View Agenda for this meeting
View Action Summary for this meeting

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 4, 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 Tuesday, December 4, 2001.

Laverne Reinke, chairman
Gerald 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

MR. CHAIRMAN: At this time I would

like to call the Novi Zoning Board of Appeals

meeting to order.

Madam Secretary, would you call the

roll, please.

MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gray?


MR. CHAIRMAN: We have all members

present this evening, so all cases that are heard

will be final.

The Zoning Board of Appeals is a

board empowered by the City Charter to hear appeals


seeking a variance from the application of the Novi

zoning ordinance.

It takes at least four members

present to approve a variance, and a vote of the

majority of the members present to deny a variance.

The Board consists of six members, and we have a

full Board this evening and all decisions will be


The rules of conduct that we govern

our meetings under is: Each person desiring to

address the Board shall have his or her name and

address stated to the secretary. Individual

persons shall be allowed five minutes to address

the Board. An extension of time will be granted at

the discretion of the chairperson. There shall be

no questioning by the audience of the person

addressing the Board; however, the Board members

may question that person with recognition of the

chairperson. No person shall be allowed to address

the Board more than once unless permission is

granted by the chairman. One spokesperson for a

group attending shall be allowed ten minutes to

address the Board.

Board members, are there any


additions or corrections to our agenda for this


(No response.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: If none, the Chair

will entertain to approve the agenda as presented.



MR. CHAIRMAN: All those in favor,

signify by saying aye.

(Vote taken.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Opposed?

(Vote taken.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. We have no

minutes for approval tonight, correct.


MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Public remarks

section. If there is anyone in the audience that

would like to address the Board at this time that

isn't pertaining to one of the cases before us,

they have the opportunity to do that.

(No response.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, we'll

close the public remarks section.



MR. CHAIRMAN: We'll call our first

case, case number 01-087, filed by Dennis Cline of

24101 Nilan.

MR. CLINE: Good evening. My name is

Dennis Cline, 24101 Nilan, adjacent subdivision.

What I'm -- I'm trying-

MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) Sir,

excuse me one moment. Would you be sworn in by our

secretary, please.

MR. CLINE: Sure.

MEMBER GRONACHAN: Would you please

raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that

the information you're about to give in the matter

in the case before you is the truth and nothing but

the truth?


MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Please proceed.

MR. CLINE: Okay. I've tried -- I've

needed more space. As you well know, the garages

are pretty well filling up anymore with bicycles

and power washers and generators and et cetera,

like that. I've run out of space in the garage

with two cars and that. We'd like to have


somewhere to put bicycles and the other

paraphernalia, yard equipment and that.

We have no restriction in our sub as

far as a shed goes. The problem with the shed is

I've talked to a few of the neighbors around, and

they really don't want to see me put a shed up.

And I did stand in the one area that I have to put

it, and I actually could look at nine houses that

would be able to see that shed from the particular

location where it's at.

So what I've done is I made a little

drawing, and I'm trying to add onto the garage and

make it esthetically blending in with the house as

much as possible on that.

The reason why I came up with the

oddball size is I do have an overhang that is

thirteen-and-a-half feet long that sticks out at

one side of the garage, and I want to keep it

consistent with that so it really doesn't stand out

on the rest of the house. I'm just trying to make

it appealing and then put some landscaping around

it after it's completed to blend it in with the


I did make a little drawing of some


degree, and I'm over, I think it is, six inches on

the front corner on the thirty foot setback, and I

am surrounded by two setbacks in the front and the

side. And I -- on the back corner I believe it's

around just under two feet that I'm over that

variance on that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Thank you. Is

there anyone in the audience that would like to

participate or input into this case?

(No response.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, we'll

close the audience remarks section.

Building department?

MR. SAVEN: Just what was pointed out

by the applicant. He does have a front yard --

you'll notice that configuration of the road is not

a straight line type of a range, and he does have a

curvature to the road which gets him into the

problem that he wants.

MR. CHAIRMAN: There were

thirty-three notices sent, we received two

approvals and no objections.

Board members, comments or



Mr. Brennan?

MEMBER BRENNAN: Like many expansions

to subdivision sites, residential sites, I'm more

moved by neighbors and their feelings. This

appears to be a very minor variance request by a

neighbor that has some needs, and without any

objections from any of his neighbors, I have no


MEMBER FANNON: Mr. Chairman, was

there any notices?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Yeah. There were

thirty-three notices sent, two approvals.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I -- you know, in what

the petitioner has done, you really aren't going to

hardly know that there's something there. It looks

like almost something attached to the garage from

the beginning, and it's really a minimum intrusive

into the setback requirement, so I really don't

have a problem with what he's proposing.

Board members, further comments or


MEMBER SANGHVI: Sir, may I make a




MEMBER SANGHVI: In the matter of

case 01-087, I move we approve the petitioner's

request for hardship regarding the story of

necessities for living in a household in Novi.

MEMBER BAUER: Second the motion.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. It's been moved

and seconded that we grant petitioner's request.

Is there any further discussion on the motion?

(No discussion.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Madam Secretary, would

you call the roll, please.

MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


MR. CHAIRMAN: Sir, your variance


request has been approved. See the building

department for the necessary permits and we wish

you the best of luck.

MR. CLINE: Thank you.


MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Next case, case

01-089, filed by Gregory Gratek of 2023 West Lake


MR. GRATEK: Hi. My name is Greg

Gratek. I live at 2023 West Lake Drive.

Before I start, I do have a couple


MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) Excuse

me one moment, please. One formality we need to

get out of the way. Would you please be sworn in

by our secretary.

MR. GRATEK: I'm sorry.

MEMBER GRONACHAN: Raise your right

hand. That's good. Do you swear or affirm that

the information you're about to give in the matter

before you is the truth?

MR. GRATEK: Yes, I do.



MR. GRATEK: Before I get started, I

do have some pictures of the area that I'm -- I

will be discussing, if anyone is not familiar with

the area, to kind of give you a scope of the

problem that I'm addressing, and I do also have a

letter from a neighbor that was unable to attend at

the last minute, if I'm able to still turn this in.


MR. GRATEK: Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

MR. GRATEK: What I'm trying to do

with the variance I'm asking for, is I'm looking to

build an architecturally correct structure that

will enhance the area, which is greatly needed,

enhancing on that side of the lake.

Any new structure on that side of the

lake would help the slow moving development on that

side of the lake, and the proposed garage that I

have would only increase the number of cars I could

park in front of my house from three to five.

The variances I am asking for, the

front yard setbacks, will give me the ability to

park a large car or truck in front of my garage.

It would also give me plenty of room between my


house and my garage, and the granting of my

variance would not make my property different from

my neighbors.

The two side yard variances I am

asking for are necessary for a two-car garage.

The south side yard variance is next

to an easement that will never have a structure

built on it. What that is considered is a

pedestrian easement.

The setbacks that I'm asking for are

-- on the south side are similar to what my house

currently has as well. I built my house

approximately five years ago.

I spoke to Terry Marone in the

building department. He recommended that I do add

gutters to the plans to kind of control the

drainage of the water.

And I've just recently, in the last

couple weeks, have purchased a couple additional

lots on that section of West Lake Drive, and my

wife and I have intentions of putting up new

construction and improving that side of the lake as

much as possible.

Thank you.


MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there

anyone in the audience who would like to

participate or input into this case?

Please step forward. For the record,

could we have your name and address, please.

MS. SIMON: My name is Debra Simon.

I live at 101 Pickford.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

MS. SIMON: It's across the street

from the lake.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Please, if you would

-- you don't have to be sworn in. Go ahead with

your comments.

MS. SIMON: I don't have an objection

to the garage at all except that the south side

easement -- the south side variance is next to the

easement that is our easement on Pickford Street.

And if you look at the plans, I'm assuming that

when he built the house he got a variance for that

to be on the property line, but I don't recall that

happening. I must have missed that.

But when he -- he put a deck on, that

was the last time we were here, when he put the

deck on he wanted to put the steps out into the


easement and, thankfully, you didn't allow him to

do that.

He has encroached on the easement

pretty much since he has been living there. He

parked his boats on there, and we had a problem

with that. We couldn't get him to remove them.

So I don't mind him building a

garage. I think a garage would be great for that

house, but why can't he move it over. All that's

on the other side of him is another garage.

So I'm not saying move it over as --

to -- you know, all the way over but more centered

so that it's away from our easement more than two

feet. Maybe give us four feet on that side and

three feet something on the other side, or even

three-and-a-half feet, anything but -- you know,

it's just so close that when he goes around the

garage -- now, when he walks around his house he

has to walk on our easement. He can't get past his

house on that side without -- and that's how he

puts his boats in and out of the lake.

And, originally, when he moved in

there there was a huge tree stump on the property

curved out like a chair. You could sit and look


out on the lake. And he proceeded to go in and

take that out on our easement without our

permission, and what that has caused now is

everybody around the lake uses our easement for a

boat launch. They go in and out. We have a

two-track trail running down our easement now where

it used to be grass, and we used to use it just for

the pleasure of going down to the lake and just

being near the lake, and now it's -- boats are in

and out all the time.

I'm out there asking people, you

know, do you live around here. I mean, it's people

that I don't even know where they live. They don't

live anywhere in our neighborhood, and they're

taking their boats in and out, and that's because

he removed that stump and allowed that area to be

driven on.

So I just don't want anymore

encroachment on the easement. That's my objection.

You know, move the garage over a little bit. I

have no problem with that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there

anyone else in the audience who would like to input

into this case?


Please step forward.

MR. PATTERSON: John Patterson. I

live at 1957 West Lake, which is a little bit down

on the other side of another easement that people

don't drive on. Greg's a neighbor, he's a good

neighbor. He's always meticulously kept care of

his house. His house is tastefully done, if you

see the pictures. It's certainly one of the nicer

structures around. Everything Greg does is nice.

He takes care of everything. Obviously, he has a

problem with someone across the street, but that's

not our problem to deal with here. I'm just here

to support -- I'm certain that the garage will be

beautiful and his house is beautiful and there

shouldn't be any problem authorizing what he wants

because it's certainly not out of hand. All right?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

MR. PATTERSON: Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Is there anyone

else in the audience who would like to input into

this case?

(No response.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, we'll

close audience participation.


Building department?

MR. SAVEN: Just a couple questions

of the applicant. Can you give me the reason why

you couldn't move the garage back towards the house?

MR. GRATEK: Well, I just thought

that would be -- there is no reason actually. I

mean, if it were to be -- if it were better for the

building department, I wouldn't have a problem

doing that. The only thing I was looking to do was

kind of keep the same distance from the road to the

garage as the majority of the garages have in that


MR. SAVEN: We're talking about --

what I picked up on this, based on the fact you

wanted to put a truck on that driveway.

MR. GRATEK: Well, no. I had just

made mention that if we were to park a truck out

there that it would give sufficient room for that,


MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) Ten foot,

I don't believe, is sufficient.

MR. GRATEK: Well, if you look at the

plot plan, the ten feet is only on the very end of

the garage. If you held the garage to the other


side, you're -- you have approximately sixteen to

seventeen feet on that side, which would be

adequate for any vehicle to be parked in.

MR. SAVEN: Do you own a well, sir?

MR. GRATEK: Yes, sir.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Where is your well


MR. SAVEN: Do you feel you're going

to get ample service to that well should you --

your well fail?

MR. GRATEK: I don't think I'd have a

problem with that.

MR. SAVEN: On five foot eight?

MR. GRATEK: Well -- and as my

neighbor and I, we kind of share that little

easement down there, that little area down there,

and he has a vehicle -- he's taken vehicles down

there in the past as well as I have, just to get

between our properties.

MR. SAVEN: I just want you to be

aware of that.

MR. GRATEK: Yes, sir. I'm aware of


MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. There were


thirty-seven notices sent out. We received four

approvals plus the additional approval that the

petitioner has brought in this evening.

Board members? Mr. Brennan.

MEMBER BRENNAN: My first observation

was, why do we need this front yard setback to the

extent that we -- that has been requested. I,

frankly, would like to get that garage back farther

off the street than closer to the street. And, as

well, I also wondered why the garage wasn't

centered on the parcel. It looks like we can have

about a three foot eight on the south side and

four foot even on the north side.

MR. GRATEK: Well, there are reasons

for that as well. If -- we live on a street where

-- Pickford is a street that comes directly towards

our house, and what we're trying to do is to block

any type of lights or anything like that that are

constantly shining into our house from people

driving down Pickford. Getting into that angle

would do best in that situation. If we were to

center it anymore, that would kind of give straight

line to our house from down the street.

And the reason -- the actual reason I


did put it there was, because, just to give me a

little more privacy.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Board members?

Miss Gray.

MEMBER GRAY: Well, I'm very familiar

with this part of the city and with this particular

area, and I was very excited when this house went

in because it's such a little gem.

From the standpoint of setbacks, I

don't know that I have a problem with the setbacks

as much. Just because the neighbors do, it doesn't

give cart blanche for everybody else to do it;

however, I appreciate the applicant's reasoning for

doing it.

What I have a problem with is the

size of the garage. And in understanding that

basements may be a limited commodity with a high

water table, and understanding that this is a very

narrow lot, I would like to see the garage

decreased in width from twenty-two feet to twenty

and still keep the architectural interest. I think

this is a wonderful look and it's going to tie in

with the existing house.

I'm a little concerned with the size.


Twenty-six feet seems awfully deep, but then again,

we don't want him coming back in two years saying I

want to put an addition for my storage.

One of my other questions is, who

owns the easement?

MR. GRATEK: Well, that's actually an

issue that I've been working with the ordinance

officers on. It's really unclear who actually owns

the easement.

MEMBER GRAY: Okay. Knowing the area

of the city as I do, I am presuming that it's a

dedicated easement to off-lake owners, and one of

my main concerns is not with moving the garage to

either side but the future prospect of somebody

putting a fence there, which I'm sure is a concern

of yours as well, because if somebody puts a fence

there to protect their easement, then, you know,

you're going to have your house right on the

property line, and there's too much of that in the

entire north part of the city anyhow.

MR. GRATEK: Right.

MEMBER GRAY: Be that as it may,

we're not here to discuss this. If this is a

pedestrian easement, I was very disturbed to see


all the two tracks that have -- from people coming

in and out of lake, so it would behoove the people

who live in the area to do something to block the

access to the lake. Other people have done it

around the lake. I live off South Lake and we have

done it on our dedicated access lot, so it's up to

you to control your own property, whether you own

it or not. The neighbors should be protecting it.

Again, I have no problem with this.

I think it's a lovely structure from an

architectural standpoint. I would like to see it

narrowed. I don't have a problem with the access

-- or the setback on the south side because --

knowing that nothing will ever be built in there,

unless a fence goes in, and I'm comfortable with

five foot eight on the north side.

Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Miss Gray.

Is there anyone else on the Board who wants input

on this case?

MEMBER FANNON: Mr. Chairman, I agree

with Frank. I think this garage should be pushed

back at least ten feet to give more room to the

road, and I would -- now that there is a neighbor,


no matter why they're here, whether they own the

pedestrian easement or not, but has objected to the

garage being too close, I think it would only be

fair to move it to the north by two feet, giving it

four foot off the pedestrian easement, or three

foot eight, whichever anyone would want to do,

split the difference, and move the garage back. I

have no problem supporting that, but I couldn't

support it the way it is right here on the drawing.

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

I'd like to, once again, ask the applicant, as to

the location of the well.

MR. GRATEK: If you take a look at

my house, the little area right here, there's a

porch area, and my well is right here in this area.

MR. SAVEN: I would ask you to bring

forward so -- I'm concerned with where the well --

the placement of the well so they can service the


MR. GRATEK: The well is located

approximately right here.

MR. CHAIRMAN: If you move that back

ten feet, you still have fifteen feet.

MR. SAVEN: That's fine. If he can't


service the well based upon where the well location

is --

MR. CHAIRMAN: In comments made by

other Board members, I echo the sentiment exactly.

Number one, ten feet is too close. I know we have

buildings that are up that close, but to put a new

building is -- just accentuates that problem all

along the -- and I can look at two things. I can

look at moving the garage two feet or narrowing the

garage two feet, either way, but it's got to -- for

my perspective there and everything, I can only

support a minimum of twenty foot setback.

MR. SAVEN: Mr. Chairman, I'd also

want to point out that we sent notices out for the

5 point -- for that difference of 5.67.

MR. SCHULTZ: Point 33.

MR. SAVEN: For .33 feet, and if we

happen to move this on over, we're not giving those

applicants -- or people who had the notices ample

opportunity to respond to that adjustment.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. I understand

your point, so I guess then if I were going to

support a variance to this as presented, it would

have to be reduced down to 20 foot in width and set


back 20 feet. That's my opinion and point of


Board members, further comments or


MEMBER BRENNAN: Good question of the

applicant. If you moved it back another ten feet

and you shorten it up twenty feet, is that

acceptable to you?

MR. GRATEK: Well, the question --

well, the shortening up 20 feet, I don't think

that's a problem, but the problem that I may have

is that I do keep landscaping and things of that

nature in front of my home, and this would

completely block any type of sunlight from getting

to that nature, so what I would have to do is pull

that out. I don't know what -- what would I

replace that with?

MEMBER BRENNAN: You mean setting

back the garage another ten feet is going to have a

negative affect?

MR. GRATEK: Yeah. There is a line

of trees on one side. I mean, it would get very

little daylight as it is.

And my other concern is, is being


within, you know, fifteen feet of the house, if

that's going to be architecturally, you know --

what I'm trying to do is create a little bit of

privacy but yet still have a little bit of yard

there as well.

And my question is, would you --

would twenty feet from the north side of the garage

be adequate?


MEMBER BRENNAN: That's only pushing

it back four feet.

MEMBER BAUER: South side.

MEMBER BRENNAN: Just from my

prospective, if any of these applicants came up

with those photographs of those old garages and

wanted to rebuild those old garages, I can assure

you, sir, that we wouldn't be agreeable to a


MR. GRATEK: (Interposing) I mean,

the one garage that shows in there, the brown one,

is one that was built pretty recently.

MEMBER SANGHVI: That's besides the


MR. CHAIRMAN: I can understand that,


but the thing is, what we're trying not to do is to

continue to promote the continued building of

something like that-

MR. GRATEK: (Interposing) Okay.

MR. CHAIRMAN: -for the simple fact

there's not even enough room for him to stop in

front of his garage without being out in the road.

Board members, further comments or


MEMBER BRENNAN: I'd like to ask the

applicant again, hearing what we've heard, can you

push that back another ten feet from the road?

MR. GRATEK: Well, that's something I

can definitely -- I can definitely take it to my

architect to see what he can design or what he can

do. You know, I don't know-

MEMBER BRENNAN: (Interposing) You

want us to move on this tonight or not?

MR. GRATEK: Will I have an

opportunity, once this is moved on, to revisit this


MR. CHAIRMAN: No. You can table it

to next month if you would like and come back with

what you feel is a minimum you can live with.


There's no guarantee to say that you're going to

get that, but if you want to take that time frame

to look at the whole situation rather than dealing

with it tonight, we'll table it to next month's



MR. SAVEN: I would probably give

concern to what the Board had indicated. If you

needed to adjust your application-

MR. GRATEK: (Interposing) Right.

MR. SAVEN: -you're going to do so

prior to the next meeting so we can go through and

notify the adjacent properties of that adjustment.

MR. GRATEK: Yeah. I don't have --

that would be fine.

MR. CHAIRMAN: You want to table that

to next meeting?

MR. GRATEK: Yes, I do.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Board members?

MEMBER SANGHVI: I move we table the


MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. That case will

be tabled to the next meeting

MR. GRATEK: Thank you.


MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you like your

pictures back or do you want us to put them in the

file from this point here? If you want them, you

can take them.

MR. GRATEK: Thank you.


MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Next case, case

number 01-090, filed by Don Marhofer representing

Saratoga Circle.

Sir, would you be sworn in by our


MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

affirm that the information you're about to give in

the matter before you is the truth?



MR. CHAIRMAN: And for our records,

could we have your name and address, please.

MR. MARHOFER: My name is

John Marhofer. I'm with S. R. Jacobson

Development. My address is 7334 Peppermill Lane,

Northville, Michigan.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Sir, would


you please present your case.

MR. MARHOFER: We presently are under

construction at Saratoga Circle on Novi Road

between Thirteen and Twelve Mile. We have a

construction trailer that we have had a permit for.

We are requesting the extension for the

construction trailer to remain where it's at.

We're requesting this because I need a safe place

to -- for my employees to be working while they're

on the site.

Along with that is we have to -- I

have to curb the OSHA and MIOSHA regulations. I

have to make sure that my people have access to

telephones, bath facilities and a safe working

condition. In the case there is an emergency,

there is also fire extinguishers in the trailer in

case there's a problem with one of the cites that

are under development.

You have in your possession some

pictures of the trailer as it exists today. I also

gave you copies of some of the bylaws and Master

Deed work and the Purchase Agreements that all the

homeowners have at the time of closing of the

units, which basically states that we have the


right to put a trailer up, construction trailer, on

site until the project is fully developed.

Market situation, the way it is right

now, we'd like to say we'd be out of that project,

but unfortunately the market's a little bit slow,

it's soft, and it's taking a little bit longer to

develop that site as expected, which requires the

extension that we're asking for.

MR. CHAIRMAN: All set?


MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone in the

audience who would like to input into this case?

Please come forward.

Could we have your name and address

for our records, please.

MS. LEMAY: Christine Lemay. It's

43081 Emerson Lane, Novi, Michigan. I live

directly across from this trailer.

After living in Novi for sixteen

months now, we built this new home, and I'm really

tired of having to look at this unsightly trailer

and vehemently oppose the requested variance


This trailer has already been there


for nearly two years. I was told before we moved

in by Laurie, the salesperson for Jacobson, and

John, the foreman on the construction site, that

this trailer would be moved within a year to

another site, the new part of Jacobson's building

right -- just north of us a quarter-mile in

Camden Court where there are spec homes and there

are also model homes.

When I called the zoning office back

in September after a year had passed, I spoke to

your zoning officers and asked them about what I

could do to have this thing moved. She said she

would check into it. The permit had already

expired. Who knows how long it would have gone

expired if I had not called.

Also, the -- she called me and said

that they had two weeks to renew it or move it. I

didn't hear anything back and I just -- I figured

maybe that, you know, they were going to move it or

they had renewed the permit. So I called her back

again and I spoke to -- I forgot the girl's name,

in the zoning office, one of the zoning officers,

and she said that they said they were going to move

the trailer.


And it still was not moved. Several

weeks passed and I called her back, and she said

they changed their mind, they decided they wanted

an extension on the variance and that they would

keep it here, and that this meeting was scheduled

tonight in December.

My many concerns are as follows: The

trailer has been vandalized and broken into, which

was reported and investigated by Novi Police. This

is a great concern to me as I am often home alone

in the evenings as my husband travels frequently.

At all hours of the night, people use

the portable toilet next to this trailer, which is

both disturbing and as a security issue.

I'm also concerned about the safety

of pedestrians and small children in the

neighborhood as trucks often use this point as a

turnaround and drive very recklessly. Once they

plowed into and destroyed our mailbox.

Also, it's a nuisance. There's a

high-powered spotlight on the front of the trailer

that is on all night, every night. I have two

skylights in the front of my home that cannot be

darkened and cannot be a real problem -- that can


be a real problem sometimes when trying to get to


It's also a health hazard as the

portable toilet has tipped over several times in

strong wind, emptying some of the waste on the

ground and street. This causes a grotesque and

smell and it's extremely unsanitary. In the summer

I was unable to stay outside when they would come

to clean -- once a week they would clean out this

portable toilet.

Also, it's extremely unsightly. It

looks like a dump. There's old tires piled up,

pieces of old lumber, broken garbage cans, broken

fencing, and other trash by the trailer.

This trailer is seldom, if ever,

used. I don't know what this gentleman was talking

about. Maybe once a day I see this old man go in

and get a broom and come out. There are many days

that no one even goes in this trailer.

When the door is open, I see hardly

any contents in the trailer, and that -- I don't

understand why it couldn't easily be moved to the

model or spec home garage.

There are only a few lots left in our


neighborhood, and there is no construction underway

at this time, nor has there been for the last six


On the other hand, the other place

where they told me they were moving this trailer

over -- they have, like, fifty-nine lots, and over

the last year, almost thirty houses have been

completed, and they don't have a trailer up there,

so I don't understand -- he's concerned about

emergencies, why they wouldn't have something up


And as far as OSHA goes, I -- that

lot backs up to a protected wetland, and with that

portable toilet dumping over, I would think that

OSHA would be concerned about that waste going into

that protected wetland.

Lastly, and certainly not least of

all, I implore all of you to consider building a

new home in Novi and having to live across the

street from this mess.

I feel that I've been patient and

reasonable up to this point. I don't feel they

were honest with me before we closed on this home

when they said that they would, in fact, move this


trailer when the other construction site was

underway. But I now feel it is time for this

hobble to be moved. I'm sure that

Mr. S. R. Jacobson and Mr. Marhofer in Northville

do not have a broken down trailer across the street

from their homes nor would they stand for it.

Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone else

in the audience -- please come forward. Can we

have your name and address for the record, please.

MR. SERROFFA: Michael Serroffa,

43099 Emerson Way. I'm Miss Lemay's neighbor.

I'd like to identify myself with all

of her remarks on behalf of all of our neighbors,

especially those of us with -- whose front of our

homes face the west and the trailer that she talked


This is not a trailer that you might

think of that would be in a new home development

where people could go who are interested in buying

a house. This is a trailer that looks like it

belongs in the slums. Next to it is a port-a-john

that she indicated that gets tipped over, that gets

used by people that aren't working on the site nor


that live there.

It is something that does cause,

besides the visual, the esthetic displeasure of it

causes foul smell and safety hazards to young

children, of which I have two.

This site -- this property that our

homes are on has already been the subject of a

fiasco by the leadership of this city, and you guys

have a chance tonight to send a signal to the

developer of this site, who I think has, frankly,

fell below the mark of what we would expect as

minimum expectations of homeowners and you should

expect as leadership of this city.

For the quality of service, the

quality of the development, the quality of response

time, we have a number of issues, I know from

talking to my neighbors that have not been

addressed by this developer. You have, apparently,

an open-ended development agreement which I'm not

privy to. The neighborhood association, which is

still patrolled by the developer, is not much

better than the Cangru Court.

The homeowner representatives that we

have on it outvoted on it almost every time there's


an issue that is controversial, and tonight we're

here to ask you to send a message to this developer

that the neighbors, that its customers, that your

residents are not happy with the quality of their


This trailer does not need to be

there. They're not using it. There's no

construction that I can see going on on this site.

The winter months are here. There will be no more

basements dug I suppose. If I'm wrong I'll stand

corrected, but if they were using it, if they were

proceeding towards the end of the completion of

this development -- we have a roadway, a driveway,

that has not been completely paved. It's two or

three inches below grade.

We have floods, we have water that

stands between the homes because the city

inspector, for hire, approved grades that were

apparently -- should not have been approved.

There's standing water that caused mosquitoes.

The site that is undeveloped -- and I

understand that the economy is soft, that's true,

but that does not mean that the vacant land has to

be left with debris all over the place and


unsightly trailer and port-a-john for use by

anybody that comes by, whether it's a drunk, and

the people -- high school kids using the bar or

whatever. It's a nuisance to our neighborhood.

All I would encourage you to do is go

look at it and decide for yourself. They can move

it. If they need to build homes in the summertime,

the springtime next year, they can bring it back,

because we all want out neighborhood completed.

I'd ask you tonight not to approve

their request for an extension.

Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there

anyone else in the audience who would like to input

into this case?

Sir, would you step forward, please.

MR. HOLCOMB: Good evening. My name

is Dick Holcomb. I live at 43089 Emerson Way, also

one of the neighbors that are directly affected by

the trailer and the port-a-john.

Everything that's been stated is

true, and there is issues that go beyond both the

trailer and the port-a-john. It's the usage of the

port-a-john, and this is one thing that really


bothers a lot of the neighborhood because there are

people using that at all hours of the night. For

some reason they found it's a very isolated place

that they can go if they have to go to the

bathroom, and they use it all the time. We see

people, we hear people coming in at 2:30,

three o'clock in morning. As a matter of fact,

it's been even frequented by the police force of

Novi because they've used it several times on cold

winter nights.

Something that we -- this is traffic

that does not help us for security of our

neighborhood. We're lucky. We don't have any

young kids, but during the summer, if you had young

kids, they couldn't ride their bicycles or

tricycles on the sidewalk in front of our houses

because of the odor. In the very strong wind in

September, the port-a-john was tipped up and blown

half across the driveway in front of the trailer.

The older gentleman who's in charge

of, more or less, maintenance repair of the

development came by on a Sunday and pushed it over

sideways and dragged it up next to the trailer

where it sat, and then on a Monday morning somebody


came along and set it back up and then bolted it

into place.

There is movement of dirt at the end

of our development. Whether it's done as a ploy to

say something is happening for this variance

meeting or not, I don't know, but it all happened

in the last week, and it just coincides with the

issue that we were told nothing was sold and there

was no sold placement on that lot and suddenly dirt

was moved.

There's adequate room on the upper

development to move this trailer and to move it to

an area that would not bother any of the houses

that currently exist up there, and that's where all

the action's been taking place.

I walk every night. I try to walk

two to five miles a night, and I spend time in both

developments, and when you drive up Novi Road

you'll see that most of the development work is in

the upper development, and that's where the workers

are, that's where the equipment are.

There's one port-a-john and no

trailer, yet there is probably four or five houses

under construction up there, which means there's


work crews of twenty-five to thirty-five people.

We see a work crew of one older gentleman who comes

into the development and spends about forty-five

minutes a day, so -- but what I recommend is if you

want to really see what goes on, spend some time in

our neighborhood and you'll see that it's a useless

occupation, space and time for the developer to be

there. He should be up where all the action is

currently. Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there

anyone else in the audience with input into this


(No response.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, we'll

close audience participation at this time.

There were thirty-five notices sent

out. We have received two objections plus the

additional input this evening from here. One of

the petitioners did have a response in writing


Building department?

MR. SAVEN: I would ask that you take

a look at the plot plan that was submitted before

you in regards to those units that were sold and


the location of where those units are that are sold

in making your decision.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm assuming from the

markings here that everything in orange are the

sold units; is that correct?

MR. MARHOFER: Everything you see

there in orange is sold. There are -- in that

orange section there are also three specs that are

going in. We presently are under construction for

another spec house on lot fifty-four. That's the

dirt the gentleman was talking about.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Board members?

Mr. Brennan.

MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, by code, the

petitioner has a right to have this trailer there

for 12 months, which he's had. He has a right to

petition us for an extension, which is why he's

here; however, I'm compelled by the evidence

brought by the neighbors that it's probably time to

move this thing, and I've heard nothing -- nothing

of the contrary to change my mind.

I would be, as a homeowner, equally

perturbed with having to deal with this across the

street, and the fact that there are still some 18


vacant homes, I think the development is underway

to being fairly mature with 33 sold. We're

approaching the 65 percent of development, and I'm

not compelled to support the petitioner.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Question. Could you

step forward, please, sir. What do you really use

that trailer for?

MR. MARHOFER: That trailer is used

by my superintendent. We keep files in there.

There is a telephone in there for emergency

purposes. There's some supplies in there to be

used for the units.

In regards to the other development,

which is Camden Court, there is -- at this time we

are using a garage over there for that particular

development, so it's not -- we're using both

locations, as I have one on Bristol Corners seven

miles down the road also.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Thank you.

Board members, comments or discussion?

MEMBER FANNON: What impact -- hold

on. What impact would it have on your company if

you didn't get this variance?

MR. MARHOFER: If there were an


emergency on the site with one of my contractors

and they needed a phone for instance, there would

be a problem there.

MEMBER FANNON: They don't have

Nextel phones?

MR. MARHOFER: I don't know if

everybody has a Nextel phone. I mean, I can't-

MEMBER FANNON: (Interposing) Well,

okay. So a phone is -- if there was an emergency

they wouldn't have a phone. And?

MR. MARHOFER: There's a fire

extinguisher in the site, at the location, for the

site for any immediate problems.


MR. MARHOFER: There are bathroom

facilities there, a port-a-john, which is not

unusual for any construction site.

That's what I need it for.

MEMBER FANNON: Okay. That's all I

need to know. I cannot -- I can't support -- after

hearing what we heard and the way that -- what it's

being used for, it just doesn't seem to me that

it's a major use of the project that it needs to

stay any longer and be bothering all these


residents, so I would not support any variance on

this trailer.

MR. CHAIRMAN: My feeling was if it

was real important, crucial to have -- speaking for

myself and my attitude -- I would make sure that it

was in a condition that it wouldn't be

objectionable to the residents to cause a problem

if it was that important for me to have.

But what I see, the way it's been

maintained and the attitude that's been taken with

it, I could never support a variance request.

Board members, comments or



concur with all three of you. My first comment,

when I opened this packet and looked at this

picture was, those poor neighbors across the

street, what they have to look at, and then to hear

the stories, it's truly upsetting.

I will not be supporting this motion

as well for the same reasons that the other Board

members indicated, and I'm being subdued this

evening, so I will not be supporting this motion at

all. Thank you.


MR. CHAIRMAN: Board members, further

comments or discussion?

(No discussion.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, the

Chair would entertain a motion in the case.

MEMBER BRENNAN: Sir, I would make a

motion with respect to case 01-090, I would move

that the petitioner's request be denied due to lack

of hardship.


MR. CHAIRMAN: Been moved and

seconded that the variance request be denied. Is

there any further discussion on the motion?

MR. SCHULTZ: MR. Chairman, just

adding onto the circumstances, it would probably be

helpful, I would make the motion to attach some

kind of statement to that, particularly finding the

comments of the residents to be credible, factual,

finding justification of the proponent to be

insufficient, those kinds of things.

MEMBER BRENNAN: Isn't that part of

the minutes?

MR. SCHULTZ: The maker of the motion

needs to make sure that those -- those comments


which are all-

MEMBER BRENNAN: (Interposing) I

don't want to argue with you. I will amend my

motion to include the specific comments of the

adjoining neighbors.

MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a affirmation-



MR. CHAIRMAN: -of the second,

please. Thank you.

Any further discussion on the motion?

Miss Gray.

MEMBER GRAY: Mr. Reinke, I would

also suggest that the petitioner be encouraged to

clean up the mess as soon as possible, whether the

trailer's pulled immediately or not. There's old

tires and stuff that's there. There are pictures

of that I have seen driving by. It's a big mess

and they should really clean up their act. Thank


MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. This is

something that I think is really -- since we're

denying the variance, I don't think it's part of

the motion. The point is well taken though.


Any further discussion on the motion?

(No discussion.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Madam Secretary, would

you call the roll, please.

MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


MR. CHAIRMAN: Sir, your variance

request has been denied.



MR. CHAIRMAN: Next case, case number

01-091, filed by Edgar Kent representing the

Redford Baptist Church.

MR. KENT: My name is Edgar Kent and

I represent the Redford Baptist Church.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Sir, could you be

sworn in by our secretary, please.

MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear that,

in the matter before you -- the information that

you're about to give is the truth and nothing but

the truth?

MR. KENT: I do.

MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you. Would

you state your name, please. Oh, never mind.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you please

present your case, sir.

MR. KENT: A couple of years ago our

church managed to be successful in negotiating the

purchase of the land on Meadowbrook directly south

of the Meadowbrook Elementary School. We achieved

the permission of the planning commission, site

plan approval and preliminary -- site plan approval

and special land use permit.


Our people became rather exuberant

because we think we have a very beautiful piece of

property there for our new church.

We now have a sign up on the

property, and we have found that sign is not legal,

so we are asking, at this point, for a variance to

allow us to leave the sign on the property for the

purpose of letting the neighbors and the neighbors

to come in the area, know that we are, indeed,

coming with our church.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there

anyone in the audience who would like to input into

this case?

(No response.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Seeing none, we will

close audience participation.

Building department?

MR. SAVEN: Mr. Kent's exuberance did

get him into a little bit of a problem.

What I can point out is that, as

you're well aware, this is a site plan process, and

this is a vacant parcel of land. What they, in

fact, had done is, if there was a building permit

issued for this particular project, they would have


been allowed to put up a sixty-four square foot

sign. The only thing that's closest to what he has

here is a real estate sign, which would have been

sixteen square foot, which is over that particular

size, so what he's attempting to do right now is to

petition the Board to maintain that sign that he

has, that eight by four, thirty-two square feet.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Let me also indicate,

there were 24 notices sent, we received no


Where -- this question is for

information. Where do you stand on your program to

start construction?

MR. KENT: We are in the process of

completing our phasing arrangements. We intend to

build in four to five phases. We are looking for

our final financial approval and backup of our own

church council in January, for completion of

funding in the late spring or summer, and hopefully

beginning construction the following summer.

In the meantime, we are looking to --

for a spot where we can begin to hold services and

become a part of the neighborhood as early as next



MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Brennan.

MR. BRENNAN: Let me ask Laverne's

question in another way. How long do you need the


MR. KENT: I beg your pardon?

MR. BRENNAN: How long would you like

to have the sign? Let's put some time lines on


At some point in time you are going

to go through planning, you're going to get some

approvals, and you can put up an official "we're

building a church here." How much time do you need

between now and that period do you think?

MR. KENT: I would think that the

maximum time would be 18 months.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Board members, further

comments or discussion?

MEMBER BAUER: Eighteen months or

earlier if they start.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Once they -- correct

me if I'm wrong, Mr. Saven, if they get a permit


MR. SAVEN: If, in the event a

building permit is issued, that sign could remain,


but I think you've got to bear in mind, there's a

lot of flexibility to-

MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) I


MR. SAVEN: -construction

identification sign. It talks about owners, the

architect, things of this nature, described in the

project itself, which is a very possibility, could

be approved, and approve a 64 square foot at that


MR. CHAIRMAN: I have no problem with

the 18 month time frame. I know what they're going

through and what -- there's a lot of things they

have to do on both their part, their group and as

well as meeting the City requirements and

everything of that nature.

MEMBER BRENNAN: Want a motion?


MEMBER BRENNAN: Case number 01-091,

I would move that the petitioner's request be

granted for a period of 18 months or less as



MR. CHAIRMAN: Been moved and


seconded to grant the petitioner's request for a

period of 18 months for the sign that they have


Is there any further discussion on

the motion?

MEMBER FANNON: I would only request

the petitioner, if they could, when time permits,

or the weather, to paint the posts that it's on the

same color as the sign if it's going to be up there

for 18 months. That's all I would ask for. Do you

know what I'm saying?

MR. KENT: We've got youth groups

that would like that project.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Board members, further

comments or discussion?

(No discussion.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none,

Madam Secretary, would you call the roll, please.

MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


MS. GRONACHAN: Member Gronachan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?



MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


MR. CHAIRMAN: Sir, your permit has

been approved. Wish you the best of luck.

MR. KENT: Thank you.


MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Next case,

01-092, filed by Mathias Keck representing


MR. KECK: I'm Mathias Keck. The

address is 1670 Mercedes in West Bloomfield, and I

representing Eberspaecher.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Sir, would you

be sworn in by our secretary?

MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

affirm that the information that you're about to

give in the matter before you is the truth?

MR. KECK: I do.



MR. CHAIRMAN: Present your case,


MR. KECK: The point is we are

136-years-old, still family-owned company, and we

developed over the years three divisions. Ten

years back, our owner, Hans Eberspaecher, gave --

he ordered that we have a special sculpture in

front of our headquarter in Germany, and that's --

because of the three divisions, that's a triangle

shape, so the shape of the tech center in Eslinger

(ph) has a triangle. As you might recognize the

shape of the tech center in Novi will have three

triangles, so that's all representing the three

divisions. And the signage -- or we see it more as

a sculpture in front at Haggerty Road, that's our

important link for us to our mother company in

Germany, so we would like to have that.

That's a picture from our

headquarters in Eslinger in Germany. That's the

triangle shape we have there, and these are -- and

this is the sculpture representing the three

divisions of Eberspaecher.


MR. KECK: And that may be hard to


see. That's what we -- the signage, the logo on

the building.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone in the

audience with input into this case?

(No response.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, we'll

close audience participation.

Building department?

MR. SAVEN: Okay. I'm going to try

to attack this the best way possible, and I don't

mean attack that way.

What they're presenting to you are

basically almost three pylon signs on one pedestal,

okay, and taking a look at this, it basically has

-- each individual pylon has a triangular shape to

it and then they each represent a phase, because

they are more than two foot apart.

I know that this variance seemed

extremely large that's being presented tonight, but

if we were just to take a look at the faces of

those signs alone, as you'd be looking at them,

even though they have the name on each one of them,

you would be looking at something that should

probably be one-third of that request, okay.


This is rather unique because there's

different heights to each one of the signs and then

each one represents the company's logo on the


MR. CHAIRMAN: Nice job.

MR. SAVEN: Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. There were four

notices sent out and we received no response.

Board members?


just want to clarify something here. Why is this

just one variance -- maybe this question needs to

go to Don -- as opposed to three?

This is just going to be one column

or is it going to be three columns?

MR. SAVEN: No. Because it's on one




MR. SAVEN: -this becomes an issue as

the sign -- if you took a look at the sign, when

they talk about a two face sign -- remember you go

back into the sign ordinance. If that sign is less

than two foot apart, okay, that would be considered


one sign-



MR. SAVEN: -but in this case,

because the configuration -- this is really

something that we've never had before anywhere in

the city of Novi -- this arrangement represents

uniqueness in the fact that the square footage

certainly is different because of the height

requirements. It's how you're taking a look at

that front and the particular angle creates the


MEMBER GRAY: Mr. Reinke?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Miss Gray.

MEMBER GRAY: When I first got this

ordinance -- this application, I looked at it and I

went they want how big a sign and boy, are the boys

going to have a field day with this one. When I

went out and looked at the site, it's nothing. I

mean, it's going to be very nice. It's going to be

very elegant. My only concern is, is the name and

the logos, are they going to be on all three faces

of each column in -- on the pylon?

MR. KECK: I mean, I was --


unfortunately, I was not the architect or the

artist on that, but it should be like you see here,

so on two of them that's only the logo and the one

there's the name.

MEMBER GRAY: So it's only on one


MR. KECK: Yeah.

MR. SANGHVI: The name is on one


MEMBER GRAY: The name and the logo

is only one side on a face?

MR. KECK: One triangle, yes.

MEMBER GRAY: And the rest of it is


MR. KECK: (Interposing) Yeah.

MEMBER GRAY: -on the back?

On -- the other two sides is plain?

MR. SAVEN: I think we need to really

concentrate on what you just said. In other words,

Eberspaecher is not going to be on the other -- on

the opposite faces of that pylon.

MEMBER BRENNAN: Sir, can you pass

that poster-

MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) Let's


pass that around so we can get a closer look and it

can be a lot more definitive.

MEMBER GRAY: You still can't tell

from looking at this, although it's lovely, it is.

Will it be -- when we see it, is it

going to be on all three sides; it's going to say

the name on all three sides, it's going to have the

logo on all three sides?

MR. DHARIA: My name is Haresh

Dharia, architect for Ghafari Associates,

17101 Michigan Avenue in Dearborn.

This sign-

MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) Can you

be sworn in, too, please.

MEMBER GRONACHAN: Would you raise

your right hand, please. The information that you

-- do you swear that the information that you're

about to give in the case before you is the truth?

MR. DHARIA: Yes, it will be all



MR. DHARIA: As Don pointed out, it's

a very elegant sign, not only the presenting -- the

corporate, three divisions, but also the shape of


building will be off to the side. As you'll see,

the main building is designed also to compliment

the signage, too.

What you see on these three signs, to

answer your question specifically, Eberspaecher

name, which is on one of the signs, would be on all

three sides, so you read from south/north. West

you see the same thing.

I have a small picture in front of me

which you have. The logo will also be showing up

on all three sides.

MR. CHAIRMAN: So what we're seeing

on the one is going to be on all three sides?


MR. CHAIRMAN: But it will be -- what

we see will be the same on each panel?

MR. DHARIA: That's right.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Board members,

further comments or discussion?

MEMBER GRAY: The other comment I

wanted to make is the stylized logo with the E is

very -- I think it's very architecturally pleasing.

I think it adds a nice touch to the building.

Thank you.


MR. CHAIRMAN: I agree with

Miss Gray in that when I first looked at this I

thought will we be able to see the building past

the sign. And when you see it in perspective

there, it gives you a much better understanding,

and I think it looks great, and I can support what

they're doing because it really isn't what they're


Board members, further comments or


(No discussion.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. We've addressed

the one sign. Are there any comments or

discussions on the -- on the height of that? I

don't see that to be anything that -- that would

all be covered under the same thing.

Further comments or discussion?

MEMBER SANGHVI: No, sir. May I make

a motion?


MEMBER SANGHVI: In the case of

number 01-092, we accept the request for variance

by the applicant because of the clarification we

received regarding the size and also because of the


elegance and esthetically superior design of the


MEMBER BAUER: Second the motion.

MR. CHAIRMAN: It's been moved and

seconded to grant the petitioner's request as

requested. Is there any further discussion on the


(No discussion.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Madam Secretary, would

you call the roll, please.

MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


MR. CHAIRMAN: Sir, your variance

request has been approved. See the building


department for the necessary permits. We wish you

the best of luck.

MR. DHARIA: Thank you so much.

MR. KECK: Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. At this time

we're going to take about a five, ten minute break

and we'll be back and continue with the rest of our


(A short recess was taken.)


MR. CHAIRMAN: Call our next case,

which is case number 01-093 filed by

Lawrence Trepeck representing the proposed gas

station at 43601 Grand River.

MR. JACOBS: Mr. Chairman, if I may,

I'm Robert Jacobs. I'm an attorney representing

Mr. Trepeck and G. L. Enterprises. With me is

Charles Lauer, our architect, here today.

If the Board would permit us, we

would like to make a combined presentation before

you. We have some graphic presentations to show

you, some pictures to show you. Also in attendance

is Mr. Gus Campbell, one of the owners with

Mr. Trepeck of the subject property.


My address is 380 North Old Woodward

in Birmingham, Michigan, and with your permission I

will just give a brief introduction and let

Mr. Lauer do his presentation.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Being an attorney, you

don't need to be sworn in but I'm going to ask your

associate to be sworn in, please.

MR. JACOBS: Thank you so much.

MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

affirm that the information you're about to give in

the matter before you is the truth?

MR. LAUER: I do.


MR. CHAIRMAN: Gentlemen, if you

would please proceed.

MR. JACOBS: Thank you so very much.

This property is a unique property, Mr. Chairman

and members of the Board. It comes to you as a

nonconforming use in the valid building

nonconforming use. It is a legally nonconforming

use that has gone through the planning commission

and is -- was used as a gas station.

The basis why it is nonconforming is

the basis that there has been a TC-I or TC-1


district established in the Town Center, and,

therefore, it makes this property nonconforming.

We have gone before your planning

commission, and we have worked with it, to present

a site plan that conforms to the TC-I district in

all particulars. I'm talking about landscaping,

I'm talking about paving, I'm talking about

amenities and structures and everything that we can

possibly do.

But we have some physical problems

with the property, and that's why we are before you

today, because in order to conform -- we can

conform with 99.9 percent, but we are asking for

three variances, and those variances Mr. Lauer is

going to point out to you and show you explicitly

where they are.

But this isn't a self-imposed or

self-induced variance that we are requiring. It is

because we are in this district that we came

subsequent to the use of this property, and we are

working with the City to conform to that use that

we are here. The property, we can't move, it is

what it is.

So, with that in mind, there are


these practical difficulties that we have here.

There is a hardship. We want to be able to utilize

this property. We don't want to just build and

continue to use the gas station in this, which we

could as a nonconforming use, but that isn't our


So we are before you to ask for your

permission to grant these specific variances.

And I'm going to ask Mr. Lauer if he

would please show you at this time specifically

what we are asking for tonight. I will address you

again after his presentation. I thank you.

MR. LAUER: Will our audiovisual

people get the monitor going so -- there we go.

This is -- it's along the old stretch

of Grand River. These are the legacy lots from

long before the Town Center. This -- the lot is

about three-quarters of an acre, and today you

wouldn't find any commercial lots that small, but

as you can see from this vicinity map here, this is

stuff that, in some cases, been there for fifty

years, and that's a big part of what we're trying

to work with here.

The -- this is the existing


conditions. Right now, the two pump islands, total

of four pumps, eight fueling stations, this is

where they were before. There were two curb cuts

on Grand River, and essentially the entire lot was

paved over, and this is the existing building.

This is the creek running across the back here.

What we're proposing to do is bring

the esthetics of the site up to the Town Center


We are abandoning the westerly curb

cut on Grand River, just having one curb cut on

Grand River with a hundred foot separation from the

corner. We have one curb cut out on Flint, also a

hundred feet back. The entire front facade is

landscaped to Town Center standards with the berm

and retaining wall, street trees, brick splash

strips, pedestrian lights, bike racks, plaza

benches. I mean, the entire collection of

Town Center amenities is now on this site.

Where we had run into problems is in

fitting all this into the site with the hundred and

fifty by two hundred foot dimensions.

So we have three specific areas that

we're asking for variances on here.


The -- this part here would be built

during the reconstruction of the site, and what's

happened is the -- because Flint Street is

considered a collector under the Town Center

ordinance, sidewalks are required to be

twelve-and-a-half feet wide on collector streets.

For some strange reason, the sidewalk on

Grand River is only required to be eight feet, so

this was a technical interpretation of the

ordinance that Ron Royo (ph) said hey, there's

nothing we can do about this, you have to go to the


What we determined is that the best

interest of esthetics would be served by keeping an

eight foot sidewalk to line up with the eight foot

sidewalk we have on Grand River, put the brick

splash strip in and get the variance of the extra

four feet of sidewalk that would go right here, and

have it part of the landscaped area. So that is

the first variance we're requesting.

The second part of that equation is

right here. Because Flint Street right now is

gravel from Grand River back, part of our

commitment to the town -- I'm sorry, to the City


was to pave Flint Street to the edge of our curb

cut, curb and gutter both sides. And so we're

paying for all the cost of this improvement, but

the extension of Flint Street will not stay in the

same place that it is right now.

The master plan indicates that

Main Street would go west and bend north about

another five hundred yards west of this, and

Flint Street would T into it at that time, so

whenever the last leg of the Main Street ring road

comes in, at that point this would be redone, and

what we would do at that point is put the rest of

the sidewalk in along our property line, and one of

the conditions of the planning commission was that

we escrowed an amount to be determined by the City

to pay for those sidewalk improvements. It's just

we simply can't do it until the rest of the road is


The final element of our variance

request is over on the other side of the property

for the request for a substandard driveway width.

What's happened is we have a loading area over

here, and this is -- this is when -- this is the

loading for the convenience store items that are


going into the store. This area back in here is

the employee parking.

The way the convenience store works,

the employees are helping off-load all those goods

as they're coming in, and so in the first case we

wouldn't see a circumstance where the employees

would be leaving when the delivery truck is showing

up, and the delivery trucks are only there for

fifteen minutes every other day. It's not a

constant sort of thing. So when the delivery truck

isn't there, we have a twenty-four foot wide

driveway that narrows down, at it's narrowest point

here, to twenty feet.

So while the ordin -- while the

request is for a waiver of fourteen feet of

driveway from a standard twenty-four to a ten, the

reality is it's a dual use area that is a loading

zone and the driveway into the employee parking


So we think that these are the

minimums that we need in order to make the site

work, and we feel that the esthetic levels before

and after will be significantly enhanced by this,

seeing the landscape details there. And I believe


you have copies of these in your packages as well.

Finally, this is the afterlook of the

building. The building will be completely skinned

in brick. We will have a stucco canopy with brick

columns, no metal anywhere really, and extensive

landscaping all the way around the building.

I assume that you know what the

existing building looks like, and we consider this

to be a big step up and is really part of -- the

end part of what, for me, has been about a six year

process working through multiple iterations with

staff and consultants over this time trying to

figure out how to make this work, and we would

appreciate the support of the ZBA on getting this

thing finalized so that we could get the

renovations going.

Thank you.

MR. JACOBS: Mr. Chairman, I think

that -- just adding to what Mr. Lauer has said, it

is obvious that there are practical hardships here

that we can't address without your good offices.

And, obviously, we have attempted and have

implemented, I think, almost a hundred percent of

the TC-I requirements within this district to


satisfy these requirements and to make this

something that is compatible with that. We are

constrained only by the shape of the land, where it

is and how it is.

If there are any questions, Mr. Lauer

or myself are here and we thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there

anyone in the audience who would like to input into

this case.

(No response.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, we'll

close audience participation.

There were 19 notices sent. We

received no approvals or no objections.

Building department?

MR. SAVEN: Mr. Chairman, as I

pointed out, or as the attorney pointed out

earlier, that this is a legal nonconforming issue,

I want to verify that, from Mr. Schultz' office,

and -- number one. Number two is that this is in a

Town Center district. There has been a zoning

change in that district since the time that this

building was built. And, number three, I would

just like to ask the applicant, have the existing


tanks been removed from that site?

MR. JACOBS: Yes, they have, they


MR. SAVEN: Thank you.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Anything else,

Mr. Saven?

MR. SAVEN: Only that the petition --

the second petition is place the money in escrow

for that until such time that Flint Street has been

redone, whatever.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Just to make a general

comment before opening discussion, how long has

that facility been sitting vacant?

MR. SAVEN: Well, from my eyes, it's

too long when we need to have something done with


MR. CHAIRMAN: That's really

immaterial, Mr. Saven.

MR. SAVEN: I realize that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Just my point is, I

would like to see something done there, and I think

the petitioner has done a magnificent job in what

they're proposing to do, and I think, really, the

variance or deviations they're asking for for what


they've done are minimal.

At this time I'll open up the floor

to Mr. Brennan.

MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, you stole my

thunder, Laverne. The Red Wings weren't on TV that

night, so I watched the planning commission

meeting, and you got to be absolutely nuts not to

support this. That site is a dump, and what you

guys have proposed is beautiful. I have no

objections. I only have -- and you've already

confirmed that, that the one variance petition is

to defer, and with that I have no problems with

what you've asked for.

MEMBER BAUER: I'll second that



MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Sanghvi.

MEMBER SANGHVI: Can I have some

comment from our attorney about this

nonconforming --

MR. SCHULTZ: I think both our office

and the previous city attorney have reviewed as

much evidence as we could find in the files and

determined that this appears to be a noncon -- a


lawful nonconforming use that has not been

abandoned, and a nonconforming site that,

theoretically, could be used in its existing

condition, so I think the key issue for the Board

to consider is the obvious one that you've all

spotted, that you have a number of improvements

that comply with the ordinance and they're down to

a few that simply can't be made, so that's the

difficulty they allege.


MR. CHAIRMAN: Miss Gray.

MEMBER GRAY: I have one question,

and I, too, watched the planning commission meeting

that night, not because the Red Wings weren't on,

although I'm an avid hockey fan as well. I

remember watching the meeting and I read through

the minutes that we got, the draft copy, and I know

this is not under our jurisdiction, but I have a


Can you tell me, either of you

gentlemen, how the tanker truck is going to pull in

and deliver with the three underground tanks at the

curb cut on Flint Street?

MR. LAUER: Yeah. The --


MEMBER GRAY: Is the truck going to

fit under the canopy?

MR. LAUER: Yeah. The canopy is

fourteen six clearance, so they come right through

to here and tank into it. And the way the gas

station servicing business works, you can order up

different size of tankers, so it would be the

short-bed tankers, and you have the clearance to

get under it.

MEMBER GRAY: That was the only

question I had, and it wasn't addressed anywhere by

anybody else, so I wanted to ask. I thank the

Board's indulgence.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Board

members, further questions or comments?

MEMBER FANNON: Mr. Chairman, in case

number 01-093, I would move that we grant all three

variances due to the fact that it would be a great

improvement to the site, and the petitioner has

shown a practical difficulty in meeting the

requirements in the TC-1 district.


MR. CHAIRMAN: It's been moved and

seconded to grant the petitioner's request. Is


there any further discussion on the motion?

(No discussion.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none,

Madam Secretary, would you call the roll, please.

MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


MR. CHAIRMAN: Sir, your variance

request has been approved. See the building

department. We wish you the best of luck.

MR. TREPECK: Thank you so very much.



MR. CHAIRMAN: Next case, case number

01-094, filed by Craig Hofeldt representing Midas.


MR. Hewitt: Good evening, sir. Good

evening to the Board. My name is Harry Hewitt. I

am with Midas International Corporation. I'm an

employee with them. I'm the real estate

development manager for Midas. My address is

1300 Arlington Heights Road, Itasca, Illinois.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Sir, would you be

sworn in by our secretary?

MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

affirm that the information that you're about to

give in the matter before you is the truth?



MR. CHAIRMAN: Please present your


MR. HEWITT: Thank you. Good

evening. I know the hour's late. I understand

there's a hockey game on television, so I'll keep

my remarks brief.

We've been at this site as Midas far


the last twenty-four years, along with our

franchisees that are here tonight, Jerry Philmore

and his son, Chris. We've tried to be good

citizens over the last twenty-four years, good

taxpayers, good neighbors.

There's been numerous changes, of

course, in the character of the neighborhood, the

streets, and, in fact, Midas over the last

twenty-four years.

We are no longer just a muffler shop.

In that regard, we've done a number of things

recently to try to upgrade our image, getting away

from the old image. If you all have booklets -- I

believe they've been passed out to you. Within

those booklets there is a rendering, I believe, of

what the building appeared to be before and what

we're in the process of trying to complete for the

signage variance this evening with our upgrade


The signage, quite frankly, along

with the landscaping that we have submitted, in

fact, has been approved by the City, we believe

will, again, be the final piece in our upgrade plan

for this facility, and we would certainly request


your favorable approval of that this evening.

The two items that we're requesting

variances for really have to do with a piece of

building signage which, if you look at the

rendering that we have, would consist of the words

Auto Service Experts on the facility. We believe

that is an important part of our upgrade program,

and also to express to the public the changes that

have taken place in Midas.

Again, mufflers are a very small part

of our business now. We have gone to some

additional services which, you know, are essential

for us to be profitable, and for Jerry and Chris to

be profitable in the future, and so -- really,

that's an important part to express that to the

consumer, that we are, in fact, involved in those

services at this point.

And the second aspect, of course, is

the second piece of the signage, which is the small

monument mounted sign that would be at the corner

of Novi and Twelve Mile Roads. This, of course,

would be a significant decrease in the pylon sign

that we have there, and we think, quite frankly, an

enhancement as far as the appearance of the sign.


It will be on a masonry base, attractively

constructed, and will be at eye level so the

consumer can, in fact, see that as they come up the


I believe, if you've been by the

site, there is a small cardboard rendering of that

sign which, I believe, is, in fact, actual size for

that, so at least you have an idea of what the sign

would appear to be when it is, in fact, constructed

if, in fact, approved by the Board.

With that, I really have no other

comments. We again, certainly appreciate your

favorable consideration of the application, and I'm

open for questions if there are any.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there

anyone in the audience who would like input into

this case?

(No response.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, we'll

close audience participation.

Building department?

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

don't know how familiar you are with the Midas

site, but most of us are. We've been here -- been


around for a while. You're all aware of the

ground -- or the pylon sign which is there. We

have an opportunity to get this sign down and

certainly deal with a ground type of monument sign

which is in line with what the ordinance dictates.

The two Midas signs which are on this

building, one which is facing the north and one

facing the east are permitted signs according to

the sign ordinance. The problem is that we have

issue where you have more than one sign, it does

require that we have to go through it and address

that particular issue. The signs, what you're

looking at, Automotive Service Center, is going to

be in place of the Muffler, Shocks and-

MR. HEWITT: (Interposing) Brakes.

MR. SAVEN: So that's basically what

we're dealing with. And I found that working with

this company in the past was certainly helpful when

approaching improvements around Twelve Mile Road.

They certainly worked with us very well.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

Mr. Brennan.

MEMBER BRENNAN: Just one question

for the petitioner. In addition to the signage, is


there a general overhaul of the entire building as

we see with this with different colors?

MR. HEWITT: Yes. That's already

been mostly completed. At this point we've

replaced bay doors, we've painted the building to

the colors you see there. Yes, that -- again, this

signage request here, along with landscaping we'll

be performing next spring, when it's appropriate to

do so, will be the final phase of our upgrade

program here.

MEMBER BRENNAN: My general feeling

is that it's very obvious that that's a 24-year-old

Midas Exhaust facility there. I think what the

petitioner has tossed at us is a good deal for us.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Well -- I'm sorry.

Are you finished, Mr. Brennan?

MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, I only had one

clarification. The ground sign is -- on the agenda

is noted as 25 feet, and I guess that's because

we're taking that dimension down at the bottom and

squaring that off?

MR. SAVEN: That's correct.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. I echo

Mr. Brennan's sentiments, except for one thing.


Being with the road development there and

everything that has changed around that area, it's

actually brought the building closer to the road.

The Auto Service Experts I think

looks better than the three individual signs that

were up there, but I feel that, somehow, that could

be reduced in height of letters because it's right

on top of the road.

My -- and this is one Board member's

opinion that, really, a 12 inch high letter at that

point could be very significant, would give the

exposure, but kind of reduces the, I don't know,

the size magnitude of what I'm looking at.

Board members, comments or


MEMBER FANNON: Mr. Chairman, is

there a sign -- is there a Midas sign on the west

side of the building?

Is there a Midas sign on the west

side of the building?

MR. HEWITT: On the west? No. There

is nothing at all on the west side. That would be

the back of the building facing down

Twelve Mile Road, if I'm correct.


MEMBER FANNON: Right. I was in

there tonight, and there wasn't a Midas sign?


sir. There is a sign on the west side.

MEMBER FANNON: So the question is,

is there a black sign on the west side of the





that's where we would like to put the two signs.

That's where we're putting the two signs that are

going up right now.


that they're taking is on Twelve Mile, the north

side, and the Auto Service Experts will remain on

the east facing side.

MEMBER FANNON: How many wall signs

are up on Midas right now?

There's one in the front. Let's say

this is Twelve Mile. Looking at Novi Road, is

there a Midas sign that looks at Twelve Mile Road

right now?




MEMBER FANNON: There isn't? It's

really on the back of the building?


MEMBER FANNON: Okay. I was sitting

in the parking lot and I was really feeling bad

when you said that there wasn't.

MR. CHAIRMAN: We're not addressing

the Midas sign on the building. All we're

addressing on the building is the Auto Service

Experts, and we're addressing the pylon sign on the

corner -- ground sign on the corner.


MR. SAVEN: Pylon sign being gone.

MEMBER BRENNAN: Any time we can get

rid of a pylon sign-

MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) I think

it's better for them, and esthetic wise, it makes

everything look better, and if you make it better

-- the whole thing is a drawing package that way.

My only feeling is that I believe the

other sign could be reduced to a one-foot high

letter and still suffice the same thing and not

jump out at such a high magnitude.


MEMBER BRENNAN: Should we try a



is only 18 inches.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I understand that.


that's the smallest one we can get right now that

is made for us.


sign on that size building is small. I mean, we

normally have twenty-four to thirty inch signs on

the building, so -- I'm just -- I'm just saying,

when you look at it, it's not a large sign really.

MEMBER BRENNAN: Just to move things

along, let's see how the Board sits and I'll try a

motion. With case number 01-094, I would move that

petitioner's request be granted, that the pylon

sign come down, and the two renderings that we have

fulfill the purpose of identification of the site.


MR. CHAIRMAN: It's been moved and

seconded to grant the petitioner's sign request

variance as presented. Any further discussion on

the motion?


(No discussion.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none,

Madam Secretary, would you call the roll, please.

MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fannon?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


MR. CHAIRMAN: Sir, your variance

request has been approved. See the building

department for the necessary permits and we wish

you the best of luck.



MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Other matters?

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

MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Saven.


MR. SAVEN: Okay. What was

distributed today before you was the -- again, the

interpretation of the sign ordinance which is

dealing with Fountain Walk signs.

At one of the previous meetings there

seemed to be a concern relative to the banner

signs. I was hopeful that -- again, that this

interpretation regarding signs would put things to

bed for those banners which were located on the

interior of the project.

I believe Miss Gray brought this up

before as a concern at one of the last meetings

that we had. I pointed it out that there was an

interpretation opinion from our city attorney

regarding this matter, and we should probably keep

this as a matter of record for any future use

regarding this particular issue as far as the signs

for Fountain Walk.

So what it did address is three basic

conditions. One were the conditions were the signs

would be facing outward to a public area. Number

two, those signs which were facing inward, as far

as like a courtyard type arrangement; and, number

three, is those signs which were fronting on that


internal private road, it's not a public road,

it's a private road, okay. So these were the signs

which were going -- and areas where banners can be

placed without being subject to the sign ordinance.

Now, one of the things that was

brought up as far as an opinion goes is whether or

not -- where would we consider that view from a

public area, and part of this opinion addresses the

condition of twenty-five foot back from the leading

most edge of that external wall, which would give

us something as a figure we could use as far as a

place to go for -- does it need comply or does it


I think this is a good approach, and

I just hope that the Board does concur with that

twenty-five feet.

As a problem with that, do we need to

beat this up with the developer and try to come

back to the Board, but I think this is reasonable.

MEMBER SANGHVI: These 25 feet is

regardless of the size of development?

MR. SAVEN: Regardless, regardless.

MEMBER SANGHVI: Shouldn't it be

proportionate to the size?


MR. SAVEN: I think what we can do is

if we have any question in regards to whether or

not this could become a problem, we can bring it

back to the Board. And I think if there is a

question, it certainly or -- may be a point of

visibility that we can't see from an area which may

be a problem, but just to have something as a point

of reference that we could use would be very


I'm not saying we're going to go back

and hide behind a bush and look at something and

say I can see that. We want to try to be


MEMBER BAUER: Give us a guide to go


MEMBER SANGHVI: This is a basic

parameter you are setting up?

MR. SAVEN: Right. That's -- this is

a basic parameter. We're going to keep this as

something -- because I do know that we're probably

going to be dealing with some pretty wild signs

coming up pretty soon, so just kind of keep it

available for you.

The second thing is that we have now


had a court reporter for some time, and I just need

to know from the Board as to what your opinion is

relative to a court reporter continuing at every

meeting, or would you want to see her at specific

meetings. This is part of our budget now. I'm

just being honest with you. I have to deal with

budget items here. And do you feel that this is

being very helpful to you, should we continue with

this process, or looking at it in a position where

we might have sensitive cases and bring them


MR. CHAIRMAN: If -- this is

something -- rather than make a snap decision, I

would suggest two things: One is that we take home

the information we were given about the banners and

Fountain Walk signage, take a little bit of time to

read through that and just for general -- if

there's any questions in general the Board members

have on it, I think it should be brought to our

next meeting.

Rather than make an impromptu

decision as to the court reporter, I suggest the

same thing, that we take and give it some thought,

and at our next meeting that we will -- each one


have a response that we can verbally discuss under

other matters and bring that point up and have a

general discussion. Be prepared to discuss that

rather than to start tonight without actually

giving it some more thought, which I think we need

to take a little more time to do.

MR. SAVEN: It was my idea for a

hasty decision in this area. I just want to bring

it to your attention, based on the fact how have

things been going, is it what you're looking at, is

this something that we want to possibly change or

is it something that we look at potential -- like

this case tonight, I didn't -- I wasn't aware they

were coming in with a court reporter.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I have no problem with

that, but rather than discussing it tonight I would

like to defer it to the next meeting, and that way

when people have had the opportunity to think it

over and they can really raise all points and cover

everything at one point in time.

MR. SAVEN: Sounds good to me.

MEMBER SANGHVI: Mr. Chairman, I just

would like to make my own point here because I

don't know if I can be here at the next meeting,


and I just like it to be known that I think it's a

wonderful idea to have a court reporter here taking

detailed minutes. In this day and age, with super

litigation, in my practice as an orthopedic

surgeon, every patient is a possible litigant, and

we always kept extensive, exhaustive records just

for that case, for that situation, because you

never know which one is going to turn up to be

what, so to have detailed records and detailed

minutes I think is a wonderful idea, and I'm sure

the building department thought it was a good idea

to have great records, and so this should be

really -- instead of taking minutes should be a

routine in every meeting so that we have excellent

records for future reference.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

MEMBER GRAY: Mr. Reinke?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Miss Gray.

MEMBER GRAY: In addition to those

two items to be thought about and brought back to

our January meeting, you made reference a little

earlier about whether we want to continue to

receive complete planning commission minutes or if

we wanted to receive an action summary. Could that


also be something that we think about and bring

back to that meeting as well?

MR. CHAIRMAN: What I would like to

do, and I mentioned this to Sarah, and I guess I

should have brought it up to the Board, I suggested

that we try an action summary, and in that way we

have, really, a chance to look at it, and we can go

back the other route if we feel we need to.

But I think -- it's still a point

that can be discussed, but I'd like to see the next

planning commission minutes be in an action

summary, then we can see, really, what we get out

of it and do we want to go this way or do we want

to the other way, but it can be a discussion point

and topic at any time.

MEMBER SANGHVI: You mean we should

have both at the same time so we can see the


MR. CHAIRMAN: No. I want to see an

action summary.


MR. CHAIRMAN: That's it. Then we've

had a chance to work with that and we can give our

opinion on whether we feel we want to continue with


this or we want to have the full minutes.

MEMBER SANGHVI: One of the problems

about action summaries is it is the perspective of

the person who prepares the summary, and that

doesn't necessarily tell you exactly what went on.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, I think this is

why I'd like to take one and just work with it. If

it doesn't suffice for what we need --

MS. MARCHIONI: Mr. Reinke?


MS. MARCHIONI: Perhaps we could just

distribute the action summaries, and to those who

are interested, the full minutes, we can put you on

the planning department's list of people that get

the full set of minutes, because I know not all of

you want to read the sixty pages of full minutes.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, let's try one

month of an action summary and see what happens,

and if we find out it doesn't work, we need

additional information, we can request it.

MEMBER BRENNAN: Are they prepared


MR. CHAIRMAN: You'll have to ask

Sarah that.


MR. BRENNAN: Is the planning

commission meeting minutes already summarized into

action items?


MR. BRENNAN: It's already done, so

it's no big deal.

MS. MARCHIONI: The problem is that

they've got kind of a backlog of minutes, so you'd

be receiving August, September and October right

now, which would be the size of the ordinance I

think, so-

MR. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) This --

I'm assuming if we get on action summary, we would

get the minutes or whatever information was on

those a lot quicker than we would, am I correct?

MS. MARCHIONI: The action summaries

were like ours. They just state the motion.

MR. CHAIRMAN: That's fine. I would

like to try it.

MR. SAVEN: I would think that if

you're getting your minutes ahead of time, or your

packet ahead of time, if you have a question in

regards to the action summary, certainly you could

contact Sarah, we can get you a copy of those


planning commission minutes.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Because it would save

a lot of time and a lot of trees.

MEMBER SANGHVI: I agree, save a


MR. CHAIRMAN: Let's try that and go

from there.

Any other items to be brought up

before the Board?

(No response.)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, we'll

adjourn the meeting.

(The meeting was adjourned at

9:24 p.m.)

Date approved: January 8, 2002 ___________________

Sarah Marchioni Recording Secretary

- - -



I, Cheryl L. James, do hereby

certify that I have recorded stenographically the

proceedings had and testimony taken in the

above-entitled matter at the time and place hereinbefore

set forth, and I do further certify that the foregoing

transcript, consisting of 103 typewritten pages, is a

true and correct transcript to the best of my abilities.



Cheryl L. James, CSR-5786