of the rezoning, the curb cut on Haggerty was essentially mandated in the zoning application and approval by City Council. He stated the curb cut was already there. In addition, he stated they would be using a curb cut on Ten Mile to keep the traffic counts away from the Ten Mile and Haggerty intersection. Therefore, he stated there was a sufficient drive from that location. He stated the intent was to create two (2) points of ingress and egress. He stated the studies submitted show the proper site circulation within the site for pedestrian and vehicular traffic. He stated there were some minor details that would be incorporated at Final. Section 2516.2 states "whether the zoning and use of surrounding land as they relate will be compatible". He stated this was an issue that had been addressed at the rezoning. He stated the property to the north is Suburban dealership, Infinity, across the street a Mercedes Benz and Ford Dealership. He stated to the west, the balance of the property remains OS-2, adjacent is OS-1. He indicated significant distance to from the residential community to the west, and the B-1 and B-3 properties are to the immediate south. He stated from a zoning district compatibility and compatibility with the approved and surrounding uses in the area. He continued explaining the location of the activities on the site, including the arrangement of the buildings, such nature is to not create noise, odor or other nuisances. He stated because of the nature of the Special Land Use, they submitted a noise study. He stated they went to another dealership and conducted measuring of noise in the service facility area. The study also included truck loading and unloading from the site. He added that under the City of Novi standard requirements of noise at the property line, the proposed project more than meets the requirements. Mr. Stoepker explained the design of the site was an attempt to get away from the traditional dealership design. He described the dealers across the property site exhibited cars loaded as mass product across the front. He stated Jaguar’s idea was to create an aesthetically pleasing building and they have still met the requirements from a design standpoint. He requested a number of waivers. Mr. Stoepker stated in reference to Special Land Use requirements, he believed the project is less intense with what would otherwise be permitted in a B-3 zoning district when referring to intensity. He stated there was not impact on Public Services and they met all of the requirements. He indicated there were no wetland or woodland issues to address. Mr. Stoepker believed the project was compatible with the intent of the Master Planning as interpreted at the time of rezoning. He stated this project is a feasible use of the property.


Rod Arroyo, Planning and Traffic Consultant stated that he could not recommend approval until the issues in his December 8, 2000 review letter were resolved. He referred to the parking in the front yard with the display of the vehicles stating that they would need ZBA variance for this. He felt that it was positive aspect that the dealership had most of the product behind the building and it would look different from the other dealerships. He indicated the deficiency from the side yard setback on the north side in terms of parking setbacks. He stated the plan did not meet the requirement of a ten (10) foot setback. He stated it is an existing drive going through and they are trying to taking advantage of parking from that drive. He stated there was a landscape buffer requirement that would be addressed by Ms. Lemke. Mr. Arroyo added a ZBA variance for the overhead door facing a major thoroughfare would be needed. He stated the issue arose with the Infinity dealership directly north. He stated Infinity did a special design of the overhead doors to incorporate it so that it appeared to be part of the façade. Mr. Arroyo commented that the doors are attractive and recessed, reducing the impact and visual nature. He did not feel that it would detract from the façade. Regarding the noise, Mr. Arroyo restated the applicant’s indication that they could meet the noise standards of the city. He felt the other issues could be incorporated. Mr. Arroyo mentioned that the Master Plan identified this corner as an entry corridor for the city with high visibility and believed the applicant was receptive to incorporating this. He noted the monument sign proposed at the corner. Mr. Arroyo asked that there be consideration for the adding of a Novi entry logo into the signage to identify the area as an entry corridor. He felt people would identify the Jaguar building as the entrance into the City of Novi.


In regard to traffic, he stated the site was unique. He questioned if the commission had ever seen a car dealer come before them with no new curb cuts proposed to any public roadway? He stated the use is coming before the commission using two (2) existing driveways. There would be not new driveways added to the road system for this project. He stated there were minor issues regarding radi and striping to be addressed at the Final. Mr. Arroyo recommended approval of the Preliminary Site Plan.


Victoria Weber, Engineering Consultant recommended approval in the review letter dated December 12, 2000. She stated water and sanitary/sewer is available to service the site. She stated drainage from the site would be directed to and detained in an existing detention basin located to the west. A sedimentation basin is proposed adjacent to the basin for the purpose of water quality. She stated there were a number of items in the letter that could be addressed at Final.


Linda Lemke, Landscape Architect stated the landscape could be described as a modern or abstract treatment. She referred to her letter dated December 5, 2000. She did not recommend approval due to the ZBA variances. However she did recommend the variances. She stated typically Novi landscaping is naturalistic scheme with berms and a variety of different types of plant materials. She explained the principles of design were with simplicity, repetition of pattern and key elements such as the cars sitting on the corner and on top of the building. She felt the intent of the ordinance was met. She stated they meet the required number of trees along both right-of-way areas and would be furnish them along ten mile and along the back of the building to the north. She stated the parking area is screened by the building and by evergreen hedges. The four (4) foot of greenspace has been provided around the building. She stated the requirement is sixty (60) percent of the façade to be plant materials. She stated they have concentrated the materials to go along with the design toward the front of the building. She commented that the model showed brightly colored plant materials such as perennials, but it did not show it on the landscape plan. She stated this was a condition of her recommendation. The applicant does not meet the side yard setback on the northern property line. However, she stated they are providing with adjacent property owners a planting area that is big enough to support the trees. She commented that although the design was different and abstract she felt that the location was a unique corner location and it fit well with the area. She stated there were a number of comments that she would be looking to have addressed at Final.


Chris Fox of JCK stated the main material proposed is burnished block with a small percentage of split face block. He stated because they are using units three (3) times larger than the standard block size. He explained they would be using four (4) inch bands of split face to divide the wall up so keep it from looking sheer. He stated the overall design and visible portion of the building were the serpentine and the curved entries and display area. He stated their biggest concern was that it would look like "block". He stated the idea was to make it look like stone. He felt the larger blocks would portray this with the other aspects of the building. Mr. Fox recommended a Section Nine Facade Waiver.



Karen Brown, 24482 Old Orchard Street, felt there was too much traffic and noise there now, and all the dealership would do would be to bring more of it. She felt there was too much commercial building in Novi now. She stated this was trapping residents in a corner. She felt the dealership would create more traffic and be an eyesore to the looked of Ten Mile.


Joyce Trombley, objects due to the existing congestion in that area. She stated bare land is at a premium. She stated she has lived here long enough to know that the site requested is for medical professional office and was a specialty medical use. She states that the all you would come across from Farmington would be more dealerships. She stated it was too much commercial too much congestion. She felt there was not enough imagination. She would like Novi to look more like open fields and good looking landscaping.


Chairperson Capello announced he 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 .


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


Seeing no one he closed the Public Hearing and turned the Matter over to the Commission for Discussion.




Member Nagy asked Mr. Fox regarding the façade. She stated she understood that the intent was to make it look like a big, large, brick size. Looking at the photograph, she stated she was having a difficult time envisioning the material when comparing it to the model presented. She asked what other material could be utilized to achieve the look?


Mr. Fox stated if the applicant was to use a true stone panel, the only way to eliminate the joint patterns, would be to make it out of very large pieces. He stated the design of the building does not lend itself to that. He stated that instead of curves, there would be jagged corners around the curves. He stated the panel in the photograph is eighteen (18) feet tall. He stated the two (2) thin lines are four (4) feet apiece.


Member Nagy clarified that every time she saw a line on the side of the building toward her, would be where the burnished block would be going across?


Mr. Fox stated it was a little less than eight (8) feet, He stated they were only sixteen (16) inches tall. Therefore, it would be about every three (3) feet.


Member Nagy asked if this type of material was economical?


Mr. Fox answered yes, but the look would not be significantly different with a stone piece. The size would have to be relatively the same. The average stone panel, on a flat wall, would be three (3) by four (4) feet. That would be approximately the size of one of the pieces presented.


Member Nagy asked if he could recall what the material is that was used for the Infinity Dealership and the Mercedes Benz?


Mr. Fox answered that he was not involved with the Infinity Dealership, that was before he was involved with facades. However, he recalled the Mercedes Benz using the efface/stucco material to create the stone look. He stated the weight requirements around the circular areas work better with the EIFS Materials verses heavy stone panels. He stated the tight curves could not be made with panels of the presented site, for construction purposes and weight considerations.

Member Churella stated the material was available in multiple colors. He stated in a previous case, they were presented with the materials, and when the project was erected, it looked like a prison. He stated the material did not seem to blend out. He felt the building was sharp. He stated there was material on the market, that had a plastic into it. He explained it was better than efface and columns could be made out of it. Member Churella asked the applicant if they were intending to use the brown color instead of the beige?

Mr. Stoepker stated the matrix in the casting of the product would need to be changed. He stated if one was looking for something with more tan…

Member Churella stated he was not telling him how to design the building. He stated he was only commenting that the model was very sharp.

Member Nagy asked what the intended color would be?

Mr. Stoepker answered that they intended for it to be warmer and a little more toward the tan.

Member Nagy clarified that this would change the look.

Mr. Stoepker passed along a better representation of the color they intend to use when they cast the product.

Member Churella asked if the front of the building would be this color too?

Mr. Stoepker answered yes. He stated they were using the synthetic plastic in limited areas on the fascia would be colored to match the color in photograph of the model.

Member Churella commented that he thought it looked good.

Member Canup stated he did not agree with the stark look of the building along Haggerty Road. He felt that it looked like a big, twenty (20) foot flat wall. He realized that they have paid attention to scalloping it and felt that the applicant had done what they could. He stated the model is beautiful. Member Canup suggested taking the trees from the back of the project and placed them in the front. He felt they should put something in there to break things up.

Mr. Stoepker: (inaudible)

Member Canup felt they should place some of the trees to break up the starkness of the wall. He stated if they chose not to, they might have a difficult time getting this approved.

Member Cassis agreed with Member Canup. He asked the applicant if they owned the entire site, including the medical building, correct?

Mr. Stoepker answered correct.

Member Cassis felt there was a massive efface up to the front was to save the building in the back. He stated this building could go behind the showroom easily. Member Cassis stated if the building in the back was demolished, they could have the adequate parking.

Mr. Stoepker stated when he originally met with the members of the planning department, city manager and director of community development. He stated in those discussions, there were limitations on what portions of the overall site the city would consider rezoning. He stated there was a ribbon of real estate that stretched along Haggerty that the city agreed was compatible with the adjacent uses. He stated the other restriction of only being allowed to rezone a limited length of frontage of approximately four hundred (400) feet. He stated it was a restriction that was recommended by your planning consultant and planning department. He suggested the thinking being that the commercial across the street on the south side of Ten Mile was a commercial use that was compatible with Jaguar up to a four hundred (400) foot limitation. Therefore, this piece of property would have a small segment returning along Ten Mile. He stated it is a larger piece overall, but they have been restricted to the limitations of the depth that could be approved to B-3 zoning.

Member Cassis asked if they foresaw what would be brought before the commission?

Mr. Dellicolli stated the model was present with the preliminary site plan when they presented their intentions for rezoning purposes. He stated they were asked to take the model out. He stated a preliminary site plan was submitted for rezoning and the Planning Commission reviewed it. He explained that the plans that they have brought back were the same. He stated if they were to set the building back further would result in a typical dealership design forcing the inventory in front of the store. He stated the intent was to avoid this and create a softer appearance with it. He stated if there was a concern regarding the appearance or the implementation of certain landscaping amenities… (tape ends). He did not feel it was just a perception. He stated if everything was pushed back there would be no inventory on the site or the inventory would be forced to the front. He clarified that they are submitting the same concept that was submitted at rezoning.

Member Churella asked if the applicant was indicating that the wall was not straight and that there were curvatures in the wall?

Member Nagy disagreed with Member Churella. She stated the only time this would look good would be at night lit up. She asked what the poles were representing?

Mr. Dellicolli answered it was the lighting.

Member Nagy asked if the trees were regular trees?

Ms. Lemke stated they were canopy deciduous trees.

Member Nagy stated there will be no green on the trees therefore, in the fall, spring and winter the site would look more stark. She felt the only way you would see the depth and the wave would be with the lights. She did not think it would be visible otherwise.

Mr. Dellicolli disagreed with Member Nagy. He stated the waves would be visible when the sunlight cast on the building. He stated he had a photo.

Member Nagy stated that it was difficult to conceptualize the presented material. She did not agree with the Jaguar sitting up on top of the round area.

Member Mutch stated that he did not support the rezoning on the property. However, he felt the applicant was entirely correct that the Planning Commission and the City Council restricted the scope of the rezoning. He stated they did not want the entire ten (10) acre site zoned B-3 and did not want the entire site used for a commercial use. He felt the applicant was working within the confines that were created for them. He felt the design in comparison to a traditional dealership, was a superior presentation. He felt the applicant had done a great job hiding the parking. He agreed it was a gateway into Novi. He felt with the sunlight, the pronounced curves would be visible. He recognized the efforts they have made to create a backdrop. He did not find this situation any different from the Mercedes dealership at Haggerty Road and Grand River Avenue. He agreed with the design and he was in support of where they were going with the façade.



Moved by Churella, seconded by Richards, CARRIED (6-2): To grant a Section Nine Facade Waiver consistent with the consultant’s letter subject to later on this evening granting Special Land Use and Preliminary Site Plan Approval.







Yes: Canup, Capello, Churella, Mutch, Piccinini, Richards

No: Cassis, Nagy,



Chairperson Capello asked the commission if they wanted to vote on the Special Land Use separately or combine it with Site Plan.



Moved by Churella, seconded by Richards, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To grant Special Land Use to Jaguar SP 00-49




Yes: Canup, Capello, Cassis, Churella, Mutch, Nagy, Piccinini, Richards

No: None




Member Canup stated he did not have any problem with the structure or the waves in it, however he felt they needed to address the wall along Haggerty Road. He stated that they have done a nice job. Member Canup suggested the planting of Evergreen trees to keep it green year round. He felt this would pacify several members on the board.





Moved by Canup, seconded by Nagy, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To grant Preliminary Site Plan Approval to Jaguar SP 00-49 subject to the consultant’s conditions and recommendations, subject to the ZBA variances.




Ms. Lemke commented that the building becomes the landscape element as it goes across in conjunction with the plaza. She understood the concern of having something to look at in the winter. She suggested changing the plant materials. She stated it was two (2) evergreens in conjunction with the hedge. She stated the building area and the plaza area as concentration and part of the landscape becoming an architectural landscape. She pointed out the three (3) deciduous trees and the five (5). She suggested having additional plantings where the color flower areas are to give winter interest. Ms. Lemke felt that more interest could be provided in this area.

Member Piccinini stated on sheet L-1, the deciduous trees are not concentrated in the back. She clarified if Ms. Lemke was proposing to put the evergreen trees in the front and place the same number in the back?


Ms. Lemke stated that she was proposing to change the deciduous. She stated there were approximately five (5) on the northern end of the building as it faces Haggerty Road. She stated she did not want the one (1) on the corner to be evergreen, because it would block the visibility.


Mr. Stoepker stated that he was concerned with the corner that was the image of the facility. He stated if the indicated trees were tall evergreens, it would hide the element of the building. He made suggestions for the area service oriented area in the back. He stated they could bring the evergreens around the corner and further enhance the screening of the service area. He felt this would allow the focal point of the architecture to be visible from the corner.


Member Nagy commented on Mr. Stoepker’s suggestion. Although she agreed with the idea of evergreen trees, she requested that they not be Austrian Pine or White Pine. She thought they could also achieve the look with taking up the branches and possibly "intermingle" the trees with the pine trees. She understood they wanted to keep the vehicles in the front corner because it is a major focus.


Mr. Stoepker agreed that this was a major focal point. He stated the whole point of the architecture was to create the doorway element into the community.


Member Nagy agreed with the idea that they did not want to add too much for the design concept and the modern design of the landscaping. She asked what type of vegetation they were proposing to add the window area?


Mr. Dellicolli stated they were proposing to add more detail to it. Currently it showed one plant material. He stated they are proposing to introduce additional plantings to create more interest. He added that in addition to the plan the Planning Commission has seen, they would add additional colorful, annual or perennial flower, around the entrance plaza.


Member Nagy questioned if they were maybe suggesting too many evergreens in front of the window?


Mr. Dellicolli answered no. He stated they simply wanted the greenery to remain low. He stated they were looking to have the visual penetration into the showroom.


Member Canup stated through all of the discussion, he has not seen anything that would break up the starkness along Haggerty Road.


Ms. Lemke felt the building would be the landscape element in this site. She stated it did not require any plant material. She felt the trees would detract from the design element.


Member Mutch asked that the motion include that the applicant work with Ms. Lemke to design an entryway concept for the city gateway. He was unaware of what the specifically should be placed there, but he suggested that Ms. Lemke work with the applicant to include this. He stated the north side yard setback does not meet the standard for the parking, because normally they have the parking going into the side yard setback and that they are to maintain ten (10) feet. He referred to Ms. Lemke’s comments stating that this was an access issue and that they needed access onto Haggerty Road. He did not agree with this. Member Mutch stated that he did not find reasoning to intrude into the setback area other than their need to place the parking that they did not want to else where on the site.


Ms. Lemke stated it was a dual issue. She stated that it was related to parking and access.


Member Mutch stated that he felt it was an access drive and they would be encouraging people to back in and out of the access drive. He did not feel this was a safe. He stated it did not make sense from a landscaping point to get rid of the setback area. He felt they had additional property that they were not developing at this time where they could place the parking.


Mr. Stoepker stated the reason for selecting that area was because the only alternative to meet the requirements would be to place it on Ten Mile. He added that the parking faces the suburban inventory lot, immediately on the other side. He stated they have five (5) feet there. He stated the intent was to hide the majority of the parking. He commented that since they only faced a parking lot, it would allow for sufficient land between the two (2) businesses. Mr. Stoepker expressed his desire to eliminate the potential parking on Ten Mile.


Member Mutch asked when they expand, would this result in less parking along Ten Mile? He stated when the expansion was done, there would be less parking on Ten Mile due to this choice. Member Mutch hoped that in the future, he would not see both. He said that they would need to go before the ZBA.


Chairperson Capello agreed with Member Canup regarding the side of the building. He made reference to the starkness of the Best Buy. He asked what the green and white stripes were consisting of?


Mr. Dellicolli answered they were grass pavers.


Chairperson Capello clarified if these paver blocks would be facing them along the sidewalk?


Mr. Metz stated it was a partial retaining wall along the edge. He stated although it appeared to be tall it was only twelve (12) inches high. He explained that it did not take a lot to create a visual attraction.


Chairperson Capello referred to the parking on Ten Mile Road. He questioned why the employee parking could not be moved to another location to allow for more greenspace?


Mr. Metz pointed out the inventory area.


Chairperson Capello asked if Mr. Arroyo if some could be given up and the requirements still be met?


Mr. Metz continued that there was a limited employee-parking amount in the western area, because the intention is to keep the employees out of the customer area.


Chairperson Capello stated he was having Mr. Arroyo check to see if they could give up some spaces to allow for more greenspace.


Mr. Arroyo stated they were right at the parking requirements.




Moved by Canup, seconded by Nagy, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To grant Preliminary Site Plan Approval to Jaguar SP 00-49 subject to the consultant’s conditions and recommendations, subject to the ZBA variances and the conditions that the applicant work with Linda Lemke to design and entryway concept for the City Gateway.




Yes: Canup, Capello, Cassis, Churella, Mutch, Nagy, Piccinini, Richards

No: None





This bank project is located in Section 17, on Grand River Avenue and west of Beck Road. The 1.02 acre site is zoned General Business District (B-2). The applicant is seeking Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Section Nine Facade Waiver.


Michael Boggio architect of the Standard Federal Bank stated they had restudied the site and made adjustments from the last presentation. He recalled one (1) of the concerns of the commission was a by pass lane. He stated they have widened the rear driveway providing two (2) lanes of stack-up plus a by pass lane around the entire building and drive-up facility. He indicated their study of the driveway, in terms of the bank flow and stack up, attempting to design the drive-up facilities on the left hand side of the drive avoiding stack up on the Grand River Avenue frontage. He stated they decide to not change the configuration. The parking on the opposite side of driveway No. 5, entering the site, would not have a pass to avoid conflicting traffic movements with the east and west side. He restated there now exists a by pass around the entire building.


Mr. Arroyo recommended approval. He stated the added additional storage would improve circulation.


Ms. Weber stated the comments from an engineering perspective remain the same as those in the October 16, 2000 letter. She stated there was one (1) minor comment and she recommended approval.


Ms. Lemke continued to recommend approval. She commented that the landscaping had not been approved for West Market Square. She stated they are continuing to hold the money for it. She added both the applicant and their landscaper are aware of this. She added changes could be seen in the spring.




Member Mutch asked if the applicant was open to reduce the number of parking spaces? He suggested the removal of spaces specifically from the southerly entrance. He did not think it would be wise to have customers backing in and out next to the entrance at the southeast corner.


Mr. Boggio responded that they have eliminated a couple of the spaces and have also increased the green belt area.


Member Mutch stated he would like to see a sidewalk connection between the sidewalk of Standard Federal and the property next to it. He suggested some short sidewalk connections across the green belt area. He anticipated an increase pedestrian traffic with the Circuit Court and nearby businesses walking to the bank and the restaurant. He requested to have this incorporated in the motion made.




Moved by Canup, seconded by Cassis, CARRIED (8-1): To grant Preliminary Site Plan Approval and the Section Nine Facade Waiver subject to the working out of sidewalks and parking spaces as discussed.



Member Churella did not support the motion. He felt the commission was attempting to "fine tune" their specialist’s review.

Chairperson Capello commented that he did not like the entranceway directly off of Beck Road and to the right. He compared it to the Standard Federal branch on Six Mile and Haggerty Road. He felt they should come in and travel around as it is designed at the Six Mile and Haggerty Road location.


Yes: Canup, Capello, Cassis, Koneda, Mutch, Nagy, Piccinini, Richards

No: Churella


















Moved by Koneda, seconded by Canup, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To adjourn the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission at 10:40 p.m.




Yes: Canup, Capello, Cassis, Churella, Koneda, Mutch, Nagy, Piccinini, Richards

No: None




Sarah Marchioni - Planning Assistant


Transcribed by: Christine Otsuji

January 31, 2001


Date Approved: February 7, 2001