View Agenda for this meeting
View Action Summary for this meeting

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2001 -- 7:30 P.M.

Proceedings had and testimony taken  in the matters of ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS at  City of Novi, 45175 West Ten Mile Road, Novi, Michigan, on Monday, November 5, 2001.

Laverne Reinke, chairman
Jerald Bauer
Frank Brennan
Brian Fannon
Sarah Gray
Cynthia Gronachan
Siddharth Sanghvi

Don Saven, building department
Thomas Schultz, city attorney
Sarah Marchioni, building department

Cheryl L. James, Certified Shorthand Reporter



1 MR. CHAIRMAN: At this time I would

2 like to call the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to

3 order.

4 Madam Secretary, will you call the

5 roll, please.

6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?

7 MEMBER BAUER: Present.

8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?

11 MEMBER FANNON: Yes -- here.

12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gray?

13 MEMBER GRAY: Present.

14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


16 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


18 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


20 MR. CHAIRMAN: The Zoning Board of

21 Appeals is a board empowered by the City charter to

22 hear appeals seeking a variance to the application

23 to the Novi zoning ordinance.

24 It takes a vote of at least four




1 members to approve a variance request, and a vote

2 of the majority of members present to deny a

3 variance. The Board consists of six members, and

4 we have a full board, so all decisions will be

5 final.

6 Rules of conduct that the Board

7 follows is that each person desiring to address the

8 Board shall state his or her name and address.

9 Individual persons will be allowed

10 five minutes to address the Board. An extension of

11 time may be granted at the discretion of the

12 Chairperson.

13 There shall be no questioning by the

14 audience of the person addressing the Board;

15 however, the Board members may question that person

16 with recognition of the Chairperson.

17 No person shall be allowed to address

18 the Board more than once unless permission is

19 granted by the Chairperson.

20 And one spokesman for a group

21 attending shall be allowed ten minutes to address

22 the Board.

23 The agenda before us tonight, is

24 there any additions or corrections?




1 MS. MARCHIONI: Number six is

2 postponed to December.

3 MR. CHAIRMAN: That's number six?


5 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. And the other

6 changes I wish to propose is that after we deal

7 with case number one -- we have two cases that

8 should be dealt with on a relatively short period,

9 so I want to go from case one to case five to case

10 seven and back to case two.

11 Any other comments about the proposed

12 agenda change?

13 MR. SAVEN: Mr. Chairman, if I may,

14 there was a letter presented to the Board from a

15 Ron and Cheryl Schomick (ph), and basically it

16 deals with one of the cases that was before you, I

17 believe on June 5th, and there was a question in

18 regards to the square footage, and the Board denied

19 the particular issue. I'd like to have discussion

20 with this, either under other matters or, if

21 possible, to bring this before the Board at your

22 discretion.

23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Why don't we put that

24 under other matters?




1 MR. SAVEN: Mr. Chairman, I do

2 believe they are here tonight; is that correct?

3 If it's your wish-

4 MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing)

5 Mr. Brennan?

6 MEMBER BRENNAN: I suggested that the

7 neighbors show up and voice their concerns via

8 public remarks because this issue is not on the

9 agenda.

10 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Why don't we

11 cover the whole issue under public remarks section

12 so we have it out of the way at that point, if

13 that's okay with the Board members.

14 With the changes that we have

15 addressed, are there any addition or corrections to

16 the agenda that we have proposed?

17 MEMBER FANNON: Move to approve.


19 MR. CHAIRMAN: All those in favor of

20 approving the modified agenda please signify by

21 saying aye.

22 (Vote taken.)

23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. The first item

24 we have is approval of minutes from the




1 September 18th and October 2nd meeting. Are there

2 any additions or corrections to the minutes?

3 MEMBER BAUER: Move to approve.


5 MR. CHAIRMAN: It's been moved to

6 approve the September 18th and October 2nd minutes.

7 All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

8 (Vote taken.)

9 MR. CHAIRMAN: All those opposed?

10 (Vote taken.)

11 MR. CHAIRMAN: Carried.

12 Mr. Saven, why don't you go ahead,

13 and then if the -- if there's anyone in the

14 audience wants to add comments-

15 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) I think

16 what we should do, Mr. Chairman, is let Ron and

17 Cheryl speak at this time.

18 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. If they would

19 come forward, please.

20 MR. PAPP: My name is Larry Papp. I

21 live at 46000 White Pine Drive (ph), a neighbor of

22 Cheryl's. I'd like to -- about ten minutes of your

23 time, if that's okay with you, Mr. Chairman.

24 MR. CHAIRMAN: I hope you can make it




1 briefer than ten.

2 MR. PAPP: Okay. I'll just -- okay.

3 The first plan that was submitted was for a five

4 car garage which was -- first let's -- can I take a

5 look at the property first we're talking about.

6 This is the site before construction

7 started. See the tree line there, and then the

8 nice row of trees there. The first plan that was

9 submitted to you was this one, which was a house --

10 about forty-five hundred square foot house with a

11 three-car garage and two-car garage, and it was

12 going to intrude into the woodlands that you see

13 over here.

14 We requested that it be changed and

15 thought -- not thought. We discussed it with the

16 woodlands committee. A revised plan come in, and

17 you can see that the house is moved back about

18 fifteen feet. You have a three-car garage, you

19 have a one-car garage, but it's the same footprint

20 of the original plan.

21 In our City Council meetings we had

22 called someone up and asked about the master plan.

23 The master plan that was submitted by the developer

24 was a three thousand square foot house that would




1 fit on this lot without going into the woodlands.

2 There were six other lots in the

3 subdivision that could have been used for this

4 house, but the owner -- or the people that bought

5 the property decided to build here.

6 Construction has already started. We

7 -- and what -- one of the letters that came across

8 that they were supposed to be careful with the

9 woodlands and not do any damage to the side or

10 anything, and hand dig if possible.

11 And you see that the tree line that's

12 here now looks like this. You notice that they

13 pretty much cleaned out the woodlands. They were

14 supposed to remove two trees. All the underbrush

15 is gone, the fence is down; however, the fence is

16 back up as of today at five o'clock.

17 He was supposed to hand dig an area.

18 First of all, we'll take a look at the house.

19 You'll see a three-car garage. You see one door

20 here, so you really got a five-car garage with four

21 doors.

22 He's going to construct a wall in

23 here and call it living space, but it's still on

24 about nine hundred sixty-eight square foot of




1 aggregate concrete. This footprint was approved at

2 seven fifty. This board denied twelve hundred

3 fifty square feet.

4 And this is how the house looks up

5 front, very close to the woodlands.

6 We're kind of upset the way the whole

7 thing went. This is a map of the woodlands. It's

8 on the City web site. The area we're talking about

9 is right here, 3.14 acres of woodlands.

10 Had he gone with the setback of

11 fifteen feet away from the woodlands, then this

12 woodlands would have been preserved and there would

13 been no trees taken down at all building a three

14 thousand square foot house that was originally in

15 the master plan.

16 I'll let Cheryl talk.

17 MS. SCHOMICK: Cheryl Schomick,

18 46035 White Pines Drive. I live directly adjacent

19 to that property, and in June I was here to speak

20 with you and was very concerned about construction

21 of that house because when I bought the lot that I

22 currently am on and paid a lot premium for it, I

23 was told by the City that that woodlands would be

24 preserved.




1 What you addressed that night at the

2 June 5th meeting, of course, wasn't the same in

3 that one and the same real big problem was that

4 two-car garage -- that extra two-car garage. If

5 that had been removed like it had been denied the

6 night of the meeting, that house could have been

7 moved over and that house would not have encroached

8 into the woodlands and would not have been

9 destroyed.

10 And I believe we told you way back

11 when we bought that lot we had a different lot

12 picked out in the same subdivision that -- and the

13 house that we built would have encroached into the

14 woodlands by two feet, would not necessitate

15 cutting down any trees, would not encroach on

16 anybody else's property, but the Zoning Board

17 denied that and told my builder at that time that

18 the house was too big for the lot and we would

19 either have to pick a different lot or build a

20 different house, which we did, we did do. We

21 understood the ZBA's decision.

22 At that time I called the city

23 forester, and he assured me that that was protected

24 woodlands and it would not come down.




1 Now, my letter to you this week --

2 that you got this week states that, indeed, we

3 thought you did your job. As a matter of fact, of

4 all of the things that have happened with this

5 case, I believe the Zoning Board was the only one

6 who did do its job. I don't think the woodlands

7 committee did their job. The City Council was very

8 dysfunctional and was inappropriate in this

9 situation.

10 Our questions, and the questions that

11 I would pose to you in this is, how were they

12 allowed to build that after the Zoning Board had

13 denied them that aggregate floor space; how were

14 they allowed to build that after the woodlands --

15 Terry Marone (ph) and Sarah can tell you, because

16 we've had several conversations -- said he would

17 not give them a building permit until they

18 submitted the appropriate plan, the plan that the

19 woodlands committee had approved, and, therefore,

20 the City Council had approved.

21 He called me the day -- Sarah called

22 me the day the basement was being dug. And

23 Mr. Papp and I had been to the City Hall that

24 morning, because the day before when I talked to




1 Sarah she said they do not have a permit. That

2 morning I came -- they were digging the basement.

3 Mr. Papp and I came up to City Hall

4 and said do they have a permit. They said yes,

5 indeed, they do. So we said well, how did they get

6 a permit, Mr. Marone told me just yesterday he

7 would not give them a permit unless they submitted

8 the appropriate permit, the one that had been

9 approved by the woodlands committee and the

10 City Council.

11 So I went home that day and we found

12 out yes, indeed, they had a permit. How they got

13 that permit, I don't know.

14 Sarah called me and said I'm just

15 calling you back to tell you Mr. Marone said no, he

16 will not give them a permit, not until they submit

17 the right plan. They have submitted no other plan

18 and he said he will not approve that plan. And I

19 said Sarah, they're digging the basement right now,

20 we were just there, they have a permit, where did

21 they get the permit.

22 You can -- I hope you can understand

23 our position on this. How did they get a permit to

24 build the aggregate floor space that you denied




1 them?

2 How did they get a permit to build a

3 house that's over three thousand square foot that

4 the master plan for that lot had.

5 How did they get a permit to build --

6 the floor plan or the plan that they're building,

7 which is not the one the woodlands committee and

8 the City Council approved them of.

9 And I hope you can appreciate why

10 we're upset about this. You can see the

11 destruction to my property is immense. It's -- and

12 things were said at City Council meeting that they

13 don't want to deny these people from building their

14 dream home. Certainly, I didn't want anybody from

15 building their dream home, but they have destroyed

16 my dream home. They've destroyed the property

17 around my home, and I don't have answers to how

18 they got all this, how they got away with it.

19 How does this happen?

20 MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

21 MS. SCHOMICK: Thank you.

22 MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else

23 that wants to speak to this issue right here?

24 (No response.)




1 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Saven?

2 MR. SAVEN: Thank you, sir. There's

3 two issues that's brought before us today. One was

4 the issue dealing with the woodlands permit, and

5 certainly an issue that the City Council acting on

6 an appeal process I believe from the woodlands

7 issue, but what was before you was an issue

8 regarding the garage, the garage itself, the size

9 of the garage, the five-car garage which was shown

10 on the initial plan which was denied by you. And

11 this was denied by you.

12 What they had done in their plan is

13 they converted a portion of the second garage, or

14 the smaller garage to the rear, they took that

15 particular portion of the garage as indicated, I

16 believe, that -- poured in concrete, what have you.

17 There's a wall that's going to go in that

18 particular area, and that section of the house is

19 going to become a habitable area of the house.

20 It's designed as a studio section floor of that

21 particular home. It's not a garage; therefore,

22 it's calculated in the square footage of the

23 house.

24 We also have a similar ordinance




1 in -- that's part of the City which we deal with

2 how similar it is, square footage associated with

3 the homes around the area, and this met that

4 specific requirement.

5 So I guess I'm a little at a loss as

6 to where we go from this particular point. This

7 matter was referred to our city attorney, who did

8 the calc -- or reviewed the calculations that we

9 had done through the building department to verify

10 the condition for that approval.

11 MR. CHAIRMAN: Don, in the summation

12 that you put together here, is that -- a copy of

13 that been given to them?

14 MR. SAVEN: I am not sure. I took

15 the square footage, which was part of the-

16 MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) I think

17 probably in the documentation they do have -- I

18 would like you to have -- we haven't had a chance

19 to go through all of this, and really, as far as

20 the Zoning Board, if the petition put there, and

21 the square footage of the garage area, which I

22 think they're allowed, what, a thousand square

23 foot, if the square footage is under a thousand

24 square feet, our hands are tied. We can't really




1 do anything because they've met the ordinance.

2 The only place I know that you could

3 possibly go is back to the City Council, because

4 there really isn't anything this Board can do for

5 you.

6 MS. SCHOMICK: Question.

7 MR. CHAIRMAN: Please.

8 MS. SCHOMICK: The City ordinance --

9 and I addressed this the night that I was here in

10 June, only because I wasn't aware of it, it was on

11 the agenda, and I have it with me from that night,

12 the City ordinance raised that for an RA or an R1

13 district, 750 square feet are allowed for a garage.

14 I asked the question that night, and

15 I believe it was Mr. Saven said let me address

16 that. Never really gave me an answer of why the

17 ordinance reads seven fifty but they're allowed a

18 thousand. But it became a mute point, I thought,

19 because you denied them the excess garage, so I

20 didn't pursue it at that time.

21 But the City ordinance now, as far as

22 I know, still, since June, reads seven hundred

23 fifty square feet. It does not say a thousand.

24 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Saven?




1 MR. SAVEN: Basically, the ordinance

2 indicates that you have a basic of 750 square foot,

3 sum total of all accessory buildings on the

4 property. There is an allowance of 1,000 square

5 foot. Another 250 additional square footage can be

6 used for the parking of motor vehicles,

7 recreational vehicles or anything else that you can

8 have within your property. There is sum total of a

9 thousand in an RA/R1 district, and in R1 -- or,

10 excuse me, R4, 3 and 2 there's a maximum of 750

11 square foot -- excuse me, 850 square foot.

12 MR. SCHULTZ: Just for the benefit of

13 Miss Schomick, that is an issue that we were

14 directly requested to prepare a written legal

15 opinion on, and I think it would be possible, if

16 she wants, to request, it exists a little more

17 detail on what Mr. Saven just described in terms of

18 how the ordinance reads and how it's been afforded.

19 MR. CHAIRMAN: I don't know what more

20 I can say. I'd like to be able to do more to help

21 you, but there really isn't anything more this

22 Board can do other than to say that your next step

23 is to take it to the City Council, the information

24 you've got, because the only thing we could do is




1 we turned the variance request down.

2 MS. SCHOMICK: You did.

3 MR. CHAIRMAN: And now it's back to

4 the ordinances as they are, and any direction or

5 questions you have, or comments, would really have

6 to be directed to City Council.


8 MR. BRENNAN: Mr. Chairman?


10 MEMBER BRENNAN: Just one last

11 comment, because I feel bad for you, but just to

12 correct your letter, we did deny them and they

13 built it according to our denial. What they did

14 was they've added that half a garage as livable

15 square feet. They've increased the size of their

16 home, their living space.

17 Now, I went in there last night to

18 see if that was a false wall, to see if there was

19 something potentially planned for the future. It

20 appears -- I'm not a builder, but it appears that

21 that is a permanent wall. It appears that they

22 have extra bracing on ceiling, on the studio wall

23 side, so it appears that they plan on doing what

24 their plan says.




1 It's unfortunate that they ended up

2 with the same square footage that they came before

3 this Board. They just -- their use is different.


5 MR. CHAIRMAN: You got an additional

6 comment, Mr. Saven?

7 MR. SAVEN: Yes. What I wanted to

8 indicate is that in your packet is the opinion from

9 the city attorney.

10 MS. SCHOMICK: Of the thousand square

11 feet allowance instead of seven fifty?

12 MR. SAVEN: That's correct.

13 MS. SCHOMICK: Okay, and that's just

14 the City attorney's interpretation of that, or is

15 that legal interpretation?

16 MR. SAVEN: That is legal.

17 MS. SCHOMICK: So what the City

18 ordinance reads, just like many of our other City

19 ordinances, is disregarded?

20 MR. SCHULTZ: It's an interpretation

21 of the language as it's written. I mean, it is-

22 MS. SCHOMICK: (Interposing) Excuse

23 me for interrupting, but it says total aggregate

24 floor space of all accessory buildings on a lot,




1 750 square feet in an RA or R1 district.

2 MR. SCHULTZ: Just for additional

3 allowable space for parking and storage, there may

4 be up to 250 square feet of space associated with

5 said garage, either physically intergrated with it

6 or in a separate building.

7 So if you have any questions, feel

8 free to call and we can talk about it.

9 MS. SCHOMICK: I appreciate your time

10 and your efforts, and I still believe that the ZBA,

11 in a letter, I informed you that I thought you did

12 the appropriate thing. I'm just not sure about all

13 the loopholes and what it's cost the property value

14 of my property.

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much.


17 CASE NUMBER 01-067

18 MR. CHAIRMAN: Next item on our

19 agenda is case 01-067 filed by Wayne Miller

20 representing Fountain Walk.

21 MEMBER GRAY: Are there any other

22 public remarks?

23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Applicant is

24 requesting a variance to allow light pole mounted




1 non-advertising graphic banners.

2 MR. MILLER: Good evening. Do we

3 have to be sworn tonight or not?

4 MR. CHAIRMAN: Were you sworn -- this

5 is really a continuation.

6 MR. MILLER: Yes, it is.

7 MR. CHAIRMAN: Go ahead.

8 MR. MILLER: Okay. When we were last

9 with you in September, the issue regarding light

10 pole mounted banners for Fountain Walk had been

11 tabled and you had asked us to go back and take

12 another look at the quantity of banners that we're

13 going to be utilizing around the site to see if we

14 could reduce that amount.

15 In working with the owner on the

16 project, and looking at the overall design aspects

17 of the project, we have undertaken to reduce the

18 quantity of banners by approximately forty

19 percent.

20 The banners that we have taken out

21 are the areas that we have outlined in the black

22 dots, dotted outlines. They're predominantly

23 around the theater and then five other locations in

24 front of building C, where we term it building G




1 and building H and Great Indoors.

2 The reduction in banners is, by no

3 means, a reduction in light poles. We still have

4 the light poles. We just removed the banners

5 themselves.

6 The banner that we're looking at is

7 this particular banner. It's on a concrete light

8 pole approximately eighteen feet tall with a

9 luminara on the top.

10 The banners are approximately thirty

11 inches wide and six feet in height and they're

12 mounted on the pole such that they are

13 perpendicular to the buildings so that from the

14 parking lots or from the streets you don't actually

15 see the banners unless you are driving parallel

16 with the building or walking down the sidewalk.

17 In essence, we have removed -- we

18 have forty of those light poles that had banners.

19 We have removed seventeen, giving us a total of

20 twenty-three.

21 As I said, in working with the owner

22 and trying to determine how many and where we could

23 delete, that is about the total that we've come up

24 with.




1 MR. CHAIRMAN: Anything else?

2 MR. MILLER: That's it.

3 MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone in the

4 audience who would like to input into this case?

5 (No response.)

6 MR. CHAIRMAN: There were nineteen

7 notices sent, we have zero approvals, zero

8 objections.

9 Building department?

10 MR. SAVEN: Mr. Chairman, just as a

11 reminder, this is basically part of the sign

12 ordinance, and in the sign ordinance we had an

13 interpretation from our attorney regarding signage

14 that was located on the interior courtyard, which

15 is not visible from the street, which-

16 MR. MILLER: (Interposing) That

17 would be this area, and this area and this area-

18 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) Up to 25

19 feet.

20 MR. MILLER: Up to 25 feet from the

21 ends of the building.

22 Basically, what we're looking for is

23 the allowance to employ banners around the

24 perimeter of the side buildings, and through here.




1 We have reduced that number, as I said, by 17.

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: If that's correct,

3 then all the interior banners will not have to

4 require a variance?

5 MR. SAVEN: No. It's because it's

6 mentioned that banners are prohibited as part of

7 the ordinance, but it didn't address this -- that

8 as far as signage, other than it being banner is

9 prohibited, so I'm just telling you if we can't see

10 the signs from a point of 25 foot from inside we're

11 not considering them a sign. They're not governed

12 as a sign ordinance in terms of making your

13 decision regarding the issue regarding banners.

14 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Brennan?

15 MEMBER BRENNAN: Maybe just a 30

16 second recap from the last time these guys were

17 here.

18 There was some view on the Board that

19 we didn't like banners at all; however, it was my

20 opinion that this is a unique development, that

21 council, or any other Board within the city, didn't

22 want to deal with this and left it in our hands, so

23 we have to deal with it.

24 When they left last week I encouraged




1 them to look real hard at cutting down the

2 numbers. The numbers seemed very great. I think

3 that they've taken a great step in nearly cutting

4 it in half, and I think that's a movement on their

5 part towards an acceptable plan.

6 I was just concerned to get the

7 numbers down. It just seemed too many. They did

8 what I wanted.

9 MEMBER BAUER: Mr. Chairman?

10 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bauer.

11 MR. BAUER: So far they have not

12 shown where it is a hardship or a practical

13 difficulty. I still say that I don't care for the

14 signs, the banners on the light poles, that are

15 shown in the brown around the project.

16 MR. CHAIRMAN: Other Board members,

17 comments or discussion?

18 Miss Gray?

19 MEMBER GRAY: Mr. Chairman, I

20 appreciate the fact that they've made an effort to

21 reduce, almost by half, the number of banners while

22 leaving the poles up to continue the lighting, and

23 that then begs the question with me then, if

24 they're willing to remove part of the banners, I




1 really think that if the poles can be bare on part

2 of the project, then they certainly can be bare on

3 the perimeter.

4 I don't necessarily have a problem

5 with the banners on the interior, but I just think

6 with all the other signs on this property and all

7 the other -- the directional signs, the big signs

8 up at the front, it's just going to look way, way

9 too cluttered, plus the fact that these buildings

10 are also going to have signs on them, and it's just

11 going to be too much visual, and I would like to

12 see all the poles of this type with the light pole

13 on it, I'd like to see them all without banners

14 because we do have an ordinance.

15 Thank you, sir.

16 MR. CHAIRMAN: Other Board members,

17 comments or discussion?

18 Mr. Sanghvi?

19 MEMBER SANGHVI: Well, I have

20 personally no problem with the banners. It looks

21 festive and everything. My job here is not to

22 direct the ordinances but to interpret the current

23 ordinance in the light of other circumstances and

24 everything like that, and none of those exist, so




1 even though I like the idea, unfortunately my

2 decision we should go against the ordinance and

3 allow them to have the banners.

4 MR. CHAIRMAN: I -- the exterior

5 banners, I really see no functional reason or

6 rationale to have them there. And as we pointed

7 out, I don't see any hardship for a deviation from

8 the existing ordinance as it stands. Nothing has

9 been shown to me that warrants a change from what

10 is in our current ordinance.

11 Now, if the ordinance is changed to

12 accommodate that, that's a different story, but I

13 really don't see a hardship.

14 Board members, further comments or

15 discussion?

16 Mr. Fannon?

17 MEMBER FANNON: Sarah, what was it

18 that you were trying to -- is it all these blue

19 ones that you're -- do you have -- do you have your

20 color -- I wasn't here at the last meeting. The

21 interior one would be blue and green. I wasn't

22 here at the last meeting, so I apologize. Were

23 they part of this 40 total?





1 MR. MILLER: No, they are not.

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: They took out the

3 exterior ones that they have.

4 MR. MILLER: The banner types one,

5 which are blue, and the banner types three, which

6 are green, were not part of that forty count.

7 Banner type two, which is the orange-ish color on

8 the site plan, there were forty of those that had

9 banners on them. We've reduced that by seventeen.

10 MEMBER FANNON: So the forty orange

11 ones, and if you count those ones that are in the

12 black dotted lines, there's seventeen of them?

13 MR. MILLER: That's correct.

14 MEMBER FANNON: And that's how you

15 get to 23?

16 MR. MILLER: That's correct.

17 MEMBER FANNON: So -- I apologize for

18 not being here at the last meeting-

19 MR. MILLER: (Interposing) September

20 18th.

21 MEMBER FANNON: Was that a meeting

22 that was changed?

23 MR. MILLER: Yes, unfortunately.

24 MEMBER FANNON: Do you mind




1 (inaudible) in about two minutes?

2 MR. MILLER: The hardship for the

3 banners?


5 MR. MILLER: Well, in essence, and I

6 must admit, it really isn't a hardship per se.

7 What we were looking for was another way by which

8 we could make the overall theme of the project work

9 better, and in utilizing banners in a decorative

10 non-advertising motif seemed to us, and the owner,

11 to be a way of achieving that. The overall theme

12 of the project and the scale of the buildings, if

13 you've been there and visited the site, seem that

14 it was conducive to be able to utilize those light

15 poles which are, I would guess, somewhere around a

16 hundred twenty-five feet apart, to make use of

17 those and put seasonal banners up, something that

18 would -- and I hate to use the term advertise --

19 but I'll say illustrate -- the seasons; Christmas,

20 Thanksgiving, fall, spring, summer, something that

21 would contribute color, something that would

22 contribute an overall and festive flair to the

23 project.

24 MEMBER FANNON: So what we're seeing




1 here tonight in this blue and yellow on the signs

2 that's your banner example isn't the banners that

3 you're proposing to have up year-round?

4 MR. MILLER: For -- no. For an

5 initial offering, to give you an idea of something

6 in a banner that would be more graphic or colorful

7 but not advertising.

8 MEMBER FANNON: I understand. I just

9 didn't know that there was-

10 MR. MILLER: (Interposing) And

11 certainly not promoting U of M. We chose that.

12 MEMBER FANNON: I just didn't know.

13 I didn't see where you were going to-

14 MR. MILLER: (Interposing) Certainly

15 not --

16 MR. CHAIRMAN: These are banners that

17 are going to be up year-round?

18 MR. MILLER: But they will be changed

19 as the season change.

20 MEMBER FANNON: (Inaudible) Of what

21 they look like, so I just -- I'm just trying --

22 I'm sorry. I'm just trying to -- and that's all I

23 really need to know.

24 MR. MILLER: For instance, in the




1 fall, let's say this month-

2 MEMBER FANNON: (Interposing) I've

3 seen them. You don't have to -- I can get it. I

4 got it.

5 I would agree with Sarah's initial

6 comments; though, seems like I think I counted up

7 -- there must be over twenty poles now with banners

8 that aren't even being considered in the count,

9 right?

10 MR. CHAIRMAN: Board members, further

11 comments or discussion?

12 MR. SCHULTZ: Mr. Chair, just to make

13 sure that we're all on the same page with the

14 terminology here, I heard the term hardship a

15 couple of times, and I just want to make sure that

16 we're not using the use variance hardship test as a

17 non-use variance that you're going to address under

18 the practical difficulty standard when you make

19 your motion.

20 MR. CHAIRMAN: I think we're -- the

21 only reason the hardship came up is that I think

22 they felt that neither was demonstrated-

23 MR. SCHULTZ: (Interposing) I think

24 that's --




1 MR. CHAIRMAN: -I think, in the

2 discussion.

3 MR. SCHULTZ: Sure.

4 MR. CHAIRMAN: Board members, further

5 comments or discussion?

6 (No discussion.)

7 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, the

8 Chair would entertain a motion in case number

9 01-067.

10 MEMBER BAUER: I -- I'll make a

11 motion in case 01-067 that the requested variance

12 be denied due to insufficient hardship or practical

13 difficulty.

14 MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a motion on

15 the floor. Is there a second on the motion?


17 MR. CHAIRMAN: Been moved and

18 seconded that the applicant's request for banners

19 be denied.

20 Is there any discussion on the

21 motion?

22 MR. MILLER: Question on the motion.

23 Just so that I'm-

24 MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) One




1 moment, please.

2 MR. MILLER: Okay.

3 MR. CHAIRMAN: This is the Board's

4 point right now for discussion. I want to clarify

5 that.

6 Board members-

7 MR. SCHULTZ: (Interposing) Just a

8 comment. The sense that I got is that there's just

9 too many? Fill out the motion a little bit.

10 Is that the determination, is that

11 these are mostly detective as opposed to required

12 for purpose of the business so that no hardship --

13 practical difficulty is -- is the appropriate test

14 here. There's no reason for the inclusion of these

15 banners that's been presented to the Board.

16 I'm just trying to fill out the

17 motion here with some facts.

18 MEMBER BAUER: Fine. We can add that

19 onto it if you wish, please.

20 MR. CHAIRMAN: Board members, further

21 comments or discussion on the motion?

22 (No discussion.)

23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none,

24 Madam Secretary, will you call the roll, please.




1 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


3 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


13 MR. CHAIRMAN: Sir, your variance

14 request has been denied.

15 MR. MILLER: Now may I ask a question

16 on the motion?


18 MR. MILLER: Was the motion all

19 inclusive on all the banners or just the ones that

20 we have requested around the perimeter of the

21 project?

22 MEMBER BAUER: Just the perimeter.

23 MR. MILLER: I want to make sure. So

24 within the pedestrian concourse and that east/west




1 drive-through that we have identified as

2 Orchard Avenue, we are still allowed to place them

3 there?

4 MR. CHAIRMAN: If it is within

5 ordinance, because we have given no variance for

6 banners.

7 MEMBER BAUER: There's none needed

8 because the attorney-

9 MR. MILLER: (Interposing) That's

10 for the sign.

11 MEMBER FANNON: So is what he saying,

12 the way it is-

13 MR. SCHULTZ: (Interposing) I

14 believe that the opinion that was given related to

15 signage only. The banners are a separate issue and

16 they're not permitted under the ordinance,

17 internally or externally.

18 Don, if you-

19 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) That's the

20 reason why I brought it up right from the very

21 beginning. One of the issues was, as indicated in

22 a previous interpretation from the City attorney,

23 was the fact we could not see a sign on the

24 interior; therefore, it's not a sign. You can't




1 see it from the road or a thoroughfare. That's why

2 the question came up with banners being inside.

3 Are you going to treat them the same way as a sign

4 on a exterior street?

5 MEMBER BAUER: These are the only

6 ones that were on the record to vote on for us, the

7 outside ones.

8 MEMBER SANGHVI: Are you clear?

9 MEMBER FANNON: I don't want to act

10 confused.

11 MR. SAVEN: I am confused.

12 MR. MILLER: Yes.

13 MR. SAVEN: I'm sorry.

14 MEMBER FANNON: I don't want to act

15 confused. You see, the ones that are -- that --

16 earlier on that you weren't dealing with, the blue

17 ones and the green ones, I was under the impression

18 those could go up if you couldn't see them or -- in

19 other words, that they were going to put them up.

20 MEMBER BAUER: We are not voting on

21 them.

22 MEMBER FANNON: It may have affected

23 the way I voted if they don't get anything, so

24 that's all I'm saying. It may have affected the




1 way I voted. I'm still confused.

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. My-

3 MEMBER FANNON: (Interposing) And

4 maybe --

5 MR. CHAIRMAN: My interpretation of

6 what we did is that we allowed no deviation from

7 the ordinance for banners.

8 MEMBER FANNON: Okay. And so if

9 somehow, for another-

10 MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing)

11 Whatever they're allowed by ordinance they can

12 have.

13 MEMBER FANNON: So if they can do

14 that, if they interpret it that they can't see it,

15 we have nothing to do with that?

16 MR. CHAIRMAN: We have nothing to do

17 with that other than in ordinance.

18 MR. SAVEN: Banners are prohibited by

19 ordinance. They are not allowed.

20 MR. MILLER: That's correct.

21 MR. SAVEN: Whether you can see them

22 or not, that's how the ordinance is, prohibited.

23 And it says prohibited signs. It says the sign I

24 requested is interpreted going onto section B2,




1 banners, spinners and streamers are prohibited.

2 That's why you can-

3 MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) But let

4 me ask you, Mr. Fannon, in reference to

5 discussion. If hearing that interpretation by

6 Mr. Saven, does that give you a different direction

7 and misunderstanding of what you voted.

8 MEMBER FANNON: No. I would just let

9 the petitioner know that, given the event that it

10 did come on the interior, I would most likely

11 support it, but I wouldn't change the vote on the

12 exterior. That's how I would -- I agree with

13 Sarah. I don't want to put words in her mouth, so

14 I'd like to send them out. I'm just one person, so

15 if they came back I probably would look at that

16 favorably, but I don't have any problems with the

17 way I voted on the ordinance tonight.

18 MR. CHAIRMAN: All right. That's

19 where we stand. Moving on.

20 MR. MILLER: Okay.








1 CASE NUMBER 01-086

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: The next case that

3 we're going to call is case number 01-086 filed by

4 Delaney-

5 MS. PROVENCHER: Delaney Provencher.

6 MR. CHAIRMAN: Representing the

7 homeowner at 112 Rexton.


9 MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you please give

10 your name and address and be sworn in by the

11 secretary.

12 MS. PROVENCHER: Delaney Provencher,

13 12333 Timbers Road, Carleton, Michigan.

14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

15 affirm that the testimony that you are about to

16 give in the matter before you is the truth?



19 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Would you

20 please present your case.

21 MS. PROVENCHER: I apologize that I'm

22 not as high tech as everybody else. You're just

23 going to have to deal with me as I am.

24 We are requesting -- I gave everyone




1 sets of plans of what we are requesting, as well as

2 the set of plans of the existing home.

3 In 1986 I believe it was, there was a

4 second-story addition put on this home, and the --

5 it's in sort of a salt box, you know, salt box

6 configuration.

7 Mr. and Mrs. Zanotti (ph) need more

8 space so that Mrs. Zanotti's mother can come and

9 live with them because she's around eighty-four,

10 and they are a little nervous of her being on her

11 own at this stage, not that she's of any danger to

12 anybody, but they would like to be able to take

13 care of her.

14 In order to do this, we have proposed

15 to put two rooms over the existing living room,

16 taking the roof off of the front of the house,

17 putting the two rooms up, adding the wall and

18 putting on a new roof.

19 The home at present is around

20 fourteen hundred square feet. What we're proposing

21 to add is another three hundred and thirty square

22 feet, allowing the total living space to be

23 seventeen hundred square feet. This would give a

24 more comfortable living space for the entire family




1 as well with the added -- the additional person.

2 It would not affect the basic

3 footprint of the home, but the problem is that the

4 home presently sits within three feet of the

5 sideline and it does not meet the thirty foot

6 requirement from the front of the house to the

7 street.

8 Although it wasn't the initial reason

9 for the requirement of the removal of the roof,

10 we've discovered, in addition -- Mr. and

11 Mrs. Zanotti have gone up into their attic and

12 found that there is some stress that's being

13 created because of the extended span on the roof

14 that we're proposing to take off, so we would have

15 a two-fold answer to a problem here. We could

16 eliminate the stress on the front part of the roof

17 and we could allow Mr. and Mrs. Zanotti to have

18 their additional space so Mrs. Zanotti's mother

19 could move in.

20 And, in addition to that, while it is

21 not, again, one of the reasons for the expansion,

22 it would greatly improve and enhance the property

23 for the entire area. There's a lot of really nice

24 homes that are coming into there, and none of the




1 neighbors, to our knowledge -- as a matter of fact,

2 Mrs. Zanotti brought in -- she wasn't aware of the

3 fact that you're supposed to mail them in. She

4 brought in an approval as well.

5 So we're hoping that you will permit

6 us this variance seeing as we are not going to

7 expand on the initial footprint and allow the

8 variance that we are requesting.

9 Mrs. Zanotti's here if you have any

10 other questions regarding the necessity.

11 MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else

12 in the audience that would like to input into this

13 case.

14 (No response.)

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: There were thirty-six

16 notices sent out. We have two responses, both

17 approval.

18 Building department?

19 MR. SAVEN: Bless you on the extended

20 family. I know what you're going through. As was

21 mentioned, this is an expansion of an existing

22 footprint of the building. That's what it's doing.

23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Board members,

24 comments or discussion?




1 Miss Gray?

2 MEMBER GRAY: I have no problem with

3 it. I'm familiar with the house, and this is going

4 to be an enhancement for their use. It's a win/win

5 situation. It's another one of the -- they're

6 fortunate enough to have two lots which gives them

7 a total of eighty feet. Again, this is north area,

8 small lots, and I think it's going to be very

9 beneficial to everybody involved.

10 MR. CHAIRMAN: I echo the comment,

11 because the thing is basically they're not

12 enlarging the footprint where they're going closer

13 to what is there in existence already, and I really

14 don't see a problem with what they're proposing.

15 Other Board members, comments or

16 discussion?

17 (No response.)

18 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, the

19 Chair would entertain a motion in case number

20 01-086.

21 MEMBER SANGHVI: Mr. Chairman, I move

22 that case number 01-086 be approved, the

23 applicant's request for the variance, because of

24 the hardships, and also the smaller likes of the




1 size of the lot.


3 MR. CHAIRMAN: Been moved and

4 seconded to grant the variance as requested. Is

5 there any further discussion on the motion?

6 (No discussion.)

7 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none,

8 Madam Secretary, would you call the roll, please.

9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


17 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


19 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


21 MR. CHAIRMAN: Your variance request

22 has been approved. See the building department for

23 necessary permits and we wish you lots of luck.

24 MS. PROVENCHER: Thank you,




1 Mr. Chairman. Can I request that you waive the

2 five-day waiting period? At this time we've been

3 waiting for this permit since August.

4 MR. CHAIRMAN: Can you handle that?

5 MR. SAVEN: I think so.

6 MS. PROVENCHER: It would be very

7 kind. I have to say that the building department

8 has been wonderful.

9 MR. CHAIRMAN: We will include that.

10 MS. PROVENCHER: We're hoping to get

11 them in by Christmas.


13 CASE NUMBER 01-088

14 MR. CHAIRMAN: Next case, 01-088,

15 filed by Anthony McGrath representing the

16 homeowners at 12 -- 1256 East Lake Drive.

17 Sir, would you give your name and

18 address to the secretary and be sworn in, please.

19 MR. McGRATH: My name is

20 Tony McGrath. I'm from 28578 North Havenwood (ph)

21 in White Lake.

22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Raise your right

23 hand, please. Do you swear or affirm that the

24 testimony that you're about to give in this matter




1 before you is the truth?

2 MR. McGRATH: Yes, I do.


4 MR. McGRATH: I represent

5 Mr. A. J. Harris who is the owner of

6 1256 East Lake Drive in Novi. 1256 has direct

7 frontage on Walled Lake. It is one of only twelve

8 to fifteen houses that do.

9 Mr. Harris is doing a total

10 renovation of the exterior of his home and about an

11 eighty percent interior renovation. Again, there

12 is no footprint extension whatsoever.

13 My variance request concerns a deck

14 that was existing. It will be rebuilt because it's

15 in such terrible shape, but Mr. Harris wishes to

16 put a sunroom on that deck. Again, it's no

17 extension at all. It's not a big box type

18 project.

19 This home has been in this family for

20 fifty years, and Mr. Harris will continue to occupy

21 this house although he is an out-of-town owner.

22 He's from Washington, D.C.

23 I base my hardship on two facts. I

24 was actually granted a building permit to do this




1 entire project on the 13th of September; however,

2 when the inspector came out on the 14th of

3 September he said that he missed the sunroom and I

4 should go get a variance because I was too close to

5 the lake. So this isn't a rear lot variance so

6 much as a lake front variance. And, secondly,

7 every house, with the exception of one that I can

8 discern that is a lake front home in this area,

9 doesn't meet the rear yard setback. Some are as

10 close as ten and twelve feet to the water.

11 Mr. Harris would be twenty-seven feet after the

12 construction of this site.

13 I don't believe I have any opposition

14 from any of the neighbors, and we don't block any

15 sight lines with this. Walled Lake angles at that

16 location. The houses are staggered and there's

17 absolutely no blockage, as far as I can discern.

18 That's it.

19 MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there

20 anyone in the audience who would like to input into

21 this case?

22 (No response.)

23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, we had

24 -- twenty-nine notices were sent out, nine were




1 sent back, and we received one approval.

2 Building department?

3 MR. SAVEN: Question. On the

4 existing deck, what was the problem on the existing

5 deck? You indicated that there was a poor shape.

6 MR. McGRATH: The spanning was too

7 large, it was two-by-sixes on thirty inch centers.

8 MR. SAVEN: What do you propose to

9 do to beef up that particular design for that?

10 MR. McGRATH: It's a complete rebuild

11 as per the print.

12 MR. SAVEN: That's what I wanted to

13 see.

14 MR. McGRATH: And the deck was

15 actually built before the inspector ever came out.

16 We did have a permit.

17 MR. CHAIRMAN: Building department,

18 further comments?

19 MR. SAVEN: No.

20 MR. CHAIRMAN: Board members?

21 Mr. Brennan?

22 MEMBER BRENNAN: We've had other

23 cases like this, and the issues have always been

24 sight lines and whether a building going up is




1 going to impact a neighbor. I think if we had

2 problems, pending problems, we'd have neighbors

3 here. We have no objections through the mail.

4 Given we're still working on the same

5 envelope that's already existing, that's going up,

6 I would tend to support the petitioner.

7 MR. CHAIRMAN: I echo Mr. Brennan's

8 comments, because if there's anything that brings

9 an uproar is block somebody's sight of the lake and

10 they'll be here. It's a problem with the size of

11 the lots out there, and trying to do anything

12 without causing a problem for somebody else, and so

13 I think you've done well to work with what you've

14 done and I really don't have a problem with it.

15 Board members, further comments or

16 discussion?

17 (No further discussion.)

18 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, the

19 Chair would entertain a motion in case number

20 01-088.

21 MEMBER BRENNAN: I'll make that

22 motion. With respect to case 01-088, I would move

23 for approval due to lot configuration.





1 MR. CHAIRMAN: It's been moved and

2 seconded to grant the variance that the petitioner

3 has requested due to lot variance. Any further

4 discussion on the motion?

5 (No further discussion.)

6 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none,

7 Madam Secretary, would you call the roll, please.

8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


16 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


18 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


20 MR. CHAIRMAN: Do we have to waive

21 the five days -- you're not going to do that part-

22 MR. McGRATH: We're fine.

23 MR. CHAIRMAN: That's good. Thank

24 you.




1 MR. McGRATH: Thank you.


3 CASE NUMBER 00-091 & 00-101

4 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Now, to go back

5 to where -- case number 00-091 filed by

6 Collins Signs representing Home Depot and Kroger.

7 Mr. Galvin, how are you this evening?

8 MR. GALVIN: Fine, Mr. Reinke.

9 MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you please

10 present your case.

11 MR. GALVIN: Yes, sir. You have a

12 rendering in front of you of the sign which we are

13 requesting, which is an eight foot sign by twelve

14 foot sign to be built approximately where I am

15 pointing on the diagram of the shopping center.

16 This variance is sought for the

17 fundamental and basic reason that any sign variance

18 is sought, and that is that there are physical

19 difficulties with this particular site which

20 destroy the visibility of the allowable signage

21 under the ordinance.

22 I'm showing you a board that has on

23 it the front elevation of the Home Depot store, and

24 I'd like you to note a couple of things about that




1 store. The first thing is the expanse of the store

2 and the relative size of the Home Depot sign.

3 That Home Depot sign is located about

4 seven hundred and seventy-five feet from the center

5 line of Grand River Avenue. It is visible from,

6 but only visible from, Grand River Avenue when

7 proceeding in a westerly direction.

8 Now, in and of itself that, perhaps,

9 wouldn't be sufficient to induce you to find

10 practical difficulties to grant the additional

11 second sign that will be involved in putting

12 Home Depot together with Kroger, together with the

13 identification of the entire shopping center on the

14 monument sign at the front of the property;

15 however, I ask you to consider a couple of other

16 things.

17 The first is the physical constraints

18 in the development of this parcel; specifically,

19 there is a wetland area which is located where I'm

20 indicating on the site plan, and there is an area

21 which has been left for the new interchange to come

22 from I-96. What this does is it creates a

23 triangular-shaped parcel rather than a

24 rectangular-shaped parcel. This causes the




1 orientation of the buildings to be canvit (ph)

2 specifically to create the situation where

3 Home Depot is visible only westbound and Kroger is

4 visible only eastbound, another practical

5 difficulty.

6 The clincher is the design and the

7 color of the building. Now, you're all familiar

8 with Home Depot buildings throughout the southeast

9 Michigan area, and I want you to note the large

10 orange band that does not surround this building.

11 Earlier this evening you were talking

12 about banners and identification and the purposes

13 for a sign. The effect of the entire ordinance

14 structure on Home Depot and Kroger at this location

15 is to prevent them from being noticed by traffic on

16 Grand River Avenue except in one direction, and

17 there's nothing wrong with all of that, but put it

18 in the context, if you will, of the importance of

19 this shopping center to the city and the importance

20 of the visibility of these two particular uses,

21 Kroger and Home Depot, which are the anchor tenants

22 in this shopping center, which the City has, for a

23 long time, wished to locate in this region.

24 When you add it all up, I think that




1 for this particular sign which is admittedly each

2 of, Home Depot and for Kroger, a second, you have a

3 case of practical difficulties which create an

4 unnecessary hardship in getting that message to the

5 public traveling on Grand River Avenue. This is

6 because of the unique physical circumstances of

7 this property singular to this shopping center

8 within the city.

9 Were it not the case that the

10 interchange were there and the wetlands were there,

11 these buildings would be oriented in a way that

12 their signage would be visible to travelers in both

13 directions on Grand River.

14 For those reasons, I respectfully

15 request that the Zoning Board of Appeals allow a

16 dimensional variance to allow -- I guess it's not a

17 dimensional variance. I want to emphasize it

18 wasn't a use variance -- to allow the construction

19 of this sign with the two anchor tenants shown on

20 the monument sign.

21 MR. CHAIRMAN: Are you going to

22 address the second part now?

23 MR. GALVIN: Oh. I thought we were

24 doing one and not the other. Certainly, I'd be




1 happy to.

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: I think you better

3 address both of them.

4 MR. GALVIN: It's the next item on

5 your agenda. I thought they were separate, Lavern.

6 I'm sorry.

7 The other request is for this

8 Home Depot sign which will be located on this wall

9 here. You'll remember that this is the seasonal

10 sales area, so it's located on this wall facing the

11 I-96 expressway.

12 The scale of the two is different.

13 The two signs are identical in size. The letters

14 are both five feet, but the -- this particular

15 rendering, which is of the rear wall, shows the

16 sign to appear to be larger than the one on the

17 front of the building. That is not the case. The

18 purpose of this sign is to pick up the I-96

19 traffic.

20 As I have indicated, there is a

21 similar sign currently located on the Kroger

22 building by virtue of a variance granted by this

23 Board. There are similar situations along the I-96

24 freeway in both Novi and in Wixom, that is, where




1 Grand River businesses have signage, like the

2 Corrigan sign, for example, on I-96 to be visible

3 from the expressway.

4 Given the needs of travelers on the

5 expressway to know what is in the shopping center

6 and, again, for the same reasons, and -- I think

7 that the Board ought really consider the fact that

8 by virtue of the design standards which are

9 applicable in the City, you can't tell, as you can

10 from the expressway in other areas, what the use is

11 that's going on in that particular building.

12 For those reasons, and because it is

13 identical, the signs which have previously been

14 granted by this Board, we believe we have

15 established practical difficulties with respect to

16 this sign and respectfully request a variance for

17 it as well.

18 And I will answer any questions that

19 the Board members have.

20 MR. CHAIRMAN: We will have. Is

21 there anyone in the audience who wishes to have

22 input into this case?

23 (No response.)

24 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, building




1 department?

2 MR. SAVEN: In reference to the first

3 case that was presented, the issue regarding the

4 signage was one which we're talking about a

5 monument basically. A monument sign on a -- it

6 could be -- and it's construed as a business sign,

7 not a business center sign. Even though you have a

8 business center identification on this sign, you

9 also have two other business signs, and that's the

10 reason why he is here referencing those particular

11 issues.

12 The second request was looking at

13 signage on the rear of the building. This would

14 have been probably allowable in any other district

15 but the B1, B2 and B3 district; therefore, that is

16 why he is here today, because he's got it as a sign

17 that's fronting on another major thoroughfare.

18 MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. What I'd

19 like to do is I'd like to have a general discussion

20 on both signs, because I think we can probably look

21 at both of them.

22 I'm sorry. There were seven notices

23 sent, we have zero approvals or objections.

24 I think we need to look at both of




1 them as we're looking at the whole sign package

2 together. I don't want to take from one and then

3 not take the other one into consideration. I think

4 we need to look at the whole thing, so I think our

5 discussion needs to be addressed.

6 Mr. Saven, a question. Do you recall

7 or know what the square footage of the Kroger sign

8 is that was allowed?

9 MR. SAVEN: I'm not sure about the

10 Kroger one, but I believe the Home Depot was a

11 little over a hundred and fifty square foot, if I'm

12 not mistaken.

13 MS. CAPRON: Two hundred and eleven

14 square feet. You talking about the building?

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: No. I'm talking

16 about-

17 MR. GALVIN: (Interposing)

18 Mr. Chairman, if I may, I think we can help out.

19 That was Johnnie Capron, and she's talking about

20 the sign -- the Home Depot sign was two eleven, and

21 I have the minutes from the Kroger request here, so

22 I can get the dimensions for that from the Board.

23 If you can go on to another thing, I'll get you

24 that.




1 MR. SAVEN: Then I was mistaken,

2 Mr. Chairman. My apologies.

3 MEMBER BRENNAN: But they're already

4 on record as saying both the Home Depot signs that

5 they're proposing are the same size. I have a

6 couple of observations while -- I mean, that's-

7 MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) While

8 he's getting that up, go ahead.

9 MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, there's a

10 couple of holes in all of this, and one being, I

11 live out there. I go to that Home Depot often,

12 and -- and that -- the current sign on the building

13 is very, very readable. If you were to agree with

14 your assumption that there is no markings on that

15 building headed eastbound, then why would you want

16 to put the sign on the expressway side? Put it on

17 the south end of the building.

18 And that -- I'll finish first.

19 However, I have no objection with the sign on the

20 expressway side anyways, but I just thought it was

21 worthwhile taking that little stab.

22 As far as that entrance sign on

23 Grand River, I see no reason for it to be as large

24 as proposed, nor as tall as proposed. If you're on




1 Grand River you can see everything that's in that

2 development, including Kroger, including a lot of

3 the smaller shops going into the back, so I have no

4 support at all for the petitioner's request in the

5 first case on the ground -- or the monument sign.

6 That's my observations.

7 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Galvin?

8 MR. GALVIN: I have the elevation on

9 the Kroger, according to the print that was filed

10 to this Board was 150 (inaudible).

11 MR. CHAIRMAN: That's the one on the

12 expressway side?

13 MR. GALVIN: On the back elevation.

14 I have the others.

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: No, that's enough.

16 Board members, further comments or

17 discussion?

18 MEMBER BAUER: I was -- Mr. Chairman?

19 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bauer.

20 MEMBER BAUER: The height of the

21 monument sign, I think, can stay within the

22 ordinance. I drive that every day at least two or

23 three times. As far as the size, it can be lower,

24 much lower. As far as the sign on the back, on the




1 expressway side, it seems to me, and I don't have

2 the calculations, that that was a little larger

3 than the one on the front, but I'm not sure of

4 that, because it does look larger than --

5 Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry. One comment

6 to tack onto. Nobody does not know that that is a

7 Home Depot or a Kroger area, I don't think anyone

8 within miles of this city.

9 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Fannon?

10 MEMBER FANNON: Well, I ditto exactly

11 what Jerry just said on both signs. I have a

12 little question here. We have a six foot by fifty

13 foot sign in front of us that says -- it may be an

14 error -- three hundred three square feet, and I'm

15 trying to find out if that was the sign that was up

16 on the building.

17 MR. GALVIN: I'm not sure.

18 MEMBER FANNON: I'm looking at this.

19 It was given in our package. Six foot by fifty

20 something foot. Now, the variance is for a

21 five-by-forty-two, so I don't know which sign was

22 up on the building. It looks like-

23 MS. CAPRON: (Interposing) It's

24 about-




1 MR. GALVIN: (Interposing) Excuse

2 me, Johnnie. Would you come up here and maybe we

3 can answer the questions, but let's do it in an

4 orderly way for them.

5 Mr. Fannon, you wanted to know?

6 MEMBER FANNON: I'd just like to

7 know, like Jerry was saying, exactly the size of

8 the sign that's up on the building.

9 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mockup that's on the

10 building.

11 MEMBER FANNON: The mockup.

12 MR. GALVIN: On the side of the

13 building next to the -- it's a little over two

14 hundred square feet. It is five-by -- and I forgot

15 the square feet.

16 MS. CAPRON: Forty-two feet two

17 inches I believe it is.

18 MR. GALVIN: And I agree with you,

19 Mr. Fannon, that the piece of paper that you were

20 given said that it was six feet by fifty, and I

21 would suspect that you would find that this is a

22 larger sign than they have used in other locations.

23 The five-by-forty-two-and-a-half

24 number is that which was applied for, it's that




1 which was advertised, and it's that that we're

2 asking for.

3 MEMBER FANNON: That's the mockup

4 sign?

5 MR. GALVIN: That's the mockup that's

6 on the-

7 MS. CAPRON: (Interposing) I can

8 give you this --

9 MR. CHAIRMAN: That's fine.

10 MEMBER FANNON: I'm okay. I just

11 want to know the size of the sign that's up on the

12 building.

13 MS. CAPRON: I apologize.

14 MEMBER FANNON: Okay. So answering

15 Mr. Bauer's question, even though it may look

16 bigger, it isn't?

17 MR. GALVIN: That's right.

18 MEMBER FANNON: That's fine.

19 MR. GALVIN: If I may, Mr. Chairman,

20 just one comment.

21 MR. CHAIRMAN: Please.

22 MR. GALVIN: Thank you.

23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Make it short.

24 MR. GALVIN: Real short. The size of




1 the monument sign, if you want to bring it down in

2 height, I have no real difficulty with that. The

3 -- there was no attempt to go on the other --

4 facing of the -- of the building because we had a

5 sign for the Grand River frontage. We have no sign

6 for the I-96 frontage. That, as I believe Don

7 pointed out, we'd be entitled to in any other

8 district, and it is identical in size, as

9 Mr. Fannon has established, with that which we have

10 in the front. It is proportional to the building,

11 and we would like you to grant that variance as

12 well as perhaps a reduced size variance on the

13 monument size.

14 Thank you.

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. I paid

16 particular attention to the Home Depot wall sign,

17 and I think on the top of the hill from the

18 Expo Center I can just about pick it up from that

19 distance there with that. I think it's excessive

20 in size. I don't discount that there is a sign

21 needed there, but it doesn't need to be five foot

22 tall, you know, so I think that can be reduced.

23 The sign on Grand River I really

24 question because, you know, I think the area is




1 quite identifiable, and you can't drive ninety-five

2 miles an hour down Grand River anyway, and you got

3 a few stoplights there. But if a sign were to be

4 permitted, the maximum I could see would be no more

5 than fifty square feet and no more than five feet

6 in height.

7 Board members, further comments or

8 discussion?

9 Mr. Sanghvi?

10 MEMBER SANGHVI: As far as the ground

11 sign is concerned, it is going to be part mostly

12 just decorative. It's not going to identify the

13 business. They are already identified. We know

14 where Kroger is and we know where Home Depot is

15 before you come to the sign. They can't be within

16 the size of ordinance.

17 And the second sign I have no problem

18 with. It looks big because of the perception and

19 we are much closer to it than it is, and so I can

20 live with the second sign.

21 MR. CHAIRMAN: Board members, further

22 comments or discussion?

23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Mr. Chairman, I

24 concur in regards to the ground sign. I, too, feel




1 that it's overkill at this point and there's no

2 real need for the size. The area is well

3 identified.

4 I also echo Member Brennan's comment

5 about coming from the east and why not have it

6 properly identified coming down Grand River as

7 opposed to -- and I don't think this sign is going

8 to do it.

9 And I also -- so I can agree with --

10 I cannot support the ground sign, and I think that

11 the size of the Home Depot sign should be scaled

12 down somewhat.

13 Thank you.

14 MEMBER BAUER: Mr. Chairman?

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bauer.

16 MEMBER BAUER: May I ask the

17 petitioner's attorney one more question?

18 MR. CHAIRMAN: Sure, go ahead.

19 MR. BAUER: Joe, when are you going

20 to come back and ask for another sign at the corner

21 of Beck and Grand River where the big sign is now

22 for the building?

23 MR. GALVIN: Truthful answer is I

24 don't know, Jerry, because I haven't talked with




1 the shopping center owner. I don't know if they're

2 going to continue to pursue that thought. I do

3 know, for the members of Board who may not be aware

4 of it, that at one time it was suggested that there

5 be a sign there. So that is the truthful answer.

6 I do not know whether the owner will pursue that or

7 not.

8 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you.

9 MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

10 MR. GALVIN: They hire me one piece

11 of work at a time.

12 MR. CHAIRMAN: Board members, further

13 comments on the two cases in reference to the

14 signs?

15 (No further discussion.)

16 MR. CHAIRMAN: If we're done with

17 that, I want to deal with each sign individually,

18 but I want this discussion to cover both signs.

19 MEMBER FANNON: Mr. Chairman, just to

20 finish up, I agree that this monument sign can be

21 kept under ordinance, so I wouldn't vote for any

22 variance on that sign; however, I would vote for a

23 variance on the other sign as long as it's a little

24 smaller. It should be the same size. For some




1 reason, it does look larger and perception is

2 reality, in my opinion. I saw it the other night

3 coming down the expressway, and it's just a little

4 too large. That's how I would vote.

5 MR. CHAIRMAN: Let me clarify one

6 thing. You're still going to have the variance on

7 the monument sign because of the additional sign.

8 They were looking at doing three variances, one

9 additional sign, height, and the size of the sign.

10 MEMBER FANNON: I wouldn't support

11 any variance to the monument sign because I think

12 it's pretty evident that Kroger and Home Depot are

13 in there. When you finally get to the West Market

14 Square sign, you'll know Home Depot and Kroger are

15 there.

16 MR. CHAIRMAN: Now, let me clarify.

17 There is not a West Market sign there, so there's

18 no monument sign involved right now.

19 MEMBER FANNON: Right, but he could

20 put one up that says West Market Square.

21 MR. CHAIRMAN: Not without a

22 variance.

23 MR. SAVEN: Time out. We're talking

24 if they chose West Market Square on its own, that




1 height requirement goes away. The square footage

2 is still needed to do deal with the square footage

3 based on how far it was from the center line of the

4 road going back.

5 For the height requirement on a

6 business center sign, you're allowed to go fifteen

7 feet, okay, depending how far back it is set from

8 the center of the road, the square footage of that

9 sign. Only when you deal with businesses -- we got

10 four more businesses in there, but if you start

11 putting other signs on it then it becomes a

12 business sign, drops it down to the monument status

13 of five foot and you have to deal with that.

14 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Let me ask a

15 question. If we would approve this monument sign,

16 could they still, by ordinance, put a business

17 identification sign on the corner?

18 MR. SAVEN: That's what they're here

19 for. You're talking about putting an additional

20 business signs?

21 MR. CHAIRMAN: Right.

22 MR. SAVEN: Then you have more than

23 one sign on the premises. That's an issue. I

24 think he'd be back before us again.




1 MEMBER BAUER: That's what I thought.

2 That's what I asked him for.

3 MR. GALVIN: Only if someone hires

4 me.

5 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Any further

6 discussion on the aspects of the two signs?

7 Mr. Brennan?

8 MEMBER BRENNAN: One last thing, and

9 maybe Mr. Galvin can answer this while he's here.

10 I think that there's a good reason why we believe

11 that that end sign, Grand River and the expressway

12 sign, looks bigger. You're dealing with a face

13 that's one-fifth of the size of the other.

14 Is there -- and I'm prepared tonight

15 to make that a bit smaller than what is proposed.

16 You've got the guy behind you nodding his head.

17 Maybe you can get a number for him.

18 MR. GALVIN: I'm wondering how much

19 blood I have to shed.

20 MR. BRENNAN: First you have to pick

21 the mic up.

22 MR. GALVIN: Yes and yes. A four

23 foot sign which would eliminate that problem that

24 you've talked about. They do have one. Remember,




1 Mr. Fannon had a six feet sign. What we came in

2 for was a five foot sign. The bare minimum is a

3 four foot sign. And, yes, we're prepared to accept

4 four foot minimum.

5 MEMBER BRENNAN: Do you know what the

6 square footage is?

7 MR. GALVIN: I think it's 140 plus or

8 minus. I'll check.

9 MS. CAPRON: One thirty-five.

10 MR. GALVIN: Excuse me. One

11 thirty-five. I missed it by five square feet.

12 MEMBER GRAY: Four by what?

13 MR. GALVIN: Four divided into one

14 thirty-five would give you the other dimension.

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. All right. I

16 want to deal -- let me ask the question first. Are

17 the Board members done with the discussion on both

18 signs?

19 (No further discussion.)

20 MR. CHAIRMAN: All right. Now, I

21 want to go back and I want to deal with each sign

22 individually so we don't have confusion on the

23 point here.

24 So, first of all, we're looking at




1 091, which is the monument sign.

2 Mr. Brennan?

3 MEMBER BRENNAN: I'll make a motion

4 on the monument sign. At this point I would move

5 with respect to that case, 00-091, that the

6 petitioner's request be denied.


8 MR. CHAIRMAN: It's been moved and

9 seconded that the monument sign in the case 00-091

10 be denied. Is there any discussion on the motion?

11 MR. SCHULTZ: We've got Mr. Galvin

12 here who's made his presentation on the practical

13 difficulties. If I could just ask you,

14 Mr. Brennan, to elaborate on the thought process

15 here.

16 MEMBER BRENNAN: The petitioner did

17 not present a practical difficulty or any hardship.

18 MR. SCHULTZ: That the current signs

19 are visible and that the monument sign isn't needed

20 for identification?

21 MEMBER BRENNAN: So amended.

22 MR. SCHULTZ: Thank you.

23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Any further

24 discussion on the motion?




1 (No further discussion.)

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: Being none,

3 Madam Secretary, would you call the roll, please.

4 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


16 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Your monument

17 sign has been denied.

18 Next case is case 01 -- or 00-101,

19 which is for the wall sign on the expressway side,

20 which would be four foot in height. And what was

21 the square footage?

22 MR. GALVIN: One thirty-five,

23 Mr. Reinke.

24 MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.




1 MR. GALVIN: Yes, sir.

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Brennan?

3 MR. BRENNAN: That case, 00-101, I

4 move the petitioner's request for a square foot

5 sign of 135 square feet be approved for the purpose

6 of identification.


8 MR. CHAIRMAN: It has been moved and

9 seconded that we grant the variance for a four foot

10 high, a hundred and thirty-five square foot wall

11 sign facing the expressway. Is there any further

12 discussion on the motion?

13 (No further discussion.)

14 MR. CHAIRMAN: Madam Secretary, will

15 you call the roll, please.

16 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


18 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


20 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


22 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


24 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?





2 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


4 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Your wall sign

5 is approved.

6 MR. GALVIN: Thank you very much.

7 And I wanted the Chair to know that immediately

8 before this meeting I called my wife and said I'm

9 number two on the agenda so I think I'll be home

10 before 9:00, and then you moved it.

11 MEMBER BRENNAN: Mr. Galvin, I know

12 that you have to report back to your boss. Would

13 you ask him to give some consideration as to what

14 his plans are for that -- for the corner? You darn

15 well he's going to want something on the corner,

16 and finish up the sign package, because we've been

17 dealing with this in piecemeal, and if he's back

18 again down the future -- or in the future we may

19 not be as cooperative.

20 MR. GALVIN: Well-

21 MR. BRENNAN: (Interposing) I'd like

22 to get it done. We've had probably five or six

23 different cases on this parcel.

24 MR. GALVIN: I will -- I have heard




1 what you said, Mr. Brennan, and I would point out

2 that my children are out of college, so I'll urge

3 them to put it all in one last shot.


5 CASE NUMBER 01-063

6 MR. CHAIRMAN: Moving on, next case,

7 case 01-063, filed by Timothy Stoepker representing

8 Jaguar.

9 MR. SAVEN: Mr. Chairman, before you

10 get started, I would like to point out to the Board

11 that in case -- in sign cases C through F, there is

12 the same repetitive variance which is being

13 requested. Only -- basically, only one sign is

14 allowed per parcel, and we'll see this consistently

15 in the parcel variances that are coming before you

16 tonight.

17 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Thank you.

18 Let's take a short break.

19 (A short recess was taken.)

20 MR. CHAIRMAN: At this time I would

21 like to reconvene the meeting. Sir, if you would

22 be sworn in by our secretary and give your name and

23 address.

24 MR. STOEPKER: For the record, my




1 name is Timothy Stoepker with Dickinson, Wright

2 appearing on behalf of Jaguar of Novi. My address

3 is 500 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, Michigan --

4 500 Woodward Avenue, suite 4000, Detroit, Michigan.

5 MR. CHAIRMAN: I stand corrected.

6 You are an attorney, correct?

7 MR. STOEPKER: Yes, I am.

8 MR. CHAIRMAN: You don't need to be

9 sworn.

10 MR. STOEPKER: You never know.

11 MR. CHAIRMAN: Go ahead and make your

12 presentation.

13 MR. STOEPKER: Mr. Chairman and

14 members of the Board, Timothy Stoepker appearing on

15 behalf of Jaguar of Novi, and we are -- we are what

16 we think are in the last permitting phases of this

17 project as the building is being built at this

18 time, and I'd like to express my appreciation to

19 the Board. At the last hearing, which was the

20 public hearing that I attended, or public comment

21 portion, when you granted us the opportunity to

22 have the hearing heard at this time as opposed to

23 waiting for 100 percent completion of the building

24 based upon the timing of sign fabrication, and we




1 realize that was a deviation from your practice and

2 we appreciate that.

3 I'm going to deviate slightly from

4 what we submitted to you in the application form,

5 and based upon some changes that were made.

6 The first is there are nine signs as

7 opposed to ten on the site that are at issue, a

8 total of nine. Some are not subject to the number

9 of sign variances because of the number of signs

10 permitted. Some are directional signs, and we'll

11 go into that.

12 The second one, as you had gone

13 through the application materials, the application

14 itself, the Jaguar sign which is located on the

15 monument, or ground sign, which is the sign E

16 located on Haggerty Road was, at one time,

17 contemplated to be at the corner of Haggerty and

18 Ten Mile at a height of approximately twenty-five

19 feet, and that has been reduced to eight feet

20 six inches and is identical in size to the used car

21 or preowned sign -- ground sign which is located on

22 Ten Mile, which is figure F, and I'll show you the

23 exact signage of that. And you've seen it because

24 it is out there.




1 So the twenty-five foot ground sign

2 that was once proposed for the property shown in

3 the original site plan submittals has been

4 eliminated, and sign E now conforms to the same

5 type of sign as sign F, and they are both on the

6 site for your visibility.

7 Sign J, which was to be located on

8 Ten Mile Road on the west portion of the property,

9 was eliminated, as was an additional Jaguar sign

10 located between the service and the leaper on the

11 south elevation of the building, which was shown,

12 again, originally in the original applications to

13 you.

14 I'd like to deal with them in the

15 same order that the department commented or

16 prepared the agenda, and that is dealing with,

17 first of all, signs A -- we'll just go right

18 through the alphabet. I think maybe that's the

19 easiest way to approach this.

20 Sign A, under the terms of your

21 ordinance, is a permitted by right sign. It is the

22 -- it is a directional sign as opposed to a sign

23 that advertised product or name. It is simply

24 states service. And that is located in this




1 location here, and the particular application of

2 the use of that sign is demonstrated right here.

3 That's service. That's the rotunda at the end of

4 the building.

5 If you will recall from the original

6 site plan applications, the -- that area of the

7 building is inset and, in fact, is glassed to

8 appear as if it is a wall elevation as opposed to a

9 service drive. And for purposes of adequately

10 identifying to the customer who is going to bring

11 their car to the service entrance, we are asking

12 for a variance at that site. We're requesting

13 11.33 square feet. Two feet is permitted.

14 That -- the service area sign, as you

15 know, is recessed actually within the building

16 itself, the cavity of the building area, and

17 considering the distance from the Ten Mile Road

18 area and the site itself, we felt, based upon the

19 lettering and also examining the other service

20 signs at the Infinity store just down the street,

21 and proper visibility, we've tried to come up with

22 a sign that was commensurate with that that would

23 allow proper and adequate visibility.

24 So that sign is permitted by right.




1 It's not being asked for as an extra sign but

2 permitted by right. What we're sighting there is a

3 9.33 square feet variance. The total square foot

4 requested is 11.33 square feet.

5 Again, that building elevation looks

6 exactly like a wall. It does not look like a

7 garage door. We want to make sure that we

8 adequately identify for our customers what, in

9 fact, is the service area of the building.

10 The next sign is sign B, is the

11 Jaguar sign. That sign is, again, permitted under

12 the ordinance, and we're asking for a variance for

13 that.

14 That sign is located -- you can see

15 part of it here. The J-a-g is located at that

16 location, and if you -- that's on the Ten Mile

17 frontage, and if you go to Haggerty frontage you

18 see the U-a-r portion of that site. The sign is a

19 total of thirteen feet in length with

20 six-and-a-half feet on Haggerty and ten-and-a-half

21 feet on Ten Mile, and is to provide adequate

22 visibility hopefully to those people going

23 westbound on Ten Mile and then going south -- from

24 south to north on Haggerty Road as to the name of




1 -- the specific name of the store as that is the

2 portion that has the most visibility from those

3 areas.

4 There is no other sign on the south

5 elevation that identifies it is a Jaguar store at

6 that location, so it provides visibility for those

7 people going south to north.

8 As you know, obviously, based upon

9 the history, this is a two-frontage site, and we

10 want to make sure that we identify adequately our

11 product, what we sell, our name and our trademark,

12 both to people going south -- actually, four

13 directions here; north to south, south to north,

14 east to west, and west to east, and that

15 accomplishes that.

16 From a percentage standpoint,

17 I think it's important to note that we have

18 two hundred and fifty-five lineal feet of building

19 frontage on Haggerty Road. Based upon my

20 calculations, that's six-and-a-half feet. At best,

21 we consume five percent of the lineal frontage of

22 the building. It would link the six-and-a-half

23 feet.

24 The Haggerty -- I'm sorry. The




1 Ten Mile frontage is a hundred and five --

2 actually, I'm reversing myself. It's one percent

3 of the building frontage on Haggerty and five

4 percent of the building frontage on Ten Mile.

5 Ten Mile is a hundred and five feet

6 in length. Haggerty, the building is two hundred

7 and fifty-five feet, give or take on the

8 percentages.

9 Again, we think it's critical, both

10 particularly from the east to west and south to

11 north.

12 The other element that you see we can

13 deal with at this point is sign C, which we

14 actually think is an architectural element of the

15 building as opposed to a sign, but based upon the

16 sign ordinance, we are required to submit that as a

17 sign. It is the leaper. It is probably the most

18 identified trademark for a vehicle, probably in the

19 world, along with the -- which is critical -- an

20 absolute critical mark to Jaguar. It is a

21 requirement, a required element by Jaguar -- and

22 there's a representative from Jaguar here this

23 evening -- on the Jaguar dealerships that are being

24 constructed across the United States. It is one of




1 the most single important elements identifying who

2 we are and the history of Jaguar, and I think on

3 all vehicles that Jaguar sells there is a leaper,

4 except for on one vehicle. There's a leaper on

5 each vehicle, and it is a -- it is one of the most

6 recognized trademarks that exists.

7 Again, we are asking for that

8 because, again, it is an extra sign and is not

9 permitted as a matter of right. It is a critical

10 element and allows adequate visibility coming,

11 again, north to south and, again, east to west and

12 west to east. And we have a video presentation

13 that will demonstrate that. It is absolutely

14 critical from our standpoint from a trademark.

15 Giving example, the stores that are

16 being built, this is a new Jaguar store. You have

17 a leaper there. That kind of gives you the

18 perspective of the Troy store which was built much

19 earlier than the one at issue. You have your

20 leaper again on the sign that's there, much higher

21 sign, a pylon sign. That gives you an idea. It's

22 shown, even across the face of the building itself

23 there as well. It is a critical element.

24 This is another sign again, even




1 showing the leaper, so it is a very critical

2 element to Jaguar and was always identified in the

3 models and site plans that we submitted to the City

4 at the time the applications were submitted.

5 The other sign is -- sign D is the

6 Jaguar of Novi sign, which is on the east elevation

7 of the building. This is the one that's actually

8 drilled into the glass. And if my recollection is

9 correct, to give you a perspective of that sign,

10 that Jaguar of Novi sign is here, that is

11 twenty-nine feet in length. It takes approximately

12 eight percent of the lineal footage of the

13 building. This would be the rotunda, Jaguar, and

14 then this is the sandstone that goes down with no

15 signage.

16 The interesting aspect of this sign

17 is it really only has a east/west -- east to west

18 elevation because it is inset. If you go back to

19 the site plan of the store itself, or the floor

20 plan, you'll see this. This is the actual location

21 of the Jaguar of Novi sign with no visibility going

22 from north to south, or even from south to north.

23 The only visibility, again, is for the visibility

24 going from east to west at that location and




1 specifically states the name Jaguar of Novi.

2 Again, it is only eight percent of the lineal

3 distance of the building.

4 So if we take the Jaguar sign on the

5 rotunda, which is not even one percent, and it's at

6 eight percent, it's giving the benefit of the doubt

7 of two hundred and fifty-five feet. We're only

8 talking nine percent of the lineal distance of the

9 building in that area.

10 The next sign is sign E, and that is

11 the ground sign which you saw on the site. That is

12 the sign that identifies Jaguar, and this is it

13 right here. That sign is eight feet six inches in

14 height. A ground sign is permitted by right. The

15 maximum height under the ordinance, however, is

16 five feet.

17 What we did is we, again, went

18 through the area to determine compatibility with

19 existing and surrounding signage. There -- in

20 part, the video will identify that, but it's

21 certainly consistent in size to the Mercedes ground

22 sign that is located at the corner of Haggerty and

23 Grand River. Actually, may be less in height. And

24 I think they did require a variance for their




1 particular sign. The Infinity sign, which is two

2 dealerships to the immediate north on our same side

3 of the street identifies both the name and the logo

4 which you'll see in the video that we present. I

5 have also separate photographs of that.

6 Again, the Mercedes sign also

7 identifies name and logo as it relates to the

8 building. And I want to go back to that. On the

9 Mercedes store, for example, in relationship to the

10 leaper addressed here, you'll see they had -- they

11 actually have three wall signs and they have --

12 this is, I think, the Haggerty elevation, but that

13 is their separate logo. And if you look at the

14 Infinity store, they also identify themselves on

15 their building by -- even though they combined it,

16 the logo of theirs also goes above their -- the

17 logo and name kind of go together.

18 What we've done is we've separated

19 that. That's the Infinity logo, and the name is

20 immediately below that. And then, of course, this

21 is the Infinity ground sign at that location.

22 Again, we tried to be consistent with

23 that look and make sure that we were being

24 consistent in both the lettering and in size for




1 the purpose of making sure for adequate

2 identification.

3 The important point there is that is

4 the only sign, as you'll see, going southbound on

5 Haggerty that actually identifies the specific

6 store itself and the nature of the product, Jaguar.

7 That is the only one that you'll be able to see.

8 The next one, the next sign is the

9 Select Edition of Preowned Automobiles sign. That

10 is located in area F on Ten Mile. That sign is

11 reflected here, Select Edition Preowned.

12 Basically, the same concept itself. This sign has

13 a totally different emphasis.

14 In most cases you have -- in most

15 automobile dealerships you'll have a primary

16 building that sells new cars and you'll have a

17 separate building, as the Chrysler dealership does

18 next door, that sells used cars, and they are

19 basically different types of businesses. That

20 customer going in to buy the used car is not going

21 the buy the new car, and the customer going to buy

22 the new car is not there to buy the used.

23 We think it's important to be able to

24 identify to those coming to the area that, in fact,




1 we are selling preowned automobiles made by Jaguar

2 and that they are select edition automobiles and

3 identify that.

4 If you look at the Chrysler dealer

5 that is immediately to the south of us, they have a

6 separate sign that is on their property

7 identifying, in fact, as a ground sign, their used

8 cars.

9 In addition to that, as you are

10 aware, they also have another ground sign that

11 fronts Haggerty Road identifying the nature of the

12 Chrysler dealership as well as their two sets of

13 wall signs, so the Chrysler dealership immediately

14 next door has two ground signs, as we are asking

15 for, one, identifying who they are; second,

16 identifying that they sell used products. And the

17 other ground -- the other two wall signs that

18 Chrysler has -- and the reason why I bring this up

19 is it also shows the importance of the trademark

20 which, in our case, is being treated separately

21 because the leaper is separate, but you have a

22 trademark here, you have Chrysler Plymouth, you

23 have the trademark again, and then you have Jeep

24 Eagle. Obviously, they're not selling Eagle




1 anymore. Someone should tell them to take the

2 Eagle sign down. But, again, we're within that

3 concept.

4 That is the -- as it relates to the

5 ground signs and the proposed wall signs. In

6 addition to that, we are also asking, in addition

7 to the service sign itself, directional signs on

8 the property.

9 Again, if you'll recall, this was a

10 difficult site from a site planning standpoint

11 because of its proximity to Ten Mile, the

12 Ten Mile/Haggerty intersection. In addition to

13 that, it's a dual purpose site. We have the Jaguar

14 store, and immediately to the west of the Jaguar

15 store behind the property line there we also have

16 the medical office building, and one of the site

17 plan requirements that was required of us was that

18 we incorporate the drives into both the medical

19 building off Ten Mile and off Haggerty as part of

20 the dealership entrances to avoid duplicity and

21 curb cuts to the site, as well as making sure that

22 the curb cuts were a sufficient distance to

23 Haggerty/Ten Mile intersection.

24 So, as a consequence, the actual




1 intersection for curb cut is extreme to the west of

2 the site. When people turn in, when they see the

3 used car sign, we have an internal directional sign

4 here, on I, which identifies where the reception

5 and service area is. There's arrows pointing to

6 them.

7 We also then -- on the Haggerty

8 elevation, this is sign G, which is at a -- also

9 identifies reception and service, and then sign H

10 we included here as well which, again, is

11 identifying reception and service, and we felt that

12 was important because, again, to distinguish if you

13 go straight here you go into a medical office

14 building, and to make sure that our customers know

15 to turn here as opposed to driving into a different

16 use than that that's being proposed.

17 So for purposes of identifying the

18 actual drive cuts into the property in sufficient

19 time, in sufficient visibility, we requested those

20 signs. They are slightly larger and slightly

21 higher than permitted under the ordinance, but as

22 you'll see from the video, when you look at the

23 Jaguar sign itself it's extremely important from a

24 timing standpoint to be able to identify those




1 without missing the drives. If you miss the drive

2 here you have to go past the store and then somehow

3 turn around and come back.

4 One of the traffic issues that we see

5 is if there's not sufficient identification to tell

6 you when and where to turn, then it creates a

7 traffic problem. People turn their heads and they

8 miss the drive, they miss the -- they got to go

9 back and turn around, and it creates confusion.

10 And to make sure that the drives are

11 adequately addressed, and knowing that they're not

12 in the center of the property, we felt that the

13 height that we were requesting and the type of

14 signs we were requesting -- these are not

15 illuminated signs.

16 I'd like to focus on it and we'll

17 look at the video itself. Obviously, we have the

18 dual frontage, and in one sense it gives us

19 advantage in the other sense it gives its

20 disadvantage. To identify your building from one

21 side but not the other side doesn't do you any

22 good; to attract. It's really particularly

23 important in reference to this particular

24 dealership because Jaguar -- there will only be two




1 Jaguar stores within the Metro area. Not to

2 reflect badly on the Ford or Chrysler dealership

3 next door, but they are more local in nature in

4 there draw. There are more Chevy dealers, there

5 are more Chrysler dealers in the Metro area than

6 there are going to be Jaguar dealers.

7 As a consequence, you'll have people

8 like me, although I've become very familiar with

9 Novi having worked out here so much, I live on the

10 east side. If I'm going to drive all the way from

11 the east side to go to Novi to be able to find the

12 car, I need to make sure that it's adequately

13 identified for me. In other words, the typical

14 customer base that's going to go to this store is

15 not somebody who lives around the corner, hopefully

16 they do, but there'll be a general broad area from

17 the Metropolitan Detroit coming here. It is

18 critical that they be able to find the store and

19 they're not frustrated with finding the store.

20 So we tried it in the F signs with

21 good taste, within proportion of the other stores

22 within the area to accomplish that.

23 In addition to the dual frontage, we

24 had this wide-split ingress and egress because of




1 the curb cut considerations, and to avoid dual curb

2 cuts in the future, and we wanted to make sure that

3 we had signs that adequately addressed how to get

4 into the building and into the site in a safe

5 manner.

6 So we think those issues there,

7 combined with the typical speed limits that you

8 normally face, created the difficulties that we

9 encountered on the property, to make sure that we

10 could adequately identify the stores safely going

11 north, south, east and west.

12 I think the best way to do that is to

13 go -- actually go through the video. We're going

14 to speed one portion along because we have a part

15 that includes the two dealers in Farmington Hills,

16 the Accura and the Honda dealer, which are --

17 obviously, it's a different community. So if you

18 want to turn behind you here, and hopefully this

19 will work.

20 This is going on -- this is shot

21 going eastbound on Ten Mile. That's the preowned

22 car -- and this, by the way, is going twenty-five

23 miles an hour.

24 There's your leaper, and you just




1 missed the service sign if you weren't looking.

2 There's the Jaguar. That's the thirteen foot sign

3 below the leaper.

4 I hope that you had an opportunity to

5 visit the site to see the signs.

6 To the left there would be, again,

7 the service area. And the reason for the -- we're

8 proceeding now into the intersection, and you can

9 just see there to the left slightly will be the

10 Jaguar of Novi sign which is recessed and placed

11 within the glass of the building on the Haggerty

12 frontage. That's the lineal footage of two hundred

13 and fifty-five foot of frontage -- of building

14 frontage on the road there. There's slightly more

15 frontage than that, as you can see.

16 And we just missed the -- we just

17 missed the Jaguar ground sign. This is going

18 towards the Mercedes dealership. We have -- this

19 is the wall sign here, Mercedes Benz of Novi. Then

20 there's another -- on that other angle you see,

21 again, Mercedes Benz of Novi, and coming up on the

22 right is their ground sign, right there, and then

23 there's their logo on the right side.

24 Again, Mercedes chooses to identify




1 their logo differently.

2 We're going to skip through this

3 because these two dealerships are outside the

4 jurisdiction of the Board of this city.

5 One thing it does demonstrate is the

6 importance to the car manufacturer of identifying

7 their logo and their name.

8 Here we go. This is the Suburban

9 Infinity sign. This is the one wall sign, which is

10 picked up in the photographs, kind of facing the --

11 giving the east to west elevation. Again, that's

12 the logo and then the name, Infinity, right below

13 that.

14 Again, we tried to design our signage

15 within the confines of that, and both from a logo

16 standpoint and from a copy standpoint.

17 And then if you look to the left,

18 there's the term service. And, again, our --

19 basically, the service sign we're proposing is the

20 same type of element; again, to make sure that the

21 customer who's coming to the site can adequately

22 find our service area.

23 And then you're all familiar with the

24 ground sign that's out front -- there it is -- and




1 that's a north to south view of the sign. Again,

2 the distinguishing characteristics of the logo and

3 the name.

4 This is the photo -- video of the

5 photograph again, showing logo and name for

6 Chrysler Plymouth, and that's -- that site also has

7 a large service sign, again, in part, because their

8 service area is so recessed. But, again, the

9 lettering we're proposing is not that large. But

10 again, it's critical to the customer who's already

11 frustrated by a service call to make sure that they

12 know where to bring their car.

13 And the concept's different now.

14 There are service writeup areas where you pull in,

15 you meet the technician, they take the car from

16 you, take the keys and you write it up.

17 Immediately out front of here as we

18 go back to the left, not viewed from this angle,

19 but there is the used car sign, and then that is

20 the sign that identifies the Chrysler dealership

21 again, logo.

22 Now we're going east -- we're going

23 south. There is the ground sign. You don't see

24 any sign, now you see the leaper coming out, and




1 this is the first point -- you just picked up

2 Jaguar of Novi again, a very quick read, and now,

3 right at the corner, you read the Jaguar sign.

4 And I think your speed was about,

5 what, twenty-five and then slowing down when you

6 get to the intersection, twenty-five to thirty

7 miles an hour.

8 And then the service bay is that

9 glass area right there, and then the -- that does

10 it.

11 We'd be glad to answer any questions

12 that you have.

13 MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there

14 anyone else in the audience who would like to input

15 into the signs in this case?

16 (No response.)

17 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, building

18 department?

19 MR. SAVEN: No comment, sir.

20 MR. CHAIRMAN: You got a lot of signs

21 and a lot of leapers. I think you have too many

22 leapers.

23 I don't know where the Board wants to

24 start. Let me start -- backtrack first. There




1 were eighteen notices sent out. We received one

2 objection. I'm not going to -- I'm going to

3 paraphrase a few things.

4 I'm getting tired of the variance

5 requests. Jaguar of Novi is built on variances and

6 have become a tower of commercialism, and I won't

7 go into the rest of it.

8 It says that -- they object to it and

9 they think it's just too much and that there should

10 be no more variances, just say no. That was signed

11 by Joyce Trombley on Burton (ph) Drive in Novi.

12 Okay. Board members, where do you

13 want to start?

14 Mr. Brennan?

15 MEMBER BRENNAN: I'm overwhelmed. I

16 -- this is one of the first cases I've seen in a

17 long time -- I can only imagine the petitioner just

18 took the sign ordinance that we've got and did this

19 and said this is what we got to have. It's too

20 bad. I'm, frankly, disappointed. I don't think

21 that there was a lot of effort put in trying to

22 find any middle ground. I won't say anything more

23 than that because I'd like to hear what the other

24 people on the Board have to say.




1 MEMBER GRAY: Mr. Chair?

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: Miss Gray.

3 MEMBER GRAY: I would like to make

4 some comments, and if it's all right with the Board

5 I would like to just go right down A, B, C-

6 MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) Go right

7 ahead.

8 MEMBER GRAY: Okay. Way too many

9 signs, as Mr. Brennan just said. These are my

10 observations.

11 Sign A, the wall sign, I don't have a

12 problem with that. That's the service entrance

13 sign. I think that it needs to be a little bit

14 larger so that it can be seen in the recessed

15 area. I think that sign is fine.

16 The wall sign, Jaguar, that goes on

17 the rotunda, I don't have a problem with that one

18 either. That should be larger, I think, with that.

19 And then sign D, Jaguar of Novi,

20 those three signs with that building, to me,

21 irrespective of the word service, if you take those

22 three sides on those two facades, that building is

23 going to be -- have a very elegant look that would

24 stand out, and set you apart from all the other




1 dealers in the area.

2 Now I'm going to go back to sign C.

3 I think the Jaguar leaper on the roof is overkill

4 and I think it takes away from the elegant

5 appearance of that rotunda and the glass area. I

6 realize it's your logo. I realize you deem it

7 critical, but I think it just -- it detracts from

8 it. It doesn't add the appearance of the

9 building.

10 Ground sign E, I was very relieved to

11 see that it was moved from the corner. I'm very

12 relieved to hear that it's been decreased in

13 height. I think where the petitioner is planning

14 to put it on Haggerty Road is not a bad location.

15 I don't have a problem with the leaper at that sign

16 -- at that size, and I would presume it's going to

17 be proportionally decreased.

18 That takes us to sign F, the Select

19 Edition, on Ten Mile. I also don't have a problem

20 with the leaper on that sign. I think it looks

21 good. It looks like the one that's on the pylon

22 sign over, I believe in Troy, and I think that's

23 where the leaper goes. It goes on those ground

24 signs. I would like to see it less than eight foot




1 in height. I would like to see it no more than

2 five foot in height, but I don't have a problem

3 with the leaper being on that particular sign in

4 that area.

5 As to the directional signs, G and J,

6 and H and I, I don't have a problem with them but I

7 certainly think that they should be within the

8 ordinance. They should be lower. I don't know

9 that you necessarily have to have your silhouetted

10 leaper on every single one of the signs. It's just

11 overkill as far as I'm concerned.

12 And I like the look of the building.

13 It has -- it does have an elegance to it that has

14 been lacking in some of the other buildings in the

15 area, and I think -- you know, I just don't want to

16 see that leaper up on the top. It just -- I don't

17 like it.

18 Thank you.

19 MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Miss Gray.

20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Mr. Chairman?

21 MR. CHAIRMAN: Cindy.

22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I concur with the

23 two previous speakers, and I will not support the

24 leaper on the roof at all. I sincerely feel that




1 it takes away from the building. I understand the

2 importance of it. I don't see the purpose of it,

3 and if anything, I'm willing to work on the ground

4 leaper, but it definitely would take away to have

5 and -- I'm truly thrilled that you're removing one

6 of them and was going to move it because it was way

7 too much for that corner.

8 You don't drive that corner at

9 twenty-five miles an hour. I spent a great deal of

10 time looking out there, and that is our entrance

11 into this city, and here is an opportunity to

12 address that when you're coming into Novi. And I

13 don't care if you're coming from Tennessee or from

14 the east side of Michigan, it is the presence in

15 which -- or the appearance in which that needs to

16 be there. Three leapers in the front is just way

17 too much. The roof leaper actually takes away from

18 that building.

19 You showed a picture in one of your

20 other stores that was a ground leaper. It was a

21 little higher than eight feet, I believe, and I

22 would -- depending on what my other Board members

23 would agree upon, I would entertain something like

24 that, something with elegance, and I don't feel




1 that that roof leaper adds that.

2 Thank you.

3 MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Board

4 members, other discussion or comments?

5 MEMBER BAUER: Yes, sir.

6 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bauer.

7 MEMBER BAUER: First of all,

8 everything they have said so far, plus I'd like to

9 see a Jaguar -- under item B, I'd like to see that

10 come right down to within the ordinance.

11 On the identification signs, I'd like

12 to see those stay at ordinance, and that also -- as

13 I said, for A and F to also be within the

14 ordinance.

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Fannon?

16 MEMBER FANNON: Just a quick question

17 again. Where did you --

18 MR. SAVEN: Mr. Stoepker?

19 MR. FANNON: Where did you move E

20 again, just so I understand?

21 MR. STOEPKER: E is -- there is E. E

22 was -- if you want, I can approach if you want. E

23 was-

24 MEMBER FANNON: (Interposing) I know




1 where it was. I just want to know -- got it.

2 And at the -- one of the meetings

3 that I was at here when Jaguar was here before, is

4 there still plans of putting two or three cars out

5 on Haggerty Road between the road and the building

6 where it curves? There was going to be cars put

7 out there on display, four or five, whatever it

8 was.

9 MR. STOEPKER: There was -- the --

10 when the site -- on the Haggerty frontage there is

11 a -- there is a display garden that is along the

12 Haggerty frontage, that's correct.

13 MEMBER FANNON: How many cars will be

14 displayed, approximately, on Haggerty Road that

15 probably has the leaper on it, if most of the cars

16 have leapers?

17 MR. STOEPKER: I can't remember if

18 it's five.

19 MEMBER FANNON: Okay. So there's

20 going to be cars along there?


22 MEMBER FANNON: So that long blank

23 wall that you talked about that was, like, just

24 blank on here really isn't going to be blank when




1 there's five cars in front of it?

2 MR. STOEPKER: That's correct. But I

3 should point out, and I think you're aware, that

4 the whole design of this dealership completely is

5 different from that even of the Mercedes store down

6 the street.

7 MEMBER FANNON: I'm not arguing with

8 you.


10 MEMBER FANNON: I'm just asking some

11 questions.

12 So they're not showed on here, the

13 cars-

14 MR. STOEPKER: (Interposing) No.

15 MEMBER FANNON: -with the little

16 leapers on them, right?

17 MR. STOEPKER: Right.

18 MEMBER FANNON: Okay. Well, I agree

19 with everything else that was said, including the

20 fact that we're going to have four or five cars

21 along the side. I think that'll take care of

22 letting everybody know it's a Jaguar dealer.

23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Brennan?

24 MEMBER BRENNAN: From what I've




1 heard, there is agreement on one sign thus far, and

2 that's sign A, and the service sign. We have

3 problems with everything else. The other agreement

4 we have as a Board is that sign C is -- there's no

5 support for that at all, and maybe we can start

6 knocking a couple of these down by making some

7 motions on signs where we do have some concurrence

8 and it won't look as overwhelming.

9 MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, let's-

10 MEMBER BAUER: (Interposing) Let's

11 just start at A and go through.

12 MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, I think that

13 Mr. Brennan had brought a point. We might as well

14 start with the ones that we really totally agree

15 on, because I think from what we agree on is going

16 to probably establish where we're going to go down

17 the road with the rest of them.

18 MEMBER SANGHVI: No problem.

19 MR. CHAIRMAN: So let's start off

20 with sign A and let's go from there.

21 MEMBER BAUER: Want a motion?

22 MR. CHAIRMAN: Might as well. We got

23 to get started someplace.

24 MEMBER BAUER: Case 01-063, sign A,




1 requested variance be granted for identification of

2 service.


4 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. It's been moved

5 and seconded that the variance request for sign A

6 be approved as presented.

7 Any further discussion on the motion?

8 (No further discussion.)

9 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none,

10 Madam Secretary, will you call the roll, please.

11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


17 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


19 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


21 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Sign A you

24 have.




1 MR. STOEPKER: Thank you.

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: All right. Where do

3 we want to go next?

4 Want to go to C?

5 Okay. Is there any further

6 discussion or a motion on sign C?

7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Mr. Chairman, I'll

8 make the motion. In case 01-063, sign C, move

9 Jaguar leaper sign be denied based on based on the

10 fact that there is no need for this location on the

11 top of the roof, no practical difficulty.

12 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

13 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. It's been moved

14 and seconded that we deny the variance request for

15 sign C.

16 Any discussion on the motion?

17 (No further discussion.)

18 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none,

19 Madam Secretary, will you call the roll, please.

20 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


22 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


24 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?





2 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


4 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


8 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Sign C has been

9 denied.

10 Where do we want to go next?

11 MEMBER BRENNAN: Mr. Chairman?

12 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Brennan.

13 MEMBER BRENNAN: If I'm not mistaken,

14 B is the one that wraps around the outside-

15 MR. STOEPKER: (Interposing) B is --

16 MEMBER BRENNAN: -and I think there

17 was some concurrence there with the Board that that

18 seemed an appropriate sign on that corner.

19 So, with that said, I'll make a

20 motion on sign B, be approved as submitted for

21 building identification.


23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. It's been moved

24 and seconded that sign B variance be granted as




1 requested.

2 Any further discussion on the motion?

3 (No further discussion.)

4 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none,

5 Madam Secretary, will you call the roll, please.

6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


14 MS. MARCHIONI: Mr. Reinke?


16 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


18 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Sign B has been

19 approved.

20 I would suggest that we go to the

21 directional signs. I think we can come to some

22 consensus on those, and that would be-

23 MR. STOEPKER: (Interposing) That's

24 G, H and I.




1 MR. BRENNAN: We need to have some

2 further discussion with the applicant whether he's

3 agreeable with some of our comments with regards to

4 height.

5 MR. STOEPKER: I think-

6 MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) I think

7 that's open to discussion at this point. I think

8 these are the next ones we should deal with.

9 MR. STOEPKER: If we could keep the

10 content of the letters the same, I think we can

11 work with the sign company in reducing -- I think

12 the height maximum is what, six feet, and I think

13 these are at nine, and we could reduce those to

14 six.

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: So that takes care of

16 the height part. So we can eliminate the height;

17 is that correct?

18 MR. SAVEN: That's correct, as long

19 as it's six feet maximum.

20 MR. STOEPKER: Right.

21 MEMBER BAUER: That's on G?


23 MR. CHAIRMAN: That's G and J.

24 MR. STOEPKER: No. J is eliminated.




1 It's G, H and I.

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. So G, H and I,

3 we're looking at within ordinance of six feet in

4 height?

5 MR. STOEPKER: Right. I think -- was

6 that the only-

7 MS. GRAY: (Interposing) Size

8 variance.

9 MR. STOEPKER: There's a minimal size

10 variance that we -- we asked for seven square feet.

11 Four is permitted.

12 MEMBER GRAY: Three is permitted.

13 MR. STOEPKER: I'm sorry. Three is

14 permitted. We asked for seven feet.

15 MS. GRAY: On one, on two, on G, and

16 on H and I you asked for five square feet variance.

17 Seven is -- two is permitted and you asked for

18 seven.

19 MEMBER BRENNAN: Just a comment. I

20 drove back into the Mercedes dealership to see what

21 they had in there, and I think that they're

22 probably going to be probably pretty close to

23 what's-

24 MR. STOEPKER: (Interposing) We




1 actually tried to duplicate their size sign. We

2 went out and looked.


4 reasonable.


6 MEMBER BRENNAN: Pardon me? On size.

7 MEMBER GRAY: The height. On height,

8 lower it.

9 MEMBER BRENNAN: Not on height. I'm

10 talking-

11 MEMBER BAUER: (Interposing) Seven

12 square feet?


14 MEMBER BAUER: I have no problem with

15 that.

16 MR. STOEPKER: H and I, by the way,

17 are internal signs too. They're set back

18 substantially from the property. I don't think

19 you're going to be able to see H from Haggerty at

20 all. It's to make sure you don't keep going into

21 the medical office building.

22 MEMBER BRENNAN: Shall we make a stab

23 at this?

24 MR. CHAIRMAN: Yeah, go for it.




1 MEMBER BRENNAN: Sign -- I'll make a

2 motion that signs G, H and I be limited to six feet

3 in height and the size of the sign as -- signs as

4 requested.

5 MR. CHAIRMAN: Seven square feet?



8 MR. CHAIRMAN: It's been moved and

9 seconded on signs G, H and I-

10 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Interposing)

11 Different dimensions?

12 MR. CHAIRMAN: What's that?

13 MEMBER SANGHVI: Identical dimensions

14 they're requesting.

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, we're giving

16 them six feet in height, and he's got seven square

17 feet to use, a maximum of seven square feet. Six

18 foot in height.

19 Okay. Is there any further

20 discussion on the motion?


22 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none,

23 Madam Secretary, will you call the roll, please.

24 MS. MARCHIONI: They get six feet in




1 height and then size-

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) Seven

3 square feet in area and six foot in height.

4 MS. MARCHIONI: For all of them?

5 MR. CHAIRMAN: All three of them, G,

6 H and I.

7 MR. STOEPKER: Per sign, correct?

8 MR. CHAIRMAN: Per sign.

9 MR. STOEPKER: All right. Thank you,

10 sir.

11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


17 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


19 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


21 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. That got rid of

24 a few of them. Now, we'll go back to the




1 beginning, might as well.

2 Okay. Sign B, which is the indent

3 Jaguar of Novi, correct?

4 MR. STOEPKER: Correct.

5 MR. CHAIRMAN: The east elevation?

6 MR. STOEPKER: It's on the east

7 elevation, that's correct.

8 MR. CHAIRMAN: I don't have a problem

9 with that one.

10 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I don't either.

11 MEMBER BAUER: Neither do I.

12 MR. CHAIRMAN: Over in here.

13 MEMBER BAUER: I make a motion --

14 I'll make a motion, Mr. Chairman.

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bauer?

16 MEMBER BAUER: Case 01-063, sign B be

17 approved as requested for identification.



20 MR. CHAIRMAN: Been moved and

21 seconded that sign B, variance be granted as

22 requested.

23 Is there any further discussion on

24 the motion?




1 (No further discussion.)

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none,

3 Madam Secretary, will you call the roll, please.

4 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


16 MR. CHAIRMAN: D is done. Let's go

17 to E.

18 Now, E has been moved to the north

19 end of the building, correct?

20 MR. STOEPKER: Correct. And it was

21 reduced from -- to eight feet six inches.

22 MR. BRENNAN: In height.

23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. So we're going

24 from -- it's going to be eight foot six in height?




1 MR. STOEPKER: This is it right here.

2 MR. CHAIRMAN: So we really only need

3 a three foot six inch height variance?

4 MR. STOEPKER: Right. And I think

5 that ground sign is permitted, other than the

6 height.

7 MR. CHAIRMAN: I can't see how any

8 sign by itself -- for a number of them.

9 MEMBER BAUER: No, it's not.

10 MR. STOEPKER: I understand.

11 MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, if it was

12 permitted, what are we talking about in square feet

13 of this sign?

14 MR. SAVEN: 37.5 feet.

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: That is permitted?

16 MR. SAVEN: That's permitted based on

17 the setback off of Ten Mile and Haggerty Road.

18 MR. CHAIRMAN: All right. Okay.

19 Board members, discussion on sign E?

20 MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, now we're

21 stuck with the -- sorry, I should have asked, but

22 now we're stuck with a large sign, nearly a hundred

23 square feet, and-

24 MR. STOEPKER: (Interposing)




1 Actually, it's reduced. It's actually 45.5 square

2 feet, because it was reduced to the exact same size

3 as the other one. The original one was twenty-five

4 square feet -- twenty five feet in height, and the

5 area was 96.25 square feet. We reduced the total

6 area, the base of the sign, down to 8.6, and the

7 exact area of the sign is, give or take a few

8 inches, is 45.5 square feet, thirty-seven square

9 being-

10 MEMBER BRENNAN: (Interposing) We're

11 okay there. I don't have a problem with that one

12 anymore.

13 MEMBER BAUER: Neither do I.

14 MR. SAVEN: Square foot variance.

15 MR. CHAIRMAN: Three foot six.

16 MR. BRENNAN: Let's take care of this

17 one. I make a motion that sign E, square footage,

18 be limited to forty-five square feet; height, eight

19 foot six inches.

20 MR. SAVEN: Point of clarity. They

21 requested 45.5.

22 MR. CHAIRMAN: Forty-five square

23 feet, and we'll have eight foot six inch height

24 total, correct?





2 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. We'll give you

3 that.

4 MR. STOEPKER: Thanks.

5 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. We got a second

6 on that motion?


8 MR. CHAIRMAN: Any further discussion

9 on the motion on sign E?

10 (No further discussion.)

11 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, Madam

12 Secretary, will you call the roll, please.

13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


17 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


19 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


21 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


23 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?





1 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. We're done with

2 E. Now we're moving on to F. F is Select Edition.

3 MR. SAVEN: Same thing.

4 MR. STOEPKER: Exact same size as D.

5 It's identifying we sell used cards.

6 MR. CHAIRMAN: And, that's on the

7 western edge on Ten Mile, correct?

8 MR. SAVEN: Mr. Chairman, you'll

9 notice that the setback from Ten Mile is a little

10 bit different than that of Haggerty Road, so it

11 will be just a little slight increase as the

12 requested variance, keeping the same square

13 footage.

14 MR. STOEPKER: Right. I think 34

15 square feet is permitted, and we're asking for 45.5

16 square feet. That's the standard-

17 MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing)

18 Actually, you're -- this would be the identical

19 size as the one we just approved for Haggerty Road?

20 MR. STOEPKER: Exactly. It's,

21 actually, the exact identical sign except the

22 copy's different.

23 MEMBER SANGHVI: Location is

24 different.




1 MR. STOEPKER: And the location's

2 different, and the product will --

3 MR. SAVEN: Sign height is the same?

4 MEMBER BAUER: Eight six, yeah.

5 MR. CHAIRMAN: I'll make the motion

6 that sign F-

7 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Interposing) Do we

8 need a separate motion?

9 MR. BRENNAN: Sign F?

10 MS. GRAY: They got a separate sign.

11 MR. SANGHVI: Okay. Let's make a

12 motion then.

13 MR. CHAIRMAN: I make the motion that

14 in case F, the square footage be 45.5 square feet

15 with a maximum height of eight foot six inches for

16 identification of Select Edition vehicles.

17 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

18 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. It's been moved

19 and seconded that we grant the variance as

20 requested in sign F.

21 Any further discussion on the motion?

22 (No further discussion.)

23 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none,

24 Madam Secretary, will you call the roll, please.




1 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


3 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


13 MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. What do we have

14 left?

15 MR. STOEPKER: That's it. Thank you,

16 Mr. Chairman.

17 For the record, because we did

18 change -- I want to submit the -- so it's

19 consistent, the diagrams that I showed you so you

20 have that and the actual signs.

21 MR. SAVEN: That would be very much

22 appreciated. Would you just initial it with

23 today's date, please.

24 MR. STOEPKER: I will. And I also




1 will give you the photographs. Do you want a copy

2 of the video?




6 MR. STOEPKER: You do want a copy?


8 MR. STOEPKER: I didn't change the

9 dimensions on here. I'm just-

10 MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) That's

11 fine.

12 I think that wraps up -- anything

13 else for other matters?

14 MR. SAVEN: Mr. Chairman, if I may,

15 in your packet you received a letter from Mr. and

16 Mrs. Michael Medrosian that were before the Board

17 before the last meeting with comments about

18 superior service that was performed by this Board.

19 Frank Brennan was acting as chairman, and I think

20 this was very deserving. You guys did a fantastic

21 job for these people.

22 If you can remember, she was the one

23 that was wringing the hanky back there because she

24 was so nervous coming before the Board. She was




1 very appreciative in all the stuff that she wanted

2 to go on record to indicate her thanks to you.

3 MR. CHAIRMAN: The only other thing I

4 have to say is we had four of our Board members at

5 the planning and zoning conference on

6 Mackinac Island. There is always good information

7 picked up from sessions and talking to the other

8 people, and sometimes just from the Board members

9 sitting down and discussing things themselves. It

10 is, like I say, always beneficial, but God, it was

11 cold. Anyway, there was information and knowledge

12 gained, and we're thankful for the support of the

13 building department to be able to do that.

14 Any other members -- or other matters

15 to come before the board?

16 (No response.)

17 MR. CHAIRMAN: This meeting is then

18 adjourned.

19 (The meeting was adjourned at

20 9:55 p.m.)

21 - - -

Date approved: April 2, 2002 ___________________

Sarah Marchioni Recording Secretary




1 C E R T I F I C A T E


3 I, Cheryl L. James, do hereby

4 certify that I have recorded stenographically the

5 proceedings had and testimony taken in the

6 above-entitled matter at the time and place hereinbefore

7 set forth, and I do further certify that the foregoing

8 transcript, consisting of 128 typewritten pages, is a

9 true and correct transcript to the best of my abilities.



12 ________________________________

Cheryl L. James, CSR-5786



14 Date