|View Agenda for this meeting
View Action Summary for this meeting
REGULAR MEETING - ZONING BOARD
Proceedings had and testimony taken in the matters of the ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, at City of Novi, 45175 West Ten Mile Road, Novi, Michigan, Tuesday, July 8, 2008.
1 Novi, Michigan
2 Tuesday, July 8, 2008
3 7:00 p.m.
4 - - - - - -
5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I would like to
6 call to order the Tuesday, July 8th, meeting
7 of the Zoning Board of Appeals for the City
8 of Novi.
9 Ms. Working, will you please call the
11 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer?
12 MEMBER BAUER: Present.
13 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi?
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Absent excused.
15 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer?
16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Absent excused
17 as well.
18 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye, present.
20 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam?
21 MEMBER GHANNAM: Present.
22 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger?
23 MEMBER KRIEGER: Present.
24 MS. WORKING: Member Wrobel?
1 MEMBER WROBEL: Present.
2 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe?
3 MEMBER IBE: Present.
4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: If we can please
5 have Member Bauer please lead us in the
6 Pledge of Allegiance.
7 BOARD MEMBERS: I pledge allegiance to
8 the flag of the United States of America and
9 to the Republic for which it stands, one
10 nation under God indivisible with liberty
11 and justice for all.
12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you,
13 Member Bauer.
14 We do have a quorum present here
15 tonight so the meeting is now in session.
16 The rules of conduct for the City of Novi
17 Zoning Board of Appeals can be found in the
18 back on the agenda and also on the City of
19 Novi's website, but I will ask that
20 everybody please turn off their cell phones
21 and pagers.
22 The Zoning Board of Appeals is a
23 hearing board empowered by the Novi City
24 Charter to hear appeals seeking variances
1 from the application of the Novi Zoning
2 Ordinance. It takes a vote of at least four
3 members to approve a variance request and a
4 vote of the majority present to deny our
6 Today we do have six members, so a
7 full Board is not present. And since at
8 least four votes are required, those
9 Petitioners who wish to table their request
10 until the next meeting or when a full Board
11 is present may do so now. Is there anyone
12 interested in doing that?
13 Seeing none, we will move on to the
14 approval of the agenda. Are there any
16 MS. WORKING: Mr. Chair?
17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes.
18 MS. WORKING: I would like to add
19 under other matters ZBA07-047 for 1339 East
20 Lake Road. You have the request for an
21 extension for 90 days to the variance
22 approval previously granted in your file
23 folder this evening.
24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Let's go ahead
1 and make that number two.
2 MS. WORKING: Under other matters,
4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Then we'll move
5 the Rules of Procedure to the last one.
6 MS. WORKING: Okay.
7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Then under three
8 I would like to discuss the City Council's
9 decision or at least make the Board aware of
10 the City Council's decision regarding that
11 exact topic, the pulling the permit how long
12 after a variance. That will be number
14 And then number four will be Rules of
16 Any other changes?
17 MS. WORKING: Not that I am aware of.
18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Then I will --
19 MEMBER WROBEL: Motion to approve the
20 amended agenda.
21 MEMBER BAUER: Second.
22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All in favor say
24 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye.
1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay, we have an
2 agenda. On the agenda is the approval of
3 the minutes from June of 2008. Are there
4 any amendments to the minutes? Or is there
5 a motion to approve?
6 MEMBER BAUER: Move to approve.
7 MEMBER GHANNAM: Second.
8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All in favor?
9 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye.
10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All right. So,
11 both have been approved.
12 We'll move to the public remarks
13 portion of the meeting and I will ask anyone
14 that wants to make a comment related not to
15 a case on the agenda tonight to come
16 forward. All comments related to a case on
17 the agenda should be held until that case is
18 called. However, if anyone else wishes to
19 address the Board at this time they may.
20 Seeing none, I will close the public
21 remark section and move to our first case.
22 But it appears that no one is present until
23 what case number?
24 MS. WORKING: Case number three or
1 item number three. Case number: 08-027.
2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Point of order,
3 I don't need to call the cases out loud we
4 can skip right to that?
5 MS. KUDLA: Correct.
7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. Then
8 we'll call case number: 08-027 filed by
9 Donna Skelcy of 301 Duana. The Board
10 Members will remember this was tabled from
11 6-10-2008. The Petitioner is requesting a
12 variance from the strict requirement of the
13 Zoning Ordinance which prohibits fences on
14 lots of record in the front yard setback.
15 MS. KUDLA: Since the lasting meeting
16 our office had an opportunity to look at the
17 section of the Ordinance more closely and
18 come to the determination that it's not
19 required for the ZBA to make the
20 determination on whether the fence is
21 decorative or not, it's the City's place to
22 make that interpretation first before
23 bringing something like this before the ZBA.
24 At this point the Applicant did visit
1 with the city landscape architect as
2 suggested and he has issued a memo
3 indicating that in his opinion it is a
4 decorative fence. So, given that the City
5 has now determined it's a decorative fence,
6 there is no need for us or the ZBA to make a
7 determination and the case can just be
8 withdrawn, and she is fine with the fence as
9 is based on the memo dated June 11th, 2008.
10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Perfect. Do we
11 need any formal motion from the Board or can
12 we move on?
13 MS. KUDLA: We can just withdraw the
15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. For the
16 Board to motion to withdraw the case?
17 MS. KUDLA: Yes.
18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Based on the
19 City's determination of it being a
20 decorative fence. I'll make that motion.
21 MEMBER BAUER: Second.
22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Bauer
23 seconded that motion.
24 If you can call the roll.
1 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer?
2 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
3 MS. WORKING: Member Fischer?
4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
5 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam?
6 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes.
7 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger?
8 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes.
9 MS. WORKING: Member Wrobel?
10 MEMBER WROBEL: Yes.
11 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe?
12 MEMBER IBE: Yes.
13 MS. WORKING: Motion to withdraw the
14 case from consideration of the Board passes
16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It turns out
17 that we don't have just jurisdiction over
18 it. The City landscape architect basically
19 said it fits within the Ordinance if I am
20 correct, so you should be all set, I
22 MS. KUDLA: That's correct.
23 MS. SKELCY: Thank you. It was an
24 interesting process.
1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We aim to
2 please. All right.
4 I will go ahead and jump back to case
5 number one on the agenda. Case number:
6 08-019 filed by RMJ Development for 25280
7 Seeley Road. Is that Petitioner present?
9 All right. Anthony Schmitt of
10 LaKritz-Weber & Company for Providence Park
11 Village. Come forward. So, we will go
12 ahead and call case number: 08-026 filed by
13 Anthony Schmitt of Lakritz-Weber & Company
14 for Providence Park Village located at 47601
15 Grand River Avenue.
16 Board Members will remember this was
17 tabled from the June 10th, 2008 meeting.
18 The Applicant is requesting one 112 square
19 foot sign variance for the placement of a
20 128 square foot double sided real estate
21 sign to be located at Providence Hospital
22 property at stated address.
23 MEMBER KRIEGER: Mr. Chair, I need to
24 recuse myself.
1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. I will
2 make a motion to allow Member Krieger to
3 recuse herself due to her working for
5 MEMBER BAUER: Second.
6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All in favor say
8 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye.
9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: At this time if
10 you can raise your hand and be sworn in for
11 us. Will you please raise your hand and
12 swear to tell the truth in case number:
14 MR. SCHUCHMAN: I swear to tell the
15 truth. I am not Anthony Schmitt. I am Gabe
17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I was just going
18 to say give your name and address and
19 proceed with presenting your case.
20 MR. SCHUCHMAN: I didn't want to start
21 off on a bad foot. My name is a Gabriel
22 Schuchman. LaKritz-Weber address is 29100
23 Northwestern Highway, Suite 240, Southfield,
24 Michigan 48034.
1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Go ahead and
2 proceed with any facts of the case you want
3 to present to the Board.
4 MR. SCHUCHMAN: We are the marketing
5 company, the retail leasing company for the
6 subject property. This is really the
7 ancillary phase is probably the best
8 description for the Providence Park
9 Development. There is only two phases to
10 the project. The hotel Staybridge Suites,
11 which has already been constructed. And
12 then we are representing the leasing for the
13 remainder of the property which would
14 encompass office, retail sources and other
15 commercial components.
16 Currently the hotel is up and
17 constructed. The developer is working with
18 Providence Hospital, Whitehall Development.
19 We're in the midst of going through the site
20 planning process on it. What we're asking
21 the ZBA for today is the current sign is
22 allotted at least a four by four sign.
23 Given the fact that the property because is
24 not a hundred percent entitled yet, we're
1 not in the construction. We expect that to
2 take place over the next few months. We are
3 hoping to keep the development sign up at
4 this time as opposed to having to take it
5 down and then put it back up the same sign
6 in a few months. That's our request at this
8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: At this time is
9 there anyone in the audience that wishes to
10 make comment on this case? Seeing none, I
11 will read the correspondence.
12 I will let the Board know that in this
13 case there were 60 notices mailed and zero
14 approvals and zero objections.
15 Anyone from the Building Department?
16 MR. AMOLSCH: No comment, sir.
17 MR. FOX: City staff, we are not in
18 support of this particular request. As far
19 as the construction identification sign goes
20 they are allowed to be a 64 square foot sign
21 with a stipulation that once the first C of
22 O has been issued they have to take it down
23 and then it can be a real estate, but not a
24 construction identification sign per the
2 They are requesting a 112 square foot
3 sign versus a 64. The original sign that
4 was up was a two-sided sign the same length,
5 but it was not split in that particular
6 fashion. A double sided sign is considered
7 one sign as long as the signs are within two
8 feet of each other. Once you spread them
9 apart they become two separate signs which
10 is why you are so much larger in square
11 footage in this particular case.
12 Since there is already a C of 0 issued
13 we're considering it to be a real estate
14 only sign which is a four by four sign. We
15 don't believe that it does substantial
16 justice to the adjoining properties since
17 there is a property across the street
18 advertising with a four by four sign in the
19 same conditions. And that's it.
20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very
21 much. And I will go ahead and open it up
22 for Board discussion and comments. Member
24 MEMBER WROBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
1 First off as we know, this property has not
2 yet received the site plan approval from the
3 Planning Commission, therefore, in my
4 opinion this is premature to go ahead and
5 ask for a larger sign. Once that is
6 approved I think at that time would be more
7 appropriate to come in and ask for a larger
8 sign than is allowed at this time.
9 Therefore, I cannot support this
10 request. Thank you.
11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you,
12 Member Wrobel.
13 Other Board Members? Member Bauer?
14 MEMBER BAUER: I too will have to
15 agree with the previous speaker. It's too
16 early to propose that sign.
17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other Board
18 Member comments?
19 MEMBER GHANNAM: I just have a
21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Absolutely.
22 Member Ghannam?
23 MEMBER GHANNAM: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
24 From the City's perspective once a C of F is
1 issued they can have a sign no larger than
2 16 square foot, is that your position?
3 MR. FOX: That is correct. You are
4 allowed a construction identification sign
5 only up until the first C of O is issued for
6 that particular property. After that they
7 are allowed a real estate sign up to 16
8 square feet.
9 MEMBER GHANNAM: And the proposed sign
10 that you see is?
11 MR. FOX: It is an eight by eight.
12 They are calling it a construction
13 identification sign, and since it has two
14 sides spread apart it's actually 64 square
15 feet per side.
16 MR. SCHUCHMAN: A 112 square feet.
17 MEMBER GHANNAM: Do you know, how,
18 sir, that the Petitioner qualifies under our
19 Ordinance to get the sign approved?
20 MR. SCHUCHMAN: From our perspective
21 -- and I stand to be corrected.
22 MEMBER GHANNAM: Absolutely.
23 MR. SCHUCHMAN: This is because this
24 project is being built in phases, so even
1 though we're right now working on the
2 entitlement process for this next phase, we
3 still view this as an active construction
4 site and we are marketing it as an active
5 construction site. With regards to right
6 now there is two phases to the sign as per
7 the Ordinance, but as Mr. Fox pointed it out
8 to us because it is separated more than two
9 feet comes to 128 square feet. Right now I
10 brought a few photos with me.
11 One of the faces is currently blocked
12 by a tree. We would have no problem just
13 making it a one face sign to reducing it
14 down so it could be the correct sign size
15 for a construction sign. If you move it any
16 closer to 64 square feet we could do that if
17 we have the correct mathematics. That is
18 from our perspective. This is an active
19 construction site. That's how we are trying
20 to get tenants to come to this project.
21 There is things happening. The hotel is
22 opening up. We are trying to keep the
23 synergy and energy at this project.
24 And I think given the distance off the
1 road that the property sits, reducing it
2 just down to a leasing sign is enough to
3 create a really hardship for the project and
4 future leasing of it. That's from just a
5 marketing perspective.
6 MEMBER GHANNAM: In the meantime
7 because there has been a C of O issued and
8 you are only entitled to a 16 square foot
9 real estate sign, my question is what is the
10 practical difficulty?
11 MR. SCHUCHMAN: The practical
12 difficulty is 60 square feet is a difficult
13 sign for people to observe, potential
14 tenants, just the distance that it sits off
15 the road, that's our practical difficulty.
16 People just will notice a vacant land and
17 they won't notice what's going on to see
18 that there is future opportunity for them to
19 be here in the community of Novi. And that
20 is what our difficulty is.
21 MEMBER GHANNAM: Thank you. I don't
22 have any other questions.
23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you,
24 Member Ghannam.
1 Member Ibe?
2 MEMBER IBE: Just real quickly.
3 Member Wrobel had mentioned something about
4 the Planning Committee. Are you aware how
5 soon that you might be before the Planning
6 Committee to get the approval that you might
8 MR. SCHUCHMAN: I can't speak
9 specifically. Better than myself with
10 regards to where the project is. My
11 understanding is that they have had a
12 plethora of meetings talking about this
13 project with Providence, with Whitehall to
14 get the point of getting this project
15 entitled. Our understanding is it's not a
16 question of years, but a question of a few
17 months of getting the project entitled. It
18 seems that it's a project that everyone
19 wants to see. That's my understanding. I
20 couldn't speak to specific dates and times.
21 MEMBER IBE: Is there anyone from the
22 City or Planning that can answer that
23 question for me?
24 MR. FOX: There is nobody here from
1 the Planning Department that can answer that
2 at this time.
3 MEMBER IBE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you.
5 Member Wrobel?
6 MEMBER WROBEL: Just because it comes
7 before the Planning Commission there is no
8 guarantee that the Planning Commission is
9 going to recommend it or proceed with what
10 the applicant proposes. So, that's another
11 thing to keep in mind.
12 MR. SCHUCHMAN: Just a thought if I
13 could interrupt just a second. If there is
14 a consideration that this project may take
15 two years for site plan approval, if we have
16 to reappear again in front of the Zoning
17 Board two or three months, a number of
18 months that you folks feel comfortable with
19 to reevaluate if the sign is still
20 appropriate, we would be willing to do that.
21 And maybe at that point we might be in a
22 better situation of how close we are to
23 actually reaching the point where maybe
24 we're at that point by right, have the right
1 to put up a construction sign. So, that's
2 something else that we would be more than
3 happy to do.
4 And obviously we will be more than
5 happy to take down one of the faces to at
6 least reach what the requirements are for
7 the City of Novi.
8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other Board
9 Members? I too, this early in the game
10 don't feel comfortable approving a sign this
11 large. The two faces are just too much. It
12 takes eight times of what is allowed by the
13 Ordinance. If the Petitioner wanted to come
14 back at some other time and reapply with
15 something I think this Board would be more
16 amicable with, I think that would be another
18 But as far as providing synergies and
19 this and that, the Zoning Board has already
20 approved several Providence Park signs.
21 Everyone knows it's coming along. This
22 whole entire project, all the phases. So, I
23 too am going to be forced to deny this
1 So, if there is no other discussion or
2 if someone would care to make a motion?
3 Member Ibe?
4 MEMBER IBE: I move that in the case
5 of -- I move that the Board deny the use
6 variance in the case number: 08-026 filed
7 by Anthony Schmitt for Providence Park
8 Village Center because the Petitioner has
9 not established a necessary hardship and the
10 Petitioner has not demonstrated that
11 granting the variance will impact the
12 adjacent properties next to it.
13 And also that the request made by the
14 Petitioner at this time is premature in
15 light of the discussions raised by the Board
16 Members. Accordingly, I would move that the
17 request be denied at this time.
18 MEMBER BAUER: Second the motion.
19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: If I could just
20 say or ask you to amend the motion to say
21 that the Board used practical difficulty as
22 its determination in this matter.
23 MEMBER IBE: That's fine.
24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And the seconder
2 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We have a motion
4 and a second by Member Bauer. If you could
5 please call the roll.
6 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer?
7 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
8 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
10 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam?
11 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes.
12 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger is
14 Member Wrobel?
15 MEMBER WROBEL: Yes.
16 MS. WORKING: Motion to deny passes
18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: At this time the
19 variance has been denied.
20 MR. SCHUCHMAN: Thank you. Can I ask
21 you a quick question?
22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We might be able
23 to answer it.
24 MR. SCHUCHMAN: You made a statement
1 that maybe we could consider a different
2 size of sign. Would that be the leasing
3 sign only or would you want to take a look
4 at a few different proposals?
5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I was going to
6 say basically that you can look at what's
7 allowed by Ordinance and if you still didn't
8 feel that that was what you needed and you
9 felt that there was a practical difficulty
10 still that you needed above that square
11 feet, that you could be reapply to the
12 Zoning Board with a different sign.
13 MR. SCHUCHMAN: Thank you.
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Welcome back,
15 Member Krieger.
17 I'll go back to case number one,
18 RMJ Development. Is that Petitioner here at
19 this time?
20 MR. COUCH: Yes.
21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We'll go ahead
22 and call case number: 08-019 filed by RMJ
23 Development for 25280 Seeley Road. As Board
24 Members may have remembered this case was
1 tabled from the June 2008 meeting. Donny
2 Couch is representing the development and is
3 requesting a variance to continue the
4 nonconforming use of outdoor storage for
5 building materials, contractor's equipment
6 and supplies and to park RMJ Development
7 vehicles on the property located at said
8 address. The property is zoned I-1 and
9 located north of Grand River and east of
10 Seeley Road.
11 And you were sworn in at the last
12 meeting as I remember.
13 MR. COUCH: Yes.
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And you are
15 still under oath. Go ahead and proceed with
16 any comments.
17 MR. COUCH: Just in regards to the
18 last meeting we were at a standstill because
19 I think you guys were trying to find out
20 whether it was zoned before and if it was
21 right after the previous tenant closed down
22 and it was always for lease. I believe that
23 was the last thing we left at, and you guys
24 were going back to your records to check
1 according to that, I believe.
2 And I think I had Jim Harrigan (ph)
3 from Signature Associates forward something
4 to the City of Novi or Robin Working's
5 e-mail. Is that right, Robin?
6 MS. WORKING: The Board Members have
7 it in their packet.
8 MR. COUCH: Okay.
9 MS. WORKING: Either from this month
10 or last month. That is correct.
11 MR. COUCH: Stating that the building
12 was, they always have been trying to lease
13 it since the other occupants moved out.
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All right.
15 Anything else?
16 MR. COUCH: No.
17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: At this time I
18 will ask the Board Secretary to read any
19 correspondence into the record.
20 MEMBER KRIEGER: For case number:
21 ZBA-08-019 there are no changes. Twenty-one
22 notices mailed and zero approvals and zero
24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, Madam
2 Is there anyone in the audience that
3 wishes to make a comment on this case?
4 Seeing none, we'll close the public comments
5 and ask the Building Department and City for
6 their comments.
7 MS. KUDLA: We looked at the issue and
8 the issue with the abandonment. We did
9 receive and we reviewed the letter that was
10 forwarded indicating that the property owner
11 had continued leasing. What would be before
12 the Board tonight would be first to look at
13 that letter and determine whether or not in
14 your opinion that's enough evidence to
15 indicate that the use was not abandoned.
16 In the event that you determine that
17 it was abandoned, then the matter is in
18 front of you as a use variance and you have
19 to consider the undue hardship standard as
20 to whether or not to grant the use variance
21 to continue to use storage outside in an I-1
23 If you do decide that it is not
24 abandoned, then you go back to the original
1 consideration of whether the use is -- in
2 the event that you determine that the use is
3 not abandoned, the original consideration
4 was whether or not the use, the
5 nonconforming use of the same or no
6 classification provided, that the Board of
7 appeals make a finding that the proposed use
8 is equally appropriate or more appropriate.
9 So, that would be in the event you
10 find it was not abandoned. What you need to
11 consider is whether the use that is proposed
12 is equally appropriate or more appropriate
13 in the district than the existing
14 nonconforming use. So, you would not be
15 looking at standards such as practical
16 difficulty or undue hardship. You are just
17 trying to determine whether the use is
18 equally appropriate or more appropriate.
19 In the event if you find the use is
20 abandoned and we're considering use
21 variance, then you are back to the undue
22 hardship standard to consider.
23 So, the first issue to consider is
24 whether or not the Board based on the
1 evidence presented thinks the use was
2 abandoned or not abandoned.
3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very
4 much. Anyone else from the City?
5 MR. FOX: I think we are all set.
6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Then I will open
7 it up for Board comments. Member Ghannam?
8 MEMBER GHANNAM: I just have a
9 question for our counsel. Do we have to make
10 that discussion first or make that finding
11 first before we make a motion?
12 MS. KUDLA: Correct. The abandonment
13 issue would have to be addressed first
14 before you can move on to whatever the
15 second question would be depending on what
16 that would be.
17 MEMBER GHANNAM: What would you
18 require or suggest? That we make a formal
19 motion on that?
20 MS. KUDLA: Correct.
21 MEMBER GHANNAM: Make that decision
22 and then move on to step two?
23 MS. KUDLA: Yes.
24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other Board
1 Members have any questions at this time?
2 Can you go one more time?
3 MS. KUDLA: Say that again?
4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Can you go one
5 more time through that for us?
6 MS. KUDLA: Sure.
7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Kind of slower.
8 MS. KUDLA: The first thing you need
9 to consider is whether the use has been
10 abandoned. The abandonment standard is the
11 necessary elements of abandonment are intent
12 or some act or omission on the part of the
13 owner or holder that clearly manifest the
14 voluntary decision to abandon. The
15 abandonment of the nonconforming use and a
16 consequent termination of any legal right
17 thereto results from the concurrence of
18 facts, circumstances and intention of the
19 owner of the premises or other person
20 entitled to the use.
21 So, what you first need to consider is
22 whether in having the building vacant for an
23 amount of time longer than 18 months
24 resulted in an abandonment, but, in addition
1 to the time period you also have to consider
2 at the same time the intent of the property
3 owner. And some evidence of the intent of
4 the property owner to continue that use was
5 presented in the form of a letter indicating
6 that marketing of that building for the same
7 use continued from the time that the
8 building was vacated until the present time.
9 So, first, you would need to consider
10 whether there was or was not abandonment of
11 the use. In the event that you determine
12 there was abandonment of the use, then what
13 the Petitioner would be seeking and what has
14 also been noticed as of a potential use
15 variance is to permit outside storage in an
16 I-1 district.
17 In the event that you find that the
18 use was abandoned, then you need to consider
19 the undue hardship standards of a use
21 In the event that you find the use was
22 not abandoned, you need to go back to the
23 standard that we were originally discussing
24 which is not a practical difficulty or undue
1 hardship, but just whether or not the Board
2 finds that the proposed use is equally
3 appropriate or more appropriate to the
4 district and the existing conforming use --
5 existing nonconforming use, I should say.
6 MS. WORKING: Nonconforming use?
7 MS. KUDLA: Yes.
8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. That time
9 it flowed a little bit better for me. So, I
10 appreciate you going through that again on
11 that second time.
12 MS. KUDLA: No problem.
13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, it looks
14 like as Member Ghannam had pointed out, our
15 first decision is to basically decide if
16 this property was abandoned or not
17 abandoned. So, I will open up comments at
18 this time for anyone who wants to make a
19 comment regarding that particular piece of
20 the case. Member Bauer?
21 MEMBER BAUER: From all the
22 correspondence and everything, there is no
23 proof that it was abandoned by the
1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Ibe?
2 MEMBER IBE: I will concur with the
3 last Board Member because based on the
4 elements on what it would need to determine
5 abandonment, the intent of the previous
6 owner I think carries more weight here. And
7 the letter written tells us that they have
8 been trying to market this property
9 consistently. And the parties who abandoned
10 that continued in that light. So, it is in
11 my opinion of the facts as presented that
12 there was no abandonment in this case.
13 Thank you, Mr. Chair.
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. I
15 would very much tend to agree, the evidence
16 that was presented shows an intent to not
17 abandon the property. So, if someone wants
18 to make a motion to that effect. I see a
19 lot of head nodding. Member Ibe?
20 MEMBER IBE: I move that the Board
21 find that the previous owner did not abandon
22 the variance that was previously granted.
23 MS. KUDLA: The existing.
24 MEMBER IBE: The existing
1 nonconforming use. Thank you very much.
2 MS. KUDLA: You are welcome.
3 MEMBER IBE: The existing
4 nonconforming use of the property as was
5 indicated in the document before us. The
6 facts point to a great intent of
7 non-abandonment, thus I would move that the
8 Board rule that the property was not
10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I will second
11 that motion. There is a motion by Member
12 Ibe and a motion by myself.
13 If you could please call the roll on
14 that motion.
15 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe?
16 MEMBER IBE: Yes.
17 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
19 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam?
20 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes.
21 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger?
22 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes.
23 MS. WORKING: Member Wrobel?
24 MEMBER WROBEL: Yes.
1 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer?
2 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Now, the Board
4 has before us, as I understand it, basically
5 whether or not we find this proposed use
6 equally as appropriate as the prior use, the
7 proposed use by this applicant.
8 MS. KUDLA: Equally or more
10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Equally or more
12 MS. KUDLA: Yes.
13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Of course. Any
15 MEMBER IBE: I guess it's one or the
17 MEMBER GHANNAM: I was going to ask a
18 question. How would you address that
19 particular question that we have to rule on?
20 MR. COUCH: If I can brief your memory
21 of the surrounding areas of the property.
22 Across the street is fuel refinery where
23 trucks are 24/7 trucking, gas in and out all
24 night long onto Grand River. It's directly
1 across the street.
2 Kitty-corner to that property there is
3 a U-Haul dealership with big U-Haul trucks
4 parked out front. Behind us, the adjacent
5 property there is multi-tenant spaces across
6 the field and there are cube vans parked
7 back there. They have their own cube vans.
8 There are vehicles parked back there all the
10 If you go to the south of the
11 property, there is a poured wall company and
12 a foundation company that has been there for
13 40 years and they have cranes and excavators
14 parked in there for the last 30 years.
15 You go two more lots down from that or
16 three more down there is an RBC Industries,
17 I believe it's called. It's a machine and
18 tool factory. They are open at 5:00 in the
19 morning and they are open until 10:00 p.m.
20 Across the street from that you have
21 all multi-tenant spaces where there are
22 semis back in the loading docks several
23 hours of the day. So, my use of this
24 property is not going to be for selling to
1 the public or manufacturing products or
2 anything like that. It's going to be for my
3 personal company vehicles to maybe pull my
4 trucks in here if they're not on the job,
5 which hopefully business will be good and
6 we'll be on the job. So, just to park there
7 and have a nice shop.
8 There is a nice home in the front.
9 We're going to beautify the home in the
10 front and we're also intending to put a
11 privacy fence all the way around the whole
12 chain link fence that exist. We'll go eight
13 feet tall. You won't even be able to see
14 into our yard. We will do a natural earth
15 tone color. Stain the fence so that it
16 probably will be less of an eye sore than
17 anything around the whole area.
18 MEMBER GHANNAM: If we approve this,
19 would you agree with the requirement that
20 everything would have to have to be stored
21 within the fenced or gated area of your
23 MR. COUCH: Yes. It's a three acre
24 yard. If I fill that up I am doing pretty
2 MEMBER GHANNAM: I got one question
3 for our counsel. If we also approve this
4 would this be indefinite, this variance?
5 MS. KUDLA: It will be, yes. It runs
6 with the land.
7 MR. COUCH: I also want to make this
8 more comfortable. I have been around the
9 city of Novi. I have done a lot of work in
10 the City of Novi at Twelve and Haggerty
11 areas and Beck west of North Corporate Park.
12 So, Robin knows me as well as CJ and Maureen
13 and Al know me very well. I comply with all
14 the rules they have had over the last six
15 years very well.
16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, sir.
17 We should bring character witnesses in.
18 Then I could just go off that.
19 I appreciate the answer regarding the
20 surrounding community, but it appears that
21 what we are really looking at is how your
22 use will compare to the prior use. It being
23 equally appropriate or more appropriate than
24 that prior use and I think that's where
1 Member Ghannam was trying to go as well as
2 the consistency with the surrounding area.
3 So, can you comment on that a little
5 MR. COUCH: It would be more
6 appropriate. Actually it would be not
7 nearly as any traffic. The last people that
8 were there they would sell to big companies
9 pipe and catch basins and manholes. So,
10 they had semis in and out of there all day
11 long from 7 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., six days a
12 week. I won't be doing that because I am
13 just using it to park vehicles. I am not
14 using it to sell product and material. All
15 my things are delivered on-site, so I don't
16 store anything other than my trucks there
17 and maybe a couple things.
18 I won't be having people coming
19 in and buying stuff and then loading their
20 trucks. It will all be private use for my
21 company. So, does that answer it a little
23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes.
24 MR. COUCH: Then also, we're going to
1 beautify it so it's not going to be like a
2 Home Depot running in and out.
3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other Board
4 Member comments?
5 Then, I'll go ahead and make a motion
6 that in case number: 08-019 filed by RMJ
7 Development for 25280 Seeley Road that we
8 find that the Petitioner, the proposed use
9 of the Petitioner is equally or more
10 appropriate than the previous use based on
11 his testimony tonight, site visits and the
12 documentation provided to us by the City and
13 the Petitioner.
14 MEMBER GHANNAM: Second that.
15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other
16 comments on that motion or any issues from
17 our counsel? Or are the findings of fact
19 MS. KUDLA: I would add more, a little
20 bit more to the findings of fact indicating
21 that there was various consistency with
22 surrounding, current surrounding conditions
23 and that the previous use had more traffic
24 and storage outside of this use.
1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Then I will
2 amend the motion to state also that the
3 Board finds that the proposed use will also
4 be consistent with the surrounding area and
5 that part of the reason we find that the
6 proposed use is equal or more appropriate
7 than the prior use is because of the lower
8 amount of activity at the site, the traffic
9 and the sales being lower as well, sales in
10 terms of numbers not dollars hopefully.
11 MEMBER GHANNAM: I will agree with
12 that and second that.
13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And the seconder
15 Mr. Fox?
16 MR. FOX: Maybe we should add
17 something as far as the condition that is
18 script into the comments about all storage
19 must be maintained within the fenced in area
20 as part of that motion.
21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And we will
22 condition it upon the storage of any
23 equipment, the vehicles and building
24 materials insofar as being contained within
1 the fenced in area of the property.
2 MEMBER GHANNAM: I will agree with
3 that too.
4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Krieger?
5 MEMBER KRIEGER: The Petitioner stated
6 that he would beautify the front area and
7 enclose the area with a fence.
8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And that
9 beautification of the property also lends
10 the Board to believe that this proposed use
11 is equal or more appropriate than the prior
13 MEMBER GHANNAM: I'll second that too.
14 MEMBER BAUER: Was that Book 2?
15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I'm sorry?
16 MEMBER BAUER: Was that Book 2?
17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yeah. Do you
18 need another piece of paper? All right, if
19 there are no other comments I'll ask Ms.
20 Working to call the roll.
21 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
23 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam?
24 MEMBER GHANNAM: Aye.
1 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe?
2 MEMBER IBE: Yes.
3 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger?
4 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes.
5 MS. WORKING: Member Wrobel?
6 MEMBER WROBEL: Yes.
7 MS. WORKING: And Member Bauer?
8 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
9 MS. WORKING: Motion to approve passes
11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You are all set
12 with your interpretations and everything
13 else from the Board and best of luck to you.
14 MR. COUCH: Thank you very much.
15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Robin, did you
16 get the conditions or would you like me to
17 write them down as well?
18 MS. WORKING: I have them, thank you.
19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I even lost
20 track of the conditions.
22 We'll call case number: 08-029
23 filed by Mr. Chawney for Villagewood
24 Condominiums. Is the Petitioner here
1 tonight? We'll move that to the end of the
4 We'll call case number: 08-033
5 filed by Michael Kahm of Singh Development
6 for 27475 Huron Drive, Waltonwood at Twelve
7 Oaks. The Petitioner is requesting a two
8 sign extension variance for one real estate
9 construction sign and one leasing sign.
10 Sign A is located on Huron Circle and Sign B
11 is located north side of Mackinac Boulevard.
12 The property is zoned RM-1 and is located
13 south of Twelve Mile and east of Novi Road.
14 Good evening.
15 MR. KAHM: Good evening.
16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Would you raise
17 your hand and be sworn in by our Board
19 MEMBER KRIEGER: Do you swear or
20 affirm in case number: 08-033, to tell the
21 truth or affirm in this case?
22 MR. KAHM: I do.
23 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you.
24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Go ahead and
1 state your name and address and proceed with
2 your case.
3 MR. KAHM: Michael Kahm, Singh
4 Development Company. 7125 Orchard Lake
5 Road, West Bloomfield, Michigan 48322.
6 As many of the Board may recall, this
7 is not the first time that we have been
8 before you to ask for an extension of our
9 signage, and I guess I don't like being here
10 any more than you like me being here.
11 Unfortunately the market from last year when
12 I came before you to ask for an extension
13 has actually gotten worse. So, we are here
14 this evening to ask for your consideration
15 to allow us to continue to keep the two
16 signs that we have at Waltonwood facility at
17 the mall. One is the ring road and one is
18 on the finger road.
19 We continue to have them for, I think
20 I asked two years, but I think it was
21 published as one year. Al, is that right?
22 I noticed in the advertisement it was
23 different than what I asked for. We had
24 this conversation last year and you may not
1 remember it, about the two years versus one
2 year. That's why I asked for two years.
3 MS. WORKING: I don't see it in the
4 notice. I don't see a time frame in the
6 MR. KAHM: Maybe I misread it. But
7 anyway, we were asking for two years only
8 because you get sick of seeing me. I am
9 just throwing it out there because we
10 discussed it last year.
11 If I may, not to complicate this any
12 more than it already is, Al and I had a
13 conversation about this idea and I don't
14 know if it's appropriate to discuss it on
15 this agenda, but at least I am going to ask
16 in case it might be. We own the property
17 adjacent to this that fronts on Twelve Mile
18 Road, and we would like if it's possible to
19 discuss this evening or at a different time
20 to move the sign that is currently on the
21 ring road up to that location. We think we
22 might get a better traffic and better
23 exposure on Twelve Mile than on the ring
1 We seem for some reason to get pretty
2 good traffic on the finger road, but not on
3 the portion of the ring road that we are on.
4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I don't believe
5 we are able to discuss that, but I will let
6 our counsel go ahead and answer that for
8 MS. KUDLA: No, we wouldn't. You have
9 to first make a determination to the
10 administration whether or not that was
11 permitted under the sign ordinance to post
12 this sign on another property. If they
13 found that it wasn't, you have to come back.
14 If he is still proposes wanting it on
15 another piece of property, come back as
16 another variance proposing it on this other
17 piece of property.
18 MR. KAHM: Okay, I thought I would
20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We'll decide
21 what we have before us and you can take that
22 back and decide if that option is another
23 thing you want to pursue.
24 I will pass this along to our Board
1 Secretary and ask her to read any
2 correspondence into the record.
3 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number:
4 08-033, 14 notices were mailed, zero
5 approvals and zero objections.
6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is there anyone
7 in the audience that wishes to make a
8 comment on this case? Seeing none, we'll
9 close the opportunity for comments and open
10 it up for the City to make comments.
11 MR. FOX: City staff has looked at
12 this and we're not in support of this
13 variance request due to lack of practical
14 difficulty, demonstrable practical
15 difficulty. They have been granted seven
16 extensions on one sign already. Five
17 extensions on the other sign that they are
18 requesting at this time.
19 It's also noted that there is already
20 permanent signage on the property in two
21 locations as well as the two temporary signs
22 that they are asking for. And by the
23 Ordinance a temporary sign is only good
24 until 30 days after the property has been
1 leased or sold, which that property has been
2 leased for quite a while.
3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you.
4 Anyone else from the City?
5 Then I will open it up for any Board
6 questions, comments or action. Member
8 MEMBER GHANNAM: I would ask you the
9 same question, sir. What is your practical
10 difficulty in this case? It appears that
11 you have been granted multiple variances
12 over a period of time for the two signs.
13 You already have permanent signage, so what
14 is the practical difficulty?
15 MR. KAHM: The operative word there
16 that Chris mentioned was leased. At this
17 point we're not leased. Our occupancy is in
18 the low 80s unfortunately and we are in an
19 unusual location because we're on the ring
20 road of the mall, so the traffic we get is
21 precious to us. We're not in a major
22 thoroughfare where we might get far more
23 exposure on the signage that we have. So,
24 any signage that would identify the fact
1 that we are offering senior housing options
2 is very important to us.
3 Unfortunately, as we discussed last
4 year, the economy has been pretty tough on
5 us, so anything we can get to help us get
6 the property up to a sustainable lease
7 occupancy, that's all we're trying to do.
8 And I agree, once it's leased we should take
9 the signs down. We're just not at a
10 sustained occupancy.
11 MEMBER GHANNAM: Is your
12 interpretation it has to be fully leased
13 before you take it down?
14 MR. KAHM: No, usually sustained is
15 identified as 90, 95 percent. I know in
16 other communities we were at 95 percent, but
17 I don't know if Novi has a definition.
18 Canton as an example is 95, but I am not
19 trying to use their standards for Novi, I am
20 just giving you an example.
21 MS. KUDLA: Administration is
22 indicating that there is no definition of
23 leased in the Ordinance.
24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: As long as I
1 remember having these discussions regarding
2 leased and how many houses in a subdivision,
3 there has never been a definitive answer.
4 So, I will leave it open to your
5 interpretation, Member Ghannam.
6 Any other comments or questions?
7 MEMBER GHANNAM: I don't have any
8 other questions. Thank you.
9 MEMBER BAUER: Not being continually
10 leased, isn't it an actual factor that since
11 this living memory care is close to the last
12 thing you want to do on earth, so you are
13 going to have a continued turnover?
14 MR. KAHM: Well, at some point you
15 reach a point where the continuing turnover,
16 your people leaving generally equals the
17 people coming in. We haven't reached that
18 point yet. That's what we are trying to get
20 Under normal circumstances I agree, we
21 should have reached that point. In an
22 economy that we started in we probably would
23 have been there, but unfortunately we are
24 victims of -- a lot of our tenants the
1 children help them in the rent payments.
2 Children are having difficulty of their own
3 and a lot of what is happening is a lot of
4 parents are going back and living with the
5 kids at home.
6 On the other side of the spectrum, a
7 lot of the people who will want to move in
8 who are independent are in single family
9 homes they no longer can take care of by
10 themselves. So, we are kind of in a little
11 vicious spiral in both ends of our continuum
12 and just we're victims of economic
14 So, that's a considerable hardship.
15 Whether or not that's considered by the
16 Board as justifiable, I'll leave that up to
17 you. That's the situation.
18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Ibe?
19 MEMBER IBE: Sir, on the sign that you
20 talk about, could you please shed some more
21 light for us on any other activities,
22 marketing activity that your company do to
23 promote the product that you are trying to
24 sell here?
1 MR. KAHM: You may notice we have
2 flyers in the newspaper. Why advertise
3 regularly. We send out mailers regularly.
4 We actually had the zealous staff at our
5 project actually put a banner on the
6 building and didn't realize that they
7 weren't allowed to do that and it had to be
8 taken down. Actually it was very effective.
9 What it does is it draws attention.
10 That's all we are trying to do is draw
11 attention for a product to get people in the
12 door. Once we get them in the door, it's
13 our job to sell them. We just want to get
14 them in the door. And it's a challenge in
15 that location, so we have to try to capture
16 as much traffic as we can. Actually the
17 banner worked wonderfully. But we
18 understand it's not allowed.
19 MEMBER IBE: Just a brief followup.
20 Do you keep records of the magic of
21 marketing in terms of how you get your
22 clients? Do you find that people generally
23 come there simply because of the sign or do
24 they respond better to the, say, the use of
1 the other marketing activities? Is there
2 any data you have to help me or this Board
3 compose what you looking for?
4 MR. KAHM: Yes. And actually we do
5 track that. When people come in the door we
6 ask them how did you find out about us. The
7 data that we have and, in fact, I looked it
8 up before I came because I thought you might
9 ask that question. It is predominantly the
11 MEMBER IBE: I have nothing further,
12 Mr. Chair.
13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I'm sorry?
14 MEMBER IBE: I have nothing further.
15 Thank you.
16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Wrobel?
17 MEMBER WROBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
18 Most of the questions I was going to ask Mr.
19 Ibe asked already. How can you really tell?
20 You are saying that this is how you are
21 getting the -- people are knowing about the
22 place, but I don't see any documentation on
23 that or anything presented. So, until I see
24 something like that I am skeptical, being a
1 real world person.
2 I understand the need for a sign.
3 Eighty percent to me is high is good in
4 today's market, but I understand what you
5 are saying, there is another 20 percent
6 there. Unfortunately we in Novi do not have
7 that Ordinance. I think that is something,
8 hint, hint, that we should look at down the
9 road in establishing levels so we know what
10 to deal with.
11 But all these things being said, I
12 find it difficult to allow two signs. I
13 could maybe support one sign, which one I am
14 not sure yet. I know it's a difficult time,
15 but it's been up there a long time.
16 Perpetually in this type of industry it
17 could be up there forever. You can never
18 hit a hundred percent even when times are
19 good. So I would find it difficult to
20 support two signs.
21 I will listen to what the rest of my
22 colleagues say before I make a decision.
23 Thank you.
24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you,
1 Member Wrobel.
2 Is there a question? Is there a
3 question? I am thinking along the same
4 lines as Member Wrobel. I definitely
5 understand the economic hard times right
6 now. Can you explain a little more how the
7 economy would kind of depend on your -- your
8 occupancy would depend on the economy? I am
9 trying to figure that out a little more. It
10 seems like either people would need this
11 type of assistance and memory care and
12 independent living or they don't.
13 So, I am kind of having a hard time
14 understanding how the economy would play a
15 role in that.
16 MR. KAHM: Well, you are right. Our
17 use is pretty much a need driven sort of a
18 facility. What happens as I mentioned
19 earlier is because we are -- this is a
20 high-end development. This is not
21 subsidized housing. So, people, if
22 economics are a constraint for them they
23 could choose something of a lesser cost.
24 We deliberately designed a high-end
1 development here. We felt the location in
2 the city warranted it. On the independent
3 side typically when we get people coming in
4 on the independent departments, they're at
5 the point in their lives where they really
6 can't take care of typically a single family
7 home. Normally one of the spouses has
8 passed away unfortunately, and they really
9 can't handle all the maintenance, so they
10 need to get in a facility that has more of
11 their needs taken care of daily, has
12 security. They don't have to worry about
13 all those things. But they need to sell the
14 house because of the money they are going to
15 use to pay the rent is in the inequity in
16 the home. And in our economy homes just
17 aren't selling. That's on the one side.
18 On the more need driven side, the
19 assisted living, those people definitely
20 need to be there, but a lot of times because
21 it's fairly costly because of the staff
22 involved, the children are assisting the
23 parents in the payments. When the children
24 are strapped for money they have to make a
1 choice, and what's happening with us is a
2 lot of the parents are now moving back. I
3 mean, going back 50 years ago that used to
4 be very common. The parents are moving in
5 with the children and the children are
6 taking care of them. And that phenomenon is
7 fairly recent and it's all driven by the
8 economic conditions here in Michigan.
9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: How long has
10 each sign been up? Seven years, and we're
11 talking about one year extensions that we
12 have made for each time?
13 MS. WORKING: They are all listed in
14 the agenda. The signs were called out and
15 identified as Sign A and B and each of them
16 are called out separately for how many
17 extensions that they have been granted.
18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Am I assuming
19 that ZBA 99 would be 1999?
20 MS. WORKING: Correct.
21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And it would
22 have been up before that even.
23 MS. WORKING: Well, the ZBA granted a
24 permanent variance, you will see in your
1 packet in 2000 for this sign, Waltonwood at
2 Twelve Oaks. This sign in your packet the
3 ZBA did not have to grant a variance because
4 it was allowed by Ordinance.
5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Correct. I am
6 talking about the leasing signs.
7 MS. WORKING: Right. The leasing sign
9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Before the ZBA
10 would have even seen the leasing signs they
11 would have been up for a period of time.
12 MR. AMOLSCH: One was a construction
13 identification sign was permitted by the
14 code --
15 MS. WORKING: They converted to a
16 leasing sign.
17 MR. AMOLSCH: Then the other real
18 estate sign was approved by the Board in
19 2000 or so.
20 The construction identification sign was
21 valid until the last certificate of
22 occupancy. They eventually combined the two
23 signs into one case.
24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: The point being
1 that it's been earlier than even in the
2 Zoning Board?
3 MR. AMOLSCH: Correct. The Ordinance
4 now permits apartment complexes to have one
5 16 square foot 5 foot high real estate sign.
6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other Board
8 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer, part
9 of a discussion we were having is that with
10 the approved signage the City doesn't
11 regulate verbiage, and that we often
12 encourage applicants to think about what
13 they are saying on their signs so that it
14 does have an impact on the community since
15 it's permanent. And I don't know if this
16 Petitioner has thought about that, so that
17 these temporary signs, which is what they
18 were intended to be, and considering they
19 have had a length of time here in the City,
20 but perhaps revisiting the permanent signage
21 verbiage might be a consideration by this
23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other Board
24 Members? Member Krieger?
1 MEMBER KRIEGER: Have you thought of
3 MR. KAHM: No, but we could. I think
4 you are indicating that we could put, as an
5 example, independent living, assisted living
6 memory care right on the permanent sign as I
7 understood what you were saying.
8 MS. WORKING: Of course, keep in mind
9 that within the approved square footage of
10 the existing sign.
11 MR. KAHM: Sure, I understand.
12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Unless they
13 would want to come back for the permanent
15 MS. WORKING: We were trying to
16 creatively think out of the box so that this
17 isn't another case in 2009 for the Board to
19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I am having a
20 very difficult time looking to approve these
21 signs, when at the same time I understand
22 the economic impact that things are having
23 on our community and all communities in
24 Southeast, Michigan. So, I would almost be
1 willing to extend the signs for six months
2 for the purpose of exploring other marketing
3 tactics as well as exploring the creative
4 suggestion of the City and others that may
5 be done.
6 As far as how long these have been
7 here, I think it is time for the sign to
8 come down. I am not sure after this long
9 that the elements of practical difficulty
10 start to diminish very rapidly and they do
11 become more or less permanent signs, which I
12 have an issue with. So, that would be my
13 recommendation to the Board at this time
14 with a six-month extension with the
15 understanding that unless they can prove
16 some real, real hard core practical
17 difficulty at that time, I am not sure that
18 I would be able to support it any further
19 after that, and I would ask them to explore
20 other marketing campaigns.
21 Member Wrobel?
22 MEMBER WROBEL: I agree with you
23 somewhat on that. Mr. Kahm, if I remember
24 right you said the ring road sign location
1 doesn't do you much good, it was the other
3 MR. KAHM: That was the reason we were
4 asking if you could move it. Of the two
5 signs that's the one we like to relocate.
6 MEMBER WROBEL: Given that and given
7 your six-month option which I can live with,
8 I would like to see just a six month option
9 on Sign B, whereas the applicant himself
10 said the sign, Sign A isn't really doing
11 much good, so why extend it for six months
12 there. I could live with that if we just
13 allowed six months on B and deny A.
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. Did you
15 want to make the motion or would anyone
16 else? Or would you like me to?
17 MEMBER WROBEL: Sure.
18 MR. KAHM: Am I allowed to speak? Or
20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Not at this
21 point. The Board is deliberating towards a
23 In this case, case number: 08-033, I
24 would move that the Board approve the
1 request for Sign A.
2 MEMBER BAUER: B.
3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Sign B for the
4 time period of six months given that the
5 Petitioner has established some marketing
6 practical difficulties regarding the site
7 due to the layout of the road. The sign not
8 being on the frontage of Twelve Mile, and
9 given the fact that the granting of this
10 late of an extension would provide
11 substantial justice to this Petitioner as
12 well as surrounding property owners.
13 MEMBER WROBEL: Second.
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a
15 motion and a second. Any other comments?
16 MS. WORKING: Would you restate that
17 one more time for me?
18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Sure. Grant
19 approval for Sign A.
20 MEMBER BAUER: B.
21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: B, in this case
22 for a time period of six months given the
23 Petitioner establishing a practical
24 difficulty regarding the ring road and not
1 being fronted on a main thoroughfare as well
2 as the economic difficulties presented.
3 MS. WORKING: Sign B is located not on
4 the ring road. So, I'm not sure whether
5 that practical difficulty would be
6 applicable there.
7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I am applying
8 Twelve Mile Road as my thoroughfare in that.
9 In my thoughts if I am allowed to do that.
10 I think that was the general consensus of
11 the Board that it's not on a main artery of
12 the City of Novi.
13 MEMBER WROBEL: I have a question to
14 our legal staff. If we go ahead and allow
15 Sign B for six more months to give them an
16 opportunity to look at other options, can we
17 say this will be the final time we will
18 extend it and at that time that sign has got
19 to come out whether they determine other
20 options or not? Do you want to address
22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: If I might
23 reiterate my comments from earlier when I
24 basically stated that unless a higher
1 practical difficulty can be found since the
2 length of time that this has been on that
3 site, that practical difficulty of trying to
4 market it kind of diminishes. It seems like
5 there needs to be other things out there, so
6 unless substantially more facts come out, I
7 would be hard pressed to extend it after
8 that length of time after another six
9 months. So, I am not necessarily saying
10 that I wouldn't, but I would need to see
11 some more evidence.
12 MEMBER WROBEL: I just don't want to
13 see further Boards get this again and, say,
14 well, this is the first time someone is
15 seeing it, let it go another six months.
16 Let it go another six months. I am trying to
17 put an end to it one way or another.
18 MS. KUDLA: There is no way that we
19 can ever technically put an end to it. If
20 he wanted to come back and apply for the
21 same thing over and over, he could do that
22 under the Ordinance. Whether or not we
23 would deny it, you can deny it every time,
24 but you can't limit him from coming back.
1 MEMBER WROBEL: Okay, thank you.
2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And the minutes
3 could be part of the case too that we have
4 had this discussion before which Robin is
5 very good at doing.
6 Member Bauer?
7 MEMBER BAUER: Are you going to turn
8 down A?
9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I was going to
10 make that separate motion. But I can make
12 MS. WORKING: Can we do A and B
13 together on this motion, please?
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We can.
15 MS. WORKING: Thank you.
16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I would also
17 move that in this case we deny Sign A, given
18 the fact that the Petitioner has not
19 established a practical difficulty in that
20 there is another sign on the property that
21 markets the similar products as well as the
22 fact that there are permanent signs, two of
23 them, one granted by this very Board to
24 identify the property.
1 MEMBER WROBEL: I will second that
3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Now is everybody
5 MEMBER BAUER: No, but...
6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Please call the
8 MS. WORKING: For Sign A the approval
9 for the six month extension. Chairman
11 MEMBER IBE: That's Sign B.
12 MS. WORKING: I'm sorry, Sign B. See,
13 I'm starting to say that. I'm sorry, Sign
15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Are we calling
16 the motion separately now?
17 MS. WORKING: It's going to be one
18 motion, but I am going to take --
19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Two roll calls?
20 MS. WORKING: Two separate votes.
21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It's one motion.
22 MS. KUDLA: One motion one vote.
23 MS. WORKING: Okay. I apologize.
24 It's just that I notified them by calling
1 them A and B.
2 MS. KUDLA: You can just make a motion
3 to approve B --
4 MS. WORKING: Approve B and deny A.
5 MS. KUDLA: Correct.
6 MS. WORKING: So, I am going to do it
7 backwards for you. Motion to deny A and
8 approve B for a period of six months.
9 Chairman Fischer?
10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
11 MS. WORKING: Member Wrobel?
12 MEMBER WROBEL: Yes.
13 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer?
14 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
15 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam?
16 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes.
17 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe?
18 MEMBER IBE: Yes.
19 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger?
20 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes.
21 MS. WORKING: Motion passes 6-0.
22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You are granted
23 a little relief.
24 MR. KAHM: Thank you.
1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I am hoping
2 things turn around for you.
3 MR. KAHM: Let me ask a quick
4 question. I still have the option of coming
5 back and discussing with you the Twelve Mile
7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Absolutely.
8 From what the City Attorney says you can
9 come back every meeting if you want. We
10 haven't seen you in a while, so I feel a
11 little neglected by you.
12 MR. KAHM: Okay.
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We'll go
15 ahead and move on to case number: 08-034
16 Singh Development for Main Street Novi
17 located at 2300 Constitution.
18 The Petitioner is requesting Main
19 Street Village to have a one sign extension
20 variance for an existing real estate sign
21 located south of Potomac Drive in Main
22 Street Village. The property is zoned TC-1
23 and is located south of Grand River Avenue
24 and east of Novi Road.
1 If you could be sworn in for this
2 case, please, by our Secretary.
3 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number:
4 08-034, that you swear or affirm to tell the
5 truth in this case?
6 MR. KAHM: I do.
7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Name and address
8 again and go ahead.
9 MR. KAHM: Michael Kahm, Singh
10 Development Company, 7125 Orchard Lake Road,
11 West Bloomfield, 48322.
12 Well, the situation at Main Street
13 Village is not that different. I think we
14 pick all the sites in the city that are hard
15 to get to. We had a sign on Grand River for
16 some time and that eventually expired and
17 was no longer granted an extension. So, the
18 sole leasing sign is the one we have on
19 Potomac just south of the intersection of
20 Main and Market streets. It's primarily in
21 front of our second phase of Main Street
22 Village and we are still in that initial
23 lease up stage there.
24 Again, pretty much for a lot of the
1 reasons that I just mentioned. Leasing is
2 slower than we like. Again, this is a
3 high-end development relatively speaking in
4 the city and the clientele that is
5 traditionally attracted to Main Street type
6 product, higher-end townhome apartments has
7 been people who were transferees into the
8 area who have come here for temporary living
9 until they find a permanent home and that
10 has traditionally been the large source of
11 our occupancy.
12 Unfortunately, those transferees are
13 coming in for the most part related to the
14 automobile industry, and I don't have to
15 tell you what condition that's in. So, that
16 source of our potential occupants has dried
17 up considerably. So, we are, again, looking
18 to have that lone exposure to our product to
19 be maintained there if we could for an
20 additional year.
21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I will ask the
22 Board Secretary to read any correspondence
23 into the record.
24 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number
1 08-034, 24 notices were mailed with zero
2 approvals and zero objections.
3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is there anyone
4 in the audience that wishes to make a
5 comment on this case? Seeing none, I close
6 any opportunity for comments and open it up
7 to the City.
8 MR. FOX: Again, from the City Staff,
9 we were not in support of this variance
10 request due to similar issues as we did on
11 the last one, the lack of demonstrable
12 practical difficulty. The sign has been
13 granted three extensions, a sixth-month
14 extension in '05, and two 12-month
15 extensions in '06 and '07. Also there is on
16 this property as well, permanent signage
17 along Grand River for this particular
18 project. Thank you.
19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very
20 much. Board Members? Member Wrobel?
21 MEMBER WROBEL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
22 What occupancy do you have there right now?
23 MR. KAHM: About 75 percent.
24 MEMBER WROBEL: I don't have as much
1 of an issue to extend this for no more than
2 a period of a year based upon they do have
3 an existing sign, but that's on Grand River.
4 This is like the back door entry and driving
5 by there quite often, it's not even a
6 presence on 12 Mile -- excuse me, the Grand
7 River entrance it's not like it's even part
8 of this over here. So there is no
9 identification for coming in off of Main
10 Street. You don't know what you are getting
11 if you are coming from the west or from the
12 north. So, I think there is more of a need
13 for sign there. I understand its need for
14 that occupancy rate, but I wouldn't approve
15 it for more than a year. Thank you.
16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you.
17 Other Board Members? You kind of stole the
18 words right out of my mouth in that sense
19 given the location of this sign.
20 And given the use for me, I think it's a
21 different use than the prior signs we are
22 talking about too, whereas before it seemed
23 like people would seek out some of the
24 products that were offered on the previous
1 case. But in this case it's the apartment
2 market and townhouse market is very
3 competitive in these times. So, I would be
4 willing to support this as well.
5 Member Bauer?
6 MEMBER BAUER: Yeah, under the
7 conditions I back you up and say maybe
8 another year.
9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: My only one
10 comment would be do we need "The developer
11 of the year" on top? What year was that
13 MR. KAHM: 2006, I believe. If you
14 like we can take that down.
15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I will move that
16 in case number: 08-034 filed by Michael
17 Kahm of Singh Development for Main Street of
18 Novi located at 2300 Constitution that we
19 approve the Petitioner's request given the
20 fact that the sign is tucked away from a
21 major thoroughfare of the city and that the
22 problem is not self-created in the current
23 market at this time due to the economic
24 downturn of the state. That there is no
1 increase of fire, danger or public safety
2 given the location of this sign, and that
3 property values will not be diminished
4 within the surrounding area. I would move
5 that this variance is good for a period of
6 one year and it is conditional upon the
7 removal of the developer of this sign --
8 "developer of the year" portion of the sign
9 which takes away from the signs aesthetics.
10 MEMBER BAUER: Second.
11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a
12 motion by Member Fischer and a second by
13 Member Bauer.
14 MS. KUDLA: Can we interrupt before
15 the vote? We were discussing that there is
16 a provision that would allow a reduction in
17 sign size that would then make it a
18 permissible sign. We just wanted to make
19 the Board aware of that Ordinance.
20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Go ahead.
21 MS. KUDLA: You were seeking to
22 regulate verbiage in the motion, was that
23 part of the motion?
24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: No, we are
1 asking that the top portion be taken off
2 because it's an extremity and it's
3 aesthetically not very pleasing.
4 MEMBER BAUER: Attachment.
5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes. So, we're
6 not regulating the verbiage. We're just
7 taking off a piece of the sign. If they
8 want to put it somewhere else they can.
9 Is there something you wanted to share
10 with us then?
11 MS. WORKING: No, that was it.
12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: The provision
14 MS. KUDLA: There is a section in the
15 Ordinance. Was it 16 square feet?
16 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes, this is the same
17 case as the Waltonwood case. The Ordinance
18 allows a 16 square 5 foot high real estate
19 sign. Of course, that's why he is here
20 today because he needs a variance for size.
21 This originally started out as a
22 construction sign like the Waltonwood sign
23 did, then eventually construction stopped,
24 therefore, now we call it just a real estate
2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Got you.
3 MEMBER GHANNAM: What is the variance
4 between what is allowed and what is
5 currently there?
6 MR. AMOLSCH: The sign is 64 square
7 feet and we allow 16, so whatever the math
8 is there.
9 MS. KUDLA: So, by reducing it it
10 could be permanent?
11 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes, they could have it
12 as long as they have a real estate sign.
13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I am comfortable
14 given the size of the complex with the size
15 at this point. Maybe that's something, once
16 again, that they might want to look at
17 before coming before the Board again would
18 be my comments to that recommendation.
19 Please call the roll.
20 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
22 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer?
23 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
24 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam?
1 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes.
2 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe?
3 MEMBER IBE: Yes.
4 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger?
5 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes.
6 MS. WORKING: Member Wrobel?
7 MEMBER WROBEL: Yes.
8 MS. WORKING: Motion passes 6-0.
9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You have another
10 year for that sign. Best of luck.
11 MR. KAHM: Thank you.
13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: At this
14 time we'll call case number: 08-035 filed
15 by Larry Kelly and Greg Hudas of Signature
16 Associates. The petitioner is present
17 today? We'll put that at the end of the
20 We'll call case number ZBA 08-036
21 filed by James Rohlfing of the Gaman Group.
22 The Petitioner is requesting a temporary
23 special land use permit renewal for the
24 placement of a temporary construction
1 trailer located at 39675 12 Mile Road from
2 July 8th, 2008 through July 8, 2009.
3 Petitioner was issued the first temporary
4 use for twelve months and a twelve month
5 renewal as well. The property is zoned B-2
6 and located south of 12 Mile Road and east
7 of M-5.
8 If you can raise your hand and be
9 sworn in by the Secretary of the Board.
10 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number:
11 08-036 do you swear or affirm to tell the
12 truth in this case?
13 MR. ROHLFING: I do.
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: State your name
15 and address and proceed with your case.
16 MR. ROHLFING: James Rohlfing. 21000
17 Ryan Road, Warren, Michigan 48091.
18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Go ahead.
19 MR. ROHLFING: We still don't have a
20 building permit for that Holiday Express.
21 It will be two years in September. That's
22 the reason I am back before the Board to get
23 an extension for the construction trailer.
24 They are threatening to give us a permit by
1 the end of this week so that will certainly
2 speed things along. That has kind of been
3 the scenario up until this point.
4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Anything else?
5 MR. ROHLFING: That's it.
6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I will ask the
7 Board Secretary to record any
9 MEMBER KRIEGER: In the case number:
10 08-306, nine notices were mailed. Zero
11 approvals and zero objections.
12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I will ask is
13 there anyone in the audience that wishes to
14 make a comment in this case? Seeing none, I
15 will close the opportunity for comments and
16 ask the City if they have any comments?
17 MR. FOX: City staff would just like
18 to reiterate that this is a request for an
19 extension, the building official has the
20 power to give them two years worth of
21 temporary use of the construction trailer.
22 They are now at the end of that two year
23 time period. They have to go now to the ZBA
24 and request an extension of that time.
1 Based on the phase of the construction
2 going on on that project, we are inclined to
3 request that maybe that be a six month time
4 frame instead of a 12 month. We don't think
5 the construction trailer is going to be
6 necessary, the construction is going to go
7 on necessarily long enough for a 12 month
8 extension. That is our recommendation, our
10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Can you clarify
11 that a little bit? What do you mean by
13 MR. FOX: Based on where the project
14 is at this point and what they are going to
15 be required to do and what we are going to
16 need them to do, we are going to be pushing
17 them for site work and things of that nature
18 before the end of the year before it gets
19 cold again. The last few month of this
20 variance it's going to be all frozen. The
21 site work should be completed by that time.
22 This particular project, this
23 construction trailer is going to have to be
24 moved all over the place during the site
1 work. We think in the six month time frame
2 the building should be pretty much done. The
3 site should be pretty much taken care of by
5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other
6 comments? I'll open it up for Board
7 discussion. Member Ghannam?
8 MEMBER GHANNAM: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
9 How long will you need this trailer for,
11 MR. ROHLFING: Probably four months,
12 three to four months, depending on the
13 issuance of the actual building permit.
14 It's been almost two years since we first
16 MEMBER GHANNAM: So, you think by the
17 end of the year as the building official
18 suggest would be sufficient?
19 MR. ROHLFING: Oh, definitely, yes.
20 MEMBER GHANNAM: Say by December 31st?
21 MR. ROHLFING: Yes, by all means.
22 MEMBER GHANNAM: And if you didn't
23 have this variance would it create a
24 hardship for you in terms of completing the
1 work that you have there?
2 MR. ROHLFING: At the state of
3 construction, and yeah, we are not able to
4 move inside of the building yet due to codes
5 and just the pace of the construction, we
6 are not quite there yet. We still need it
7 for a short time.
8 MEMBER GHANNAM: Is your construction
9 on track in terms of timing?
10 MEMBER GHANNAM: No, no. We are about
11 a year and a half behind. We have got
12 issues with the franchise. Like I say, it's
13 been -- this project should have been
14 probably an eight to ten month project from
15 start to finish. But there has been a few
16 issues. We hopefully worked through
17 everything with the planner. We should be
18 good to go.
19 MEMBER GHANNAM: I have no problems
20 supporting your request. That's all the
21 questions I have. Thank you, sir.
22 MS. KUDLA: I just want to point out
23 that it is a practical difficulty not undue
24 hardship standard.
1 MEMBER GHANNAM: Right.
2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I have no
3 comments other than what Member Ghannam
5 Member Bauer?
6 MEMBER BAUER: Since he agrees by the
7 end of the year let's make it that.
8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Ghannam?
9 MEMBER GHANNAM: I am ready to make a
10 motion if you are ready.
11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All you.
12 MEMBER GHANNAM: I'll move that in
13 case number: 08-036 filed by James Rohlfing
14 for the Gaman Group for 39675 Twelve Mile
15 Road that we approve the request for a
16 variance until December 31st, 2008, given
17 the practical difficulty that the petitioner
18 has established in that there have been
19 delays due to franchise issues, not the
20 creation of the Petitioner themselves and
21 that it will need longer than that period of
22 time to complete their work to move inside
23 the building. I think it meets the spirit
24 of the zoning Ordinance. Certainly will
1 have no effect on the property values or
2 diminishing property values. There would be
3 no increase of fire, danger or public
4 safety. There would be no issues with light
5 or air provided to agent properties and they
6 are unique circumstance as I just suggested.
7 MR. WROBEL: Second.
8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a
9 motion by Member Ghannam and a second by
10 Member Wrobel.
11 Any further comment on the case or
12 motion? Seeing none, Ms. Working, will you
13 please call the roll.
14 MS. WORKING: Motion to approve an
15 extension for a temporary land use permit.
16 Member Ghannam?
17 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes.
18 MS. WORKING: Member Wrobel?
19 MEMBER WROBEL: Yes.
20 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer?
21 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
22 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
24 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe?
1 MEMBER IBE: Yes.
2 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger.
3 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes.
4 MS. WORKING: Motion is granted 6-0.
5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There you go for
6 six months. Best of luck to you guys.
7 MR. ROHLFING: Thank you.
9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All right.
10 I will call one last time for ZBA 08-029, if
11 Villagewood Place Condos is in the atrium
12 area? It appears not. As Board Members
13 will remember that this case was tabled in
14 June because the Petitioner was not present.
15 So, it's the second time that he has not
16 shown up. I would --
17 MS. WORKING: Excuse me, Chairman
19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes.
20 MS. WORKING: Just to solidify our
21 records, may I look at the file to make sure
22 that he was sent a new notification letter?
23 I did speak with the gentleman, but I would
24 like to see that we documented it as well.
1 Thank you.
2 I would like the record to reflect on
3 June 12th that Mr. Chawney was mailed a
4 letter indicating that he would appear at
5 7:00 p.m. on July 8, and that he or a
6 representative should attend the meeting to
7 have this case heard.
8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, it appears
9 we have given him two chances. I would just
10 for discussion sake, I would prefer at this
11 point to see a denial of this case given the
12 lack of practical difficulty that he didn't
13 show up to prove.
14 So, seeing people agree with that, I
15 will go ahead move that in case number:
16 ZBA-08-029 filed by Mr. Chawney of
17 Villagewood Place Condominiums that the
18 Board deny the request as stated due to the
19 Petitioner not showing up or sending a
20 representative to explain the case.
21 MEMBER BAUER: Second.
22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It's a motion by
23 Chairman Fischer. Seconded by Member Bauer.
24 Ms. Working, will you please call the
2 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
4 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer?
5 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
6 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam?
7 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes.
8 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe?
9 MEMBER IBE: Yes.
10 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger?
11 MS. KRIEGER: Yes.
12 MS. WORKING: And Member Wrobel?
13 MEMBER WROBEL: Yes.
14 MS. WORKING: Motion to deny request
15 passes 6-0.
17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Our last case is
18 case 08-035. Is that case here? Seeing no
19 one, what is the Board's pleasure with this
21 MEMBER BAUER: (Unintelligible).
22 MS. WORKING: That was the first time.
23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Correct. So, we
24 would want to table this and ask Robin to
1 touch base and send a letter for this case?
2 Is that appropriate for you, Robin?
3 MS. WORKING: Yes.
4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Would you care
5 to make that motion?
6 MEMBER BAUER: Right, I did.
7 MEMBER WROBEL: Second.
8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay, all right.
9 We have a motion to table this case with
10 those directions from Member Bauer and a
11 second from Member Wrobel. If Ms. Working
12 could please call the roll.
13 MS. WORKING: That's 035?
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes.
15 MS. KUDLA: Yes.
16 MS. WORKING: Motion is by Member
18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Correct. And the
19 second by Member Wrobel.
20 MS. WORKING: Thank you.
21 Member Bauer?
22 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
23 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
1 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam?
2 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes.
3 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe?
4 MEMBER IBE: Yes.
5 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger?
6 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes.
7 MS. WORKING: Member Wrobel?
8 MEMBER WROBEL: Yes.
9 MS. WORKING: Motion to table passes
11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: That wraps up
12 the cases that the Zoning Board has before
13 it and we will move to other matters.
15 First item under other matters is
16 ZBA08-015 for 1195 West Lake Road. And
17 let's also go ahead and combine item number
18 two which is also a request of an extension.
19 Do you wish to make any comments on those
20 cases or shall we?
21 MS. WORKING: I believe that the
22 Petitioner submitted letters to you
23 indicating what their request was and why,
24 which they are required to do. So we have
1 two requests for 90 days.
2 MS. KUDLA: Are they two different
3 case numbers?
4 MS. WORKING: Yes.
5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes.
6 MS. KUDLA: Do them separately.
7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is there any
8 discussion on the request for a 90-day
10 MEMBER BAUER: I would make a motion
11 in case: 08-015, request a 90-day extension
12 be approved.
13 MEMBER IBE: Second.
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a
15 motion by Member Bauer and a second by
16 Member Ibe.
17 Ms. Working, please call the roll.
18 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer?
19 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
20 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
22 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam?
23 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes.
24 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe?
1 MEMBER IBE: Yes.
2 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger?
3 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes.
4 MS. WORKING: And Member Wrobel?
5 MEMBER WROBEL: Yes.
6 MS. WORKING: Motion to approve
7 extension request for ZBA08-015 passes 6-0.
9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Do you have the
10 case number for the other one? I didn't
11 write it down.
12 MS. WORKING: It's 07-047 for 1339
13 East Lake Road.
14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is there any
15 other discussion on the request for this
16 case? If not, will someone make a motion?
17 MEMBER KRIEGER: So move in case
18 number: 07-047 that 1339 East Lake is
19 granted a 90-day extension.
20 MEMBER IBE: Second.
21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There a motion
22 by Member Krieger and a second by Member
24 Please call the roll.
1 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger?
2 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes.
3 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe?
4 MEMBER IBE: Yes.
5 MS. WORKING: Member Wrobel?
6 MEMBER WROBEL: Yes.
7 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer?
8 MEMBER BAUER: Yes.
9 MS. WORKING: Member Fischer -- or
10 Chairman Fischer? I apologize.
11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
12 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam?
13 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes.
14 MS. WORKING: Motion to grant
15 extension in ZBA07-047 for 90 days at 1339
16 East Lake passes 6-0.
17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I have been
18 called worse, Ms. Working, probably by
19 people at this table.
20 MS. WORKING: Got to give all due
23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We will move to
24 item number three which is an update on a
1 request we sent to review the 90-day time
2 limit to pull the permit after variance is
3 granted. Did one of you guys want to
5 MS. KUDLA: I can summarize.
6 Yesterday City Council, I am assuming did
7 pass on the second meeting the amendment to
8 make it 180 days to get a building permit.
9 It will be 15 more days before they actually
10 that becomes effective. Actually 15 days
11 from yesterday before that becomes
13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, that's good
14 news on that front. Hopefully we'll see
15 less of these requests.
17 And then the last item on the
18 agenda is Rules of Procedure update.
19 MS. KUDLA: Yes. I did research and
20 put together a draft opinion regarding the
21 alternate member and what the alternate
22 member can do when they are not sitting as a
23 voting member. Tom Schultz said I can now
24 submit it to you. I will put it in format
1 to submit to the Board for the next meeting.
2 You can consider what you want to do
3 once you read the opinion letter and then
4 make a decision which way you want to go and
5 then you can revise the rule accordingly.
6 And then once that is taken care of we
7 should go over the rules. I will get you a
8 red line draft and approve it.
9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All right, that
10 sounds good.
11 MS. KUDLA: You probably would want
12 some time to consider it. So I don't think
13 you what would want to consider it earlier
14 than that.
15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Depending on we
16 get it we can have Robin put it on the
17 agenda. You are usually good at keeping us
18 on track.
19 Seeing no other business before us I
20 will entertain a motion to adjourn.
21 MEMBER WROBEL: Motion to adjourn.
22 MEMBER BAUER: Motion to adjourn.
23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is two
24 motions which is good enough for a second
1 for me. All in favor aye?
2 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye.
3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: The Board is
5 (The meeting was adjourned at
6 8:34 p.m.)
1 C E R T I F I C A T E
4 I, Mona L. Talton, do hereby certify
5 that I have recorded stenographically the
6 proceedings had and testimony taken in the
7 above-entitled matter at the time and place
8 hereinbefore set forth, and I do further
9 certify that the foregoing transcript,
10 consisting of (82) typewritten pages, is a
11 true and correct transcript of my said
12 stenographic notes.
19 Mona L. Talton,
20 Certified Shorthand Reporter
22 July 17, 2008