View Agenda for this meeting
View Action Summary for this meeting

TUESDAY, JUNE 3, 2003 -- 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, June 3, 2003.

Cynthia Gronachan, chairman
Jerald Bauer
Frank Brennan
Bob Gatt
Chris Reed
Laverne Reinke

Don Saven, Building Department
Sarah Marchioni, Building Department
Thomas Schultz, City Attorney

Cheryl L. James, Certified Shorthand Reporter

1 MS. CHAIRMAN: We can go ahead and call

2 the meeting to order. Sarah, would you please call

3 the roll.

4 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?

5 MEMBER BAUER: Present.

6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gatt?


10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gray I have as

11 absent excused.

12 Member Gronachan?


14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


16 MS. MARCHIONI: And Member Reed is not

17 here yet.

18 MS. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. The Zoning

19 Board of Appeals is a hearing board empowered by the

20 City -- Novi City Charter to hear appeals seeking

21 variances from the application of the Novi zoning

22 ordinances.

23 It takes at least four votes to approve

24 a variance request and a vote of the majority of the






1 members present to deny a variance.

2 This evening we have five members, so

3 if there's -- because there -- we need a full board,

4 six members, our alternate is on his way, but since

5 there's only five members present tonight, and at

6 least four votes are required, those petitioners who

7 wish to table their request until the next meeting,

8 or until a full board is present, may do so now.

9 Any board decision made tonight will be

10 final.

11 Are there any changes in the agenda?

12 MS. MARCHIONI: Yes. Please remove the

13 May 6th, 2003 minutes, and there is the addition,

14 under other matters, number one,

15 Oak Pointe Church, and number two is mockup signs.

16 MS. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Minutes.

17 Any changes? I think we've got -- the March and

18 April minutes came back to us in this packet.

19 MEMBER BRENNAN: Move for approval.

20 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

21 MS. CHAIRMAN: It's been moved and

22 approved that the minutes -- all in favor, say aye.

23 (Vote taken.)

24 MS. CHAIRMAN: Anybody oppose?






1 (Vote taken.)

2 MS. CHAIRMAN: This isi a -- at this

3 point, if there's anyone in the audience that wishes

4 to make a remark, public remark, in regards to

5 anything other than the cases that are currently

6 coming before us, they can do so now. Is there

7 anyone in the audiences that wishes to address the

8 board? Yes, sir. You need to come to the podium,

9 please.

10 MR. FELLOWS: Good evening. I don't

11 mean to be out of line. I didn't quite understand

12 your comment earlier, if I wish to be tabled. Do I

13 need to wait until my case comes up to ask that it be

14 table, or can I do that now?

15 MEMBER REINKE: You can do it right

16 now.

17 MS. CHAIRMAN: You can do it right now,

18 if you wish. We were told that our alternate may be

19 late, but there's no guarantee that he will be here.

20 We only have five members at the current time. What

21 case number are you?

22 MR. FELLOWS: Item number four, Case

23 Number 03-041.

24 MS. CHAIRMAN: It's up to you at this






1 point. If you want to wait to see if our alternate,

2 you know, is going to show up at this point, then you

3 could, at that time, you can ask to have it tabled.

4 THE WITNESS: No. I guess I'd like to

5 make the decision to table it right now, please.

6 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay, all right. So

7 case number four, 03-041, Michael Fellows from

8 Brookhaven subdivision, has requested that his case

9 be tabled until next month.

10 MR. FELLOWS: Yes.

11 MS. CHAIRMAN: And you're waiting for a

12 full board, is that the reason for your tabling it at

13 this time?

14 MR. FELLOWS: That is correct.

15 MS. CHAIRMAN: That's July. Sarah, do

16 you have the date.

17 MS. MARCHIONI: I believe it's July --

18 MS. CHAIRMAN: It will be early July.

19 MR. FELLOWS: That's fine.

20 MS. CHAIRMAN: We'll table it for the

21 July meeting then.

22 MR. FELLOWS: Please.

23 MS. CHAIRMAN: All right.

24 MS. MARCHIONI: I think it's July 8th.






1 MS. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Saven?

2 MR. SAVEN: I just want to point out

3 that I believe the sign is about ready to expire; is

4 that correct?

5 MR. FELLOWS: I think it has.

6 MS. MARCHIONI: It already has.

7 MR. SAVEN: All right. So that we're

8 just -- because it is tabled, this is an ongoing

9 issue; therefore, no action will be taken against

10 this gentleman until you hear the case.

11 MR. FELLOWS: Thank you.

12 MEMBER BRENNAN: Keep your sign.

13 ME. FELLOWS: Thanks. See you next

14 month.

15 MS. CHAIRMAN: Anyone else?

16 (No response.)

17 MS. CHAIRMAN: Well, then, let's get

18 started.


20 CASE NUMBER 03-038

21 MS. CHAIRMAN: First case, 03-038,

22 filed by -- boy, I hope I don't -- I'm sorry if I

23 don't pronounce this correctly -- Amarjit Chawney

24 from -- for Hampton Woods, Phase II.






1 Would you like to come down and be

2 sworn in by our secretary, to the podium right there.

3 MEMBER BAUER: Would you raise your

4 right hand, Mr. Chawney? Do you solemnly swear or

5 affirm to tell the truth regarding Case 03-038?

6 MR. CHAWNEY: I do.

7 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you. Proceed.

8 MR. CHAWNEY: My name is Amarjit

9 Chawney. Everybody calls me Amar. And my address is

10 23965 Novi Road, suite 120 in Novi, Michigan. That's

11 where my office is.

12 This is a development which we are

13 planning to build in phases, and we are, for phase

14 two, short by two parking spaces, not by three,

15 because we were able to find an extra parking space

16 because the loading/unloading area, we have made it

17 larger than required, so once we adjust it, then we

18 were able to add one more parking space. We are

19 short by two. But once the development is finished,

20 we will not be short by any parking spaces because

21 the two parking spaces can go in the next phase very

22 easily.

23 Basically, the building is going to be

24 similar to what we have built before.






1 And the request is for two parking

2 spaces.

3 MS. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. There were

4 25 notices sent; no approvals, no objections, and six

5 letters were returned.

6 Is there anyone in the audience that

7 wishes to speak in regards to this case?

8 (No response.)

9 MS. CHAIRMAN: No one. Building

10 department?

11 MR. SAVEN: I would just have to point

12 out that the request that Mr. Chawney indicated, as

13 he had submitted, was for two parking spaces. The

14 planning department has indicated that there were

15 three parking spaces that were needed to be looked

16 at.

17 Just a couple things. This is part of

18 a major phase project, and as Mr. Chawney had

19 indicated, there are future buildings that will be

20 going in here which may not require this additional

21 parking requirement.

22 And that's about it.

23 MS. CHAIRMAN: Board members?

24 MEMBER GATT: I just have one question.






1 Mr. Chawney, how does this impact the handicap

2 parking?

3 MR. CHAWNEY: The handicap parking,

4 they're two space provided even though one was

5 required when you combine phases one and two. In

6 phase one we provided three of them and phase two we

7 have provided two.

8 MEMBER GATT: And that complies with

9 the laws?

10 MR. CHAWNEY: Yes, it complies. I

11 think it's more than what the requirements are.

12 MEMBER GATT: Thank you.

13 MS. CHAIRMAN: Anyone else?

14 MEMBER BRENNAN: I'll speak the

15 obvious. It appears that this is a minimum request

16 or requirement. We had two phase or three spaces for

17 the type of use that this is planned. I don't have

18 any problem with this.

19 MEMBER REINKE: Madam Chairman, also I

20 think the petitioner has mentioned that as the

21 additional phases of the project are built, there

22 will be sufficient parking places that would actually

23 make up this deficit, so in the long run we're not

24 going to really end up being short. We're short at






1 this point in time. And so for the total project

2 it's really not going to suffer from that. I can

3 support the petitioner's request.

4 MS. CHAIRMAN: The chair will entertain

5 a motion.

6 MEMBER BRENNAN: Would you like a

7 motion?


9 MEMBER BRENNAN: I'll make a motion

10 with respect to 03-038, the petitioner's request be

11 approved for either two or three, whatever it works

12 out, in that he is within the spirit of the ordinance

13 and we expect that we may reclaim this in the future.

14 MEMBER BAUER: Second the motion.

15 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay. There's been a

16 motion made and a second. Any further discussion on

17 the motion?

18 (No further discussion.)

19 MS. CHAIRMAN: Sarah, would you please

20 call the vote.

21 MS. MARCHIONI: Does Member Reed wish

22 to vote?

23 MS. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Reed, are you ready

24 to vote.






1 MR. REED: Yeah, I would like to vote.

2 I read the documents before coming.

3 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gatt?


9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reed?


15 MS. CHAIRMAN. Okay.

16 MR. CHAWNEY: Thank you.

17 MS. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Have a good

18 evening.


20 CASE NUMBER 03-039

21 MS. CHAIRMAN: All right. We will call

22 Case Number 03-039, Mr. Ghaleb Assaf, representing

23 homeowners at 1431 West Lake Drive, looking for

24 some -- Mr. Assaf here? Anyone regarding 1431 West






1 Lake Drive?

2 MEMBER BRENNAN: Madam Chair, I would

3 make a motion that we put this on hold and call the

4 next case.



7 CASE NUMBER 03-040

8 MS. CHAIRMAN: Case Number 03-040,

9 Singh Development and Waltonwoods at Twelve Oaks,

10 phase two. Mr. KAHM?

11 MR. SAVEN: I believe he's outside

12 talking to Mr. Chawney.

13 MS. CHAIRMAN: All right.

14 MEMBER GATT: The officer's going to

15 get him.

16 MS. CHAIRMAN: Are you 03-040 for Singh

17 Development?

18 MR. KAHM: Yes, I am. I thought I was

19 later on.

20 MS. CHAIRMAN: We move fast here.

21 MR. KAHM: Sorry about that.

22 MS. CHAIRMAN: Would you like to come

23 up to the podium and raise your right hand and be

24 sworn in by our secretary?






1 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear or

2 affirm in Case 03-040 to tell the truth?

3 MR. KAHM: I do.

4 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you.

5 MS. CHAIRMAN: If you would explain to

6 us what you need.

7 MR. KAHM: Yes, I will. Again, I

8 apologize.

9 MS. CHAIRMAN: That's fine.

10 MR. KAHM: My name is Michael Kahm,

11 Singh Development Company. I'm here tonight

12 regarding our Waltonwood/Twelve Oaks project at the

13 Twelve-Oaks Mall.

14 While we are in the process of getting

15 final approvals for the second phase of our

16 development, which is an assisted living and memory

17 care phase, when we originally got this project

18 approved some years ago, site plan approved, we got

19 it approved as one building, and that was --

20 that's the intent of our operation, to be one

21 building.

22 Because of the nature of the

23 development, it has congregate care, which is

24 independent apartments with services, which is the






1 building that's out there right now, and then it has

2 connected to it assisted living and memory care,

3 which is what we're going to be building hopefully

4 this year.

5 On the drawing here, the lighter shaded

6 building is the existing building. This small center

7 area is what we call a common service hub, and there

8 you'll find administrative offices, our central

9 kitchen, central laundry, maintenance, the kind of

10 services that the entire building share together, and

11 then the assisted living and memory care is the phase

12 to the west, which is integrally connected to the

13 existing phase, and they will be operated and owned

14 as one building, one operation. We just built them

15 in two phases for market reasons.

16 Back when we originally built phase

17 one, in financing these kinds of projects, the

18 lenders always want to have separate tax ID numbers.

19 That's just one of their things. So what we did was

20 we came and we split the property for tax purposes

21 and created this -- what I consider an imaginary

22 property line because we needed a tax ID number.

23 Unbeknownst to us later on it would actually be

24 looked at as a property line, and it's not intended






1 to be one except that's the only way you can get a

2 tax ID number, is to actually split the property. So

3 that's what we did.

4 What we're here tonight requesting,

5 which kind of looks complicated but really isn't, is

6 for the board to grant us the permission to really

7 connect the two buildings and basically have a zero

8 lot line condition between the two phases, because

9 they're intended to be one building, they're intended

10 to be operated collectively.

11 In our infinite wisdom, when we created

12 this property line -- I should say tax ID -- the

13 devising line is what I consider it. When we brought

14 it across here and when we did phase one, we were

15 just bringing it across the north end of the parking,

16 for no particular reason quite frankly. Well, what

17 it ended up being is it ended up creating what was

18 considered technically a front lot line, and the

19 reason for the third variance you see in your list is

20 because the way the line got drawn, it ended up being

21 that close to the second phase, so it really was just

22 no reason at all. It's just that that's the way the

23 property line got drawn.

24 And so the variances are really,






1 tonight, to ask you if you would consider allowing us

2 to continue to operate the building as one and to

3 really consider this property line as really a tax

4 identification separation line because we need that

5 for our separate lending institutions.

6 Just as a point of reference, we also

7 went to the Construction Board of Appeals on somewhat

8 similar matter because we had requested their

9 permission to allow us to have the buildings

10 connected, and that was back on

11 May 8th. They did grant that approval, so my

12 explanation to them is really similar to the one I

13 just gave you, so -- just so you know, that these

14 conditions actually existed only because we created a

15 separate property line which created separate tax ID

16 numbers for the phases.

17 So we're here tonight to ask your

18 approval to have those variances. If you have any

19 questions, I'll be happy to answer them.

20 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. Is

21 there anyone in the audience at this time that has

22 anything to say in regards to this case?

23 (No response.)

24 MS. CHAIRMAN: No one? There were 11






1 notices sent; nothing was returned.

2 Building department?

3 MR. SAVEN: Basically, I want to ask

4 Mike one question. This is still under one

5 ownership?

6 MR. KAHM: Yes, sir.

7 MR. SAVEN: And it always will be under

8 one ownership?

9 MR. KAHM: Yes, sir. And, actually --

10 I'm glad you asked that, Don, because one of the

11 things that the -- we are going to do is record

12 against the property an operating agreement, which is

13 one of the things we agreed to with the Construction

14 Board of Appeals, that this building will be operated

15 as one entity and it will be owned by one entity, so

16 functionally it will be one building. And that

17 agreement will be recorded against the property

18 affirming that fact. We'll be forwarding that

19 through the City attorney.

20 MS. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Brennan?

21 MEMBER BRENNAN: Again, it seems like a

22 no-brainer. This is more of an administrative

23 cleaning up with legal issues.

24 Unless there's recommendation from Tom






1 to the otherwise, I support the petitioner.

2 MR. SCHULTZ: If I may quickly, no

3 recommendation to the contrary, but if the motion of

4 the board is to approve, I think it should be subject

5 to an indication that this is -- that the variance is

6 granted subject to the single ownership of both

7 parts.

8 MS. CHAIRMAN: Anyone else? Member

9 Brennan?

10 MEMBER BRENNAN: I'll move it along.

11 With respect to Case 03-040, I would move that the

12 petitioner's request be approved as presented, that

13 we include his comments tonight that the variance is

14 issued based on a single ownership, and it's an

15 administrative/legal cleaning up.

16 MEMBER GATT: Second.

17 MS. CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and a

18 second. Any further discussion on the motion?

19 (No further discussion.)

20 MS. CHAIRMAN: Seing none, Sarah, can

21 you please call the roll.

22 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


24 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gatt?







2 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


4 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reed?


10 MS. CHAIRMAN: Your variance has been

11 granted.

12 MR. KAHM: Thank you very much.

13 MS. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.


15 CASE NUMBER 03-039

16 MS. CHAIRMAN: Case number four has --

17 we've tabled case number four. I see some gentlemen

18 walking in. By any chance were you Case 03-039?

19 UNIDENTIFIED: No, I'm sorry.

20 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Then if that's

21 the case we'll go to Case Number -- are you Ghaleb

22 Assaf?

23 MR. ASSAF: Yes.

24 MS. CHAIRMAN: All right. You missed






1 your calling. Case four has tabled, so if you'd like

2 to come down now and present your case, we're ready

3 for you.

4 Please state your name.

5 MR. ASSAF: Good evening. My name is

6 Ghaleb Assaf.

7 MEMBER BAUER: Are you going to speak,

8 sir?


10 MEMBER BAUER: Would you raise -- do

11 you both swear to tell the truth, or affirm to tell

12 the truth, regarding this case, 03-039.

13 MR. ASSAF: I do.


15 MS. CHAIRMAN: Would you please state

16 your name?

17 MR. ASSAF: My name is Ghaleb Assaf.

18 I'm with (inaudible) Engineering, and we're for Case

19 03-039 for the zoning regarding the side setback.

20 I'm the property owner.

21 MS. CHAIRMAN: Who ever's going to

22 speak first, go right ahead and tell us-

23 UNIDENTIFIED: (Interposing) First of

24 all, I apologize. We were outside talking to my






1 neighbors regarding the plans themselves, and one of

2 the things that was asked of me, which I had

3 indicated that I would go along with, was a privacy

4 fence on the side which would be facing north, which

5 is not reflected on the plans. And whatever I have

6 to do to get that done, I indicated I would get that

7 done.

8 The present building is at an angle. I

9 believe you have a copy showing a footed dotted line.

10 We're trying to straighten that angle. That means

11 that at its closest point it's approximately four

12 feet two inches away from the north side, and that's

13 where the privacy fence is going to go.

14 That house is going to move to the

15 right somewhat wider by approximately four feet, and

16 that would be to the south.

17 The physical location of the house is

18 actually moving towards the street so as to give a

19 deeper backyard on the lake.

20 Other than that addition to the left,

21 or to the south side of the house, the footprint of

22 the house will remain the same. That's the only

23 change.

24 The present side setbacks are not up to






1 these 25 feet. Its only a 40 foot lot. And so it

2 wasn't in code when I bought the house 20 years ago

3 and, you know, we've never changed it since then, and

4 that's what we're asking for.

5 And as I understand it, there were some

6 objections that were filed. I think I've satisfied

7 the problem with those objections, but I can't speak

8 to the objections, but I think there may have been

9 someone who had an objection that may be resolved.

10 But that's basically what we're asking

11 for.

12 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. There

13 were thirty-five notices sent; three approvals, one

14 objection. The one objection came from -- was

15 that Mr. Ott?

16 MR. OTT: My name is Ray Ott. I live

17 at 1425 West Lake Drive. I'm on the north side of

18 the 1431 property.

19 When I responded, we had not had any

20 dialog between the builders and the homeowners, so I

21 had a number of concerns regarding the property

22 that's on the north side of the home that abuts to

23 mine, and the maintenance of that property.

24 Just prior to this meeting, we have






1 reached agreement between myself, the builder and the

2 homeowner that we will put a six foot privacy fence

3 along -- running along our home and the garage, and

4 that would satisfy my concerns about the

5 unsightliness of that piece of property.

6 And I'm not opposed to them

7 straightening out the home to get it lined up

8 straight the four feet all the way along.

9 So I think we've reached agreement.

10 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay.

11 MR. OTT: So I can withdraw my

12 objection.

13 MS. CHAIRMAN: All right. Thank you

14 very much. Anyone in the audience that wishes --

15 come on down, please.

16 MR. LUKEY: My name is Larry Lukey and

17 I actually live on the south side of this property.

18 Of course, if you live on the lake on a 40 foot lot,

19 you need variances to build your house, and we looked

20 at the plans together, Ray on the north side and

21 myself on the south side, and are in agreement that

22 we think that we don't have any objections.

23 MS. CHAIRMAN: I'm happy to see the

24 neighbors are happy. Anyone else in the audience






1 that wishes to make a deal here?

2 (No response.)

3 MS. CHAIRMAN: No one. Building

4 department?

5 MR. SAVEN: Well, I think just for a

6 matter, this is a fire damaged home. We looked --

7 we're looking forward to something being done with

8 this home. The only concern that I have is there

9 were many issues that were brought up earlier in the

10 presentation. I just want to verify that the

11 footprint of the building that's before us tonight is

12 a footprint that you intend to build?

13 MR. ASSAF: Yes, that's the one.

14 MR. SAVEN: And I'll also point out to

15 the board members, the footprint of the building sits

16 back, 1425, where the deck is coming out probably

17 close to and in line with the adjacent building, so

18 there's no vision obstruction for what they're

19 planning to do.

20 UNIDENTIFIED: If I may just address

21 that. The height of the building, as it's going to

22 be redone, will actually be lower than what it is

23 now, so the sight line for people on the street would

24 actually be improved, because this was a very






1 high-peaked roof when we bought the house, and we

2 never changed it. But it will not be now. It will

3 be lower.

4 MR. SAVEN: All I'm just trying to

5 point out is that the footprint of the building here

6 is not going to change based upon your presentation?

7 UNIDENTIFIED: That's correct.

8 MR. ASSAF: The only change is the

9 privacy fence, only addition.

10 MS. CHAIRMAN: Board members?

11 MEMBER REINKE: I think the -- Madam

12 Chairman, I think the issues that we saw as potential

13 problems have been resolved with the neighbors.

14 Because it's a 40 foot lot and it's very hard to

15 build without a variance. I think they've done a

16 good job in not expanding further than what they

17 have. And since everybody's happy on both sides,

18 everybody affected by this, I can support the

19 petition.

20 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Anybody else?

21 MEMBER GATT: I just want to concur. I

22 mean, prior to hearing the neighbors speak I was

23 opposed to it. I didn't want to upset neighbors.

24 But since they're both here and they're both in






1 agreement, I can also support.

2 MS. CHAIRMAN: Member Brennan, did you

3 have something?

4 MEMBER BRENNAN: No. Mr. Gatt was

5 going to make the motion.

6 MEMBER GATT: I'll go ahead and try it

7 then. In Case Number 03-039, I would move that the

8 board accept the petition from the homeowner,

9 including the three variances asked for.

10 MEMBER REINKE: Support, if petitioner

11 will state that the -- or the motion maker would

12 state that the reason for the variance is lot size

13 and configuration.

14 MEMBER GATT: Yes, so moved.

15 MEMBER REINKE: Support.

16 MEMBER GATT: Can we go along with the

17 privacy fence?

18 MR. SCHULTZ: I was going to say, if

19 that's significant to your decision, it should be

20 added as a subject to the variance.

21 MEMBER GATT: (Interposing) I would

22 add that, that the privacy fence be erected on the

23 north side of the home.

24 MS. CHAIRMAN: I think we have a motion






1 and a second here. Is there any discussion on the

2 motion?

3 (No discussion.)

4 MS. CHAIRMAN: Seeing none, Sarah,

5 would you please call the roll.

6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gatt?


8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


16 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reed?


18 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Your variance has

19 been granted. Please see the building department.


21 CASE NUMBER 03-042

22 MS. CHAIRMAN: I think we're back on

23 track now. Let's call case number five, 03-042,

24 filed by Albert Alagna representing Athenian Coney






1 Island located on Eleven Mile in the Town Centers.

2 This is for a sign variance.

3 Would you gentlemen like to come down?

4 Would you please state your names and raise your

5 right hand to be sworn in.

6 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear or

7 affirm to tell the truth regarding Case 03-042?

8 MR. ALAGNA: Yes, I do. My name is

9 Albert Alagna. Our office is at 42388 Mound Road,

10 Sterling Heights, and we're here to ask for a

11 variance for the 43324 Eleven Mile Road, Athenian

12 Coney Island.

13 We'd like to install two signs on our

14 wall, one on each side of the wall, one facing east I

15 believe and the other one is facing south. And we

16 would like to remove the one that's on the tower

17 which reads Coney Island Inn, which is a former

18 business there. They've been using that sign since

19 they've been in business, so now they want their sign

20 up and they'd like to have two signs for visibility

21 reasons.

22 Eleven Mile Road stops right there at

23 their corner, and then there's another road which is

24 called-






1 UNIDENTIFIED: (Interposing) I believe

2 it's Crescent Boulevard.

3 MR. ALAGNA: And when people are asked

4 directions how to get -- when they ask directions how

5 to get to their location, they have a problem with

6 Eleven Mile Road because it turns into a different

7 road, and they have a problem seeing the sign, and

8 they're calling and asking where are you at so we can

9 pick up our order. That's happened a few times I

10 believe.

11 UNIDENTIFIED: Quite a few times.

12 MR. ALAGNA: So they're asking for more

13 visibility basically. And in that shopping center, I

14 believe there's two other businesses that do have

15 signs on both their walls.

16 UNIDENTIFIED: Pita Cafe is one.

17 MR. ALAGNA: Pita Cafe is one, and-

18 UNIDENTIFIED: (Interposing) Matress

19 and Futon Shop I think.

20 MR. ALAGNA: Yes, the mattress shop.

21 So that's where they got their idea to

22 go ahead and try to get two signs.

23 That's basically our --

24 MS. CHAIRMAN: All right, thank you.






1 Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to voice

2 their opinion on this?

3 (No response.)

4 MS. CHAIRMAN: Seeing none, building

5 department?

6 MR. SAVEN: No comment.

7 MS. CHAIRMAN: There were forty-eight

8 notices sent, and there were no approvals or

9 objections, and five letters returned.

10 Board members?

11 MEMBER REINKE: Madam Chairman, corner

12 situation where they're at, and what other businesses

13 are in corner locations like that have been kind of

14 unique. And the location, since you're out on that

15 point area, for people coming around, to come around

16 on the -- would be west side, they're not going to

17 see the tower, they're not going to see anything to

18 know that you're there. I can understand that.

19 We've had other businesses in there even prior to

20 this that had second signs and still didn't even make

21 it with the second sign in there.

22 I can support petitioner's request.

23 The only thing I have is with the two signs, I'd like

24 see see them be a little smaller to fit in the banner






1 rather than be the size of the mockup because I think

2 it's a little bit too large.

3 I don't know what you could propose or

4 what you're looking at in that possibility.

5 MR. ALAGNA: I do have -- I do have a

6 sketch of a sign that we have at 40 square feet, and

7 it does fit inside that light band. Can I bring it

8 over to you?

9 This is 40 square feet, so it gives

10 it -- now, that banner, quite frankly, we ordered it.

11 It was too late. That mockup we did for the banner,

12 it's a little bit larger than the actual proposed

13 sign that we want to put up, but we kind put it up

14 real quickly because we got notice that we're

15 supposed to have one up, and I didn't know that until

16 Tuesday or Wednesday after the holiday, so --

17 MEMBER REINKE: In my personal opinion,

18 I still feel that that's pushing the envelope, the

19 size there. I would like to see something in the

20 line of about 34 or 36 square feet that would give it

21 a little more symmetry along with the rest of the

22 identification that are on the panels.

23 MR. ALAGNA: That we can -- we could

24 guarantee we could do it. It won't make that much






1 difference, as we're concerned, as far as building

2 the sign. We can do it at 36.

3 MEMBER REINKE: Other board members


5 MS. CHAIRMAN: I -- driving by there, I

6 agree with Member Reinke. You can definitely see it

7 from Grand River, and I do know that you do need a

8 sign out there. It's very difficult to find your

9 restaurant; however, and I also concur with the size.

10 I'll let other members -- go ahead, Member Brennan.

11 MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, I have a

12 completely different perspective on this. I drove up

13 and down Grand River and I wanted to ask the

14 petitioner, are you attempting -- with the signage

15 change, are you attempting to draw people in from

16 Grand River or from within the parking lot?

17 MR. ALAGNA: Whichever, whichever can

18 see them the best.

19 MEMBER BRENNAN: It's a big difference,

20 as far as I'm concerned, because going on Grand River

21 you cannot see the two sides of that building because

22 of the -- you cannot see the two sides of that

23 building because they're hidden by trees and that

24 heavily shrubbed . The only thing you can see is






1 that corner, and I wondered why the heck wouldn't you

2 want to take advantage of that corner -- hold on --

3 why wouldn't you want to take advantage of that

4 corner, given all of the trees and the shrubbery and

5 the like.

6 I swear, I drove by that thing four

7 times. I could not see those side walls from Grand

8 River.

9 Now, if their case and their petition

10 is well, it's for within the parking lot, it's a

11 different story, but that's what I first thought.

12 UNIDENTIFIED: It's within the parking

13 lot, sir.

14 MR. ALAGNA: Plus when they -- when

15 people ask directions how to get there, they tell

16 them Eleven Mile Road, it's an Eleven Mile Road

17 address, it's not a Grand River address, so they're

18 going to get into that section and then once they're

19 in that section they can see the sign.

20 MEMBER REINKE: I think it's -- Madam

21 Chairman, I think it's almost really impossible to

22 have a sign there that would be directed from Grand

23 River because it would have to be sizeable. The

24 corner sign is even difficult to see. You have trees






1 that are growing up there that are starting to block

2 that off more and everything in that nature.

3 I think to ask the petitioner to state

4 what they're looking for is parking lot direction,

5 because people coming up there around the corner on

6 the -- as I make reference to the west side, there's

7 nothing, and once you're in there they're really --

8 the corner sign does you no value at all because you

9 can't see it, where on the banner you can see the

10 sign, see identification and know where they're at

11 and go from there.

12 MS. CHAIRMAN: Yes, Member Bauer.

13 MEMBER BAUER: I have a different

14 outlook. I'd like to see it about 30 on both sides,

15 but I won't fight for it. I will go for the 36.

16 MEMBER REINKE: I just threw that up as

17 a number.

18 MEMBER BAUER: Because 30 -- you're

19 talking 60 square feet, and that's a lot. With 36

20 your over 70 feet.

21 MEMBER REED: Miss Chairman, I

22 support the two-sided sign. I think it's important

23 for the parking lot, instead of having a blank side

24 when you're looking for the place, and I think there






1 should be a little more balance on the sign as far

2 as -- I think the -- I'm not sure if 36 or 30 is a

3 right number, but a little bit of balance on the top

4 of the sign within the banner.

5 And I think given the unique situation

6 on the corner lots, that it's important to have --

7 especially on the parking lot to have a blank banner

8 there, I don't think -- it's not as pleasing, so I

9 support the double-sided sign. And between the 30

10 and 36 size I think is fine.

11 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay. So we've got some

12 direction here. How are we going to resolve this

13 size?

14 MEMBER BRENNAN: Somebody make a

15 motion.

16 MEMBER GATT: Can we ask the

17 petitioner, can you live with a 30 foot?

18 MR. ALAGNA: As a sign person that

19 builds them, 36 would be esthetically nicer because

20 of the length of the sign and the height of the sign.

21 Over and above 30 square feet would -- 36 would look

22 better.

23 But we want to get two signs up there,

24 so we'll go ahead and compromise, whatever we need to






1 do, but 36 would look a lot better.

2 MEMBER GATT: Because six times six --

3 what was five times five?

4 MR. ALAGNA: Well, the way the sign is

5 sitting in there -- I don't have my computer with me

6 to draw it up, but 36 square feet would look better

7 than 30 square feet because of the way the sign is.

8 MEMBER REINKE: Madam Chairman, I think

9 that we're in a range that's workable, and the

10 recommendation I'm going to make, and I'm prepared to

11 make a motion, that we allow two signs at 32 square

12 feet, which I think would give you adequate -- would

13 fit in the banner, would look good, give you

14 identification and everything to work with.

15 MR. ALAGNA: Did you say 32 square

16 feet?

17 MEMBER REINKE: Thirty-two square feet.

18 UNIDENTIFIED: He's the sign guy.

19 MR. ALAGNA: He needs two signs there,

20 so that's fine, 32 square feet. We agree with that.

21 MEMBER REINKE: Madam Chairman, in Case

22 Number 03-042, I move that petitioner's request for

23 two banner identification signs of 32 square foot

24 each be approved and that the corner tower sign come






1 down, and the reason for the variance is a corner

2 business and identification from two directions.

3 MEMBER BAUER: Second the motion.

4 MS. CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and a

5 second. Any discussion on the motion?

6 (No discussion.)

7 MS. CHAIRMAN: Seeing none, Sarah,

8 could you please call the roll.

9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gatt?


17 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


19 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reed?


21 MS. CHAIRMAN: Your variance has been

22 granted. Please see the building department.

23 MR. ALAGNA: Thank you very much.







1 CASE NUMBER 03-043

2 MS. CHAIRMAN: Case 03-043,

3 Beacon Sign Company representing Michaels at

4 West Oaks Shopping Center.

5 Please state your names, raise your

6 right hand and be sworn in.

7 MR. HARRIS: I'm Roy Harris for Beacon

8 Sign Company.

9 MR. LOUKS: Matthew Louks with

10 Michaels.

11 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear or

12 affirm to tell the truth regarding Case 03-043?


14 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you.

15 MS. CHAIRMAN: We've reviewed your

16 case, and if you want to summarize, we would

17 appreciate it.

18 MR. HARRIS: Okay. I'm Roay Harris

19 from Beacon Sign Company, and this is Case Number

20 03-043.

21 We are requesting six signs to be

22 installed at the 43635 West Oaks Drive, West Oaks

23 Shopping Center, and I believe you do have plans.

24 We have some photographs above the






1 signs across the country we would like to show you of

2 other Michaels stores.

3 MS. CHAIRMAN: You can proceed while --

4 MR. HARRIS: I'm sorry about the

5 mockup, and I didn't understand what they meant.

6 We're just the installation company. We're not the

7 manufacturer of the sign, so there was little

8 misunderstanding, but we did get the mockups out

9 there today. I don't know if anybody had a chance to

10 see them.

11 MS. CHAIRMAN: No. Did anyone else?

12 Okay.

13 Anything else you want to add to your

14 case?

15 Anyone in the audience that wishes to

16 address the board in regards to this case?

17 (No response.)

18 MS. CHAIRMAN: There were 16 notices

19 sent, and there were no approvals or objections.

20 Building department?

21 MR. SAVEN: No comment.

22 MS. CHAIRMAN: Board members?

23 MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, I don't know if

24 Michaels has been before the City of Novi regarding






1 signs. I don't know if the sign maker has been in

2 front of the City regarding signs, but we have a very

3 strict sign ordinance, and one of the things that we

4 have always historically been unsupportive of is

5 signs for the purpose of advertising.

6 The sign, Michaels, is an

7 identification of a business. The other signs are

8 nothing but advertisement, and I have no support for

9 those at all, and I probably would want to negotiate

10 on the size of the Michael sign.

11 Thank you.

12 MEMBER REINKE: Madam Chairman?

13 MS. CHAIRMAN: Yes, Member Reinke.

14 MEMBER REINKE: I would echo and

15 totally support Mr. Brennan's comments. The five

16 additional signs I could no way support, and the

17 Michaels sign, if there wasn't a building, I think I

18 could park at the gas station and see it very

19 visibly. I would have to see the Michaels sign

20 reduced as well as to what Mr. Brennan alluded to.

21 Thank you.

22 MS. CHAIRMAN: Member Bauer.

23 MEMBER BAUER: I concur with both

24 members of the board. The signs for the silk, floral






1 and crafts and arts supplies and frames and home

2 decor I could not vote for and approve. And the sign

3 for Michaels would have to come down in size. It's

4 just too big.

5 MS. CHAIRMAN: I think you kind of have

6 an idea where we're going here.

7 MR. HARRIS: We have an alternate plan.

8 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay. I suggest you

9 bring it forward.

10 MR. HARRIS: I see that.

11 MS. CHAIRMAN: So how does this differ

12 from your previous request in size?

13 MR. HARRIS: Well, everything is

14 under -- it's not stretched out, and it's now stated

15 The Arts and Crafts Store, and that's so that people

16 know what Michaels is.

17 In size, they could be manufactured to

18 whatever size you agree upon, but they do need to

19 specify what Michaels -- you know, what it is that,

20 Michaels.

21 MS. CHAIRMAN: Board members?

22 MEMBER REINKE: I don't think there's

23 anybody in this room that doesn't know what Michaels

24 has.






1 MR. LOUKS: Fantastic.

2 MEMBER REINKE: Not a single person.

3 That's why I can't support The Arts and Crafts Store

4 verbiage on there. It's -- your name identifies it.

5 Everybody in the area here knows Michaels store, they

6 know what they have, and they know what they can

7 expect to find when why walk in the door. And I

8 can't support that identification.

9 MR. LOUKS: Could I make a reply to

10 that?

11 MEMBER REINKE: Chairman's discretion.

12 MS. CHAIRMAN: I'm sorry?

13 MR. LOUKS: Could I make a reply to

14 that?

15 MS. CHAIRMAN: Yes, but can you use the

16 microphone so everyone can hear you?

17 MR. LOUKS: Certainly. I'm sorry. I've

18 never done this before.

19 When I first started with Michaels,

20 which was six years ago, I had answered from a

21 recruiting station that they had a position, and the

22 first position I thought that I was applying for was

23 a grocery store. It started out in the

24 Bay City/Saginaw market, and there's a Michael's






1 grocery store. And I don't know if they reach this

2 far down, because I've traveled with Michaels

3 extensively. I've been to five states and twelve

4 cities.

5 And I do appreciate the comments made,

6 that's very flattering, that everyone does know what

7 Michaels is, and that's a great message, thank you,

8 but in the Bay City and Saginaw market, that is a

9 distinct difference. And I don't know if Michael's

10 is a grocery store in this market as well.

11 The only other thing I would have to

12 add is, I would love to see, if there is a Michael's

13 grocery store, is the distinction between the

14 offerings that we have.

15 MS. CHAIRMAN: Member Brennan?

16 MEMBER BRENNAN: No, there's no

17 Michael's grocery stores around here. And I'm not --

18 believe me. I'm not an arts and crafts guy and I

19 know who Michaels is.

20 I did some quick calculations, and the

21 arts and crafts logo underneath I'm not going to

22 support.

23 I'm trying to get this overall store

24 identification sign down. I did some quick






1 calculations. If we squeeze that down in height to

2 four foot and squeezed it together a little bit from

3 twenty-seven to twenty-four, we're dealing with a

4 ninety-six square foot sign, which is twice that of

5 what's allowed. It would provide sufficient store

6 identification, especially if it's done with that red

7 against that tan background.

8 I don't know how you feel about that,

9 but that's a proposal.

10 MEMBER REINKE: A side line comment, if

11 I could. I agree in principle what you're doing, but

12 I think -- I'm not -- if we got the height down to

13 four feet, whatever worked in their layout of their

14 signage letter spacing I could support, but I can't

15 support four foot in height.

16 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Well --

17 MEMBER BRENNAN: Sign guy, you got

18 something you can build in that four foot tall by

19 twenty something?

20 MR. HARRIS: The only thing -- again,

21 the only thing I did -- The Arts and Craft Store. I

22 mean, it's really -- that's what Michaels is, and it

23 needs to be-

24 MEMBER BRENNAN: (Interposing) You're






1 not going to get it. Cut to the chase.

2 MS. CHAIRMAN: It would have to be --

3 the whole thing would have to be a lot smaller in

4 order to add all that.

5 And I am the consumer and the craft

6 store shopper, and I know what Michaels is.

7 And, again -- and I go into locations

8 -- where this store is, the chances of a grocery

9 store being there are slim to none.

10 So I mean -- I mean, you're in an area

11 -- you're in a prime Novi area, that everyone knows

12 where Joanne Fabrics is, where, you know -- those

13 stores build those reputations at those locations,

14 so -- if it was a different location you might have a

15 good argument, but I can't -- I can't go along with

16 it either.

17 So either the sign would have to be a

18 lot smaller to fit everything that you want in here,

19 or I would come up with a creative Michaels at four

20 foot tall or less, which would be the way the board

21 is heading.

22 So can you give us some figures here on

23 what it would be if we went with four foot-

24 MR. HARRIS: (Interposing) Yeah. We






1 can make four foot letters, yeah. I mean, not --

2 install them. We don't make them.

3 MS. CHAIRMAN: I understand that, but

4 can we get some final measurements?

5 MR. HARRIS: I don't have the

6 measurements. I'm sorry. They didn't give me that

7 information.

8 MS. CHAIRMAN: Board members, would you

9 like to assist on this?

10 MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, along Laverne's

11 thoughts, and what I had recommended, if you want to

12 limit the height of the sign to the range of four

13 feet and keep the overall square footage in the range

14 of what my suggestion was, ninety-six. Now, if it's

15 plus or minus a couple of feet, I wouldn't be too

16 concerned with that, because we've had sign people

17 over the years say we have limitations and this gizmo

18 and that gizmo and it makes a difference.

19 So if you could live with ninety-six

20 square feet, plus or minus a foot or two -- no?

21 MEMBER BAUER: It's got to be 96 or 97.

22 MEMBER BRENNAN: He's not prepared to-

23 MEMBER REINKE: (Interposing) I think

24 that -- no. I agree with Mr. Brennan, that it's -- I






1 think you're pretty much in the ballpark, but the

2 thing is its maximum letter height is four feet, and

3 that's the controlling factor, and if it's 96, 94,

4 92, with the spacing, because you're going to make

5 it, you know, the way your basic layout of your name

6 is.

7 MR. HARRIS: It will be spaced exactly

8 like that, and four feet tall.

9 MEMBER REINKE: And, you know,

10 proportional to that, so I could support that

11 direction, and I think we're giving him a controlling

12 direction by doing that.

13 MEMBER GATT: Can we control it any

14 further by saying not to exceed a hundred feet say,

15 or something that the board can agree on, rather than

16 leaving it open ended?

17 MEMBER BAUER: That's what I don't

18 like, open ended.

19 MR. HARRIS: I believe, with a hundred

20 square feet -- because on five foot it's a hundred

21 and thirty-seven, and so I believe you're correct in

22 saying a hundred. It might be less than that.

23 MEMBER REINKE: I can live with that.

24 MEMBER BRENNAN: Okay. There you go.






1 Good idea, Bob.

2 MS. CHAIRMAN: Was that a motion,

3 Member Gatt?

4 MEMBER GATT: I'll try it. In the

5 case -- what's the number on this -- 03-043, I would

6 move that we grant the petitioner's request to erect

7 a -- one sign only, the Michaels sign, not to exceed

8 four feet in height and not to be in excess of one

9 hundred square feet overall. All the other requests

10 would be denied.

11 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

12 MS. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Schultz?

13 MR. SCHULTZ: Just a quick comment,

14 under the circumstances, in the reduction in the

15 variance, could I offer a comment in terms of

16 findings on practical difficulties?

17 MEMBER GATT: Please.

18 MR. SCHULTZ: What I heard was,

19 essentially, that the additional verbiage is

20 advertising and that there wasn't a chance of

21 confusion. And the other issue seems to be that

22 there is no visibility problem for Michaels in this

23 location.

24 So in terms of findings, it's just a






1 suggestion.

2 MEMBER GATT: That's fine. I will add

3 what the attorney just said, correct.

4 MS. CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and a

5 second. Any further discussion on the motion?

6 (No further discussion.)

7 MS. CHAIRMAN: Sarah, please call the

8 roll.

9 MS. MARCHIONI: Who seconded that?

10 MS. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bauer.

11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gatt?


13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


17 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


19 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


21 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reed?


23 MS. CHAIRMAN: Your variance has been

24 granted. Please see the building department.






1 MR. HARRIS: Thank you.

2 MR. LOUKS: Thank you very much.


4 CASE NUMBER 03-044

5 MS. CHAIRMAN: 03-044, filed by Deborah

6 Whitehead at Starbucks. Is she present? Starbucks

7 here?

8 No one here from Starbucks, no one out

9 in the hallway?

10 I must have been psychic about that

11 one. We'll table that case.


13 CASE NUMBER 03-045

14 MS. CHAIRMAN: And we'll go ahead and

15 call 03-045, Colliers International.

16 Would you like to come down, please.

17 Raise your right hand and be sworn in by our

18 secretary?

19 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear or

20 affirm to tell the truth regarding Case 03-045?

21 MR. HUGHES: I do. My name is Rob

22 Hughes. I'm with Colliers International, and we are

23 the real estate company in charge of the leasing of

24 the Tech Center at Meadowbridge.






1 I'm sure you're familiar with the

2 complex. The building in question is tucked in the

3 interior of the park and has absolutely no drive-by

4 visibility except for other tenants within the

5 complex, so we erected a sign visible from the

6 freeway that did comply with the six foot

7 requirement, which couldn't be seen at all. And so

8 our request is for the larger sign that is visible

9 from the freeway through the brush that's overgrown.

10 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Anything else?

11 MR. HUGHES: I don't think so.

12 MS. CHAIRMAN: There were ten notices

13 sent; no approvals, no objections, one letter was

14 returned.

15 Anyone in the audience wishes to speak

16 to anything in regards to this case?

17 (No response.)

18 MS. CHAIRMAN: Seeing no one, building

19 department?

20 MR. SAVEN: Only the maximum sign of a

21 temporary real estate sign is six feet, and this is

22 kind of unusual case.

23 MS. CHAIRMAN: Board members? Member

24 Brennan.






1 MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, it is unusual,

2 and the only drive-by traffic he is going to get is

3 I-96 at 90 miles an hour, unfortunately, so given

4 this is a temporary sign, I would support

5 petitioner's request.

6 MR. SAVEN: We have a limit?

7 MEMBER REINKE: What's the time frame

8 that you're looking for?

9 MR. HUGHES: I didn't have a specific

10 time frame. Until the job was done essentially.

11 MEMBER BRENNAN: Could you live with a

12 year?

13 MR. HUGHES: I could live with a year.

14 MEMBER REINKE: Is that a motion,

15 Frank?

16 MEMBER BRENNAN: I'm just getting

17 there. 03-045, I would move that the petitioner's

18 request be approved for a period of one year for the

19 purpose of advertising and leasing this parcel.

20 MEMBER REINKE: Support.

21 MS. CHAIRMAN: So there's been a motion

22 and a second. Any further discussion on the motion?

23 (No further discussion.)

24 MS. CHAIRMAN: Sarah, please call the






1 roll.

2 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


4 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gatt?


10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reed?


14 MS. CHAIRMAN: Your variance has been

15 approved.

16 MR. HUGHES: Thank you.

17 MS. CHAIRMAN: Honesst, I'm not trying

18 to break a record.

19 CASE NUMBER 030-046

20 MS. CHAIRMAN: Case Number 03-046,

21 Dales and Graphic Systems for Post Bar at

22 42875 Grand River. They're looking for a sign

23 variance.

24 Would you like to raise your right and






1 be sworn in by our secretary?

2 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear or

3 affirm to tell the truth regarding Case 03-046?

4 MR. DALES: I do.

5 MS. CHAIRMAN: Would you state your

6 name for the record, please.

7 MR. DALES: Sure. My name is Jim

8 Dales, and there's a little bit of confusion of who

9 I'm representing here. I have a business in Novi

10 called Dales and Graphic Systems on Trans X. I left

11 that card with this as a contact, but I'm really here

12 representing the Post Bar. I'm a partner in that

13 project also, and so really -- we're not a sign

14 company, Dales and Graphic Systems. We have nothing

15 to do with the signs themselves that are being built.

16 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Why don't you

17 tell us a little bit about what you need this

18 evening.

19 MR. DALES: Well, as probably you're

20 aware, we're going into what is often referred to as

21 the Vic's Market building in the southwest corner of

22 the building, which, from Grand River, is hardly seen

23 at all. So we feel a need to somehow get some

24 signage out on






1 Grand River so people can find our business.

2 With regard to the multiple signs on

3 buildings, I understand that when that building was

4 originally built it was one tenant, but unlikely it

5 will ever be that way again. So I think you're

6 probably going to be facing this from time to time in

7 that building.

8 The part about the sign being on poles,

9 I think that's maybe a mistake on our part. I've

10 reviewed these drawings. It does look like they're

11 on poles. If you visited the mockup, we don't intend

12 for it to be on poles. It's built to ground level,

13 as you call for in your specifications, so we were

14 remiss in that drawing in not drawing out to the

15 bottom. We apologize. Our intent is to cover that

16 sign right to the ground.

17 And then the other part about our sign

18 is just within 250 feet of the BD sign. We're 240.

19 We feel that's, you know, pretty, you know, minimal

20 amount of distance.

21 The sign is not particularly large. We

22 think it fits in with the character of that Main

23 Street area that we've seen.

24 That's it.






1 MS. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. There were

2 13 notices sent; no objections, no approvals.

3 Build -- is there anyone in the audience that wishes

4 to comment on this case?

5 (No response.)

6 MS. CHAIRMAN: Building department?

7 MR. SAVEN: No comment.

8 MS. CHAIRMAN: Board members? Member

9 Brennan.

10 MEMBER BRENNAN: I seem to be very

11 opinionated tonight.

12 First of all, I'm thrilled to see the

13 Post come in.

14 MR. DALES: Good. So are we.

15 MEMBER BRENNAN: This is a Detroit --

16 originally a Detroit-based pub that's been very

17 successful for probably 80 years.

18 MR. DALES: Probably the original bar

19 about is that old.

20 MEMBER BRENNAN: Seems like I've been

21 going there that long.

22 I really have a problem with the Grand

23 River sign, and I'll tell you why. As part of the

24 Main Street properties and the theme of that whole






1 development, there's a lot of things done that the

2 City even backs in bringing people in. There's car

3 nights in the summer, there's a lot of activities,

4 there's live bands, and I think the draw to Main

5 Street in itself will bring people into your

6 business. I just can't buy that sign on Grand River,

7 and I think it's dangerous to even consider it

8 because it just opens up Pandora's box for every

9 other bar and restaurant that's on Main Street.

10 Main Street's the draw. The city and

11 the community goes there. And Main Street -- being

12 on Main Street will bring people to your business.

13 I don't have any problem with the

14 elevated sign, the projectile sign. I think it's

15 well done, and -- so I will support that one, but

16 personally I just have a problem with the

17 Grand River sign.

18 MS. CHAIRMAN: Member Bauer?

19 MEMBER BAUER: I'm glad you're coming

20 also; however, Grand River sign, it -- the project

21 that was set there was never meant to have a sign out

22 there. It was designed not to, due to the fact of

23 Main Street, as Mr. Brennan has said, and I do not

24 support that. The other sign, yes.






1 MS. CHAIRMAN: Member Gatt?

2 MEMBER GATT: I just -- I won't take up

3 much time. I just want to concur with my two

4 colleagues here. I think you do your business a

5 disservice even thinking you need a sign out on Grand

6 River. The Post Bar will attract people and they'll

7 know where it is.

8 This City and this community has spent

9 a lot of time and a lot of money marketing that area

10 of town, and the people will come. If you build it,

11 they will come.

12 I can't support Grand River, but the

13 other sign, yes.

14 MR. DALES: I certainly understand your

15 objections, and being a business owner on Trans X, I

16 know where Main Street is, and I -- you know, it's

17 pretty visible to me, too.

18 In light of that, could we consider

19 maybe our sign -- our projection sign -- if we

20 withdrew our application for the Grand River sign,

21 could our projection sign possibly be made bigger? I

22 mean, BDs Mongolian Barbecue is seven six by seven

23 six, and our proposed sign is only three feet by

24 maybe five feet.






1 MEMBER REINKE: It would have to be

2 readvertised, repetitioned because it's a larger

3 sign.

4 MEMBER BRENNAN: Let me ask a question.

5 Will the Post Bar come all the way to the end of the

6 building facing Grand River?

7 MR. DALES: No.

8 MEMBER BRENNAN: You couldn't bring

9 that sign any further north?

10 MR. DALES: That's correct. We're --

11 that's where Gus O'Connor's will be, that front

12 corner, so we're always going to be back there. You

13 know, we were just hoping that we can get something

14 comparable to the BDs sign.

15 I'm sure you've been by our sign. It's

16 not real big on that wall.

17 MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, I won't speak

18 for anybody else, because I never do, but I would be

19 more supportive of a larger sign that might be able

20 to pick up flying by Grand River.

21 MEMBER REINKE: Let me ask a question.

22 MEMBER BRENNAN: Rather than the Grand

23 River sign.

24 MEMBER REINKE: If he is going for one






1 sign, projection sign, is there a maximum that he

2 would be allowed, or because it is a projection sign

3 does it have to have a variance for placement as a

4 projection sign?

5 MR. SAVEN: Well, first of all, you

6 have to bear in mind what was presented before the

7 board tonight, the size that it was, and I think

8 that's one of the conditions that you need to take a

9 look at.

10 I would ask you give me a couple

11 minutes, I'll go back into the district, the sign

12 ordinance, and see what I can come up with for you.

13 MEMBER REINKE: Well, I don't think we

14 really need to do that. I think if the petitioner

15 would like a larger projection sign, we can't do

16 anything more tonight than what we have before us,

17 and he may, by ordinance, be allowed to have a single

18 sign that's larger without a variance, which he could

19 do with the building department. Or if he needs and

20 wants something larger that requires a variance, he

21 would have to be reposted or readvertised anyway, so

22 there's really nothing that we could do at this point

23 this evening other than to say we can table this and

24 you can come back with what you were looking for in a






1 projection sign and we can deal with that at our next

2 meeting.

3 MR. DALES: Okay.

4 MR. SAVEN: Madam Chairperson, May I

5 make another suggestion?


7 MR. SAVEN: As long as you're working

8 on the projection sign itself, the issue before you

9 really tonight was the 250 foot distance, so if you

10 worked on that and anything that would define what

11 our findings were, if it allowed the additional

12 square footage, possibly that could be something we

13 could try to work out, but I think for the

14 additional -- for the fact that is a 240 square foot

15 issue before you tonight, that's the issue I think

16 you should be voting on.

17 MEMBER BRENNAN: So you're suggesting

18 that we address that one-

19 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) Absolutely,

20 absolutely. And if it exceeds whatever is allowable

21 by ordinance, then we'll just have to come back

22 before us -- before you.

23 MR. DALES: So if I understand that

24 correctly, then we agreed on that part of the






1 variance, then if my partners decided the sign we

2 have is all that's going -- is there and we don't

3 petition you anymore, would we be approved for that

4 sign as is tonight?

5 MS. CHAIRMAN: That's correct.

6 MR. DALES: Okay, all right. I'll

7 withdraw the Grand River sign request officially.

8 MS. CHAIRMAN: All right. So now we're

9 just dealing with sign B?

10 MR. DALES: Yes.

11 MS. CHAIRMAN: And the 240 feet

12 distance from Mongolian Barbecue?

13 MEMBER BRENNAN: And with a motion with

14 respect to that item, we're also leaving open the

15 option of this petitioner coming back for a larger

16 projection sign, is that what we just said?

17 MR. SAVEN: If it's outside of the

18 ordinance. We're dealing with distance now and only

19 the distance before you tonight based upon the sign

20 that had been presented.

21 MR. SCHULTZ: If the board is so

22 inclined, you could grant the variance for sign B as

23 requested, and -- if he wants, and so you don't need

24 to make any changes to the proposal; grant that as






1 requested and he'll decide if he wants to come back.

2 MEMBER BRENNAN: If you wanted to

3 appeal the size, you can do that again.

4 MEMBER REINKE: That will work.

5 MEMBER BRENNAN: I'll try that.

6 MS. CHAIRMAN: Member Brennan.

7 MEMBER BRENNAN: 03-046, I move that

8 the sign A be denied and I move that sign B be

9 approved for business identification.


11 MS. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Schultz?

12 MR. SCHULTZ: Only comment is he

13 withdrew sign A so we, you know.

14 MEMBER BRENNAN: (Interposing) We

15 don't deny it. Sorry.

16 MS. CHAIRMAN: Motion made and second.

17 Any further discussion on the motion?

18 (No further discussion.)

19 MS. MARCHIONI: I have a question.


21 MS. MARCHIONI: If he has to come back

22 to ZBA for the size, do you want him to reapply; new

23 application fee, new application?







1 MEMBER BAUER: It's outside of the

2 ordinance.


4 MS. CHAIRMAN: They have to start all

5 over again.

6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gatt?


12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


16 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reed?


18 MS. CHAIRMAN: Your variance, sign B,

19 has been approved. Please see the building

20 department.

21 MR. DALES: Thank you.


23 CASE NUMBER 03-047

24 MS. CHAIRMAN: All right. Case Number






1 03-048 filed by Cypress Partners representing Gus

2 O'Connor's at 42875 Grand River, Main Street.

3 Well, let's do 03-047 filed by

4 Cambridge Homes representing homeowners at

5 47510 Capri Court, Mark Guidobono for Cambridge

6 Homes.

7 Good evening. Sorry.

8 MR. GUIDOBONO: Good evening. Mark

9 Guidobono for Cambridge Homes representing Mr. and

10 Mrs. Barton, one of our homeowners at Bellagio.

11 MS. CHAIRMAN: Before you get started,

12 raise your hand and be sworn in by our secretary?

13 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear or

14 affirm to tell the truth regarding Case 03-047?


16 MS. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

17 MR. GUIDOBONO: We're asking for a

18 variance of 66 square feet. The ordinance requires

19 garages not to exceed a thousand square feet, and

20 this garage is 1,066 square feet.

21 The homeowners need this additional

22 square footage for storage and to be able to access

23 out of their cars, their vehicles have enough room,

24 and so they are requesting this variance of 66 square






1 feet.

2 I do have a set of blueprints here I'd

3 be happy to share of the home with you -- or

4 floorplan with you, if you would like to see that.

5 MS. CHAIRMAN: No, thank you. Anything

6 else?

7 MR. GUIDOBONO: That's it.

8 MS. CHAIRMAN: There were 17 notices

9 sent; no approvals, no objections.

10 Is there anyone in the audience that

11 wishes to speak on behalf of this case?

12 (No response.)

13 MS. CHAIRMAN: Seeing none, building

14 department?

15 MR. SAVEN: Only that this was a

16 similar case that was before you previously. The

17 property is zoned RA, which means it's a one acre

18 parcel. The parcel of land has a fault shy of that

19 particular requirement, and that's why he's here

20 today petitioning for that additional 66 square feet.

21 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Board members?

22 Member Brennan.

23 MEMBER BRENNAN: Yes. Just for the

24 sake of new board members, we've had developers in






1 front of us many, many times in front of city council

2 and planning that make all kind of promises, and not

3 all come through. I'd like this board to know,

4 especially new board members, that Bellagio came in

5 years ago initially pitching this development, and

6 part of that pitch was a four acre central park with

7 a gazebo and plantings. And you know what? That's

8 the first thing they put in. They kept their word.

9 I think that we should be supportive of

10 developers that keep their word.

11 I think this is a minor request and

12 it's in line with the other approvals we've given in

13 this same complex.

14 Thank you, sir.

15 MR. GUIDOBONO: Thank you, thank you.

16 MEMBER BAUER: I'll second that.

17 MS. CHAIRMAN: Any others?


19 MS. CHAIRMAN: Member Reinke.

20 MEMBER REINKE: The problem I've always

21 had with new construction where the variance was

22 requested is it's very seldom been for square

23 footage. Usually they're trying to overbuild the

24 lot, they're trying to get into setbacks all around






1 and everything, and that's not here. And it's the

2 unique configuration that has brought this about, and

3 I think that the variance request is really minimal

4 and it's not something that shows up to be intrusive.

5 It's not building out, overbuilding the lot, and I

6 can support petitioner's request.

7 MR. GUIDOBONO: Thank you.

8 MS. CHAIRMAN: I concur. We have a lot

9 of shaking heads here. Any motions?

10 MEMBER REINKE: Madam Chairman, case

11 03-047, I move that petitioner's variance request of

12 66 square feet be granted due to building layout and

13 configuration.

14 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

15 MS. CHAIRMAN: We have a motion and a

16 second. Any further discussion on the motion?

17 (No further discussion.)

18 MADAM CHAIRMAN: Seeing none, Sarah,

19 would you please call the roll.

20 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


22 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


24 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?







2 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gatt?


4 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reed?


8 MS. CHAIRMAN: Your variance has been

9 approved. Please see the building department.

10 MR. GUIDOBONO: Thank you.


12 CASE NUMBER 03-048

13 MS. CHAIRMAN: Sorry about that out of

14 order thing. Representing Gus O'Connor on Grand

15 River.

16 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear or

17 affirm to tell the truth regarding Case 03-048?

18 MR. GABRYS: I do.

19 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you.

20 MR. GABRYS: Thank you for your time

21 this evening. My name is Steve Gabrys. I work for

22 Cypress Partners. We're representing Gus O'Connor's

23 Pub, which is proposed to go in the northwest corner

24 of the Vic's Market building.






1 Cypress has been working with the City

2 of Novi and Gus O'Connor's in the unique restaurant

3 concept to add to the Main Street diversity that you

4 have there with the restaurants.

5 This evening we are here requesting a

6 variance for a hundred and six parking spaces for

7 that development.

8 The parking you're seeing on -- as the

9 entire development of the Main Street development,

10 not just specifically our property. We have -- I've

11 also solicited support from a lot of the other

12 businesses, and we have letters from 14 different

13 restaurants, and -- some of the restaurants, and also

14 some of the other uses, retail uses there, did

15 support this variance request. Thank you.

16 MS. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. There were

17 13 notices sent; no approvals, no objections.

18 Is there anyone in the audience that

19 wishes to speak on behalf of this case?

20 (No response.)

21 MS. CHAIRMAN: No one. Building

22 department?

23 MR. SAVEN: Only that this is a very

24 difficult issue because we have buildings out Here






1 that have not been built yet.

2 In regards to the parking scenario,

3 this will have to be constantly monitored through the

4 plan review center in terms of parking requirements.

5 As indicated, we still have buildings

6 that need to be built, and yet we're taking into

7 account the overall parking study for the entire

8 complex. It's a very difficult situation to deal

9 with at the present time.

10 MS. CHAIRMAN: Board members? Member

11 Brennan.

12 MEMBER BRENNAN: My only conflict is do

13 I go to O'Connor's or the Post first.

14 I've been looking at two things, and

15 number one, this is similar to the other case on Ten

16 Mile and Grand River, that we've got future

17 development that's going to change this mix, as

18 somebody's already indicated.

19 But the current variance is less than

20 five percent of the current calculation of a parking

21 lot that's got 2200 parking spots. I don't think

22 that this is a big deal.

23 I would support the petitioner's

24 request.






1 MS. CHAIRMAN: Member Gatt?

2 MEMBER GATT: Just another handicap

3 question. How does this affect the handicap parking?

4 MR. GABRYS: The study that -- what we

5 did was, our engineer, (inaudible), took a parking

6 study that was done -- or actually -- there was an

7 original parking study that was done. It was

8 amended. When the Post Bar came in, we amended that

9 also to take into account -- we used the calculations

10 that were set forth to determine what the original

11 development, and my understanding is there are

12 sufficient -- under that, that we meet that

13 requirement with the -- for the handicap spaces under

14 that calculation.

15 MEMBER GATT: The question for Don,

16 does the police department review these requests at

17 all that affects parking?

18 MR. SAVEN: I believe they were

19 involved at one time, and it didn't continue to look

20 at the plans, the site plans.

21 The handicap parking requirements are

22 required through the State Construction Code and

23 Barrier Free Sign criteria, and many other issues

24 that are looked at, and they have to take into






1 account the use of the building, how many parking

2 spaces are there and percentage of those parking

3 spaces meeting that requirement.

4 Undoubtedly, because of the amount of

5 businesses that come in and you wonder where are

6 going to place this.

7 Like in Town Center, for example, you

8 may have a higher intensive use at the theatre

9 because the theatre would take more people, but you

10 need to sporadically put the handicap parking

11 throughout the site.

12 So there's some difficulty. In most

13 instances -- most instances, the developers, they're

14 intune to this and they'll -- if they see a problem

15 in the area, they'll try to help the situation out.

16 Even though it meets the requirements

17 of the building code and is in accordance with the

18 handicap parking, above and beyond, sometimes it's

19 worked out based upon the need.

20 MEMBER GATT: Thank you. I, too, can

21 support this request.

22 MS. CHAIRMAN: Is that a motion again?


24 MEMBER REINKE: Madam Chairman?






1 MS. CHAIRMAN: Yes, Member Reinke.

2 MEMBER REINKE: I think as it exists

3 today, I don't see a problem. As other businesses go

4 in there I think we're going to have to be very

5 cautious of what we're doing and what we're giving

6 variances to, for deficient parking.

7 For right now, I don't see a problem,

8 but I think this is something that, as other -- as

9 Mr. Saven has indicated, that there's other buildings

10 to go in there yet, other businesses to go in there

11 yet, that this -- we don't want it to come up and be

12 a real problem for us in the future.

13 MEMBER BRENNAN: Good point. Is there

14 future plans for additional parking as

15 Main Street's built out?

16 MR. SAVEN: I believe there is. I

17 believe there is issues where we'll be dealing with

18 the type of use that goes into the buildings which

19 dictates the amount of parking spaces that are

20 required. You get a higher intensity use when you

21 deal with an assembly use group, i.e., bars and

22 things of this nature; where you deal with a business

23 use which is lot less intense than the bar issue, so

24 that's some of the things that you need to take a






1 look at, too.

2 MEMBER BRENNAN: I was just going to

3 say, if Main Street gets to the point where people

4 can't find a place to park, I think that's going to

5 be a good thing.

6 MEMBER GATT: If we grant a variance

7 like this, which we probably will, will this come

8 back to haunt us as it grows out and the businesses

9 say well, you granted this variance?

10 MR. SAVEN: I can see this is a concern

11 of yours for future uses. I can bring this up to the

12 planning director regarding this issue, to pay

13 particular attention to future use of that particular

14 site.

15 As it exists now, you have buildings

16 that are existing and they need to be filled, and

17 undoubtedly we're going to run into this probably

18 again until such time we can start working on future

19 development, and that's going to be the key.

20 MEMBER BRENNAN: Again, maybe for Bob's

21 sake, this is recalculated constantly. This number

22 changes.

23 MR. SAVEN: Yes.

24 MEMBER BRENNAN: So We can get better






1 or get worse based on what else goes in there.

2 MR. SAVEN: I almost hate to say it,

3 but If Gus O'Connor's all of a sudden decides they're

4 going to put in a furniture store, there's a big

5 difference, and Gus O'Connor's and the furniture

6 store comes in, that particular use, that's being

7 utilized more by displays of furniture than you have

8 for the occupant load, which is much more intense in

9 the bar scene, so it's always fluctuating.

10 MS. CHAIRMAN: Anyone else?

11 MEMBER REED: Just one question on the

12 same note. You mentioned that the calculation was --

13 also included some future intention, some plan right

14 now obviously, but -- so, in other words, if someone

15 came into another space in the building and put a

16 different type of use, it would certainly recalculate

17 like -- it was a daily -- like a use during the day

18 versus a use during the night, that thing, and that

19 would all affect-

20 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) That was all

21 part of the overall study, and that study is in your

22 packet right now. That's how they were able to

23 compute the overall Main Street parking for the

24 entire project, how they were able to calculate that






1 based upon shared parking.

2 MEMBER REED: Right, based on the

3 proposal in front of us at this point?

4 MS. CHAIRMAN: That's correct.

5 MR. REED: Thank you.


7 MEMBER BRENNAN: Madam Chair, if you

8 like, I'll take a stab at this and see where the

9 board sits.

10 MS. CHAIRMAN: All right, Go ahead.

11 MEMBER BRENNAN: Case 03-048, I move

12 that petitioner's request be approved as submitted.

13 The request is minimal and is subject to change in

14 the future as far as the calculation, but given the

15 information we have before us tonight, I move for

16 approval.

17 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

18 MS. CHAIRMAN: I have a question on the

19 motion. Maybe Mr. -- I don't know if Mr. Saven or

20 Mr. Schultz would answer this. Can we make this

21 specific to this business only?

22 MR. SAVEN: I'm almost positive, no

23 matter what we do for any additional business, they

24 will we back before you, because right now, based






1 upon the calculations, you have exceeded what's

2 there.

3 MS. CHAIRMAN: Right.

4 MR. SAVEN: So there's a potential --

5 good potential that whoever comes in there will be

6 coming back before you right now.

7 Yes. I would assume that that could

8 be-

9 MR. SCHULTZ: (Interposing) Yes.

10 MS. CHAIRMAN: So we can make it for

11 this business?

12 MR. SCHULTZ: Sure. What's going to

13 happen, as these uses come in, they get a new parking

14 calculation, it's almost inherent that it's limited

15 to this use, but you can say that.

16 MS. CHAIRMAN: It's not something

17 that's really necessary?

18 MR. SCHULTZ: I think it clarifies the

19 board's intent.

20 MS. CHAIRMAN: If that's the case,

21 would the maker of the motion consider a friendly

22 amendment?


24 MS. CHAIRMAN: To include -- to address






1 this variance request for this business only.

2 Any further discussion?

3 (No further discussion.)

4 MS. CHAIRMAN: Seeing none, Sarah,

5 please call the roll.

6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gatt?


12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


16 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reed?


18 MS. CHAIRMAN: Sir, your variance has

19 been granted. Please see -- I don't believe you see

20 the building department. I think you're all set.

21 MR. GABRYS: Thank you very much.



24 CASE NUMBER 03-049






1 MS. CHAIRMAN: Last case, second from

2 last case, Case Number 03-049, filed by Todd Keene of

3 2300 Austin, is looking for a variance to build a

4 garage.

5 Would you like to raise your right hand

6 and be sworn in by our secretary?

7 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear or

8 affirm to tell the truth regarding Case 03-049?

9 MR. KEENE: I do. Good evening. My

10 name is Todd Keene, 2300 Austin Drive, and I'm

11 requesting a variance of 18 feet on a unique

12 situation.

13 I've got double frontage on a double

14 lot for a garage addition. I think you have the

15 layout of that.

16 As you can see, the house itself is

17 close to the property line, 15 foot, 12 foot at the

18 front. I'm not going to exceed any of that.

19 And with the existing architecture, if

20 you want to call my cottage architecture, it fights

21 within the landscape and the rest of the

22 architecture. That's it.

23 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you.

24 MR. KEENE: I also have some






1 photographs of the land, if anybody hasn't seen it,

2 would like to see some photographs.

3 MS. CHAIRMAN: There were 40 notices

4 sent; 21 approvals, no objections.

5 Is there anyone in the audience that

6 wishes to speak on this case?

7 (No response.).

8 MS. CHAIRMAN: Seeing none, building

9 department?

10 MR. SAVEN: Just a couple issues.

11 You're not going to cut down the trees, are you?

12 MR. KEENE: The pine tree that's right

13 next to my house is causing foundation damage. That

14 one I will have to take down.

15 MR. SAVEN: The ones that are adjacent

16 to where you're laying out the garage.

17 MR. KEENE: No. I might have to trim

18 them.

19 MR. SAVEN: I understand you may have

20 to trim them.

21 MR. KEENE: No, no, no.

22 MR. SAVEN: So you'll be centering the

23 door within that area?

24 MR. KEENE: Yes.






1 MR. SAVEN: Okay, that's number one.

2 Number two, you're pretty close to a floodplain line

3 there.

4 MR. KEENE: Okay.

5 MR. SAVEN: Okay. And I can see where

6 some of my people did some GIS surveys there, and

7 you're going to be looking at a portion of the

8 building being affected by this. The base flood

9 elevation out there is something you have to watch

10 very carefully. Make sure that that floor level is

11 above the base flood elevation, just for the certain

12 portion of that building.

13 MR. KEENE: Sure.

14 MR. SAVEN: Okay. Just so you're aware

15 of that.

16 MR. KEENE: Actually, if I may speak, I

17 did plan on bringing that elevation up about seven

18 inches higher than the concrete pad that's back there

19 going down in my basement, too, so -- and it would

20 come straight out, so it would be above it. Or are

21 you talking about the actual, like, footing?

22 MR. SAVEN: I'm just talking about the

23 foundation -- or, actually, the level of your garage

24 floor referencing the floodplain elevation that is






1 shown there.

2 MR. KEENE: Okay.

3 MR. SAVEN: And the rest is up to these

4 people.

5 MS. CHAIRMAN: Member Brennan.

6 MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, I think,

7 Mr. Keene, you must have done an excellent job. This

8 is property on Austin, and you have 21 approvals and

9 you have no objections. I think that speaks-

10 MR. KEENE: (Interposing) I'm waiting

11 for Mr. Corte to come bursting through the door.

12 MEMBER BRENNAN: Let's vote on this

13 real quick. Jim, I hope you're watching at home.

14 MS. CHAIRMAN: Anyone else?

15 MEMBER REINKE: Madam Chairman, I --

16 the thing is, we have problems up there with just

17 about all the old plotted lots and everything like

18 that, and trying to work things around.

19 I think the gentleman has done a good

20 job in trying to put this together.

21 The only problem I have is the twelve

22 feet, because that is -- right now he's got a nice

23 little private short drive there because the bridge

24 is out of commission, but there's going be traffic






1 going down that road, and I really don't like to see

2 something 12 foot off that.

3 MR. KEENE: Sir?


5 MR. KEENE: Actually, the 12 feet is

6 from the property line. The road itself is only 20

7 feet wide right now, and-

8 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) It's still

9 the right-of-way, and it puts it on top of the road

10 that -- there's almost no chance if there's any

11 movement, and I -- if it's -- the thing is, it's not

12 there, so we're trying to work -- as I see it, we're

13 trying to work -- I'm trying to work to see you get

14 what you want but I don't want to see it on top of

15 the lot line.

16 MR. KEENE: Sure, Right.

17 MEMBER REINKE: Because that is going

18 to be -- when the bridge is fixed, there's going to

19 be traffic going through there.

20 MR. KEENE: Sure.

21 MEMBER BRENNAN: What size garage is

22 this?

23 MR. KEENE: Well, it shows here that

24 it's 33 by 22; however, because it's on the back of






1 the house there's going to be a lot of unused space.

2 I plan on actually putting a second level on it, so

3 I'm going to have to be having stairs going up to it,

4 for more living space.

5 MEMBER BRENNAN: But it's a two car

6 garage?

7 MR. KEENE: Yes.

8 MR. SAVEN: One of the things I want to

9 point out, if you've been out to the site, even his

10 existing driveway that's there is right at the road.

11 He has no measure to get his car off the road other

12 than what is there at the pad that he's got there, so

13 the pad is probably in a right-of-way right now.

14 With the garage, maybe it's something to get him off

15 the road a little bit, but I don't know how big or

16 whatever, he can put it back farther, whatever. I

17 guess that's up to you guys, what you want to do.

18 MEMBER REINKE: I understand what

19 you're talking about there, but the thing is, I look

20 at if we build this 12 foot off the property line and

21 we get something else that's up there that's right on

22 top of the situation, that doesn't give us any

23 latitude.

24 MEMBER BRENNEN: What would you






1 recommend?

2 MEMBER REINKE: I recommend to move it

3 back. I would much rather give a variance on the

4 back side of that and get it off that front property

5 line, street, because you got a curve coming around

6 there, and that's a very touchy situation.

7 MEMBER BRENNAN: Mr. Keene, are you

8 following what Mr. Reinke's suggesting, kind of

9 pushing that garage back more behind the deck and

10 getting it farther off the road?

11 MR. KEENE: I understand what he's

12 saying.

13 MEMBER BRENNAN: Any problem with that?

14 Is there a well or anything back there

15 behind?

16 MR. KEENE: A well? Actually, there's

17 a well right on the property line at 15 feet. Right

18 where you show the arrow, there's a well right there,

19 there's a tree right there on the -- where the arrow

20 on the 12 feet is. There's a big tree right in the

21 way. You'd have to go around the tree as well. My

22 house is protected by the tree actually. It's -- the

23 tree will be eight feet closer to the road than my

24 garage will be where it sits right now. Big tree.






1 MR. SAVEN: I believe what Mr. Reinke

2 was trying to indicate is the fact that if you had a

3 car parked out there, there may be a little bit of a

4 problem with liability that the City might be looking

5 at.

6 MR. KEENE: Parking on the driveway?

7 MR. SAVEN: The twelve foot setback

8 is -- basically they're looking at possibly pushing

9 the garage back an additional four foot or something

10 along that line, the length of a car.

11 MR. KEENE: The only thing, it just

12 gives more problem with tying it into the house.

13 That's the only problem I would have by moving it

14 further back. I tried to limit that already.

15 So you're saying if I'm parking a car

16 on the driveway itself, there's a problem, or if it's

17 in the garage?

18 MEMBER REINKE: Well, you can't park a

19 vehicle in the driveway and have it contained within

20 your lot line.

21 MR. KEENE: You're right. My truck is

22 a lot longer than that. Nineteen feet.

23 MEMBER REINKE: I can't support the

24 layout that's here. And it's -- you're working with






1 a difficult situation, but somewhere there's got to

2 be some creativity in there to give some kind of

3 spacing that has a little bit more latitude than

4 what's there.

5 MR. KEENE: What do you recommend?

6 MEMBER REINKE: I would have to see it

7 -- for my -- just looking at it right now, and not

8 taking into account everything you're trying to do, I

9 would have to see this go back eight foot.

10 MR. KEENE: It's not worth it. It's

11 not.

12 MEMBER BRENNAN: Don't give up on us,

13 Mr. Keene. Rather than get too frustrated, would you

14 like another month to look at alternative plans? I

15 mean you yourself said that that truck is 19 feet

16 long.

17 MR. KEENE: I don't plan on -- for

18 example, if the road -- right now if the road is 20

19 feet wide, and I realize you're saying if you did

20 work there -- well, right now there's a gravel road

21 there. It's 20 feet wide. That actually leaves me

22 35 feet from the corner of my garage to the actual --

23 where my grass stops and the gravel road is.

24 As of right now, I can't imagine things






1 are going to change. It's a residential road tucked

2 back in a -- right next to -- the other side of it's

3 the lake. The road's not going to be used for

4 anything but residential right there. It was never

5 really busy in the past.

6 MEMBER REINKE: I understand that, but

7 I can't support you parking a vehicle in front of a

8 garage that you can't be at least, a minimal,

9 contained on your lot line.

10 MR. KEENE: But I am right now, up

11 here.

12 MEMBER REINKE: You're proposing a

13 garage that's 12 foot off the lot line.

14 MR. KEENE: Pardon me?

15 MEMBER REINKE: You're proposing your

16 garage to be 12 foot off the lot line.

17 MR. KEENE: Yes.

18 MEMBER REINKE: You cannot park a

19 vehicle there and contain it on your lot line, and I

20 can't support that.

21 MEMBER REED: Can I make a comment,

22 please. Mr. Keene, one thing we're -- we have a

23 habit of liking to see is that there's a proven

24 hardship.






1 And, obviously, you'd like to have a

2 garage and you'd like to get the cars as far away as

3 possible. And you mentioned you want to keep the

4 design fluent with the house and have access into the

5 house.

6 So maybe it would be appropriate to

7 show a little bit more detail around the house and

8 around the deck and around the access into the house

9 to show more what you're thinking about the actual

10 access and what drives that, because I can't --

11 actually, I haven't heard exactly what the problem is

12 with moving it deeper into the lot.

13 MR. KEENE: I -- one thing, right now,

14 if you look at the little extension off there,

15 there's like a little nub coming off the house.

16 That's an access to the basement. I'm trying to keep

17 that access in the garage. If I move back eight

18 feet, there's no way to keep that in the garage.

19 That was one of the goals of putting the garage

20 there, is to make the basement accessible from the

21 indoors.

22 MEMBER REED: That's certainly -- I

23 have the same thing. It's a great feature.

24 I mean, just -- as far as creativity






1 we're talking here, I mean, about jogging the garage

2 a little bit so you still have access to that, so you

3 could park the car in the driveway.

4 Maybe if you can -- if you can show the

5 actual hardship to say there's no way to push the

6 garage eight feet back because there's a hundred year

7 old tree behind it or there's no way to get access

8 into that.

9 I mean, maybe you could extend the

10 garage deeper in the lot away from the house, make it

11 35 feet and then get the 20 feet and still have

12 access into the basement.

13 So far we can't really hear the true

14 hardship. Maybe there's a way to achieve everybody's

15 goal.

16 We want you to have a garage, but maybe

17 there's a way to make it work, or prove that there's

18 a way that it can't be worked. That's Both sides of

19 the coin.

20 MR. KEENE: Well, frankly, I think it

21 would look stupid if it were back eight more feet.

22 It would just be -- I can't -- it would just look

23 bad, and I don't want to make it look bad.

24 MEMBER REED: Right. But we need to






1 see maybe like a nice view of the house and see the

2 gables and see the relationship. You may be right.

3 MR. KEENE: I have some photographs, if

4 you would like to project them. I don't know if

5 they'll tell you anything or not. Would you like to

6 see them, or --

7 MS. CHAIRMAN: Go ahead and pass them

8 to the board, if you would, please.

9 While the other members are looking at

10 these pictures, I would like to make a comment.

11 I was out to your house and saw the

12 back of your house, and I agree, that the first thing

13 that I looked at when I looked at this was is there

14 another place to put this, okay, and the problem --

15 tell me, if you would, the garage -- are you going to

16 remove part of this deck then?

17 MR. KEENE: Yes. I have to remove part

18 of the deck already to push it back.

19 MS. CHAIRMAN: So if you were going to

20 build it right where it is, where you're proposing

21 right now, are you going to be removing -- you are

22 going to be removing part of the deck?

23 MR. KEENE: Part of the deck, sure.

24 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay. Knowing that, if






1 the deck's coming off anyways, I would make a

2 suggestion to you, because I'm not creative with

3 drawings either, and I can get kind of frustrated.

4 I've been there myself as a homeowner. My suggestion

5 would be to go back and take a look at this and have

6 us table this. I think there's a creative solution

7 here. You have some fine members on this board that

8 have been here a long time. I know that you have

9 your neighbors' support, and I know that you're in a

10 corner lot and you've got some unique circumstances,

11 but I just would like to take a look at it and make

12 sure that there isn't something else that can be

13 done, because I have some safety concerns if the road

14 is widened in the future, if that bridge is finished.

15 And I don't have a crystal ball, and I certainly

16 don't want to make a decision sitting at this table

17 and you have something of a safety nature come up

18 down the road.

19 Now, I know that there's a lot of work

20 that's involved here. Member Reed mentioned, you

21 know, to take that -- to go back and look at it.

22 Being that you're removing part of that deck already,

23 maybe there's another option there.

24 We can't redesign it for you. Perhaps,






1 you know, checking out with someone or having someone

2 else take a look at this to give you some guidance

3 might help you.

4 I mean, I would have to do it if I was

5 in your shoes because I wouldn't know, just looking

6 at this, what the solution would be.

7 I know you have a tree back there

8 that's got to come down that's real close to the

9 house, your property slants down a little bit. It's

10 a lovely backyard. And I know that you want to

11 improve the house and you don't want it to look bad,

12 but I think that maybe just taking some time and

13 taking a look at this while you have the support of

14 your neighborhood -- and if you're going to be there

15 for any length of time, the last thing you want is

16 the road widened, something in the future to happen,

17 to offset a problem where you couldn't turn into your

18 garage or couldn't back out of the driveway because

19 of the traffic or whatever kind of problems would be.

20 So that would be my suggestion.

21 Board members, other comments, once

22 you've looked at the pictures?

23 MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, I think it's his

24 choice. I think he's heard many of the board members






1 voice some opinion.

2 It's your choice, to call a vote or

3 take another month to look at it and try and come

4 up --

5 MS. CHAIRMAN: What would you like to

6 do at this point?

7 MEMBER BRENNAN: Yeah, it's your call.

8 MR. KEENE: Well, there's -- I can't

9 push it back eight more feet, so I'll just not do it

10 I guess.

11 CHAIRMAN: Okay. Anyone would like to

12 make a-

13 MEMBER REINKE: (Interposing) The only

14 comment I want to make before this goes on any

15 further is, if there wasn't property behind the

16 garage that he had to work with, we would have to

17 look at it differently, but there is sufficient

18 property there, and I can't support 12 foot.

19 MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, I think the

20 petitioner has withdrawn his-

21 MS. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) Okay. So

22 you're officially withdrawing?

23 MR. KEENE: Yes. Why don't we vote on

24 it. I'd like to see the vote. That's the way I want






1 it.

2 MEMBER REINKE: He wants to go forward

3 with what's-

4 MS. CHAIRMAN: (Interposing) Right.

5 MEMBER REINKE: He doesn't want to give

6 any consideration to anything else.

7 MS. CHAIRMAN: We still have to vote on

8 it.


10 MS. CHAIRMAN: So I'm waiting for a

11 motion. To deny it?

12 MEMBER REINKE: Either way.

13 MS. CHAIRMAN: We still have to have a

14 motion. Am I clear on that?

15 MR. SCHULTZ: Yes.

16 MS. CHAIRMAN: That's what I'm waiting

17 for.

18 MEMBER REINKE: Madam Chairman, Case

19 03-049, I move that petitioner's request be denied

20 for insufficient hardship.


22 MS. CHAIRMAN: Any further discussion

23 on the motion?

24 MR. SCHULTZ: Just briefly, Madam






1 Chair, just so we're clear, and in light of the fact

2 that it's in denial, we should make clear that we're

3 talking about practical difficulty standard, not the

4 unnecessary hardship standard in denying the

5 variance. And as I understand the discussion, we're

6 talking essentially that there is no basis for the

7 variance because there's plenty of room to push the

8 garage back?


10 MS. CHAIRMAN: Right, thanks. Anything

11 else?

12 (No further discussion.)

13 MS. CHAIRMAN: No further discussion

14 Sarah, would you please call the roll.

15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


17 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


19 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


21 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


23 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gatt?







1 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reed?


3 MS. CHAIRMAN: I'm sorry, but your

4 variance has been denied.

5 MR. KEENE: Thank you all for

6 supporting of my neighbors.


8 CASE NUMBER 03-044

9 MS. CHAIRMAN: We have Case 03-044,

10 starbucks. They were not here earlier. Are they

11 here now?

12 (No response.)

13 MEMBER BRENNAN: Madam Chair, I think

14 we move for denial when the petitioner doesn't show

15 up.

16 MS. CHAIRMAN: Okay.

17 MEMBER BRENNAN: i will make that

18 motion.

19 MEMBER REINKE: Support.

20 MEMBER BRENNAN: Discussion on my

21 motion. Sarah, did you have any phone call from

22 anybody from Starbucks?

23 MS. MARCHIONI: I did not.

24 MEMBER BRENNAN: I stand by my motion.






1 MS. CHAIRMAN: Motion made and second.

2 Sarah, would you Please call the roll.

3 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Brennan?


5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reinke?


7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gatt?


11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Reed?


15 MS. CHAIRMAN: File's been denied based

16 on no show:

17 This closes the case portion. I see we

18 still have audience members. I hope I didn't lose

19 anybody and their paperwork.

20 We have other matters for discussion.

21 Sarah, you mentioned Oak Pointe.

22 MS. MARCHIONI: I think Mr. Schultz

23 wanted to talk about that.

24 MR. SCHULTZ: Yeah, thanks. The board






1 members have on there desks this evening a letter on

2 the Oak Pointe matter that attaches the judge's

3 opinion, which essentially remands the case back to

4 this board for further findings of fact.

5 If you recall, all but one or two

6 members were present on the board. This is actually

7 going back a couple years ago.

8 Two primary variances For the

9 Oak Pointe Church were a height variance for a small

10 portion of the building, and front yard parking.

11 There was actually a pretty extensive

12 record for this kind of proceeding that was put on

13 before the board. But what the Court has done,

14 essentially, without commenting on the sufficiency of

15 the record or how extensive it was, essentially the

16 judge made a determination that without further

17 verbal findings as to why the variances were granted,

18 he can't review the record and can't make a

19 determination, so he's remanding the the matter back

20 to this board.

21 The end of my letter, I've indicated

22 that I don't see anything in the Court's opinion that

23 requires you to re-open the hearing for further

24 evidence or to take further facts. He simply wants






1 to see findings that support the decision that's been

2 made.

3 Having said that, there's nothing in

4 the opinion that precludes you from re-opening the

5 hearing, if that's what the board wants to to.

6 So, in part, I'm here asking how the

7 board wants to deal with this. I've suggested in the

8 letter that it go on the July agenda for further

9 findings by the board. I think the board has two

10 options. It can either simply put the matter on the

11 agenda and at the time the matter is called if the

12 board decides not to take additional testimony and

13 make findings of fact in support of the four variance

14 requests, nothing that would prevent you from

15 changing your decision, if that were your

16 inclination, too.

17 Alternatively, if -- on one or two

18 occasions I think the board has directed our office

19 to prepare findings for your review. We can do that

20 as well.

21 And I guess that's it. I want to

22 apologize to Mr. Gatt and Mr. Reinke. I'm a little

23 sensitive to the fact finding issues after this

24 argument with the Court, so that really was just kind






1 of bringing to the attention that we need to get into

2 the habit of findings of fact, particularly on

3 sensitive cases, which I think the board needs to be

4 aware of.

5 MS. CHAIRMAN: I thought we were doing

6 so well.

7 MR. SCHULTZ: You guys are doing fine.

8 MS. CHAIRMAN: I personally think that

9 all of our paperwork and the minutes and everything

10 would come back to us in July for our review for that

11 case.

12 MR. SCHULTZ: We can do that.

13 MS. CHAIRMAN: We would need that.

14 MR. SCHULTZ: Yep.

15 MS. CHAIRMAN: That was over a year

16 old, that case.

17 MEMBER REINKE: I think we would need

18 that as a bare minimum for all of us that weren't

19 there, plus the new members that have joined the

20 board, to be able to review the whole situation and

21 scenario.

22 MR. SAVEN: Including the minutes.


24 MS. CHAIRMAN: Including the minutes.






1 MEMBER GATT: Sarah, just a reminder, I

2 won't be here in July. I'll be in the Caribbean.

3 MS. CHAIRMAN: I think that with all

4 that information available to us, including the

5 minutes, then it would be fair for us to be able to

6 draw a conclusion or fill in the blanks, if you will,

7 if there was something that we left out at the

8 previous meeting.

9 Anyone else have anything? I think

10 that would be-

11 MR. SCHULTZ: (Interposing) So you

12 want a to draft of findings from our office, or do

13 you just do it that evening? It's your choice.

14 MEMBER BRENNAN: I remember this case

15 very vividly.

16 MS. CHAIRMAN: I remember it pretty

17 well, yeah.

18 MEMBER BRENNAN: I mean, if the Court

19 wants us to look at it again, I'd be happy to look at

20 the minutes and see whether my thoughts and my

21 impressions on that case were in error or of a

22 different opinion today, but I don't think I need

23 anything more than that. I mean, it was fairly

24 straightforward.






1 MR. SCHULTZ: Remember, what the Court

2 -- the Court doesn't want you to look at the opinion

3 and determine again that you believe you made the

4 right decision. It wants -- when you read the

5 opinion you're going to find the Court wants you to

6 address particular standards and make findings of

7 fact under each one of those standards.

8 He's reading the case law and the

9 ordinance very narrowly and very conservatively, and

10 I think the board just needs to be prepared to refer

11 to each one of those standards and make specific

12 findings following that reference.

13 That's -- frankly, what he's looking

14 for is the argument was, you know, this standard in

15 the ordinance, did the board specifically look at

16 this and make a finding that it was or was not.

17 That's what he's after.

18 MEMBER REINKE: Madam Chairman, I think

19 we probably need a legal summary from the Court's

20 direction on what areas they're asking us to address.

21 MS. CHAIRMAN: Yeah. In looking at

22 this-

23 MEMBER REINKE: (Interposing) Because

24 I think it's really out of our hands and expertise to






1 try to be able to answer these scenarios that -- of

2 course, we haven't had the opportunity to read

3 through this. We will have before the next

4 meeting -- as to what they're really addressing us to

5 look at and deal with, and rather than trying to make

6 a lengthy discussion topic, I think we need to have

7 as much information before us before we come in.

8 And I would request that this be gotten

9 to us, that we can -- not have to look at it at the

10 meeting.

11 MR. SCHULTZ: We can put it in the

12 packet.

13 MS. CHAIRMAN: That would be

14 appreciative.

15 MEMBER REINKE: I mean, I'm not

16 directing -- I'm throwing this out for consideration.

17 MS. CHAIRMAN: I understand. That's

18 why I said everything would be available in our

19 packet prior to the meeting. There is going to be a

20 lot of blanket material to read, so if we get it

21 prior to reading our packet, along with a request

22 from your office to do the findings fact, we can do

23 our research, then I'm comfortable with that, if the

24 other members as as well.






1 MEMBER BAUER: I would like to make one

2 more suggestion, if I can.

3 MR. SAVEN: He's looking right at me.

4 MEMBER BAUER: And that is if you can

5 get them out before the 1st, because I'm going to be

6 gone the 1st and I'll be back on the 8th. That will

7 give me time to look at it; otherwise, I won't get

8 them until I get back-

9 MS. MARCHIONI: (Interposing) The

10 meeting won't be until --

11 MEMBER BAUER: -the day of the meeting.

12 MS. MARCHIONI: The packet will go out

13 two Fridays before the meeting.

14 MR. SAVEN: As long as we're in

15 discussion, in your letter, Tom, I think for the rest

16 of board members, a lot of issues that we bring

17 before the board we deal with unique configurations

18 of the property because of certain things. What was

19 it that the judge did not understand about-

20 MR. SCHULTZ: (Interposing) The judge

21 was very clear that he was not ruling on whether or

22 not the board made the right decision. He never got

23 to that issue, and I think he acknowledged, actually,

24 at the beginning of the oral argument that there was






1 an extensive record.

2 What he is looking for, very

3 formalistically, and conservatively -- he was given a

4 copy of the ordinance, and the ordinance, when you

5 read it, has a number of things that you don't

6 typically make findings on, and that's not unusual

7 from board to board or community to community.

8 In fact, some of the language is

9 actually kind of antiquated and is a hangover from

10 the Township ordinances, and maybe in light of this

11 we might propose some changes.

12 But he just said here's the standard, I

13 didn't see a particular finding, not that he didn't

14 think you made a right decision, just that he wanted

15 a formalistic set of findings. And that's really

16 what he sent it back for.

17 MEMBER BAUER: Put that section of the

18 ordinance in there, please, when you send it out.

19 MR. SCHULTZ: Absolutely. And what

20 you'll get is, we filed a packet about this thick

21 with the Court, and for the record, a lot of

22 duplicative, but we'll probably just be copy the

23 whole thing that went to the Court so that you're

24 looking at the same thing that he's going to be






1 leaking at when he reviews the decision.

2 MEMBER REINKE: Good idea.

3 MS. CHAIRMAN: There goes 4th of July.

4 MR. SCHULTZ: A lot of it is

5 duplicative. It will be the formal record on appeal

6 that was already submitted once to him.

7 MEMBER REINKE: Date of meeting is the

8 8th?

9 MS. CHAIRMAN: Next topic is mockup

10 signs.

11 MS. MARCHIONI: That's me. I pass out

12 a packet to all the applicants when they come in.

13 The mockup signs are mentioned six times in the

14 packet, yet every month I get verbally abused on the

15 phone by the applicants of why they have to put these

16 mockup signs up. I'm wondering if we can come up

17 with some better language or, you know, do something

18 so that they understand what the mockups are about

19 and why they need to do it. They feel it's, you

20 know, too much money, they don't want to work on it.

21 MEMBER BAUER: Is it a separate

22 paragraph?

23 MS. MARCHIONI: It's on, like, five

24 different pages, so they're just not-






1 MEMBER REINKE: (Interposing) Can you

2 include a copy of that in our package, and then maybe

3 this is an item everybody can kind of read over

4 and --

5 MEMBER BRENNAN: It's basically a take

6 off from Jim Harrington's directions toa petition.

7 MS. MARCHIONI: Yeah. Allen wrote some

8 language in here, and I mean-

9 MEMBER REINKE: (Interposing) Maybe

10 kind of brainstorm it a little bit, you know, maybe

11 throw up some ideas.

12 MEMBER BRENNAN: Nothing else, if it's

13 mentioned six times in there. Make it in bold about

14 four our five letters tall.

15 MS. MARCHIONI: And, also, if we could

16 -- there's some businesses in Novi that come in and

17 redo the facade and they need new signs, so I guess

18 we need to do -- decide when exactly you want to see

19 the the signs. For example, Leon's. We did their

20 facade. Did you want to see the new signs with the

21 old facade or have them come in when the new facade's

22 done, or at what point do you want to see it?

23 MEMBER BRENNAN: A new sign is a new

24 sign.






1 MEMBER REINKE: We can address -- put

2 that together and we'll deal with the whole thing

3 together, because facade wise, it would be a mockup

4 sign, there's really no -- because they're going to

5 try to blend it in the best way. I'm just looking at

6 size and location is my concern, not whether it

7 blends with the facade or not. That's his problem.

8 MS. CHAIRMAN: And that's out of paper

9 anyways.

10 MEMBER REINKE: If they choose to put

11 up a real sign and we say we don't like it, then

12 that's a problem.

13 MS. MARCHIONI: Do you want me to put

14 this packet with your next packet?

15 MEMBER REINKE: Please. That's my

16 feeling.

17 MS. MARCHIONI: That would be great.

18 MS. CHAIRMAN: Don, I have a question.

19 MR. SAVEN: Sure.

20 MS. CHAIRMAN: In regards to the

21 training, now that we have the new members, and in

22 light of this latest thing, as a brushup of -- the

23 meeting with Tom last year, can we make sure that

24 that happens soon? I mean, grant it, July is going






1 to be a full month with vacations and that, but I

2 really hate to wait to get to the fall or something,

3 especially when we have the new members.

4 I'm here and I know how helpful it was

5 for us -- well, myself and Sarah, but it's pretty

6 helpful. The training is very beneficial, and

7 it's -- it just makes you a better member.

8 MR. SAVEN: Day, evening, time, time of

9 day, whatever?

10 MS. CHAIRMAN: Evenings would be

11 probably -- everybody available in the evenings?

12 MR. SCHULTZ: Any particular day of the

13 week?

14 MEMBER BAUER: Weekend?

15 MR. SCHULTZ: Weekend would be fine,

16 too.

17 MS. CHAIRMAN: If it's on the boat.

18 You want it on the weekend it's on the boat,

19 weekend's fine for me, but during the week is better.

20 MR. SCHULTZ: If we can get a consensus

21 on which day of the week, I'll be happy to come back

22 with dates this month and next month.

23 (Discussion was held.)

24 MS. CHAIRMAN: Wednesday.






1 MEMBER GATT: Wednesday.

2 MR. SCHULTZ: What time, 6:00?

3 MS. CHAIRMAN: 6:30. I can't get here

4 by 6:00. 6:30?

5 MR. SCHULTZ: 6:30 How long do you

6 anticipate, hour, hour-and-a-half?

7 MS. CHAIRMAN: I don't know how many

8 questions. Enough for the first --

9 MEMBER BAUER: It's going to be all

10 scrambled.

11 MS. MARCHIONI: Would have to make sure

12 it's not on planning commission.

13 MS. CHAIRMAN: We don't have to do it

14 right here. We can probably have it here somewhere.

15 MR. SCHULTZ: I'll look for a Wednesday

16 around 6:30.

17 MS. CHAIRMAN: That would be great.

18 Anything else? Great meeting. Thank you, members.

19 I officially adjourn this meeting.

20 (The meeting was adjourned at

21 9:30 p.m.)

22 - - -

23 Date approved:

August 12, 2003 __________________________

Sarah Marchioni Recording Secretary










1 C E R T I F I C A T E


3 I, Cheryl L. James, do hereby

4 certify that I have recorded stenographically the

5 proceedings had and testimony taken in the

6 above-entitled matter at the time and place hereinbefore

7 set forth, and I do further certify that the foregoing

8 transcript, consisting of one hundred twenty-two (122)

9 typewritten pages, is a true and correct transcript of my

10 said stenograph notes to the best of my ability.



13 -------------------------

Cheryl L. James, CSR-5786



15 --------------