View Agenda for this meeting
View Action Summary for this meeting


Proceedings had and testimony taken in the matters of the ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS at City of Novi, 45175 Ten Mile Road, Novi, Michigan, on Tuesday, June 1, 2004.

Cynthia Gronachan, Chairman
Sarah Gray
Frank Brennan
Gerald Bauer
Brent Canup
Justin Fischer
Siddharth Sanghvi

Don Saven, Building Department.
David Gilliam, Attorney.
Denise Anderson, ZBA Recording Secretary.

Machelle R. Billingslea-Moore, Certified Shorthand Reporter.

1 Novi, Michigan

2 Tuesday, June 1, 2004

3 At 7:30 p.m.

4 - - - - -

5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: We'll call the

6 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to order.

7 Denise, would you please call the

8 roll.

9 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Bauer?

10 MEMBER BAUER: Present.

11 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Brennan?


13 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Canup?


15 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gray?

16 MEMBER GRAY: Present.

17 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gronachan?


19 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Sanghvi?


21 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Fisher?

22 MEMBER FISHER: Present.

23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: The Zoning Board of

24 Appeals is a Hearing board, empowered by the City of









1 Novi Charter to hear appeals seeking variances from

2 the application of the Novi Zoning Ordinances. It

3 takes at least -- it takes a vote of at least four

4 members to approve a variance; and a vote of the

5 majority of the members present to deny a variance.

6 This evening, we do have a full board.

7 I will ask at this time that the

8 audience please pay attention to the rules of conduct

9 that are on the front of the agenda, and ask at this

10 time that all cell phones and pagers be turned off.

11 I would also like to note that

12 Mr. Schultz is not present with us this evening. I

13 would like to introduce David Gilliam to our board

14 members as our attorney.

15 Welcome.

16 MR. GILLIAM: Thank you.

17 Nice to be here.

18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: The agenda, are

19 there any changes?

20 DENISE ANDERSON: There are no changes

21 to the agenda.

22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: There were no

23 Minutes for approval.

24 Is there a problem there?









1 DENISE ANDERSON: I think we've taken

2 care of that.


4 At this time, is there anyone in the

5 audience that wishes to make a comment to the Board,

6 that is not relevant to the cases that are before us?


8 I know there was a gentleman that

9 wishes to approach the Board from Fidelity Investment

10 Signage?

11 Would you please state your name for

12 the record.

13 MR. SHALOT(ph): Good evening. My name

14 is Charlie Shalot. I'm with the Site Enhancement

15 Services.

16 After speaking with the chairperson,

17 at this time, we would respectfully request the

18 opportunity to continue our application until the

19 next Hearing.

20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I understand that

21 there is not an agreement on the signage at the

22 current time. You want to take it back to the

23 client; is that correct?

24 MR. SHALOT: That is correct.










2 So you wish to be tabled until July?

3 MR. SHALOT: That is correct.


5 Board Members?

6 All those in favor?


8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Any opposed?

9 Okay. We'll see you in July.

10 MR. SHALOT: Thank you very much.

11 MEMBER BRENNAN: For the record, that

12 was 04-048, Fidelity --

13 MR. SHALOT: That is correct, sir.

14 MEMBER BRENNAN: Thank you.

15 MR. SHALOT: Thank you, sir.

16 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Is there anyone

17 else in the audience that wishes to make a comment to

18 the Board, other than -- in regards to anything

19 other than what's in front of the Board this evening?

20 Seeing none, we'll go ahead and call

21 our first case. This case was tabled from last

22 month, 04-040, filed by Bryan Letourneau for

23 residence at 50191 Nine Mile Road.

24 Good evening. You were sworn in last









1 month and it will continue this month, okay?

2 MR. LETOURNEAU: Okay. Last month we

3 came in to the Hearing, and we weren't quite as

4 prepared as we needed to be. So I've drawn up a new

5 plot plan for you, and with more -- better

6 measurements. And with the help of Mr. Saven and Ms.

7 Anderson, they've hooked me up with a aerial view of

8 the property, so we could kind of better tell you

9 where everything is at and why we can only come out

10 this way with the addition.

11 We have the pool in the back; and then

12 the well is about right here, positioned about six-

13 feet outside of the house, kind of off-set. And then

14 we have a lot of big oak trees right up in here. And

15 then our sewer system, we've hooked up to the Grinder

16 Sewer System that's out there, the pressure main; and

17 it's right here next to the house, also, and it comes

18 out this way.

19 The reason, we've been with like three

20 different designers, trying to figure out a better

21 way to tie this all in, but we really can't come up

22 with anything, because we're adding a foyer and a

23 three-car garage in addition.

24 Now there's really no where to go back









1 this way; and we don't want to go this way, because

2 of the way the wetlands -- this is all woods here.

3 You can see the trees. And if we come more out front

4 and we tried to off set it, we'd be covering up the

5 whole front of the house.

6 Now, I've put another elevation of

7 what we want to build in the pamphlets, to kind of

8 better show you what we have going. I have outlined

9 like new edition and existing house.

10 Do you have that elevation?


12 MR. LETOURNEAU: To kind of better

13 give you a better idea of what we're trying to do

14 here.

15 That's pretty much all I can -- have

16 to say.

17 I'm ready to take any questions from

18 the Board.


20 Is there anyone in the audience that

21 wishes to make comment in regards to this case at

22 this time?

23 Seeing none, there were six notices

24 were mailed, no approvals, no objections.









1 Building Department?

2 MR. SAVEN: Mr. Letourneau, have you

3 contacted your neighbor adjacent that was most

4 affected by the addition?

5 MR. LETOURNEAU: Yes, I did. And he

6 was supposed to send in his approval, and he didn't.

7 So he approved, no problem. And the neighbor next to

8 him has no problem. And then the people -- the

9 neighbor over here, I don't really know these people

10 over here, the home, all this, 20. You don't have it

11 up here anymore.

12 But yes, he has no problem with it at

13 all.

14 MR. SAVEN: Okay. The Board Members

15 at the last meeting, they asked for you to do a

16 little more research and asked, as far as my

17 department is concerned, we went into the GIS; taking

18 into account the wetlands and the effect on this

19 particular lot.

20 This is a pre-existing lot of record;

21 and that this gentleman has just certain space that

22 he can work within, and that's what he's presenting

23 to you tonight.










1 Board Members?

2 Member Brennan.

3 MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, thank you.

4 You've given us a lot more to look at. It's obvious

5 you can't go to the east or is that the west?


7 MEMBER BRENNAN: To the east, because

8 of all of that water and wetlands. And now you've

9 identified where that well-head is, and the pool.

10 I guess my only question is -- I guess

11 I answered it myself. The reason for the nine foot

12 variance, rather than something less, is that you

13 want a three-car garage.



16 Which might be reasonable on a lot

17 that size, considering he has no objection from his

18 neighbor. If his neighbor had an objection, we would

19 have gotten it either in writing or in some other

20 form.

21 This is a rather rural area, and I

22 guess I'm compelled to support the Petitioner.


24 MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you.









1 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I would like to add

2 my comments to the record.

3 I'm glad you did go back to the

4 drawing board and help us out. And as you can see,

5 it's a lot for us to know where everything is. So I

6 commend you for doing your homework. I, too, am in

7 support of it.

8 I would just like to know -- I don't

9 know when you're driving by, if anybody else saw a

10 for sale sign on the house next door. Is there

11 anybody living in that house right now?



14 Which might be, if he's leaving, the

15 reason why he didn't write the letter.

16 MR. LETOURNEAU: no, he said he was

17 going to send it, so I don't know. He's kind of --

18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So I'm also in

19 support.

20 Member Gray?

21 MEMBER GRAY: I could reluctantly be

22 in support of this because I think you have several

23 other design options you could investigate. One of

24 my concerns is if we grant the variance, you have









1 nine feet along the west property line, which has a

2 certain amount of vegetation along there, too.

3 But if something happens to your well,

4 how are you going to get well rig back there to

5 service your well; and that's a rhetorical question.

6 I think nine feet to the property line, when you have

7 adequate room to the front to do a three-car garage,

8 is a self-imposed hardship. But I just think that

9 should have been taken into consideration.

10 I don't know. Is there water,

11 Municipal water along Nine Mile Road?


13 MEMBER GRAY: So if something happens

14 to that well, this addition -- you're going to be

15 hard-pressed to get a rig in there to service that

16 well, but I'm sure you've already taken that into

17 consideration.

18 Thank you.

19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Anyone else?

20 Member Sanghvi.

21 MEMBER SANGHVI: Madam Chair, if I

22 may, I'd like to make a Motion in case 04-040, that

23 we grant the variance requested by applicant because

24 of hardship demonstrated by presence of the wetlands









1 on the east, as well as the well, and configuration

2 of the lot.


4 MEMBER GRONACHAN: It's been moved and

5 supported.

6 Any further discussion on the Motion?

7 Seeing none, Denise, would you please

8 call the roll.

9 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Sanghvi?


11 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Brennan?


13 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Bauer?


15 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Canup?


17 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gray?


19 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gronachan?


21 DENISE ANDERSON: Motion passes, four

22 to zero. I mean, four to two, I'm sorry.

23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Your variance has

24 been granted.









1 MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you.

2 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Calling case number

3 04-041, filed by Mr. and Mrs. John Anderson for

4 residence at 1361 East Lake Drive. This case was

5 also tabled from the May meeting.

6 MS. ANDERSON: Good evening.

7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Good evening.

8 MS. ANDERSON: Well, it was tabled

9 last month because I think it was some

10 misunderstanding what it was we were going to do or

11 asking to be able to do on the property. And seems

12 like maybe it's been misprinted again; that we're

13 going to do new construction, which would indicate

14 that we're going to tear down, and we are not.

15 We're looking to just add on to the

16 existing 700 square feet. We have sent to 15 of the

17 neighbors in the immediate area our proposal, with

18 the plot plans and drawings; and spoke to several of

19 them.

20 Mr. Williams to our left, he does have

21 some concerns, but I do hope that we can work those

22 out. I mean, that isn't something that would cause

23 the project not to be able to go through, hopefully.

24 And again, it was printed that we're looking for a









1 variance for new construction, and that's not

2 correct.


4 Is there anyone in the audience that

5 wishes to make comment in regards to this case?

6 Come on down, sir, please.

7 MR. WILLIAMS: Good evening.

8 My name is Bill Williams. My daughter

9 and I own the deed to that home, there. My daughter

10 lives in the home. I do not live in the home. I

11 have sent in an objection and I think it was --

12 you've received it.

13 There are some corrections that have

14 to be made to that objection, but nothing too

15 outstanding. I wonder if I could put the map of the

16 area, and I'm not sure how we work this. There we

17 go.

18 My concern, and I've had several

19 conversations with Mr. Anderson, and just before the

20 holiday, the last weekend holiday, he did put in our

21 mailbox the drawing of the proposed project he has,

22 which is a change from the project that he and I

23 discussed just the week before. So there are

24 constant changes being made.









1 Let me identify the property that we

2 reside in, it's this house here. This is a driveway,

3 approximately nine feet. There was that started

4 about here and went to the end of the property line

5 there. This section of the fence has been removed

6 permanently. The posts have been broken off or

7 lifted out with the concrete.

8 This is the existing home, which this

9 address is. There is approximately three feet here.

10 In a conversation that I had with Mr. Anderson, when

11 I repeatedly asked him and the Board here in the

12 building, there is no access to the back of this

13 house; other than this side here, which is not on his

14 property, or my driveway. And yet, the proposal

15 calls for what was first described as a garage; now a

16 utility building, rather large size, in addition to

17 the home here.

18 And yet, there still is no access to

19 the back area there. This is a well. I'd ask the

20 same question, how are you going to build, how are

21 you going to maintain, how are you going to repair

22 anything that goes on back here.

23 This front of this house -- and again,

24 he told me that he was going to remove three feet of









1 this house so that he would have a six foot driveway

2 here. In the drawing that's been presented to us

3 this weekend, the new door that he's put in is

4 located there. There are two large sliding doors

5 here. The front of this house, now is -- as it is

6 going to be -- yet his plan that he and I discussed

7 called for a reduction of the house by three feet;

8 and that is not in the current plan.

9 So I guess my concerns are, as

10 expressed in the objection, is that we are increasing

11 the lot coverage to 46 percent in the back, plus 8.3

12 percent. There are no other properties, as you can

13 see, from the back of the property line -- none of

14 these homes here have variations. This is a new home

15 that's being -- that was constructed. This lot here

16 is now undergoing construction.

17 By the way, this is a one-story home.

18 The basement of this new house comes up to the half

19 of the first story, and is going to go up 35 feet in

20 the air. So they did not request any variations

21 either; nor do they have -- as you can see, there are

22 no -- this is wetlands here. We have wooded areas.

23 It's now under water, about an inch of water because

24 of all the rain, and this is a stream that comes by









1 here.

2 So there is no -- there has been no

3 variations granted to the new houses; this one, nor

4 this one, that's under construction. So I guess on

5 my objection is or concern is, that we're -- all the

6 land at his house is now covered by gravel. There's

7 no green grass on that land any more. The gravel is

8 anywhere from maybe three inches to, I would

9 estimate, two feet.

10 In the back area here, is where the

11 gravel is the deepest where -- I'm sorry, over here.

12 I was concerned because of this fence being removed.

13 The fence -- he did ask me permission to temporarily

14 remove the link. It was a chain-link fence, which

15 was in good condition, not rusted. He did ask me to

16 remove the chain-link fence so that the Bobcat -- I

17 believe that's the correct name of the instrument --

18 could come in here and dump gravel on this three foot

19 area. He did not indicate to me that a dump truck,

20 carrying several tons of gravel would back down my

21 driveway -- well, first, remove the fence and the

22 posts, back down the driveway and dump a mountain of

23 gravel here.

24 Again, there was no communication that









1 this was going to happen. My concern is that plans

2 continually are in flux, and I think that there is

3 cause for concern on my part.

4 Thank you.

5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Anyone else that

6 wishes to make comment in regards to this case?

7 Seeing none, there were 39 notices,

8 one objection, which Mr. Williams just spoke and one

9 letter returned; no approvals.

10 Building Department?

11 MR. SAVEN: This matter was brought

12 back before the Board based on a misunderstanding

13 error on -- regarding the front parcel of land or the

14 front building that was presented. It was my

15 understanding that this was going to be setback 30

16 feet so to be able to get a car off of the -- or 20,

17 25 feet or something along -- just enough to get a

18 car off of the road. But apparently, it was not.

19 So in the application, it basically

20 indicated they were going to provide for parking,

21 off-street parking. I understood -- I thought that

22 was what was going to take place on this parcel.

23 Apparently not.

24 They're maintaining the same existing









1 single-family, one-story home portion, which is shown

2 on the plan. He's indicated that he's going to be

3 having a setback of 6.6 feet, which we were going to

4 cut-off three feet of that building.

5 MR. ANDERSON: That's what I'm

6 planning on doing, yeah, and come up with nine foot

7 six.

8 MR. SAVEN: And everything else is

9 what is shown.


11 Board Members?

12 Member Canup.

13 MEMBER CANUP: I still don't think --

14 you know, even after we looked at this last time and

15 asked them to come back, I don't see anything here

16 that would change my attitude about what we talked

17 about at the last meeting.

18 If I'm reading this right, alongside

19 the house, you've got six feet six inches between the

20 lot line and the house; is that correct?

21 MR. ANDERSON: Correct.

22 MR. SAVEN: Member Canup, this is what

23 he's proposing.

24 MEMBER CANUP: You can barely walk









1 down six foot six inches, and you certainly can't get

2 a vehicle down through there. And in the front, I'm

3 reading 12 feet from the lot line to the front of the

4 house.

5 MR. ANDERSON: 12 feet, right.

6 MEMBER CANUP: How are you going to

7 park on 12 feet. Where are you going to park at

8 here? I guess that's my question.

9 MR. ANDERSON: That's what I'm trying

10 to solve. I'm going to take three feet off, so I've

11 got nine foot six to get to the back, and part at

12 least two cars alongside the house.

13 MEMBER CANUP: And you've still got

14 six foot six between the house and the lot line; and

15 three feet on the other side, which admittedly from

16 the testimony of the other gentleman, is not even

17 enough to push a wheelbarrel down.

18 MR. ANDERSON: Well, he said it's

19 three foot. It's actually six foot six. I've got

20 the survey, and if I take another three foot six off,

21 I don't even need a variance on that side. I'd have

22 ten feet. But in addition we're lessening the 700

23 square foot down to about 560, which is pretty hard

24 to live in. I'm just asking for a very small









1 addition, 17 by 22.

2 MEMBER CANUP: I still have a

3 difficult time supporting this, and that's my

4 comment.


6 MEMBER GRAY: I'm having a awful hard

7 time with this one, too, simply because of over

8 coverage of the lot. If the accessory structure is

9 not going to be a garage. And we just discussed how

10 it's almost impossible to get a car into a double

11 garage with ten feet between two structures.

12 Mr. Anderson indicated that he would not necessarily

13 use it as a garage, but Mr. Anderson may not always

14 be living there. Future residents might want -- try

15 to figure out how to move a vehicle.

16 I see there's additional space there

17 now on a smaller building, and I'm not as worried

18 about the well. I know there's Municipal water along

19 East Lake Drive, as well as septic. So utilities are

20 not a problem coming in from the front.

21 But I am concerned about still is this

22 exhibit house, where -- yes, it is existing. And I

23 know that there was some talk about building straight

24 up over it. And Mr. Saven indicated there was









1 question about the foundation, etc. If you're going

2 to be taking three feet off the existing house, I

3 kind of wonder why you put in brand-new doors and

4 brand-new windows in the front; but that's your

5 prerogative.

6 I know there's parking across the

7 street on the lake lot, as well. However, I have a

8 major problem with the excessive coverage of this

9 lot; and the fact that I know that the back of that

10 property is wet quite often because of the Morgan

11 Creek and the wetlands there, and I can't support

12 this. It's just way too over built for the property.

13 Thank you.

14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Member Brennan, did

15 I see your hand up?

16 MEMBER BRENNAN: Well, it's already

17 been stated. I just have -- it's already 46 percent

18 of the lot is proposed to be covered with buildings

19 and I can't support that in that neighborhood.

20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Anyone else?

21 Member Canup?

22 MEMBER CANUP: There's no further

23 discussion, I would make a Motion if it's appropriate

24 at this time.










2 Go ahead.

3 MEMBER CANUP: In case 04-041 for John

4 Anderson at 1361 East Lake Drive, that we deny the

5 request for variances as stated, for the reasons that

6 were mentioned in the previous testimony and by Board

7 Members.

8 MEMBER GRAY: Second.

9 Can I make a friendly amendment to

10 your Motion?

11 MEMBER CANUP: Accepted.

12 MEMBER GRAY: Would you be willing to

13 state for the record that the applicant has not

14 indicated that he can't build without less of a

15 variance?


17 MEMBER GRAY: Thank you.

18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. It's been

19 moved and seconded.

20 Is there any further discussion?

21 Denise, would you please call the

22 roll.

23 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Canup?












3 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Bauer?


5 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Brennan?


7 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gronachan?


9 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Sanghvi?


11 DENISE ANDERSON: Motion passes six to

12 zero.

13 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I'm sorry. At this

14 time, your variance request has been denied.

15 MR. ANDERSON: Thank you.


17 Our next case is 04-044, filed by Dean

18 Masciulli of Multi Building Company for 20882 Maybury

19 Park Drive in Maybury Park Estates Subdivision.

20 Mr. Masciulli is requesting 164 square foot variance

21 for the construction of an attached garage, located

22 at 20882 Maybury Park Drive.

23 Good evening.

24 MR. MASCIULLI: Good evening.









1 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Would you please

2 raise your right hand and be sworn in by our

3 secretary.

4 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear

5 or affirm to tell the truth, regarding case 04-044?


7 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you, sir.

8 MR. MASCIULLI: Thank you.

9 I coming of the Board tonight and

10 request 164 square foot variance. The homeowner

11 requested a four-car garage. As requested, we added

12 four feet to the garage. They want larger garage

13 doors, 18 foot wide, versus 16 foot wide, which is

14 adding approximately 100 square feet to our garage.

15 Even without the four feet, we would

16 probably be up here requesting a 64 square feet

17 variance on the garage. In Maybury Park, it's a R-A

18 Zoning with RUD agreement with R-1. We have some

19 lots that do meet the requirements so they can build

20 over a thousand square feet; and there are other lots

21 that do not meet the requirements.


23 All done?










1 MEMBER GRONACHAN: There were 16

2 notices sent, no approvals, no objections.

3 Building Department?

4 I'm sorry. Is there anyone in the

5 audience that wishes to make a comment in regards to

6 this case?

7 Seeing none, Building Department?

8 MR. SAVEN: I just want to brief the

9 Board that there is a first meeting scheduled for the

10 increase in square footage for accessory structures;

11 specifically, dealing with the R-A; R-1 District.

12 And it should be going before City Council, I

13 believe, after next meeting --

14 MR. MASCIULLI: Correct.

15 MR. SAVEN: -- as a matter of fact, I

16 think you'll see that increase greater than what

17 Mr. Masciulli is asking for.

18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Board Members?

19 Member Brennan.

20 MEMBER BRENNAN: Is that me?


22 MEMBER BRENNAN: With respect to the

23 size of this particular piece of property, is it just

24 short of an acre? Do you know what it is percentage-









1 wise? I saw 31,607 square feet.

2 MR. MASCIULLI: Just shy of an acre.

3 MEMBER BRENNAN: That's the only

4 question I had.

5 MR. MASCIULLI: A lot of these lots

6 are under an acre because preserving of the wetlands

7 we did in there.

8 MEMBER BRENNAN: We've historically

9 had similar conditions giving us similar results, and

10 unless there's an argument, I'd make a Motion.


12 Oh, Member Gray?

13 MEMBER GRAY: My thoughts exactly.

14 The configuration of the lot, if it was a true

15 whatever, it would be -- we would not be having this

16 discussion, so, Frank, make your Motion.


18 With respect to case 04-045, I would

19 move for -- did I say the wrong one?

20 MEMBER BAUER: Uh-huh.

21 44.


23 MEMBER BRENNAN: You've got another

24 one right behind this one.









1 04-044, I would move that the

2 Petitioner's request be granted due to the

3 conservative conservation needs easement causing a

4 problem with the lot configuration.


6 MEMBER GRONACHAN: It's been moved and

7 seconded.

8 Is there any further discussion on the

9 Motion?

10 Seeing none, Denise, would you please

11 call the roll.

12 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Brennan?


14 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Bauer?


16 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Canup?


18 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gray?


20 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gronachan?


22 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Sanghvi?


24 DENISE ANDERSON: Motion passes six to









1 zero.

2 MR. MASCIULLI: Thank you.

3 MEMBER GRONACHAN: You're not going

4 too far, are you?

5 MR. MASCIULLI: The next one's been

6 withdrawn, because we found out the lot was over an

7 acre.


9 MR. MASCIULLI: So we didn't want to

10 be in violation.

11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Your variance has

12 been granted.

13 Please see the building department.

14 You're all set.

15 MR. MASCIULLI: Thank you.

16 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Our next case is

17 04-046 filed by Desiree Davis of Tadian Homes for

18 signage at Saratoga Circle and Camden Court

19 Developments.

20 Desiree, is she present?

21 MEMBER BRENNAN: Madam Secretary, I

22 would move that we put this to the end of the case

23 load. And if she's not here, we'll excuse it.

24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: All those in favor?










2 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Moving right along

3 now to 04-047, filed by Douglas Teubert for a vacant

4 property adjacent to 48120 Eight Mile Road. Mr.

5 Teubert is requested the placement of an accessory

6 structure on a parcel of land, prior to the placement

7 of a principle permitted structure.

8 Good evening?

9 MR. TEUBERT: Good evening.

10 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Your name, please?

11 MR. TEUBERT: My name is Doug Teubert.

12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Raise your right

13 hand to be sworn in by our secretary.

14 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear

15 or affirm to tell the truth, regarding case 04-047?

16 MR. TEUBERT: Yes, sir.

17 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you.


19 MR. TEUBERT: I'm requiring or asking

20 for an accessory building. I was talking to

21 Mr. Saven, and I guess the problem is having an

22 accessory building before I build a home. I own the

23 property right next door, where the Barn Antiques is.

24 There's two acres there; and this parcel is one acre.









1 Basically, we want to put an accessory

2 building up, and then at some point we intend on

3 building a home on that lot, also. It would possibly

4 be for my daughter. We're not sure. We're thinking

5 about bringing her into the business; and there's the

6 possibility that we might turn our current house into

7 a Bed and Breakfast; but we don't really know yet.


9 Is that it?

10 MR. TEUBERT: That's it.

11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Is there anyone in

12 the audience that wishes to make comment in regards

13 to this case?

14 Seeing none, there were ten notices

15 mailed; no approvals, no objections, no letters

16 returned.

17 Building Department?

18 MR. SAVEN: Just to point out a little

19 bit of history. The Red Barn Antiques was given a

20 variance for the operation of that business on that

21 property several, several years ago. I can't think

22 of Jule --

23 MR. TEUBERT: Elvy.

24 MR. SAVEN: Elvy, owned the property.









1 And in doing so, they had some out buildings in the

2 back. And as it exists right now, Mr. Teubert has a

3 lean-to out there, and he has it very close to the

4 property line, very near the new development that's

5 taking place. And there are issues that need to be

6 address in moving the storage.

7 We were trying to come up with a

8 solution to this particular issue. He did purchase

9 the property, the adjacent property, and he was

10 wondering whether or not he could put an accessory

11 structure on that property.

12 While taking into account, what is

13 your long-ranged plan with the property, because it

14 does meet the requirement for the R-A District. It

15 meets everything that's there. If he was going to

16 put a barn up, what would the size be; how would it

17 be in relationship to the proposed house, should he

18 decide to split the property.

19 So the need that he has or that he's

20 requesting for right now, he needs that storage space

21 so he can get rid of the stuff that's behind there,

22 adjacent to the new development, and place it in a

23 secured area.

24 So that's what he's asking.









1 MR. TEUBERT: You said it better than

2 me.

3 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Board Members?

4 Member Canup?

5 MEMBER CANUP: I guess I don't have a

6 problem with what they're asking, but I would like to

7 see a representation of the type of structure that

8 you're going to build. And I looked through the

9 folder here and I didn't see anything in here that's

10 a representation.

11 And I would suggest to the Board -- if

12 the Board is in agreement, that we would table this

13 case until the next meeting, to give the presentor an

14 opportunity to give us a presentation of what the

15 structure is going to look like, the type, the type

16 of material, flooring, ceiling. What's it gonna be?

17 Is it going to be a pole barn?

18 MR. TEUBERT: Well, if my wife has her

19 way, it's going to be pretty substantial. Actually,

20 she's thinking of building the barn, so that when we

21 put or, not barn, but pole barn, the accessory

22 building -- building the accessory building, so that

23 when we build the house, they'll compliment one

24 another.









1 So her idea's are -- you know, she's

2 pretty artistic and creative and so it's not going to

3 be just plastic or corrugated steel or something like

4 that.

5 MEMBER CANUP: I still would like to

6 see a rendering of what your intentions are.

7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Member Brennan?

8 MEMBER BRENNAN: I have a different

9 twist on this. It has nothing to do with the

10 Petitioner, but I remember in the early '80's, the

11 guys that were going to build a goat farm came before

12 the city, and said, well, we want to build this barn.

13 And the city said nah. I'm not going to let you do

14 that.

15 They came back and said, well, we're

16 going to build a bar and a bowling alley. The city

17 said, well, that's a good idea. They built the bar

18 and said, guess what, we ran out of money.

19 Now, what's to stop you from building

20 this accessory building and never putting up a house?

21 That's my only question. And I would support your

22 request, because it makes sense. But how can I get a

23 hook in there that tell us someday there's going to

24 be a house?









1 MR. TEUBERT: I don't know the answer

2 to that question.

3 MR. BRENNAN: I mean, is it five

4 years? Six years?

5 MR. TEUBERT: I mean, hopefully, it

6 would be sooner than that. I mean it's really -- to

7 be honest, it's a matter of money.


9 MR. TEUBERT: And so, I would hope to

10 do it in two years, but I couldn't guarantee to this

11 Board that I'm going to do it within two years

12 because things happen. You know, if I can get a

13 mortgage, I'd probably do it right away. But I'm

14 kind of mortgaged up on the other piece of property,

15 trying to make the business work, and everything

16 else.

17 So I don't know. That is a good

18 question and I don't have an answer for you.

19 MEMBER BRENNAN: My heart tells me

20 that you're putting me -- my heart says that you have

21 the right thing in mind, but something back, back in

22 the cellar says you're putting the cart before the

23 horse.

24 Don?









1 I'm sorry.


3 MEMBER GRAY: Well, I have a solution

4 to that problem and the solution is to combine the

5 two lots, and that negates the need right there. And

6 then at such time he wants to -- if he decides he

7 wants to break off that acre and sell it or put a

8 house, he can go for a lot split. Because it would

9 comply -- because it would -- I mean, the parcels of

10 land are pertinent to each other. They're

11 continuous.

12 I mean, there's no reason why he --

13 it's one piece of land and that would negate that

14 problem right there.

15 MR. SAVEN: Basically what I'm going

16 to indicate is exactly what she said. We had a

17 conversation and he was trying to keep it separate,

18 because his long-ranged plan was to be able to sell

19 that property somewhere down the road, to -- whether

20 it belongs to anyone in the family, but I didn't want

21 to create a problem with him only to try to rectify

22 that problem later on. So what we're trying to do is

23 make sure those setbacks are appropriate. But the

24 issue was he wanted to keep the properties separate.









1 MEMBER GRAY: The solution is to

2 combine them. And there's no cost to combine them

3 and no cost for a lot split, is there?

4 MR. SAVEN: You can combine the two

5 pieces of property, and if you feel that you have to

6 sell them down the road, you can do a lot split. It's

7 one acre in an R-A Zoning.

8 MR. TEUBERT: So if I put it as one

9 piece of property, now there would not be a problem

10 down the road?

11 MR. SAVEN: I would ask the question

12 of the Board's take on this particular matter.

13 Remember, this is a business use this gentleman has

14 on his property. If he combines it, how are we going

15 to address that particular issue. He wants this

16 strictly for storage, like what he needs for the

17 store. I mean, that's why I'm very careful about

18 this.

19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Member Canup?

20 MEMBER CANUP: We should ask for legal

21 counsel about lot splits. I know there's some State

22 Statute, I think that deals with that if you have

23 been split with the last ten years, or something like

24 that, you can't combine them again.









1 Could you tell us if he combines these

2 lots, would it be difficult then to resplit the lot?

3 MR. GILLIAM: As I understand it, the

4 lot has not been split in recent history then if the

5 size of the lot meats all standards of lean-to.

6 It's a discretionary decision, but still I Think the

7 issue that comes up with the -- it's more of a

8 question of the use at that point in time, than the

9 actual lot split itself.

10 MEMBER GRAY: We granted a variance on

11 the business use. Doesn't R-A Zoning still trump, if

12 you will, the usage?

13 MEMBER BRENNAN: The variance that has

14 been grated is for the lot that the barn is on and

15 not the lot that is in front of the Zoning Board

16 tonight.

17 MEMBER CANUP: Could we grant a

18 variance if the Petitioner should request that he

19 would request it for a specific purpose as a one

20 parcel? Would that be something we could do? I

21 guess in -- I don't have a problem with the building

22 structure, as long as the structure is more than just

23 a barn.










1 MEMBER BRENNAN: A nice barn or

2 garage, whatever he wants to call it.

3 MR. TEUBERT: So you want it to be

4 quality.

5 MEMBER CANUP: Yes, that's correct.

6 And by that one that a house will be built there. A

7 structure is too expensive to just leave sit there. I

8 don't have a problem with it, except I want to see --

9 I don't know how the rest of the Board feels.

10 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Member Canup?

11 MEMBER BRENNAN: Couple of points.

12 Number one, the matter before us is requiring the

13 construction to build there, rather than the lot and

14 they should place them or do whatever they do.

15 Number two, we don't know what this structure is

16 going to look like with the information we have.

17 It might be easier for us to make a

18 positive decision if we know what it's going to look

19 like. And so again, as Member Canup discussed

20 earlier, maybe this gentleman should be given time to

21 give us more information regarding the appearance of

22 this structure and other details so we can make an

23 intelligent decision regarding his variance request.

24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Anything else?









1 Is there a Motion at this end of the

2 table?

3 Member Canup?

4 MEMBER CANUP: My Motion then would be

5 to table this request for next meeting or whenever it

6 is convenient to him to give us the information

7 regarding the nature of this structure he's planning

8 to build.

9 MEMBER GRONACHAN: We're going to

10 table this until next meeting.

11 Are you in agreement with that to come

12 back in front of the Board and show us what it is

13 you're building?

14 MR. TEUBERT: Yes. I've got a little

15 bit of a problem that's relly not your problem, in

16 that Multi Builders is really forcing my hand to get

17 off of that -- to get that lean-to taken down by July

18 15th. And I need a place to put the stuff that's in

19 there. I don't really -- I mean, I don't have the

20 time, but I guess I'll have to try to make some sort

21 of an agreement with Multi Builders. Hopefully

22 they'll understand my situation and give me a little

23 bit more time.

24 I don't think they're already building









1 a house back there now anyway. It's going to take

2 really two or three months to build a house. I

3 wouldn't think that it would be a problem, but --

4 MEMBER GRONACHAN: We'll table this

5 until next meeting and you'll be back for us to take

6 a look at --

7 MR. TEUBERT: Can you give me any

8 incite what you would like from me? I mean, you want

9 to know what it's going to look like, the materials,

10 what it's going to be made out of, stuff like that.


12 MR. TEUBERT: Okay.

13 MR. SAVEN: I believe they want

14 elevations in regards to how it's going to look and

15 the front and the side and the rear.

16 MR. TEUBERT: And nobody will be able

17 to see it from the front -- well, there's one channel

18 of trees that are open, but nobody is really going to

19 be able to see it. There's a lot of trees on the

20 property right now. It'll be very difficult. I

21 mean, somebody driving by, they would have to stop

22 the car and look down the tree line to actually see

23 this structure.

24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: We'll table this









1 case until July. All those in favor --


3 MEMBER GRONACHAN: See you then.

4 MR. TEUBERT: All right.

5 Thank you.

6 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Moving right along

7 to case number 04-049, filed by George Dawson, for

8 residence at 1405 East Lake Road.

9 Is Mr. Dawson here this evening?

10 MR. DAWSON: Yes.

11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Mr. Dawson is

12 requesting four variances for the construction of a

13 second floor addition to an existing home located at

14 the above address.

15 Are all three of you going to speak to

16 the Board?

17 MR. DAWSON: Just me.


19 Would you raise your right hand in be

20 sworn in by our secretary.

21 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear

22 or affirm to tell the truth regarding case, 04-049?

23 MR. DAWSON: Yes, I do.

24 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you, sir.









1 MR. DAWSON: The request for four

2 variances to have -- for the sideyard setback and

3 front setback on an existing home.

4 The current lot is a 30.1 foot lot,

5 common to that neighborhood. The size and shape of

6 that lot make the setback impossible to meet and

7 build on that piece of property.

8 The size and location of the current

9 house is not changing. The size of the footprint of

10 the house is going to be the same. What I've

11 proposed for this home is going to be on the second

12 floor of the existing structure.

13 This hardship is due to the existing

14 structure being on a 30.1 incline, due to the lot.

15 The current second floor -- it is currently a second

16 floor. It's an addition that's 25 years old.

17 Although it's structurally sound, it is of poor

18 quality. For example, the seams -- this easement

19 leaks badly to the first floor.

20 The existing second floor two bedrooms

21 currently, no bathroom. The only bathroom is the

22 house is on the first floor in the rear behind the

23 kitchen.

24 The proposed work will be to add 85









1 square feet to the second floor and to reconstruct

2 the second floor, including the addition of a

3 bathroom on the second floor. The requested

4 variances are for the existing structure only.

5 There's no plan on changing the existing structure;

6 other than the second floor addition. So these are

7 the only improvements to correct this situation.

8 I've spoke with the people to the

9 south and north of me and have been notified they

10 will be actually very supportive of the changes.

11 The home is not -- the home is an

12 older home and is in need of repair. I think the

13 feeling is that it will only enhance the area, and

14 will maintain the original character of East Lake

15 Drive.


17 MR. DAWSON: Yes.


19 Is there anyone else in the audience

20 that wishes to make comment in regards to this case?

21 Seeing none, there were 54 notices

22 mailed; one approval; no objections. The approval

23 came from Andrew and Susan Lebrowski(ph), at 1407

24 East Lake Drive. Please note our complete approval









1 of Mr. Dawson's request for variance and all

2 improvements are welcome. In this neighborhood, lots

3 are 30 by a 110 feet; and with the sideyard setbacks,

4 only five feet of property would be available to

5 build on. Furthermore, this is not increasing the

6 dimensions of the existing home. We lend our full

7 support to Mr. Dawson.

8 Building Department?

9 MR. SAVEN: What she said. It's going

10 up the building.


12 Member Gray?

13 MEMBER GRAY: There's no -- there's

14 not going to be an increase to the footprint of the

15 house. It's needed that work for a long time. I

16 remember when Andy and Susan came for a variance. I

17 wasn't on the Board, but I sure was in support of it

18 at the time. And this just continues their rehab of

19 that particular block on East Lake. And I have no

20 problem with it.

21 It's going to be a benefit. And

22 there's adequate parking across the street, if

23 necessary, because I believe he owns a lake lot, too.










1 Member Brennan?

2 MEMBER BRENNAN: Sarah took the words

3 out of my mouth and if she wants to make a Motion,

4 I'll support it.

5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Any other Board

6 Members?

7 Member Sanghvi?

8 MEMBER SANGHVI: I just have one

9 question. Do you have a floor plan for your second

10 floor?

11 MR. DAWSON: Yes.

12 MEMBER SANGHVI: Is it in the packet?

13 MEMBER GRAY: Did you bring it with

14 you?

15 MR. DAWSON: I do have a copy of it

16 with me, yes, a single copy of it.

17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: For those who are

18 watching at home, I want to note on the record that

19 there is an existing house that it does not change

20 the lot size coverage or lot coverage, as the

21 previous cases you may have seen us say something in

22 that regard to additions. He's just adding to the

23 existing structure.

24 And also, it doesn't increase the









1 square footage.

2 Anything else?

3 MEMBER SANGHVI: And is your bathroom

4 going to be here?

5 MR. DAWSON: It's going to be upper

6 left-hand corner of the drawing; that's the north

7 east corner.


9 Thank you.

10 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Anything else?

11 Member Canup?

12 MEMBER CANUP: If there's no further

13 discussion, I would make a Motion; that in case

14 number 04-049, 1405 East Lake Drive, two-story

15 addition, that we grant the variance as requested for

16 reasons as stated by the owner and the observations

17 made by the Board.


19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: It's been moved and

20 seconded.

21 Is there any further discussion in

22 regards to the Motion?

23 Seeing none, Denise, would you please

24 call the roll.









1 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Canup?


3 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Brennan?


5 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Bauer?




9 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gronachan?


11 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Sanghvi?


13 DENISE ANDERSON: Motion passes six to

14 zero.

15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Your variance has

16 been granted.

17 Please see the Building Department.

18 MR. DAWSON: Okay.

19 Thank you.

20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you and good

21 luck.

22 Okay.

23 Our next case is 04-050 filed by David

24 Khalil --









1 MR. KHALIL: Khalil.


3 For 43000 Nine Mile Road, Novi

4 Business Center Building. Mr. Khalil is requesting

5 a variance to allow outdoor storage of

6 trailers located at the above address. The

7 property is zoned I-1, and is located on

8 the north side of Nine Mile, between Novi

9 Road and the railroad tracks.

10 And you are Mr. Khalil?

11 MR. KHALIL: Yes, I am.

12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Please raise your

13 right hand and be sworn in by our secretary.

14 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear

15 or affirm to tell the truth regarding case 04-050?

16 MR. KHALIL: I do.

17 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you, sir.

18 MR. KHALIL: I am the property owner

19 at 43000 Nine Mile Road and I also have two of my

20 tenants with me, Underwood Fire System and Classic

21 Carpets.

22 Classic Carpet has one trailer, and

23 that's one of the -- none of these are storage

24 trailers. They're used daily sometimes to conduct









1 their business.

2 Underwood Fire Systems has two large

3 fire pumps that they have on the property; one of

4 which, I believe, right now, is in California to be

5 used for an emergency that occurred out there.

6 None of these trailers are used for

7 storage at all. They are used to haul materials that

8 are necessary to conduct their business. The -- both

9 tenants have been in the building for several years.

10 They've had the trailers on the lot for several

11 years. We bought the building in December, and we're

12 requesting a variance so that these tenants may

13 continue to use these trailers to conduct their

14 business.

15 To not allow them to use -- to put the

16 trailers on the lot would be definite hardships to

17 each of these businesses.


19 Is there anyone in the audience that

20 wishes to make comment in regards to this case?

21 Seeing none, there were 23 notices

22 sent and one objection. This is from a resident,

23 Lynn Cosin(ph). I'm opposed to the request for

24 variance for the outdoor storage of trailers located









1 at 43000 Nine Mile Road.

2 As you know, the property is zoned I-

3 1. It's located on the north side of Nine Mile,

4 between Novi Road and the railroad tracks. While I

5 believe that this development does not affect

6 residential, the allowance of outdoor storage in one

7 light industrial area does set a precedent for all

8 other I-1 areas.

9 Hickory Corporate Park is very near

10 this site, and it does affect residential. City

11 Ordinance Section 1905, paragraph 1(a), states that

12 all usage shall be conducted in a completely enclosed

13 building. If there is a need for trailer storage, it

14 indicates to me that the property is probably not

15 suitable or large enough for this use.

16 I would appreciate the continued

17 enforcement of no outdoor storage in light industrial

18 zones.

19 Building Department?

20 MR. SAVEN: Just to point out, this is

21 coming to the Board based upon a notice of violation

22 that was issued for this case; the outdoor storage in

23 dealing with trailers and debris.

24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Board Members?









1 Member Sanghvi?

2 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you, Madam

3 Chair.

4 I just have a couple of questions.

5 MR. KHALIL: Sure.

6 MEMBER SANGHVI: Are these parked

7 there permanently?

8 MR. KHALIL: No. In fact, as I stated

9 earlier, one of the three trailers -- as I understand

10 from my tenants -- is currently being used in

11 California, and will be there for three months.

12 The trailer that belongs to Classic

13 Carpet is used to deliver carpet on a weekly basis;

14 if not daily basis. So these are not storage

15 trailers, and they are not stored on the lot. They

16 are used to conduct business, and they have been used

17 for several years by each tenant.

18 MEMBER SANGHVI: So you don't conduct

19 any business out of these trailers.

20 MR. KHALIL: No, sir.

21 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you.

22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Member Brennan?

23 MEMBER BRENNAN: I can't support this

24 request. There's plenty of storage facilities all









1 over the city. This is the same type of accessories

2 that -- residents are obligated to take their

3 trailers and other outdoor camping gear, and all of

4 that -- I just don't see any reason why this has to

5 be sitting out in the parking lot.

6 If they can't get it inside of their

7 facility that they're leasing from you, maybe the

8 facility is too small. But I've heard nothing,

9 nothing that gave me any sense of hardship; other

10 than it's pretty convenient to put it out in the

11 parking lot, that's for sure.

12 But I won't support this.


14 MEMBER GRAY: I can't support it

15 either. I mean, the one trailer that's shown in the

16 picture provided looks like a snowmobile trailer. I

17 didn't see it when I was there, so that may have been

18 moved. The large trailer with the coil of drain

19 hose, that maybe the one that's in California.

20 The other trailer that's out at the

21 end of the property looks like it hasn't been moved

22 in months. I mean, it's got all sorts of leaves and

23 debris on it, and so to -- that leads me to believe

24 that it isn't being used on a daily, weekly or even









1 monthly basis.

2 And as Member Brennan stated, there

3 are plenty of storage facilities where it could be --

4 these trailers could be stored. I know a lot of the

5 contractors that I insure have to put their trailers

6 in storage yards; because they're not allowed to have

7 them either at their homes or where their offices are

8 because of the Ordinance.

9 And I see no reason to vary in this

10 case.

11 Thank you.

12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Member Canup?

13 MEMBER CANUP: If there's no further

14 discuss on this Motion -- on this case, I would be

15 willing to make a motion.


17 MEMBER CANUP: I would make a Motion

18 that in case number 04-050, located at 43000 Nine

19 Mile Road, Novi Business Center, that the request for

20 outdoor storage be denied at this time for reasons

21 stated by the Board.

22 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: It's been moved and

24 seconded.









1 Is there any further discussion on

2 this Motion?

3 Seeing none, Denise, would you please

4 call the roll.

5 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Canup?


7 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Bauer?


9 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Brennan?


11 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gray?


13 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gronachan?


15 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Sanghvi?


17 DENISE ANDERSON: Motion passes six to

18 zero.

19 MR. KHALIL: Thank you for your time.

20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Would the Board

21 entertain a five-minute break at this time?

22 MEMBER BRENNAN: If you would like to.

23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: The Board's going

24 to take a five-minute break and be right back.









1 (Brief recess taken.)

2 (Back on the record.)

3 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I'll call the Board

4 Meeting back to order.

5 And call case number 04-051, Victoria

6 Willbond of Multi Building Company for Maybury Estate

7 Park(sic).

8 MR. ENDRIDGE(ph): I'm not Victoria.

9 MEMBER GRONACHAN: State your name and

10 raise your right hand and be sworn in by our

11 secretary, please.

12 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear

13 or affirm to tell the truth regarding case 04-051?


15 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you.

16 MR. ENDRIDGE: Rick Endridge with

17 Multi Building Company.

18 First, I'd like to thank you for your

19 consideration this evening. And as you know, our

20 request, as you mentioned it, regarding the entry

21 sign to Maybury Park Estates. I would just briefly

22 like to point out the rationale behind our request.

23 All start with the subdivision

24 identification signs. We feel that the signage is









1 necessary on both sides of the entrance to

2 accommodate both directions of oncoming traffic

3 safely. And specifically, emergency vehicles.

4 In the same vein, we feel that the

5 size of the lettering should be as proposed,

6 regarding the visibility concerns, and you know, also

7 considering the high speed of traffic which occurs on

8 Eight Mile Road.

9 I also wanted to point out something

10 that I think the Board mentioned that the number of

11 letters in the name of the development do make it a

12 little bit difficult for us to work within the

13 Ordinance. If the lettering -- if there were fewer

14 letters, it would be a lot easier to make a sign that

15 would easily identify for the traffic from Eight Mile

16 Road.

17 Regarding the crest, which is also on

18 the cited variances -- one of the things we're

19 requesting here tonight. Our feeling is that the

20 crest should not be considered a sign; that it is

21 more of an artistic augmentation to the entry way, as

22 opposed to a visual distraction or an advertisement.

23 I do have the adjacent -- well, I

24 shouldn't say adjacent -- the property owners who









1 would really be most affected by our signage, happen

2 to be in Northville Township, and I do have their

3 signatures of approval; and I'll pass that along,

4 too.

5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. You can just

6 bring it to me.


8 And finally, I would just like to

9 point out that Multi Building Company -- we've

10 enjoyed a long fruitful relationship with -- in the

11 City of Novi, dealing with the officials and Building

12 Department, and we look forward to your comments and

13 our discussion this evening.

14 And thank you, again, for your time.


16 Nothing else?

17 There were 12 notices sent; no

18 approvals; no objections; with the exception of what

19 Petitioner, himself, brought to the meeting signed by

20 someone by the initials of E.L; and someone signing

21 -- I have no objections to the requested variance,

22 Carol Elvy.

23 Building Department?

24 MR. SAVEN: No comment.










2 Board Members?

3 Member Canup?

4 MEMBER CANUP: The representation that

5 they have, the artist representation -- the picture

6 that you have in the back is a representation of the

7 name on it. I think it fits. It looks good. I

8 don't see a problem. It's page three, isn't it, that

9 there's a representation of what they've submitted.


11 MEMBER BAUER: I think it's page four.

12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Member Brennan?

13 MEMBER BRENNAN: I think four of these

14 variance requests are all relative to the crest, and

15 the crest is relatively small, very small. I mean,

16 the fact that it's at the top of this structure makes

17 it 18 feet high. So when you take that into

18 consideration, I don't have a problem with any of

19 these.

20 I think just, you know, by the letter

21 of the law they're in violation and it requires five

22 variances. But in fact, it's a very minimal request.

23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Variance two on the

24 crest height, it says 18 feet, 16 inches.









1 MR. SAVEN: It's 16.

2 MEMBER GRONACHAN: 16 inches?

3 MR. SAVEN: I'm sorry. Six inches.

4 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So it's 18 feet,

5 six inches?

6 MR. SAVEN: I believe that's correct.

7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So then it would be

8 13 feet and six inches.

9 MR. SAVEN: I believe that's correct.

10 MEMBER GRAY: Or is it 19 feet, six

11 inches.

12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: On the crest issue

13 --


15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: -- on variance two,

16 what is it that you're actually requesting?

17 MR. ENDRIDGE: Well, we're requesting

18 that the crest not be considered a sign, and again,

19 just pointing out, as I mentioned, more of an

20 artistic augmentation; as opposed to a visual

21 advertisement or a distraction.


23 We understand that.

24 But on the height of the sign, the









1 requested height says 18 feet, 16 inches. So is that

2 six inches or --

3 MEMBER CANUP: I think it's

4 irrelevant, at least in my opinion.

5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Well, I think we

6 should get it right on the size --

7 MEMBER CANUP: Whoever makes the

8 Motion, in my opinion, would make the Motion based on

9 the representation; whether it's 19 feet six inches

10 or 18 feet, 18 inches. Doesn't matter.

11 MEMBER BRENNAN: It's at the top of

12 that structure.

13 MEMBER CANUP: If the Board saw fit to

14 accept it as an artist --

15 MR. ENDRIDGE: Artistic augmentation,

16 MEMBER CANUP: Whatever.

17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: A creative sign. A

18 creative --

19 MEMBER CANUP: It's really not. In my

20 opinion, it's not really a sign. It's just a crest.

21 A crest isn't a sign. I guess it's all the way you

22 look at it.

23 MEMBER BAUER: It's just a mock-up.

24 MEMBER BRENNAN: Ready for a Motion.









1 If you don't, I will.

2 MEMBER CANUP: I would make a Motion

3 in case number 04-051, Maybury Estates, that we grant

4 the two requests; that's the one dealing with the --

5 I think it's number four; is that correct? We'll

6 start at the top. Variance number -- there's three

7 that's with the crest sign, that it be accepted as an

8 artist augmentation; is that correct, and to be used

9 in this case only, as represented on the drawing; as

10 presented to this Board; and in the documentation.

11 Okay?


13 Keep going.

14 MEMBER CANUP: Variance number --

15 let's see. Well, that gets the crest sign out of the

16 way, right? One, two --

17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I think, one, two

18 and --


20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: -- and four

21 MEMBER BRENNAN: And five.

22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: -- and five.

23 MEMBER CANUP: One, two, four and

24 five.









1 So we're dealing with three?


3 MEMBER CANUP: Grant the request as

4 same.

5 MEMBER BAUER: Support.

6 MEMBER CANUP: And then that's pretty

7 much covered by the first.

8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. I think you

9 need to -- okay, variance six and seven?

10 MEMBER BRENNAN: Three and six are

11 identical.


13 And seven?

14 We're all set.


16 MEMBER GRONACHAN: It's been moved and

17 supported by Member Bauer.

18 Is there any further discussion on the

19 --

20 Member Gray?

21 MEMBER GRAY: I am in support of all

22 these, and I understand you went to the south side of

23 Eight Mile to get the neighbors, because if Dr. Geek

24 doesn't like it, he'd let us know.









1 MR. ENDRIDGE: They're very wonderful

2 people, both Mr. Long(ph) and Mr. Geek(ph) are

3 outstanding people, and they've been a pleasure to

4 work with them time and time through the whole

5 process.

6 Thank you.

7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Seeing no further

8 discussion, Denise, would you please call the roll.

9 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Canup?


11 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Bauer?


13 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Brennan?


15 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gray?


17 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gronachan?


19 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Sanghvi?


21 DENISE ANDERSON: Motion passes six to

22 zero.

23 MR. ENDRIDGE: Thanks a lot for your

24 time.










2 Okay.

3 MEMBER BRENNAN: Did you know that

4 your subdivision used to be the site for the Joker's

5 Motorcycle Club?


7 Thank you.

8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. Our next

9 case is 04-052 filed by Carrie Lynch of Allied Signs

10 for AT&T Wireless. Carrie Lynch is requesting to

11 install a second wall sign at the AT&T Wireless Store

12 located at 43267 Crescent Boulevard, which is north

13 of Grand River Avenue and east of Novi Road.

14 Are you Carrie Lynch?

15 MR. SEIBERT: Actually, no. My name

16 is Pat Seibert of Allied.

17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Would you please

18 raise your right hand and be sworn in by our

19 secretary.

20 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear

21 or affirm to tell the truth regarding case 04-052?

22 MR. SEIBERT: Yes, sir.

23 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you.

24 Go ahead.









1 MR. SEIBERT: As you just stated, we

2 are requesting to install a second wall sign at 43267

3 Crescent Boulevard at the existing AT&T Wireless

4 location. We're requesting a second wall sign due to

5 lack of identification of the store to traffic on

6 Crescent Boulevard, itself.

7 I'd just like to start by going back

8 to who this all started, which brought us to this

9 point to come before you tonight. We originally

10 submitted for this sign back on the 25th of February.

11 We received approval and actually received permits

12 in-hand on the 5th of March. Upon receiving the

13 permits, we had the sign manufactured and we actually

14 went out and installed this sign on the site.

15 So there was some sort of problem at

16 the Building Department; they overlooked the fact

17 that the drawing showed the sign on the rear

18 elevation. So there was that mistake. On our part,

19 our permit department actually resubmitted a second

20 set of drawings and permit applications for the same

21 sign. And that was on, I believe, the 29th of March.

22 And at that point, the Building

23 Department realized that the sign was not allowed by

24 the Ordinance. We were then contacted by Allen from









1 the Building Department, who instructed us to have

2 the sign was illegal, and we wanted -- you know, we

3 figured out what the problem was how we originally

4 submitted it.

5 It was kind of a mess going back and

6 forth. But anyway, we submitted the same drawings

7 that you're looking at originally to Allen, showing

8 the elevation, specifically, the southern rear

9 elevation, so I'd just like to see if that could be

10 considered at all.

11 The fact that there was a mistake that

12 was made when we were originally approved to put the

13 sign up; and then after the fact, after the expense

14 of having the sign manufactured; having the expense

15 of the sign being installed, we were now told that it

16 was illegal.

17 So that's what brought us to this

18 point, and that's why we're here tonight to ask for a

19 variance for this sign. I do believe that there were

20 variances granted in the past for signs on this

21 elevation. I was told that one was granted. I know

22 there's two on that side; and I was told by Allen

23 that, in the past, you guys have said that that was

24 -- those are going to be the only signs allowed.









1 So I realize that there is a problem

2 here, but we're just here to ask to see if there's

3 anything that can be done about leaving this sign in

4 place.

5 And that's pretty much what's going

6 on.

7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Is there anyone in

8 the audience that wishes to make comment in regards

9 to this case?

10 Seeing none, there were 71 notices

11 sent; no approvals; no objections; four letters

12 returned.

13 Building Department?

14 MR. SAVEN: This is a very unique

15 building, in as much as it does face Center and it

16 also faces Crescent Boulevard, number one. Number

17 two, it was a single-use building at one time and it

18 went to a two-user building and then a three-user

19 building; and now it's a three-user building, as it

20 exists now.

21 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Board Members?

22 Member Gray?

23 MEMBER GRAY: No, I don't really have

24 a problem with this sign, because I, for one, think









1 we need to support the Town Center, do what we can to

2 get rid of some of these empty store fronts. And

3 it's for I.D. purposes, because it does face

4 Crescent, as well as the interior. I think it's

5 necessary for I.D. purposes, and I'm in support of

6 it.

7 Thank you.

8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Member Brennan?

9 MEMBER BRENNAN: I'll make a Motion

10 with respect to case 04-052, that the Petitioner's

11 request for the second sign facing Crescent to be

12 approved for the purposes of site identification.

13 MEMBER GRAY: Second.

14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: It's been moved and

15 seconded.

16 Is there any further discussion in

17 regards to this matter?

18 Seeing none, Denise, would you please

19 call the roll.

20 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Brennan?


22 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gray?


24 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Bauer?










2 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Canup?


4 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gronachan?


6 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Sanghvi?


8 DENISE ANDERSON: Motion passes, six

9 to zero.

10 MR. SEIBERT: Thank you very much.

11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Call case 04-053,

12 filed by Paul Rizzardi of Singh Management, Company,

13 LLC, for Brownstone Apartment Homes. Brownstone

14 Apartments is requesting one sign variance for an

15 extension for a construction sign located at the

16 corner of 13 Mile and Holmes Drive.

17 Are you Mr. Rizzardi?

18 MR. RIZZARDI: Yes, I am.

19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Would you please

20 raise your right hand and be sworn in by our

21 secretary.

22 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear

23 or affirm to tell the truth regarding case, 04-053?

24 MR. RIZZARDI: Yes, I do.









1 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you.


3 MR. RIZZARDI: Briefly, Singh

4 Development Company purchased the Brownstones

5 Apartments in late October of last year. As part of

6 that, Singh Management Company took over the

7 management activities of this property. We're still

8 to lease up -- when Brownstones sold the property,

9 they never totally leased up. We currently about 74

10 percent occupancy.

11 We now want to keep the existing sign

12 where it is and just reface it with our new sign that

13 says -- or the same sign with the company --

14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Is there anyone in

15 the audience that wishes to make comment in regards

16 to this case?

17 Seeing none, Board Members?

18 Oh, 123 notices, no approvals; no

19 objections.

20 Board Members?

21 Member Brennan?

22 MEMBER BRENNAN: I noticed in the

23 packet that they are 70 percent leased out or

24 occupied; but given that this is new management









1 running this, I'm compelled to give them some

2 extended period; and I guess I'd be agreeable to

3 yield.


5 MEMBER BRENNAN: There's a lot of

6 shaking heads.

7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Would you like to

8 make a Motion?

9 MEMBER BRENNAN: I'll make a Motion

10 that -- with respect to case, 04-053, that the

11 Petitioner's request be granted --

12 BOARD MEMBERS: Your mic.

13 MEMBER BRENNAN: I always leave mine

14 on.

15 04-053, that the Petitioner's request

16 be granted for one year from tonight.

17 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: It's been moved and

19 seconded.

20 Is there any further discussion on the

21 Motion?

22 Seeing none, Denise, would you please

23 call the roll.

24 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Brennan?










2 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Bauer?


4 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Canup?




8 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gronachan?


10 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Sanghvi?


12 DENISE ANDERSON: Motion passes six to

13 zero.

14 MR. RIZZARDI: Thank you.

15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. Thank you

16 and good luck.

17 Okay. We have case number, 04-058

18 filed by Evan Gerish for 24823 Thatcher Drive in the

19 Churchill Drive Subdivision. Mr. Gerish of LoPiccolo

20 Homes is requesting 191.75 square foot variance for

21 the construction of an attached garage.

22 Are you, in fact, Mr. Gerish?

23 MR. GERISH: I am he.

24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Would you raise









1 your right hand and be sworn in by our secretary,

2 please.

3 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear

4 or affirm to tell the truth regarding case 04-058?

5 MR. GERISH: I do.

6 MEMBER BAUER: Please go ahead.

7 MR. GERISH: We were building this

8 house in this subdivision that's located across the

9 street, Crescent -- Churchill Crossing, rather. And

10 this particular house that's under construction --

11 above the half-way point of construction, it was

12 pointed out to us that we're in violation of the

13 Ordinance that pertains to the attached garage.

14 Subsequently, we applied for this

15 variance. We thought we were proceeding in good-

16 faith. We thought we had a building permit issued by

17 the Building Department; and we were not at all aware

18 of this particular restriction, and that's why I'm

19 here this evening to ask that you would give us this

20 your consideration.


22 Is there anyone in the audience that

23 wishes to make comment in regards to this case?

24 Seeing none, there were 39 notices









1 sent; no approvals; no objections; one letter

2 returned.

3 Building Department?

4 MR. SAVEN: No comment.

5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Board Members?

6 Member Brennan?

7 MEMBER BRENNAN: So, Don, they had all

8 the building permits?

9 MR. SAVEN: That's correct.

10 MEMBER BRENNAN: Everything was

11 issued.

12 MR. SAVEN: Yes.

13 MEMBER BRENNAN: This allows this

14 potential customer or owner for what, a three-car

15 garage?

16 MR. GERISH: Yes.

17 That particular house has a -- what we

18 call a tandem. It has a three-car garage, but it's

19 tandem. Two cars opening in the front with a rear;

20 and they asked for a three-car garage; and that's

21 what we applied for; and thinking that, you know, we

22 -- our first concern was to make sure that we were

23 meeting all the setback and sideyard restrictions.

24 That's the most prominate thing in our minds. And I









1 had no idea about the square footage restrictions.

2 MEMBER BRENNAN: And that's more

3 important to me, as a Board Member, as well.

4 Considering the request of a variance

5 is rather minimal, I support the Petitioner's

6 request, given the circumstances.

7 MEMBER BAUER: Will you make a Motion?


9 With respect to 04-058, I would move

10 to approval of the Petitioner, in the spirit of the

11 Ordinance.

12 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

13 MEMBER GRONACHAN: It's been moved and

14 seconded.

15 Is there any further discussion on the

16 Motion?

17 Denise, would you please call the

18 roll.

19 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Brennan?


21 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Bauer?


23 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Canup?












3 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gronachan?


5 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Sanghvi?


7 DENISE ANDERSON: Motion passes six

8 to zero.

9 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Your variance has

10 been granted.

11 MR. GERISH: Thank you very much.


13 Okay. And the last case of the

14 evening, is case number 04-060, filed by Mike Baker

15 of Schonsheck, Inc., for Millennium Technology

16 Center. Mr. Baker is requesting a variance for the

17 shared access road, required as a condition of the

18 preliminary site plan approval for the Millennium

19 Technology Center development located between 12 Mile

20 and Haggerty.

21 You are Mr. Baker?

22 MR. BAKER: Correct.

23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Would you please

24 raise your right hand and be sworn in by our









1 secretary.

2 MEMBER BAUER: Do you solemnly swear

3 or affirm to tell the truth regarding case 04-060?

4 MR. BAKER: I do.

5 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you.


7 MR. BAKER: We approached the Planning

8 Commission for preliminary site approval last year,

9 in August, I believe. And as a condition of the

10 preliminary site plan approval, we were required to

11 show a third access point for this property, which is

12 sandwiched between Haggerty and Cabot, with access to

13 both streets.

14 The third point was really -- the

15 third point of access was really to allow our

16 neighbor, originally, to access our site, and

17 thereby, come into the plant; but their preliminary

18 site approval only required to points of access.

19 We had a conversation with the

20 Planning Commission that night, and it was somewhat

21 misconstrued on our part. We didn't realize it was

22 going to be a condition of our site planning

23 approval, but rather, we thought that we were

24 instructed to negotiate with the property owner for









1 that easement.

2 Negotiations took place. They were

3 unsuccessful. We were not able to secure an easement

4 with the adjacent property owner for a number of

5 reasons.

6 We subsequently Petitioned the

7 Planning Commission to try to have the Motion revised

8 and were denied. And we would like to have that

9 Motion removed, or that portion of the Motion removed

10 so we can receive site planning approval. It's

11 really the only sticky point left with the City

12 before we receive our final approval.


14 There's obviously no one in the

15 audience that wishes to make comment at this time.

16 There were 13 notices mailed; no approvals; no

17 objections; five letters returned.

18 Building Department?

19 MR. SAVEN: I believe in your packet,

20 you'll see a letter from our attorney regarding this

21 particular matter. And as indicated by this

22 gentleman, essentially, he's being held hostage for

23 that third additional site; but that's one of the

24 issues that the Planning Commission dictated and said









1 this is part of the approval process; therefore,

2 we're mandating that this be done.

3 The only people that can make that

4 decision is this Board.


6 MEMBER GRAY: In reviewing the

7 information presented to us, it struck me as the only

8 real reason that the Planning Commission would have

9 asked you to do this access was to benefit Ridgeway;

10 not to you, because you're site complied with the

11 Ordinance, with the two accesses. And so you know,

12 if you have negotiated in good-faith and it didn't

13 happen, there's no reason -- I mean, I have no

14 reason whatsoever to not support your request.

15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Member Brennan?

16 MEMBER BRENNAN: Madam Chair, based on

17 the recommendation from our attorney -- we seek his

18 guidance on difficult cases -- I would move that we

19 approve the Petitioner's request, based on that

20 recommendation.

21 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: It's been moved and

23 seconded.

24 Is there any further discussion on the









1 Motion?

2 Seeing none, Denise, would you please

3 call the roll.

4 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Brennan?


6 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Bauer?


8 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Canup?


10 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gray?


12 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Gronachan?


14 DENISE ANDERSON: Member Sanghvi?


16 DENISE ANDERSON: Motion passes six to

17 zero.

18 MR. BAKER: Thank you.

19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Your variance has

20 been granted.

21 Good luck.

22 MR. BAKER: Thank you.

23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Earlier we tabled

24 case number 04-046, Saratoga Circle. And it appears









1 that no one has appeared for this case. However,

2 Denise told me earlier that they did call and say

3 they couldn't get anyone to come. Denise asked them

4 to fax a letter to us saying they would not be

5 coming.

6 What is the Board's pleasure to do

7 with this case?

8 MEMBER BRENNAN: Madam Chair?

9 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Member Brennan?

10 MEMBER BRENNAN: I guess we can't deny

11 their request, if they're not in front of us, which

12 would have been my preference, based upon the

13 documentation that the last time they were in front

14 of us, they had agreed that there had to be an end in

15 site and now they're looking for another end in site.

16 But the fact that they are not here to

17 hear that, I guess, I have no problem with tabling

18 this, as they did make some attempt at getting a hold

19 of us.

20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Yes, Mr. Gilliam?

21 MR. GILLIAM: If I might, if it's the

22 Board's conclusion tonight, what you might want to do

23 is specifically put them on notice that if this comes

24 back next month and they're not here, the Board will









1 go ahead and act on the application, regardless of

2 the fact that they're not here at that time.


4 MEMBER BRENNAN: I accept that

5 language.


7 So we're going to table this until

8 July; and the Petitioner will be notified that if

9 there's still a failure to -- let me try that again

10 -- failure to appear, it'll be taken as a denial.


12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So any further

13 matters for discussion?

14 Member Canup?

15 MEMBER CANUP: Never mind.


17 MEMBER CANUP: Well, very brief.


19 MEMBER CANUP: There is coming up

20 before the Planning Commission a Petition for

21 rezoning for the cemetery parcel on the corner of 12

22 Mile and Novi Road. I would encourage anybody that

23 has an opinion about that to certainly make it known;

24 and I feel very strongly about it. That's my reason









1 for --

2 MEMBER BAUER: They'll probably come

3 for approval.

4 MEMBER CANUP: Well, they don't want to

5 rezone it just to build more grave sites. They want

6 to rezone it to build a gas station. So that's --


8 Anything else?

9 Mr. Saven?

10 MR. SAVEN: I always have something to

11 say.

12 MEMBER CANUP I have one more thing.

13 Remember the case on Novi Road and

14 Grand River, the rug store and we granted him a

15 variance; based on the fact that he would no longer

16 display his rugs and he would remove all the signs?


18 MEMBER CANUP: Well, the next day I

19 drove by and he's putting up more signs. I think we

20 have continuing jurisdiction in this case, and I

21 would like to make a Motion that we rescind the

22 variance that was granted to him. I think we have

23 the power to do that.

24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Mr. Saven, we did









1 specifically, when he was before the Board, request

2 that those signs from the windows be removed --

3 MR. SAVEN: He agreed that the signs

4 or the displays be removed, but he did not --

5 MEMBER BAUER: He's got signs.

6 MR. SAVEN: He's got signs?


8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In the back and --

9 MR. SAVEN: Wholly smoke and I'm an

10 inspector, gees.

11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In the back window.

12 He had rugs out there yesterday.

13 MEMBER BAUER: They're out there

14 every day.

15 MR. SAVEN: That was a condition by

16 the Board. We will contact him and let him know.

17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In regards to

18 Member Canup's request, can we just deny the case

19 like that? Deny his request?

20 MR. GILLIAM: You'd have to bring him

21 back in front of the Board, here. So basically, you

22 can put the matter back on the agenda, provide notice

23 to the applicant, if there's an issue; and see where

24 it goes from there.









1 MEMBER BRENNAN: It was just last

2 month.

3 Well, I tell you what, given it was

4 just last month, and he was very clear that he was

5 going to support that position.

6 MEMBER FISCHER: Has he placed the

7 sign that we granted the variance for?



10 MEMBER FISCHER: I think we might want

11 to stop there, because we didn't state that he had to

12 remove it immediately.

13 MEMBER CANUP: Well, he's in violation

14 --

15 MEMBER FISCHER: Right. But that's

16 not our problem; only the part of the Motion that we

17 made.

18 MR. SAVEN: That's why I was asking if

19 that was up, because if that sign was up, I didn't

20 see the sign.

21 MEMBER GRONACHAN: But all the window

22 signs are still up and the rugs are still out.

23 MEMBER BAUER: Bring him back.

24 MEMBER GRAY: We granted the sign on









1 the second floor, which faces Novi Road; that faces

2 west.

3 MEMBER FISCHER: I think we have a

4 problem rescinding the Motion, due to the fact that

5 we did not state the fact that it had to be removed;

6 but that is part of our continuing jurisdiction.

7 MEMBER GRAY: But it was clear about no

8 rugs outside.


10 MEMBER CANUP: We could ask him to

11 come back before us, correct?

12 MEMBER BAUER: Uh-huh.

13 MR. GILLIAM: The other option we've

14 got, because the Motion was made and adopted at the

15 last meeting that the Zoning Board had; if the Zoning

16 Board wanted at this point in time, they could bring

17 a Motion to Reconsider the decision that you had made

18 at the last planning meeting you had, to get the --

19 you'd have to get the issue back on the table.

20 Since there's a Motion to actually

21 reconsider, then it would be brought back in front of

22 you at your next meeting, I would assume, basically

23 bringing a ne application.

24 That's another option the Zoning Board









1 has, too.

2 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Let's let the

3 Building Department check into it, first.

4 MR. SAVEN: We'll do that

5 investigation first and see where he's at with his

6 process, and see how soon he takes the signs down.

7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: If he puts the rugs

8 back, he definitely needs to come in.

9 MR. SAVEN: That was part of the -- I

10 believe that was part of the Motion or part of the

11 agreement was for all this to happen.

12 MEMBER CANUP: And there's a good

13 reason for, when we grant variances for signs, we

14 need to really be specific about the fact that we

15 have continuing jurisdiction and not only in the

16 signage, but other cases where there's violations,

17 etc., like the case with the trailers tonight.

18 If we had approved that, that would

19 have been a case where we should have objected

20 continuing jurisdiction.


22 All right. I agree.

23 Okay.

24 Anything else, Board Members?









1 Mr. Saven?

2 MR. SAVEN: I'd just like to make you

3 more aware that we do have a lot of tabled cases that

4 came out of this grouping. We have a full Board. We

5 have a full agenda for next month, already. I just

6 want the Board to be aware you're going to have a

7 pretty heavy agenda.

8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: For the month of

9 July.

10 MR. SAVEN: I guess.


12 Anything else?

13 MR. SAVEN: Thank you, once again.

14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: You're welcome.

15 All those in favor of adjourning the

16 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, say aye?


18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Meeting adjourned.

19 (The meeting was adjourned

20 at 9:12 p.m.)

21 - - - - - -












1 C__E__R__T__I__F__I__C__A__T__E_


3 I do hereby certify that I have

4 recorded stenographically the proceedings had and testimony

5 taken in the above-entitled matter at the time and place

6 hereinbefore set forth, and that the foregoing is a full,

7 true and correct transcript of proceedings had in the

8 above-entitled matter; and I do further certify that the

9 foregoing transcript, consisting of (89) typewritten pages,

10 is a true and correct transcript of my said stenograph

11 notes.



14 ________________________________________

15 Machelle R. Billingslea-Moore, Reporter.


17 __________

18 Date