TUESDAY, MARCH 7, 2006 -- 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, March 7, 2006.

Justin Fischer, Chairman
Jerald Bauer
Cynthia Gronachan
Linda Krieger
Mav Sanghvi
Tim Shroyer

Alan Amolsch, Ordinance Enforcement
Don Saven, Building Department
Sarah Marchioni, Building Department
Thomas Schultz, City Attorney

Cheryl L. James, Certified Shorthand Reporter

1 Tuesday, March 7, 2006

2 7:30 p.m.

3 MEMBER FISCHER: I would like to call to

4 order the March 2006 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting

5 for the City of Novi.

6 At this time, although not on the

7 agenda, could we all rise for the Pledge of

8 Allegience.

9 (Pledge of Allegience done.)

10 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll ask for a roll

11 call. Miss Marchioni, would you please call the roll.

12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?

13 MEMBER BAUER: Present.

14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Canup, absent

15 excused.

16 Member Fischer?


18 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


20 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger?


22 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


24 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?




2 MEMBER FISCHER: We do have a quorum, so

3 the meeting is now in session.

4 At this time I'd like to go over a

5 couple of the rules of conduct. They all can be found

6 on the agenda, so if you have time please look over

7 them. But I would like to point out that we would

8 like everyone to turn off all pagers and all cell

9 phones.

10 And tonight we do have quite a large

11 agenda, so individuals will have five minutes to

12 address the board, groups will have ten minutes, and I

13 will be asking the secretary to adhere to those rules.

14 The Zoning Board of Appeals is hearing

15 board empowered by the Novi city charter to hear

16 appeals seeking variances from the application of the

17 Novi zoning ordinance.

18 It takes a vote of at least four members

19 to approve a variance request, and a vote of the

20 majority present to deny a request. Tonight we do

21 have a full board, so any decisions made will be

22 final.

23 Are there any changes to the agenda?

24 MS. MARCHIONI: Yes. There's one



1 deletion under other matters, the discussion of

2 previous case 06-009 has been removed.

3 MEMBER FISCHER: We'll remove that. Any

4 other changes?


6 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll

7 entertain a motion to approve as amended. All in

8 favor say aye.

9 (Vote taken.)

10 MEMBER FISCHER: All right. We do have

11 an agenda for tonight. We'll move on to the approval

12 of the minutes. And in our packet we do have December

13 6, 2005, and January 10, 2006. Are there any changes

14 to the minutes?

15 (No response.)

16 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll

17 entertain a motion to approve as submitted.

18 (Motion made.)

19 MEMBER FISCHER: All in favor say aye.

20 (Vote taken.)

21 MEMBER FISCHER: Minutes for those two

22 months have been approved.

23 This brings us to the public remarks

24 section of the hearing tonight. All comments related



1 to a case on the agenda, if you could please wait

2 until that case is called it would be greatly

3 appreciated.

4 However, if anyone wishes to address the

5 board on a matter that is not on our agenda tonight,

6 please come forward now.

7 (No response.)

8 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, we'll

9 close the public remarks section of the meeting.


11 CASE NUMBER 06-001

12 MEMBER FISCHER: And we'll move to case

13 number 06-001 filed by Matthew Gudaitis for property

14 at 2115 West Lake Drive. The petitioner is requesting

15 six variances for the construction of a new home at

16 said address.

17 And you are the petitioners?

18 MR. GUDAITIS: Yes. I'm Matt Gudaitis.

19 MEMBER FISCHER: And you were both sworn

20 in last month, correct?


22 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. Then I'll remind

23 you that that still stands, and also remind the board

24 that this was tabled from last month.



1 And if you wish to proceed with your

2 altered plans.

3 MR. GUDAITIS: Correct, yes.

4 MR. MAMMOLA: Thank you members of the

5 board. Lee Mammola, Mammola Associates Architects.

6 Since our last meeting here about a

7 month ago, we've had an opportunity to advance the

8 design of the house and listen to some of the comments

9 that were made at the last meeting and try to

10 incorporate and respond to those comments.

11 We've also obtained more accurate and

12 defined site data, full -- what we call a normal

13 architectural site survey data has come in.

14 The design has changed. The house has

15 become narrower, in response predominantly to the

16 concern of our neighbor to the south. To do this, Mr.

17 Gudaitis has altered his initial demands for -- yeah,

18 really requirements, desires, for a connecting

19 bathroom to a guest room that would accommodate his

20 parents when they came to visit. That's now been --

21 the bathroom has been separated from the guest room

22 and one will have to go into the hallway then to allow

23 significant reduction in width.

24 And we've also indented the front door



1 to the entry area, along with an indent to the other

2 side, to the north side of the garage, to allow for a

3 mechanical device to go outside, the cooling unit like

4 that, so as not to interfere with the side yard to the

5 north.

6 We've taken away some storage area in

7 the garage and we've frankly, I think, made the entry

8 to the house a little more attractive by making the

9 front door approach and narrowed the house to a

10 twenty-four feet dimesion.

11 We also looked at some of the designs of

12 the elevation.

13 Excuse me. Before I remove this board,

14 I'd like to point out some important issues. The

15 neighbor to the north, we do not impede his view to

16 the lake, which is very much a concern of his at the

17 last meeting. We got the survey data and we're able

18 to confirm that now. And we've also kept his

19 four-foot distance that you required, so that doesn't

20 change.

21 I will point out, however, that with our

22 new survey data, our property line has moved further

23 from the street towards the lake. We've picked up,

24 depending on which side of the property you're looking



1 at, anywhere from twenty-four feet to thirty-one feet

2 in depth. That has the implication to really

3 impact -- to really reduce the extent of the footprint

4 variance if you will.

5 I believe there should be a memo or a

6 letter on your desk tonight. We're in the

7 neighborhood of -- instead of a 13 point some percent

8 variance, 6.6 I believe. It's in the memo, the exact

9 number.

10 And it also eliminates the need for a

11 variance in the rear yard.

12 Now, you could say we couldn't. We have

13 some slack front to back in dimension, and we could

14 move the house further two feet to the rear and

15 eliminate the requirement of the front yard. We

16 really would not like to do that in all -- with all

17 respect to our neighbor to the north by moving the

18 house completely we start to impede his vision of the

19 lake. We told him we would not do that.

20 Additionally, that two foot represents a little two

21 foot by two foot little dib of a corner in the garage,

22 so it's really a minuscule impact to the overall site.

23 And we think that the neighbor's view of the lake

24 being maintained is a more important issue frankly.



1 We have, depending upon where you

2 measure our -- from our southerly property line to the

3 southerly wall line, anywhere from four foot seven to

4 four foot nine dimension.

5 It was requested -- after we met at the

6 podium last month, we were met with neighbors and

7 representatives to the south, and they were quite

8 emphatic that we come and meet five feet, it had to be

9 five feet. And if we could meet five feet that they

10 would have no objections. Well, we're not quite able

11 to meet the five feet. We moved every inch that we

12 really could. And I would point out that we've asked

13 for a little bit more than -- there's a four foot one

14 dimension because of the need for posts to support a

15 covered walkway as one would go from the driveway

16 along and into the -- towards the door. So really the

17 wall line at that point is eight foot nine from the

18 property line. It's much more than the five foot that

19 the folks represented they would like to see. It's

20 only for structural posts that we feel we need along

21 that line, that we need that variance.

22 If you look carefully at the site plan

23 that's submitted, you'll find that the -- there's also

24 dimension from the south property line to the existing



1 house that's under construction of nine foot seven I

2 believe. Part of their requirement, part of their

3 reasoning, if you will, for us maintaining a five-foot

4 dimension was they had to live by the rule of ten

5 feet. They did not have a variance. Well, if ten

6 foot's the requirement, something happened during

7 construction that that ten foot is less than ten feet

8 now. Those things happen in construction. We feel

9 they're close enough and we'd like you to think that

10 we are close enough at four foot nine where they can

11 (inaudible) property line and measure to our building.

12 Additionally, with respect to the design

13 of the building, the question was about materials at

14 the last month's meeting. We do have a combination of

15 masonry brick around the perimeter of the building,

16 and siding. And I feel, frankly, that materials are

17 part of architecture, but really scale, proportion and

18 texture and color are, frankly, a more important part

19 of architecture as it really defines the shape and

20 form of architecture.

21 We did try to be sensitive to the height

22 and scale of the building immediately to our south.

23 It is about a story-and-a-half before it peaks

24 upwards. And by locating the certain kinds of spaces



1 that we have on our southerly wall of our building,

2 stairways, closets, and a small sitting room, those

3 rooms do not require an eight foot wall, so we've had

4 a lower wall. We're able to lower our eave height

5 along the southerly property line. It's not quite as

6 low as the house to our south, but it comes pretty

7 darn close. It's maybe about a two-foot difference.

8 I think you can see that schematically on the drawing

9 to my far left, your right, and should be on the

10 prints that you're looking at as well, too. What this

11 does for us is it, one, not only respects the

12 character of the proportions to the house to the

13 south, but it also allows us to start to create an

14 image of a cottage-like look and scale to the front of

15 Mr. Gudaitis's house. By adding the various peaks, by

16 adding some lines over the garage, we're able to

17 reduce the effect of that wall and to give it a little

18 texture, architectural texture and character, and that

19 inviting feel he wants when visitors come to his

20 house.

21 I also have a floor plan that sums up

22 and shows some of the layout and characteristics and

23 how we tried to squeeze this space down. We really

24 have squeezed it as much we practically can. We can't



1 go -- we have to go four-inch increments because of

2 the brick that's being used around the perimeter. We

3 can't move it by one inch or anything of that sort

4 without creating other problems.

5 It was also just recently let it be

6 known to us that the people to the south would like to

7 make sure that we have a ten foot setback between our

8 property, the common property line, and our house.

9 You know, if we were to take another five feet off

10 this house, we might very well be creating -- well,

11 we'd be creating a house that's twenty feet wide, and

12 might very well be creating the need to come to the

13 board to seek an appeal for a similar/dissimilar

14 ordinance. By keeping it in the territory of the

15 width that we have, we're keeping it consistent with

16 the character and the architecture in that

17 neighborhood.

18 With that, I'd be willing to answer any

19 questions of the board or respond to any comments from

20 the audience.

21 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

22 Mr. Mammola.

23 MR. MAMMOLA: Thank you.

24 MEMBER FISCHER: In this case, there



1 were twenty-eight notices mailed with zero approvals

2 and zero objections.

3 Is there anyone in the audience that

4 wishes to comment on this case? Please come forward.

5 If you could just state your name and

6 address and proceed with your comments.

7 MR. ROSENTHAL: Good evening. My name

8 is Jan David Rosenthal, this is

9 Patricia Dwyer, and we are going to be the occupants

10 of the said house. My address now is in California,

11 6801 Springview Place, Alta Loma, California 91701.

12 This is Michael Himan. He spoke last month on behalf

13 of me, as well as

14 Mr. Nichey, the architect, who's unavailable tonight.

15 First I'd like to thank you for your

16 time to allow us to address you. Last month you were

17 kind enough to give us time, as well as Mr. Gudaitis,

18 and explicit direction, more than you usually do, in

19 order to help him resolve the issue with us.

20 After the meeting, Mr. Gudaitis, as well

21 as his architect, met with Mr. Himan, as well as

22 Patricia Dwyer, and I was talking to another neighbor

23 out front. At that time,

24 Mr. Himan stated he'd be available every day at the



1 house, as well as Miss Dwyer, at anytime, that I was

2 going back to California. Mr. Nichey said he'd also

3 be available at any time to discuss any changes.

4 At that time we stated that we would

5 accept the five foot variance if the materials in the

6 house represented something that was close to our

7 house.

8 In the interim, over the past month, Mr.

9 Nichey had a 30-minute drive-by call by their

10 architect, which was unscheduled, to show him plans

11 that he already designed with variances requesting now

12 a 4.1 variance on my side yard instead of two feet.

13 So he's given up 2.1 more feet. And in the rear he's

14 gone from twenty-seven feet down to twenty-nine.

15 Because they didn't attempt to call Mr.

16 Himan or Miss Dwyer or myself, and just last week

17 talked to Mr. Nichey for 30 minutes, I had to fly out

18 here in order to represent myself because Mr. Nichey

19 couldn't be here.

20 I'm requesting that at least a ten foot

21 variance be maintained on the south side, as fifteen

22 is the normal variance.

23 The house that I'm building has been

24 maintained within that, is on two lots, which I paid



1 for, and represents a significant investment;

2 therefore, any closer home to my home impacts the

3 value of my home directly.

4 So I'm asking that he maintain at least

5 the thirty-five foot setback in the rear, as well as

6 least a ten foot setback on the side yard instead of

7 the fifteen, which is what is required.

8 I'd now like to have Mr. Himan address

9 anything more.

10 MR. HIMAN: Thank you. At your request

11 or suggestion as to last week's -- last month's

12 meeting, we did meet outside of this office. We

13 suggested that if they could come up with a five foot

14 variance that we would agree and assist them in trying

15 to get the house built, working it through. At that

16 time I was told that it probably can't be done. I

17 suggested that I've been a designer for well over

18 thirty-eight years and have had many solutions solved

19 by talking, more than one head, having two heads

20 talking it over. I offered my services at that time.

21 I handed them a card and said to them that I would be

22 available at any time to discuss any of the matters

23 with the house, that I could review it on Mr.

24 Rosenthal's behalf. I haven't received a phone call,



1 we haven't seen the plans, we haven't seen the

2 elevations, we've seen nothing. Because of that we

3 felt that they did not take your advice and obviously

4 we should go another route.

5 But we would welcome them as neighbors.

6 We would welcome them to have a beautiful home there.

7 We don't want to see the ugly eyesore of the house

8 that's there right now, but we also don't want to have

9 the infringement. We do have some of the concerns

10 that you had brought up as well as maintaining the

11 property, being able to take care of the maintenance

12 and the lawns or what's on the side of the properties.

13 We just have those worries and concerns as well.

14 But, again, we felt that because of your

15 generous offer to suggest and talk to us, we haven't

16 been able to talk to them and give them any of our

17 suggestion or ideas, or maybe even help. We're not

18 suggesting they build a ten-foot wide house or a

19 fifteen-foot wide house. We just believe that looking

20 at it from another angle, or having another eyes look

21 at it, might be helpful. They did not take that, so

22 on Mr. Rosenthal's behalf, he would wish now that he

23 maintain the ten foot rather than even the five foot.

24 Thank you.



1 MR. ROSENTHAL: Thank you for your time.

2 We did send -- I don't know if you got

3 this. Mr. Nichey wrote a letter on behalf of myself

4 and faxed it to the board today.

5 MS. MARCHIONI: I didn't receive

6 anything. I checked the fax at five o'clock.

7 MEMBER FISCHER: You're here and your

8 comments are well noted.

9 MR. ROSENTHAL: Okay. It was an

10 objection.

11 Thank you so much.

12 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. Is there

13 anyone else in the audience that wishes to comment on

14 this case?

15 (No reponse.)

16 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll ask

17 the building department for any comments.

18 MR. SAVEN: In the presentation you

19 talked about looking at the site again and getting

20 more accurate surveys or dimensions for your property.

21 You further indicated that the rear yard variance

22 would not be necessary; is that correct?

23 MR. MAMMOLA: That's correct.

24 MR. SAVEN: So we're eliminating the



1 rear yard variance.

2 Secondly, the issue regarding the lot

3 coverage is now at a point where you're dealing with

4 6.6 percent instead of 13.5; is that correct?

5 MR. MAMMOLA: Yes, sir.

6 MR. SAVEN: And this will be on the

7 survey that you're going to propose?

8 MR. MAMMOLA: That is -- that's -- yes,

9 sir. It's the drawing that you have in your

10 possession.

11 MR. SAVEN: I just wanted to make sure

12 the board was aware of that.

13 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

14 Mr. Saven.

15 And I will open it up now for board

16 discussion. Member Gronachan?

17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you. First I

18 would like to commend you on your effort of heeding

19 our request last month and certainly doing your due

20 diligence and going back and seeing that less, in

21 fact, was better.

22 I have a question for Mr. Saven, and I

23 need a clarification if you will.

24 Mr. Mammola indicated that if he, in fact, did do the



1 five feet side yard variance that the house would have

2 to be less than twenty feet wide. I guess maybe-

3 MR. MAMMOLA: (Interposing) I'm sorry.

4 If we were to add five feet and make it a ten foot

5 setback, the house would be less than twenty feet

6 wide.

7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: And you're in

8 agreement with that; is that correct? Because I'm not

9 an architect, so -- I mean, that's basically what it

10 sounded-

11 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) I will

12 assume, that based upon his dimensions that he

13 proposed, it would be less than that.

14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. I'm torn and

15 I'm not torn, and the reason why is that normally, in

16 these type of situations, we look at health, safety

17 and welfare of the neighborhood. We take in several

18 different considerations. I'm going to say my piece

19 and then I'm going to let the other board members jump

20 in, but I'll give them a clue of where I'm at.

21 I feel that the petitioner has

22 demonstrated, beyond the call of duty, why this house

23 can't be built with any less of a variance. I think

24 he's indicated and substantiated in his testimony that



1 the view of this house does not -- I'm sorry, that the

2 location of this house does not obstruct any views

3 from the area neighbors.

4 I also indicate -- I also would like to

5 state that material is not a concern of ours and,

6 therefore, although it's part of this house and it's a

7 part of what it is that you do, I don't feel that it

8 adds or detracts from the variances that you request

9 and, therefore, will not -- it has nothing to do with

10 us.

11 And unless the board members at this

12 point have something else to add, given that the

13 petitioner has substantiated what he -- what we asked

14 for last month, I intend to be in support of this,

15 although other people out there know that usually I'm

16 not because of the closeness to the property line.

17 However, we are not talking about the same width of

18 property. We're talking about a 35-foot width lot,

19 and that to me is a hardship in itself.

20 So I will yield to the other opinions at

21 this table and we can take it from there.

22 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

23 Member Gronachan. Member Krieger?

24 MEMBER KRIEGER: I agree with the



1 previous speaker, that there was a huge effort in the

2 previous presentation and this presentation in that

3 going from 13.5 to 6.6 percent, and taking the

4 neighbors into consideration and changing the

5 setbacks.

6 And those are my comments. Thank you.

7 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

8 Member Krieger. Member Bauer?

9 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you, Chair. I

10 think we've done -- the architect's done a pretty good

11 job, seeing that the existing house had, might as well

12 say, right on the lot line, and this is going back far

13 enough in between the two homes. They've got

14 fourteen -- almost fourteen feet. And I am in favor

15 it.

16 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

17 Member Bauer.

18 Member Sanghvi, any comments, not to put

19 you on the spot?

20 MEMBER SANGHVI: You're not putting me

21 on the spot. In some way I am at an advantage and a

22 disadvantage in the sense that I wasn't here last

23 month. I have heard you for the first time. To me

24 it's an advantage because I'm just hearing what is



1 being presented, what is going to be done instead of

2 what went on in the past.

3 Having said that, I also want to point

4 out that in that neighborhood, the size of lots there

5 and all around there, I don't think anybody could

6 bring in any houses without any variances. It's not

7 possible. They are more or less postage stamp size

8 lots. And if you give the variances you have a five

9 foot there and nothing else left. So variances are

10 necessary.

11 I also find out that you reduced the lot

12 coverage by almost 50 percent. I don't how you did

13 it, but magic miracle measurements and precision.

14 Considering everything, I do not have

15 any problem in supporting current application for

16 variances.

17 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

18 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

19 Mr. Sanghvi. Mr. Shroyer?

20 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, sir. I

21 agree with all the previous speakers. Anytime we're

22 faced with one of these lake side lots, or lake

23 frontage lots, they're all narrow. There's always

24 going to be difficulties. There's always -- try -- we



1 always try to come up with some type of a give and

2 take to be fair to everyone surrounding the area. We

3 don't want to ever obscure anybody's view of the lake,

4 et cetera.

5 All -- basically all of the items that I

6 brought up at the last meeting have been addressed.

7 If you go back and look at your original submittal

8 back in February,

9 actually February 7th, the original request was

10 twenty-three percent lot coverage variance. That's

11 almost a quarter of the whole property. You've

12 reduced that to 6.6 percent. I think that's very

13 admirable.

14 I am disappointed that there wasn't some

15 type of resolution worked out with the neighbors to

16 the south. You're going to have to live next to them.

17 They're going to have to live next to you.

18 I would -- if we pass this the way it

19 stands, we're giving them minimum requirements,

20 correct, for the minimum variance on each of these?

21 Consequently, if they choose at a later

22 time to lessen that variance, they wouldn't have to

23 come back to us; is that correct?

24 MR. SAVEN: If it stayed within the



1 footprint as defined by the board.

2 MEMBER SHROYER: Okay. So that is the

3 way I'm going to vote. I'll be in support of the

4 motion, if somebody cares to make one.

5 But I would also encourage you to work

6 with your neighbors to the south. If there's anything

7 more you can do to minimize their concern, I'm sure

8 everybody would be happier.

9 Thank you, Chair.

10 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

11 Member Shroyer. Member Sanghvi?

12 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you,

13 Mr. Chairman. After having heard the board members,

14 if I may, I would like to make a motion that in case

15 number 06-001, that currently requested variances be

16 granted because of the lot configuration.

17 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion.


19 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a second.

20 Member Gronachan?

21 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I would like to add a

22 friendly amendment, Member Sanghvi, if I could, and

23 that would be that -- specifically to the discussion

24 previous in regards to the effect that petitioner has



1 demonstrated all of the concerns previously brought up

2 by this board, and due to lot size and configuration,

3 along with the statement given by the architect that

4 the house would be too small if the variances were not

5 granted, creating thus a practical difficulty. You

6 took the words right out of my mouth. Thank you.

7 Would you accept that?


9 MEMBER FISCHER: Does the second concur?


11 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion and a

12 second. Any further discussion?

13 (No further discussion.)

14 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, closed.

15 MR. SAVEN: But the modification to the

16 request for the variance based upon testimony given

17 tonight in regards to there would be no rear yard

18 setback variance, and also that there was a reduction

19 in the lot size coverage, lot coverage.

20 MEMBER SANGHVI: I thought that was

21 covered by the word current request.

22 MR. SAVEN: I do apologize, sir.

23 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Schultz, are you

24 fine with that?



1 MR. SCHULTZ: I think that's an

2 excellent thing to add, if I may, Mr. Chair. I guess

3 the other point in terms of incorporating into the

4 motion, all members of the board spoke on this, and I

5 think the consensus was was practical difficulty, was

6 because of the lot width. The petitioners reduced the

7 width of the house as much as possible to deal with

8 that burden, and this is the minimum variance that the

9 board feels can be granted while still giving both the

10 neighbor and this property owner substantial justice.

11 If that could be added, I think that's a fair

12 summation of the comments that I heard.

13 MEMBER FISCHER: Do you wish to make

14 those comments part of the motion?

15 MEMBER SANGHVI: Let it be.

16 MEMBER FISCHER: And the second agrees?

17 Any other discussion?

18 (No further discussion.)

19 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none,

20 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll.

21 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


23 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?




1 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer.


3 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan.


5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger.


7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer.


9 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to

10 zero.

11 MEMBER FISCHER: Variances have been

12 granted. Please see the building department.


14 CASE NUMBER 06-002

15 MEMBER FISCHER: At this time I would

16 like to call case number 06-002 filed by NorthStar

17 Signs for Campus Tech Park. The applicant is

18 requesting one sign variance to erect a construction

19 identification sign located north of Eleven Mile Road

20 and east of Meadowbrook.

21 Is the petitioner here tonight?

22 And the applicant is requesting the sign

23 to be 63 square feet. This case was also tabled from

24 last month due to not being able to -- not sure where



1 the property was, correct?

2 MR. ASH: Correct.

3 MEMBER FISCHER: All right. And you

4 were sworn in at this time, and that still stands

5 tonight.

6 So if you wish to state your name and

7 address and proceed.

8 MR. ASH: Robbie Ash, 950 Lakeview,

9 that's Waterford.

10 Very briefly, my client is continuing to

11 work with his clients to finalize the drawings to get

12 them submitted to you as quickly as possible. And

13 even if you could just give us a short-term variance

14 on this, just allowing him enough time to get

15 something finalized. As I had mentioned last month,

16 there will be a development here. They're just, you

17 know, hashing out the details. And as soon as they

18 get those resolved they will be submitting those plans

19 for permits.

20 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. Is there

21 anyone in the audience that wishes to comment on this

22 case?

23 (No response.)

24 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll let



1 the board know that in this case there was sixteen

2 notices mailed with zero approvals and zero

3 objections.

4 Building department make a comment?

5 MR. AMOLSCH: No comment, sir.

6 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll open it for board

7 discussion. Member Shroyer?

8 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you,

9 Mr. Chair. At the last meeting we did have one

10 objection. It was a Mr. Paul Fenkell on Bridge

11 Street. Were new notices mailed out?

12 MS. MARCHIONI: New notices were mailed

13 out.

14 MEMBER SHROYER: Okay. He chose not to

15 respond?

16 MS. MARCHIONI: I didn't hear from

17 anyone.

18 MEMBER SHROYER: I wanted to ask the

19 petitioner, the sign that's currently up there is four

20 foot by four foot, so that is the one that you're

21 looking at retaining in the location, or are you going

22 to replace it with the one you have down here, seven

23 foot by nine foot?

24 THE WITNESS: To be replaced with seven



1 foot by nine.

2 MEMBER SHROYER: And that falls within

3 the size maximums; is that correct?

4 MR. AMOLSCH: For a construction sign,

5 yes, sir.

6 MEMBER SHROYER: That's all I have, Mr.

7 Chair.

8 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

9 Member Shroyer. Other members.

10 Member Gronachan?

11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I have no problem. I

12 think that the mixup was if this property was right,

13 and that's all been resolved. Miss Marchioni, I'm

14 sure, checked that all out. And I'm confident that

15 this is correct, so based on the testimony, I will be

16 in full support of this temporary permit.

17 And if there's no other, I'll go with

18 the motion. In case 06-002 filed by NorthStar Signs

19 for Campus Tech Park, I move that we approve this

20 sign, replacing the current four by four sign, and

21 thus the height being five by nine.

22 MEMBER SHROYER: Seven by nine.

23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Seven by nine, I'm

24 sorry. And for a period of two years.




2 MEMBER GRONACHAN: For two years.


4 MEMBER FISCHER: There is a motion and a

5 second. Any further question?

6 (No further discussion.)

7 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none,

8 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll.

9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer?


15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger?


17 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


19 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?


21 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to

22 nothing.

23 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been

24 granted for a period of two years. Please see the



1 building department, and good luck.


3 CASE NUMBER 06-013

4 MEMBER FISCHER: We'll move along to

5 case number 06-013 filed by Novi Urgent Care at 24230

6 Karim Boulevard. The petitioner is requesting one

7 sign variance to add language of Novi Urgent Care to

8 an existing business center sign north of Ten Mile

9 Road and west of Haggerty. The variance requested is

10 seven square feet.

11 And you are the petitioner?

12 DR. NASRY: Yes. I'm Dr. Nasry.

13 MEMBER FISCHER: If you can take one

14 second and be sworn in by our secretary.

15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Raise your right

16 hand, please. Do you swear or affirm the information

17 that you're about to give in the matter before you is

18 the truth?

19 DR. NASRY: Yes, I do.


21 MEMBER FISCHER: You can then state your

22 name and address and then proceed with your comments.

23 DR. NASRY: Okay. I'm Dr. Nasry,

24 N-a-s-r-y. I'm the medical director Novi Urgent Care,



1 24230 Karim Boulevard, suite 125. I'm also the

2 medical director for the River Urgent Care in Trenton.

3 We opened this urgent care on

4 March 1st, and one of the main obstacle was the sign

5 that we were given by the owner of the building.

6 We're leasing the front suite in that

7 building, and in order for us to -- I mean, I'm going

8 to push this from two points. Number one, I'm a

9 businessman bringing business to the city of Novi, and

10 the City needs to meet the requirement of an urgent

11 care. Urgent care cannot be found by people if it's

12 hidden in the back of a building. We need to put the

13 sign on the street that people walking by can see.

14 And, on the other hand, for the sick and injured in

15 the middle of the night looking for a place for quick

16 care, we need to show them that there is a place here

17 where you can have a laceration sewn, a cold treated,

18 antibiotic shot, a flu vaccine.

19 So we propose actually adding a sign to

20 the bottom of the present sign so people can see it

21 from the street.

22 However, after we did that -- I want to

23 show this picture to the members.

24 MEMBER FISCHER: If you want to place it



1 right on the overhead there, they should be able to

2 pull it up for us. It will pull up. Is it on the

3 correct side, facing up?

4 DR. NASRY: Correct side, yeah.

5 MEMBER FISCHER: There we go.

6 DR. NASRY: After we made the proposal,

7 we discovered that if we add the sign to the bottom of

8 the present sign, the light fixture is going to be

9 blocking the view of the sign. So now we are now

10 requesting, if you would help us out here, by allowing

11 us to raise the whole sign another foot and keep the

12 present square footage of the sign, just raise the

13 sign about one foot, one-foot-and-a-half so it's not

14 blocked by the light fixture.

15 And I want to present to you a few

16 other-

17 MEMBER FISCHER: (Interposing) Can I

18 ask one quick question of the building department?

19 DR. NASRY: Sure.

20 MEMBER FISCHER: I think I have a

21 concern here. If we have to do that and grant that

22 variance, we would have to renotice, which means we

23 would have to table it, and there's no point in making

24 the whole presentation at this time if we have to



1 renotice from the City's point of view.

2 MR. SAVEN: Let me ask the question.

3 Alan, (inaudible), if it was to be raised an

4 additional foot, would that be something we would have

5 to renotice?

6 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes. Because it's five

7 foot now (inaudible).

8 MEMBER FISCHER: So if we took it from

9 five feet up to six feet, then it would require one

10 foot height variance, and in order to grant that

11 tonight, then -- we wouldn't be able to grant that

12 tonight.

13 DR. NASRY: Would I be allowed to keep

14 it in this position until we have the meeting next

15 month? The business is open.

16 MEMBER FISCHER: The mockup sign?

17 DR. NASRY: Yeah.

18 MEMBER FISCHER: I would leave it up to

19 the board. I don't see an objection.

20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I don't have a

21 problem with it.

22 MEMBER FISCHER: So if you want to leave

23 it for our purposes, then that would be great.

24 DR. NASRY: That's fine. I need to show



1 you a couple of other things and see what you have to

2 tell me about.

3 I'm comparing myself to other urgent

4 care in the area, but I want you to see what type

5 of -- this is our competition on Haggerty and north of

6 Maple, the Lakes Medical Center. It's a big building,

7 like four, five times the building that I'm in, and

8 look at the urgent care sign at their entrance.

9 MEMBER FISCHER: And we do look at each

10 case on a case by case basis, so -- but we will give

11 you this opportunity to present all this next time and

12 it will be fresh in our minds at that time. Then we

13 can make a decision at that time.

14 DR. NASRY: Okay.


16 MR. SAVEN: As a point, I'd like to

17 bring to you in regards to the previous picture that

18 you have -- if you put that back up again just for a

19 second, so that we don't have to deal with issues that

20 are maybe a foot. If you take a look at where that

21 sign's location is in reference to the light, please

22 make sure the dimensions that you're going to give us

23 is accurate in accordance with what you're wanting to

24 do to get it above that sign.



1 DR. NASRY: Okay.

2 MR. SAVEN: One I foot, I don't think,

3 is going to take you to that point you're talking

4 about.

5 DR. NASRY: Okay. Very good. Thank

6 you.

7 MEMBER FISCHER: But we do look forward

8 to meeting with you next month.

9 And if I can have a motion to table next

10 month.

11 MEMBER BAUER: Motion to table.

12 MEMBER FISCHER: All in favor, say aye.

13 (Vote taken.)

14 MEMBER FISCHER: All right. So we'll

15 see you next month with revised plans.


17 CASE NUMBER 06-014

18 MEMBER FISCHER: At this time I would

19 like to call case number 06-014 filed by Metro PCS

20 Michigan, Incorporated, for

21 42380 Arena Drive. The petitioner is requesting a

22 variance to the requirement of a face brick exterior

23 equipment shelter building on all four sides located

24 at said address. The applicant wishes to install a



1 metal equipment cabinet that is not an approved

2 material.

3 If you could raise your hand and be

4 sworn in by our secretary.

5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

6 affirm that the information that you're about to give

7 in the matter before you is the truth?

8 MR. JERSON: Yes.

9 MEMBER FISCHER: If you could state your

10 name and address and proceed.

11 MR. JERSON: Thank you, sir. My name is

12 Matthew Jerson. I'm with Richard, Conner, Riley and

13 Associates, and I represent Metro PCS. My address is

14 30150 Telegraph Road, suite 420, Bingham Farms,

15 Michigan 48025.

16 Metro PCS currently in its initial

17 infrastructure build plan phase here in the state.

18 They are the latest wireless carrier to enter this

19 market in Michigan, and they plan to launch service

20 here in this first quarter of 2006.

21 I'm happy to report all of the sites

22 that we have identified during this initial phase for

23 the city of Novi have been co location sites. We've

24 worked very hard to make sure that that's been the



1 case. We are simply asking the board tonight to be

2 fair and equitable in treating the equipment cabinets

3 that we are proposing.

4 Like many of the other carriers in Novi

5 and throughout southeastern Michigan, in fact,

6 throughout the country, we utilize, as part of our

7 network infrastructure, outdoor equipment cabinets.

8 Some carriers use shelters. Some carriers use

9 buildings.

10 This particular equipment is designed to

11 be placed outdoors, and that is the that equipment

12 we're proposing tonight.

13 I would indicate this equipment is more

14 streamline, takes up less space. And, again, it's

15 designed to be placed outdoors, not within another

16 enclosure.

17 I have -- this evening I brought some

18 additional pictures of an actual installation. This

19 picture is of a site in the city of Farmington that's

20 actually been recently installed. It will give you an

21 idea of the real life proportions and look of the

22 equipment.

23 I would note for the board that this is

24 a minimal installation. We are proposing one radio



1 equipment cabinet with one battery cabinet. The

2 battery cabinet Is the smaller shorter cabinet

3 adjacent to it.

4 On the submitted drawings we're also

5 proposing expansion of one additional radio cabinet

6 and one additional battery cabinet.

7 I would note at this site I was involved

8 in the initial (inaudible) for Sprint at the ice arena

9 for the location. This is really, in many respects,

10 an ideal location to minimize the visual impact of

11 these sites.

12 The road is not thru road. The only

13 cars that are really traveling down to the site are

14 representatives of the tower companies to service and

15 maintain it.

16 There's existing pine trees, evergreen

17 trees, that are planted around the entire compound.

18 There's also a large -- relatively large berm that's

19 along the north and west sides, which further blocks

20 the view.

21 As a practical matter, you can't see

22 this site when you're at the ice arena. You have to

23 actually travel down the road to be there.

24 I would also note that there are a few



1 carriers there with outdoor equipment currently.

2 We're proposing to place this between Sprint and

3 T-Mobile. And from the front of the entrance, as a

4 practical matter, you wouldn't even see our equipment.

5 T-Mobile's equipment which may, in fact, be bigger,

6 it's probably comparable, but I know that there's more

7 pieces, cabinets there than we're proposing is

8 actually screening the view from the front.

9 And I would note two other additional

10 comments. The brick building, I am certainly -- I'm

11 certain that a brick building is going to have more of

12 a visual impact as far as the size and the look and

13 appearance than the outdoor equipment cabinets. Most

14 Communities, in fact, prefer outdoor equipment

15 cabinets as opposed to a shelter or a building.

16 Lastly, I would note, too, the ordinance

17 specifically requests face brick only with respect to

18 shelter buildings. And we're, in fact, proposing a

19 cabinet. We're not proposing a building.

20 So, with that, I would ask for the

21 board's support.

22 I would be happy to answer any questions

23 that you might have.

24 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you very much.



1 In this case there were fourteen notices

2 mailed with zero approvals and zero objections.

3 Is there anyone in the audience that

4 wishes to comment on this case?

5 (No response.)

6 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll ask

7 the building department if they have any comments.

8 MR. SAVEN: I think this is a very tough

9 issue because, number one, I think from a standpoint

10 of view this is one of the waves of the future, all of

11 these cabinets and equipments and things of this

12 nature that's associated. But I think where the most

13 impact is going to be is the visual impact, where this

14 is relative to the site, and it's probably more of the

15 things that the board should take into consideration

16 in this matter.

17 MEMBER FISCHER: Anything else? I'll

18 open it up for board discussion.

19 Member Krieger?

20 MEMBER KRIEGER: I have a question. Is

21 the surrounding developed?

22 MR. SAVEN: I think for where the arena

23 drive is, I think you have the industrial application

24 which is directly south, and this is where the Novi



1 Ace Arena is at. It's located on the properties of

2 the Novi Ice Arena, I believe, and the tower location

3 is there, which sits to the rear of the property.

4 MEMBER KRIEGER: So it would not have a

5 visual impact except for the ice arena?

6 MR. SAVEN: It's located in the rear of

7 the ice arena.

8 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you,

9 Mr. Chair.

10 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

11 Member Krieger. Member Gronachan.

12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Forget my name for a

13 minute?

14 MEMBER FISCHER: Wanted to.

15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Mr. Saven, the

16 petitioner indicated that there's other cell companies

17 at this same location. And did I understand that

18 correct?

19 MR. JERSON: Yes.

20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you know what the

21 material is of these other-

22 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) No, I do not.


24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Member Shroyer,



1 through the chair.

2 MEMBER SHROYER: Right now, Sprint on

3 the northwest corner is on a platform; Cingular,

4 northeast corner, is on a pad; and T-Mobile is on a

5 pad on the southwest corner. They're all exposed to

6 the elements. There is one brick-faced shelter with

7 gabled roof, and that's Nextel, currently sits on the

8 southeast corner at this location.

9 MEMBER FISCHER: Must be why I get

10 crummy service through Nextel.

11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So -- you're saying

12 platform. You're saying that they're in cabinets like

13 this then?


15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. So there's two

16 that have these cabinets?


18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: And one with a brick

19 face besides the -- this petitioner.

20 Sir, I have a question.

21 MR. JERSON: Sure.

22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Why not build with

23 brick? You indicated everything else, but you never

24 answered the question as to why you wouldn't use the



1 brick.

2 MR. JERSON: Well, the equipment is out

3 -- it's designed and manufactured to be outdoors. You

4 can't actually enclose it. There's air conditioning

5 units, there's heat problems that would result if you

6 did that. I think that probably the reason Nextel is

7 a brick face is because they probably proposed a

8 shelter. I know that Sprint originally had proposed

9 an outdoor equipment cabinet. I'm not sure about the

10 other companies. But certainly there's three

11 companies that are using cabinets. I think the

12 ordinance requirement specifically states it's only

13 brick face with respect to shelter buildings.

14 And I think when you look around,

15 typically Nextel does use shelters usually.

16 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I have nothing

17 further. Thank you.

18 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

19 Member Gronachan. Member Shroyer.

20 MEMBER SHROYER: I did want to ask the

21 City if they know the sequence of applications as they

22 came in on the cell applications. Was Sprint the

23 first one that came in, or Cingular or-

24 MR. JERSON: (Interposing) Sprint is



1 the first one. Sprint was the company that actually

2 built the site.

3 MEMBER SHROYER: Was Nextel the last

4 one?

5 MR. JERSON: I don't know.

6 MEMBER SHROYER: What I'm trying to get

7 at is I know the City has had a lot of discussions

8 around this through, and through the planning

9 commission especially, and if they're saying, you

10 know, from here on out we want to make sure that every

11 single application coming into the City is going to be

12 brick shelter with gabled roofs, I sure would like to

13 know that before we act on this tonight. If they

14 haven't addressed it, that's fine, too. And I know

15 we're within our rights by following the ordinances

16 and acting on it as we may, but I was -- I really

17 wanted to know the sequence that that fell into and

18 where we're headed, because in visiting other sites in

19 the city -- and I can think of one right off the

20 bat -- is Harold on Grand River. There's also a brick

21 face building with Gabled roof storing cellular

22 equipment.

23 So where are we going with this? If the

24 City doesn't know, maybe we need to table it and come



1 back to it at a later time.

2 I'll yield to Mr. Schultz.

3 MR. SCHULTZ: If I may, through the

4 Chair. I can't speak to the sequence of when the --

5 which cabinets came. But I did speak to

6 Tim Schmidt today about this just briefly, and I can't

7 say that his position represented -- represents the

8 planning department's or commission's views, but it

9 did not appear to me that this is the subject of an

10 ongoing discussion or anything like that at planning

11 commission or planning department level.

12 I think there was a recognition in the

13 conversation we had that this ordinance is kind of

14 written with the assumption that a provider's going to

15 come in with an actual building, so if they do that

16 and they come in proposing a shelter building, here's

17 what we want it to look like. The ordinance is not

18 particularly set up to deal with somebody who comes in

19 with an open outdoor cabinet that's designed to be an

20 outdoor cabinet.

21 But has the City gotten to the point of

22 trying to resolve this with an ordinance amendment, I

23 don't think there's any work with that that's ongoing

24 with that.



1 This is kind of squarely in your lap,

2 interpreting the ordinance and then giving a variance

3 if you find that that's appropriate.

4 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. I

5 appreciate that. I was concerned about that.

6 I know at least probably two years ago

7 the request came in from a gas company concerning the

8 same thing at the dead end of Clark Street and Grand

9 River. They were told you build a brick building with

10 gabled roofs, things like that, As well to store

11 equipment. I don't know if it was equipment designed

12 to be outdoors, et cetera.

13 One of the questions I would ask the

14 petitioner, I'm sure that this meets all safety and

15 OSHA and MIOSHA standards-

16 MR. JERSON: (Interposing) absolutely.

17 MEMBER SHROYER: -et cetera?

18 Is there a reason for it being -- the

19 one you provided in Farmington Hills -- being on a

20 platform as opposed to being on a pad?

21 MR. JERSON: Typically our sites are

22 built on elevated platforms. There are certain cases,

23 usually smaller installation, where they are put on

24 concrete pads. I'm not sure if this one could be



1 placed on a pad or not. I think somebody had

2 mentioned, too -- I think one of the carriers, I

3 believe it's T-Mobile directly to the south of this,

4 is also on a elevated platform, so I think we have

5 both situations there.


7 MR. JERSON: We typically do it on a --

8 Sprint usually Does it on a elevated platform, too.

9 MEMBER SHROYER: Sprint's on a platform.

10 T-Mobile's on a pad. They will be blocking your view

11 -- or the view of your equipment from the entry-

12 MR. JERSON: (Interposing) Yes.

13 MEMBER SHROYER: -but they are shorter

14 pieces of equipment, so yours will show above it.

15 I don't see any disconcernable viewings

16 of your equipment that would prevent me from being

17 okay with this request.

18 MR. JERSON: I'm not actually sure if

19 they're -- I think they're comparable in height.

20 I have been at the site recently, and I

21 can tell you -- oh. The fact that it's on the -- that

22 may have impact as to the total height. I'm sure the

23 equipment is very comparable.

24 And the number -- the number of boxes



1 that we're proposing, again, with the possible

2 expansion is still less than at least T-Mobile, and I

3 think both Cingular and Sprint, too.

4 MEMBER SHROYER: The property is

5 surrounded, as he mentioned, by I believe white pines,

6 they go all way around it. It doesn't totally block

7 out the view, but it is in the back of the ice arena

8 area going down Cingular Drive a ways. I don't

9 anticipate any additional building going on in the

10 immediate area.

11 Basically I don't see a problem with

12 this request, and I'll be in favor of a motion for

13 this. Thank you.

14 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other discussion?

15 (No further discussion.)

16 MEMBER FISCHER: You were on a roll. Do

17 you care to make a motion for our consideration?

18 MEMBER SHROYER: I planned not to talk a

19 lot tonight because I'm getting over a flu.

20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I'll do it.

21 MEMBER FISCHER: Member Gronachan.

22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In case number 06-014

23 filed by Metro PCS Michigan, Inc., I move that we

24 approve the variance as requested for the applicant to



1 install metal equipment as opposed to the face brick

2 and gabled roof based on the petitioner's testimony,

3 and that this is outdoor equipment placed on the

4 outdoors, it's been indicated that this is a minimized

5 -- that the -- sorry -- that the site of this project

6 is minimal, that there's minimal exposure. And that

7 also I recommend that the -- this ordinance be sent to

8 ordinance review for further clarification for

9 anything else that comes before us in the future on

10 this matter.

11 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

12 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion and

13 the second on the table. Any further discussion?

14 MEMBER SHROYER: Can we add -- I'd like

15 to see the verbiage in there that the petitioner has

16 stated that it will meet all MIOSHA standards for

17 safety purposes.

18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I accept that

19 amendment.

20 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you.

21 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other discussion?

22 (No further discussion.)

23 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none,

24 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll.



1 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


3 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer?


7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger?


9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?


13 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to

14 zero.

15 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been

16 granted.

17 MR. JERSON: Thank you.


19 CASE NUMBER 06-015

20 MEMBER FISCHER: Don't go too far. I'd

21 like to call case number 06-015 filed by Metro PCS

22 Michigan, Inc., for 45500 Grand River.

23 The petitioner is requesting to install a metal

24 equipment cabinet that is not of an approved material.



1 If you could raise your hand and be

2 sworn in for this case.

3 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

4 affirm that the information that you're about to give

5 in the matter before you is the truth?

6 MR. JERSON: Yes.

7 MEMBER FISCHER: Name and address and

8 proceed.

9 MR. JERSON: Thank you. Matthew Jerson.

10 I'm with Richards, Connor, Riley and Associates. I

11 represent Metro PCS. My address is 30150 Telegraph

12 Road, suite 420,

13 Bingham Farms, Michigan 48025.

14 I would ask the board to consider the

15 general and the specific comments that we had

16 mentioned from the previous site, because they are

17 applicable to this one, but I would make additional

18 comments, too.

19 Like the other site, this site is hard

20 to see from the areas where people would be traversing

21 in their cars. Along Grand River, the site is blocked

22 by the existing building that's adjacent to it.

23 There's also large -- in this case, much larger

24 evergreen trees along the east, and I think they also



1 go into the south a little bit, too, which block the

2 views from Taft Road which, as you know, is a dead end

3 street, doesn't normally receive a lot of traffic.

4 I've been by the site a few times. I've

5 been by there most recently tonight. I can tell you,

6 driving down both those roads, also noting the fact

7 that the access into the site is restricted. There's

8 locked gates both from

9 Grand River and Taft.

10 This site is hard to see. The only

11 place you can actually see the ground equipment is

12 from Taft, probably halfway down the road towards a

13 dead end, so it's not a site that's going to be

14 heavily viewed.

15 I would also note before, just to

16 reiterate the important points, a brick faced shelter

17 would actually have a more visual, stronger, larger

18 impact than would the equipment cabinets. The picture

19 that we have up is the same equipment that we'd be

20 proposing at this site as the last site. This

21 equipment, again, is designed to be placed outdoors.

22 It doesn't function within an enclosure.

23 And I would also note the comments about

24 the ordinance. The ordinance really is specifying --



1 a brick face applies specifically and only to

2 equipment shelter buildings.

3 So with that I'd be happy to answer any

4 questions you might have.

5 MEMBER FISCHER: In this case there were

6 twenty-three notices mailed with zero approvals and

7 zero objections.

8 Anyone in the audience that wishes to

9 Comment on this case?

10 (No response.)

11 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll go to

12 the building department for their comments.

13 MR. SAVEN: No comments. Same as

14 previous case.

15 MEMBER FISCHER: And board discussion.

16 Member Gronachan?

17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Again, based on the

18 testimony of the petitioner, this particular case is

19 in a more of a desolate area. I believe that there's

20 minimal exposure, and that the petitioner has clearly

21 stated the advantages of using this metal cabinet as

22 opposed to a brick building. And I will be in support

23 of it.

24 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,



1 Member Gronachan. Member Shroyer?

2 MEMBER SHROYER: Just a quick question,

3 sir, from the petitioner. You indicated that both of

4 these sites, the one prior and this one, are

5 co-locations. I couldn't find another cellular usage

6 on this site. Is there another one there, or you're

7 referring to co-location meaning that it's an existing

8 tower that's used for other purposes?

9 MR. JERSON: Right, the later. Just

10 that it's an existing tower. We're actually the ones

11 co-locating on that site.

12 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you.

13 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

14 Member Shroyer. Any other board members?

15 MEMBER FISCHER: You did so well last

16 time, Member Gronachan, do you wish to enter a motion

17 to entertain?

18 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In case number 06-015

19 filed by Metro PCS Michigan, I move that the request

20 for the variance for the metal equipment Cabinets be

21 approved based on the discussion at this table and

22 given by the testimony of the petitioner.

23 MEMBER BAUER: Second that motion.

24 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other further



1 discussion?

2 (No further discussion.)

3 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none,

4 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll.

5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer?


11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger?


13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?


17 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to

18 zero.

19 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been

20 granted. Please see the building department and good

21 luck.

22 MR. JERSON: Thank you.


24 CASE NUMBER 06-016



1 MEMBER FISCHER: I'd like to call case

2 number 06-016 filed by Singh Management for Main

3 Street Village. The petitioner is requesting an

4 extension to allow the existing sign to remain on the

5 property. This is at

6 25300 Constitution, around Main Street Village.

7 If you want to raise your hand and be

8 sworn in by our secretary.

9 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

10 affirm that the information that you're about to give

11 in the matter before you is the truth?

12 MR. KAME: I do.

13 MEMBER FISCHER: And if you'll give your

14 name and address and proceed.

15 MR. KAME: Sure. Mike Kame,

16 Singh Development Company, 7125 Orchard Lake Road,

17 West Bloomfield, 48322.

18 I'm here this evening to discuss our

19 development sign at Main Street Village, our second

20 phase, which is the one closest to downtown Main

21 Street.

22 We realize the board has been very

23 understanding and considerate with this development.

24 Unfortunately, given the trying economic



1 times that we're facing, particularly in the apartment

2 industry, lease-up on our apartment developments has

3 been slow, and we take two steps forward and three

4 steps back.

5 So we're here this evening to beg your

6 assistance in giving us another year on this sign to

7 allow us to try to continue to lease this development

8 up and to obtain sustained occupancy.

9 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you very much.

10 I'll note that in this case there were

11 thirty-eight notices mailed with one approval. The

12 approval is from Joseph Evangelista at 46850 Grand

13 River Ave., with no comments.

14 Is there anyone in the audience that

15 wishes to comment on this case?

16 (No response.)

17 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, building

18 department?

19 MR. AMOLSCH: No comment, sir.

20 MR. SAVEN: I'd just ask how much longer

21 for the sign?

22 MR. KAME: I wish I knew, Don. I mean,

23 with the economy, you know, is tough, you know, we

24 hope within the next year that things are going to



1 start looking up and that we'll reach sustained

2 occupancy. We'll all cross our fingers.

3 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

4 Mr. Saven. Board members? Member Shroyer.

5 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you.

6 Mr. Kame, last year in June you indicated that you

7 were at 84 percent occupancy or leasing.

8 MR. KAME: Right.

9 MEMBER SHROYER: Where do you stand

10 today?

11 MR. KAME: Pretty much the same.

12 MEMBER SHROYER: About the same.

13 Unfortunately, you probably lost as many as you

14 gained?

15 MR. KAME: Yes. Or more.


17 MR. KAME: Yes, unfortunately. Because

18 we -- because of the higher-end nature of our

19 developments, we -- a lot of transferees are a large

20 part of our market. And, unfortunately, with the auto

21 industry being in the situation that it's in, a lot of

22 the transferee market dried up, so we suffered along

23 with them.

24 MEMBER SHROYER: Phase one is pretty



1 much done?

2 MR. KAME: Phase one is not much

3 different situation. But that sign, unfort -- that

4 sign has gone away, so -- we could bring it back, I'd

5 love to come in here for that occasion.

6 MEMBER SHROYER: The location of the

7 current sign, I think, serves both?

8 MR. KAME: Yeah. From the west it does,

9 that's correct. We just lost our exposure on Grand

10 River.

11 MEMBER SHROYER: I assume you're still

12 in the point where you need pretty much the 90

13 percentage to get the permit financing?

14 MR. KAME: To get there, yes.

15 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. That's all

16 I have, sir.

17 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

18 Member Shroyer. Any other board members?

19 I'll state that, you know, in this case

20 I look at the intent of the ordinance, and the intent

21 was to insure that something doesn't stay too long

22 when people are there, but I don't see many objections

23 to this. It is tucked in a little bit, like you said,

24 losing the Grand River frontage. So I have no



1 objections.

2 I'll leave that to other board members

3 at this time. Member Bauer.

4 MEMBER BAUER: You know, I have no

5 objections to this, but you got to stop sending the

6 people away.

7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Is that a motion?

8 MEMBER SANGHVI: Mr. Chairman?

9 MEMBER FISHCER: Member Sanghvi.

10 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you, sir.

11 (Inaudible) Left for me to make a motion in case

12 number 06-016 we grant the request of the applicant

13 for continued sign variance at

14 25300 Constitution for a period of one year.


16 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion and a

17 second. Any further discussion?

18 (No further discussion.)

19 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none,

20 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll.

21 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


23 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?




1 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer?


3 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger?


7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?


9 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to

10 zero.

11 MEMBER FISCHER: You've been granted a

12 variance for one year. Good luck.

13 MR. KAME: Thank you.

14 MR. FISCHER: We'll do one more and then

15 we'll take a break.


17 CASE NUMBER 06-017

18 MEMBER FISCHER: Case 06-017 filed by

19 Singh Management for Waltonwoods at

20 Twelve Oaks, the applicant is requesting two -- is

21 requesting sign extension variances for two marketing

22 signs at Waltonwood at Twelve Oaks.

23 Could you please raise your hand and be

24 sworn in by our secretary.



1 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

2 affirm that the information that you're about to give

3 in the matter before you is the truth?

4 MR. KAME: I do.


6 MEMBER FISCHER: Name and address again

7 then proceed.

8 MR. KAME: Mike Kame, Singh Development

9 Company, 7125 Orchard Lake Road,

10 West Bloomfield, 48322.

11 Sadly, my story here is not that

12 different than one I just gave you.

13 Somewhat unique in this case, Waltonwood

14 at Twelve Oaks is a continuum of care, senior housing

15 development that has independent living, assisted

16 living and memory care, and it was developed in two

17 phases. The first phase, the independent living, the

18 sign that we have for that is on the ring road of the

19 mall. The second phase, which is the assisted living

20 and memory care, was recently completed, and that sign

21 is on the finger road that goes out to Twelve Mile

22 Road. We have an entry that faces the finger road.

23 In this particular case, we're suffering

24 from kind of two things. One, the second phase is in



1 its initial lease-up phase, and as the case of many of

2 these continuum of care retirement communities, a

3 great deal of the people who move into our assisted

4 living and memory care are those who were living in

5 our independent living, who have aged in place and

6 have now got to the point where they really need

7 additional assistance. So a number of people who have

8 moved over to our assisted living and memory care

9 actually were, and continue to be, our residents but

10 just in a different phase. what that does is empty

11 out the first phase.

12 So we are suffering in this particular

13 case somewhat from a slow economy, but to a large

14 extent we're just going through aging in place and

15 lease-up of a continuing care/retirement community

16 where some of our independent living residents are

17 moving over to the development that's under --

18 currently under lease.

19 And that project, the second phase, is

20 approximately 45 percent leased at this point.

21 What it's done, it's depleted our

22 independent living, and that one is down in the lower

23 to mid eighties.

24 So we really need the signage to try and



1 -- in this particular case, because we're on a corner,

2 we really get traffic exposure from two different

3 roads, we have two different frontages with these

4 signs.

5 So we're asking for the board to grant

6 us an additional year to help us get this development

7 up to full occupancy.

8 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you, sir. And in

9 this case there were seven notices mailed with zero

10 approvals and zero objections.

11 Anyone in the audience that wish to

12 comment on this case?

13 (No response.)

14 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll move

15 to the building department.

16 MR. AMOLSCH: No comment, sir.

17 MEMBER FISCHER: Board members? Member

18 Gronachan.


20 appreciate the fact that you're having a tough time.

21 And I want to say that. I also want to say that I

22 welcome and support all of the businesses in Novi.

23 However, this sign has been out there for a very long

24 time, and I don't think that identification is the



1 problem, or lack of. I'm not too sure that the

2 economy doesn't play part of it. And I'm affiliated

3 with this industry and have had quite a bit of

4 exposure to your facility which, by the way, is an

5 absolutely wonderful facility.

6 I'm looking for a new place to move to,

7 but I don't think expended care is what I'm ready for

8 yet. I opened myself up for that one.

9 However, seriously, and without -- I

10 certainly do not want to insult anyone here, but I

11 don't feel that extending this sign any longer is

12 going to change the -- I lost my train of thought --

13 occupancy in this building. I really feel that it's

14 the economy more than anything else. I feel that a

15 lot of people know where your building is. I do know

16 that there's a lot of stages, and I will have to say

17 that Waltonwood development is very highly

18 recommended, or very highly regarded.

19 So I just don't know that this sign

20 serves the purpose, And I'm reluctant to support the

21 sign again because I don't want it to become a

22 advertising sign as opposed to -- so that's where I'm

23 torn.

24 And I'll turn it back to the Chair and



1 wait to hear from other board members on their issues.

2 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

3 Member Gronachan. Other board members?

4 Member Shroyer.

5 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. I have some

6 concerns as well. I did want to get some

7 clarification from the City, if I may. the violation

8 notice dated 9/02/05 for restoration, the new request

9 we did receive wasn't until 2/2/06, some five months

10 later. What happened in the interim?

11 MR. AMOLSCH: Well, they failed to

12 respond to the letter, and then I believe they filed a

13 application with no money. there's some confusion

14 with the company I believe.

15 MEMBER SHROYER: Was there citations

16 issued?

17 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes, there were.

18 MEMBER SHROYER: Paid; are we paid and

19 current?

20 MR. AMOLSCH: The case is ongoing until

21 the decision of the board.

22 MEMBER SHROYER: The other question I

23 had, this is for our attorney, if I may, is there any

24 type of statutes and limitations on signage?



1 Is there -- can we do this forever, or

2 after so many years does it become a permanent sign

3 and we can't change it?

4 MR. SCHULTZ: Through the Chair. It

5 doesn't become a permanent sign unless you make it a

6 permanent sign through the action of this board. Can

7 you do it forever? I guess you theoretically you

8 could.

9 MR. SHROYER: If I may, back to the City

10 again, do you have any recommendations of options or

11 alternatives to continuously granting this? Because

12 there's no immediate signs of the economy turning

13 around. I wish there was, obviously, but we don't see

14 any, and I very easily could see Mr. Kame back here

15 again next year asking for the same thing. I'm

16 looking for guidance or suggestions, or is there other

17 options out there that should be presented?

18 MR. AMOLSCH: Not through the ordinance

19 unless it's changed by the council.

20 MEMBER SHROYER: Is there something that

21 we should recommend to council for their review or

22 consideration or looking into -- regarding matters in

23 this -- this like this?

24 MR. SAVEN: I think it's a real tough



1 issue, strictly for the fact of a marketing standpoint

2 of view, and specifically to the housing that he is

3 proposing at the independent care, senior facility,

4 this type of thing. It's a special type of a

5 scenario, and when you're dealing with that particular

6 issue, the turnaround time, it isn't like you're doing

7 a single family home where the market is there for

8 everybody. It's a different market. It's a very

9 difficult situation.

10 If you want to talk about how we can

11 review this from maybe a policy type of situation,

12 what percent of occupancy are you looking at before

13 the sign is removed, that type of thing, that might be

14 something the board would want to take a look at in

15 the future. Maybe in this particular case is whether

16 or not you want to continue this as long as it's

17 reasonable.

18 That's all I can say.

19 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Schultz?

20 MR. SCHULTZ: Just briefly, similar kind

21 of answer, I guess a different approach. You know, at

22 this point, this is almost six years this sign has

23 been in place. It kinda (inaudible) a permanent sign.

24 But my guess is, knowing who is involved in the



1 planning process at the City, and planning department

2 and people who might have opinion actually very

3 question you're asking, what should we do, does this

4 become different than a lease or available sign.

5 So, you know, I don't think anybody

6 sitting here today has thought about what else might

7 be done other than extending the sign, but you can

8 certainly decide what to do.

9 MEMBER SHROYER: I believe we're

10 beginning to see a trend here. I think it's -- would

11 be worth the time, maybe somebody within the City to

12 put a second set of eyes on this and try to figure out

13 alternate solutions that may assist our very

14 hard-working vendors so to speak as they come forth

15 and make these requests.

16 I'll also make a comment quickly that it

17 may help our applicant as well. When you live in the

18 city and you live in an area for so many years and you

19 drive by the same sign day in and day out, it gets to

20 the point where you never read it again. And I wonder

21 if you may want to consider changing the sign, having

22 it look different.

23 MR. KAME: True.

24 MEMBER SHROYER: The next time somebody



1 drives into Twelve Oaks Mall, all of a sudden they see

2 something that sticks out; oh, gee, I didn't realize

3 those that those are still for lease or for rent or

4 available. I'm not suggesting you do that, but it's

5 something you may want to consider looking at. I've

6 said it just becomes old hat when you drive by the

7 sign so many times and it doesn't even dawn in your

8 mind that you may want to recommend that location to

9 somebody because you just don't read the signs

10 anymore. They've been there so long it almost seems

11 like a permanent sign.

12 With all that babble, I don't have a

13 problem with recommending one more year, but I do

14 think we need to look at some type of alternate

15 solutions and recommendations.

16 Thank you, Mr. chair.

17 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you.

18 Member Gronachan.


20 Mr. Chair. I would -- I think that this should be

21 sent to the planning department for a recommendation

22 as opposed to just extending it for another year. As

23 Mr. Schultz said, we have six years on the books with

24 this sign, and I don't think that they -- the



1 departing ways of Waltonwoods is ever going to change.

2 It is what it is. It's senior housing. There's going

3 to be a constant change in residency, and I think that

4 if we send this back to the planning department and

5 they -- they may be able to come up with something

6 that's even better for you as opposed to coming back

7 here, you know. And then it would be a permanent

8 solution, perhaps, that they might give us some

9 guidance on. And also, the proper identification,

10 because this business is different and unique than

11 just a regular housing market or an apartment

12 building.

13 So I don't know how we go about doing

14 that to-

15 MEMBER FISCHER: (Interposing)

16 Personally --

17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: To sending to the

18 planning department.

19 MEMBER FISCHER: Personally, I can't

20 agree more, sending it for some type of review.

21 Obviously, I think everyone's shaking their head yes,

22 but in that -- in your comments you stated several

23 times -- everyone's stated that it's a very unique

24 type of living arrangement. And I'm not willing to



1 make this petitioner wait around as we do send this

2 for review, and I don't have a problem with extending

3 it one more year either, so -- I'm sure we can send it

4 for some type of review, not necessarily for a formal

5 thing. So I think that could be part of the motion.

6 Indeed, Miss Marchioni would take notes and send it

7 people's way. That's where I stand.

8 If there's other comments or a motion.

9 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you,

10 Mr. Chairman. I will make a motion that in case

11 number 06-017 we grant an extension of one more year

12 to the sign as standing; and, B, we also send a copy

13 of the minutes and comments of the different members

14 of the board for review by the planning department,

15 and also send a copy to all of the members of the city

16 council and the ordinance review board. Thank you.

17 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion on the

18 table. Do you have a time limit that you'd like to

19 put on this?

20 MEMBER SANGHVI: One year.

21 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. Is there a

22 second?

23 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

24 MEMBER FISCHER: There is a motion and a



1 second. Any further discussion?

2 (No further discussion.)

3 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none,

4 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll.

5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer?


11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger?


15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?


17 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to

18 zero.

19 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been

20 granted for one year. Good luck. Please see the

21 building department.

22 MEMBER FISCHER: Yeah, let's go ahead

23 and take a break. We'll take a ten-minute break and

24 we'll be right back out.



1 (A short recess was taken.)


3 CASE NUMBER 06-018

4 MEMBER FISCHER: At this time I would

5 like to call case number 06-018 filed by Toll Brothers

6 for Island Lake of Novi Subdivision. Petitioner is

7 requesting several ground signs to be erected in said

8 development. The development is located between Grand

9 River and Ten Mile Road on Wixom Road.

10 If you could be -- raise your hand and

11 be sworn in by our secretary.

12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

13 affirm that the information that you're about to give

14 in the matter before you is the truth?

15 MR. HARDING: Yes.

16 MEMBER FISCHER: State your name and

17 address and please proceed.

18 MR. HARDING: Lance Harding with Toll

19 Brothers, 30500 Northwestern,

20 Farmington Hills, Michigan.

21 Asking for a variance on some signs that

22 are in our site. They're all directional signs and

23 information signs.

24 We were here about a year ago and asked



1 for a variance, you granted those. At the time there

2 were some that needed to be removed, which have.

3 These are just the existing ones that have remained.

4 MEMBER FISCHER: Anything else?


6 MEMBER FISCHER: In this case there were

7 409 notices mailed with one approval from Diane Byrne

8 and Jim Quinlan at 24827 Reeds Pointe, and there were

9 zero objections.

10 Is there anyone in the audience that

11 wishes to comment on this case?

12 (No response.)

13 MR. FISCHER: Seeing none, building

14 department, any comments?

15 Ms. Marchioni?

16 MS. MARCHIONI: The approval letter was

17 contingent on some items. I don't know if you want to

18 read that.

19 MEMBER FISCHER: Sorry. Thank you for

20 bringing that to my attention. I'll ask the secretary

21 to read our correspondence.

22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: We request that Toll

23 Brothers provide a tree line along Wixom Road, Reeds

24 Pointe Drive, as was originally promised comparable to



1 the tree line along

2 Napier Road. Currently there are some scattered trees

3 along Wixom Road but nothing that provides an

4 obstructed view between the Reeds Pointe Condos and

5 the Wixom Road traffic. In contrast, the condos on

6 the opposite end of the lake have a beautiful tree

7 line between their street and Napier Road with many

8 other things, nicely blocking the view of the road.

9 The solid tree line between Reeds Pointe and Wixom

10 Road would make the signs much easier to tolerate.

11 And that's from Diane Byrne, B-y-r-n-e,

12 and Jim Quinlan, Q-u-i-n-l-a-n.

13 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you Madam

14 Secretary.

15 Anything else from the building

16 department?


18 MEMBER FISCHER: Then I'll open it up

19 for board discussion at this time.

20 Member Gronachan.


22 Mr. Chair.

23 Mr. Harding, what is the percentage of

24 occupancy now in your subdivision?



1 MR. HARDING: I don't have the exact

2 number, but it's -- occupancy is probably 50 percent,

3 a little bit more I think.

4 MEMBER GRONACHAN: And do you feel -- or

5 do you know when completion of your subdivision --

6 when will you reach build-out?

7 MR. HARDING: It will probably be about

8 four years before the last home is settled.

9 We've gone through, and as we're going

10 through, we remove signs that aren't necessary. These

11 are all located kind of on the south side, which is

12 where our sales offices are. So these are directional

13 signs, just to get people who haven't been to our

14 community, to our sales offices. But when a sign's

15 not needed, we take them down.

16 The last time I was here we had a

17 variance for, I think, eleven signs, and we've removed

18 some of them and we're taking signs down as we need

19 them. These are ones just to get people to our

20 models.

21 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So you're indicating

22 to this board tonight that these six signs that you're

23 requesting to keep are directional signs to all of

24 your models; am I understanding you correctly?



1 MR. HARDING: Directional and

2 information signs about the community.

3 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. And this is

4 mostly on the south side of the subdivision; is that

5 correct?


7 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So you say four more

8 years. But you're certainly not thinking that you're

9 going to need these signs for another four years?


11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. How long do

12 you think you're gonna need these signs?

13 MR. HARDING: For these, I'm guessing

14 probably two, but, you know, that might be adjusted if

15 our sales are different and as product lines -- we

16 have three different -- or four products right now.

17 As our products diminish we don't need as many signs

18 because there's less places for potential homeowners

19 to go.

20 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I'll tell you the one

21 sign that I am not in support of to last for another

22 two years, and the reason why -- first off, it's the

23 sign on the northwest corner of Ten Mile and Wixom

24 Road. And the reason why is that this subdivision is,



1 as it's more developing along Wixom Road, it's very

2 identifiable, your entrance, of what you are, okay.

3 And I just don't feel that that big of a sign out

4 there is necessary for that length of time.

5 I just want -- I guess I'm not clear as

6 to when people come into your subdivision, are they

7 saying they can't find the things?

8 MR. HARDING: Absolutely. Yeah. We

9 have a hard time getting people to our models. We try

10 to get people with fresh eyes drive through it,

11 pretend that they were a homeowner, or potential

12 homeowner and come there and how our directions to get

13 to our models, and that is one of the complaints we

14 have, is they're not -- because it's such a large

15 community, they're not sure where to go.

16 MEMBER GRONACHAN: What about this

17 resident that's asking about the trees on -- alongside

18 Wixom Road?

19 Are you able to answer that question or

20 address that issue?

21 MR. HARDING: I'm not positive about

22 this, but I know at one situation we had is, on Wixom

23 Road, Wixom is a much more -- it's a busier road. And

24 we did have pine trees on there, and I believe that



1 the City asked us to remove them. I'm not sure. But

2 one of the complaints they had is that children can

3 hide behind pine trees and that if they ran out into

4 the road cars wouldn't be able to see them. I'm not

5 positive that was the reasoning, but I believe it was.

6 Where Napier, there is a berm and it's a dirt road,

7 that landscaping approvals were different and we

8 planted both sections according to the plan approved

9 by the City.

10 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So it's your belief

11 that this is a safety concern and that's why those

12 trees aren't there?

13 MR. HARDING: Yes.

14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I'm going to ask you

15 to do me a favor, and perhaps, when you get a minute,

16 to contact Sarah Marchioni, our secretary, and address

17 that with this resident-

18 MR. HARDING: (Interposing) Yeah.

19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: -so she doesn't think that

20 her concerns were not addressed. And also that if it

21 is a safety concern, I'd like you to research that and

22 if it could be resolved that it does.

23 MR. HARDING: Yes.

24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I know it wasn't --



1 but it's a complaint from a resident.


3 MEMBER GRONACHAN: That's all I have

4 this evening. Well, not the evening.

5 MEMBER FISCHER: I was hoping, being

6 optimistic. Thank you, Member Gronachan.

7 Any other board members?

8 Mr. Saven?

9 MR. SAVEN: I'm not a board member, but

10 I would like to comment on what

11 Member Gronachan was indicating. On any site or any

12 development that's going on in the City, there's

13 normally going to be landscape plan for that

14 particular project. It's reviewed and approved by the

15 landscaping consultant or person on in-house staff.

16 And during that time those are the plantings that

17 needed to be done. If they're not done they're bonded

18 for a period of time to ensure that the plantings are

19 done.

20 The issue may be that this young lady

21 may want above and beyond what is there, but we do

22 have an approved plan that we have to stick into the

23 development of that particular project.

24 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,



1 Mr. Saven. Any other board members?

2 Member Bauer?

3 MEMBER BAUER: I think they've come a

4 long way. They had eleven signs and they only have

5 six now. They've dropped five. I'm for having them

6 get their renewals.

7 MEMBER FISCHER: Agreed. Member

8 Gronachan, is that a motion?


10 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Shroyer?

11 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you,

12 Mr. Chair. I tend to agree with Member -- my esteemed

13 colleague; therefore, I think what I would like to do

14 is see us go ahead and approve these but for a limit

15 of a year as opposed to two years. That way, if there

16 is an increase in sales, perhaps that sign number four

17 at the corner of Ten Mile and Wixom can be removed.

18 Therefore, I'll go ahead and make a

19 motion in case number 06-018 filed by

20 Toll Brothers for the Island Lake of Novi Subdivision,

21 I move for approval of a one-year extension or

22 sell-out by area represented, which ever comes first,

23 for the signs numbered three, four, five, eight, ten

24 and eleven, which includes a continuance of a real



1 estate sign variance as indicated in the application.

2 This motion is due to the need indicated by the number

3 of units yet to be sold.


5 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion and a

6 second. Any further discussion?

7 (No further discussion.)

8 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none,

9 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll.

10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?


12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger?


16 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


18 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?



21 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to

22 zero.

23 MEMBER FISCHER: Your signs have been

24 granted for a period of one year. Good luck.



1 MR. HARDING: Thank you very much.

2 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you.


4 CASE NUMBER 06-019

5 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll move on to case

6 06-019 filed by Thurber Building Company for

7 Cheltenham North Subdivision. The applicant is

8 requesting permission to erect a 64 square foot

9 entranceway sign.

10 Would you please raise your hand and be

11 sworn in by our secretary.

12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

13 affirm that the information that you're about to give

14 in the matter before you is the truth?

15 MR. THURBER: Yes, I do.

16 MEMBER FISCHER: If you'll state your

17 name and address and proceed.

18 MR. THURBER: My name is

19 Matt Thurber, and address is 932 McDonald Drive,

20 Northville, Michigan 48167.

21 And I'm applying for a temporary sign,

22 information sign, for Cheltenham Subdivision. I need

23 a variance because the sign is not on my property.

24 I've purchased the 27 lots at Wilshire



1 Abbey, and this is the only access sign that I'll have

2 to promote the community as I try to sell it.

3 I have the support of Cheltenham

4 homeowner's association. There's two members that are

5 here tonight. They've also had a general meeting of

6 all their residents, and there wasn't any objections

7 to the sign going there as well.

8 And I'm requesting it for a two-year

9 period, if possible.

10 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you very much.

11 In this case there were eighteen notices mailed with

12 zero approvals and zero objections.

13 Is there anyone in the audience that

14 wishes to comment on this case?

15 Come forward. Please state your name

16 and address and share your comments.

17 MR. GRESS: My name is Doug Gress. I

18 live at 47550 Aberdine Drive in the Cheltenham

19 Subdivision, and I am a member of the board. I'm the

20 vice president of our homeowner's association board.

21 And our board has been working with

22 Matt Thurber and Thurber Building on the permission to

23 erect this sign, actually on our common ground, which

24 borders along Beck Road. The board supported that.



1 We did take it to a meeting of our association, and it

2 was unanimously supported by the quorum of homeowners

3 present at that meeting earlier. So we are in full

4 support of this.

5 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you very much.

6 Anyone else in the audience that wishes to comment on

7 this case.

8 (No response.)

9 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll ask

10 the building department for any comments.

11 MS. MARCHIONI: I would like to make a

12 comment on the E-mail I sent. I had thought that Matt

13 had talked to one of our (inaudible) about the

14 Wilshire Abbey doing business as Cheltenham North. He

15 actually talked to your attorney.

16 MR. THURBER: Yes, I did. And Pete

17 talked to Beth, and they gave him a verbal -- thought

18 verbally that it would be okay to do that. And

19 they're gonna -- the two of them are going to follow

20 up, and that way we don't have to go through the

21 replanning process to formally be -- we'll be doing

22 business as Cheltenham North.

23 One of the reasons we're doing that is

24 because of using the Cheltenham entrance for all our



1 traffic, it was a bit confusing in my mind to call it

2 Wilshire Abbey, and people would know where the

3 entrance was.

4 Also, we're trying to combine the two

5 associations, and that will go through some type of

6 formal approval process.

7 But in lieu of having two separate

8 associations there, we want to have one combined, so

9 they sort of have joint spending power. We're also

10 going to spend a fair amount of money in upgrading the

11 entranceway, recognizing that I don't have a formal

12 entranceway, so I'm willing to contribute to improving

13 that entranceway.

14 I also had tried to buy the adjacent lot

15 to the north that Bill Locke owned and put the sign

16 there and I wouldn't need a variance to -- come before

17 you for a variance, but the homeowners at Cheltenham

18 didn't want the additional traffic coming in the

19 construction access behind the homes, and they

20 actually prefer the sign be put around the front where

21 it is -- where it's placed now.

22 So that's how-

23 MS. MARCHIONI: (Interposing) I want

24 you to make sure before you have the sign put up



1 (inaudible.)

2 MR. THURBER: Yeah. Pete did call your

3 attorneys in the last couple days.

4 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Schultz, if you

5 wish to comment on this information.

6 MR. SCHULTZ: I guess, just to clarify,

7 and I'm sure the board knows, the plat for this parcel

8 was originally Wilshire Abbey and they want to be

9 Cheltenham North. Sounds to me like there's been

10 correspondence initiated by Miss Marchioni.

11 I don't think the board needs to say

12 anything other than that. What ever the name turns

13 out to be, we're not approving it tonight. We're

14 approving the location of the sign and we'll let the

15 City attorney and property owners' attorney work out

16 the names (inaudible).

17 MEMBER FISCHER: So I guess, Alan, would

18 you like to-

19 MR. AMOLSCH: (Interposing) I just want

20 to make one comment. The issue here is not location

21 of the sign. The location is approved by ordinance.

22 It allows an off-premis sign if the subdivision does

23 not have an entrance through a thoroughfare. The

24 ordinance allows a sign at that location where the



1 access point to the thoroughfare is, provided they

2 have permission from the property owners.

3 The issue here right now is they do not

4 have building permits yet.

5 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you for that

6 clarification.

7 MR. THURBER: And they have been issued

8 now, I think, as of today. I think as of today

9 they've been issued, or maybe.

10 MS. MARCHIONI: I know something has

11 been applied for.

12 MR. THURBER: I think they just -- they

13 waited for the silt fence inspection, which was today,

14 and that should have been just the building permits.

15 MR. SAVEN: I think we have the Ready

16 for Use letter for your project. Then we have Ready

17 for Use and compliance to all the environmental

18 issues. Those are the things that need to be complied

19 with.

20 MR. THURBER: You're waiting on that you

21 said?

22 MS. MARCHIONI: Do we have that.

23 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. To the issue at

24 hand, it's our understanding, as a board, that the



1 permits have not been issued, and that's the case that

2 we're looking and the variance that we're looking at,

3 so that's what we'll be deciding on tonight.

4 MR. THURBER: Okay.

5 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other comments from

6 the building department?

7 (No repsonse.)

8 MEMBER FISCHER: If not, I'll open it up

9 for board discussion. I have a --

10 Member Gronachan.

11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: I want to verify the

12 size of the sign. It is 64 square feet or it's 96?

13 I'm confused here. So we don't have anything on the

14 size. It's just simply the sign because there's no

15 permits?

16 MR. AMOLSCH: That's correct. The sign

17 meets the ordinance in every way except for the

18 building permit.

19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. I don't have a

20 problem with this.

21 MEMBER FISCHER: Quickly -- go ahead,

22 Member Krieger.

23 MEMBER KRIEGER: I have a question. Do

24 we need to have something in writing from the other



1 subdivision members?


3 MEMBER FISCHER: I was just going to

4 kind of follow up on that. I see a letter here that

5 says that a letter from the property owner will be

6 needed.

7 MR. AMOLSCH: That's correct.

8 MEMBER FISCHER: So -- and are we -- is

9 it the board members of the-

10 MS. MARCHIONI: (Interposing) Yeah, the

11 board members.

12 MEMBER FISCHER: The board members of

13 the homeowners assiciation, that letter signifies the

14 necessity to have property owners' approval, so that

15 checks out in my book and I agree. I have no problem

16 as well.

17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. I guess I'll

18 make a motion. In case number 06-019 filed by Thurber

19 Building Company, I move that we approve the request

20 for one sign variance to be erected on the entranceway

21 of the Cheltenham North Subdivision located north of

22 Nine Mile and west of Beck due to the testimony given

23 by the petitioner here this evening.

24 MEMBER FISCHER: And does the maker wish



1 to put a time limit?

2 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Oh. For two years.

3 MEMBER FISCHER: There is a motion. Is

4 there a second?


6 MEMBER FISCHER: Is there any further

7 discussion on the motion?

8 MR. AMOLSCH: Might be -- just to say

9 until the first building permit is issued.

10 MEMBER FISCHER: Two years or

11 building --

12 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Okay. I'll amend my

13 motion and say for two years or until the first

14 building permit is issued.

15 MEMBER FISCHER: Which ever's first?

16 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Which ever's first.

17 MEMBER FISCHER: Does the second agree?


19 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other discussion?

20 (No further discussion.)

21 MEMBER FISCHER: Miss Marchioni, will

22 you please call the-

23 MS. MARCHIONI: (Interposing) I have a

24 question. Do we need to incorporate the attorney



1 approval?

2 MR. SCHULTZ: I think that's on the

3 record.

4 MS. MARCHIONI: Okay. Member Gronachan?


6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer?


10 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger?


12 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


14 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?


16 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to

17 zero.

18 MEMBER FISCHER: Variance has been

19 granted. Good luck.

20 MR. THURBER: Thank you very much.

21 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you.


23 CASE NUMBER 06-020

24 MEMBER FISHER: Move along to case



1 number 06-020 filed by Radiant Sign Company for Leo's

2 Coney Island. The applicant is requesting to erect an

3 additional wall sign of 36 square feet. The

4 property's located at

5 47830 Grand River in Westmarket Square.

6 If you could, please raise your hand --

7 will you both be speaking?


9 MEMBER FISCHER: You can both your hand

10 and be sworn in.

11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

12 affirm that the information you're about to give in

13 the matter before you is the truth?


15 MEMBER FISCHER: If you could state your

16 names and address and proceed.

17 MR. WEINSTOCK: Paul Weinstock, 30943

18 Centersville Court, Farmington Hills.

19 MR. KRELL: Phil Krell,

20 47830 Grand River, Novi, Michigan 48374,

21 Leo's Coney Island.

22 MEMBER FISCHER: Proceed with your case.

23 MR. WEINSTOCK: What we're proposing is

24 a second sign facing the eastbound traffic of --



1 coming off the ramp off 96 going on to the Beck Road

2 exit.

3 Leo's Coney Island's been around in that

4 shopping center for six years, and they've had one

5 sign that faces south, you know, onto Grand River.

6 There's actually no exposure to Leo's Coney Island for

7 people exiting the freeway unless they know it's

8 there.

9 He's had some, you know, problems in the

10 past couple years with all the construction going on.

11 He's trying to boost his, you know, sales and

12 everything back up to where it was, and he thinks --

13 we think that the second sign stating that there's a

14 restaurant there would be an addition.

15 And we have support from the property

16 owner also. We have a letter from the property owner.

17 MEMBER FISCHER: Do we have one on file

18 or --


20 MEMBER FISCHER: Can you please submit

21 it to Miss Marchioni.

22 Anything else?

23 MR. KRELL: Covered everything.

24 MEMBER FISCHER: In this case there were



1 sixteen notices mailed; two approvals and zero

2 objections.

3 Madam Secretary, will you please read

4 the correspondence.

5 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Certainly. First one

6 is an approval from Joseph Gerack at

7 28 Barber Lane in Bloomfield Hills. And I don't know

8 how Mr. Gerack is affiliated. Gerak Associates Real

9 Estate Investment Development. The next letter is an

10 approval from

11 James Woltersom, W-o-l-t-e-r-s-o-m, vice president,

12 corporate facilities, for TCF Bank. Business in the

13 area have hardships with one sign restriction. TCF

14 Bank customers have commented on the -- our lack of

15 identity driving south on Beck Road. Okay. We highly

16 support Leo's request for additional signs. The

17 address for Mr. Woltersom is 41 East Liberty Street,

18 Ann Arbor, Michigan.

19 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you

20 Madam Secretary.

21 Is there anyone in the audience that

22 wishes to make comment on this case?

23 (No response.)

24 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, building



1 department?

2 MR. AMOLSCH: No comment, sir.

3 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll open it up for

4 board discussion. Which one of you would like to

5 start?

6 MEMBER SHROYER: Ladies first.

7 MEMBER FISCHER: Madam Gronachan.

8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Thank you. I raised

9 my hand. Do you feel that the -- you said that your

10 business has gone down.

11 MR. KRELL: Over the last three years,

12 with construction on Grand River, each year we widened

13 it, then with the bridge closing, it hurt us a little

14 bit. Since the bridge is open, it's a blessing, but

15 we're trying to bring our sales back up. And I think

16 by allowing customers to see our -- a new sign as

17 they're exiting onto Beck Road, that would really help

18 us capture people that don't know where they are.

19 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So this would be

20 basically in the back of the building as opposed to in

21 the front? I mean, I don't have-

22 MR. WEINSTOCK: It's on the side

23 actually.

24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: On the side.



1 MR. KRELL: I'm on -- I'm in the corner

2 location, the front side, and this would be a sign on

3 the side of the building.

4 MR. WEINSTOCK: It faces the

5 Home Depot and the on/exit ramp.

6 MR. KRELL: I'll be attracting the

7 eastbound traffic getting off the ramp.

8 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you have people

9 that come in and say I've driven for days and I can't

10 find you, or what made you decide -- is this just to

11 drive -- to increase people coming in but not so much

12 as people not being able to locate you?

13 MR. KRELL: I get people that tell me

14 how long have you been here, I didn't know you were

15 here. I've been seeing that for a while, and

16 especially people that just move to the area. They

17 say we've been here five months, six months, didn't

18 know you were there. We usually get people that go to

19 Home Depot or Kroger, and that's how they find us.

20 Because we're not visible from Grand River. The

21 distance is so far, you really can't read out the

22 sign. So usually I get a lot of people that come into

23 Home Depot and that's how they find us.

24 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Actually, that might



1 be your bonus point that you just presented, and that

2 is true. You can't see you from Grand River, and the

3 only time that you can find you is if you go -- if

4 happen to go into the Home Depot.

5 I will tell you that you reminded me of

6 something, and because you just made that statement I

7 will change my view on this. I will be in support of

8 the sign, and because of the layout of the -- the

9 actual layout of the complex it does make it very

10 difficult to see you guys.

11 It wouldn't make any difference to me,

12 on a personal note, if there was a sign there or not

13 because I would come in anyways, as I do often.

14 But you just -- and that's what I was

15 looking for, the reason why you needed the sign, and

16 you hit the nail on the head. So you just covered

17 your own case. That's all I need.

18 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

19 Member Gronachan. Any other comments?

20 Mr. Bauer.

21 MEMBER BAUER: What size is the sign in

22 front?

23 MR. WEINSTOCK: The size in front is a

24 24 square foot sign which was allowed by the City



1 originally. It was the maximum that was allowed. It

2 was kind of at -- we had a bad placement due to the

3 structure of the building. You had to kind of stack

4 it. It really wasn't across the front like all the

5 other stores you see based-

6 MEMBER BAUER: (Interposing) How far

7 are you from Grand River?

8 MR. KRELL: How many feet?


10 MR. KRELL: I don't know.

11 MR. WEINSTOCK: It's got to be a

12 thousand feet.

13 MEMBER BAUER: How far are you from Beck

14 Road?

15 MR. KRELL: From Beck Road. We're on

16 the-

17 MR. WEINSTOCK: (Interposing) The

18 plaza's on the corner really.

19 MR. KRELL: Yeah. We're not far -- the

20 actual location of my location is far from Beck, but

21 the actual building itself is --

22 MEMBER GRONACHAN: A thousand feet.

23 MR. WEINSTOCK: Yeah, about a thousand

24 feet. But you're -- he's tucked in the corner of the



1 plaza. Really, the only way you're going to see it is

2 if you're at the Home Depot.

3 MR. KRELL: Yeah. You can't see me from

4 Beck Road.

5 MEMBER FISCHER: Anyone else?

6 Mr. Shroyer.

7 MEMBER SHROYER: I've always been a

8 proponent of additional signage along entrance ramps

9 and major thoroughfares, so that's a plus there.

10 One of the questions I do have, however,

11 is if we approve this sign to be erected on the

12 building, would you intend on removing the sign that's

13 in the window on that side of the building?

14 MR. KRELL: It's never crossed my mind.

15 I would probably say yes, because it's more like a

16 decal. That's the only reason we had it there,

17 because we didn't have lit sign.

18 MR. WEINSTOCK: There was no exposure

19 towards the Home Depot.

20 MEMBER SHROYER: And I could understand

21 what the need would be, but if the sign was on the

22 building I wouldn't see any reason to have the sign.

23 MR. WEINSTOCK: We can definitely remove

24 that.



1 MEMBER SHROYER: Would it be appropriate

2 to make that contingency? I mean, that would be the

3 way that I'm agreeing to this case. I would be in

4 favor of the sign, but only with the understanding

5 that the sign in the window be removed.

6 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

7 Mr. Shroyer.

8 I would tend to agree with all the other

9 speakers. My question is, does the sign in front turn

10 off at all? And -- let me ask that first.

11 MR. KRELL: Yes, it does turn off.

12 MEMBER FISCHER: Will it be -- will the

13 new sign be on the same schedule as the old sign?

14 MR. KRELL: It could be very -- it can

15 be flexible.

16 MEMBER FISCHER: What is your intention?

17 MR. KRELL: I would like to leave the

18 sign that faces the freeway on as long as possible. I

19 didn't know if there was a time limit or not.

20 MR. WEINSTOCK: At least til the, you

21 know, the bar crowd, Two o'clock in the morning, three

22 o'clock in the morning, until the bar crowd is gone.

23 MEMBER FISCHER: What about after hours;

24 do you intend to have it on after you close?



1 MR. WEINSTOCK: It's going to be on 24

2 hours, like all night long?


4 MR. WEINSTOCK: It's not our intention.

5 MEMBER KRELL: It wasn't our intention.

6 MEMBER FISCHER: I would agree with --

7 especially the comment Mr. Shroyer made about major

8 thoroughfares and on and off ramps and -- you know,

9 we've had a lot of cases in the area where my comments

10 have been that Beck Road is a regional corridor now.

11 It's attracting people from all over southeast

12 Michigan, if not, you know, mid Michigan and western

13 Michigan to the

14 Expo Center and the way things are building up there.

15 And I think that promoting business in this way is a

16 great idea.

17 And I think that the corner store

18 provides, you know, ample practical difficulty as

19 well.

20 So, like these guys, I'll be willing to

21 support as well.

22 Member Krieger.

23 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number 06-020

24 filed by Radiant Sign Company for



1 Leo's Coney Island at 47380 Grand River at Westmarket

2 Square, that they be granted a variance for the

3 sign -- the additional sign facing the entrance ramp

4 to Beck Road, and contingent that the sign on the west

5 side also is removed from the window as previously

6 stated, and that the -- with the previous discussion.


8 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion and a

9 second. Any further discussion?

10 (No further discussion.)

11 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none,

12 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll.

13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger?


15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


17 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?


19 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


21 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer?


23 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?




1 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to

2 zero.

3 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been

4 granted. Best of luck to you.

5 MR. KRELL: Thank you.

6 MR. WEINSTOCK: Thank you.

7 CASE NUMBER 06-021

8 MEMBER FISCHER: We'll move along to

9 case number 06-021 filed by James Weiner at 2094

10 Austin. The applicant is requesting four variances

11 for the construction of a new home located at said

12 address.

13 And if you could please raise your hand

14 and be sworn in by our secretary.

15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

16 affirm that the information that you're about to give

17 in the matter before you is the truth?

18 MR. WEINER: Yes, I do.

19 MEMBER FISCHER: Do you want to state

20 your name and address and-

21 MR. WEINER: (Interposing) Yes. My

22 name is James C. Weiner. My current address 286 Lake

23 village Drive in Walled Lake, Michigan 48390.

24 I -- I'm requesting a variance to allow



1 me to build a reasonable size house on a piece of

2 property here that the current address is 2094 Austin.

3 It is vacant but it does have a street address. That

4 will be the street address.

5 The variances from side to side are -- I

6 will be hitting the minimum setbacks -- excuse me.

7 May I -- if I can do this, this is the

8 packet that I've done. This is a lakefront lot on

9 Shawood Lake.

10 And what I'm requesting -- the front --

11 the very front of the property here is 60 foot wide.

12 And I'd like to build out 35 feet wide for the house,

13 which -- because it's a slight taper into the back,

14 it -- to the back of the lot -- it's only about 58

15 feet wide in the back, I need this corner of the house

16 right here. Just this little corner in the back right

17 here is a one-and-a-half to 1.75 foot variance that

18 I'm requesting for side to side. I will hit the ten

19 foot minimums on both sides. It's just the -- but the

20 combined twenty-five foot, or the fifteen foot once

21 you put ten foot, is two of the three variances that

22 I'm requesting.

23 The proposed house here, and the garage

24 also, cover approximately twenty-seven percent of the



1 property, of the lot. And I'm requesting a -- that's

2 a two percent variance from the twenty-five percent

3 maximum that this City allows in that area.

4 The issue becomes -- and the biggest

5 variance that I'm requesting is I'm -- is right here

6 in front. I'm requesting a 11.25 foot variance so --

7 from the thirty foot setback. I will still be

8 eighteen-and-a-half feet, eighteen feet from the front

9 of the property. I'll be approximately twenty-five

10 feet from the road. I will still have adequate

11 parking.

12 The reason is -- that I want that is, if

13 you look at it, I'm trying not to block my neighbors'

14 views. If you look where the pen is there, that's the

15 rear of the neighbors' houses, and I'm trying not to

16 block my neighbors' views. I'm trying to move the

17 house away from the lake.

18 The other issue becomes one of, the lake

19 is actually right here, and it goes out here.

20 This -- and the lot line was actually

21 plotted in the 1920s.

22 So that this rear lot line, I assume,

23 used to follow the lake level or the shoreline. The

24 shoreline has straightened itself out. And I can show



1 that a little bit better with this lot here. Okay.

2 If you look, and -- I don't know. Here. If you look

3 here, it's from here to here. It's from here to here,

4 and from right here is where the actual -- the actual

5 lake level, the lake lot line is actually another ten

6 to twelve feet out from the end of the plotted lot

7 that was plotted in 1927. So I'm trying to maintain

8 it -- maintain as far away from the lake as possible

9 to not to block my neighbors' views.

10 The issue becomes one of, like I say,

11 not blocking the neighbors' views and still allowing

12 me to putting a reasonable size house.

13 The proposed -- the plot plan of the

14 house is only a thousand square feet, so -- it's only

15 approximately a thousand square feet that -- you know,

16 in the footprint, plus the garage, that I'm trying to

17 build here, and this is a -- the reasonable size for

18 this area.

19 Hopefully it will renovate and -- I

20 mean, the normal plot -- from what I understand, the

21 normal size house is well in excess of twenty-two to

22 twenty-five hundred square feet, and I'm going to --

23 you know, it's a thousand square foot footprint is

24 what I'm proposing, plus the garage like I say.



1 It will have adequate -- and I'd like to

2 also point out here, I'm 18.7 -- eighteen-and-a-half

3 of what I'm proposing from the lake.

4 Immediately next to me, Mr. Korte's

5 house, is approximately twenty feet, plus there's a

6 porch on it. Over here it's ten feet plus there's a

7 porch on it, or ten feet. I don't know about a porch

8 on it. Over here it's twenty-eight feet. Here it's

9 only four feet from the lake -- from the right-of-way.

10 This house right here in this lot is only four feet

11 from the front. This house here, there's a garage

12 here that's only six feet from the front.

13 And as I noted here, this house here in

14 1990 -- or, excuse me, 2003, just a couple years ago,

15 this board granted the people that lived in this house

16 a variance to go to approximately ten -- again,

17 approximately the same level, eighteen feet from the

18 road, and that was with -- that was only four feet

19 from the lot line. That doesn't even hit minimum of

20 ten feet. So I'm keeping the minimum ten feet on the

21 two sides, on both sides, and I'm keeping -- and I'm

22 trying to, like I say, minimize the impact on my

23 neighbors by not blocking their view.

24 And I hope that -- I mean, I could slide



1 the house back towards the lake and I would still hit

2 the minimum probably. I think I could still hit the

3 minimum from the lake, the actual current lake level,

4 lake line, but I just as soon not impact my neighbors,

5 if you know what I mean. I'm trying to be nice to

6 them so that I'm not impacting their lake view at all.

7 Is there any questions?

8 MEMBER FISCHER: We'll get to those if

9 you're done with your presentation at this time.

10 MR. WEINER: I believe that's it. Dean

11 is my builder. Dean is my actual builder.

12 MEMBER FISCHER: If you can also be

13 sworn in by our secretary.

14 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

15 affirm that the information that you're about to give

16 in the matter before you is the truth?

17 MR. SUTTON: Yes, I do.

18 MEMBER FISCHER: State your name and

19 address and then proceed.

20 MR. SUTTON: James Sutton, 20 -- 2270

21 Crown Drive in Novi. And I'm actually the property

22 owner only two doors down from where he's proposing to

23 build this house.

24 And from any aspect of that, I mean, I'm



1 welcoming it. It's -- just because it's gonna be a

2 huge improvement on the neighborhood because it'll

3 actually maybe draw more people in to renovate and

4 rebuild and make it a place that it could be.

5 And then along with what Mr. Weiner was

6 talking about, with all the setbacks -- I mean, you

7 stated four variances, but there are only three.

8 There's a small two percent footprint variance, and

9 then there's only a one-and-a-half pie shaped piece

10 out of the back corner of the house, and then there's

11 the large variance, which is bringing the house closer

12 to the road. But it just fits in conservatively with

13 every other house on that street because it's just --

14 it varies from as little as four feet to -- I guess on

15 average it's probably twelve to fifteen feet, so he's

16 well conservatively below the average. So I think it

17 fits in from, you know, a point of being a neighbor,

18 and a point of just, I guess, requesting the variance

19 and -- anything else?

20 But I think that's about it.

21 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay, thank you. And

22 in this case there were thirty-seven notices mailed

23 with one approval and zero objections. The approval

24 was from T. Malicki at 2213 Austin approving of this



1 new house.

2 Is there anyone in the audience that

3 wishes to comment on this case? Please come forward.

4 If you'll state your name and address-

5 MR. KORTE: (Interposing) Korte, Sha --

6 MEMBER FISCHER: If you'll state your

7 name and address and proceed.

8 MR. KORTE: James Korte, and I'm living

9 at 2034 Austin, just to the north.

10 And the house is not twenty feet. The

11 house is thirty feet from the road. And where the

12 problems of all of us came in, I have a six-and-a-half

13 foot front porch that is into the thirty feet. So it

14 isn't twenty, it's twenty-four.

15 All of these houses here generally

16 started with thirty foot from the road. In the '50s

17 and '60s, after the war, we had good times and they

18 put their front porches on, and we lost the thirty So

19 that's how much of the area got into the position it's

20 in.

21 I have no problem with the house being

22 built. He is paralleling ten feet to the north lot

23 line and 2034 is reasonably six foot, six-and-a-half

24 foot parallel upon that lot line.



1 When you work on pie shaped pieces of

2 property, what is square to where? Then you don't

3 even got a good triangle because the road comes in at

4 another angle, so you can't do the side, you can't do

5 the front, and it's clumsy to get any square upon

6 this.

7 I talked with a Paul -- or I tried to

8 talk with Paul Taylor today. He is one of the

9 consultants. I don't understand why

10 similar/dissimilar is not one of your issues today. I

11 am pursuing that, but it's not an issue. I feel that

12 similar/dissimilar, with all the reviews that the

13 final plans will have to go through, is going to

14 become a problem, but -- and that's just for the

15 record.

16 The next problem is flooding, flooding,

17 flooding from the lot itself, and I'm in a hole. And

18 any house that's built there is going to have to be

19 very specific as to how they do their drainage,

20 especially when these giant houses come in, that I

21 don't get anymore water, because I'm already too low.

22 I started in 1924.

23 Now, the next thing that has to get on

24 record is I question, and it doesn't necessarily mean



1 a whole lot to me, the topography. When you look at

2 the benchmarks that were taken by his certified

3 people, they went from the gate valve that I had moved

4 last summer. So I would imagine that the topography

5 is not specifically correct, and I will prove that

6 because I talked with Sarah Marchioni and she dug up

7 the approved plans from 1997, 1998, that specifically

8 show my corner at 936. Now, since that time I'm now

9 937. And I tell you I wish I could raise myself a

10 foot every five years because then I wouldn't be in a

11 hole. Now, it doesn't make any difference if I'm at

12 936, 938 or 932, as long as I don't get flooded.

13 But I think we have to get these

14 documents right. And as I say, the flooding of my

15 property is a major problem.

16 When the house to the south went, all of

17 the property was owned by one owner, Michael Morgan,

18 filled in probably ten to fifteen feet on Mr. Warners'

19 property, and put all of his water onto the empty lot.

20 Now, he has to deal with that. I complained at that

21 point in time it's wrong, it's illegal, and Terry

22 Marrone said to me are you flooding. I said no. And,

23 of course, you know I have a mouth. I said well, when

24 the jerk buys here and thinks he can do that to me, I



1 have a problem. So flooding, flooding, flooding.

2 There in there -- and the only plan I

3 have is the alternative if you don't grant the 18.

4 Now, there seems to be some problem, if

5 the house goes in at thirty, then he doesn't have

6 thirty-five to the back.

7 Now, my 115 north side is eleven foot

8 farther, and his comes in just a little, which he may

9 reclaim with no problem with the City and no problem

10 with the State; therefore, I don't understand -- and I

11 have represented so many people here -- why we still

12 fight the issue of a lot line at lakeside. His

13 property goes out into technically the lake more than

14 it should.

15 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Korte, I will ask

16 you to wrap up at this time.

17 MR. KORTE: All right. I've done

18 benchmarks. I've done similar/dissimilar. The side

19 yard variance is nothing. The lot coverage is

20 nothing. I question the eighteen feet, and I question

21 it for off-street parking reasons, understanding that

22 five feet from the road would be better for me. The

23 farther it gets away from my view the better it is.

24 But I have to look at the greater picture and question



1 the eighteen feet.

2 Thank you.

3 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. Anyone else

4 in the audience that wishes to comment on this case?

5 (No response.)

6 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, we'll move

7 to the building department for any comments.

8 MEMBER SAVEN: Just a couple things I'd

9 like to bring to your attention. Number one, the City

10 of Novi has a flood plan ordinance, FEMA -- or the

11 flood insurance study. One of the things that we take

12 a look at very strongly is the issue regarding the

13 flood elevations that are surrounding lake areas and

14 how this affects this property. This property in

15 particular is one of those properties on that side of

16 the street, is dealing with a tremendous amount of

17 changes in elevations.

18 The -- one of the reasons I would assume

19 that this building is brought forward was strictly

20 because of the elevation. What you're looking at at

21 934 as being the flood plane elevation, which is

22 depicted on the map in itself.

23 Our ordinance -- our ordinance states

24 that you have to be at least one foot above the base



1 of the elevation, so that would be the 935, and take a

2 look at 935. It relates to property and you see how

3 close it is to the rear of the property. So these are

4 one of the things that we would take a look at,

5 certainly from an engineering standpoint of view. Not

6 put into flood plan already, and that's a positive

7 feature, and I can see how that request for the

8 setback to move the building forward would be to that

9 advantage.

10 The only other issue that I'd like to

11 bring up is that we also have an engineering firm,

12 consulting engineer, that looks at these plans for

13 issues regarding grading and drainage and things of

14 this nature (inaudible).

15 By virtue of what's being said tonight,

16 and Mr. Korte's concern for his property, that these

17 particular items will be taken a look at and make sure

18 that they're not flooding onto the adjacent neighbors'

19 property.

20 And I would like to ask, based on the

21 information that you have here, you're showing the top

22 of a wall which is adjacent to your property. I

23 assume this is to divert the drainage and prevent any

24 other drainage going up?



1 MR. WEINER: What I was actually

2 thinking about doing -- and the surveyor put those

3 walls in without my knowledge -- and it cost me a lot

4 of money to change it. What I was actually thinking

5 about doing was leaving the existing side -- the

6 elevation on that side, the ten foot, leaving it

7 almost exactly the same and cupping it between my

8 property and the north property line so that there

9 would be a drainage ditch down that side, and probably

10 keeping it graveled so there's almost a walkway down

11 to the lake on that side, so that -- and then

12 keeping -- can we turn this on? I don't know how to

13 turn this on.

14 MEMBER FISCHER: You just place the

15 paper there.

16 MR. WEINER: Okay. And then keeping --

17 keeping this -- keeping this area almost the existing,

18 and then I will have to do -- I'd like to note that

19 there is a big tree right -- there's a hickory tree

20 that I'm trying to save here. It's the last tree on

21 the lot. So that's one of the reasons why I'm ten

22 foot from this property line. We could only do the

23 minimum ten foot to the side. I'm trying to save the

24 tree. But what I intend to do is keep this almost the



1 same and gutter it so that Mr. Korte does not have

2 drainage issues.

3 I -- I've at least got a mental plan on

4 what I'm planning on doing.

5 MR. SAVEN: Make sure this is reflected

6 in your plot plan.

7 MR. WEINER: I'm planning on -- yeah.

8 MR. SUTTON: It was done by a

9 professional, certified surveyor that does work with

10 Novi, so they were aware of all of the rules, and they

11 did it according to the rules. MR.

12 WEINER: You know, what that -- that was -- mentally

13 that's what I was planning on doing, was not changing

14 the elevation on that ten foot side, almost so that if

15 I need to I can get something, you know, a cart down

16 there so that -- and then all of the elevation would

17 be -- changes would be on the front side.

18 I do -- there's a tree right here that

19 I'm -- that I'm going to try and save, but I'm -- I

20 hope I don't have to fill in too much on the -- over

21 the roots on that because it's already filled in to

22 the north side here. I'm trying to do that. I'd

23 really would like to keep it. It's a hickory or

24 chestnut, something like that, that could be a



1 valuable tree in the future. So I'm really trying to

2 save that one, and that's the reason.

3 But I really want -- I plan on putting

4 gutter on that side. I'm planning on putting adequate

5 drainage in there so that it's not going to be a

6 problem. And -- at least I don't expect it to be a

7 problem, let's put it that way.

8 The -- and I still think -- if you

9 notice where Austin Drive is here, from here to here

10 there still is a significant four, five feet between

11 the front of the property line and the road, so I'm

12 really not too worried about off street parking

13 because I'll have twenty-five feet.

14 MEMBER FISCHER: Well, that was -- let's

15 stick to Mr. Saven's concern.

16 MR. WEINER: Sorry.

17 MEMBER FISCHER: And if the board wants

18 to talk about that they will.

19 MR. WEINER: Okay.

20 MR. SAVEN: Show the swale. Show the

21 swale. That's all I want to make sure.

22 MEMBER FISCHER: If Mr. Saven has

23 anymore concerns, then he can ask you. Otherwise

24 we'll move to board discussion.



1 MR. SAVEN: Go to board discussion.

2 MEMBER FISCHER: Are you sure?

3 MR. SAVEN: Yes.


5 discussion. Member Krieger.

6 MEMBER KRIEGER: I have a question. Are

7 we going by the plot plan or the alternative?

8 MR. WEINER: We're going by the original

9 plot plan. The alternative actually shows what it

10 would be like if I put the thirty foot front yard

11 setback, and it shows that I would have to move it

12 pretty back -- pretty far back and I would actually be

13 blocking the view of

14 Mr. Korte's view. I'm still going to be -- I would be

15 almost -- the rear of the house would be almost thirty

16 feet in front of the rear of his house, and I just --

17 and this way it's only approximately ten or fifteen

18 feet, just -- and so I'm trying to minimize the

19 blockage of the view that way.

20 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you.

21 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Saven. I have a

22 question, in your most expert opinion, as always.

23 What could potentially, should the variance be allowed

24 for the front yard setback, what could be potentially



1 built in the back now?

2 Could an addition be built on and then

3 he gets the best of both worlds?

4 MR. SAVEN: An addition can be placed on

5 the building provided it does not increase the

6 nonconformance of the building. Depending on how it's

7 set back, he may defeat the thirty-five foot setback

8 requirement, if that's what you're looking at. But he

9 also has to maintain the side yard setbacks.

10 MEMBER FISCHER: Right. My concern is

11 -- I think it's very noble to move on forward to-

12 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) Bear in mind,

13 just what I said earlier about this flood plane issue.

14 It is one he has to watch very carefully.

15 MR. WEINER: May I ask what the --

16 I would ask-

17 MEMBER FISCHER: Mr. Schultz.

18 MR. SCHULTZ: Just briefly, and to add

19 to Mr. Saven's comments, you can address as a

20 condition (inaudible) moving the building forward and

21 future building improvements at the rear as a

22 condition on a motion.

23 MR. WEINER: May I point out one thing?

24 I'm asking-



1 MEMBER FISCHER: (Interposing) Not at

2 this time.

3 MR. WEINER: I'm sorry.

4 MEMBER FISCHER: Let the board discuss

5 it. If there's any questions-

6 MR. WEINER: (Interposing) I'd just to

7 point out the issue-

8 MEMBER FISCHER: (Interposing) I just

9 -- if there's any questions then we will ask you to

10 address them. But my question was for

11 Mr. Saven. And I'll turn the table over to

12 Miss Gronachan.

13 MEMBER GRONACHAN: How did I get

14 involved?

15 MEMBER FISCHER: You were raising your

16 hand.

17 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Oh, okay. I don't

18 have a problem with these requests. I would like to

19 put the condition on, if this -- given the other board

20 members are also in approval with this agreement with

21 this, and the reason, as previously stated, is that

22 because of that flood plane back there, would be the

23 reason why I would approve the front yard setback.

24 The petitioner is requesting a minimum



1 size house. A thousand square feet is not a lot to

2 live in. This is an unusual lot shape, and certainly

3 with the age of this plot and the uniqueness to this

4 lot, this petitioner has demonstrated going beyond the

5 call of trying to minimize a negative impact on his

6 neighbors with -- by requesting what I foresee as

7 minimum variances and, therefore, I would be

8 supporting this request.

9 Thank you.

10 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

11 Member Gronachan. Member Krieger.

12 MEMBER KRIEGER: Another question, I'm

13 sorry. Regarding the water, the drainage, the

14 slopeage, if there are any issues because of the

15 grade, this would all be -- according to this, what

16 they're saying, that they're going to take care of the

17 grade?

18 MR. SAVEN: I think what you indicated

19 is what we discussed earlier on that. This is going

20 to be part of what's required by the design and

21 structural standards of the City. (Inaudible)

22 specifically the issue regarding the cupping or the

23 swaling or whatever it is that you're proposing for

24 that side to insure that that drainage is going to be



1 in line with what the existing conditions are of the

2 adjacent home. That is one of the things his engineer

3 is going to have to provide.

4 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you.

5 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other board members?

6 Member Shroyer.

7 MEMBER SHROYER: Just a couple quickies.

8 I agree with all the previous speakers. I do want to

9 emphasize as well that the issue of flooding, of

10 course, needs to be addressed during construction as

11 well as after, so -- quite often when we get into

12 moving dirt and moving everything else, a lot of the

13 thoughts of water movements remains a secondary issue,

14 and we have to make sure that our neighbors and

15 everybody is pleased with what goes on there as well.

16 If not, we'll be getting calls I'm sure concerning

17 that.

18 I am very much opposed to the

19 alternative plot plan, so I'm not even going to

20 address that any further.

21 And the first one I think is very

22 reasonable. I do like the idea that even with the

23 specified front yard setback you are pretty much in

24 line with the residences on either side of you. Even



1 though that may be a concern to some, I think that's

2 adequate with the streets being as narrow as they are

3 and the off-street parking being as cumbersome at

4 times as it would be on that street, I think this

5 should actually help improve it.

6 So basically I guess I'm saying I'm in

7 favor of these variances as well.

8 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

9 Member Shroyer.

10 Any other comments from board members?

11 MEMBER SANGHVI: I've been trying to

12 figure out, what is the kind of house you are going to

13 put there?

14 MR. WEINER: I'm probably going to put a

15 two-story house. I may be building it up. That would

16 be the idea. I'm not -- it's going to be a big box

17 with a garage in front of it. And the -- I don't have

18 definite plans yet. It will be a walkout basement,

19 but it's -- it's -- I built a bump out there because

20 I'd like a -- kind of a bay window in the back looking

21 over the lake because -- obviously to maximize the

22 lake view. I really don't have specific plans yet.

23 I'm hoping to do -- hoping to make it look nice and

24 make it be one of the nicer houses in the subdivision



1 anyways. And I don't want to put something too small

2 in there that can't be resold that's -- because I'm

3 hoping that this whole neighborhood renovates in the

4 future.

5 It was plotted basically for cottages in

6 the 1920s, and I -- just like

7 Walled Lake proper did, I think this area is ripe for

8 renovation.

9 And I don't want to make it too small so

10 that I -- so that the house is not one that when it

11 does renovate that it's, you know -- it's a brand-new

12 house and small.

13 And may I ask -- may I just point one --

14 go off subject for just a second? I'm asking for a

15 variance for the two percent variance. I won't be

16 able to put any additions on this once I build it

17 without another variance because I'd be over the

18 twenty-five percent.

19 MR. SUTTON: It's already aligned with

20 the back lot line. That's the point.

21 MR. WEINER: So I'm not planning on

22 putting -- you know, I'm thinking this is the maximum

23 that can -- that -- without another variance and

24 coming before this board again, I won't be able to do



1 any additions.

2 But I think it'll -- I'm looking for

3 nice lake views off the back of the house, and most of

4 the house is going to be off the back.

5 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

6 Member Sanghvi. Mr. Saven.

7 MR. SAVEN: Just as a point of interest,

8 so that everybody's clear in regards to the

9 habitability portion of this thing for the size of

10 the -- talking about for the addition that may go out

11 there, he is incorrect. In fact, he's already here

12 for a variance based upon the lot coverage. What can

13 be installed is a deck.

14 MEMBER FISCHER: With a sunroom?

15 MR. SAVEN: The deck's -- no sunroom. Open

16 unenclosed deck can be installed up to the point

17 (inaudible) what is required for the rear yard

18 setback. And -- but you got to bear in mind,

19 unenclosed. This is very important, so that there's

20 no misunderstanding here, no sunroom on top of the

21 deck, anything like that. It's just one of the

22 issues.

23 MR. SUTTON: We're aware of that.

24 MR. WEINER: The other thing I am aware



1 of, there is a twenty-five foot minimum requirement

2 from the lake, so I -- there's no way I can build any

3 closer, even for the deck. There's no way.

4 MR. SAVEN: Just watch very carefully

5 the flood issue.

6 MR. WEINER: I was planning on it. I

7 don't-

8 MR. SAVEN: (Interposing) I'm the one

9 who gets audited for the City.

10 MR. SUTTON: My engineer puts a seal on

11 it for a reason so that somebody's liable.

12 MR. WEINER: I'm not planning on the --

13 this is the 935. The 934 is the lake level. This lot

14 -- this line right here is 935 of what he was saying.

15 The front of the property is 949, and even if I went a

16 ten foot basement, from a --from ten foot deep down, I

17 should be -- the base of the property, I should still

18 be --

19 MR. SAVEN: That will be reviewed during

20 the course.

21 MEMBER FISCHER: You can talk about that

22 all you want when the plans come through, but we have

23 variances to look at tonight, so I'll open it to the

24 board again.



1 MEMBER KRIEGER: I'm sorry, one other

2 question. Regarding the number 935, 936, what is that

3 based from?

4 MR. SAVEN: The 934 is the elevation of

5 the flood plane for properties as plotted. The City

6 of Novi ordinance, 935, is what is required by virtue

7 of the ordinance to build one foot above the base

8 flood elevation. So the lowest elevation of that

9 house has to be at least at that particular point or

10 higher.

11 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other questions or

12 motions? Member Gronachan.

13 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In case number 06-021

14 filed by James Weiner at 2094 Austin, I move that the

15 request for the variances be approved based on the

16 discussion here this evening, particularly to my

17 comments in that the size of this house is minimum,

18 that the unusual lot shape, the unusual dimensions of

19 this lot, that the petitioner has indicated that

20 his -- he does not want to negatively impact his

21 neighbors and, therefore, has substantiated why these

22 variances are necessary.

23 MEMBER BAUER: Second.

24 MEMBER FISCHER: There is a motion and a



1 second. Any other discussion?

2 (No further discussion.)

3 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none,

4 Miss Marchioni, please call the roll.

5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?


7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer?


11 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger?


13 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


15 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?


17 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to

18 zero.

19 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been

20 granted. Good luck to you.

21 MR. SUTTON: Thank you.

22 MR. WEINER: Thank you.

23 MR. SUTTON: Have a good night.

24 MEMBER FISCHER: You, too.




2 CASE NUMBER 06-022

3 MEMBER FISCHER: We'll move along to

4 case number 06-022 filed by Glen Klocke. The

5 applicant is requesting three variances for the

6 construction of an addition at 44480 Eleven Mile Road.

7 A note to the board, that this was a

8 previous approval granted but the project has not

9 started, so the applicant is now requesting an

10 additional two foot front setback variance, but

11 basically the same other ones.

12 MR. KLOCKE: Yes.

13 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll ask you to be

14 sworn in by our secretary.

15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

16 affirm -- would you raise your right hand, please.

17 Do you swear or affirm that the

18 information that you're about to give in the matter

19 before you is the truth?

20 MR. KLOCKE: I do. The reason I'm

21 asking for the extra two feet here is so I can put a

22 handicap ramp inside the garage. That's the only

23 reason for the change in the application from '04 to

24 '06. Other than that, it's for the same reasons. We



1 just didn't think that this was going to come about

2 because we didn't think she'd ever be coming back to

3 my house to live, so -- for health reasons.

4 MEMBER FISCHER: In this case there

5 twenty-five notices mailed with zero approvals and

6 zero objections.

7 Is there anyone in the audience that

8 wishes to comment on this case? Please come down.

9 MR. McPHERSON: Hi. I'm Brian McPherson

10 from 25998 Petros Boulevard. We're the corner lot of

11 Cedar Spring Estates, corner of Eleven Mile and

12 Petros. We basically have the house that is directly

13 across from Eleven Mile from Klockes.

14 And just to be brief, we're in full

15 support of any of variances here, so -- that's one of

16 the nicer properties on Eleven Mile in that stretch,

17 so we are in support completely.

18 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. And anyone

19 else in the audience?

20 (No response.)

21 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll ask

22 the building department for any comments.

23 MR. SAVEN: I think everything else was

24 pretty much (inaudible).



1 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,

2 Mr. Saven.

3 And might I just say that -- especially

4 for Member Sanghvi, but all for the board, I think,

5 personally for me, the reason we brought this case

6 back was to renotice it in case any neighbors wanted

7 to make any comments. So I will be in full support of

8 a motion.

9 Member Gronachan.

10 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In case number 06-022

11 filed by Glen Klocke at 44480 Eleven Mile Road, given

12 the previous information in the case that was

13 presented to this board on December 7, 2004, as well

14 as the additional information added by the petitioner

15 for this evening, I feel that there's no other reason

16 but to approve these variances as requested.


18 MEMBER FISCHER: There's a motion and a

19 second. Any other discussion?

20 (No further discussion.)

21 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none,

22 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll.

23 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?




1 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger?


3 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


5 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?


7 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


9 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer?


11 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to

12 zero.

13 MEMBER FISCHER: I wish all cases were

14 that easy.

15 MR. KLOCKE: Thank you.

16 MEMBER FISCHER: Your variance has been

17 granted. Good luck to you.


19 CASE NUMBER 06-023

20 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll call case number

21 06-023 filed by Home Depot at

22 47950 Grand River. The applicant is requesting a

23 temporary use permit to allow a tent sale in a parking

24 lot at said address, Home depot. Applicant would like



1 to have outdoor tent and patio furniture from May 14

2 of 2006 to June 6, 2006.

3 And could you please raise your hand and

4 be sworn sworn in by our -- will both of you be

5 speaking?


7 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. If you both want

8 to both be sworn in.

9 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

10 affirm that the information that you're about to give

11 in the matter before you is the truth?



14 MEMBER FISCHER: Just state your names

15 and addresses and proceed.

16 MR. CAMPBELL: James Howard Campbell.

17 Address is 3270 South Milford Road, Milford, Michigan

18 48381.

19 MR. MENIER: Thanks. Mick Menier,

20 address 16434 Whitehead Drive, Lyndon, Michigan.

21 MEMBER FISCHER: And if you want to

22 proceed.

23 MR. CAMPBELL: We're requesting to have

24 a temporary outdoor tent patio sale from



1 May 14, 2006, to June 6, 2006. We're requesting this

2 to provide a larger selection at a greater value to

3 our customers. Due to the size of the building, we

4 are unable to fit the event inside of the four walls.

5 We're using this to offset the

6 Beck Road overpass being closed last spring. Our

7 business has suffered roughly 19 percent compared to

8 the previous year.

9 The tent size is approximately eighteen

10 hundred square feet, and will be located in the

11 parking lot with sides and is securable.

12 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay. In this case

13 there were sixteen notices mailed with zero approvals

14 and zero objections. However, on file we do have the

15 landlord of Westmarket Square as supporting and having

16 no objections to the tent.

17 Is there anyone in the audience who

18 wishes to comment on this case?

19 (No response.)

20 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, building

21 department?

22 MR. SAVEN: We've had previous approvals

23 for the tent to be erected within the site, in the

24 parking lot area. One of the things we always like to



1 monitor is the fact if we have any complaints or any

2 issues, that we would bring this up to the board.

3 During the time of the construction of the tent I

4 didn't receive any complaints regarding this issue.

5 Based on the (inaudible) the temporary use permits

6 which I could allow for, the fact that these things

7 are repeated and they keep coming back, it gets to the

8 point where what the ordinance says I can do and for

9 the approval process is now bringing this back before

10 the board because I'm limited as far as my approvals.

11 You're going to see this in actually both cases, this

12 case and the next case, to be honest.

13 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you.

14 Mr. Amolsch?

15 MR. AMOLSCH: Also, I want to remind the

16 petitioner there's no signage, such as banners or

17 anything like that allowed for this tent sale.


19 MR. CAMPBELL: Correct. I know that.

20 MEMBER FISCHER: I'll open it for board

21 discussion. Mr. Shroyer.

22 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you,

23 Mr. Chair. This is to one of the applicants, whoever

24 wants to address it.



1 Why -- and, of course, I'm familiar with

2 the tent sales. Unfortunately, spent quite a bit of

3 money at them.

4 Is there a reason why we are not using

5 Retail West as the side location as opposed to out in

6 the middle of the parking lot?

7 MR. CAMPBELL: Retail West is actually undeveloped.

8 It's actually just a sand soil.


10 MR. CAMPBELL: So if we were to put an

11 actual tenting right there, it's not a hard surface.

12 We would be able to secure the tent to the site;

13 however, the traffic would actually pose a safety

14 hazard because it's uneven ground and sandy, rocky,

15 and so forth.

16 MEMBER SHROYER: Okay. I didn't know if

17 there was a reason. It just seemed like that was an

18 obvious place to put a tent sale.

19 MR. CAMPBELL: That's quite a large

20 area.

21 MEMBER SHROYER: And plenty of room,

22 safety wouldn't be an issue having to do with egress

23 and ingress. But I understand if the topography is

24 bad, I guess if it rains just before erecting the tent



1 or something like that, it would create issues as

2 well.

3 That was the main question I had

4 regarding that. The other one was on the approval of

5 the owner of the plaza, and I see we have a letter on

6 file now.

7 That's all I have.

8 MEMBER FISCHER: Member Krieger.

9 MEMBER KRIEGER: I just have a question.

10 Are you going to have the Nascar (inaudible)?

11 MR. CAMPBELL: We have not been notified

12 if we're one of the locations that are actually going

13 to have it this year. They do not give us ample

14 (inaudible) notice.

15 MEMBER GRONACHAN: But if Jamie calls me

16 I'll let you know.

17 MEMBER FISCHER: Getting back to the

18 variance request, Member Sanghvi.

19 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you,

20 Mr. Chairman. If I may, I would like to make a motion

21 in case number 06-023 filed by the

22 Home Depot at 47950 Grand River, to grant the

23 applicant's request for a temporary use permit for the

24 dates mentioned in the application.




2 MEMBER FISCHER: There is a motion and a

3 second.

4 I notice in previous times that we have

5 mentioned the tent size in the motion. Do you suggest

6 we do that?

7 Would it be inappropriate to do so, Mr.

8 Schultz?

9 MR. SCHULTZ: It would not be

10 inappropriate, Mr. Chair. I think it would be a good

11 idea so everyone knows (inaudible).

12 MEMBER FISCHER: Then I would propose a

13 friendly amendment to include that it no larger than

14 forty by sixty as stated on the applicant's

15 application.


17 MEMBER SANGHVI: Amendment accepted.

18 MEMBER FISCHER: Any other discussion?

19 (No further discussion.)

20 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none,

21 Miss Marchioni, will you please call the roll.

22 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Sanghvi?


24 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Gronachan?




2 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Krieger?


4 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Shroyer?


6 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Bauer?


8 MS. MARCHIONI: Member Fischer?


10 MS. MARCHIONI: Motion passes six to

11 zero.

12 MEMBER FISCHER: Your application has

13 been granted.

14 You're up next.


16 CASE NUMBER 06-024

17 MEMBER FISHCER: I would like to call

18 case number 06-024 filed by Home Depot at 47950 Grand

19 River. The applicant is requesting a temporary use

20 permit to allow a sidewalk sale at said address.

21 If you could raise your hand and be

22 sworn in for this case.

23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Do you swear or

24 affirm that the information that you're about to give



1 in the matter before you is the truth?


3 MEMBER FISCHER: Names and addresses

4 again and proceed.

5 MR. CAMPBELL: Howard Campbell,

6 3270 South Milford Road, Milford, Michigan 48381.

7 MR. MENIER: Mick Menier, Lyndon,

8 Michigan; 16434 Whithead Drive, 48151.

9 MR. CAMPBELL: We are requesting at this

10 time to have a temporary sidewalk sale from May 15th

11 to September 6 to sell live goods and promotional

12 items. The items that would be out there would be

13 non-temporary. They'd be moved in every night. That

14 would be such as flower racks for color, either annual

15 or perenial, and also a variety of grills.

16 But, once again, it would all be

17 temporary and be able to be brought in every night at

18 the time of the building closing.

19 We turned in the location of the items

20 where it would actually be merchandised, which would

21 be on the north and south end of the exterior garden

22 gates, which is facing

23 Coney Island, which is the -- which is where the

24 majority of the traffic actually enter the building



1 during the summertime.

2 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you very much.

3 In this case there was sixty notices with zero

4 approvals and zero objections. Once again, I'll note

5 that Westmarket Square has no objection to this

6 request either.

7 Anyone in the audience that wishes to

8 comment on this case?

9 (No response.)

10 MEMBER FISCHER: Seeing none, I'll move

11 to the building department.

12 MR. AMOLSCH: Same comment about the

13 signage.

14 MEMBER FISCHER: When you first said --

15 I'm glad that you cleared it up -- live good was, I

16 thought it was cows and horses and livestock. Shows

17 how much I know about flowers. Board

18 members? Member Shroyer. MEMBER

19 SHROYER: Thank you,

20 Mr. Chair. Unlike the other one that I had no problem

21 with, this one I have a little bit of concern, and the

22 main thing is the length. Before we were talking

23 three weeks on the previous application. The history

24 items here, we're talking anywhere from one week to



1 five weeks as listed. What you're asking for this

2 time is four months, and to me that's not temporary.

3 That's an entire summer.

4 Apron merchandising basically causes a

5 congregation of shoppers on the sidewalk that may

6 spill into the parking lot, so I have some safety

7 concerns about that. As you have mentioned, it is

8 right at the main entrance to that area.

9 Specific sales for limited times with

10 restrictions requiring, say, a minimum of four foot or

11 six foot of unoccupied sidewalk buffer between the

12 merchandise and the parking lot I would be okay with.

13 Bottom line, safety of the pedestrians

14 is my concern.

15 I think we need more restrictions on the

16 request than what is currently listed if we're going

17 to pursue this any further. Length of timing -- I

18 mean length of time, and also in approved area for

19 merchandising to make sure that there's adequate

20 sidewalk available for the shoppers to view the

21 merchandise without spilling over into the parking

22 lot.

23 Thank you.

24 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you,



1 Member Shroyer. Member Gronachan.

2 MEMBER GRONACHAN: In the past didn't

3 the sidewalk sale coincide with your tent sale or

4 something, or am I confused?

5 MR. MENIER: No. We've only done one

6 tent sale in the past, and that was last year. That

7 was actually towards the fall (inaudible) garden

8 season.

9 What we've done is -- at that end of the

10 building-

11 MEMBER GRONACHAN: (Interposing) You

12 need to walk up to the microphone so they can hear

13 you.

14 MR. MENIER: Oh, I'm sorry. At that end

15 of the building, the -- there really --the parking lot

16 is actually across the

17 Leo's Coney Island. There's actually a drive-thru

18 between there, and the garden gate's off -- and,

19 actually, the sidewalk -- I don't have exact, but it's

20 at least 20 feet deep right there, so it wouldn't be

21 impeding too far into the road -- or parking lot,

22 sorry.

23 MEMBER GRONACHAN: So I guess my

24 question to you though is, why to have this for four



1 months?

2 What's the purpose of it? I don't think

3 you really covered the actual extent for the length?

4 MR. MENIER: We've done temporary use

5 permits before, like Memorial weekend, Fourth of July

6 and Labor Day weekend. What we're running into is

7 just the vast amount of customers who want to keep

8 their flowers out there all the time, so we turn it

9 over and keep it fresher and in a better selection.

10 And that way, you know, we (inaudible) for

11 merchandising, keep it on wheels so we can move it

12 back and forth.

13 MEMBER GRONACHAN: Great. But then

14 that's not a temporary use, and that's what I'm

15 concerned with as well, so -- at the way that you're

16 requesting for this -- it's late and I'm tired.

17 Sorry. Based on how you are asking for this, I would

18 not be able to support the length of time.

19 And I understand Member Shroyer's

20 concern for safety, but if it's not there to begin

21 with then we don't even have to worry about safety

22 issues.

23 I don't feel that this is a temporary

24 use request and, therefore, I will not be supporting



1 your request for this.

2 Thank you.

3 MEMBER FISCHER: Member Krieger?

4 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. Regarding in the

5 summertime, the garden area, do people -- what's the

6 percentage of people that load at that area?

7 MR. CAMPBELL: Generally what happens

8 is, as an entrance, when we put plants out there and

9 when people can actually see the actual color, you

10 actually see the customers, the -- obviously the

11 females go to the right of the store and the males go

12 to the left of the store when -- as they exit the

13 parking lot. Not a lot of loading actually happens

14 down there.

15 And as you can see -- if you turn this

16 back on -- this is actually the end of the actual

17 parking lot. This is actually the end of the parking

18 lot, and this is actually the Coney building right

19 here. There is no traffic that actually comes around

20 this parking lot other than delivery trucks, which

21 delivery trucks enter from this side of the building.

22 These spaces right there is actually a fire lane, so

23 there is no parking actually allowed here.

24 Other than that, there's really not a



1 lot of through traffic. The loading zone that we

2 actually have when people actually purchase large

3 quantities out of there actually happens right there,

4 which we usually have it coned off for designated

5 areas, that way the cars know where they can actually

6 go to, and it's actually a safety zone area which is

7 at -- I think it's actually twelve feet away from any

8 of the merchandise that would actually be there.

9 MEMBER KRIEGER: So what you're

10 proposing would increase the concentration of people

11 coming there, and you have loading, so that would be

12 my concern.

13 MR. CAMPBELL: Correct, ma'am. On the

14 right side of the garden gate is actually a covered

15 overhang which is where majority of the product

16 actually would be, the direction. And the loading

17 zone is actually on the other side of the garden gate,

18 which is where the beginning of the fire lane starts,

19 too. So there's no vehicles that can actually come up

20 in this location because it's actually a covered area,

21 which is located between our tool rental center, which

22 is the main entrance, and the garden gate which, with

23 the overhang, there's actually pillars to where people

24 cannot actually drive their cars up in there.



1 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you.

2 MEMBER FISCHER: Member Sanghvi?

3 MEMBER SANGHVI: Thank you,

4 Mr. Chairman. Like everybody else, I have a concern

5 with the period you want this permit for. And what

6 you are really doing by what you are requesting is

7 increasing the size of your store for four months.

8 It's not a sale event really. If it was an event for

9 a specified period of time I would have no problem in

10 helping and assisting, but this way if -- you heard

11 what everybody said, it is not going to go.

12 What can you live with? That is my

13 question.

14 MR. CAMPBELL: What can we live with?

15 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. I don't think you

16 were actually prepared this number of four months

17 (inaudible).

18 MR. CAMPBELL: We can actually resubmit

19 it to where-

20 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Interposing) You're

21 not going to get a temporary use permit for four

22 months from this board, from what I hear.

23 MR. CAMPBELL: We can actually resubmit

24 it to where we can shorten the time frame down to



1 where it's two days prior to a weekend holiday and two

2 days after that to actually be able to sell through

3 what we actually bring in.

4 MEMBER SANGHVI: Would be specific

5 dates?

6 MR. CAMPBELL: Correct. I can resubmit

7 it with specific dates.

8 MEMBER FISCHER: You'd have to go back,

9 talk to those guys and come back to us.

10 MR. CAMPBELL: Well, we already know

11 what holidays, I don't have a calendar in front of me

12 to-

13 MEMBER SANGHVI: (Interposing) I think

14 you want to think again and maybe you want to come

15 back again and tell us.

16 MR. CAMPBELL: Correct, for this one.

17 MEMBER SANGHVI: This is not going to

18 fly.


20 MR. SAVEN: As a follow-up,

21 Mr. Sanghvi had indicated for the present board

22 members, it might behoove you to do a layout of the

23 area so that they could see where the sidewalk's at,

24 so when they go out there they can actually see what



1 they're looking at for allowing this temporary use to

2 take place. I think that would be to your advantage,

3 and have your days that you're looking at.

4 The only reason why I couldn't do the

5 temporary again is the fact I brought them before the

6 board when Frank Brennan was here. Frank loves Home

7 Depot.

8 The bottom line is, we have to make sure

9 the safety aspect was there when we did this. The

10 size of the tiers that you had for the plants and

11 how -- where it was at at the wall versus how much it

12 projected out, this is what the board's going to want

13 to see, and for that length of wall so you're not

14 obstructing the path of travel.

15 MEMBER BAUER: Is it tabled then till

16 next month?


18 MEMBER FISCHER: Agreed with you guys as

19 well?


21 MEMBER FISCHER: All right. I'll

22 entertain a motion to table this case to next month.

23 MEMBER SANGHVI: So moved.




1 MEMBER SHROYER: Ready for discussion?

2 MEMBER FISCHER: Did you have anything

3 that you wanted -- or do you want to wait till next

4 month?

5 MEMBER SHROYER: I'm fine with the

6 motion. I just want that (inaudible).

7 MEMBER FISCHER: Okay, thanks. All in

8 favor, say aye.

9 (Vote taken.)

10 MEMBER FISCHER: Motion passes to table

11 to April.

12 Mr. Shroyer, if you wanted to give more

13 feedback.

14 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. I'm not

15 sure you fully understood what Mr. Saven was talking

16 about. We're a very visual board, and if you took

17 your twenty foot apron sidewalk and even laid a string

18 of tape or something along the line, this is how far

19 the merchandise would come out, this is the buffer

20 between the end of the merchandise and the traffic

21 flow, or put up some concrete blocks with the

22 temporary walls, anything like that. I'm there every

23 week, so I pretty much understand it. And I

24 understand the flowers and everything, that's very



1 important. It's the area that's more at the entrance

2 coming in where you're extending that out that I'm

3 more concerned about than the rear part of the

4 building.

5 MR. CAMPBELL: Road versus sidewalk.


7 MR. CAMPBELL: I understand that.

8 MEMBER FISCHER: Thank you. And we look

9 forward to seeing you next month.

10 MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you.

11 MEMBER FISCHER: That concludes our

12 cases.

13 I would like to take a minute and

14 introduce and -- well, reintroduce and welcome Sarah

15 Marchioni for helping us. She did give us our ZBA

16 caps. And I'll entertain a motion to have Cindy wear

17 the cap through the rest of the year, if that's

18 applicable. Okay, apparently not.

19 I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.

20 All in favor in adjourning say aye.

21 (Vote taken.)

22 MEMBER FISCHER: The meeting hereby

23 stands adjourned.

24 (The meeting was concluded at



1 10:31 p.m.)

2 - - -


























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 set

7 forth, and I do further certify that the foregoing

8 transcript, consisting of one hundred seventy (170)

9 typewritten pages, is a true and correct transcript of my

10 said stenograph notes.



13 -------------------------

Cheryl L. James, CSR-5786


15 --------------