| View Agenda for this meeting View Action Summary for this meeting
REGULAR MEETING - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 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, Wednesday, November 12, 2008. BOARD MEMBERS ALSO PRESENT: REPORTED BY: 1 Novi, Michigan 2 Wednesday, November 12, 2008 3 7:00 p.m. 4 - - - - - - 5 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It is 7:00. I 7 would like to call to order the Wednesday, 8 November 12th, 2008 City of Novi Zoning 9 Board of Appeals meeting. 10 Ms. Working, would you please call the 11 roll for us. 12 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 13 MEMBER BAUER: Present. 14 MS. WORKING: Member Burke? 15 MEMBER BURKE: Here. 16 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 17 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Here. 18 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 19 MEMBER SHROYER: Here. 20 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Present. 22 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 23 MEMBER GHANNAM: Present. 24 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger?
4 1 MEMBER KRIEGER: Here. 2 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 3 MEMBER IBE: Present. 4 MS. WORKING: All present, Mr. Chair. 5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Excellent. I 6 would ask my Vice Chair to go ahead and lead 7 us in a pledge of allegiance. 8 BOARD MEMBERS: I pledge allegiance to 9 the flag of the United States of America and 10 to the Republic for which it stands, one 11 nation under God indivisible with liberty 12 and justice for all. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 14 Vice-Chair Sanghvi. 15 I would like to point out in the back 16 of the room there should be a copy of the 17 rules and the procedure for the Zoning Board 18 of Appeals. I would like to call attention 19 to two of the main rules. First of all, if 20 everyone could make sure that they turn off 21 or at least put on vibrate all of their cell 22 phones and pagers. 23 I would like to let you know that 24 tonight we will, and in any case we will
5 1 hold individuals to address the Board, they 2 have five minutes to do so. Groups have ten 3 minutes to address the Board if they are 4 speaking on behalf of, an individual 5 speaking on behalf of a whole group has ten 6 minutes to speak. 7 The Zoning Board of Appeal is a 8 hearing board empowered by the Novi City 9 Charter to hear appeals seeking variances 10 from the application of the Novi Zoning 11 Ordinance. It takes a vote of at least four 12 members to approve a variance request and a 13 vote of a majority present to deny a 14 variance request. Tonight we do have a full 15 board so any decisions made will be final. 16 Looking at our agenda, are there any 17 changes to our agenda tonight? 18 MS. WORKING: Mr. Chair, I would like 19 to please add under approval of minutes, the 20 minutes for the October 5th, Zoning Board of 21 Appeals hearing. 22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It was the 14th? 23 MS. WORKING: October 14th. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you.
6 1 MS. WORKING: And under Other Matters, 2 if it pleases the Board under number 4, the 3 Rules of Procedure. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is that going to 5 be a discussion? Or is there a little bit 6 to tell us about? 7 MS. WORKING: I believe last meeting, 8 Mr. Chair, there were a couple of minor 9 changes to the rules and I do not believe 10 there was a vote to approve -- to codify 11 them. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We can talk 13 about when we get to that. Any other 14 changes or is there a motion to approve as 15 amended? 16 VICE CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: So moved. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is there a 18 second? 19 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 21 motion by Member Sanghvi and a second by 22 Member Bauer. 23 All in favor say aye? 24 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye.
7 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any opposed? 2 Seeing none, we have an agenda. 3 We'll move to the approval of the 4 minutes from the September 9th, 2008 Zoning 5 Board of Appeals meeting. Are there any 6 changes? Member Sanghvi? 7 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: A couple of 8 things I noticed. One for the September, 9 we'll take September first. And on page 108 10 line 18, it says: I think you are requiring 11 the new members to participate. It should 12 be excluding by changing the date of the 13 election. If you remember the discussion we 14 had. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Oh, excluding. 16 Page 108, line 18. Requiring should be 17 changed to excluding? 18 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other 20 changes? 21 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: And for 22 October -- 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Let's do 24 September first. Is there a motion to
8 1 approve as amended? 2 MEMBER BAUER: Approve as amended. 3 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Second. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is motion 5 by Member Bauer and a second by Member 6 Sanghvi. 7 All in favor say aye? 8 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any opposed? 10 Seeing none, the minutes are approved as 11 amended. 12 And move to October 14th, 2008 13 minutes. Member Sanghvi? 14 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Page 43, 15 line 10 where it says: Is there a safety, 16 and there it says unintelligible. It should 17 be changed to hazard. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. Page 43, 19 line 10, unintelligible should be changed to 20 hazard. 21 Any other changes? Is there motion to 22 approve as amended? 23 MEMBER BAUER: So approved. 24 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Second.
9 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 2 motion to approve as amended by Member Bauer 3 and a second by Member Sanghvi. All in 4 favor say aye? 5 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any opposed? 7 Seeing, none, the October 14th minutes are 8 approved as amended. 9 At this time I will go ahead and move 10 to the public remarks section of the Zoning 11 Board of Appeals meeting. This is a public 12 remarks portion where anyone in the audience 13 may make a comment. Any comments relating 14 to a case on the agenda should be held to 15 that case being called. So if anyone wishes 16 at this time to address the Board on a 17 matter not in front of the Board tonight, 18 please come forward. Seeing none, we will 19 close the public remarks section of the 20 meeting. 21 22 And we will go ahead and call 23 case number: 08-054 filed by the Manyam 24 Group, LLC, for the property located at
10 1 26233 Taft Road. The petitioner is 2 requesting it appears to be seven height 3 variances and then an accessory structure 4 height variance, dumpster located in the 5 side yard as well as a parking variance. 6 MEMBER BURKE: Mr. Chair, I need to 7 interrupt you just for a second. Seeing as 8 I sat on the Planning Commission on this 9 item I need to recuse myself. Do I have to 10 make a motion to that affect? 11 MEMBER IBE: So moved. 12 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Second. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 14 motion to recuse Member Burke by Member 15 Bauer and there is a second by Member 16 Shroyer. All in favor say aye? 17 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I'm sorry, 19 second by Member Ibe. 20 MEMBER SHROYER: Before you go to the 21 vote I believe Mr. Schultz might have a 22 comment. 23 MR. SCHULTZ: No, I'm fine. Thank you 24 very much.
11 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 2 motion. All in favor say aye? 3 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any opposed? 5 Seeing none. Mr. Burke, we will see you in 6 a bit. 7 And you are here to represent the 8 Petitioner? 9 MR. AMANN: I am, Mr. Chairman. My 10 name is Bryan Amann. I am the attorney on 11 behalf of the Petitioner. I have given my 12 card with the address to the stenographer so 13 she won't have to figure out how to spell 14 that name. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. Just so 16 everyone knows, since you are an attorney we 17 won't need to swear you in for this case, 18 but I am sure you will be happy to tell the 19 truth anyway. 20 MR. AMANN: I never understood why 21 they don't swear in the attorneys but 22 everybody else. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I never 24 understood it either. The least reliable
12 1 people in the world. 2 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: I won't say 3 that, but anyway. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I'm surrounded 5 by them. 6 (Interposing)(Unintelligible). 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Before I get 8 myself into any more trouble, please 9 proceed. 10 MR. AMANN: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let 11 me indicate what is the ninth item, the 12 variance we are referring to regarding the 13 dumpster, we are no longer seeking. We have 14 essentially found a way to move the dumpster 15 to the rear of the building pursuant to our 16 report with the Planning Commission -- 17 Barbara is shaking her head no at me. And 18 we still need that variance. 19 Okay, late changing news, we still 20 need that variance. We will get to that at 21 a later time. 22 Mr. Chairman, I will briefly address a 23 quick introduction of project and I will get 24 the architect to kind of walk through each
13 1 individual item. First, we appreciate the 2 time and effort you have been putting in 3 this effort. We have worked greatly with 4 your staff and the administration and the 5 Planning Commission up to this point and we 6 appreciate the time put into that. 7 This project, if you have received 8 this part of your packet, this package which 9 actually refers to the preliminary site 10 plan, those elements. Unless you could not 11 sleep at night I would not expect you to 12 read line by line on this item, but you will 13 find in this a reference to the fundamental 14 design of this project. 15 This was established pursuant to a 16 practice known as Vastu. And, in fact, the 17 practice that many of you know as Fung Shway 18 comes out of this practice of Vastu. It 19 dates back to the 1300s and it really is 20 based in the 2000-year-old principles of 21 what is known as the Vastus, the scriptural 22 principles which support this religion and 23 this practice. It aligns a prescriptive 24 relationship between certain elements of the
14 1 designs in the building. And those elements 2 that we are here to talk to you tonight is 3 the heights of certain features are of those 4 elements that are under this Vastu approach 5 are prescriptively designed and it took 12 6 months with the architect to try to make 7 sure the building, its features and all the 8 other elements including where the windows 9 are, the number of windows and all those 10 items are part of this religious basis of 11 this Vastu principle that they may apply. 12 Material to, reflective of their religious 13 objectives. We will go through those 14 individual features. 15 But I think some of the good news that 16 we are really here on what I deal with a lot 17 of other communities which are essentially 18 architectural features. We are not seeking 19 wholesale dimension variances or wholesale 20 variances that allow a whole wall to be a 21 lot taller than others. These are 22 architectural features which are essentially 23 key to their religious practice under the 24 Vastus principle. So, with that I am going
15 1 to bring Praveen Manyam, the architect to 2 explain each item to you in detail you so he 3 can point out exactly what we are talking 4 about. 5 MR. MANYAM: Thank you. My name is 6 Praveen Manyam. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Are you an 8 attorney as well? 9 MR. MANYAM: No. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All right. If 11 you would please raise your hand and be 12 sworn in by our Secretary. 13 MR. MANYAM: Okay. 14 MEMBER KRIEGER: Do you swear or 15 affirm in this case number: 08-054 to tell 16 the truth in this case? 17 MR. MANYAM: I do. 18 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: State your name 20 and address and then go ahead and proceed 21 with your presentation. 22 MR. MANYAM: I am Praveen Manyam of 23 Frankenmuth, Michigan. I am an architect. 24 I represent the design profession on this
16 1 project. I would just like to explain a 2 little bit about the variances that we are 3 seeking for this project. 4 I will start with the height 5 variances. Some of these variances actually 6 I will deal with one particular building. 7 It's a three phase project. Three buildings 8 there. One particular building is the 9 temple building that is part of the phase 10 two on this project. The height variances 11 that we are seeking, first one is this 12 building, this structure right here, the 13 Maha Rajagopuram. This is essentially the 14 entrance gateway to the building. All of 15 these design features on this building are 16 derived out of the necessities dealing with 17 the temple itself. They are not there for 18 pretty decorations. Hindu temple is an 19 authenticate Hindu temple in India and the 20 carving on the building. And each carving 21 is a unique carving. And every temple is 22 different carving and so forth. 23 So, what we are putting together here 24 is an emulation of an authentic building
17 1 found in India. Most specifically the 2 southern regions of India. This is the 3 entrance gateway and we're basically looking 4 for two feet, four and a half inches 5 variance for this structure. It's a strict 6 proportional entity. And you can see by the 7 drawing there that it's the wider bands at 8 the bottom and they taper up to the smaller 9 bands toward the top. It's completely 10 derived out of mathematics and it wasn't 11 something where we were able to just shorten 12 it this way or that way emulating the 13 authenticity of this structure. 14 Another couple of variances that we 15 are looking at from a height perspective is 16 behind the structure there is -- let me pull 17 this sheet up a little bit. Now, I am 18 showing you the north elevation of this 19 building. The entrance gateway we are 20 talking about earlier is right here. 21 Toward the front of the building we 22 are talking about the entry point. And 23 these elements here, we are looking for a 24 variance of one and a half feet. Also, same
18 1 thing, this is the actual building itself. 2 We are marking the actual entry points of 3 this building. It's part of the process of 4 extension to the prayer hall space and it's 5 something where the doors itself on the 6 building are not standard doors. We are 7 talking greater than 10 feet height doors 8 and really magnificent large doors. 9 In proportion with the entire 10 entrance perspective of the building, we are 11 seeking this variance for these elements 12 that compliment the entry points of the 13 building. Towards the rear of the building 14 there are three, essentially three items 15 here that stand out quite tall. This 16 element here is the tallest variance that we 17 are seeking. It's 55' 1" in height, so we 18 are asking for a variance of 20' 1". 19 I will show you a section that 20 essentially this, that piece that we're 21 talking about right here, it's purely a 22 decorative piece and this space that lies 23 under that piece is a very sacred space. 24 This is a space where the general public
19 1 will actually not be allowed to enter this 2 space. This is essentially the markings of 3 that space. 4 In this temple configuration there 5 will be three such spaces like that and 6 that's what these three elements represent 7 in this structure here. The brass pole over 8 here is also part of the process of entering 9 the temple building. Once you pass this 10 brass pole you have not entered the prayer 11 hall space yet. It's really the last point 12 that you pass before you enter the prayer 13 hall space. This has a definite symmetry to 14 the tallest point of the back of the 15 building to that sacred place that I showed 16 you. 17 They are both 55' 1" in height and it 18 simulates with one another. It's 19 essentially those two elements are meant to 20 be in symmetry with each other and they are 21 on center on access with the center of that 22 sacred space there. Those are, I believe 23 those are the height variances that we are 24 seeking.
20 1 The other, there is one 2 more height variance that we are seeking 3 that deals with the roof top units. Right 4 here we are seeking a variance on the height 5 vertical for a 7 foot variance for a 42 foot 6 high structure above the building here. 7 What we have done here is that we are 8 enclosing the mechanical equipment in order 9 to ensure that there is no sound, outdoor 10 noise situations on this property being that 11 we have residential neighbors essentially 12 all over the property lines, so we will be 13 using acoustic material inside that 14 structure there. 15 In order to get a service technician 16 in and so forth, we needed to have the 17 height implications that we are presenting 18 here. We have lowered the height of the 19 prayer hall space that falls underneath that 20 to try to reduce the overall height of that 21 space but still with the serviceability 22 implications and so forth, we needed it to 23 be -- the best we could do was 42 feet on 24 that structure there.
21 1 Then another variance that we are 2 seeking is the refuge bin. Essentially we 3 were looking at the refuse bin, we were 4 looking at the three buildings as 5 essentially as main buildings. So we were 6 initially looking at moving the dumpster 7 behind the cultural center building. I will 8 show the site perspective. I will show you 9 the road just to get some perspective. The 10 road is essentially on the right edge of the 11 screen there. The cultural center is this 12 building right here up front. The temple 13 building that we are talking about is right 14 here. So, we do have a refuge bin behind 15 this temple building. But we are looking 16 for another refuge bin for this cultural 17 center building that is something more 18 relative to this building. 19 Essentially for the Planning 20 Commission we did put it on the side of this 21 building and what we were looking at is that 22 this won't be an accessory building, so we 23 were looking at moving this dumpster to 24 somewhere behind the cultural center
22 1 building and not requesting a variance. 2 Essentially anywhere we put it here will be 3 a side yard, so we are requesting a variance 4 for putting the dumpster. We would be happy 5 to move it from this location and put it 6 somewhere else which we could work with the 7 Community Development Department on that, 8 but we would be looking for a variance to 9 put it anywhere here, before this temple 10 building. 11 And then the last 12 variance that we are seeking is the parking 13 variance. We presented a plan that provides 14 272 spaces for parking for this development. 15 From the calculations at the Planning 16 Commission, we determined that the main use 17 building, the temple building has two, we 18 were going to determine the parking based on 19 the main use building. The temple building 20 has a prayer hall on the upper floor and a 21 multi purpose room on the lower floor. 22 The prayer hall is determined that it 23 would need 194 parking spaces. The multi 24 purpose room it was determined that it would
23 1 require 112 parking spaces. So the total 2 for that would be a requirement of 306 3 parking spaces. We have provided 272 4 parking spaces, so we are requesting 5 variance for 112 parking spaces. 6 In support of that variance one, we 7 wanted to mention that the prayer hall and 8 the multi purpose room are not meant to be 9 simultaneous activity spaces. The prayer 10 hall space itself in terms of maximum 11 capacity is a totally separate use from the 12 multi purpose room and we can't even 13 conceive of a situation where we would want 14 to be having such an event in the prayer 15 hall and let people be in the multi purpose 16 room. 17 But barring that, we do have 18 contingency plans. One is an overflow 19 parking agreement we do have with Miracle 20 Software which is a property located on 21 Grand River not far from here. And we do 22 have a letter of agreement for that. Also 23 we do have, we do have someone representing 24 Miracle Software here as well to verify that
24 1 request of that. 2 So, those are essentially the 3 variances that we are seeking and I will 4 turn it over to Bryan. 5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. 6 MR. AMANN: Just to wrap up very 7 quickly. I think it's important to point 8 out when we were at the Planning Commission, 9 although we had certain neighbors concerned 10 and things like that, we were really pleased 11 at the general appreciation and expression 12 and support of the beauty and the splendor 13 of the buildings. These buildings have a 14 certain look and it's very expensive 15 exterior finishes. So we think that will be 16 reflective. 17 Also, this building is essentially at 18 its closest is 27 feet away from the nearest 19 resident. So, although we are seeking 20 certain variances on certain heights, when 21 you look at it as relationship to actual 22 setbacks from other residents, the potential 23 impact of that is certainly minimized if 24 non-existent.
25 1 With that for one final closing point 2 I want to bring up Anand Gangadharan who his 3 going to represent the actual temple itself. 4 He just has one comment and then we are 5 prepared to answer any questions or hear any 6 comments. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Perfect. Good 8 evening, and are you an attorney? 9 MR. GANGADHARAN: Not I am not. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: If you will 11 please be sworn in as well. 12 MEMBER KRIEGER: Do you swear or 13 affirm in case number: 08-054 to tell the 14 truth in this case? 15 MR. GANGADHARAN: Yes. Again, we 16 appreciate on behalf of the Sri Venkateswara 17 Temple and Cultural Center. I just want to 18 state that the variances requested are very 19 much a part of religious practice. It is 20 part of the Hindu basis of why and how a 21 temple is constructed. And fundamentally we 22 appreciate your consideration of our request 23 here. If there are any questions I am happy 24 to answer. That's all. Thank you.
26 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is that all, Mr. 2 Amann? 3 MR. AMANN: We are all set, thank you, 4 Mr. Chairman. 5 MR. MANYAM: I have a bunch here a 6 letters from various members in the 7 community that are in support of this 8 project. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Robin, did we 10 receive those prior to? 11 MS. WORKING: I have not received 12 them, no. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Can we go ahead 14 and get those to you and you can make a copy 15 of them as part of the case? 16 MS. WORKING: Absolutely. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You can go ahead 18 and bring them to the Board. I don't seem 19 to have the case file for this case. At 20 this point in the meeting we normally go 21 ahead and read all the correspondence into 22 the case prior to letting the audience make 23 their comments, unfortunately I am missing 24 the file, so if you would bear with us for a
27 1 few moments while Robin helps me out I would 2 greatly appreciate it. 3 Madam Secretary, if you will please go 4 ahead and read the correspondence into the 5 record, I would appreciate it. 6 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number: 7 08-054, 32 notices were mailed. One 8 response, and it is, Dear Board Members. 9 The purpose of this letter is to object to 10 the approval of the variances to construct 11 the proposed cultural center. My objection 12 is based on the following reasons: One, to 13 build the proposed -- I don't want to say it 14 or I am going to miss it up -- Sri Ven -- 15 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Sri 16 Venkateswara Temple. 17 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you. And 18 cultural center requires approval of too 19 many variances. To approve all those 20 variances makes a mockery of the building 21 ordinances of the City of Novi. 22 Two, the size of the parcel does not 23 provide enough spaces to accommodate so many 24 parking spaces. Reducing the size of the
28 1 building to 21,823 square feet is not 2 enough. It does not reduce the number of 3 people who will come for major celebrations 4 and banquets. 5 Three, discharging more water into the 6 back of Andes Hills will increase the storm 7 water problem we currently face with the 8 storm water from the commercial buildings of 9 the north. 10 Four, the parcel is too small to the 11 proportion of the proposed cultural center. 12 According to web page of this project, the 13 temple is expecting to serve a membership of 14 over 3,000 families and the cultural center 15 expects to have over 1,000 persons seating 16 down at one time. 17 The web page also indicates that the 18 temple and cultural center will be the place 19 to celebrate weddings, birthdays, 20 graduations and other important occasions. 21 It is reasonable and realistic to anticipate 22 that the temple and cultural center will be 23 used at the same time as a gathering place 24 for thousands of people. Perhaps over 3,000
29 1 families who will come to worship and 2 celebrate their cultural practices. 3 The web page also indicates that the 4 cultural center will be the place where 5 medical and legal help will be offered by 6 willing specialists in their respective 7 fields for our community. 8 Are the medical and legal services 9 free or will there be a minimum charge? In 10 either case many people will come for the 11 services all the time. The community center 12 will be considered as a re-configurable 13 space focused on 1,000 persons seating 14 weddings, multi-purpose classroom and 15 recreational activities. Premium banquet 16 hall with all (unintelligible) for an Indian 17 wedding. To me this use of the cultural 18 center sounds like a commercial hall. The 19 traffic and commotion of the area will be 20 inevitable. 21 This number of people will arrive in 22 more than 287 cars, therefore, people will 23 have to park all over the neighborhood 24 creating too much commotion. The
30 1 disturbance will negatively impact in the 2 peace and value of the properties around. 3 Thank you for considering my concerns. 4 Cordially Felix Alwana (phonetic) from Andes 5 Hills Court. 6 That's it. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Mr. Schultz, 8 also in our packet we did receive -- 9 MS. WORKING: I'm sorry, through the 10 Chair. I think there was a late submission, 11 number two behind that one, Mr. Chair. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: This appears to 13 have been sent in with no name or address. 14 Mr. Schultz, is it appropriate to read it 15 into the record? 16 MR. SCHULTZ: No, it is not. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We will skip 18 this e-mail at this time. Any other 19 comments that you are aware of, Robin? 20 MS. WORKING: That was it. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very 22 much as always for your help on that. At 23 this time I would ask anyone in the audience 24 if they wish to make comment on this case if
31 1 they will please come forward. If there are 2 going to be other people behind her, go 3 ahead and come forward so we can keep a 4 cycle going and line up against the wall if 5 you are able to. Before we do get started 6 with the public remarks, comments. I do 7 want to mention that the Zoning Board has 8 the scope and the jurisdiction over the 9 ordinances and variances requested on the 10 agenda and the heights that were mentioned 11 during the presentation, et cetera. We 12 would appreciate everyone keeping their 13 comments to those variances and keeping 14 their comments mainly on the proceedings 15 tonight. 16 As far as what the Planning 17 Commission has decided and as far as 18 building sizes, et cetera, we don't have 19 jurisdiction per se over that. So, I just 20 want to ask that everyone keep their 21 comments to the point in order to keep this 22 as an efficient meeting. 23 Please state your name and address and 24 then proceed with your comments.
32 1 MS. GARDENER: My name is Jane 2 Gardener. I live 46000 West Eleven Mile, 3 Novi, Michigan. I would like to start, we 4 as residents in this community, we are 5 trying to come to grips with this building 6 going into this spot and we are kind of 7 excited about it, and I do appreciate the 8 explanation of the different decorative 9 elements on the top of the temple. It's a 10 big concern to me, the decorative elements, 11 not so much in how tall they are, but in 12 terms of how well they are lit, and I want 13 to discuss that a little bit. 14 But I also wanted to say in his 15 presentation about this temple, I 16 appreciated that, but the Applicant totally 17 omitted to mention the 21,000 square foot 18 cultural center and its use. Yes, I don't 19 believe that they will use the upstairs 20 prayer portion of the temple and the 21 downstairs 4,000 square foot multi-purpose 22 room. I can't imagine our own church, the 23 Catholic church I belong to using the church 24 and having a function at the same time. You
33 1 just wouldn't do that. It would be 2 irreverent. But I really am concerned that 3 the 4,000 square foot multi-purpose room and 4 the cultural center will be used at the same 5 time. And I think that this is a huge issue 6 for parking. 7 There is almost 4,000 square feet in 8 the multi purpose and I think in the 9 cultural center as well. If you look at 10 your plan you can see these are two large 11 spaces. So, yes, I don't believe that the 12 temple or these parking places for these 13 variances will be used at the same time, but 14 I don't think the Applicant at all addressed 15 the fact that the two buildings because they 16 are two separate buildings of the same size. 17 If you look, the one is 22,000 square feet. 18 The other one is 21,000 square feet. And I 19 guess as a resident of this area and living 20 on a very small road of Taft and Eleven Mile 21 we are grossly concerned that this is going 22 to provide a headache constantly for all of 23 the people involved. We believe it will be 24 a safety hazard. It will be a traffic mess.
34 1 And the intersection will be overwhelmed and 2 we as a community will be overwhelmed. 3 So, I really would like the Zoning 4 Board to look at that. One of my fellow 5 residents is going to talk more about the 6 parking spaces because it is a big issue. 7 And we are not trying to prevent this 8 temple. We are appreciative of the 9 diversity of our area and of our culture for 10 our children and for our community, so, we 11 really welcome this. 12 But we really also want to have our 13 living on those properties. So, we also 14 expect a little bit of consideration given 15 that this site is going to go in. Ten 16 variances is a lot of variances. I know 17 most of us have tried to get variances at 18 one time or another and had not been granted 19 one. So, these are very large variances and 20 I guess the one I want to talk about in 21 terms of the lighting. 22 I believe these are beautiful 23 structures on top of this building. My 24 property backs up on Eleven Mile backs up
35 1 into the woodland. I don't want to be 2 sitting outside on a beautiful evening and 3 see these large structures lit up all night. 4 As it is there is a lighting from the back 5 intersection that went in. Some nights with 6 the cloud cover you could particularly read 7 in my backyard because it is so bright. My 8 biggest concern is how long are these 9 structures or the steeples, the decorative 10 elements, whatever they want to be called, 11 how long are they going to be lit? And if 12 these variances are granted, I believe we 13 have to have wording in the approval of the 14 variances that sets a time frame for these 15 structures to be lit. 16 This building is bright white. 17 It will beautiful, but it is bright white. 18 So, the ambient light that reflects off this 19 and these tall towers is going to be huge 20 and we have a very big concern, the 21 residents in this whole area about seeing 22 this in the evening. So, we would really 23 like to know what time it's going to be lit 24 and we want the temple and the Applicant
36 1 held to these times. That is very important 2 to us. 3 Another thing I just 4 wanted to point out in terms of the 5 structure being close to residents. Yes, 6 the temple itself may be 275 feet from the 7 nearest residence, but the cultural center 8 is 75 feet from the nearest resident. I 9 know Mrs. Thibodaux (phonetic) who lives on 10 that piece of property next to where the 11 dumpster was before, she is truly 12 appreciative of moving the dumpster 13 literally outside of 10 feet from her 14 property because that's where the initial 15 application is. So, we appreciate them 16 working with her and us in terms of moving 17 that. 18 I guess that about sums up our 19 concerns. We want to be excited about the 20 temple, we truly do. My daughter just came 21 down to U of M to go to the Indian dance 22 that was performed there. She had several 23 friends and we would like to also be a part 24 of that community for them. But we also
37 1 want them to be cognizant of why we moved to 2 these pieces of property and why we built 3 our homes and why we live in this area 4 because we appreciate the wetland and 5 woodland and we would like those as 6 undisturbed as possible by the lighting, the 7 parking and the traffic. 8 So, those are some big concerns I 9 have. Thank you very much for your time. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very 11 much. Is there anyone else? Is there 12 anyone else in the audience that wishes to 13 make comment? Yes? 14 MS. THIBODAUX (ph): Yes, I am Janet 15 Thibodaux. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Your address as 17 well, please? 18 MS. THIBODAUX: My address is 26201 19 Taft Road and my property is directly south 20 to the proposed project. And I have been 21 opposed to this project from the very 22 beginning for many reasons. The amount of 23 variances that they are asking tells me that 24 perhaps this site does not accommodate the
38 1 very wonderful plans that they have for 2 their temple and cultural center. I am very 3 concerned about the impact that this project 4 will have on myself and the other residents 5 surrounding this project. 6 I am very concerned about a dumpster 7 being 10 to 20 feet from the side of my 8 property and perhaps I don't understand the 9 variances that are being asked, but that is 10 my understanding at this point. I am very 11 concerned. And when I hear a variance that 12 request the dumpster being put to the side, 13 what does that mean to my property? I do 14 not wish to see a dumpster. I do not wish 15 to smell trash from a dumpster from my 16 property. 17 Additionally, I am 18 concerned about my ability to leave and 19 enter my driveway. The Basilian Brothers 20 residency is underway right now, that 21 project is being underway, and I know you 22 are not here tonight to hear that. But I am 23 very concerned about how close their egress 24 is to Eleven Mile. I will have that new
39 1 egress to the right of my property as I 2 leave my drive. And then I will have this 3 new project egress to the left of my 4 property and I am very concerned about that. 5 Eleven Mile and Taft Road is already -- what 6 do I want to say? A dangerous site. You 7 know why? Hit the brakes and look both ways 8 and hope that nothing is going to happen 9 when I proceed south down Taft Road. 10 Please consider the impact that this 11 project will have not only on my residency, 12 but on the residences that's surrounding. 13 And at the same time I know you wish to 14 accommodate the interest of the people who 15 support this project. It's not an easy 16 decision and I hope you will make the right 17 one. Thank you. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very 19 much. Next? Name and address for us and 20 make your comments. 21 MR. ROZACH (ph): Good evening, my 22 name is Matt Rozach. My address is 45950 23 West Eleven Mile. I am probably the second 24 closest resident -- I am probably the
40 1 closest resident to this temple. Parking 2 requirements are typically dedicated by 3 building size and usage per the City of Novi 4 Ordinances. In this case as stated in the 5 Planning Review preliminary site plan, "The 6 Applicant provided data was used to 7 calculate the occupancy of the temple and 8 the cultural center which was then used to 9 determine the parking standard for the 10 overall site." So, there was a strong bias 11 to using the Applicant's supplied data. 12 From this information parking 13 requirements were determined for each of the 14 buildings. We have the temple up here, 15 22,600 square feet. The cultural center 16 21,823 feet. Parking was determined from 17 the prayer hall and the multi-purpose room 18 which is 40% of the temple. And parking was 19 determined for the main conference and the 20 classrooms which is 50% of the cultural 21 center. I wish my percentages came in 22 there. I guess I got the red a little too 23 dark. Working with this they came up with 24 the temple needing 306 required parking and
41 1 the cultural center needing 239 required 2 parking for a total of 545 total required 3 parking. 4 Now the requests for variance is for 5 34 parking spaces based on just the use of 6 the temple building now. If we look at just 7 the use of the temple building now, we are 8 taking the 306 minus the 272 planned parking 9 and we come up with 34 variances and there 10 is no parking right now designated for the 11 cultural center. 12 When actually what's 13 going on is, parking is only provided for 14 20% of both building spaces with the 15 variance of 34 parking spaces. Doesn't 16 something seem wrong here? Wake up. There 17 is too much building and not enough parking. 18 We have moved from allocating 7 or 15 square 19 feet per person, depending upon the building 20 or the room to allocating 49 square feet per 21 person to determine our work parking 22 requirement on this project. 23 Using only one of the buildings at a 24 time appears to be a moving target with the
42 1 Applicant. Even though the Planning 2 Department's approval basis on both 3 authorities will not be utilized 4 simultaneously. Building usage from the 5 Applicant has evolved from the September 6 24th Planning minutes saying uses would not 7 occur at the same time. Then we moved up to 8 the October 22nd Planning minutes and now 9 major events will not occur at the same 10 time. So all of a sudden now we are using 11 two buildings but major events will not 12 occur. 13 Now, the latest is in the October 29, 14 letter to the City Zoning Board from the 15 Manyam Group they say maximum capacity use 16 will not occur simultaneously. They are 17 admitting they are going to use both 18 buildings. It's obvious to me that there is 19 definitely an intent by the Applicant to use 20 both buildings at the same time. What 21 number of persons in a building does it 22 require that parking places be provided? 23 Fifty people? A hundred people? 24 Consider the following here. These
43 1 are the hours that they are presenting for 2 use of the temple. We are talking 9:00 to 3 9:00 during the weekdays except for early 4 afternoon and on the weekends we are talking 5 9:00 to 10:00 in the evening. 6 Uses of the cultural center. There are 7 10 recognized southern Hindu major festivals 8 and other minor festivals that are 9 celebrated. In addition, temples or centers 10 in Canton and Troy are booked three to four 11 months out for parties such as wedding, 12 graduations, birthdays and other events. 13 The same will most likely occur here. 14 Traditional weddings in India will be for 15 two days, it is possible that two-day 16 weddings will occur here. 17 This is an authenticate 18 traditional Hindu temple, very ornate with 19 the next closest one in Chicago. This alone 20 with attract more activities than other 21 temples in the area. It seems like a lot of 22 activity in the cultural center during 23 temple hours. To me it sounds like both 24 buildings are attended and will be operated
44 1 simultaneously. Therefore, parking 2 requirements must be addressed for use of 3 both buildings. 4 The question is is 308 required 5 parking places sufficient together with off 6 site parking to meet the needs of 45,000 7 square feet? No. Off-site parking will 8 actually have a heavier burden on the 9 traffic flow. Traffic increases not only 10 for those arriving, departing to park on the 11 site's lot, but traffic for those cars 12 performing drops offs and pick ups will 13 actually had four times to the traffic 14 volume. 15 This is the lot here and we have Grand 16 River and we have a Taft Road and down here 17 we have Eleven Mile. With only a single 18 entrance, there is only one entrance to this 19 parcel, all traffic will be required to use 20 Taft Road which at this location is a very 21 short two lane residential street. Note 22 also very close by are two schools. There 23 is a school down here. A school here, a 24 church, the Basilian and the Basilian
45 1 Father's project that is going in. And this 2 intersection right here, Eleven Mile and 3 Taft Road, that is the number one crash site 4 today per the April 16th, 2008 master plan 5 for land use. 6 Off site parking is currently 7 discussed to be at Miracle Software which is 8 up here. That requires left-hand turns off 9 the site, so people coming out of the site 10 are going to have to make a left-hand turn 11 to go up to Miracle Software. While cars on 12 Taft trying to turn in on left are going to 13 back up. So you have got two directions 14 trying to turn left here. 15 Backups will occur and residences 16 that use Taft to get to from their subs are 17 not going to be pleased and there is a lot 18 of people that use Taft to get off the 19 expressway to come in their sub. 20 In summary regarding the parking, it's 21 more important than ever that adequate 22 parking is provided for both buildings and 23 on-site. It's strongly stressed that any 24 parking variances come out of the zoning
46 1 that it is conditioned upon the applicant's 2 promise and statement that both facilities 3 will not be utilized simultaneously in the 4 motion to approve and that the term utilized 5 is quantified. Define the number of people. 6 Is that 50, a hundred people when the 7 building becomes utilized? If this is not 8 adhered to the neighborhood will not only be 9 overran by traffic, but also by parked 10 vehicles because this is really not a 34 11 space variance, it's 100 percent variance 12 based on the use of two buildings. 13 The variance must be conditioned upon 14 the promised statement that applicant, that 15 both the temple and the cultural center will 16 not be used at the same time, otherwise this 17 variance will not be appropriate. It is a 18 disaster waiting to happen. 19 I am very concerned four to six years 20 into the future if it's found that the 21 deciding facts were way too conservative or 22 building use is different than as presented 23 that the city and neighboring residents and 24 subdivisions will pay a heavy toll since the
47 1 project may not have been approved with 2 better facts on the onset. 3 Now regarding the height variances. 4 This falls under special land use this 5 project. Under special planned use 6 additional requirements Section 2516.2C 7 states, "The proposed use is to be 8 compatible with adjacent uses of land in 9 terms of location, size, character and 10 impact on adjacent property or the 11 surrounding neighborhood. Again, this is a 12 residential district. The building and its 13 towers are not at all compatible in size and 14 character with the surrounding parcels. 15 Homes one side, the temple and an office 16 building of finishes that are white and not 17 neutral in color on the other side. How is 18 that compatible with adjacent uses of land? 19 It will definitely stand out in this 20 residential community. 21 Approving the requested land variance 22 only further conflicts with the requirements 23 to not impact adjacent properties or the 24 surrounding neighborhood.
48 1 Now, added lighting to the building, 2 the building towers and the parking lots. 3 This is a significant wild life wooded area 4 that will be undergoing a major stress 5 change. That parcel that this site is going 6 to be on is basically going to divide a 7 major wildlife habitat and the lighting, if 8 it's not monitored or restricted is 9 definitely going to impact this wildlife 10 habitat in this woodland area. 11 I ask that lighting not remain on 12 beyond a reasonable length of time in the 13 evening. Hopefully the lights can be shut 14 off by 10 p.m. This lightening issue needs 15 to be considered so that light pollution 16 does not further intrude into our 17 residential neighborhood. Any motion to 18 approve the height variance must address for 19 the residences' sake the lighting element 20 and the time restriction, especially if the 21 architecture elements are going to be 22 approved at the height requested. Thank you 23 very much for your time. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very
49 1 much. 2 MS. DOOLEY: My name is Trisha Dooley. 3 I live at 25711 Arcadia. I sat at the 4 Planning Commission meeting last month and 5 heard people speaking and letters being read 6 in support of the temple and the cultural 7 center and how it would benefit the 8 community and their families. 9 And the fact is, no one ever 10 argued that point. This has never been the 11 issue. The issue remains to be for me is 12 why for this particular project I feel like 13 so many issues are willing to be overlooked 14 or ignored. The City Ordinance, the 15 protective lands. The traffic situation. 16 And my next question for whether it's you or 17 the Planning Commission, I don't know, is if 18 we do that for this project, what do we do 19 for the next project that comes to the city 20 that wants to change 10 ordinances, 13 21 variances? And really I don't know if 22 that's a precedent that's being set for 23 future projects that are coming to the area. 24 And that makes me nervous.
50 1 I think it's a wonderful project. 2 It's a beautiful building. I still believe 3 that there is a better site that would be 4 much more suitable for a project this size. 5 But if it is going to end up on this 6 property since so many considerations will 7 have had to be made for this project to fit 8 into this piece of land, I would just expect 9 that the same amount of consideration be 10 given to the residents in this area. Which 11 means that, I understand to the best of my 12 knowledge that there are required times, 13 that there are specific times that the 14 temple can be open, but I have yet to hear 15 about designated hours that the cultural 16 center will be opened and I think that that 17 needs to be regulated and monitored for the 18 residents in the area how late that can stay 19 open? How early it can be open? And, 20 again, the lighting for people in that area 21 remains to be a big issue. 22 I would expect the traffic issue to be 23 re-examined because, again, from my 24 understanding, I think the traffic report
51 1 was clearly biased. What I understood was 2 that they believed that there was to be no 3 traffic -- I know you all have driven that 4 and if you for any reason could think that a 5 center of this size, bringing that many 6 people into that area, it's a problem there 7 already and it is only going to get worse. 8 Again, what I would really just like 9 to say is, I think to have good neighbors, 10 you need to be good neighbors. If everybody 11 is willing to give something. Obviously, 12 like I said, if it's going to be in that 13 area, they will be getting a lot and I think 14 they need to give the same back to the 15 neighbors and be considerate of the area 16 that they are moving into, the residential 17 area they are moving into. Anyway, thank 18 you. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very 20 much. If I could just make one quick 21 comment. Once again, per the rules of 22 conduct, please make sure that all cell 23 phones are turned off or at least on vibrate 24 out of consideration for Petitioners,
52 1 speakers and the Board, I would greatly 2 appreciate that. 3 Name and address? 4 MS. MATHIS (ph): My name is Maria 5 Mathis. I live at 25714 Arcardia Drive. And 6 I have been a Novi resident since 1986. I 7 bought my second house in Novi off of Eleven 8 Mile because we loved being there. We love 9 the location. Away from everything and it 10 is just keeps getting more and more, 11 Catholic Central going in and now 12 Providence, and the traffic on Eleven Mile 13 has become atrocious. 14 I would drive down Eleven Mile 15 and I would set my cruise at 30 because I do 16 not want a traffic ticket and I have to go 17 on my back end all the time and I am coming 18 from that perspective. I don't know how you 19 are going to be able to monitor this. 20 Let me back up. The parking variance 21 is also what I want to talk about. When you 22 have a place, the web site promoted 3,000 23 families. You are talking at least one car 24 per family. We are not talking about a wife
53 1 or husband coming at separate times or the 2 teenage child starting to drive. Then we 3 are talking additional cars than 3,000. We 4 have to be realistic. And the gentleman had 5 the photographs of all that. He did a 6 fantastic job. It was so well prepared. 7 Let's look at the real picture. How 8 many people are the cultural center thinking 9 of having? If you look at what at the last 10 meeting because they brought a photograph 11 and they showed the place in Troy and they 12 were parked all over the grass. And my 13 question is, who is going to police this? 14 If they start parking all over the grass, I 15 mean our community, it brings us down. We 16 are supposed to be one of the top 100 17 cities. And people starting to park on the 18 grass is not going to look very attractive. 19 And who is going to monitor that? What 20 start happening if you give a little fine, 21 the fine is not going to be a big deal. So, 22 I want to know who is going to monitor that? 23 And they mentioned that there is going 24 to be a company that is going to be
54 1 providing additional parking. How many 2 parking spaces does this company have? And 3 how is the transportation? Is it going to 4 be with busses? Is it going to be with 5 vans? How is all that going to work out? 6 And then also at the last meeting it 7 was brought up that the school system was 8 also going to provide additional parking. I 9 know at my child's elementary school parking 10 we use Novi Meadows when we have been 11 advised that we don't have enough parking. 12 And then if they are going to use the school 13 property who is going to maintain that? 14 It's all during winter break and there is 15 nobody shoveling the driveway. So, I want to 16 make with realistic of, can you have a place 17 that big with that amount of parking spots? 18 Be realistic. If you went and looked at the 19 web site before it was taken off you would 20 have seen how it was promoted and it was 21 promoted to bring people from all over. 22 It's a regional center and a regional center 23 is going to have more than 300 parking 24 spots. It has to. So, I am asking as a
55 1 resident of Novi, a resident that deals with 2 Taft Road all the time, we like Taft, it's 3 usually local residents going to their 4 places. Once in a while we get people 5 cutting through. Usually it's local and now 6 we are going to have much more traffic down 7 there. I am asking please be responsible. 8 And if it goes through make sure that 9 everything is kept up to par. That there 10 are monitoring with the police making sure 11 that traffic is not getting to go too fast. 12 If there is a left turn lane problem, 13 that a left turn lane is going to be put in 14 and then whose going to have to pay for 15 that? Hopefully as a Novi taxpayer I'm not 16 going to have to have the extra expense in 17 that. That's going to be written in. That 18 if any infrastructure and all that needs to 19 be changed that that is going to be taken 20 care of. 21 But most importantly be realistic with 22 parking. If you look at really how many 23 people they are going to cater to and really 24 where they are going to park? And hopefully
56 1 I forgot to notice that Taft Road has no 2 parking signs, but if they don't I would 3 hope that that would be consistent and 4 people are not parking along the road. 5 Look at us residents that have been 6 here a long time. Yes, we want the temple. 7 We want the goodness of people but we have 8 to be realistic of where they are going to 9 park. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very 11 much. I wish I had jurisdiction over the 12 potholes because my road would be the best 13 in Novi, but I appreciate your comments. 14 More comments? 15 MR. KASER (ph): Ray Kaser, 45435 16 Andes Hills Court directly north of the 17 temple. It's almost hard to expound on 18 everything that my neighbors have said 19 because they have done a good job. One 20 thing, I don't know what the question here 21 is, at the onset of us learning this back in 22 September, there was 14 variances and the 23 parking variance had stated it needed over 24 900 parking spots for this project and
57 1 magically it's down to 400 or 500 or 300 2 now. And I have no idea where these parking 3 spots had gone. 4 They said they have downsized 55,000 5 square feet of building on that space and 6 it's only 8 and a half acres. It's not a 10 7 acre site. It's eight and a half inches and 8 an acre and a half is wetlands which crosses 9 a river. So, the property cross a river. 10 And that's equivalent to 33 houses or 1,500 11 square feet houses being built on that 12 property which you two probably would have 13 never allowed to happen. 14 I researched by going to Troy. Troy 15 has two entrances. One of them goes out to 16 a three lane highway having a left turn 17 lane. And Canton has one building. It has 18 the temple and I believe below is the 19 conference room. So, what else I have 20 noticed at both those places, there are 21 trees are everywhere. They must have 40 foot 22 trees and 20 foot lights. Their neighbors 23 cannot see them at all which is really they 24 are really nice to their neighbors.
58 1 One of the variances that are missing 2 in the beginning is a berm. I think 3 ordinance say that they have to have a 15 4 foot berm. Well, because of the size of the 5 property they can't put a 15 foot berm. So 6 they brought it down to three foot. While 7 they have three foot berm and a ten foot 8 tree, and I have looked at the site plans, 9 they have a 20 foot light. That means we 10 will see lights all the time. I will be 11 sitting on my deck and it would just be lit 12 up. It's too big a project. Too big of a 13 temple to be put on eight and a half acres. 14 Thank you very much. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. 16 MR. MORELY (ph): Good evening, my 17 name is Irwin Morely. I am a resident of 18 Novi, 24508 Partridge Court. I just wanted 19 to add on that in addition of the scale it's 20 something that is very positive for the 21 Indian community in Novi as well as other 22 surrounding areas and we really appreciate 23 you taking the time to understand the 24 development, understand people's concern and
59 1 hopefully you will do the right thing and 2 approve this for us. We appreciate it. 3 Thank you. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very 5 much. Is there anyone else in the audience 6 that wishes to make a comment on this case? 7 Going once, going twice, seeing no other 8 comments, I will close the public remarks 9 portion of the case. And I will ask if 10 anyone from the City wishes to make a 11 comment? 12 MR. BOULARD: I wanted to give Barbara 13 McBeth, our Deputy Community Development 14 director is here. I believe she was present 15 and can speak to the previous hearings. And 16 I wanted to ask Barbara if she could bring 17 us up to date on the progress so far that 18 may have eliminated some of the variances. 19 And also, Barb, if you would be so 20 kind, there seems to be some question about 21 the number of parking spaces required if 22 it's 306 or 308. Then that number required 23 for the variance appears the same 34, but I 24 wondered if you would clarify that if you
60 1 would be so kind? 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Right before you 3 get to that, I actually just want to ask our 4 attorney and I am sure he will have some 5 comment to make, but as far as the number of 6 spots and how it was determined, that is not 7 under our purview, am I correct in that 8 statement? 9 MR. SCHULTZ: You are correct. And I 10 think it's important about understanding 11 exactly. And we'll have Barb go through the 12 sort of physical characteristics of the 308. 13 The bottom line is, the Planning Commission 14 as part of its special land use made the 15 determination based on the representations 16 about not having use at the same time. 17 That's it's the 308 or 306, whichever number 18 Barb says it is. And that's not an issue 19 that's on appeal to the ZBA. It's not an 20 issue that the ZBA can look into, decide 21 whether they agree or disagree with, that's 22 the number. So, the 308 or 306 boils down 23 to the fact that they provided 272. So the 24 issue is 34 spaces.
61 1 It would be helpful if Ms. McBeth 2 could talk a little bit about whether or not 3 those spaces actually could be put on the 4 property if need be because I think that's 5 an important consideration for you as we 6 move forward. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Absolutely. I 8 just wanted t make sure that the Zoning 9 Board and everyone in the audience 10 understood that we are not allowed to 11 necessarily look at how the number was 12 brought. We are not looking at the 308, we 13 must concentrate on the 34 and apply our 14 standards to the 34. 15 MR. SCHULTZ: That is correct. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. Ms. 17 McBeth? 18 MS. McBETH: Thank you. Good evening. 19 I will go over a few of the details that I 20 was hoping to talk with the Board about. 21 This is the areal photo of the property. 22 The subject property is outlined in red 23 here. Taft Road is over to the right. Mrs. 24 Thibodaux's house is right here she alluded
62 1 to her property earlier. The Andes Hills 2 development is here and Grand River is just 3 to the north and off the page. 4 The property is zoned RA, residential 5 acreage and is master planned for single 6 family residential uses. There are wetlands 7 on the front of the property as well as near 8 the back of the property and almost all of 9 the back part of the property contains very 10 good quality dense woodlands on the back 11 half of the site. I did also just want to 12 go just over briefly the site plan for the 13 property so that we can all make sure that 14 we're aware of where the different buildings 15 are prosed to be located. 16 So, again, Taft Road is to the right 17 and north is up. The cultural center 18 building is located closest to Taft Road. 19 It's a two-story building about 21,823 20 square feet. The proposed temple building 21 is also two stories. It's about 22,693 22 square feet. The first phase of the 23 development is the priest residence and 24 temporary temple essentially a room in
63 1 residence that will accommodate the temple 2 until the second phase, the temple itself is 3 constructed. And then the third phase 4 somewhere down the line will be the cultural 5 center again closest to Taft Road. 6 The Planning Commission approved 7 this special land use, the preliminary site 8 plan the woodland and wetland permits on 9 October 22nd, subject to the considerations 10 of the Zoning Board of Appeals for the 11 variances and ordinance considerations that 12 are presented this evening. All of the 13 height variances are related to the temple 14 building itself. Mr. Manyam presented the 15 cross section and elevations that there is 16 an artist rendering that I can also show you 17 where the height considerations are located 18 for the features on the temple building. 19 Again, the structure that is located in 20 front of the temple is proposed to be 37' 4 21 1/2" in height. 22 There are a couple of decorative 23 elements appearing on the temple that are 36 24 and a half feet and 40 and a half feet in
64 1 height. There are two decorative elements 2 here at the back what we refer to as 3 elements that exceed the typical height 4 standards that are 50 feet in height each 5 and then two elements that are 55' 1" in 6 height. The brass pole and the element in 7 the very back of the building. 8 We have noted in Section 2903 of the 9 Zoning Ordinance exemptions from the height 10 locations have been identified. The zoning 11 ordinance states that church spires are not 12 required to meet the height standards and 13 it's staff's opinion that these elements 14 could be considered to be the equivalent of 15 a spire on a church. We did some research, 16 if anybody is interested we can show some 17 pictures of various church spires that exist 18 on churches around the world, but I won't 19 show you those at this point and I will move 20 on to the other aspects of this. 21 The proposed temple we know that each 22 element is setback from the property line 23 the distance that is greater than the height 24 of those elements as the ordinance requires
65 1 and the staff supports the approval of the 2 use variances since the elements are part of 3 the design and function of the temple. 4 The final height variance is for the 5 mechanical equipment screening on the roof, 6 located right about here. That is 42 feet 7 in height and that variance is from a 8 different section of the ordinance, Section 9 2503.2E (2) which states that roof top 10 appurtenances shall not exceed the maximum 11 height standard of the distance which is 35 12 feet. 13 We note that the screening is located 14 in the center of the temple building and is 15 proposed to match the color of the building. 16 Staff supports this variance since the 17 screening has been designed to be an 18 integral part of the design of the building. 19 There is another request from the 20 ordinance standards and that relates to the 21 location of the dumpster enclosure near the 22 cultural center, so I'll put that back up 23 here. I can zoom in on it a little bit. 24 The location where it is shown on the plans
66 1 is right about in this location here. And 2 we have talked with the applicant about 3 relocating that somewhere further to the 4 west. Somewhere further from the adjacent 5 residential home. Possibly somewhere in 6 this location over here, but that has not 7 been determined yet. 8 It's staff's opinion that the Zoning 9 Board of Appeals would continue to need to 10 look at this as an ordinance variation since 11 the dumpster enclosure would be still 12 located in the side yard. We would like to 13 work with Applicant at the time of final 14 site plan to find a better location for that 15 dumpster enclosure. 16 And we did provide quite a bit of 17 information in the written materials to the 18 Zoning Board of Appeals related to the 19 parking requirements for the site. We did 20 note that the Planning Commission approved a 21 special land use of the site plan designing 22 that the parking in the more intense use. 23 The temple is required to be provided on the 24 site. A total of 308 parking spaces are
67 1 required for the development and only 274 2 parking spaces have been provided with the 3 deficiency of 34 parking spaces. Again, we 4 did have the applicant in the applicant's 5 materials, let me show you up here on the 6 overhead with the statements about the 7 events at the cultural center would never be 8 held concurrently with any large scale 9 temple activities. So, we relied on that 10 information. But if the Zoning Board of 11 Appeals is inclined to grant the variance, 12 we would suggest that this be requested 13 again on the record and is part of that 14 statement. 15 It sounds like people are interested 16 in the actual calculations, that the 17 Planning Commission endorsed for the parking 18 requirement. What we did was we took the 19 temple parking standards and we looked at 20 the prayer hall and the multi-purpose room 21 in the temple itself and we found that the 22 prayer hall could be assumed to have an 23 occupancy of one person per seven square 24 feet. That's based on a curve line of
68 1 people sitting in chairs. There would be no 2 pews or chairs as we understand it provided 3 in that prayer hall. So, we kind of took 4 the tightest scenario that we could. 5 And then for the multi-purpose room on 6 the first floor of that building we made an 7 assumption that there would be one person 8 per 15 square feet, assuming that people 9 might be sitting at tables and chairs and 10 that's when we came up with the 308 parking 11 spaces that would be required. 12 Again, I looked at the cultural 13 center, that building also would require a 14 number of parking spaces and, again, we took 15 the maximum occupancy that we're assuming 16 for the main area that would be occupied. 17 There is kind of banquet room that again we 18 assumed would be one person for every 15 19 square feet. With the tables and chairs for 20 150 spaces for that room and then some 21 classrooms as well. And then our calculation 22 again at one per 15 square feet were 89 23 parking spaces. 24 So, that building itself would require
69 1 239. Again, based on the assumption that the 2 Applicant is -- we can rely on the 3 Applicant's statements that there would not 4 be concurrent use of the two buildings, the 5 Planning Commission endorsed the higher of 6 those requirements which was the 308 parking 7 spaces. And that's how we arrived at that 8 number. 9 I will be happy to answer any of 10 the questions that the Board might have 11 either now or at the appropriate time. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I think we will 13 bring you back up during more discussion 14 should there be any questions. 15 MS. McBETH: Thank you. 16 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: I have a 17 question. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We will let the 19 whole entire city speak and then we will 20 turn it to Board discussion. And at that 21 time if you request her assistance we will 22 call her back up. 23 Anyone else from the City 24 officials who wish to make comments at this
70 1 time? 2 MR. BOULARD: Nothing further. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Then at this 4 time I will go ahead and open it up for 5 Board discussion. It sounds like you may be 6 coming back up as soon as I turn it over to 7 Vice-Chair Sanghvi. 8 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: First of 9 all, I want to thank you for your 10 presentation. I have a couple of questions. 11 If I am correct, Novi area is about 36 12 square miles? 13 MS. McBETH: I would say that's about 14 correct. 15 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: How many 16 churches do we have in Novi? 17 MS. McBETH: You know, our department 18 has not made a study of that. That would be 19 something interesting -- 20 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Because the 21 number I came to in my mind after going 22 through different streets and all that was 23 about 14. How many of them are not in a 24 residential area?
71 1 MS. McBETH: Again, churches are 2 typically permitted with special land use 3 approval if in a residential district. I am 4 not aware of any churches or places or 5 worship that are not located in a 6 residential district in Novi. 7 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. 8 One of the issues that was raised by some of 9 the city residents here was about the 10 traffic or the perception of a traffic 11 problem. I believe a traffic study was 12 presented to the Planning Commission. Would 13 you like to throw some light on that so 14 people will understand that this fact has 15 already be covered in this discussion? 16 MS. McBETH: Through the Chair, the 17 Applicant did provide a traffic study and 18 some parking figures as well in that traffic 19 study and that was reviewed by the City's 20 traffic consultant. Our consultant had some 21 questions about that study and referred it 22 back to the Applicant's expert and they took 23 a look at the traffic study together and 24 provided some additional information that
72 1 was requested or required by our traffic 2 consultant. 3 Our consultant eventually did endorse 4 that traffic study and made a conclusion 5 that he was comfortable with it and that 6 Taft Road would be able to accommodate the 7 traffic that would be generated. 8 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. 9 I have one more question for you. Would you 10 rather have the prescribed number of parking 11 spots in this project or save the trees if 12 you could? 13 MS. McBETH: Again, I think that might 14 be a matter for the Zoning Board of Appeals. 15 Our consultants again are environmental 16 consultants have noted that woodlands that 17 are on site are in very high quality and 18 good habitat as the residents have pointed 19 it as well. It would be our preference as 20 planners to keep the woodlands intact 21 wherever its possible without causing undue 22 difficulty with the parking on the site. 23 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you 24 very much. I don't have any more questions
73 1 for you. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 3 Member Sanghvi. 4 I just want to ask the Board if we 5 want to look at all the variances at once, I 6 mentioned this to you before, or if we 7 wanted to break them into different 8 sections. Does anyone have an opinion on 9 that that they wish to share? 10 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: I think 11 easier administrative put for discussion. 12 Maybe just the height variance first and the 13 parking variance second. 14 Because dumpster is off. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: No, we still 16 have to review that as well, the dumpster as 17 well. But I do like that idea. I think we 18 are going to go ahead and discuss the height 19 variance first if that's appropriate, Mr. 20 Schultz? 21 MR. SCHULTZ: It may be a good time to 22 make a little introductory statement on the 23 questions that relate to height briefly. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I already gave
74 1 you your chance. 2 MR. SCHULTZ: Okay, I can wait. I 3 noticed a couple of times use of the word 4 variances for the height issues here and we 5 were careful in the letter that we did and 6 what the Planning Department came up with to 7 try and say you have got two different ways 8 to go here. You are used to dealing with 9 issues relating to more height than is 10 allowed under the ordinance as a variance. 11 In this case though because it's a church. 12 And it's our position and I think it's the 13 Planning Department's position that we are 14 really not looking at you exercising 15 authority to grant variances. Yes, there 16 are elements, seven elements that are listed 17 in the notice as being beyond 35 feet in 18 height. But there is a provision in the 19 ordinance called the general exceptions 20 provision that says for church spires the 35 21 foot height limitation doesn't apply. And 22 unfortunately as we said in our letter, the 23 language is a little bit inconsistent or 24 might even be a word or two missing. But
75 1 our interpretation of that Section 2903 of 2 the Ordinance is the 35 foot height 3 limitation is not a limitation in the normal 4 sense and you are not being asked in our 5 view to give a variance from. What you are 6 being asked to do under 2903 is decide 7 whether what they have proposed as to height 8 for these particular seven architectural 9 elements, which we think are church spires 10 would fall under that, are those appropriate 11 heights. 12 2903 does not give you good standards 13 to do that. It basically just says the ZBA 14 if it's a special land use can specify what 15 the height limit is going to be. It's not 16 the same as granting a variance. It's not 17 your usual practical difficulty standard. It 18 just sort of says, the height limit doesn't 19 apply for church spires, the ZBA decides if 20 it's a special land use. I think the 21 assumption of the ordinance is it's going to 22 be higher than 35 feet because frankly, most 23 churches whether they're in a residential 24 area or anywhere else tend to have at least
76 1 some architectural element that's higher 2 than the rest of the building to draw 3 attention to it or for the purposes 4 described by the proponent. 5 So, the question that the Board needs 6 to ask itself is, taking a look at these 7 seven things, whether they're in a 8 residential area or anywhere else tend to 9 have at least some architectural element 10 that's higher than the rest of the building 11 to draw attention to it or for the purposes 12 described by the proponent. So, the 13 question that the Board needs to ask itself 14 is, taking a look at these seven things, 15 should the height that they are proposing be 16 permitted? Without good standards in that 17 Section 2903, though, what we tried to do in 18 the letter that we gave you today, my 19 apologies for doing that, we got a number of 20 questions so we thought we would put 21 together a letter. 22 Because it's a special land use we 23 thought it would be appropriate to look at 24 the Special Land Use Section that normally
77 1 is the province of the Planning Commission. 2 You don't normally apply those factors that 3 are laid out in the letter. But without 4 that kind of guidance you are just sort of 5 left deciding whether or not it's a good 6 height or not. 7 I think the first thing you have to do 8 is decide, number one, do you think these 9 fall under the characterization of church 10 spires? And if they do, you are not talking 11 about variances, you are talking about is 12 the height that is proposed appropriate for 13 a church spire. Here it says a temple. A 14 temple architectural element. So, if you 15 decide to go down that road, then you need 16 to look at those factors, not your practical 17 difficulty factors, but the factors laid out 18 in our letter, compatibility with 19 surrounding uses, appropriateness to the 20 particular use and decide are these heights 21 that are proposed for these elements 22 appropriate and can they be approved. 23 Because that Section 2903 leaves that 24 question to you. I wish it had better
78 1 guidance, but it is what it is. 2 So, I think that's the height issue 3 with everything except those, the air 4 conditioner which is your usual variance, 5 practical difficulty and all that kind of 6 different stuff. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, I think 8 that's where we are going to break at. We 9 will look at one through seven at this time 10 and discuss that first. Then we will get to 11 the apparatus, the dumpster and the parking 12 last. 13 Do you wish to make comment as well in 14 regards to the distance of the nearest 15 property line as part of that ordinance as 16 well? 17 MR. SCHULTZ: That is the one standard 18 that I guess is in the ordinance. It says 19 obviously it can't be higher than the 20 distance from that element to the property 21 line and that is not here. They are 75 feet 22 away. The tallest aspect of this is 50 23 feet. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you as
79 1 always for your expertise, Mr. Schultz. 2 Board Members? 3 MEMBER KRIEGER: Question? 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Secretary 5 Krieger? 6 MEMBER KRIEGER: Regarding the height. 7 No, I'm sorry. For Mr. Schultz. How do we 8 measure the height? For example, on Novi 9 Road they are building a dentist office I 10 believe next to a residential area and I 11 believe they put in landfill or filler, and 12 then they put in the building. So, is the 13 height determined or maybe it's for Beth, 14 I'm not sure, how they determine the height? 15 I'm not or maybe it for both. 16 MR. SCHULTZ: She is walking up. I 17 will wait for her to answer. 18 MS. McBETH: Thank you for the 19 question. Typically the height is measured 20 from average grade around the building. So, 21 we look at the four sides of the building, 22 come up with the average grade and then the 23 height is measured from that average 24 finished grade. I think that the office
80 1 that you are referring to might be slightly 2 different because they are bringing in some 3 fill at that point. Usually it would be 4 measured from the average grade around the 5 building at its finished level and thought's 6 how it is measured. 7 MEMBER KRIEGER: That's it. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 9 Member Krieger. Other Board Members? 10 Member Shroyer? 11 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. I have so 12 many questions I'm not sure how to start. 13 The presentation was excellent. It cleared 14 a lot of questions that I had initially 15 because I didn't have a complete 16 understanding, even to the point of hearing 17 that one person said the cultural center was 18 one story and reading that it is two. And 19 then having it confirmed that it is a two 20 story, right? 21 The first question I have regarding 22 height would be, is there anything in your 23 religious SWA or whatever that would prevent 24 the Applicant from building the building
81 1 seven feet below ground? Lowering it seven 2 feet which meant a height above the average 3 grade? 4 MR. AMANN: I just want to stipulate 5 for Mr. Schultz's purposes we would have no 6 objection to the interpretation of the spire 7 approach versus the variance request that we 8 stipulate to as well. I'll let Praveen 9 maybe answer the question. 10 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you very much. 11 MR. SCHULTZ: If I could. I am not 12 agreeing to the stipulation. I think 13 obviously that's going to be the Board's 14 determination whether to go that route and 15 if you decide you don't want to treat them 16 as spires, you will be back into the 17 variance. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Understood. 19 Thank you both for the clarification. 20 MR. MANYAM: Part of the design 21 implication that we were dealing with one is 22 if the soils report comes out that the soil 23 generally in that area are very poor, so we 24 were trying to negotiate with the expense of
82 1 realistically making these buildings happen 2 without re-inventing the wheel. 3 Going below let's say even seven foot, 4 with the tight program that we were 5 maintaining in order to maximum woodlands 6 that we are trying to preserve on this 7 property and then allowing for normal 8 implications in terms of how people enter 9 the building, the process they go through to 10 get to the point that they need to get to, 11 determining in terms of like snow, ice EDA 12 capabilities and so forth, we were looking 13 at needing more floor space again just to go 14 below anything that we needed to go. So we 15 were trying to come up with the best 16 compromise and preserve as much of the 17 woodlands as we possibly can. 18 MR. AMANN: To complete that answer 19 there is a more practical issue to be 20 confronted. This is as you have heard 21 surrounded by some very pristine woodlands, 22 but also a substantial wetland area. The 23 water table of this site is such that if we 24 were to try to go road we were going to
83 1 breach the water table and would be 2 impossible of constructing in that manner. 3 MEMBER SHROYER: There are not 4 residences in the area that have basements? 5 MR. AMANN: The residences are to the 6 north of there a substantial distance away. 7 We are essentially wrapped around it and we 8 actually took a substantial portion of the 9 site and preserved the wetland in there and 10 would have constructed it near. The 11 residences are essentially uphill to the 12 north. 13 MEMBER SHROYER: Did you look at other 14 residences or other property within the Novi 15 area that perhaps it could be lowered seven 16 feet which would bring everything within our 17 ordinance requirements? 18 MR. AMANN: No, we got into this site 19 obviously because they owned this site and 20 started to try to design with this site. 21 And then the ultimate presentation we had 22 earlier as to the Vastu principle, that 23 they go to the religious connections of the 24 design of the building kind to take over
84 1 when they get into that and that is 2 essentially what drove this design. 3 MEMBER SHROYER: Tying in with other 4 questions that have already been somewhat 5 looked at, the lighting? 6 MR. AMANN: I am glad you asked that 7 question. In fact, we have already 8 indicated at the Planning Commission and I 9 think the photometric report shows that, in 10 fact, we meet the Ordinance requirements of 11 (unintelligible) that property line level. 12 But more importantly it also indicated the 13 building lighting, people are concerned 14 about the back lighting will be turned off 15 no later than 11:00 p.m. as a regular basis, 16 that was part of our Planning Commission 17 presentation as well. 18 MEMBER SHROYER: I still have, I have 19 an interpretation concerning having to do 20 with what constitutes a spire. Everything I 21 have read it's something conical, coming to 22 a point. There is definitions that indicate 23 that it basically is a steeple. And the 24 things I read of a steeple, it simulates the
85 1 same thing. So that's something that I want 2 to get further clarification myself on 3 regarding height. 4 MR. AMANN: If I may, Mr. Chair, I 5 have actually had the pleasure of 6 representing now several temples. I did the 7 last three temples in Canton, Michigan and 8 have had the experience as to the definition 9 issue that Mr. Schultz raises. 10 Our ordinances are typically written 11 from an American perspective so we use the 12 term spire. Spire if you look at its 13 intended meaning essentially a conical type 14 of architectural structure for religious 15 significance. Because I was raised in a 16 Baptist church and a spire was a much 17 different thing than what you are looking 18 for on this temple. 19 A spire I think when used in ordinance 20 terms in your mind's eye creates the sense 21 of a conical type structure. And although 22 the ordinance is written essentially in 23 American terminology in a sense of what we 24 are used to seeing, the fact is I think what
86 1 we are presenting to you is essentially the 2 reflection of this religion's perspective of 3 what their spires are. 4 I have come to the same issue in other 5 communities, they have come to the same 6 conclusion on this. 7 MEMBER SHROYER: Thanks for your input 8 on that. I still want to do further 9 research myself. Regarding the mechanics 10 which is also a height variance. I 11 understand that -- 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Mr. Shroyer, if 13 we could stick with the first seven. The 14 height of the interpretation and the spire I 15 think that's where we're going to stick with 16 first and then we will get to the apparatus. 17 MEMBER SHROYER: Okay. I thought that 18 was the height. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It is the height 20 as well, however, we're looking at the 21 interpretation versus that brass goes back 22 to our normal practical difficulty standard. 23 MEMBER SHROYER: Is the brass pole in 24 the first seven?
87 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes. 2 MEMBER SHROYER: Okay. Come on up. 3 The renderings on the brass poles show some 4 type of appendixes off the top. Are those 5 antenna or what is the -- 6 MR. GANGADHARAN: Fundamentally the 7 brass pole is a flag pole that basically 8 where the daisy or the guard declares this 9 is my territory or this is a religious spot. 10 It's very similar to a U.S. flag in a U.S. 11 consulate in a different country. It's 12 fundamentally something that says this is a 13 temple. This is proclaimed. It's something 14 that is visible. It's a brass, but it's a 15 flag made of brass on a pole. 16 MEMBER SHROYER: I was looking at 17 interpreting it as flag pole as well. What 18 are the appendixes, the things sticking out? 19 MR. GANGADHARAN: It simply stands 20 like a flag. It is symbolic. 21 MR. AMANN: It is a flag and it would 22 appear like a flag. 23 MEMBER SHROYER: It's nothing like a 24 person physically, it's not like a crows
88 1 nest or something that would be up there? 2 MR. AMANN: No. 3 MEMBER SHROYER: And it has no 4 servicing purposes such as an antenna? 5 MR. AMANN: No. No. 6 MR. GANGADHARAN: No, it is strictly 7 for religious purpose. 8 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. I believe 9 these are all my questions I have for now, 10 Mr. Chair. Thank you. 11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 12 Member Shroyer. Other Board Members? 13 Member Bauer? 14 MEMBER BAUER: What is a decorative 15 element? 16 MR. AMANN: You are referring to the 17 term of -- I think you have heard the term 18 used decorative element for what we have 19 ascribed to these elements of the religious 20 practice a part of the Vastus principle. 21 So, even the parapet that you see along the 22 front of the building has a particular 23 religious purpose representing aspirations 24 of hope, wealth, security and faithfulness
89 1 and those things like that. So, sometimes 2 you have seen them described as decorative 3 elements because they are not a flat wall. 4 It's just part of they appear decorative as 5 the rest of the building. But the elements 6 they are seeking the variances on are as we 7 described even though they have been 8 characterized as decorative elements, they 9 are functionally part of the religious 10 demonstration of the Vastu principles that 11 they are seeking approval of. 12 MEMBER BAUER: It actually is part of 13 the religion? 14 MR. AMANN: It is part of the Vastu 15 principles exactly. 16 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 18 Members? Vice-Chair Sanghvi? 19 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you. 20 I would like one of you to describe the 21 architecture of a Hindu temple which will 22 cover all these questions for everybody 23 else. I know what they are, but that's not 24 the issue. And I think you might as well
90 1 enlighten everybody by stating in the 2 scriptures of Hinduism there are prescribed 3 structures for a temple of different parts 4 and elements of that temple which are 5 essential for this place of worship. 6 MR. MANYAM: In the design of the 7 Hindu temple you will never find two temples 8 that are actually alike. A true authentic 9 temple was actually carved out of stone on a 10 hillside mountain in India. The carvings 11 that are done on these temples are stories 12 and they wrap around the entire building. 13 It's a story of various scriptures within 14 the Gita which is the Holy book for the 15 Hindu religion and these stories and the 16 temple that's created for the deity that is 17 represented in that temple are specific and 18 very germane to the design of that temple 19 and that's where a Boston specialist comes 20 in and determines how this temple is laid 21 out. 22 The entrance of every temple faces 23 eastward for the rising of the sun in the 24 morning. The deity is on center with the
91 1 door. The flag pole that we are talking 2 about is an element that relates directly to 3 the main central deity that is represented 4 in this temple. 5 In this temple that we are presenting 6 here, the deity is flagged by two other 7 (unintelligible), and these two 8 representations are part and parcel of this 9 deity that we have here. And so, it's an 10 actual process of entering a temple. It's a 11 situation where the temple that this is 12 emulated from is one that rest up in the 13 hills of southern India and it's an ascent 14 from way below near sea level all the way 15 up. And people sometimes walk on bare feet 16 to get to this point. It's an ascension 17 process and that's why most temples, even 18 the Hindu temples that you see here that 19 states that the prayer hall itself is on the 20 second floor. It's not a situation where 21 you go downstairs and then come back 22 upstairs. You park your car on ground 23 level, you enter in at some point at ground 24 level. You take off your shoes. You take
92 1 off your coat and you prepare yourself from 2 this journey to the prayer hall space. 3 The elements that are depicted on the 4 building are indicative of what is composed 5 of this specific temple. So, for this 6 reason we went to a specialist in India who 7 helped us determine exactly the composition 8 proportions and sizing of all the elements 9 that were presented to you here today. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. I 11 will go ahead and make a few comments 12 regarding the height variance on items 13 number one through seven. No, you first. 14 MEMBER GHANNAM: I don't have any 15 comments. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Oh. Did you 17 have something? 18 MR. SCHULTZ: Just on the spire 19 question. We did address that. We did 20 highlight that section of the ordinance. We 21 don't find a lot of initiating case that 22 talks what a spire is. So, we fell back on 23 some kind of practical research. What would 24 be described as spires. And you find
93 1 descriptions of that, not just the conical 2 or steeple kind of thing, but I think the 3 architectural term we use to describe all 4 different shapes and sizes, so I just wanted 5 to throw that out there. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. 7 Schultz. 8 Regarding the items one through seven 9 I tend to agree that the use of spire in our 10 ordinance is more of an americanized version 11 of what we are looking at and it would be my 12 belief that, I just want it to be 13 interpreted as such and it would fall under 14 the ordinance of that the height limitations 15 shall not apply to such religious 16 structures. And as such, given our 17 attorney's opinion, I don't find any reason 18 that the Zoning Board should exercise its 19 ability to restrict that underneath the 20 greater distance to the nearest property 21 line. We are in between that. 22 Another point regarding the spire is 23 that, some of the items that require the 24 largest variances actually are what we or
94 1 some of us are Christians look at as a 2 spire. They are in the same context that 3 that whole type structure. So, I feel that 4 the items that are being requested that have 5 the large variance request, if you will, 6 fall even closer to that description of a 7 spire. So, once again I believe for this 8 purpose, items one through seven would fall 9 under that interpretation. That would be 10 finding. 11 What I would like a little bit of 12 clarification on is that in page one of the 13 packet that was prepared for the Zoning 14 Board, this packet. It says that the some 15 of the Vastu principles determine decisions 16 as how one enters the temple and where on 17 the land the temple should be located as 18 well as height and ratios among other 19 criteria. 20 If you could just give me more 21 explanation as to how the ratios were 22 derived at, given the religious background 23 and driving the height that was finally 24 decided upon in this request. I will let
95 1 you go first. 2 MR. MANYAM: Some of the things that 3 make up other criteria are things like bird 4 stars and star signs of the deity itself. 5 Essentially the deity in the temple 6 situation is personified. So, there are 7 birth dates. There are essential elements 8 about the deity that this temple is built 9 for that make up the other criteria that 10 come up in the design. If we pick a 11 different deity than the temple, the 12 proportions, the elements of how we put this 13 together changes slightly and those are all 14 composed of, say, the bird sign, the 15 location, geographic location, and elements 16 like that. If it helps now. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I understand a 18 little bit more. I appreciate your 19 willingness to teach us more. So, thank you 20 for that. 21 Last for the attorney. In regards to 22 this we are looking at an interpretation and 23 finding that is in a religious sense a spire 24 in accordance with this ordinance.
96 1 I also have concerns regarding the 2 lighting. Are we able to with an 3 interpretation motion attach a condition or 4 finding of fact that they did state that the 5 lights would come down at 11:00? That is 6 also a major concern of mine. Living close 7 to a commercial property where the lights 8 were on at all hours of the night. 9 MR. SCHULTZ: Sure. The answer is, 10 yes. The only reason I am hesitating, I 11 don't know that you need to formally make an 12 interpretation if somebody makes a motion 13 under Section 2903 to approve those heights, 14 then you don't need to use the word 15 interpretation, you have made that motion 16 and, yes, you would be able to attach a 17 condition with regard to the lighting being 18 turned off I believe at 11 o'clock or 19 whatever time you find it appropriate. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 21 Members? 22 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Just a 23 question to you, Mr. Schultz. Just a matter 24 of interpretation. Is it all right to
97 1 mention the City attorney's letter to the 2 Planning Commission in the current 3 discussion? 4 MR. SCHULTZ: Through the Chair, you 5 can ask questions about what's in the letter 6 in terms of a motion or reading things out 7 of it, I guess I would prefer not to do 8 that. But if you have a question -- 9 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: No, I just 10 have a couple of questions regarding that. 11 And one of them was his reference to this 12 RLUIPA. 13 MR. SCHULTZ: RLUIPA. 14 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Would you 15 like to educate me a little more about it? 16 MR. SCHULTZ: Sure. What you referred 17 to is an acronym for the Religious Land Use 18 and Institutionalized Persons Act. It's a 19 Federal Statute that was adopted a few years 20 ago when the United States Congress made 21 some findings that maybe certain religious 22 uses were not getting a fair shake before 23 local municipal approving bodies. You can 24 agree with that or disagree with that, but
98 1 the bottom line is a Federal statute was 2 enacted that basically changes the way a 3 court might look at it at a decision of a 4 local body like this if there is a denial of 5 a requested religious use. 6 Normally your decisions are, I don't 7 want to say easy to uphold from review, but 8 it's a pretty minimal standard that's unique 9 as the Zoning Board of Appeals reviewing 10 court doesn't decide whether you made the 11 right decision, whether it agrees with the 12 decision. It basically looks and hears the 13 records, sees what was before you and says 14 to itself, was there any basis on which they 15 could have made that decision. Even though 16 I think it's wrong, was it irrational. 17 That's a very minimal differential standard 18 to review. 19 The Federal statute flips that on its 20 head and basically says, if it's a religious 21 use and you are making a discretionary 22 decision and that decision burdens the 23 ability, that decision burdens the ability 24 of the user to engage in that religious use,
99 1 substantially, not a minor burden, but a 2 real burden, then it goes the other way. 3 Instead of the proponent having 4 to prove that you were wrong, we essentially 5 have to prove that we were right and it's a 6 much higher standard. It's often brought up 7 by religious petitioners, petitioners for 8 religious use. Sometimes it applies. 9 Sometimes it doesn't. Whether it's applies 10 has to do with whether or not you are really 11 imposing a burden limiting somebody's 12 ability to engage in a religious use. So, 13 the question, for example, tonight on this 14 issue would be if we are looking at the 15 height issue. You would ask yourself if we 16 just said, you know what, those elements, 17 the spires, whatever you want to call them, 18 are too high. You got to cut them down by 19 12 feet to meet the ordinance, would that be 20 imposing a burden, a substantial burden on 21 their ability to practice their religion. 22 If somebody reviewing your decision 23 says, yes, that would be a substantial 24 burden, we would have the obligation to
100 1 prove that there was some compelling 2 governmental interest, that this was the 3 least restrictive thing we could do to meet 4 the height ordinance. We haven't 5 necessarily talked about this until now, but 6 it's an issue. 7 The fact that it's a religious 8 use makes it a little different than the 9 next case that's coming up because of that 10 Federal statute. 11 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you 12 for your educational discourse. I think it 13 helps everybody else who listened to you 14 also to understand what else is involved 15 under the service here what we are facing. 16 Thank you, Mr. Chair? 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 18 Member Sanghvi. Member Shroyer? 19 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 20 If Ms. McBeth -- she is still here. I 21 thought you were hiding behind that chair. 22 In looking at one of our standards 23 that we tried to review concerning providing 24 substantial justice to the Petitioner and
101 1 the surrounding property owners, if the 2 surrounding property owners were sitting 3 onto their rear deck or in their backyard, 4 is there a way to determine how much of the 5 spires they would be able to see over the 6 tree lines? 7 MS. McBETH: I am not sure if the 8 architect has presented kind of a site 9 drawing. 10 MEMBER SHROYER: I haven't seen one in 11 the packet. 12 MS. McBETH: I don't think we have 13 seen that either. I don't recall seeing 14 something like that. I can point out that 15 there are the wooded areas, again, 16 throughout the property. 17 MEMBER SHROYER: Primarily endogenous 18 trees? 19 MS. McBETH: Yes. 20 MEMBER SHROYER: (Unintelligible). 21 MS. McBETH: Yes, I believe they would 22 for the most part. So, here is the temple 23 that we were talking about that has the 24 height consideration. The Planning
102 1 Commission looked at this project twice as 2 you may or may not know. The first time the 3 priest residence had been a little bit 4 further to the back and the temple building 5 had been a little bit further to the rear as 6 well. Encroaching into this natural woodland 7 area. So, they have moved the buildings out 8 of that area a little bit. They are 9 proposing these trees in this area to 10 further buffer and our landscape architect 11 and our woodland consultant are going to 12 work together to determine if those are 13 going to need the julett (ph) or evergreen 14 trees. I think there is an argument to make 15 those evergreen trees. 16 I think at that point to help mitigate 17 the view from the residents that have talked 18 this evening that are off of Eleven Mile 19 Road -- let me in switch this over. They 20 are this area to the south. 21 So, there was that mitigating factor. 22 Also some trees are proposed along here, 23 but, of course this is a very dense woodland 24 on the south side and the other residents
103 1 that we have talked about as well. Andes 2 Hills are here and the applicant is 3 proposing some landscaping through here. 4 So, I think to answer your question, there 5 has not been a study done by our department. 6 I'm not sure if the architect has done one 7 to take a look at it, but there are some 8 existing woodlands and replacement landscape 9 trees that are proposed and woodland 10 replacements on site as well. 11 MEMBER SHROYER: The topography of the 12 area Andes Court is higher than the land and 13 the development; is that correct? 14 MS. McBETH: This area here is quite 15 low. This is a wetland area, so there is not 16 too much vegetation in this area. This area 17 is lower. We have heard that this area in 18 the back here is lower as well. So, I think 19 that this property stands a little bit 20 higher, but I haven't verified that on a 21 survey at this point. 22 MEMBER SHROYER: And we are not 23 looking at any height variances at all 24 regarding the cultural center?
104 1 MS. McBETH: No, not for the cultural 2 center. Again, that is two stories above 3 grade and that meets the height variance of 4 35 feet. 5 MEMBER SHROYER: There was no 6 mechanical apparatus? 7 MS. McBETH: We have not seen any 8 mechanical apparatus on top of that 9 building. So, I am going to say, no, there 10 was none. 11 MEMBER SHROYER: I know that's not an 12 original seven, but while I have her up 13 here. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Absolutely. You 15 have the floor. 16 MEMBER SHROYER: I think that's it. 17 I had a second question but it wasn't 18 for Ms. McBeth. That's all for now. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 20 Members? 21 More comments? Member Ibe? 22 MEMBER IBE: My comment I think is 23 probably more from a legal point of view. 24 Now, this is not, it's not indicative of
105 1 what I think of the project now, but I think 2 the definition of spire, clearly I will 3 agree with the attorney for the Petitioner 4 as well as for the (unintelligible). If we 5 are to accept the definition to be what it 6 is, then, of course, this whole discussion 7 is moot. I don't know why we are wasting 8 all the time. I think we need to make a 9 motion. Thank you. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I just want to 11 clarify one last time with our attorney, the 12 City attorney. You say that we would make 13 a -- you would recommend making a motion, 14 but towards the effect of granting the 15 variances as opposed to an interpretation? 16 Is that what you said? 17 MR. SCHULTZ: No. And I think I 18 wasn't clear. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. 20 MR. SCHULTZ: It's a two-step 21 analysis. If you look at Section 2903 and 22 say I think that that was intended to apply 23 to these elements, they are spires, they are 24 within that concept, then you don't need to
106 1 do the variance issue. You don't need to 2 make a specific formal interpretation of 3 that. You would just apply that standard. 4 You would say, what 2903 says is, if you are 5 a spire, the 35 feet doesn't apply and the 6 Board specifies the height. As long as it's 7 not more than 75 in this case. 8 So, the motion would be, I find under 9 Section 2903, these are spires. I think the 10 height is appropriate, but I want to deal 11 with the lighting and I want it turned off 12 by such and such a time. That would be the 13 motion if I am correctly understanding it, 14 it's a motion to approve. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Ibe? 16 MEMBER IBE: So, may I move forward 17 with a motion then? 18 MR. SCHULTZ: Thank you. 19 MEMBER IBE: In light of the extended 20 discussions, presentations made by 21 Petitioners, comments made by concerned 22 residents and the discussions we have heard 23 from the Board Members as well as the City 24 and the attorney for the City, I would move
107 1 that the structure as presented by the 2 Petitioner falls under the definition of 3 what a church spire should be. And in 4 accordance with Section 2903, there are 5 spires and the heights obviously makes 6 exemptions from height limitations. And as 7 a result a variance relief is not required 8 and as such I move that the Board adopt, 9 adopt the definition -- strike that. I move 10 that the Board apply the standard for the 11 definition of a church spire to the 12 Petitioner's claims. 13 In addition, there should be a 14 condition that the lighting of the structure 15 should be turned off by 11 p.m. each day. 16 Mr. Schultz, (unintelligible)? 17 MR. SCHULTZ: It does, but briefly 18 through the Chair. Confirm that this 19 relates to all seven of the elements, the 20 spires. 21 MEMBER IBE: Certainly. 22 MR. SCHULTZ: And that you are 23 approving the heights that are proposed on 24 the site plan.
108 1 MEMBER IBE: So moved. 2 MR. SCHULTZ: Thank you very much. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: For the items 4 one through seven on the agenda? 5 MR. SCHULTZ: Correct. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Would it also be 7 appropriate to mention that this is in 8 consideration of the Religious Land Use and 9 Industrialized Persons Act and other 10 determinations would be a burden on 11 religious exercise? 12 MR. SCHULTZ: No. I don't know that 13 you need to mention RLUIPA. I think that's 14 kind of a background kind of thing. I think 15 it would be appropriate if the maker of the 16 motion chose to say that these are elements 17 that appear to be related to the purpose of 18 the temple and that the height relates to 19 that larger building structure. That would 20 be appropriate. 21 MEMBER IBE: I will concur with that. 22 MR. SCHULTZ: Thank you. 23 MEMBER IBE: So moved. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, we have a
109 1 motion on the table. 2 MEMBER GHANNAM: I'll second it. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Ghannam 4 seconds the motion and all its amendments I 5 assume? 6 MEMBER GHANNAM: Absolutely. 7 MR. BOULARD: If I may further 8 complicate issues, that's not my intent. 9 The lighting which is to go off at 11 p.m. 10 and my understanding would be that it would 11 not come on before daylight in the morning, 12 that is the light for just the building or 13 all the site lighting, the parking lot 14 lighting? 15 MR. SCHULTZ: Through the Chair, I 16 think your ability to condition that 17 probably relates to the seven elements that 18 you are talking about. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I think you also 20 bring up a good question. Do we have a 21 morning time that we want to relate to? 22 MEMBER IBE: I would think that 23 depending on when we have daylight. 24 MR. AMANN: If I may. We wouldn't
110 1 expect to have them on ever before -- I 2 think the earliest we get dark around here 3 even with Daylight Saving's Time in effect 4 is probably 5:00 p.m. 5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I am referring 6 to the morning. 7 MR. AMANN: Well, we wouldn't expect 8 to have them on in the morning. So, it's 9 problem solved. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, delaying the 11 first two items one through seven only 12 (unintelligible)? 13 MR. SCHULTZ: That's correct. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And the seconder 15 concurs with all those comments? 16 MR. GHANNAM: Yes. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other 18 comments before the motion is called? 19 Member Shroyer? 20 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. I just 21 want to mention I am not opposed whatsoever 22 to this structure. I think it's a gorgeous 23 building. However, I still reserve the 24 thought that I said originally, that I want
111 1 to do further research on spires and temples 2 -- I mean spires and steeples. 3 And also due to the lateness of 4 receiving the attorney's recommendation, or 5 letter I should say this afternoon, I have 6 not had adequate time to thoroughly review 7 it. Consequently I will not be in support 8 of any motions this evening. Thank you. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. Any 10 other comments? Seeing one, Ms. Working, 11 please call the roll. 12 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 13 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 14 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 15 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 16 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 17 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 18 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 19 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. 20 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 21 MEMBER SHROYER: No. 22 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 23 MEMBER BAUER: No. 24 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
112 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 2 MS. WORKING: Motion passes 5-2. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Let's go ahead 4 and move along with the Board discussion on 5 item number 8, the roof top apparatus and I 6 will open it back up for Board discussion. 7 Member Bauer? 8 MEMBER BAUER: I think in the past 9 when we have run into these type of things 10 it's almost a given. I mean, you got to 11 have them somewhere and rather than take out 12 space inside of building itself, that's 13 where they go on top. So, I would be in 14 favor of leaving at the 42 feet. The seven 15 feet variance. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Sanghvi? 17 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: I agree 18 with what Mr. Bauer says. Thank you. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Just a point of 20 clarification, Mr. Schultz, that we are now 21 back to our practical difficulty standard on 22 this; is that correct? 23 MR. SCHULTZ: That it's a practical 24 difficulty and the dumpsters, yes.
113 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 2 Members? You can go ahead and come up for 3 us, the architect or you. Both of you. 4 Given the standards, the legal standards 5 that I am sure you are well aware of for 6 practical difficulty, go ahead and please 7 explain to us what the practical difficulty 8 in this situation is. 9 MR. AMANN: Thank you. Certainly, the 10 practical difficulty is simply based on the 11 fact that we obviously have a roof line that 12 is at a certain level and then we have the 13 mechanical equipment of the size required 14 for this structure. So, in order to 15 properly screen it, we have had to apply a 16 seven foot, essentially we needed a variance 17 of seven foot to get appropriate screening 18 because of the desire, particularly as we 19 have heard concerns from neighbors tonight 20 and also with the Planning Commission 21 throughout the process as to not wanting to 22 hear mechanical equipment, not wanting to 23 see mechanical equipment. So, in order to 24 sufficiently screen it we need to start from
114 1 where our roof line is and then provide what 2 has been determined a seven foot wall to 3 provide that screening. So our practical 4 difficulty is where we have to start and 5 then the sufficiency of wall needed to 6 complete the job. And that being the basis 7 of the seven foot variance. It's our desire 8 to have sufficient wall that it allows us to 9 use materials for absorption of sound so we 10 can minimize any sound escaping as well as 11 prevent any visualization of the equipment 12 as well. 13 We have also located it centrally 14 enough to the building even though we have 15 this practical difficulty, we try to 16 minimize any potential impact of that 17 practical difficulty on the neighbors to try 18 to further minimize the appearance of it. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I am looking 20 through the Plan Review Center report that 21 was dated October 14th, and it appears that 22 the Community Development Department brought 23 up the point that you could consider placing 24 the unit in a mechanical room as part of the
115 1 building or placing the unit on the ground. 2 Why can't that be done? 3 MR. AMANN: Certainly it's feasible to 4 do that. It affects their layout that they 5 had and I will let them address that. As to 6 being on the ground, I think you are seeing 7 more and more not only with religious 8 institutions but with many institutions uses 9 and other uses, the attempt to have them off 10 the ground away from potential mischief and 11 also involvement of people trying to do any 12 danger, especially HVAC systems it's best to 13 have it in a secure area so that you don't 14 have any potential problems with those. I 15 will let them address the actual design 16 within the building of that location. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: That would be 18 great. 19 MR. MANYAM: On the ground just like 20 Mr. Amann said that the site footprint that 21 we in order to for the goal to maximum the 22 woodland on this property when the site 23 footprint is very tight. We have parking up 24 against this building. There is no real
116 1 yard space on the side of these buildings. 2 The location of this, we do have a separate 3 mechanical room inside the space on the 4 floor in addition to the penthouse 5 mechanical structure. The nature of this 6 building, the choreography of the spaces, 7 the prayer hall space itself is in its sense 8 its own space. There is the ground floor 9 space in which you enter which you go 10 through process of removing your shoes and 11 coat. And there are those services like the 12 restrooms and so forth there. They is a 13 stairway and elevator to go up to the second 14 floor. And then on the second floor there 15 is going to be the front spaces of the 16 second floor before you actually enter the 17 prayer hall space itself. 18 So, in essence it's designed as its 19 own entity and we are trying to create a 20 clear span of space that's in the prayer 21 hall likewise within in the building. So, 22 when you compose all those items together 23 and the duct work that we would like to 24 utilize to get to within all the elements of
117 1 the building and properly servicing a 2 building of this nature, this is a location 3 that we really need to be more centralized. 4 MR. AMANN: One aspect of that if I 5 can ask him in front of you. I never really 6 like to ask questions that I am not sure of 7 the answer to, but I am going to do that 8 here. It is my understanding also that the 9 equipment we have on the exterior of the 10 roof is equipment that we could not 11 necessarily have internal to the building 12 without open ventilation and access. 13 MR. MANYAM: Right, and proper 14 ventilation as being accommodated for the 15 building structure. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: What about the 17 equipment that makes it that way? 18 MR. MANYAM: The air conditioning unit 19 and the open air systems that we would like 20 to have for proper ventilation of running 21 this equipment. These are equipment, for 22 instance, the AC condenser unit, not the 23 furnace itself. Those are all located 24 within the mechanical room within the first
118 1 floor. 2 MR. AMANN: One other aspect of this 3 is also in light of obviously the seven 4 structures that we talked about earlier, 5 although this mechanical screening wall that 6 we have is above the sidewalk, obviously 7 it's below, and we have made it out of 8 similar color. Essentially disappear into 9 what would be arising above the roof. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I appreciate the 11 aesthetics there. In my mind I see it as a 12 separate unit, but I want to look at it in a 13 different light as far as the legal world 14 would take it. So, I appreciate your 15 comments Thank you. That's all I have as 16 far as questions. 17 Other Board Members? 18 MR. GHANNAM: I would be willing to 19 make a motion if there are no other 20 discussion. I would move that in case 21 number: 08-054 that in item Number 8 that 22 we approve the proposed variance requested 23 by 7 feet as requested and as designed by 24 the architects because it meets the
119 1 practical difficulty standards in that if we 2 do not approve it it would be unreasonably 3 prevent the use of the property for 4 permitted purpose. The variance would 5 provide substantial justice to the 6 petitioner and surrounding property owners. 7 The property is unique in that it's a 8 residential area and they are trying to fit 9 these structures on the property. 10 The problem was not self created, 11 because as they explained, the structure has 12 to be certain height and to me the most 13 logical place is on top of the roof for the 14 reasons that they have discussed. There is 15 proper and adequate light provided to 16 adjacent properties. There is no increase 17 of fire danger or public safety. In fact, I 18 think it would be decreased. Property 19 values would not be diminished and the 20 spirit of the zoning ordinance would be 21 observed. 22 MEMBER IBE: Second. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 24 motion by Member Ghannam and a second by
120 1 Member Ibe. Would you consider making part 2 of the motion the last comments that were 3 made regarding the aesthetics matching that 4 of the rest of the building? 5 MR. GHANNAM: Yes. I stated that I 6 would move to approve it as proposed, so 7 that would include that. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. Any other 9 discussion? Seeing none, Ms. Working, 10 please call the roll. 11 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 12 MR. GHANNAM: Yes. 13 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 14 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 15 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 16 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 17 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 18 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. 19 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 20 MEMBER SHROYER: No. 21 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 22 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 23 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye.
121 1 MS. WORKING: Motion passes 6-1. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Moving along to 3 item 9. We are still talking about the 4 dumpster. It's gone back and forth whether 5 or not we were discussing that, but it 6 appears, Ms. McBeth, that it's still is on 7 the table for us to decide tonight. So I 8 will open up the Board for discussion on the 9 dumpster, number 9. 10 And I will start off. Ms. McBeth, if 11 I could bother you for a second. 12 MS. McBETH: Sure. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: One of your 14 comments was that basically the final 15 placement is going to be decided at the 16 final site plan approval anyway. So I find 17 it hard for the Zoning Board to approve a 18 blanket for anywhere in the side yard at 19 this time. Can you explain maybe why you 20 would consider that we do? 21 MS. McBETH: Yes. The staff felt 22 strongly that the location as to the single 23 family home was not an appropriate location. 24 And we felt that there were many other
122 1 locations where it would be appropriate 2 behind the cultural center but not 3 technically in the rear yard. It's a little 4 bit strange because we have multiple 5 buildings on the site. So, the side yard 6 would be anywhere to the side of these 7 buildings. The rear yard would actually 8 have to be behind all of the buildings on 9 the site, and we don't feel that that would 10 be appropriate to have the dumpster located 11 physical to the cultural center that far 12 away. And our best representation is that 13 the dumpster itself could be located along 14 this line here which is also in the side 15 yard, but more appropriately located for the 16 cultural center which was the third stage 17 and located closest to Taft Road. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: On the left-hand 19 side of the cultural center there is a 20 little green box, is that the entrance then? 21 MS. McBETH: This area here, Mr. 22 Chairman? 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes. 24 MS. McBETH: Yes, that is a
123 1 (unintelligible) I believe for driving under 2 and dropping people off. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: The area where 4 you are looking at on the south side where 5 you think it might be more appropriate, tell 6 me more about the land that is to the south 7 of that. 8 MS. McBETH: The resident that was 9 present this evening, there is a house right 10 in this location and a swimming pool at 11 about this location. And then heavy woods. 12 Really nice quality woodlands that are in 13 that area occupy all of this space here. We 14 felt that locating a dumpster enclosure with 15 the appropriate screening would be better 16 located further away for the noise problems 17 that are sometimes preceding with emptying 18 the dumpster and sometimes the smell of the 19 dumpster enclosure to be located as far away 20 from that home as possible without really 21 encroaching into the other residential areas 22 that are surrounding. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: What is possible 24 for the lot below there? South of where you
124 1 are proposing the possible dumpster and west 2 of the home in question. 3 MS. McBETH: This is the current 4 property line shown right here. So, it's 5 assumed that this property would stay 6 residential. This parcel here just to the 7 west of that actually comes to the south and 8 connects over to Taft Road a little bit 9 farther down off the page here. So, this is 10 connected to a larger site. Again, zoned 11 single family residential. We would expect 12 residential types of entities on the 13 property. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: What time can 15 dumpsters be emptied in residential areas? 16 MS. McBETH: I don't believe that 17 there is an Ordinance provision for that. 18 Charles, I'm sorry, are you aware if 19 there are any Ordinance provisions on that? 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I believe in 21 commercial abutting residential it's 6:00 in 22 the morning, but I'm not aware if there is 23 anything as special land uses abutting a 24 residential area.
125 1 MR. BOULARD: I am not aware of a 2 limitation. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Has the north 4 property line been considered as far as 5 dumpster location? 6 MS. McBETH: Yes. The north property 7 line here. This area is not shown for 8 development because it is a regulated 9 wetland and they are proposing some wetland 10 mitigation in these other areas that are 11 identified. This line of trees here, kind 12 of a heavy line of trees was proposed by the 13 Applicant and approved or recommended for 14 approval by our landscape architect. The 15 residential property is to the north from 16 the cultural center itself. So, we felt 17 that it would be more appropriate to be 18 located on the southern property line and 19 more convenient and less obtrusive into the 20 natural areas that are on site. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: That's all the 22 questions I have. I will open it up for 23 other Board Members. Member Ghannam? 24 MEMBER GHANNAM: Actually I have a
126 1 couple of questions for Ms. McBeth. 2 Ms. McBeth, I have got a couple 3 of questions for you. If we did approve 4 item number 9 which is the dumpster 5 variance, would you recommend that we 6 approve it for the south side or what you 7 call the side yard property, to be 8 determined between the Applicant and the 9 Planning Commission? 10 MS. McBETH: I think that would be 11 appropriate between the Applicant and the 12 Community Development Department on their 13 final site plan review which we would be 14 handling administratively. 15 The Applicant's attorney, Mr. Amann, 16 just suggested that they would be willing to 17 as well provide a limitation on the request 18 that the dumpster enclosure itself be at 19 least 100 feet from that adjacent 20 residential area. 21 MR. AMANN: Actually better than that. 22 That hard red line along the bottom is a 23 wall. So the end of that wall no less than 24 100 feet west from that wall, so it would
127 1 put it essentially we think about there if 2 you want to use that picture. 3 MS. McBETH: So, the same general 4 area, just 100 feet from the end of the 5 walk. 6 MR. AMANN: What we are dealing with 7 on the south of us that is a pool in the 8 rear and the house is in front of the pool, 9 that would put us probably 200 feet. And we 10 have no problem as it relates to really the 11 application, if there is a standard that 12 doesn't allow dumpsters being picked up 13 before 6:00 a.m., on commercial property is 14 adjacent to residential, we don't have a 15 particular issue with that either as well to 16 our dumpster and we wouldn't expect it to be 17 before that time. 18 MEMBER GHANNAM: I don't have any 19 other questions. Thank you. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It's not so much 21 regarding the time limit that I have -- I am 22 not particularly impressed with the 23 Ordinance that allows that to begin with. I 24 think 6:00 is too early. And I appreciate
128 1 the effort. And as far as putting it 100 2 yards from that line, but I live even 3 further than that from the dumpsters in the 4 commercial area and at 6:00 when they come 5 by I can still hear them. And it's much 6 more than that. So, I am not sure where I 7 can take a time limit on this. 8 I am struggling because I see that 9 there is really no other place on this lot 10 and this makes much more sense to put the 11 dumpster closest to the Cultural Center. 12 However, there is also great concerns about 13 the affect on that neighbor. So where does 14 the neighbor's right coincide with their 15 right to have a dumpster nearest to the 16 Cultural Center as far as the legal standard 17 is permitted? 18 MR. SCHULTZ: That's a fair question. 19 I mean, that's the determination that you 20 are making in terms of is the proposed 21 location, does it do justice to the property 22 owner as well as the proponent here? So, 23 you have to make that determination. If the 24 question is can you impose conditions on
129 1 timing, regular removal to make sure there 2 is no overflow and things like that, all 3 those conditions are appropriate to be made. 4 MEMBER KRIEGER: (Unintelligible). 5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You want to make 6 your comments known. 7 MEMBER KRIEGER: My question would be, 8 if we could table it until a future time 9 when they are building it to determine? 10 MR. SCHULTZ: And maybe Ms. McBeth 11 would chime in on this. At some point they 12 need a final site plan approval and they 13 need to know where to show the dumpster. I 14 think they can proceed at some point with 15 the assumption that they are going to bring 16 that question back. But they do need final 17 site plan approval and they need to know 18 where their dumpster is permitted. They do 19 need a dumpster. In terms of the proponent, 20 the proponent has to be able to put it 21 somewhere on the property. Whether it's 22 further away or closer, I guess, that's what 23 you would need to struggle with. 24 From a Planning Review perspective and
130 1 from a Community Development perspective, I 2 don't know that they need to see the 3 building still first. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Sanghvi? 5 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Is it just 6 enough to say that they cannot put it in the 7 backyard, and leave it at that? Because 8 that is the main concern of the neighbors 9 around there. The dumpster being close to 10 the property line in the backyard, back of 11 the property. 12 MR. SCHULTZ: Through the Chair, it 13 would be appropriate to say it's got to be 14 at least X feet away from the residential 15 improvements wherever they ultimately agree 16 on. 17 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: So, they 18 don't have to come back to us again and they 19 can decide for themselves. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 21 Members have any other comments? Anyone? 22 MEMBER GHANNAM: How about I make a 23 motion if there is no further discussion. I 24 will go ahead and move in case number:
131 1 08-054 as to item Number 9 to approve the 2 petition that the dumpster be located in the 3 side yard with the understanding and 4 specific agreement that it will be at least 5 100 feet west of the southern wall that's on 6 the property line as described on the site 7 plan I believe that is shown tonight. The 8 specific location to be approved and agreed 9 between mutual consent of the Community 10 Development Department as well as the 11 Petitioner for the reasons that, first of 12 all, they have to have, it's got to be a 13 location that doesn't affect at least as 14 much as possible the neighbors mainly to the 15 south. 16 And based on the layout of this 17 particular site, I think there are unique 18 circumstances to the property where it 19 deserves to be in the side yard. The 20 problem is not self created. There is no 21 increase of fire danger or public safety. 22 Property values would not be diminished 23 within the surrounding area. And the spirit 24 of the Ordinance is observed.
132 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 2 motion on the table. 3 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Second. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 5 second by Member Sanghvi. Any further 6 discussion? Member Krieger? 7 MEMBER KRIEGER: Question? Was that a 8 100 feet or 100 yards from the westerly 9 point of that wall? 10 MEMBER GHANNAM: As the Petitioner 11 suggested at least 100 feet west of the 12 southern wall that's adjacent to the 13 southern property. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other 15 questions or comments? Seeing none, Ms. 16 Working. 17 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 18 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 19 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 20 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. 21 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 22 MEMBER SHROYER: No. 23 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 24 MEMBER BAUER: No.
133 1 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: No. 3 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 4 MEMBER IBE: Present. 5 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 6 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 7 MR. SCHULTZ: Could you clarify that 8 the present was a yes. 9 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe, present is a 10 yes for clarification, please? 11 MEMBER IBE: I think my vote is a 12 present vote. You can interpret it 13 whichever way you want. It means I am 14 neither for nor against it. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: The only issue 16 with that, Member Ibe, is that I believe the 17 rules that regulate the Zoning Board mandate 18 that we do vote a yes or a no on each motion 19 in front of us. And I believe that maybe 20 not by our rules but maybe in the Charter, 21 the City Charter, I believe. 22 MR. SCHULTZ: It's a requirement of 23 the Rules. It's a requirement under the 24 Statute. There is no abstentions unless you
134 1 have a conflict of interest which I don't 2 believe is present. So, there must be a yes 3 or not vote, you are correct. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Can you please 5 recall the roll, Ms. Working. 6 MS. WORKING: Should I begin at the 7 beginning? 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes, with the 9 motion maker. 10 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 11 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes. 12 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 13 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. 14 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 15 MEMBER SHROYER: No. 16 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 17 MEMBER BAUER: No. 18 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: No. 20 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 21 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 22 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 23 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 24 MS. WORKING: Motion to approve passes
135 1 4-3. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And last to the 3 parking item number 10. I'll open it up for 4 Board discussion. Member Ibe? 5 MEMBER IBE: Mr. Chair, as well as the 6 Petitioner this is one area that concerns me 7 the most as perhaps the parking. I think if 8 there is any area where I am on the fence, 9 it is the parking. I think the gentleman, 10 one of the residents who had some, he had a 11 projection for us to see. He made a good 12 point. And I think that's Mr. Mathis, I 13 believe, I am not sure if I got his name 14 right. And I will go over his points, and 15 I'm not paraphrasing, I am actually quoting 16 him, he is says, "This is too much building 17 and not enough parking." And John I think 18 said, Is this the best site for this 19 project? I think the parking is what 20 troubles me the most. Everything about what 21 we have heard so far I have had no problem 22 with. As much as I think that we ought to 23 accommodate with what the Petitioner wants, 24 it troubles me that you do have two large
136 1 structures in a big building. 2 And to someone who understands world 3 religion. I am a Catholic, but I do 4 understand the Hindu religion very well, and 5 I do know that the people are very religious 6 devout people. And there will be events. 7 And there will be multiple events. It's not 8 just going to be one event. Knowing fully 9 well that there is a temple in Canton that I 10 am familiar with and I drive by it. My 11 family lives very close to the temple and I 12 know how busy it can be. And they don't 13 even have a cultural center that is 14 separate. 15 MR. AMANN: It's part of their 16 building. 17 MR. IBE: It's part of the building. 18 So, parking is a huge issue for me. 19 The residents are concerned that you 20 will not have activities going on. Is there 21 any guarantee that you can give to alleviate 22 the fears of those residents as well as to 23 calm me down for me to trust that this is 24 not one of those April Fool's jokes that you
137 1 are playing on us? Because the last thing I 2 want is driving down Taft and having these 3 people coming the same route because the 4 place is crowded and we can't get by. 5 MR. AMANN: Certainly. I very much 6 appreciate your concern in your question. 7 We spent a fair amount of time with this in 8 the Planning Commission. You are raising an 9 issue, I think what your attorney was 10 talking about is essentially about the 11 underlying calculation of the parking 12 required for the site. And I will address 13 that. 14 The issue before you tonight, though, 15 is really about these 34 spaces. But let me 16 address the first part because I think it 17 will help to give you comfort in 18 understanding of that 34 space issue. As it 19 relates to the parking as probably Beth 20 explained, we submitted, of course, a 21 detailed traffic study which included 22 parking calculations. 23 The traffic consultant we are very 24 appreciative of the fact that not only did
138 1 they review it, they questioned it. They 2 disagreed at first and said how can you make 3 these assertions? The beauty of what we 4 have here is that you don't have to take our 5 word as a promise, but we do have a letter 6 on file as part of the Planning Commission 7 approval that says that you will not have 8 simultaneous events as part of our condition 9 of our approval. 10 What the traffic consultant did is 11 actually said go check the other temples 12 that are in existence. And they referenced 13 the one in Troy that they thought, many 14 thought was the worst case scenario. And, 15 in fact, to demonstrate and determine, in 16 fact, whether or not, number one, do they 17 have simultaneous events with the Cultural 18 Center and the Temple. 19 You are right, many of the Temples you 20 don't see separate buildings because, for 21 example, the one that I was representing in 22 Canton, they have the ability because of the 23 size they have them as part of the building 24 itself. So, there was a Prayer area. There
139 1 was a Cultural Center area. All within the 2 one same building. So, it wasn't that they 3 didn't have the capacity for the use on 4 site, that had it, it was just all within 5 one building. And those sites parked 6 properly because just as this Temple, they 7 do not use both sites at one time. It is by 8 the very nature of their function. Although 9 we have given a letter based on the Planning 10 Commission condition that should be I think 11 part of your file that says as a condition 12 we agree that they will not be used. 13 But, secondly, we had the ability to 14 have the traffic consultant go and, in fact, 15 verify the actual experience of other 16 Temples to see that this is, in fact, the 17 case. Just as we also looked at one of the 18 bigger issues is your Ordinance is typically 19 Americanized as it relates to calculating 20 parking spaces for worship spaces. In fact, 21 I go to a church where 22,000 families 22 belong and maybe 4,000 people attend on a 23 weekend at each services, four different 24 services. We all sit in a pew, we sit in a
140 1 seat and you can designate a space for it. 2 The fact is we can then cram more 3 people in one area and we have to have more 4 parking to accommodate that. This Temple 5 actually involves the use of the prayer room 6 which is (unintelligible) where people 7 actually would go prostate. They would 8 actually go flat on the ground. And the 9 space required for an individual worshipper 10 in this area is much larger than you could 11 have actually think. So, it actually 12 affects the parking calculations because you 13 will not physical fit in the area where 14 normally you would think in a normal 15 Americanized worship experience. 16 So, that's where it fundamentally 17 affects the underlying parking calculation. 18 Then when you look at the actual uses and 19 decide not to have multiplicity of use. 20 Then when you look at the actual 21 verification of that experience, that's how 22 we ultimately got to an understanding of the 23 underlying parking calculations. 24 As it relates to the particular issue
141 1 on the 34 spaces, it comes down to as Ms. 2 McBeth explained, an attempt and the desire 3 expressed by the Environmental consultant 4 and the Planning Commission the desire to 5 preserve really a pristine woodland area as 6 opposed to putting more spaces in there. 7 Particularly since we are only going to 8 confront this experience of being 9 potentially maximized on the parking on 10 certain events in the year and we do have 11 several events. You are aware of several 12 events throughout the year. But that's why 13 we have also made an accommodation with the 14 ZBA and the Planning Commission as it 15 considered before us off site parking. 16 Questions were raised about what that 17 does to parking. We will actually as we 18 have indicated in the Planning Commission 19 have a van, a shuttle van which would be 20 used to transport people back and forth 21 keeping cars away from the site. But more 22 importantly out of all these concerns about 23 traffic and parking, it's important to 24 understand one of the great things about
142 1 religious institutions as it relates to 2 traffic and parking concern is predominantly 3 they occur on Sundays. So, we hear a lot of 4 concerns about cars getting in and out of 5 the road and whatever. That's why when 6 traffic analyst look at these issues they 7 look at how they are non-rush hour and they 8 are very compatible to residential. They 9 are compatible in the business areas because 10 we are not occurring at rush hour times 11 which are on weekdays. Even though we will 12 have people to come in to worship and 13 perform functions throughout the week, but 14 those will not be the areas or the times 15 where we have large gatherings of people 16 where we have to worry about the parking. 17 So, as it relates to -- and we also 18 indicated to the Planning Commission, we 19 know it's important to the neighbors that 20 this site is properly parked. We know it's 21 important to the City. We have gone through 22 great discussions on this. It is more 23 important to us if our worshippers can't get 24 to the site, there is more problems for the
143 1 leadership of the Temple than anybody else. 2 So, they have spent a lot of time with the 3 traffic consultant to make sure they are 4 actually properly parked and that's why they 5 have also entered into the ancillary 6 agreement. They have also approached the 7 school about a secondary agreement if they 8 need for some other purpose for other 9 spaces. 10 The Cultural Center itself is a 11 subsequent phase that we may get to. It's 12 not part of the initial construction. So, 13 we are going to have the time and experience 14 of having the temple built. Its operation 15 and then we will be coming to ultimately on 16 the final site plan with the City on the 17 Cultural Center some time down the road. 18 The City will have had years under its 19 belt with this site operating in the Temple 20 and its parking and its traffic before it 21 has to give any consideration ultimate to 22 the Cultural Center and its final site plan. 23 So, you will know. So there won't be any 24 April Fools. There will be great experience
144 1 under the belt. 2 MR. SCHULTZ: Mr. Chair, can I 3 followup on those comments to address sort 4 of, is this a real promise kind of question 5 just so everybody is clear? And it was 6 discussed a little bit at the Planning 7 Commission. It's a lot more than just a 8 promise the way the Planning Commission has 9 phrased it. It's an actual condition of the 10 special land use approval. If there is a 11 violation, and I think you all got the 12 minutes that shows what that limitation is, 13 events will occur at the same time. I think 14 one of the earlier speakers from the public 15 asked the question who pays attention to 16 that? Who enforces that? And the answer 17 is, the City would in the normal course 18 enforce that. Not just an Ordinance 19 requirement that says you can't create a 20 nuisance situation. You can't park on Taft 21 Road, but literally go to that special land 22 use approval and say this is the condition 23 that allows you to be having any events here 24 whether it's worship service or the use of
145 1 the Cultural Center. And if, in fact, it's 2 not being adhered to and it's deemed to be 3 an actual violation of that condition, the 4 City absolutely has the right to enforce 5 that provision as though it were an 6 Ordinance, maybe even more so. It's the 7 kind of thing that we would probably 8 approach the Court and say they are in 9 violation of their entire use because they 10 are not supposed to be parking on Taft Road. 11 They can't park on the lawn. If they have 12 problems with the parking that they have set 13 up, they either need to go back and get more 14 parking approved which would go to the 15 Planning Commission. Or if they can't do 16 that, then they have to make their own 17 arrangements as they were discussing. But 18 it's an enforceable promise. It's actually 19 a condition that the Planning Commission put 20 out and you would be able to tag along to 21 your own determination if you chose to do 22 that. Thank you. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Can you better 24 define enforceable? What happens down the
146 1 road? Are they no longer allowed to 2 practice? Are they no longer allowed to use 3 the building for purposes? Or are they 4 issued a $100 ticket? Where on the spectrum 5 is -- where is the enticement for them to 6 actually go along with this condition or 7 just ignore it and drag it out in court? 8 MR. SCHULTZ: That's a good question. 9 Where on the spectrum the City's enforcement 10 falls depends on where the violation is. If 11 it's the occasional car or something like 12 that parked improperly, then they give a 13 ticket. That may be a regular role of 14 Ordinance enforcement. If it's a regular 15 occurrence that there seems to be violation 16 of the promise and a condition not to use 17 these two at the same time, we probably 18 approach the appropriate authority in 19 District Court or in the Circuit Court and 20 say, here is the approval. Here is what we 21 want them to start doing and stop doing. 22 And I guess what I am saying is, the courts 23 acknowledge your ability to place that 24 condition on and, therefore, our ability to
147 1 enforce it on behalf the ZBA or Planning 2 Commission. It's in the Statute. It's in 3 the Ordinance. You have the authority -- 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I understand we 5 have the authority to attach it. What is 6 the punitive realization of such a 7 condition? I am still grasping -- 8 MR. SCHULTZ: It goes anywhere from 9 the ticket if it's a minor thing that can be 10 corrected that way to full blown litigation 11 where we ask for a court to order them to do 12 something or stop doing something. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: But we have no 14 idea what that something could be? 15 MR. SCHULTZ: It would be to comply 16 with the condition. Not use the two at the 17 same time. Don't park on the grass. Don't 18 park on Taft Road. Whatever the violation 19 is is what we're asking. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay. That's an 21 answer. I'll open it up for the Board. 22 MEMBER KRIEGER: I guess just to add 23 to that. Like they could park, not 24 necessarily if they would, but the potential
148 1 of parking on the shoulder is there because 2 there is shoulder. Just like at the high 3 school on a football night you drive down 4 Taft and if they are there and they're 5 arguing with the people, they are doing it, 6 so why can't we? 7 MR. AMANN: If I may address that -- 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Not at this 9 time. If the Board ask a direct question 10 then we will call you up. 11 MR. AMANN: Okay. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We are trying to 13 get some answers from our City Attorney at 14 this time. Thank you. 15 MR. SCHULTZ: That is one of the 16 conditions that the Planning Commission put 17 on it that there wouldn't be that occurring 18 as happens with football games. That's a 19 requirement. So, once they make that 20 representation and the Planning commission 21 and perhaps this Board says it's going to be 22 a condition of whatever approval we give 23 you, then there is no ability to come back 24 later and say but the school does it on the
149 1 weekends. It's a condition. 2 MEMBER KRIEGER: Another question I 3 came up with too is the number of services, 4 because it being a church or a temple, that 5 if you go to church on Sunday and you might 6 have three services, two in the morning and 7 one at night, then what would they 8 anticipate here for amount of people? The 9 number of services? 10 MR. GANGADHARAN: Fundamentally it's 11 more or less an open format between you and 12 your God. You can come there at any time 13 you choose when the temple is open. It's 14 not a prescribed service per se. There 15 might be offerings that people might make, 16 but come in and let the priest help them any 17 way they wish. It's almost a menu format 18 that says these are the various things you 19 could do by way of services and it's a one 20 on one thing. 21 So, there is not a concentrated 22 time at which things happen. There might be 23 just because the way of American life people 24 might get free at 6:00 or 7:00 and you might
150 1 find that small bump up around that popular 2 time, but otherwise anyone who wishes to 3 practice can walk in any time the temple is 4 open and get the equivalent of personalized 5 service, if you will. 6 And also along the discussion just to 7 say that we have agreed about not parking on 8 Taft, putting signs for not parking on Taft 9 just to add to the previous questions. 10 MEMBER KRIEGER: Thank you. 11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other 12 questions, Member Krieger? 13 MEMBER KRIEGER: No. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 15 Members? Mr. Shroyer? 16 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 17 Ms. McBeth? I have several questions here. 18 First of all, is the master plan showing 19 Taft being widened any time soon? 20 MS. McBETH: The master plan for land 21 use for expanding Taft Road to more than -- 22 MEMBER SHROYER: Multiple lanes? 23 MS. McBETH: Not that I am aware of, 24 not at this point.
151 1 MEMBER SHROYER: So, there are no 2 plans on the record at all for widening the 3 two? 4 MS. McBETH: Not that I'm aware of. 5 MEMBER SHROYER: Any plan for 6 improvements on the intersection of Taft? 7 MS. McBETH: I am not aware of any 8 proposed improvements for that intersection 9 at this time. 10 MEMBER SHROYER: Somebody had 11 indicated I think they said a 2006 survey it 12 was slated it was the number one crash site 13 in the intersection. Is that correct? 14 MS. McBETH: I have not been able to 15 confirm whether that's correct. I did not 16 go back and check the record on that. 17 MEMBER SHROYER: Is there parking 18 permitted on Andre Hills road? 19 MS. McBETH: In Andes Hills. 20 MEMBER SHROYER: Andes Hills. 21 MS. McBETH: It's a private road and 22 speaking with a couple of the residents 23 there they indicated that they would not 24 want to allow or encourage parking on their
152 1 street. So, I assume that that would be 2 enforced and that there would be no parking 3 on Andes Hills Court. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: I didn't think there 5 was. I wanted to make sure. Any there any 6 connecting sidewalks or driveways planned 7 that would run from Grand River to the 8 property or from Eleven Mile Road to the 9 property? 10 MS. McBETH: Again on the plan there 11 is a gap. Andes Hills has the sidewalk to 12 this point and that I believe goes all the 13 way to Grand River. But there is gap here 14 where the wetland is currently located. 15 The temple is proposing a sidewalk 16 along Taft Road here. There is another gap 17 in property to the south. As you get a 18 little bit farther to the south into the 19 corner it's part of the approval for the 20 Basilian Father's, there are sidewalks 21 proposed to the corner. 22 MEMBER SHROYER: And when there is a 23 wetland such as where the gap is, the only 24 way to have a sidewalk there is at the
153 1 City's expense; is that correct? 2 MS. McBETH: There would be, that 3 would probably show up on the report that's 4 being prepared that talks about gaps in the 5 sidewalk. There are various funding 6 mechanisms. One of which if the City could 7 take the initiative and complete that. They 8 are looking at other funding alternatives, 9 but that one seems to be the primary source 10 at this time. 11 MR. SHROYER: Okay, thank you. And 12 obviously what I am looking at is I am 13 equally concerned as Member Ibe stated about 14 safety and traffic and parking, etcetera. 15 It's a huge concern in my eyes. On the site 16 itself can additional parking be added 17 without approval of the MDEQ? 18 MS. McBETH: Yes, the MDEQ would cover 19 the wetlands issue, so I believe that this 20 area is regulated wetlands and it doesn't 21 seem likely that they could add parking 22 there without MDEQ approval at that 23 location. Further to the back this is all 24 regulated woodland and not all covered by
154 1 wetland. I think there is a creek or stream 2 that comes through here. And its an area 3 that is wetland. But I believe they could 4 add some parking there in the back with 5 removal of some of that. 6 MEMBER SHROYER: About any idea how 7 much we would lose to create 34 parking 8 spaces? 9 MS. McBETH: No, we haven't done a 10 study of that in particular. And there may 11 be other areas on the site where they can do 12 that. I know there are buffers required 13 around the perimeter here and I think they 14 have worked their way to provide the 15 necessary buffers in those locations as 16 well. This is also a wetland area here. 17 So, I think that it's most likely that that 18 back area would be affected before adding 19 additional parking without trying to get any 20 additional variance. 21 MEMBER SHROYER: And they can do that 22 whether we approve it or not actually? 23 MS. McBETH: Well, that would again go 24 to the Planning Commission for review and
155 1 they would take a look at it, tree survey 2 the woodland plan and get some professional 3 recommendations from our environmental 4 consultants and they would talk about the 5 replacement value, whether they could 6 replace the woodlands on site or if they 7 needed to pay into the tree fund as part of 8 that. And the Planning Commission would be 9 the one to authorize to grant a woodland 10 permit. 11 MEMBER SHROYER: So that would be one 12 option available if we were to deny the 13 parking variance. Is there other options 14 that you are aware of? 15 MS. McBETH: I think another option 16 would be to reduce the size of the building. 17 That would be something that I think the 18 Applicant is taking into consideration 19 regarding the review of the project, 20 especially between the first and second 21 reviews by the Planning Commission. There 22 was a 10,000 square foot decrease in the 23 building size of the Cultural Center at this 24 location here. And I believe they reduced
156 1 some of the meeting space as well as some of 2 the other functional space. That would be 3 another option. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: Does our Ordinance 5 enforcement officers work on Sundays? 6 MS. McBETH: I think occasionally it's 7 some work on the weekends. But Alan is 8 shaking his head. 9 (Interposing)(Unintelligible). 10 MEMBER SHROYER: What I am looking at, 11 obviously I think it would be very difficult 12 for the City to monitor these usages. And 13 if we do look at something like this and 14 attaching requirement terms like large 15 numbers when we are talking about 16 simultaneous events and maximized spacing 17 and what have you, I think you will need to 18 attach specific numbers too. I am going to 19 rule out completely the possibility of 20 thinking about Miracle Software as an 21 overflow. Especially in today's economy, 22 and hopefully this will never happen, but in 23 today's economy we don't know from one day 24 to another if a business is going to even be
157 1 in existence. We don't know what tenant may 2 be in there in the future, if any. So, I am 3 not going to look at that any further. 4 I still want to and I mentioned 5 earlier, I want to review things further. 6 But this initial talk on the three phases of 7 547 spaces, which would leave a shortest of 8 273 spaces is only 50 percent. So I want to 9 go back and review that even further. 10 One other question for the Applicant, 11 if I may. This is partially because of my 12 ignorance of the Hindu religion and I 13 apologize for that. It was mentioned this 14 evening that if a different deity was used 15 that may change the requirements that would 16 need to be built of the temple itself. Is 17 there a different deity that could be used 18 that would allow -- 19 MR. AMANN: The deity they had 20 selected for this is at the very core of 21 their religious purpose. And I think Mr. 22 Schultz will tell you you are now deep down 23 into RLUIPA in a long long manner. 24 Let me further address that. You are
158 1 expressing concerns about -- 2 MEMBER SHROYER: There is no other 3 explanation. 4 MR. AMANN: Not on that point, but 5 about the 547 parking spaces. 6 MEMBER SHROYER: I didn't ask you 7 about that. 8 MR. AMANN: Okay, well, it shouldn't 9 be part of the consideration. 10 MR. SCHULTZ: Mr. Chair, can I just 11 followup the question? I don't think the 12 question was improper. I think the answer 13 was fine. There was a comment made. I 14 think Mr. Shroyer was simply asking a 15 question to get some more clarification. 16 There is nothing wrong with that. But 17 obviously it is sort of their core issue, so 18 probably not going to be the basis on which 19 you make your decision. 20 MEMBER SHROYER: Oh, not at all. 21 MR. SCHULTZ: Thank you. 22 MEMBER SHROYER: And to the City, is 23 there any way at all of separating the 24 phases? Looking at -- Oh, I'm sorry, I
159 1 didn't think it would have to be you again, 2 Ms. McBeth. Since it is three phases and it 3 is stretched out over a period of time is 4 there a way you can look at phase one and 5 two and approve those activities and 6 postpone phase three? Or is it all because 7 it's tied into the final site plan approval? 8 MS. McBETH: I believe, and Mr. 9 Schultz can correct me on this if I'm wrong, 10 but the Applicant has proposed the 11 development in its entirety, so they are 12 asking for approval in its entirety. The 13 phasing is helpful so we will know which 14 order the buildings will be constructed and 15 would be completed. Utilities available for 16 each phase. 17 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you. That's 18 all I have, Mr. Chair. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 20 Member Shroyer. Further discussion? Member 21 Ghannam? 22 MEMBER GHANNAM: Thank you. I have 23 got a couple of questions again. You have 24 mentioned this business on Grand River that
160 1 you have an agreement with for overflow 2 parking and so forth. Is it the intent of 3 the Applicant to enter into a lease for that 4 space during certain periods of time? And 5 if so, for how long? 6 MR. AMANN: It's our intent to enter 7 into an enforceable agreement, lease or 8 easement which would be provided for as long 9 as need. We also have tentative agreements 10 from Rock Financial as well as agreement we 11 have with the school as far as additional 12 spaces if we need to get to there. And we 13 have talked about that because the focus of 14 this variance request is about 34 spaces. 15 It's not about intersection questions or 16 width of roads and stuff like that, it's 17 about these 34 spaces. We have the ability 18 we reflected in the record to meet that 19 amount over and over and over. So, we would 20 have put them into an enforceable agreement 21 that would run with the land so that even if 22 the company or something were to happen with 23 the company, the agreement would be 24 enforceable.
161 1 MR. SCHULTZ: Mr. Chair, can I break 2 in here a little bit? I guess I want to 3 make sure we don't get too far down the road 4 on this idea that they are coming to you 5 with a lease for spaces off site. It's not 6 really what our Ordinance is set up for. 7 It's not really something that we want to 8 encourage petitioners to do in the normal 9 course. We can't meet the parking on our 10 site so we are going to go several 11 properties down the road. We had an 12 Ordinance that allowed shared parking in 13 certain circumstances that allows such 14 parking agreements, but it's very specific 15 and I think we are getting pretty far field 16 from it. 17 I think it's a fine point for them to 18 raise, but I don't think it's something that 19 you as a Board want to be regularly relying 20 on. If they enter into a lease and that's 21 how they plan to make sure that are not in 22 violation of our Ordinances, that's great. 23 But I don't know that it should be formally 24 brought into the discussion. I just wanted
162 1 to get that out there. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Ghannam, 3 you still have the floor. 4 MEMBER GHANNAM: Yes, just one more 5 question. One of the citizens came up here, 6 the gentleman who gave us a nice 7 presentation indicated that apparently there 8 has been some change in your position 9 regarding whether or not there is going to 10 be major events held at the same time or 11 that type of analysis. I just want to make 12 it clear from my mind that if a parking 13 variance is granted and their, I guess day 14 of worship is on Sunday; is that accurate? 15 MR. AMANN: Yes. 16 MEMBER GHANNAM: That there would be 17 no other events at the Cultural Building; is 18 that accurate? 19 MR. AMANN: Yes. The language that 20 was given, the letter was presumed to a 21 specific request and conversation with the 22 Planning Commission that pretty much 23 articulated here is want we want, the 24 condition we want you to agree to.
163 1 Essentially we gave a letter and it is 2 expected that, the letter specifically talks 3 about not having maximum usage of the site 4 which means essentially usage of the temple 5 and then usage of the cultural center in 6 which if it gets built, because we're still 7 talking about that being a phase down the 8 road. So, the language that is actually in 9 the agreement, although he is correct, it 10 hasn't worked, but the language that was 11 given, the letter requested was the language 12 requested pursuant to the condition of the 13 Planning Commission on its approval. 14 MEMBER GHANNAM: So, if they have 15 worship on a Sunday there will not be, say, 16 a wedding or some other type of large amount 17 in the Cultural Building? 18 MR. AMANN: Exactly. 19 MR. GANGADHARAN: It's not just a day 20 of worship, but it might be those select 21 days that we had mentioned as being the 22 major worship days in the year. 23 MEMBER GHANNAM: Right, and I 24 understand that.
164 1 MR. GANGADHARAN: They may not 2 necessarily fall on a Sunday, but for those 3 days we will definitely take all the 4 precautions because end of the day when we 5 have such a fine development, we fully 6 intend for it to be an enjoyable experience 7 as much as a spiritual experience. It's not 8 much of a spiritual experience if you can't 9 find parking. And you are driving around 10 the place and you can't park on Taft. You 11 have to get out some place. We want to 12 organize it such that it's done well. I was 13 the person representing the trustees and the 14 executive in offering that letter to make it 15 very clear that that is a commitment from 16 the Temple organization to the City and we 17 take it very seriously that we have no 18 intention of making this just a statement 19 for the purpose of getting this permit. We 20 are citizens. We stay here. I have been a 21 resident of Novi. I am a business owner in 22 Novi. We fully intend for this to be 23 something that we are all proud of in the 24 community and something that works well.
165 1 We are trying to work within the 2 constraints of the whole system, but in 3 general we want for this to be a pleasant 4 experience for all us that will be using the 5 facility. 6 MEMBER GHANNAM: I understand your 7 point and it's well taken. But we also want 8 to make sure that you are a good neighbor to 9 your surrounding property owners. Thank 10 you. I have no other questions. Thank you. 11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Were we given -- 12 I don't remember seeing a copy of that 13 letter that keeps being referred to as part 14 of the agreement. 15 Member Bauer? 16 MEMBER BAUER: The letter that I have 17 of November 6th, states that: We wish to 18 clarify that we will not use the Cultural 19 Center and Temple facilities concurrently at 20 maximum capacity. But you could use one at 21 full and one at half. 22 MR. AMANN: I guess you could try to 23 interpret it that way. You have heard the 24 expression on the record and certainly you
166 1 can include that in as a condition if you 2 were so generous to give an approval. It is 3 not intended to use, to have scheduled 4 events at each facility at simultaneously 5 times. 6 MEMBER BAUER: Thank you, sir. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I found the 8 letter I was referring to. I was referring 9 to the letter with the parking and the 10 Planning Department or the Planning 11 Commission. I didn't catch which one it 12 was. 13 MR. AMANN: That's the letter that we 14 gave in response to the Planning Commission, 15 yes, that's correct. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You sounded much 17 more formal, I guess. 18 MR. AMANN: It actually was made -- 19 I'm sorry, if I wasn't clear about that. 20 The Planning Commission made it as a 21 condition of their approval and they wanted 22 a letter acknowledging their condition and 23 that was the purpose. 24 MR. SCHULTZ: I just want to point
167 1 out. The Planning Commission approval and 2 the language in that is the floor beneath 3 which they can't sink. So, whatever their 4 letter says it's still the Planning 5 Commission motion that applies. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 7 Members? I have a couple of questions 8 regarding the parking study or to address 9 the parking in this booklet. Now, it's 10 states in here that -- now, this is your 11 traffic study that was sworn to? 12 MR. AMANN: Yes, we provided the 13 traffic study that was reviewed by the City 14 traffic consultant. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It admits itself 16 that the weekend parking demand may be an 17 issue, correct? 18 MR. AMANN: Certainly the weekend is 19 when we expect the greatest usage of the 20 sign. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I am just 22 quoting the actual comments as made in the 23 study. Would the Cultural Center 2.8 times 24 as large as the one inch (unintelligible)
168 1 potential demand would be 510. 2 MR. AMANN: Hang on just one second. 3 We have got some specific. When you look 4 at, yeah, you are extrapolating out a 5 particular line when you get to the 6 conclusions that says, in fact -- 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I am going line 8 by line, just trying to understand your take 9 on it. I will get down to the bottom. 10 MR. AMANN: Right. If you use the 11 same square foot of the entire area Cultural 12 Center you utilize the one inch, correct. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Then it gets 14 down to like you stated what they say is a 15 more comparable reference point, correct? 16 When they say the demand estimate is at 265 17 parking spots? 18 MR. AMANN: Correct. 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Based on a 20 Saturday afternoon accumulation of 182 in 21 Troy. Did they only do one weekend of 22 study? 23 MR. AMANN: You mean our consultant? 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes.
169 1 MR. GANGADHARAN: They gave a complete 2 week. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Including one 4 weekend? 5 MR. AMANN: I believe that's one 6 weekend. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: One weekend. 8 And was that weekend one of these particular 9 instances where it would be higher than just 10 a normal weekend? 11 MR. GANGADHARAN: It was. It was 12 determined that there was an event taking 13 place at the Bharatiya Temple in Troy on the 14 Saturday afternoon. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: What about 16 Sunday? 17 MR. GANGADHARAN: I don't actually 18 recall on Sunday. I am not aware of 19 anything. 20 MR. AMANN: If I can help reference 21 that. I think you are trying to go to the 22 underlying determination of the parking 23 capacity which started with the Planning 24 Commission --
170 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: No, sir, I'm 2 not. I'm looking at the 308. I am not 3 looking to say that anyone is appealing the 4 308. I am looking at, you are going below 5 the 308 and that 34 is crucial to me and I 6 have great concerns about that. So, I am 7 specifically talking about the 34 that you 8 were going under the 308 that everyone has 9 determined is kind of the floor at the time, 10 but determined by the Planning Department. 11 So, I'm sticking with the 304. 12 So, I am still questioning, did this 13 include a Sunday? 14 MR. GANGADHARAN: It did include a 15 Sunday. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And was this a 17 regular Sunday or a Christmas type event? 18 MR. AMANN: It was a regular Sunday 19 after the Saturday being one of the High 20 Holidays. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, it was near 22 a High holiday? 23 MR. GANGADHARAN: For clarification, 24 most of those major days that we talk about
171 1 don't necessarily have to fall on a Sunday. 2 It would be literally improbable that is 3 just falls, that it's coincidence with a 4 Sunday. Sunday is just general traffic you 5 will find it higher. But on an auspicious 6 day which we celebrate could be any day of 7 the week and we had one of those days 8 included as part of the traffic study. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: What day was 10 that? 11 MR. GANGADHARAN: I suspect it was a 12 Saturday that we were talking about. 13 MR. MANYAM: There was a retirement 14 engagement on the Sunday afternoon. 15 MR. GANGADHARAN: So, there was an 16 event as well on Sunday. 17 MR. AMANN: In fact in Troy, in the 18 Troy center they do not have a description 19 of the use of the Cultural Center. They are 20 allowed to use the Cultural Center at the 21 same time for other events like that where 22 we would not be doing that. 23 MR. MANYAM: As a matter of fact, the 24 control traffic study that was submitted to
172 1 the Planning Commission showed peak Sunday 2 usage. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Which was the 4 High Holy day? 5 MR. AMANN: Saturday. 6 MR. MANYAM: Saturday there was an 7 event that leads us toward the evening and 8 on Sunday there was an afternoon luncheon 9 type occasion or retirement type party that 10 occurred that day. 11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, I'm looking 12 at a peak of about 230 at 8:00 on Saturday? 13 MR. AMANN: Yes. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, the study 15 still references 183 as a peak. Now if I am 16 looking at this peak of 200 multiplying by 17 his ratio, we would be over and probably in 18 between the 277 and the 308. 19 MR. MANYAM: What I am showing here is 20 enter and exit. It's written here on the 21 side, side bar entry about exiting volume 22 per hour. (Unintelligible). 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Let me ask as 24 well. You said you represented other areas
173 1 or other temples in Canton as well. Are any 2 of them of a more similar nature to this as 3 far as size goes? 4 MR. AMANN: I don't recall the exact 5 square footage. They were all unified 6 buildings. We had separate buildings. It 7 seems to me the last temple I did I think 8 was roughly, it's not constructed yet. It's 9 roughly 36,000 square feet I think. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I have great 11 concern about the parking as well and as 12 mentioned regarding Miracle Software they 13 could go away and I understand we would look 14 at tenant agreements, and I agree, I don't 15 think we want to promote an agreement. We 16 need to work on keeping parking on site. I 17 think that's the main intent of the 18 Ordinance. This one study from one day and 19 one temple in Troy that is half the size is 20 not convincing to me that the number of 21 demand per spots would be adequate at 277, 22 notwithstanding 308, not to be in question 23 once again. 24 So, I will ask one last question of
174 1 Ms. McBeth just to clarify something on a 2 memo that I saw regarding 25 percent. It's 3 page 4 of your October 14th memo, the very 4 last couple of lines. I believe it refers 5 to the Planning Commission, but I just want 6 a clarification as it may apply to us. If 7 it's not even germane to the proceedings let 8 me know that too. It says the Zoning Board 9 has advised the Planning Commission the 10 mechanism to accept land banking up to 25 11 percent? 12 MS. McBETH: It does, that is correct. 13 I think that would have been a Planning 14 Commission determination. The Planning 15 Commission would have said that they would 16 support the idea that not all the parking 17 space will be installed at the initial time 18 and that a certain area is being reserved 19 for those additional parking spaces. That 20 was not something that was proposed by the 21 Applicant. That was not a plan that was 22 reviewed by the Planning Commission or the 23 Community Development Department. And 24 likely if they had seen a plan it might have
175 1 been one of those encroached into the 2 woodland because things like that would have 3 been in the logical area. So that question 4 was not really supported by the Planning 5 Commission. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Okay, thank you. 7 That sums up my comments in general. I am 8 not convinced given the study that was 9 provided to us regarding parking and other 10 concerns that I brought up as well as other 11 Board Members that the 34 variance would do 12 substantial justice to this Petitioner and 13 the others in the area. I'll leave it at 14 that. 15 Other Board Members? Member Sanghvi? 16 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank you, 17 sir. I would like to make certain 18 observation and comments. First observation 19 I want to point out that Hindu year is a uni 20 year and it is not like what we have in the 21 western world. Number two, Sunday has no 22 special significance in a Hindu religion and 23 all this hang ups about Sunday and all these 24 things are really irrelevant when it comes
176 1 to celebrating certain Hindu days of 2 worship. Number three, when you have a 3 congregation of 3,000 family and you all go 4 to your churches and all that and I go to 5 mine which is not this particular church 6 anyway, but hardly ever you will find the 7 whole congregation showing up at the same 8 time. How many times have you seen it? So, 9 when you consider all these things I think 10 let us keep common sense in front of our 11 mind when we take all these decisions and 12 talk about all these numbers rather than get 13 carried away by the numbers used there and 14 everywhere. Sometimes statistics have bad 15 traffic and will mislead you. So, please 16 don't get hung up on these numbers. As well 17 as this particular traffic area we are 18 trying to put here from what I gather this 19 is the temple complex where entire Hindu way 20 of life is going to be represented in that 21 complex about how people live, Hindus live 22 in their own life which is very different 23 than what we know, understand as to how the 24 (unintelligible) lives.
177 1 I have lived in the western part of 2 the world for over 50 years. Not only in 3 this country but also in England. I have 4 seen all kinds of temples and all kind of 5 churches and when we start talking about 6 getting into the microscopic details of this 7 thing, sometimes going for the trees we 8 forget the woods. So, let us understand the 9 issue here. 10 The issue here is 34 parking spots as 11 recommended by our own City Department. Are 12 these 34 spots so critical that you are 13 likely to prevent this kind of place of 14 worship to be constructed in this city? 15 Whether they can cut the trees and build 16 those 34 spots because they have a legal 17 land to do it and whether you would like to 18 see more cement concrete than live tree is 19 another issue we ought to think about. So, 20 let common sense direct and let's get on 21 with it. We have been dealing with this 22 issue, first case for about three hours and 23 I think time has come to understand the 24 value of our time and everybody's else time
178 1 as well as the importance of this project 2 and make decisions and move on. Thank you. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 4 Members? Member Krieger? 5 MEMBER KRIEGER: My concern would be 6 if we denied the 34 spaces then they could 7 always cut down some trees and put up some 8 more parking lot. So, that is what my 9 question would be. Thank you. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 11 Members? By no means am I under the 12 impression that cutting down more trees and 13 putting more cement is ever the correct 14 answer. But I have not been convinced that 15 the amount of space or the space in between 16 the 277 and 308 won't keep people from 17 parking in the nearby residences. I have 18 done it myself. I have been at the football 19 games. I have been many places where 20 parking is not adequate and that is not 21 something that the City of Novi wants to 22 create. And until, once again, the 23 Petitioner has the burden of proof to show 24 us that the practical difficulty is there
179 1 and that this is adequate and it does 2 everybody justice and it works in the best 3 interest of the City and the residents and 4 the visitors that will be there, until that 5 can be done, whether it be through studies 6 or further information from the Planning 7 Department, I cannot support this at this 8 time. 9 One car parked in a resident's street, 10 a residential street and traffic running 11 through residential street is one too many 12 for me. And until I am convinced that that 13 won't take place and that there is adequate 14 parking on site, I cannot support this. I'm 15 sorry. 16 Other Board Members? Other 17 suggestions? The Board has never been so 18 quiet. 19 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Let me be 20 the devil's advocate and I'll make -- 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Ibe, 22 speak. 23 MEMBER IBE: Just a quick comment. I 24 understand your point is well taken. But I
180 1 think to the defense of the other Board 2 Members, I don't believe that I am hung up 3 on Sunday as any day for the sake of 4 argument. As I stated previously, I do 5 understand the Hindu religion just as much 6 as I understand my religion of being a 7 catholic. And understand the practice and 8 the way of the people. It's a great 9 religion and I completely want to 10 accommodate them. As someone who attends a 11 church in Farmington Hills, when I saw the 12 size of the church grow, where we were 13 parking at that funeral facility that is 14 located next to the church, that they had to 15 literally give us tickets every Sunday and 16 the residents in the condo were complaining 17 because church members were parking just 18 everywhere. It became a nuisance. The city 19 of Farmington Hills had to assign the police 20 to direct traffic on Sundays. That was 21 costing the city money. It was 22 inconveniencing the people in the 23 neighborhood and until the church was able 24 to take matters into their own hands and
181 1 expand the parking lot, and made away with 2 so many other things that we enjoy in order 3 to create more parking for the parishioners, 4 I think it is incumbent upon the Petitioner 5 to find a way to accommodate the needs of 6 the residents. 7 Unfortunately I may have gone along 8 with other things that we have had so far 9 today, but this is where I draw it off. I 10 don't think I am going to support the 11 variance that is being requested for the 12 parking for the simple fact that I think the 13 residents have made their point clear. I 14 think their point is that it's just not 15 going to work. I don't buy the idea that 16 because you have some off site parking that 17 that is going to solve this problem. I 18 seriously don't buy that at all. I probably 19 use the term April Fool's day because that's 20 going to happen here. I don't buy the idea 21 the City is going to enforce this rule on 22 any given day. I just don't buy that idea 23 because no one has told me exactly what that 24 penalty will be. What is a punitive nature
182 1 of this penalty? Is it going to $100? 2 Well, gee, maybe they can just pay that. Is 3 it going to require the taxpayers of the 4 City of Novi to have to litigate this case 5 in court at my own expense? I don't think 6 that's fair to the people who live in this 7 neighborhood or the people of the City of 8 Novi to have to litigate something that we 9 can foresee right now. It is foreseeable 10 that we are going to end up litigating this 11 matter. I just don't buy it. I'm sorry, I 12 just don't approve of this variance. Thank 13 you. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Might I suggest 15 at this time that the Board consider a 16 postponement of this case to give the 17 Petitioner and the City more time to review 18 and come up with any factual evidence that 19 they want to present to the Board, possibly 20 additional studies as I have mentioned. If 21 we can get some more clarification on the 22 litigation of punitive damages piece. 23 I need some clarification from the 24 Petitioner regarding the extent to which a
183 1 quote unquote "large scale temple activity", 2 and what that is and how it won't coincide 3 with the Cultural Center and what events 4 takes place at the Cultural Center. I just 5 need to know estimates of real population 6 that they anticipate now, five years down 7 the road, ten years down the road when none 8 of us will likely be on the Board anymore. 9 And I would also like to see some 10 input from the Planning Department and the 11 environmental consultants regarding the 12 woodlands and wetlands and the parking as it 13 sees fit. I think there is a lot more 14 factual evidence that this Board is going to 15 need before they make a decision on this 16 parking determination. I would suggest a 17 postponement. Other than that I would not 18 be able to support and would be forced to 19 deny it. 20 Mr. Schultz? 21 MR. SCHULTZ: Just a couple of 22 comments. Number one, in terms of the 23 enforcement issue, I guess I am surprised at 24 that. That engenders as much discussion as
184 1 it has. In any case where you grant a 2 variance in any case where you make an 3 approval, you are sort of assuming that the 4 proponent is going to live up to what's been 5 approved and sought and that the City is 6 going to do what it normally does in the 7 event that that doesn't happen. That is -- 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: The counter on 9 that, Mr. Schultz, is if we approve some 10 type of setback on a house and they go in 11 and they build the house and if it's not to 12 the specifications that the Zoning Board 13 takes place, we can litigate that and that's 14 litigated once. 15 On the other hand, when you are 16 looking at a traffic situation or a parking 17 situation where people are parking daily, 18 weekly, monthly, whatever it may be, we have 19 the potential to have to litigate this over 20 and over and over again. It's not a one 21 time thing of I built my house, I put it six 22 feet away and the Zoning Board said I could 23 put it five feet away from the setback, this 24 is a parking issue that is constantly
185 1 moving. And I think that warrants the 2 discussion of where a litigation may go. 3 MR. SCHULTZ: I take the point that 4 it's different than sort of a one time 5 building issue and I don't disagree. I 6 guess I would, I would say there are all 7 sorts of approvals that the City gives 8 everyday through the Planning Commission and 9 occasionally through this Board that do 10 exactly what is proposed here today. The 11 Planning Commission I guess more so than 12 this Board. It's the nature of the land use 13 approval. All of these issues are ongoing 14 and, therefore, require vigilance. If it's 15 a Sunday the police are out there responding 16 to a complaint. I am not actually 17 disagreeing, I am just saying it's 18 enforcement in the normal course I guess 19 from staff's perspective. 20 And then with regard to the tabling, I 21 guess we just need to know what additional 22 information you are seeking. I don't know 23 whether the proponent has a timing issue for 24 this or not?
186 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I made my list 2 of what I would prefer to see. I saw heads 3 nodding and I think Member Ibe just made 4 some comments as to what he would see. And 5 I certainly don't want to forejudge this 6 just because of any timing issues. I would 7 be interested if they wanted to make any 8 comments as to timing, I am sure we would 9 accommodate them and get them on the 10 December meeting if possible. But I 11 certainly can't make a decision based on 12 timing. I am sure you don't want to defend 13 that in court. That's not a practical 14 difficulty standard. 15 MR. SCHULTZ: Sure. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other Board 17 Members want to make a comment on a possible 18 postponement? Does the Petitioner wish to 19 make any comments as far as you see where we 20 are going at this time? 21 MR. AMANN: Mr. Chairman, thank you 22 for the opportunity to respond. And I will 23 respond to the limited questioning by the 24 Board Members. We would certainly welcome
187 1 if you believe it's the pleasure of the 2 Board that it would otherwise deny the 3 application that we would certainly welcome 4 the postponement of the application as 5 opposed to a denial so we could work with 6 staff and the City attorney and anyone else 7 to provide additional information to respond 8 to the concerns expressed by the Board 9 Members. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: If you do have 11 any other questions through the City, I am 12 sure that the City would be more than happy 13 to contact any of the Board Members to 14 gather additional information as to what we 15 are requesting of you. 16 MR. AMANN: We appreciate that. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I would make a 18 motion that we postpone this case likely to 19 the December meeting or when the Petitioner 20 is ready for further clarification on the 21 issues brought up by the Board Members and 22 give time for the City attorney, Planning 23 Department as well as the Petitioner to 24 address those concerns.
188 1 MEMBER BAUER: Second the motion. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We have a second 3 by Member Bauer. All in favor say aye -- 4 I'm sorry, Ms. Working, please call the 5 roll. 6 (Interposing)(Unintelligible). 7 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 9 MS. WORKING: Motion to postpone. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Correct. 11 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 12 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 13 MS. WORKING: Member Ghannam? 14 MEMBER GHANNAM: No. 15 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 16 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 17 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 18 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 19 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 20 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: No. 21 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 22 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 23 MS. WORKING: Motion to postpone 24 passes 5-2.
189 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: With that the 2 Zoning Board will take a 10 minute break and 3 come back. 4 (A recess was held.) 5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We will 6 call Case Number 2 on the agenda. Case 7 Number: 08-056 filed by filed by Jason 8 Minock for Toll Brothers for Island Lake 9 located south of Grand River, north of Ten 10 Mile, east of Napier Road and west of Wixom 11 Road. 12 Is the Petitioner here tonight? 13 MR. MINOCK: Yes. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All right, 15 please go ahead and step up to the front. 16 The Petitioner is requesting 9 variances for 17 oversized real estate advertising signs to 18 be located at several addresses on the 19 property. And the Petitioner is requesting 20 12 variances for directional signage within 21 the development to be located at several 22 addresses within the property as well. All 23 those properties can be found on the agenda. 24 Are you an attorney?
190 1 MR. MINOCK: No. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All right, could 3 you be sworn in by our Secretary. 4 MEMBER KRIEGER: Do you swear or 5 affirm in case number: 08-056 to tell the 6 truth in this case? 7 MR. MINOCK: I do. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Go ahead and 9 proceed with your case. 10 MR. MINOCK: You need my address or 11 no? 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Name and address 13 and your case, yes. 14 MR. MINOCK: My name is Jason Minock. 15 My address is 25622 Napier Road. 16 As most of you I'm sure know, Island 17 Lake is a large community. It covers over 18 900 acres. We are asking that the current 19 signage that we have in the community that 20 we get an extension for a year. We have two 21 models on the site currently and due to the 22 large size of the site we have models on 23 both the north and south side and there is 24 multiple entrances and we believe that
191 1 signage is needed in order to get to our 2 models and get around where people are not 3 driving around in the community lost. 4 The signs are all in good shape except 5 for some that I was about to replace and 6 then I got the notice that I needed an 7 extension, so I have held off on that. 8 There are some signs, I don't know if you 9 guys have this map. The signs on the 10 northern most piece of the property. It 11 would be signs 23 through 25, and hopefully 12 if I sign one of these deals this weekend I 13 will only need three of those signs and so 14 we will see if that occurs. 15 Since last time we had an extension we 16 have removed one of the signs. It's been 17 taken down. And I could go into some of the 18 economics. We talked earlier with Robin 19 about the economics. I don't know that I 20 need to bore you with all the economics. 21 It's a tough market out there. I think 22 pretty much everybody reads the paper and 23 understands that getting traffic to our site 24 is paramount for our sales.
192 1 I don't have a whole lot to say. If 2 people have questions I can answer. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you for 4 your comments and I will go ahead and ask 5 the Secretary to read any correspondence. 6 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number: 7 08-056, 370 notice were mailed and we have 8 five responses. 9 The first one: The only sign we 10 object to is the boathouse on Drakes Bay 11 Drive. Number two, this sign is much too 12 big and contains directions and descriptions 13 that other signage also describes. From 14 Chris and Debra Richinger (ph) on Reeds 15 Pointe Drive. 16 The next one is from Charles A. Selski 17 (ph), 50406 Drakes Bay Drive: Toll Brothers 18 has done an outstanding job in maintaining 19 these signs they received on approval. I 20 know I speak for other homeowner when I say 21 the word targeted up scaling advertising for 22 the development improves the value and 23 future marketability of all homes. 24 The next one is from John McKernan
193 1 (ph), 25976 Island Lake Drive: I object to 2 the variance for the nine oversized signs 3 requested by Toll Brothers. 4 I see no need after five years that this 5 neighborhood has to continue to look like a 6 used car lot. Signs for homes for sale or 7 model homes is one thing, but I think by now 8 everyone knows there are homes for sale by 9 Toll Brothers. They are asking for 10 variances, they should be making repairs to 11 some of the grounds they are responsible 12 for. 13 The next one is from Fred Cola (ph), 14 50385 Drakes Bay Drive: I am in support of 15 Toll Brothers' request for nine variances of 16 oversized signs. 17 And the next one is from Frederick and 18 Lisa Cola: I am in support of Toll 19 Brothers' request for nine oversized signs 20 for Island Lake of Novi. 21 Carlene and Robert Luntsford (ph): We 22 strongly oppose the Toll Brothers proposal 23 for large signs. Toll Brothers violated the 24 state and local laws by fraudulently
194 1 representing no development behind our homes 2 verbally and inviting as been evidenced by 3 the master deed and record (unintelligible) 4 located in the City of Novi. The 5 consequences of their breach are still felt 6 to this day. Buyers who are not impacted 7 are simply lucky. Do not allow Toll 8 Brothers to utilize larger signage in our 9 community. Our fellow homeowners are not 10 allowed oversized signs to help sell their 11 homes. Why should Toll Brothers benefit and 12 our homeowners be harmed any further. 13 Lastly, larger signs will not equate to the 14 additional sales. The economy will. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, Madam 16 Secretary. I will ask if there is anyone in 17 the audience who wishes to make a comment on 18 this case? Seeing none, we will close the 19 public comments section and move along to 20 the City if anyone from the City who wishes 21 to make a comment. 22 MR. BOULARD: Mr. Chairman, I don't 23 have any particular information to add 24 beyond what was included in your packets. I
195 1 did want to point out that extensions were 2 granted for oversized real estate signs in 3 2004 and then again in 2006 and 2007. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. 5 Anyone else? Open it up for Board 6 discussion. Member Shroyer? 7 MEMBER SHROYER: Thank you, Mr. Chair. 8 The applicant, Mr. Minock, please come 9 forward. Somewhere in here I read that 10 there was signs that would be combined in 11 order to be reduced. How many signs were 12 being combined? 13 MR. MINOCK: There is actually going 14 to be two signs combined into one. I 15 believe sign number 7 and 8. I don't know 16 if you have this map. Number 7 and 8 are 17 going to be combined into one. I haven't 18 done that yet. But that's my intention is 19 to combine those. 20 MEMBER SHROYER: Which sign will be 21 removed then? 22 MR. MINOCK: Actually, both of them. 23 They both have some paint peeling and I need 24 to have a new sign put in.
196 1 MEMBER SHROYER: So, 7 and 8 are being 2 removed and only one is being replaced? 3 MR. MINOCK: Correct. 4 MEMBER SHROYER: I read earlier that 5 signs 7, 8, 9, 44, 46, 66 and 27 are to be 6 replaced by newly identified signs. What is 7 the size of those? Do the new signs meet 8 the City ordinance or are they oversized as 9 well? 10 MR. MINOCK: They are oversized. They 11 are actually in place. The new signs I am 12 going to put actually do meet the lot size 13 marker for 25, 26, 24 and 23 on the north 14 side, those would be -- I don't know if you 15 are looking at the map. 16 MEMBER SHROYER: I am going from the 17 written response. 18 MR. MINOCK: Oh, I'm sorry, you are 19 talking about the home site number. Yes, 20 correct. I was looking at -- yes, those are 21 -- 22 MEMBER SHROYER: It's 24 by 36. 23 MR. MINOCK: Right. Which I believe 24 falls under the six square falls under the
197 1 six square feet. 2 MEMBER SHROYER: Is that right, Mr. 3 Amolsch? Does that fall within our sign 4 ordinance? 5 MR. AMOLSCH: If they are less than 6 six square feet, yes, and five feet high. 7 MEMBER SHROYER: Do they fall within 8 five feet? 9 MR. MINOCK: We can make them five 10 feet, yes. 11 MEMBER SHROYER: That's all the 12 questions I have, Mr. Chair. Thank you. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 14 Member Shroyer. Member Burke? 15 MEMBER BURKE: Jason, you said pending 16 the outcome this weekend you may have a pass 17 on which sign? 18 MR. MINOCK: The signs that we were 19 just referring to. Currently those signs 20 are oversized that are there. They have 21 been there for several years. They have 22 been there like four or five years and I was 23 going to replace those with signs that 24 actually are going to fall within the six
198 1 square feet so I actually wouldn't need a 2 variance. 3 MEMBER BURKE: That would be 7 and 8? 4 Which number signs? 5 MR. MINOCK: Yes, it would be 6, 7, 8 6 and 9. 7 MEMBER BURKE: So that whole north 8 end? 9 MR. MINOCK: Correct. 10 MEMBER BURKE: Sell me on the 11 billboard being sign number 2. Tell me why 12 that has to be that big? It seems that you 13 have got some support within the community, 14 but somebody had a pretty specific position 15 against sign number two and it is pretty 16 big. 17 MR. MINOCK: There is no question it's 18 a larger sign. It's been there for a couple 19 of years and what is does is that photo 20 that's in there, it's an aerial photo of the 21 boathouse. It gives people the ability to 22 see an areal shot of what's down in that 23 boathouse without actually driving down 24 there and touring around. So, it's been
199 1 very successful for us because we're selling 2 lifestyle in terms of this community. The 3 amenities that we have there are different 4 from all the other developments in Novi. I 5 think we have a 170 acre lake. We have a 6 boathouse that has tennis courts in places. 7 You go swimming and an outdoor pool, boat 8 docks and that kind of thing. In my opinion 9 this really showcases that. 10 It is sitting back, it's a little bit 11 off the road and it also directs people that 12 the two signs actually direct people to the 13 model. The one model is somewhat within the 14 middle of the community there. We have 15 people that tend to get a little bit 16 confused driving around so both has the 17 directional and then an aerial photo to show 18 that. 19 MEMBER BURKE: Would it be safe to 20 assume that any potential buyer coming out 21 here has done a little research on the 22 facility or just happened to drive by? You 23 probably don't get a lot of sales by 24 drive-bys, would that be accurate?
200 1 MR. MINOCK: More so, yes, that's 2 true. 3 MEMBER BURKE: So they are probably 4 doing a little research on-line? 5 MR. MINOCK: A little bit of research, 6 correct. 7 MEMBER BURKE: You probably have this 8 aerial picture on-line? 9 MR. MINOCK: We have some of this 10 on-line, correct. But when you drive by 11 it's not completely apparent that that's 12 what is there. It sits quite a ways off of 13 Drakes Bay. 14 MEMBER BURKE: Do you know what the 15 size of this is? 16 MR. MINOCK: I don't know off the top 17 of my head. It's probably, I am just going 18 to make a guess here and say it's probably 9 19 feet wide and maybe 6 feet high by itself. 20 The actual sign not the height off the 21 ground. Five feet high maybe. 22 MEMBER BURKE: And you said that that 23 sits off the road a little bit? 24 MR. MINOCK: It sits off the road. I
201 1 mean, it's not sitting right on the road. 2 It's behind the sidewalk there. It's 3 actually at the entrance to the boathouse 4 going in. 5 MEMBER BURKE: I have been there a few 6 times. It's a nice sub, no doubt and nice 7 community. I think the signs throughout are 8 okay. I have to appreciate what the one 9 respondent said about the sign that it is 10 pretty big and that might be one that I 11 would have a problem with. 12 MR. MINOCK: The idea with the signs 13 too is, I mean, it's a benefit to the 14 homeowners. Nobody benefits, the City, us 15 or the homeowner if I have vacant lots 16 sitting in there. 17 MEMBER BURKE: You won't hear that 18 argument from me. But it's a big sign. 19 Thank you. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Krieger? 21 MEMBER KRIEGER: Two things. On the 22 notice of violation did they pay the $400 23 fee? Alan or Robin? 24 MS. WORKING: The fee receipt would be
202 1 on the last page on the right hand side of 2 the case file. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Yes. 4 MEMBER KRIEGER: Then the second thing 5 was, I actually drove through this twice, 6 and I was in jeans and a T-shirt so I guess 7 the lady in the model thought I was the 8 woman that was going to fix her signs, but 9 that was okay. 10 MR. MINOCK: She didn't no. She asked 11 me about today. She had no idea that I was 12 even doing this. 13 MEMBER KRIEGER: Okay. For 6, 7, 8, 9 14 is where I started out at. I then I saw how 15 many real estate signs were up. So, then I 16 was wondering, okay, Toll Brothers is 17 selling empty lots and homeowners are trying 18 to sell their site. So, I was wondering 19 what's the difference. Then I drove along 20 and I got to where 19 was and saw another 21 sign and said, oh, these are the arrow 22 signs. So, I went all the way down because 23 the directional arrows really didn't tell me 24 where to go and so I started from 16 and
203 1 then went 17, 18, 19. Of course, 19 2 somebody played with and said turn right 3 instead of turn left. So, then I went 4 around and had the scenic ride all the way 5 down to 20. And when I got to 21 that was 6 laying out in the grass both signs. And 7 then I got to 2 and 3, 11 and 12 and if the 8 signs are, if you have got a sign, the 9 homeowners, the majority of the people 10 there, they are already residents, they know 11 what's at the boathouse. So, the only 12 person it would benefit would be somebody 13 coming in at 1. 14 So, it looks like that whole south end 15 near Ten Mile the area that wants to be 16 built, so I can see a sign where number 1 is 17 at and then the rest of them would be 18 irritating to the homeowners I think more 19 than anyone trying to get direction to 20 anywhere. And that's my observation so far. 21 Question percent built? The percent 22 that's left to be built? And what 23 percentage has been built so far this year? 24 MR. MINOCK: Left to build is around
204 1 18, 19 percent for the community as a whole. 2 And everything except for the four lots on 3 the north side there, everything on the 4 north side of the lake is sold. So, the 5 only thing we have left to sell is on the 6 south side of Drakes Bay. On the south side 7 of the lake. And it not just out at Ten 8 Mile. We actually have this whole section 9 back here. Then we have 27 lots back here 10 and we have almost 100 lots down here. 11 There are quite a few lots to go. We're 12 getting there, but we're definitely not 13 there. 14 MEMBER KRIEGER: So, total percentage 15 build out? 16 MR. MINOCK: About 82 percent. Was 17 your question how many sales we had this 18 year? 19 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 20 MR. MINOCK: Between the two sites we 21 have had 12. 22 MEMBER KRIEGER: Twelve percent? 23 MR. MINOCK: Oh, I'm sorry. Oh, geez, 24 no.
205 1 MEMBER IBE: Sales. 2 MEMBER KRIEGER: Units? 3 MR. MINOCK: I would be promoted and I 4 wouldn't be here if it was 12 percent. I 5 can assure you that. Twelve sales. 6 MEMBER KRIEGER: Those were all my 7 questions. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 9 Member Krieger. Anyone else? I tend to 10 agree in the general sense that the lots 11 sitting vacant and the houses sitting vacant 12 do nothing for you, do nothing for the City, 13 do nothing for the homeowners. I can 14 support this request with probably a year 15 time limit on it. 16 There are certain ones that are large 17 like number 2 that probably should be looked 18 at maybe next time, but given everything 19 that's going on, given the statistics that 20 you presented, I can support this for one 21 year. 22 I will make a motion that in case 23 number: 08-056 that we approve for one year 24 the variance as requested given the unique
206 1 size of the land, the layout of the land, 2 the layout of the roads. All with the 3 condition that the signs must be maintained 4 and to the standards of the Community 5 Development Department. Should they have 6 any issues I would appreciate them letting 7 the Zoning Board know. 8 MEMBER BURKE: Second. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, motion by 10 Member Fischer and a second by Member Burke. 11 Any other questions? Member Sanghvi? 12 MEMBER SANGHVI: I was going to 13 suggest a friendly amendment to make it two 14 years because I don't think the economy is 15 going to change very much in a year's time. 16 And things the way they are they are not 17 likely to improve to sell this kind of 18 design houses in a year's time. 19 (Unintelligible). 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You said you are 21 82 percent built. What about sold? 22 MR. MINOCK: Eighty-two percent are 23 closed and we have got eight that's -- seven 24 in backlog right now that we haven't closed
207 1 yet, but we have sold and were built. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I will amend it 3 to 18 months. 4 MEMBER SANGHVI: All right. 5 MEMBER BURKE: Second. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Seconder 7 concurs. Any other questions or comments? 8 Member Shroyer? 9 MEMBER SHROYER: Would the Motioner 10 entertain a second friendly amendment that 11 the Petitioner would indicate that signs 12 number 7, 8, 9, 44, 46, 66 and 27 when they 13 are to be replaced by newly identified style 14 not to exceed the 24 inches by 36 inches and 15 no more in height than the five feet as 16 required by Ordinance? 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I can agree to 18 that given that the Petitioner stated that 19 in his comments, yes. 20 MEMBER BURKE: Concur. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other 22 comments? Seeing none, Ms. Working, please 23 call the roll. 24 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer?
208 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 2 MS. WORKING: Member Burke? 3 MEMBER BURKE: Yes. 4 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 5 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 6 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 7 MEMBER KRIEGER: Sure, I guess. 8 MS. WORKING: And Member Sanghvi? 9 MEMBER SANGHVI: Yes. 10 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 11 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 12 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 13 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 14 MS. WORKING: Motion to approve passes 15 7-0. 16 MR. MINOCK: Thank you. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. 18 We will call number 3 on the agenda 19 which is Case Number: 08-057 filed by John 20 Babcock for the property located north of 21 Eight Mile and west of Beck Road at the 22 Richmond Drive Entranceway. The Petitioner 23 is requesting two 1.83 square foot 24 single-face builder panel signs to be placed
209 1 below each of the existing signs. The 2 Petitioner is also requesting two 10 feet 3 height variances for the placement of two 4 6.5 square foot monogram seal emblem signs 5 15 feet high on the existing peaks of the 6 entranceway ground sign. The property is 7 zoned RA and is located north of Eight Mile 8 west of Beck Road. 9 You are the Petitioner? 10 MR. BABCOCK: I am. 11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Are you an 12 attorney? 13 MR. BABCOCK: No, I'm not. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Please be sworn 15 in. 16 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number: 17 08-057 for Maybury Park Estates do you swear 18 or affirm to tell the truth in this case? 19 MR. BABCOCK: I do. John Babcock, 20 2071 Maple Road, Babcock Homes. In Maybury 21 Park we have two entrances there that were 22 built at two different times. The first 23 entrance to phase one and the entrance to 24 phase two is basically a duplicate of the
210 1 two of them. The phase two landscaping 2 monuments and everything has already been 3 approved and looked at. The signage that we 4 are talking about putting on phase two is 5 exactly the same that has already approved 6 on phase one. It's just in need of a 7 variance because of the way the signage sits 8 on a monument higher up, but it's exactly 9 the same as phase one. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other 11 comments? 12 MR. BABCOCK: No. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Then I will ask 14 the Board Secretary if there are any 15 comments. I will note that there is 14 16 notices mailed with zero responses and I 17 will ask if there is anyone in the audience 18 that wishes to make a comment on this case? 19 No? Then we will close that opportunity and 20 turn to the City. Mr. Fox? 21 MR. FOX: Through the Chair for some 22 clarification. The two entrances of the new 23 proposed entrance is only a few hundred feet 24 down the road on Eight Mile from the
211 1 original. The Applicant is proposing to put 2 the same signage up for consistency sake. 3 Originally when the original entrance was 4 approved through ZBA 04-051 I think was the 5 first time that was pushed through. They 6 considered the crest up at the very high 7 point to be considered artistic augmentation 8 is how they called it which is not 9 considered signage. And then the rest of it 10 should be consistent as far as size and 11 everything else. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. 13 Fox. I remember the first time, I was much 14 younger when this case came before us. A 15 long time ago. 16 I will open it up for Board 17 discussion. Member Burke? 18 MEMBER BURKE: How far did you say the 19 two streets were? You said a few hundred? 20 MR. FOX: I don't know the exact 21 number, but they are not very far apart 22 there's probably five to seven feet maybe 23 between the two. 24 MEMBER BURKE: I see. I support it.
212 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I'm sorry? 2 MEMBER BURKE: Nothing. I just said I 3 support it. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Shroyer? 5 MEMBER SHROYER: I think it's a pretty 6 simple case and I am going to go ahead and 7 make a motion that in case number: 08-057, 8 Maybury Park Estates, move to approve a 9 variance request. Being the seal is more 10 decorative in nature and not part of the 11 signage. This variance allows for the 12 consistency and the sign is already approved 13 in existence and making this property 14 unique. And granting this relief will not 15 result in use that is incompatible with 16 adjacent and surrounding properties and is 17 not inconsistent with the spirt of the 18 ordinance. 19 MEMBER KRIEGER: Second. 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 21 motion by Member Shroyer. Seconded by 22 Member Krieger. 23 Any further discussion? Seeing none, 24 Ms. Working, please call the roll.
213 1 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 2 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 3 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 4 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 5 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 6 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. 7 MS. WORKING: Member 8 Bauer? 9 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 10 MS. WORKING: Member Burke? 11 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 12 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 14 MS. WORKING: And Member Ibe? 15 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 16 MS. WORKING: Motion to approve passes 17 7-0. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Your variance 19 has been granted. Thank you very much. We 20 probably scared you with the earlier cases. 21 Have a good night. 22 23 We will call Case Number: 08-058 24 filed by Michael Kahm of Singh Development
214 1 for the property located at 27475 Huron 2 Circle. The Petitioner is requesting one 3 sign variance for the location of a double 4 sided leasing sign for Waltonwood at Twelve 5 Oaks to be located in the northwest corner 6 of said property. This property is zoned RC 7 and located south of Twelve Mile Road, east 8 of Novi Road. 9 If you can raise your hand and be 10 sworn in for us. 11 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number: 12 08-058 for Waltonwood do you swear or affirm 13 to tell the truth? 14 MR. KAHM: I do. My name is Mike 15 Kahm. I am with Singh Development Company, 16 7125 Orchard Lake Road, West Bloomfield. 17 Good evening. A long night. 18 Most of you remember I was here a few 19 months ago regarding the signs we have at 20 our Waltonwood Development and we discussed 21 the current economic conditions and the 22 exposure that we need for this development. 23 And at that time you allowed us to keep the 24 one sign that we have on the ring road of
215 1 the mall -- no, pardon. You had us remove 2 the one on ring road and we still have the 3 one. And I indicated at that time that one 4 of the important things for us given the 5 location of our development is really having 6 the exposure from Twelve Mile Road. So, 7 what we presented this evening is a 8 directional/marketing sign which is off 9 premise on property that we own adjacent to 10 our Waltonwood Development. But we would 11 like to use that as a way of directing 12 people who are looking for a development, 13 but who are not completely acquainted with 14 the Novi area. We have people living in our 15 development that live from areas as far away 16 as Grosse Pointe. So, Novi is a regional 17 destination. So, it's important to us to be 18 able to direct people from a major 19 thoroughfare to our development. So, we are 20 asking if you would consider us placing this 21 sign on our property that fronts on Twelve 22 Mile Road and we obviously meet the setback 23 requirements in the Ordinance for the sign. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All right.
216 1 Thank you very much. In this case there 2 were 14 notices mailed with zero responses. 3 Is there anyone in the audience that wishes 4 to make a comment on this case? Seeing 5 none, we will close that opportunity as well 6 and turn it over to the City. 7 MR. BOULARD: No response or comment 8 other than what is in your packet. If you 9 have any questions we'll be glad to answer. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. And 11 Board Members? Vice-Chair Sanghvi? 12 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: I can 13 support their request. It is a replacement 14 for the Huron Circle sign because once you 15 get inside you know where Waltonwood 16 Development is. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 18 Vice-Chair Sanghvi. 19 Mr. Kahm, just a question on the 20 application attachment where you said: 21 Therefore, marketing efforts are a never 22 ending necessity and exposure is critical to 23 that effort. 24 Do we have an end plan to having these
217 1 types of signs ever? 2 MR. KAHM: I wish. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And I 4 understand. I guess all I'm asking is is 5 there a point where you will feel that you 6 are occupied in the sense where these kind 7 of signs can come down and you are basically 8 replenishing with new customers? Or are we 9 looking at something that really, truly 10 could potentially be there forever? Assume 11 a decent economy or an economic turnaround 12 as well. 13 MR. KAHM: I would say obviously when 14 we develop the property that it's on we are 15 not going to probably want that sign there 16 any more and we are hoping as the economy 17 turns around and we get more customer 18 traffic that this project will stabilize. 19 But the statement in the application is 20 true, the assisted living side of things, we 21 probably have a 50 percent turnover annually 22 and that's only because of the nature of 23 our -- 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I'm sorry, what
218 1 percent? 2 MR. KAHM: A 50 percent turnover. But 3 that's because of the nature of the 4 occupants. They come there out of necessity 5 not out of demand. So, they either have 6 something happen in their life and a lot of 7 times we lose people to nursing homes, 8 hospitals or unfortunately death. And 9 that's just the nature of the beast. Our 10 average age, our entry age I should say is 11 85. So, we will always be marketing, but 12 right now to us it's very crucial to have 13 some exposure to bring the traffic in from 14 Twelve Mile and recognize where we are and 15 what we are. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: But assuming an 17 economic turnaround and assuming that this 18 stabilizes at some point, this type of 19 marketing may go away and you will promote 20 in other ways, I'm hoping? 21 MR. KAHM: Or I will be here with my 22 knee pads on. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: With the economy 24 I might be living here by that time.
219 1 What type of time were you looking 2 for? 3 MR. KAHM: A couple of years if that's 4 all right. 5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Other Board 6 Members? Mr. Shroyer, do you have any 7 comments? 8 MEMBER SHROYER: I do. Mr. Amolsch, 9 does this sign fall within the size 10 requirements of the City for size 11 limitation? It looks like it's about to 8 12 feet by 4 feet 7 inches. 13 MR. AMOLSCH: It's an off premise 14 advertising sign is what it is. So, it 15 doesn't fall under the normal aspects of the 16 Ordinance. If it's a real estate sign it 17 would only be allowed to be 16 square feet 18 in area and 10 feet tall. 19 MEMBER SHROYER: So, this would be an 20 off site advertised sign. It can be 21 construed temporary in nature as well? 22 MR. AMOLSCH: An off premise sign it 23 would be up to the Board as to the time 24 limit. It's not a permitted sign. That's
220 1 why it has to be here. 2 MEMBER SHROYER: Our temporary sign 3 that's on Huron Drive right now is scheduled 4 to be done in January; is that correct? 5 MR. AMOLSCH: That is correct. 6 MS. WORKING: No. I'm sorry, through 7 the Chair. It is the Huron Circle sign that 8 was denied and the Mackinaw Boulevard sign 9 will expire in January of 2009. 10 MR. AMOLSCH: That's it. 11 MS. WORKING: They are very similar. 12 MR. AMOLSCH: Yes. 13 MEMBER SHROYER: I have my streets 14 mixed up. Those are the only questions I 15 have, Mr. Chair. Thank you. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 17 Member Shroyer. Member Burke? 18 MEMBER BURKE: I just had to laugh 19 real quick because the staff couldn't 20 support this variance due to a lack of 21 demonstrated practical difficulty. I can't 22 imagine anybody for the first time coming in 23 around the mall and that not being a 24 practical difficult entrance.
221 1 Anyway, I support the sign and would 2 like to make a motion in case number: 3 08-058 for the approval of one off premise 4 advertising sign for the reason that it is 5 upon circumstances of features that are 6 exceptional and unique to the property, and 7 that the failure to grant relief would limit 8 the use of property and could result in 9 substantial inability to obtain a higher 10 financial return. And this would not result 11 in any unreasonable interference with 12 adjacent or surrounding properties. Also, 13 that we would give this approval for two 14 years and we would reiterate that the 15 Mackinaw Boulevard sign would be removed in 16 January of '09. 17 MEMBER SHROYER: Support. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Isn't it already 19 scheduled to come down in January '09? 20 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Do we need it as 22 part of the motion then? 23 MS. WORKING: I believe the Petitioner 24 reserves the right to petition the Board on
222 1 the Mackinaw sign when it expires. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I would say it 3 would be its own case and we shouldn't be 4 deciding that tonight. I would feel 5 hesitant to put that as part of the motion. 6 MR. SCHULTZ: I mean, it would be a 7 permissible condition but it sounds like 8 it's been requested. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Would we not be 10 taking away his right to appeal that sign? 11 MR. SCHULTZ: He could ask for that 12 sign, but then he would lose the one that he 13 just asked for. It would be permitted but it 14 sounds like it's withdrawn. 15 MEMBER BURKE: So, if I retract it, he 16 can still come back in January and say can I 17 keep the Mackinaw sign? 18 MR. SCHULTZ: Correct. 19 MEMBER BURKE: Then I retract it. My 20 bad. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Do we need to 22 talk about the land ownership at all given 23 that they own it? I don't think it would be 24 an issue.
223 1 MR. SCHULTZ: No. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 3 motion by Mr. Burke for two years and a 4 second by Member Shroyer. Any further 5 discussion? Seeing none, Ms. Working, 6 please call the roll. 7 MS. WORKING: Member Burke? 8 MEMBER BURKE: Yes. 9 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 10 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 11 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 12 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 13 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 15 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 16 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 17 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 18 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 19 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 20 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. 21 MS. WORKING: Motion to approve passes 22 7-0. 23 MR. KAHM: Thank you very much. 24 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you. Best
224 1 of luck. Save me a room. 2 (Interposing)(Unintelligible). 3 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We'll Case 5 Number: 08-059 filed by Sam LoPiccolo for 6 159 at 24580 Cavendish Avenue. Petitioner 7 is requesting a temporary use permit for the 8 continued placement of a temporary 9 construction trailer at said lot for the 10 time period November 12, 2008 through 11 November 12, 2010. And the Petitioner has 12 received temporary use permit and a one year 13 extension. The property is zoned R-4 14 located north of Ten Mile Road and west of 15 Novi Road. 16 Are you an attorney? 17 MR. LoPICCOLO: No, sir. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Can you raise 19 your hand and be sworn in by our Secretary? 20 MEMBER KRIEGER: In Case Number: 21 08-059 for LoPiccolo Homes. Did I say that 22 right? 23 MR. LoPICCOLO: Close. 24 MEMBER KRIEGER: Do you swear or
225 1 affirm to tell the truth in this case? 2 MR. LoPICCOLO: I do. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Go ahead and 4 state your name and address and proceed with 5 your case. 6 MR. LoPICCOLO: My name is Salvatore 7 (ph) LoPiccolo. I am owner of LoPiccolo 8 Homes. My address 44303 Plymouth Oaks 9 Boulevard in Plymouth. This is just, I 10 guess reiterating what we did last year 11 because of the economy. I would have been 12 out of here three years ago if things didn't 13 turn as they did. Nothing has changed since 14 last year. I am asking for a two year 15 variance, but quite honestly I can't 16 guarantee that that's going to be done. 17 Depending on when this thing turns around. 18 I still have 23 vacant lots in there. So, 19 it's a substantial amount and it's adjacent 20 to Singh's third phase which we were in and 21 could not go into it because of the economy. 22 So, the trailer is right next to phase three 23 which has got quite a bit more lots than we 24 have left.
226 1 I have got people I'm working with 2 right now and I am going to need someplace. 3 I can't stay there forever like this. The 4 trailer would be gone with everything else. 5 So, I got the lots nice and clean. The 6 trailer there isn't any garage laying around 7 it. We would appreciate the help on that. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: All right. Any 9 other comments? 10 MR. LoPICCOLO: No, I don't. 11 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I would ask, 12 Madam Secretary, if you could read any 13 correspondence into the record. 14 MEMBER KRIEGER: In case number: 15 08-059 43 notices were mailed. Two 16 responses and one complaint was received. 17 The first one is from Sally, I can't say the 18 name. The last name is spelled 19 G-O-G-I-N-E-I, on Cavendish Avenue: We 20 strongly oppose the continued placement of 21 the trailer on Lot 159. There are many 22 developed and owner occupied homes around 23 the lot and the trailer is an eye sore. It 24 also is a hazard to kids playing around,
227 1 with construction workers pulling and out of 2 the trailer in this parking lot. LoPiccolo 3 has many options to place this trailer where 4 there are a majority of undeveloped, unsold 5 or unoccupied lots without causing 6 inconveniences to any other owners. Safety 7 of children is our top priority. 8 (Unintelligible) are right around that 9 trailer. I strongly oppose this permit 10 extension. 11 The next is from Cromwell (ph) on 12 Cavendish Avenue: An empty trailer and 13 building equipment has been sitting on Lot 14 159 for over a year. The trailer is not 15 being used or cared for. The builder has 16 empty spec homes that could be used instead 17 of the trailer should they build another 18 house. Since they have not built a house 19 recently the trailer should be removed. It 20 seems dangerous to have an empty trailer 21 sitting there. 22 This one is from Sandra McCarthy on 23 Decker Drive. Dear, Ms. Working, attached 24 you will find our comments in regards to the
228 1 Zoning Board of Appeals Case Number: 2 08-059, and the attached documentation 3 states: Please do not extend the temporary 4 use permit to extend the temporary 5 construction trailer of Lot 159 in Churchill 6 Crossing at 24580 Cavendish from November 7 12, 2008 to November 12, 2010 for the 8 following reasons. Number one, LoPiccolo 9 Homes have not built a new home in the 20 10 months since we have been in our home. Two, 11 the construction trailer has been vacant, 12 abandoned since summer of 2007. Three, all 13 utilities to the trailer have been cut off. 14 Four, Singh is currently building homes and 15 they have no construction trailer. There is 16 no reason for LoPiccolo to retain their 17 vacant trailer on site. Five, the 18 construction trailer attracts kids to the 19 site causing mischief. Six, a very 20 unpleasant sight to view. And that's it. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: This second 22 complaint form was not necessarily part of 23 the send out? Ms. Working, could you just 24 clarify that for the Board, if you would?
229 1 MS. WORKING: That is correct, Mr. 2 Chair. A resident came to the City 3 requesting to file a complaint and we were 4 aware that the case was appearing before the 5 Board, so we brought it to your attention 6 here at the ZBA for your consideration. 7 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: And we 8 appreciate that. Thank you very much. 9 MS. WORKING: You are very welcome. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is there anyone 11 in the audience who wishes to make a comment 12 on this? Please come forward. 13 MR. COLLINS: Good evening, everybody, 14 my name is Dave Collins. I live at 24652 15 Cavendish. Actually, guys, what I would 16 like to do is show a real quick slide show 17 on the trailer. Pretty much pictures say 18 words, you know. If things will work out. I 19 don't now how well this is going to work 20 out. That is just a shot down the street. 21 Let me try another one here. This is the 22 trailer in question. And it's still too 23 glossy. Actually, I don't know if I can 24 hand these to you and you can take a look
230 1 for yourself since these are not showing too 2 well. Here is another one. And there has 3 also been some tickets written on it. You 4 can barely see it. It's a trailer right 5 here. Right below my finger and there is 6 some equipment on the side too also. 7 The bottom installation is falling out 8 of this thing. The top is rusting. I agree 9 with my fellow homeowners, it's not too 10 pretty. Actually, I just had a listing on 11 my house. Nothing is selling right now and 12 I tell you, this doesn't help when you come 13 in the sub and you roll in and you see that. 14 The electricity is cut off. There was a 15 porta potty a while back, that's gone. It's 16 not been used. I can feel for Mr. LoPiccolo 17 and him trying to sell houses. But, again, 18 this isn't helping. 19 That's pretty much all I got to say, 20 guys. 21 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you very 22 much. Anyone else tonight who wishes to 23 make a comment on this case? If not, we 24 will close the opportunity for comments and
231 1 turn it over to the City. 2 MR. FOX: Just for some clarification. 3 As far as Singh not having a trailer on 4 site, they have a trailer that they are 5 using on another one of their sites. They 6 have three or four sites here in town that 7 have combined all their efforts into one 8 trailer. As a matter of fact I think is has 9 come before you to be talked about recently, 10 so they don't need it. They don't need a 11 trailer on every one of their sites at this 12 time. So, they are just combining it into 13 one location and this just isn't the 14 location where they keep it. 15 As far as the trailer is concerned, we 16 had a site visit. It does look like it's 17 not been maintained very well. It does look 18 vacant, although we don't know that for a 19 fact. When we were out there there was 20 nobody there, but that doesn't necessarily 21 make it vacent. There is some heavy 22 equipment stored on the site either on that 23 site or adjacent to that site with some 24 building materials that might need to be
232 1 taken care of. Maybe a stipulation as part 2 of it if you guys are inclined to grant the 3 variance. 4 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. 5 Fox. Board Members? Mr. Burke? 6 MEMBER BURKE: Do you still have 7 equipment on site? 8 MR. LoPICCOLO: Yeah, I have a 9 bulldozer and a back hoe on site. 10 MEMBER BURKE: Did you get a citation 11 that said you had to move that stuff off? 12 MR. LoPICCOLO: Yes, I did. 13 MEMBER BURKE: What is the condition 14 of the trailer? 15 MR. LoPICCOLO: The trailer does have 16 some issues with that resting on top. But 17 nobody has even asked me for that. I would 18 be happy to take care of that. 19 MEMBER BURKE: Certainly you can see 20 where people that you build homes for -- 21 MR. LoPICCOLO: This economy isn't 22 going to stay there and I will have to come 23 back sooner or later -- 24 MEMBER BURKE: Hold on. Hold on. Let
233 1 me just finish. You can understand why they 2 have an objection -- 3 MR. LoPICCOLO: Absolutely. 4 MEMBER BURKE: -- as a bit of an eye 5 sore. I am just trying to get clarification. 6 We have some pictures dated as recent as 7 October 6th, so I just wanted to know since 8 then have you removed the equipment, cleaned 9 up the lot, taken care of the building? 10 MR. LoPICCOLO: Not knowing if I am 11 going to be pulling the trailer out I have 12 not. Nobody has asked me to do it. That 13 trailer is in the same condition it's been 14 in for three years. 15 MEMBER BURKE: Okay. Thank you. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Any other Board 17 Members? Member Sanghvi? 18 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Thank 19 you, Mr. Chair. I visited the site 20 yesterday and it doesn't look any different 21 than what is shown on those pictures. It is 22 in shambles. There is no way I can support 23 this kind of trailer sitting on that lot. 24 Thank you.
234 1 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Ibe? 2 MEMBER IBE: Mr. Piccolo -- 3 MR. LoPICCOLO: LoPiccolo. 4 MEMBER IBE: LoPiccolo, sir, would you 5 agree that the economy is bad? We can agree 6 on that? 7 MR. LoPICCOLO: We have been in 8 business for 30 years and never seen it this 9 bad. Builders are going out of business 10 every day. 11 MEMBER IBE: I completely concur with 12 you. Would you also agree that you have 13 homeowners who have their properties leased 14 in there? 15 MR. LoPICCOLO: As well as I do. 16 MR. IBE: That's correct. 17 MR. LoPICCOLO: I got six completed 18 houses in there. 19 MR. IBE: So, would you agree in this 20 economy the buyer has more preferences now 21 and if they come to your place and see that 22 trailer in the bad condition it is, do you 23 think they are more likely buy from that 24 subdivision? Or are they going to go to one
235 1 that doesn't have an eye sore like what you 2 have? 3 MR. LoPICCOLO: That trailer is a 4 temporary vehicle and people see that it's 5 temporary. Now, if people want it cleaned 6 up, I have no problem cleaning it up. That 7 trailer was put there like that. That was 8 Multi's trailer and sometimes I put my 9 trailer in the lot. So, I have no problem. 10 Nobody has asked me to date to do that. I 11 would be more than happy to do a clean up on 12 that. Everything is nice and neat that's 13 there. I have got two buyers that I am 14 working on. I am going to need the 15 equipment. 16 Now, I can't force the people to buy. 17 I am trying the best that I can. There are 18 a lot of other issues that we're fighting 19 every day besides that. 20 MEMBER IBE: I do understand that, 21 sir. Do you think that we have to ask you 22 to clean up something that looks like an eye 23 sore? 24 MR. LoPICCOLO: Like I said, it's been
236 1 that way for three years. It's temporary 2 there. Unfortunately this temporary has 3 dragged on way too long. So, I agree with 4 you that it can be cleaned up. And I would 5 be happy to do that. 6 MEMBER IBE: The point I am trying to 7 make, you know, you keep repeating this 8 which is my annoyance, and I will tell you 9 what it is. No one has asked you to do 10 something. Excuse me one moment, sir. You 11 have an obligation not just to yourself, but 12 the people who live there to clean it up. 13 You are making it look like that have to 14 sanction you to make you do something that 15 you have an obligation to do. Would you 16 agree, sir, that no one has to ask you to 17 take care of your property? If it's in a 18 bad condition, you have some obligation that 19 you shoulder as the owner of that trailer to 20 keep it in good shape so that the residents 21 don't have to look at an eye sore and 22 potential buyers don't see it and get scared 23 that this property is (unintelligible). And 24 you drive down the home values. Would you
237 1 agree, sir, that it is your obligation to do 2 it without anyone asking you to do it? 3 MR. LoPICCOLO: Yes, I do. 4 MEMBER IBE: Thank you. I have 5 nothing further. 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Thank you, 7 Member Ibe. Any other comments? Questions? 8 Is the trailer completely vacant? 9 MR. LoPICCOLO: Nothing has moved in 10 or out. I stopped paying electric because I 11 didn't need electricity because of the air 12 conditioning in the summer time. I don't 13 even know if the electric has been turned 14 off, to be honest with you. That's the only 15 utility that we have there. 16 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: When do you 17 anticipate using the trailer again? 18 MR. LoPICCOLO: We store stuff in 19 there. I do maintenance on the houses. I 20 just got done, we had electricians there. I 21 don't have a lot of volume right now because 22 there is nobody buying. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: When was the 24 last time you were there?
238 1 MR. LoPICCOLO: I was personally there 2 probably two weeks ago. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Mr. Amolsch, am 4 I safe to understand that this expired in 5 April? Can you give me a little background 6 on that? 7 MR. AMOLSCH: I can't. This was 8 Officer Underhill's case. I do know that a 9 ticket was issued -- 10 MR. LoPICCOLO: I think a ticket was 11 just issued -- 12 MR. AMOLSCH: A formal hearing was 13 scheduled if not done already. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I have a 15 violation in my packet from April 2008. 16 MR. LoPICCOLO: On the trailer? 17 MR. AMOLSCH: Right. 18 MR. LoPICCOLO: You filed it the day 19 after. The equipment was on Singh's lot and 20 I had that moved. It was our lot at the 21 time it was there. But then we didn't go 22 into phase three, so I had it moved. It was 23 during the cold weather and I couldn't get 24 it out of there. It was mud, so it was
239 1 difficult. But I did get it out of there. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Shroyer? 3 MEMBER SHROYER: Due to the economy 4 and only due to the economy I would be 5 willing to move forward on this granting of 6 a temporary use. But I would expect us to 7 look at a much shorter period, perhaps even 8 a nine month time frame which would only go 9 through the summer of next year with a lot 10 of conditions. Naturally it would require 11 the cleaning up and removal and storage of 12 heavy equipment and materials and taking 13 care of any of the safety issues with the 14 trailer, et cetera. It is not fair to the 15 surrounding homeowners and the people in 16 that subdivision to that have to look at 17 that eye sore everyday. 18 After nine months or whatever period 19 of time you may wish to grant, I would like 20 to see the Petitioner back with evidence 21 that he has maintained the property as 22 requested. That would be my comment. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I would concur 24 and I would even support six months,
240 1 beginning of the Springtime given the 2 concerns that we have seen. 3 Board Members? Any comments on that 4 time limit? Anything here? For a motion? 5 Member Burke? 6 MEMBER BURKE: What are you going to 7 do with the equipment? Are you going to 8 pull the equipment out of there? 9 MR. LoPICCOLO: If I don't get these 10 deals signed I am going to have to. It's not 11 -- 12 MEMBER BURKE: You were given a notice 13 in April, in August and September. Now you 14 got a citation in October. So, I think it's 15 quite clear that the city wants the 16 equipment off property. 17 MR. LoPICCOLO: The first notice was 18 on (unintelligible) that was a lot that was 19 on Singh's property. 20 MEMBER BURKE: I am look just looking 21 -- 22 MR. LoPICCOLO: I understand. It 23 moved from one lot to the other -- 24 MEMBER BURKE: At this point it really
241 1 doesn't matter. It started in April and 2 here we are now in November. What I am 3 looking at is the citation. 4 MR. LoPICCOLO: I guess let me ask 5 you. When do you expect it to removed and I 6 will have it removed? 7 MEMBER BURKE: If it's equipment how 8 is tomorrow? They have been asking you 9 since -- they give you a reminder in August 10 and September. And you got a citation in 11 October about the equipment on the property. 12 I am not sure how much lead time you need. 13 You tell me. 14 MR. LoPICCOLO: It depends on if I 15 sign the deal. I will do the best I can to 16 get them out of there now. Right now I am 17 limited at what I can do and I don't have a 18 big staff. After 30 years I am down to just 19 me right now. I will get it moved as 20 quickly as I get it started and out of 21 there. 22 MEMBER BURKE: I tell you what, I 23 would support my fellow members here on 24 giving you six months in the trailer, but
242 1 that equipment has got to be gone and out of 2 there. I don't know if we can give you a 3 time frame on that, but I would want it out 4 yesterday. You are not building anything 5 right now. They don't need to be there and 6 it's clearly an eye sore for the entire 7 community there. And I would also put some 8 stipulations on you cleaning up the 9 property and making this trailer look 10 halfway decent. That would be about the 11 only way I can support it. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Shroyer? 13 MEMBER SHROYER: I will go ahead and 14 make a motion then. And please feel free to 15 add something on this. In Case Number: 16 08-059, LoPiccolo Homes I move to approve 17 the temporary use requested for a period of 18 six months provided all actions that do not 19 fall within our Ordinance requirements are 20 ceased by month's end. This includes 21 storage of any heavy equipment and any other 22 stored materials. Also, the site must 23 cleared of any -- cleared up with removal of 24 any and all trash and debris and all safety
243 1 concerns of the trailer need to be addressed 2 by the same time. The construction trailer 3 as well as the parking area, the landscaping 4 and grass must be maintained for the length 5 of the variance. The use permit is based on 6 the need for the use due to 22 lots yet to 7 be developed. Is that correct, sir? 8 MR. LoPICCOLO: Well, home sites 9 built. The lots are developed. 10 MEMBER SHROYER: Twenty-two homes 11 sites yet to be developed. The slowness of 12 our current housing industry. No additional 13 fire or safety issues being created. No 14 decrease in surrounding property values and 15 the spirt of the Ordinance upheld. 16 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 17 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 18 motion with conditions by Member Shroyer and 19 seconded by Member Bauer. Any further 20 comments or questions? Seeing none, Ms. 21 Working, please call the roll. 22 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 23 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 24 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer?
244 1 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 2 MS. WORKING: Member Burke? 3 MEMBER BURKE: Yes. 4 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 5 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 6 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 7 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 8 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 9 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 10 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 11 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. 12 MS. WORKING: Motion passes 7-0. 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You were given 14 six months, but hopefully when you come back 15 at that time will see some progress. So, 16 best of luck, though. 17 MR. LoPICCOLO: Thank you very much. 18 (Interposing)(Unintelligible). 19 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: He will get the 20 notice from the City. 21 Moving on to other matter. 22 Number one, it appears that we have a 23 request for ZBA 08-024 on Meadowbrook Road 24 for a six month extension and we received
245 1 that in our packet and the back up for it. 2 Is there a motion? 3 MEMBER BURKE: Motion to approve. 4 MEMBER BAUER: Second. Are we looking 5 for six months from today, Robin? Chris? 6 MR. FOX: The expiration would be six 7 months from the expiration date from the 8 original variance. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Is that fine 10 with you, Mr. Burke? 11 MEMBER BURKE: It is. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Member Bauer? 13 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 14 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: So, we have a 15 motion and a second. Ms. Working, please 16 call the roll. 17 MS. WORKING: Member Burke? 18 MEMBER BURKE: Yes. 19 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 20 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 21 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 23 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 24 MEMBER IBE: Yes.
246 1 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 2 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 3 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 4 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. 5 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 6 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 7 MS. WORKING: Motion to approve passes 8 7-0. 9 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We'll look 10 at Case Number: ZBA 08-010 requesting 180 11 day extension from the original expiration 12 date. Is there a motion to approve that? 13 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: So moved. 14 MEMBER BAUER: Second. 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: There is a 16 motion by Member Sanghvi and a second by 17 Member Bauer. 18 MS. WORKING: And the time frame 19 please? 20 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It is 180 days 21 from the original expiration as requested. 22 Please call the roll. 23 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 24 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes.
247 1 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 2 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 3 MS. WORKING: Member Burke? 4 MEMBER BURKE: Yes. 5 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 6 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 7 MS. WORKING: Member Ibe? 8 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 9 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 10 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 11 MS. WORKING: And, Member 12 Shroyer? 13 MEMBER SHROYER: Yes. 14 MS. WORKING: Motion to approve passes 15 7-0. 16 And last ZBA 08-020. They are 17 requesting a six-month extension from the 18 original expiration date. Is there a motion 19 to approve as requested? 20 MEMBER BAUER: So moved. 21 MEMBER KRIEGER: Second. 22 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Motion by Member 23 Bauer and a second by Member Krieger for a 24 six month extension from the original
248 1 expiration date. 2 MS. WORKING: Member Bauer? 3 MEMBER BAUER: Yes. 4 MS. WORKING: Member Krieger? 5 MEMBER KRIEGER: Yes. 6 MS. WORKING: Member Sanghvi? 7 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Yes. 8 MS. WORKING: Member Shroyer? 9 MEMBER SHROYER: Si. 10 MS. WORKING: Member Burke? 11 MEMBER BURKE: Yep. 12 MS. WORKING: Chairman Fischer? 13 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Aye. 14 MS. WORKING: And Member Ibe? 15 MEMBER IBE: Yes. 16 MS. WORKING: Motion to approve 17 passes 7-0. 18 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Moving along to 19 the last item of the day. The Rules. 20 MS. WORKING: Through the Chair, this 21 is a document that you have all worked very 22 hard on and there have been several 23 revisions and last month there were a few 24 minor changes made and we would like to have
249 1 it codified, if possible, with the 2 appropriate approval and signatures. 3 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: I thought we 4 already approved the re-write. We approved 5 it based on them being rewritten as we 6 stated. Do we really need an approval 7 again? 8 MS. WORKING: I will leave that up to 9 Counsel. 10 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Can we just sign 11 it? 12 MR. SCHULTZ: I'm sorry I wasn't here. 13 Were there changes discussed at the last 14 meeting? 15 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: It was 16 discussed, but we approved it based on that 17 and said we approve it with those already -- 18 MEMBER BURKE: There is a motion -- 19 MR. SCHULTZ: I think it just needs a 20 signature. 21 MS. WORKING: It just needs a 22 signature. 23 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: You will 24 withdraw your motion?
250 1 MEMBER BURKE: I withdraw it. 2 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Given that that 3 takes care of all the business before the 4 Zoning Board today. I will entertain a 5 motion to adjourn. 6 MEMBER BAUER: So moved. 7 VICE-CHAIRPERSON SANGHVI: Second. 8 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: Motion by Member 9 Bauer. Seconded by Member Sanghvi to 10 adjourn. All in favor say aye? 11 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 12 CHAIRPERSON FISCHER: We are hereby 13 adjourned for the November meeting. 14 (The meeting was adjourned at 15 11:32 p.m.) 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
251 1 C E R T I F I C A T E 2 3 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 (204) typewritten pages, is a 11 true and correct transcript of my said 12 stenographic notes. 13 14 15 16 17 18 _____________________________ 19 Mona L. Talton, 20 Certified Shorthand Reporter 21 22 November 21, 2008 23 24
|