REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NOVI

MONDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1995 AT 8:00 PM EDT

COUNCIL CHAMBERS - NOVI CIVIC CENTER - 45175 TEN MILE ROAD

 

 

The meeting was called to order at 8:04 pm by Mayor Kathleen McLallen.

 

 

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

 

ROLL CALL: Council Members Crawford (present), Mason (present), Mitzel

(present), Pope (absent/excused), Schmid (present), Toth (present)

and Mayor McLallen (present)

 

-ooo-

 

 

ALSO PRESENT: Edward Kriewall - City Manager

Craig Klaver - Assistant City Manager

David Fried - City Attorney

Tonni Bartholomew - City Clerk

 

-ooo-

 

 

PRESENTATIONS

 

Mayor McLallen said before we approve the main agenda we have two special presentations.

 

The first one is the introduction of the two newest staff members to the City of Novi. These are our Data Management Specialist and a Budget Analyst. Both of these positions were approved in the 1995-96 Budget and Iím happy to report these persons are now on staff.

 

Mr. Kriewall said unfortunately one of the additional staff members, the Data Management Specialist, is taking some night classes and cannot be here until later on. We do have the Budget Analyst with us at this time and weíll ask that the Finance Director, Les Gibson, introduce our newly created position of Budget Analyst.

 

Mr. Gibson said it is my pleasure to introduce Kimberly Pittel. Kim is the new Budget Analyst. She has a degree from Michigan State in finance and she has a nice variety of experience. She comes to us from Fox Hill Country Club where she was the Assistant Controller and she has her work cut out for her. She brings a lot of enthusiasm to the City and she will do a nice job.

 

Mayor McLallen asked Kimberly would you like to say anything?

 

Ms. Pittel said no thank you, not at this time.

 

Mayor McLallen said sheíll do really well. Ms. Pittel said it was nice to meet them all.

 

Mayor McLallen asked, Mr. Kriewall would you just like to give us the background on the Data Management Specialist?

 

Mr. Kriewall said she will be introduced a little bit later on. She is just graduating from Wayne State University with a Masters Degree in Civil Engineering and she is involved with the Wayne State University project where theyíre providing some GIS consulting services to the City of Novi at this time, so with her graduation taking place and her Masters Degree within the next 30 to 45 days sheíll be joining us. She has actually joined us already but her Masters Degree is expected within the next 45 days from Wayne State.

 

Mayor McLallen said we are very much looking forward to the addition of these people and the expansion of service that weíre going to receive.

 

Mayor McLallen said the next item on the agenda this evening is the Beautification Awards and this is an annual program whereby the City recognizes all of the efforts that you, the citizens, put in to making this a gorgeous community. Iím going to move over to the podium and weíll have a little bit different format tonight. She said she would announce the names of the Exceptional, Very Good and the two top and will only personally present the two top plaques. She said the other awards will be given by the Beautification Commission members in the atrium. She said while she is speaking, she would be able to visually see how beautiful the City looked in the summer.

 

Mayor McLallen said Iíd like to thank Mr. Aruffo and all the members of our new Beautification Commission for all the energy that went into doing this and to Kevin from the Cable Commission for the visuals.

 

The winners of the Excellent Awards are Barclay Estates, Briarwood Condoís, Cedar Springs, Chateau Estates, Crosswinds West Condoís, Crystal Glenn Office Center, Dr. Robert Stiles Office, Fountain Park, Greenwood Oaks, Intech of Novi, JCK and Associates, John OíBrien Funeral Home, Lochmoor Village, Novi Meadows, Oak Ridge, Providence Medical Center, River Oaks Apartments, Saddle Creek Apartments, Springs Apartments, Varsity Lincoln Mercury, Weathervane Village and Woodland Glens. As you can see it runs the gamut; our businesses as well as our residents take great pride in presenting a very attractive face.

 

She said in the Very Good category: Addington Park Subdivision, Americore Corporation, Anglin Supply, Atlas Leasing, Bob Evans Restaurant, Bradford of Novi, Briarwood Village, Brown Jig Grinding, Chiliís Restaurant, Comerica, Country Place Condoís, Diversified Recruiters, Fife Electric, Frank W. Kerr Company, Guardian Industries, Guernsey Dairy, Harmon-Marcus Glass, Henry Ford Medical Center - Novi, Hickory Woods Elementary School, Highland Hills Estates, Highline Club, Hilton Hotel, Key Plastic, Knight Auto Supply, Maples of Novi, McDonaldís at Haggerty and Eight Mile, Metro 25 Tire, Michigan Milk Producers, Mobil Oil on Grand River, Mobil Oil on Haggerty, Mystic Forest Subdivision, National Bank of Detroit, Novi Civic Center, Novi Ridge Apartments, Oak Pointe Plaza, Old Orchard Condoís, Peach Tree Shopping Center, Pheasant Run, Portsmouth Apartments, Roma Ridge, Scott Shuptrine and South Point Condoís. Also, Sovel Gas, Spirit of Christ Lutheran Church, Tad Products, Timber Ridge Subdivision, Treetop Meadow Apartments, Turtle Creek Subdivision, Walden Woods and Yorkshire.

 

Mayor McLallen said Iíd like for you all to applaud all these wonderfully, beautiful appointments.

 

Mayor McLallen said and now if we had a drum roll, I donít know how the Commission was able to choose just two as Exceptional but the Exceptional Winners for 1995 are Chase Farms Subdivision and Wexford Town Homes. Are the representatives of those communities here?

 

Mayor McLallen presented the two Exceptional Awards and said again, to all of the members of the other communities, please accept our thanks and weíll look forward to more intense competition next year and you may receive your certificates out in the atrium.

 

 

 

APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

 

Mr. Fried said Madam Mayor I ask you to add an item to Attorneyís Report and that item is a request to the Michigan Municipal League to file a brief Megas Curi in a case that the City has before the Michigan Supreme Court and that would be under Attorneyís Report.

 

Mayor McLallen said Mr. Fried would like to add a discussion item under the Attorneyís Report to request to MML and he will go into detail at that time.

 

Mr. Fried said thatís an action item.

 

Mayor McLallen asked for any additions or corrections to the agenda as presented.

 

Mr. Kriewall said Iíd like to add Item #8, Fireworks Permit for MAFE Convention scheduled for November 3.

 

Mayor McLallen said the City Managerís has requested that Item #8 be added, a Fireworks Permit for the MAFE Convention on November 3. She asked are there any other additions or corrections to the agenda.

 

Councilman Toth said regarding Item 1 that you have under the Mayor and Council Issues to revisit the North Novi property, thatís with respect to the proposals received on the bids for that park land. He felt it would probably be more appropriate to put that under Matters for Council Action. He said he intended to bring that back up to revisit that issue and to have some discussion and the Council ought to at least consider going with part of that proposal to look at exploring that park land.

 

Mayor McLallen asked Member Toth if he would like to insert that as Item 4A?

 

Councilman Toth said yes, I would, please.

 

Mayor McLallen said Mrs. Bartholomew, you had some direction for the Council concerning how that motion should be brought back.

 

Mrs. Bartholomew said yes I did. I checked with the parliamentarian and with the City Attorneyís Office and also the procedures that the Council has adopted and Member Toth did put that in print, to me, prior to the Wednesday of this last week, so he did meet the dead line and everything is according to . . . .

 

Someone spoke up and said they could not hear.

 

 

Mayor McLallen said we will be cautious of speaking into the mike. She said the discussion here is that Mr. Toth is bringing back an Item that the Council took no action on. He said our City Clerk is just reiterating that the procedure to bring this back has been affirmed and it will be brought back and discussed as Item 4A. She said it is a discussion of the awarding or the possible awarding of a Master Plan document for the park property north of Twelve Mile.

 

Mayor McLallen asked are there any other additions or corrections to the agenda?

 

It was then,

 

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

 

That the Agenda be approved as amended.

 

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

 

Mayor McLallen said at this time we have our first Audience Participation of the evening.

 

 

Sarah Gray, 133 Maudlin, said it really is very difficult to hear you in the back row. I know the sound system isnít working the best, but we couldnít hear a word that Mr. Kriewall said and heard very little of what Mr.Fried said.

 

First of all, Item #2 under Matters for Council Action, proposed Lakewoods Preserve, I would respectfully ask that I may reserve several minutes on behalf of Southeast Shawood Homeowners Association at the time of the presentation for remarks. Mayor McLallen said she would so note it.

 

Ms. Gray said regarding campaign signs. I would like to urge Administration to immediately order the Ordinance Enforcement Officers to enforce the ten foot rule within right-of-way. She said a sign goes up and the next person comes along and they put theirs a little bit closer to the road and then the next one and the intersection up in our area is a mess and it would behoove all of you who are running whether you are sitting at this table, or sitting behind me or watching at home to tell your campaign staff there is a ten foot rule. Itís an eyesore and sign pollution is at its worst.

 

Ms. Gray said something I mentioned to Kathy Kendra today to let Mr. Nowicki know was that no matter what happens with the Haggerty Connector M-5, M 2 1/2, whatever itís going to be called this year, we as a City cannot afford to wait for whatever is going on with the Feds or with the State as far as the intersection at Thirteen Mile and Haggerty Road. It is terrible. I think as immediately as possible we need to realign it with east bound Thirteen in Farmington Hills so that those of us who travel that route to work each day and home, donít take our lives in our hands when weíre turning. Itís awful and itís getting worse. Please take that under advisement and please come back with a proposal to do something. She said Haggerty Connector may never be built north of Twelve Mile. I think we have to be realistic and know that and for us to continually subject people to this bad, bad intersection, weíre asking for a major lawsuit.

 

Mayor McLallen said Iíd like to note that City Administration can bring us an update on what is scheduled, if anything, and a time frame for that intersection.

 

Rosemary Denton, 41447 Glyme Drive, said I have another meeting to attend so I wanted to get up here quick. I have three quick items. She said first of all last week, the Recreation Committee met with the City Council. That meeting should have been televised. I asked my husband to turn it on and was very disappointed to find out that there was nothing on. Thank you, to Carol Mason and Joe Toth for attempting to allow the taxpayers of Novi to be in the know in regards to our community. I will say until we have adequate family opportunities like parks and bike paths, I am opposed to any municipal golf course and I would have enjoyed seeing that meeting and seeing where everybody stood especially because we have an election around the corner.

 

September 18th, a month ago, I had an interview for the Aquatic Facilities Committee. It had been several weeks, and my husband asked me "whatís the outcome of this" and I said I donít know. Going through my records today I find a letter dated September 1st saying I can come to this interview and what I did then was move to call several of you to ask you what happened. A couple of you informed me that a letter had been sent. After talking with Mayor McLallen, I was informed that no letter had been sent. I am very offended by this. First of all, I never in my wildest dreams expected that I would be chosen for this Committee but after I take the time to fill out an application, to go to an interview, then Iím supposed to find out by osmosis if I get on the Committee or I donít. Thatís pretty rude and I will say to you if some of you think you have connections with Governor Engler and the powers that be you first of all need to get in touch with the residents and give us the courtesy of letting us know what the outcome is. I think those of you up there know who I am speaking to. It is just common courtesy and rude to not receive anything back. I implore you to please allow courtesy for us taxpayers who are willing to volunteer our time.

 

She said in regards to the Interlock disaster, allowing a 24 hour operation next to a residential property is never appropriate. Therefore, we need an ordinance proposal which addresses 24 hour operation and protects the residents. This, also, will impact my vote for Mayor so this travesty never occurs again.

 

Lynn Kocan, 23088 Ennishore Drive, said thank you for the opportunity to address you regarding the proposed amendments of those ordinances which govern Light Industrial Districts which abut residential properties. I trust that you have read my correspondence regarding this issue. At the January 14, 1987 City Council meeting Article 19 of the Zoning Ordinance was adopted which provided for the I-1 Light Industrial Zoning District which regulated the uses within that district. The major consideration of establishing the ordinance was to protect the residents from uses which are not compatible with the Residential District. From that discussion came the development of the three tiers within the ordinance. As you know, tier 1, includes offices which are allowed next to Residential. Tier 3 uses are considered too intensive to abut Residential. Tier 2 businesses include warehouses and certain manufacturing operations which require special land use approval when proposed next to residential. It was stated at that meeting in 1987 that special land use would " give residents the opportunity to respond to what was going to be next to them" and that this was "the best that they could do at this point in history." Although special land use approval requires Public Hearings and additional requirements to be met, it also indicates that thereís an adverse situation that needs extra care. The residents have been told that special land use guarantees that their interest and their properties will be protected. Then there was Interlock. All the guarantees went right out the door. The City is allowing what the Detroit News describes as an incurable defect to be placed next to residential homes. An incurable defect is a flaw in a property or its surroundings that can never be corrected and which passed out on the future marketability of that property. The ordinance which was considered in 87 to be the best that could be done has significant shortcomings. The Planning Commission confirms this by their response at the Public Hearing on August 9th. They have requested that the Implementation Committee consider all concerns residents expressed that evening to determine whether amendments are in order. I appreciate that residents of Meadowbrook Lake have been invited to be involved in these Implementation meetings. However, what the Planning Commission does not consider to be critical is the limitation of the hours of operation. The majority of the Commission concluded that limiting hours would be too restrictive on all tiers within the zoning. I contend that just as there are different tiers there can be different restrictions upon those tiers. I do not believe that the City is required to treat office uses the same as it treats industrial uses. My letter in your packet addressed this issue in more detail. A 24 hour factory abutting residential property creates an incurable defect therefore, I request a restriction of the hours of operation of Tier 2 Light Industries to the hours of 6 AM and 10 PM. City Ordinance already designates these hours as normal work periods as opposed to the sleeping hours of 10 PM to 6 AM. Right now special land use approval is the exclusive responsibility of the Planning Commission. There is no hearing at the City Council level and there is no appeal other than to the courts. What other recourse did we have.

 

Mayor McLallen said you are reaching your three minutes.

 

Ms. Kocan said if, however, restricted hours on the Industrial District would cause undue hardship the petitioner would have the option of appealing to the ZBA as long as there be no adverse impact on adjacent Residential Districts. The residents would have additional protection and the developer would have a level of appeal. My request, this evening, is that the Planning Commission should be directed to include rather than exclude a limitation of hours of operation on Tier 2 businesses in their deliberation and recommendation of future amendments.

 

Laura Lorenzo, 45995 Galway Drive, said Iím here to address you this evening as an individual citizen and taxpayer. I wanted to say that I am concerned about the proposed golf course on the north Novi park lands. I am not necessarily opposed to a golf course, per se, quite frankly Iím not informed enough about golf course operations to make an informed decision at this point or give any input on that. The 1993 Wildlife Habitat Plan did identify this area, 300 plus acres, as a Wildlife Core Reserve that is very sensitive. They recommended that this area be used solely for passive recreational uses. I think that the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Council should look to that document for direction in this case. I believe that the property would be best served and would best serve the residents of the City of Novi in a passive recreational use and being preserved in its natural character and I would appreciate your consideration of that.

 

Jim Korte, Shawood Lake, said Iíve written another letter to the editor which doesnít surprise you. Please read it this coming Thursday it has to do with I think some problems with regards to our Police Department and/or prosecuting attorneyís. There is a second part to that letter that they are in the process of researching, at this point in time, and unfortunately research has to be done. Theyíve researched the legality of the first part of the letter therefore it will be published. At this point in time, I would like to read the end of that letter, it is very short and less than three minutes.

 

"This last paragraph is not meant to be a character assassination. Rather it is meant to be a character analysis. I think before anyone votes on November 7th we have to understand the character of the candidates involved. Only then can we make a truly educated decision that controls our destiny for the next 2 or 4 years. I have looked and talked of credibility. I have also made comments on what is credible and what an incredible City we have. The next story is so incredible and so outrageous that I cannot believe it is true; however, it is. Last year on a field trip to the holocaust memorial, West Bloomfield, one of the children/classmates decided to wear swaticas and other symbols that would designate a member or supporter of the Third Reich. This alarmed a teacher, Kelly by name, to the point that the parent was asked to, shall I say, clean up the childís act. Mayor McLallen commented that her son was only exercising his Constitutional rights. Our Constitution was set to protect all of us. It is unacceptable for a child to tread on the sensitivities necessary in these situations. I donít think any of us moved to this City to watch Neo Nazism creep in and rear itís ugly head. Possibly, on Cambridge Drive, this is considered acceptable behavior. However, every Jew, every homosexual, every black in this community should be outraged by such behavior and know that it was sanctioned by the authorities that directly control that childís behavior. In previous letters to the editor we have read dictator and the word Hitler used in the direction of the Mayor. Who would have thought the writer hit the nail on the head. Yes, discrimination is ugly. However, acceptance of any injustice and any infraction to human rights is totally unacceptable. Where did this child learn this behavior? I certainly hope not on the streets of Novi." Please read the Novi News, thank you.

 

Mayor McLallen said for the information of this audience, I do not normally respond at all to criticisms, obviously everyone has the right to make any statements they wish. I would like to respond at this moment in one simple word and I can elaborate on it later after Iíve reviewed Mr. Korteís letter. The quote he made, the incident stated on the child in question do not exist. That is not a true statement.

 

Mayor McLallen said I understand this gentleman here would like to speak, you have the floor sir.

 

Mr. Korte said if this is true I will apologize.

 

Doug Hamilton, 41483 Glyme Drive, said I am a new resident of the City of Novi and I would like to speak on the Interlock and 24 hour operations issue. I watched with incredulity last week at the Planning Commission meeting and I was struck by three points and Iíd like to address those three.

 

Mr. Hamilton said the first one is Iím somewhat taken back in the lack of accountability and the Planning Commission being able to essentially make decisions without being voted into office in any manner. It completely goes contrary to the lack of our system of representation. The second issue deals with the inadequacy of the information put forward by Interlock. There were some conflicting reports about their ability to abide by the noise requirements and the information that was provided by them was completely inadequate and very little discussed at that meeting last week at the Planning Commission. The models were not geometrically accurate, our representative who was a acoustical engineer, Richard Kalono, spoke to that point. He said the information was completely incapable of providing an accurate assessment of what the decibel levels were. Third issue was the City Ordinances, as far as sound goes, and it is apparent that Novi is completely and totally out of step with both the local communities in this area and with the Country at large and what we consider to be acceptable noise levels. I think we need to immediately address this before other Interlocks come to play and adjoin our neighborhood communities and disrupt our way of life.

 

Norman Young, Meadowbrook Lake, said he was a 26 year resident of the City of Novi. I was pleased when I first heard that this City Council would again have the opportunity to consider the matter of 24 hour operations. I hope that you people will send it back to the Planning Commission to reconsider their decision. As youíre hearing tonight, there seems to be a growing concern or support from the citizens, and I am reminded that there were more than a dozen residents spoke out in favor of such a restriction at the August hearing held by the Planning Commission. Twenty four hour operations, however, are to me only a part of the much larger question of how Novi is going to deal with manufacturing developments adjacent to residential in the future. Thereís a substantial number of undeveloped I-1 parcels still available within the City so the problem is not likely to go away. In that regard there are two areas that I would like to have this Council consider taking action.

 

The first is the I-1 Ordinance itself. When representatives from Meadowbrook Lake worked with the City Officials to develop this ordinance, it was clear to those involved that the primary purpose was to provide protection for the residential properties against uncontrolled industrial development. He said the Ordinance itself makes numerous references to this intent by using phrases such as, "in no manner," "at all times," "against any adverse impact," free from all danger of," "to preserve and protect" and others. He said those would seem to be clear enough in themselves, but they are nevertheless subject to human and individual interpretations and when that happens, unintended consequences can result. He said his first suggestion is that this Council take the appropriate action to re-examine the entire I-1 Ordinance and develop the necessary changes to re-establish the original intent and eliminate any ambiguities that might lead to future conflicts. He said as they did before, representatives from Meadowbrook Lake would be more than happy to work with City Officials on such a project.

 

Mr. Young said the second item regards special land use decisions. He said the only recourse an affected party has was through the courts and that was what the residents of Meadowbrook Lake were forced to do. He felt it was poor government policy to put citizens in that kind of a position particularly when those sensitive decisions were made by appointed Commissioners who have no accountability to the electorate of this city. He said it was his strong recommendation, therefore, that this Council take appropriate action to see that all future special land use projects involving manufacturing operations adjacent to residential be made by this Council instead of the Planning Commission.

 

Mr. Young said it was in the best interest of the City of Novi that they address those problems now and avoid the probability of future conflicts and resulting delays to the orderly development of their City.

 

Mr. Avagian was present and reminded the Council and the viewing public that several weeks ago, he came before the Council to announce the Candidatesí Night for the Lakes Area Residents Association. He would like to remind the viewing public, that this particular Candidates Night is open to everyone in the City of Novi and even those who are not in the City of Novi, who may possess an interest of the issues and what the candidates represent and how they are likely to represent you, the electorate come the 7th of November.

 

Mr. Avagian said as important as this particular re-announcement may be, he wanted to take this opportunity to also indicate that it would take place at 7:30 P.M., a week from tomorrow night, October 24th, but instead of being in the media center of the Walled Lake Middle School, it would be in the cafeteria. He said they would have a very brief LARA business meeting between 7:00 and 7:30 so LARA members should still come at 7:00 PM. He felt they need to look at the issues and see how people stand on the issues and as they all know, many of the concerns that they have had in the Lakes Area community have now surfaced to the point where the City Council was dealing with them, both through Committees and also at the Council table and Taft Road was an example and Lakewood Preserves. He said all of those items have been dealt with extensive dialogue with extensive interest on behalf of the people who live in the Lakes Area.

Mr. Avagian said his people were active politically and he just didnít like to see their intellectual and physical motivation go to waste, so he would like everyone to be at this Candidatesí Night and it was something they started eight years ago and they do this every two years as a service to the community and everyone was welcome and to the candidates Good Luck.

 

Mr. David Ruyle of 40474 Mill Road, Court East, Nevi, was present. He said he wanted to discuss Item No. 1 on the Agenda. He said he knows that Interlock was going to be resolved in the Courts, so he was not up to address that right now, but he would like them to look at what they are going to discuss that evening. He said it has been brought to his attention that there are approximately ten miles of land that was zoned in the I-1 District that abuts Residential and he would strongly, strongly urge them to revisit the I-1 zoning and make an Ordinance and meet with the City Attorney and get it out of the Residential areas.

Mr. Ruyle said he wouldnít want to have another Meadowbrook Lake incident where the citizens have to go out and sue the City and get things screwed up and they need to revisit this and they have a lot of heavy industrial land in this area where they could put those kinds of buildings in, and they do not need them in Residential areas. He said if he could prevent Interlock, he would do it, but there is nothing he could do at this time.

 

Mr. Kenneth Pickel of 23035 Falcon in Meadowbrook Lake was present. He said he has lived in the Meadowbrook Lake Subdivision for 25 years since August, 1970. He said contrary to an Editorial in the Novi News on July 6th and expressed by various other people, he was aware of existing Zoning Ordinances and one candidate is quoted in the Novi News of last Thursday, October 12th addressing the Interlock issue by saying the industrial park was there before the subdivision was and the builder does have a constitutional right to build on the property. He said that candidate was either ill-advised or has not done his homework.

 

Mr. Pickel said the Meadowbrook Lake Subdivision was there first before Hickory Corporate Park. He said additionally Interlock owners and management purchased Lots 11 and 12 in Hickory Park intending to seek variances to the existing Ordinances relevant to their proposed industrial operation. He said this was obvious when their original site plan and requested special land use variances were reviewed.

 

Mr. Pickel said they did not look at or consider any other Novi location. He said Meadowbrook Lake Subdivision residents are asking the Planning Commission and their Ordinance Review Committee and now City Council, for protection for their peace and quiet and their way of life and their property values, as provided by the existing Ordinances and if by interpretation, the Ordinances need review and changing to ensure those conditions, they must be amended. He said one suggested change before the Council that evening was the proposal to limit hours of operation for this type of manufacturing facility to less than 3 shifts 24 hours.

 

Mr. Pickel said the adverse impact on any abutting residential districts has been presented and debated. He said business and commercial interests view this as a deterrent to their operations. He said it need not be necessary if they relocate or they locate in an appropriate zoned district that is not abutting residential. He said while he wasnít speaking for any group, he was confident that other concerned residents of Novi would be amenable to solutions other than time limiting operations. He said however if no other solutions are found, they must seek the badly needed help from Novi City Government.

 

Mr. Pickel said he would suggest that if they were to mount the campaign of residents and effect shift changes at 11:00 at night, and 7:00 in the morning, changing shifts for 37 employees as Interlock would propose, and just slam car doors and have a normal conversation and did that in their backyards, they would find some way to determine that they were disturbing the peace and would call a halt to it.

 

Mr. Pickel said he was asking them now not to put the residents in the same situation and please help them find some way to stop this disturbance of their peace and quiet and their way of life.

 

Mr. Bob Shaw of 40612 Village Oaks and Parks & Recreation Commissioner, was present. He indicated he was not speaking on behalf of the Commission but as a citizen. He said he would address the issue of 4A on the Agenda, which he was glad was moved as an action item for Council. He said he appreciated the Novi News interest in Parks & Recreation activities in last Thursdayís issue, but they were still not doing Parks & Recreation any favors. He said two weeks ago, the editorial said they were going to put residential in with the golf course, which absolutely had no basis in fact. He said this last issue said that they were going to build a golf course or a park and he felt that needed to be clarified so that people would understand what the Commissionís intent has been and that was to look at a Golf Course as a part of the park and they have 400 acres up there roughly and they were looking at about 40% of that to be considered for a golf course and the other 60% would be park.

 

Mr. Shaw said so they were not going to make one or the other, it would be both or entirely park. He said the Simpson Trial gave them a new phrase, "if the glove fits, you must acquit," and if the golf course did not fit, they wouldnít build it, and that was basically the conclusion the Commission came from, and what they were trying to do was to find out if it fits or not so that they could then make a rational decision.

 

Mr. Shaw said using national averages, there are about 3500-5000 golfers who are Novi residents and with Novi demographics, those numbers are much higher, so they know there is a demand and Parks and Recreation was trying to satisfy that demand, but other than demand, why would they consider a golf course in an environmentally sensitive area and it was money.

 

Mr. Shaw said a municipal golf course, according to numbers they give, would be expected to generate $100,000 a year plus per year in profits into the Cityís coffers and it could very well be $200,000 a year. He said that would help fund Parks & Rec operations, as well as General City operations and it would keep their taxes low, and he felt they were all interested in that and it would be a benefit to all of their residents.

 

Mr. Shaw said a golf course could be built with revenue bonds as opposed to GO Bonds so they donít have to use taxpayer dollars to develop that 150 acres of park property. He said on the other side, if it was just park property, 150 acres would cost them $50,000 a year to maintain it, just to cut the grass and keep the weeds under control, so they were looking at possibly a quarter million dollars a year, $150,000-$250,000 a year difference in revenue and outcome. He said for that reason, they want to look at the possibility of a golf course and they were not designing a golf course and they were not going out for construction contracts and they just want to see if a golf course would fit and if it was worthy of additional consideration. He said their selection of Faren & Associates was on the basis of their environmental sensitivity and ability and proven knowledge and their experience, so they were not as the Novi News said, leveling the land to build a golf course, and if they did it, it would be built around those facilities, so he urged the Council to at least consider reconsidering and think about a golf course in the area for the benefit of Novi residents.

 

A gentleman by the name of Stanley of 22670 Penton Rise Court was present. He said listening to all of the arguments, the Planning Commission was the recommending body for Zoning Ordinances in the City, but if they make poor choices in the Planning Commission, then all of their Ordinances were in danger. He said also the Detroit News, as was stated before, to allow a 24 hour operation abutting residential property or its surrounding area, would incur an incurable defect in a property that could never be corrected, which could cast doubt in the future.

 

This gentleman also indicated there was no reason why the Planning Commission and the City Council couldnít work on the Ordinance. He didnít see why this Ordinance couldnít be employed. He felt if any of them lived anywhere near this type of situation and put themselves in those peopleís situation, he was sure they would say, "not in my backyard."

 

Ms. Diane Davies of 24836 Jamestown Road was present. She indicated she has come before the City Council before with over 1200 petitions that were signed by residents of the City of Novi and that was back in the spring. She said she was waiting all summer long to hear something about the Fuerst Farm and when September rolled around, she thought maybe she would hear something but she was still waiting.

 

Ms. Davies said the end of the year is coming soon and the Election is here which she knows is taking peopleís time and attention away from some of the matters and this may not seem as serious a matter, but they were losing time. She said the School Board wants an answer and the residents want an answer. She said she was continuously asked by people who recognize her or people who know her, what is going on with the Fuerst Farm and the only thing she could tell them was she hasnít heard anything. Thank you.

 

Ms. Nancy Petrie of 24486 Bashian Drive was present. She said regarding the noise levels, she felt they were too high as they are, and two weeks ago, she was awaken by a truck down at Grand River, and if that would wake her up at 4:30 AM, she couldnít imagine what those people were going to have to put up with. She indicated she didnít live anywhere near Meadowbrook Lake Subdivision, but she felt it was terrible what has happened there.

 

Ms. Petrie said as far as the golf course goes, she loved to play golf when she could and she honestly believed their taxes would go way up for maintaining that course. She said it costs about a million dollars a year to maintain a decent 18 hole golf course. She said she didnít know where the figures came from. She said also a lot of people here may not be aware of the Oakland County Commission owned land out Ten Mile Road with South Lyon, where they were planning on putting a golf course there.

 

Mr. Charles Young of 50910 West Nine Mile was present. He thanked the City for recognizing the volunteers. He said over the years, he hasnít really volunteered until he became involved with the Homeowners Association on the southwest side of town. He felt if people want to help in the City of Novi, they need to get involved in some type of volunteer organization.

 

Mr. Young indicated that a whole group of them have formed an organization called SWAN and they have four spokes people now and they were going to be a watchdog in the southwest section of the City. He again would like to thank all of the volunteers and people on the Planning Commission, who have given of their time for the City of Novi and he felt it was great.

 

Ms. Kathy Mutch was present and she indicated she was speaking as a resident and as a citizen instead of Mr. Jim Antosiak who was the President of Preservation Novi and she was a member of the Board. She said Ms. Davis made an eloquent plea which was directed to Council not to Preservation Novi, which was that they provide some sort of public discussion or response to the information that has been prepared and presented to them previously on the Fuerst Farm.

 

Ms. Mutch said she would ask that when they get to Item #5 under Matters for Council Action, which was the request for a Joint Meeting of Council with the School Board, that if they indeed set that meeting and they set the Agenda for it, she would strongly urge them and beg them to have the Fuerst property as an item on that Agenda because while the public is unaware of the information that has been presented, that information will be available through the Clerk and through the Novi Public Library and the Northville Library as well.

 

Ms. Mutch indicated that Preservation Novi has commissioned a report on the Fuerst property addressing the concerns that were raised by the Council within the 3 member committee and then at the Council table. She felt they have all been addressed in this report and subsequent letters. She said what they would like to know was what else does Council want them to do and they were prepared to do whatever was needed to make this happen. She said they were willing to have a leadership role in the community to bring together in some active way all of those groups and individuals who have said they want this to happen.

Ms. Mutch said every time they have a Candidates Night, the question comes up and every time there was a public gathering, people ask what was happening. She said it was in Councilís hands and she hoped they would let them know what they could do to help them make it happen..

 

Mr. Gary Kidd was present and indicated he has lived in Novi for over 25 years and wished to speak on the Interlock situation. He stated he has attended many of the Planning Commission meetings and was appalled by the absolute arrogant lack of regard of the public wish. He indicated eight out of ten people in the Audience spoke against what the Planning Commission approved. He said he sat there until 3:00 AM one time when they initially approved it and he could not believe it.

 

Mr. Kidd said the only other thing in the City of Novi that has shocked him more was when he found out that City Offices were dumping sewage into his lake behind his house .He said that goes back a number of years and he hoped that problem was primarily corrected. He said there were many City Council Members at that time who were doing the same thing, and that was just as bad as far as he was concerned and had major effects on the property values. He said he lived as far away from that Hickory Park area a person could get and still be in Meadowbrook Lake and his house has frontage on Meadowbrook Road. He said it was obvious the Planning Commission does not answer to the people and they donít have to worry about votes and they were not a big subdivision and there were only 150-160 houses with a couple of votes in each house maybe 3-4, but he felt there were a lot of other subdivisions and a lot of other people in this City that have sympathy for this problem and he has talked to a number of them and they feel the same way.

 

Mr. Kidd said they donít need 24 hour operations in abutting residential and they were looking for this body to solve that problem and they only way they could retaliate was with their votes and they would like not to do that and they would like the Council to do something sensible. He asked would the Council want this 24 hour operation next to them and it was next to a lot of the houses in their subdivision. He begged them to pay special attention to this and donít let it happen.

 

Mayor McLallen closed the Audience Participation and reminded the Audience there were two more opportunities to address Council later that evening.

 

Mayor McLallen said before moving on to the Agenda, she understood their new Data Management Specialist has finished her class and Mr. Nowicki would like to introduce her to the citizens.

 

Mr. Nowicki introduced Ms. Margaret Jolin, who comes to the City from Wayne State University where she was formerly a Graduate Research Assistant and she has a Bachelors Degree in Civil Engineering and was working on her Masters Degree in Civil Engineering with concentration on Transportation Engineering Design.

 

Ms. Jolin indicated she has been with the City for two weeks now and she has met a lot of nice people in the City and was very excited about the progress and the change that was coming and has been coming. She said the Geographic Information System was where she would be spending a lot of her time, and hopefully it would make a big difference in a lot of their lives. She said it was very nice to meet everyone.

 

 

CONSENT AGENDA

 

1. Approve Minutes of Regular Meeting of September 25. 1995.

2. Approval of Nine Mile Road Sewer Extension Contract and Supplemental Specification with Singh Development Company.

3. Approval of Traffic Control Order 95-86 - 15 MPH Speed Limit for all Service Roads and Parking Lots at the Nevi Civic Center.

4. Approval of Traffic Control Order 95-87 - 15 MPH Speed Limit for all Service Roads and Parking Lots at the Nevi Public Library.

 

Councilman Toth removed Item #1.

 

It was then,

 

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel

 

To approve Items #2, 3 and 4 of the Consent Agenda.

 

(Voice vote) Motion Carried Unanimously

 

MATTERS FOR COUNCIL ACTION - PART I.

 

1. 24 Hour Operations - Light Industrial Uses Adjacent to Residential Districts.

 

Mayor McLallen explained this item was here at the request of Council and it was sent back to the Planning Commission for review and a response and the Planning Commission was requested to hold a public hearing, which was held in August. She said the resulting information was that the Planning Commission voted 6-3 to keep the Ordinance as it existed but to send a number of specific performance items through their review process to see that those items can be addressed. She said Mr. Capote was the person directed to bring this item back.

 

Mr. Capite said on a more formal basis and pursuant to this Councilís meeting on June 19, 1995, the Planning Commission held a special meeting, a public hearing, to consider the 24 hour operation issue and during that meeting, they did come and make a firm recommendation pursuant to their request to not recommend the sample ordinance in limiting the hours of operation in an I-1 District.

 

Mr. Capite explained what happened out of that meeting was that they recommended that the Implementation Committee further study the issue and not to include any discussions in limiting the hours of operation, but to look at setback requirements, landscaping requirements, decibel level requirements, and performance standards. He said the Implementation Committee has come up with ten items that were to be studied. He said it was to go back to the Planning Commission on November 1st and he wanted to make an amendment to his memo where he said in the Planning Commissionís motion, they were to come back in 60 days to the City Council and that was amended to 90 days, which brings it to November 1, 1995. He said he also indicated he included the ten item list in their packet. He then said he would be happy to answer any questions.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

Councilwoman Mason asked Mr. Capite about two statements. She said one statement he had in the Special August meeting, Mr. Capite states in reporting this information back to the Implementation Committee, there was a feeling that they need to find some evidence that identifies a problem exists before they establish any type of control in hopes that it would address whatever problems were out there, whatever it might be and not only just 24 hour operations and he said in all fairness, it was important that they try to find something.

 

Councilwoman Mason said Mr. Capite also indicated that he hoped the business residents were present that night and could express their concerns as this control would restrict the use of the land, and he felt that was one of the big considerations that he hoped the Planning Commission would think about very carefully.

 

Councilwoman Mason said in her opinion, she felt he was working for the developer and not the people who pay his salary and she would like him to tell her, what his situation is.

 

Mr. Capite said when he was asked by Planning Commissioners and members of the Implementation Committee as to whether this is a good idea and what other considerations should they consider and when he also had the Assistant City Attorney in those meetings, they both said words to that effect.

Councilwoman Mason asked was he saying that he didnít see anything wrong with 24 hour operations next to residential as a planner for the City.

 

Mr. Capite felt that was a decision for the Planning Commission and for a recommendation to come from the Implementation Committee to the Planning Commission and that he should have no opinions. He felt it was up to the Commission and the Council to decide what they want to do. He said but in a working session with the Implementation Committee, both he and Mr. Watson made suggestions or recommendations. He said that was how he wished to respond to her question.

 

Councilwoman Mason said it also said to be fair to the business community. She then said she didnít read anything in here where he said to be fair to the people that live in that subdivision.

 

Councilman Toth asked Mr. Fried what actions were possible at this point. Mr. Fried replied they could send out to his office to prepare an Ordinance along the lines that they recommend.

 

Councilman Toth said this was still in the hands of the Planning Commission and Mr. Fried said no it was in the hands of the City Council that night and it would be an action item when they have an Ordinance in front of them.

 

Councilman Schmid said he has been in the City a number of years and Mr. Kidd used to come quite often and talk about a lot of things. He said they all miss him because he was always such a great spokesman. He said he has never seen so much politics being played in one evening and he was not talking about Meadowbrook Lake, and he was talking about everyone else, almost to the point, that spoke that evening. He felt frankly it was too bad and there was an election coming up and so he supposed there was some feeling that there would be put on this Council to do certain things, such as the Fuerst property and the outlandish attack on the Mayor was absolutely ridiculous in a public forum such as this.

 

Councilman Schmid said he knows the people in the Audience and probably out in TV land know that this Council volunteers their time and they donít know what they have to go through to get elected. He said first of all, it costs $3,000-$6,000 to run for Council and the first time he ran for Council, it probably cost $200.00 to buy some signs and now it costs up to $7,000 to get elected to a position that they feel they were doing a service to the community. He said the Council does get paid $15.00 a meeting. He said at the best, they may make $1,000 a year and the Mayor gets $20.00 so she really has it made.

Councilman Schmid said over the years, he suspected he has spent at least twice that much than he has ever made at this Council table doing the things for the City and traveling and so forth. He said he wasnít complaining, but sometimes he sits back here at the Council table and feels that possibly citizens misinterpret what Council was doing and what the Commissioners were doing and the Council was not always right and the Commission was not always right and they all make mistakes , but they all do the best they can. He said that has nothing to do with Meadowbrook Lake or any other issue. He felt politics were being played that evening and it was distressing to him

 

Councilman Schmid said regarding the 24 hour operations, he has looked at this long and hard and he would be very honest and at one time during this whole issue, he said to himself that he was glad this was in the Commissionís hat and not his and it has been a hot, difficult topic to discuss. He said on the one hand, the residents have definitely a point and on the other hand, the Novi News, although he felt they have errored in some areas, made a point as far as business. He said the City has to develop and support itself and it has to have the money available.

 

Councilman Schmid said frankly the bad thing in this whole matter was that a bad decision was made in 1986 in his opinion, when this land was zoned industrial as opposed to residential and at that time, he did not sit on Council, but at that time, it was said they couldnít build next railroad tracks, well now they could build almost next to anything.

 

Councilman Schmid said some people say "you do it in your front yard," and for the last year and a half, he has had a road go through his front yard and a highway not far away so they were not alone in some of the things that have happened in the City of Novi as it grows.

 

Councilman Schmid felt the first mistake was rezoning it. He felt the second mistake was there may have been an error on the decision of the Commission to allow the use that was there now, which has really brought this whole matter to issue. He said he went and looked at the facility downriver and it was not a bad looking facility and it wasnít heavy industrial and it didnít pound like a stamping plant and a lot of other things, and it was a very quiet plastic type of operation where he didnít feel there was much noise.

 

Councilman Schmid said on the other hand, it is a major manufacturing company and probably never should have been allowed next to a residential area with all the ramifications of the Ordinance, and they could have kept it out, but that was a tough decision, and he didnít know how he would have voted for it at that time because he didnít have all the information perhaps so it was a tough one.

 

Councilman Schmid said he talked to someone the other evening and he could see perhaps a manufacturing company like that next to residential should not have 24 hour operations, but he also believed there was some facilities that should have 24 hour operations even if it was next to residential, so the bottom line was he felt they have to send it back to have the ten items discussed, and he felt that was the only other alternative.

 

Councilman Schmid said he would lean towards eliminating 24 hour operations in manufacturing next to residential, particularly in this case where it truly was residential there before manufacturing ever thought of being there, and residential was truly there, but in some areas where industrial land was there and someone chooses to build right next to it, he didnít have quite the empathy.

 

Councilman Schmid said M-14 is a major expressway and they are building $500,000 homes and you canít tell him there isnít more noise coming off that expressway than will ever be effected by this relatively quiet manufacturing facility.

 

Councilman Schmid said he would be looking for direction as to what this Council should do to resolve the issue, and he felt it has to go back to the Implementation Committee to look at the ten items and then he felt it has to come back to this Council for a tough decision whether or not they were going to allow 24 hour operations next to residential or not.

 

Councilman Schmid said frankly he was leaning towards not allowing it and he could say that at one time during his deliberations over the last several months, he wasnít quite as sure, and he wasnít even positive now as it was a very tough issue. He said he would be glad to hear from other Council members.

 

Mayor McLallen said at this time this matter was not here for any directed action unless the Council so chooses and it was brought back to the Council for a report on the activity the Planning Commission was directed to. She said the Planning Commission has chosen to further research through their Implementation Committee but has supported the ordinance as it stands and then there are ten items that they wish to further research. She asked for any other comments.

 

Councilman Toth said to Mr. Capite in his memo of September 21st, the ten items that he has listed, he had a question about Item #3, and he would like him to have the Committee members look very strongly on the review of permitted uses and uses subject to special conditions within the I-1 District when they are adjacent to residential districts. He felt perhaps they could contact some of the surrounding communities and see what they are doing in that same light and get some information from them.

 

Councilman Toth felt Special Conditions should be addressed in detail to make sure they have all the answers possible by November 1st, so he felt they could check with some of the surrounding communities such as Farmington Hills and West Bloomfield and see what they have and see what possible special conditions they impose in some of their areas so they make sure they have adequate protection in there. He stated he would like to see a complete report on that particular area.

 

Mayor McLallen said at this time, the Council will await the report of the Implementation Committee in November.

 

 

2. Proposed Lakewoods Preserve, SP95-17 - Possible Concept Plan.

 

Mayor McLallan explained this was before the Council for a possible concept plan. She explained Lakewoods Preserve is a 206 acre R-2 and R-4 site at the junction of West Road and South Lake Drive. She indicated there were positive recommendations from all Consultants at this time on the concept.

 

Mayor McLallen pointed out a feature which they have not yet seen in a typical Novi subdivision development, which was they have their own swimming pool and tennis courts, so this was an innovative addition to their project.

 

Mr. Robert Gibbs was present and indicated he was representing the Novi Group. He explained the Novi Group was made up of Metropolitan Detroitís three premier residential developers and he then introduced Mr. Ted Jacobson of Mark Jacobson Development; Mr. Norm Cohen of Biltmore Homes; Mr. Jeff Paresian of Pulte Homes of Michigan who couldnít be present that evening; and Mr. Arnie Serlin of Mark Jacobson Homes.

 

Mr. Gibbs said those developers were known for developing the most quality developments in the area and for making extraordinary efforts to cooperate with communities in which they work and he felt as a group, they have done their best to do that in Novi. He said they have had over 100 meetings with the Novi Staff and Consultants and Homeowner Groups and have met with LARA in seven meetings alone.

 

Mr. Gibbs said they have been planning this project for almost a year and their site was located on the western end of the City on the extreme west shore of Walled Lake and the site has 205 acres and has over a quarter mile of lake frontage on Walled Lake itself. He indicated the site includes all three corners of the intersection of West Road and South Lake Drive and is bounded to the north by South Lake Court. He said the property is surrounded with an approximate 200 acre light industrial zoned piece to its west and the western property is all zoned Light Industrial, and to the north with an approximate 300 acre multiple family zoning of which is 100% built-out and then there were a number of large apartment buildings immediately adjacent to their site to the north edge.

 

Mr. Gibbs said the property is surrounded to the north also by R-4 zoning and to the southeast by R-4 zoning and to the south by R-A zoning. He said in almost all cases, it is surrounded by an equal or more intense zoning than what he was proposing.

 

Mr. Gibbs said he was successful in obtaining from the Planning Commission their recommendation that they have the right to use the Preservation Option on this property and that is what they are seeking that night, the right to develop this site using the Preservation Option. He said by using the Preservation Option, they were proposing to set aside 22% of the site or 35 of its acres as protected woodlands or wildlife habitat areas. He said in addition to that, they are setting aside 46 acres of the site that are regulated wetlands for a total of almost 40% of the site, which would be set aside indefinitely.

 

Mr. Gibbs said in addition to that, per the request of the Planning Commission, they were putting in protections for the lake shore itself to be protected with a 75 foot preservation easement and they have given up their rights per the Planning Commissionís request to develop any lake front usage and they were entitled to develop 40 boat slips but they have given up the right to develop all of those and they would not be developing any boat slips on the lake.

 

Mr. Gibbs indicated if the property is developed as the Preservation Option, then what they were entitled to do is by protecting 40% of the site, they were allowed to make the lots 20% smaller. He said they were proposing 231 lots, of which 213 would be 90 feet by 160 feet and about 18 of those would be 80 feet by 125 feet. He said those were R-4 lots.

 

Mr. Gibbs said they feel this is an excellent plan and is an excellent way of having a win-win on the property and it preserves all of the siteís significant woodlands, preserves many of the siteís hedgerows and concentrates the development effectively into the more open spaces of the property. He said he looked forward to their favorable opinion.

Mayor McLallen explained this was an action item and the request is to grant Preliminary approval for the Preservation Option Concept as it is presented that night.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

It was,

 

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

 

To approve the Concept Plan for Lakewoods Preserves, SP95-17.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

Councilwoman Mason asked Councilman Toth if he would explain what the Concept plan is for the people who are concerned about this and what it means and it doesnít mean they were accepting anything and they were just saying they were accepting the concept of this.

 

Councilman Toth said they were accepting the concept and now they will move on to the actual working of that property and that will come through the review process and go through the Planning Department for Preliminary approval.

 

Councilman Mitzel said he had asked several questions and Mr. Rogers had responded to him through a memo, but he had one question he would like one of the environmental consultants to address which was the issue of the habitat that was being preserved. He said under the Preservation Option, upland woodlands is a credible habitat preservation, wetland buffer areas and then also unique wildlife areas or some smaller non-regulated wetlands, which meet certain criteria. He said he would like a rundown on how some of the areas that were not upland woodlands and not wetland buffer areas and not wetlands, meet the criteria which was in the Ordinance and how they would be preserved in that habitat state without reverting to what would be a different type of habitat if they were being credited for a meadow for example.

 

Ms. Lemke felt Councilman Mitzel brought out a good point on how they maintain a natural area, which was something they have never really addressed in their Ordinances.. She said a prime example of that was a meadow, which Councilman Mitzel raised and there was quite a bit of meadows in those areas that were not regulated woodlands and they were not part of the buffer for the wetlands, but they would be an open meadow-like area.

 

Ms. Lemke felt there needs to be a mechanism for maintenance of that. She said meadows were usually maintained and improved by yearly mowing or a yearly controlled burn which most of the experts in the field now were going towards. She said the mowing would still allow exotic species in, versus the natural species of the meadow habitat area and when they burn those, they usually burn in the fall or they wait until a year following the spring to do the controlled burn.

 

Ms. Lemke said Councilman Mitzel had asked if there should be a mechanism for maintenance and she felt there is and she felt they could handle that as long as that provision is made that they could review it in detail when they go through the wetlands and the woodlands permits, which neither she or Ms. Tepatti or Mr. Pargoff have recommended at this time because they donít have quite enough detailed information. She said they have enough to make a conceptual recommendation, but not for detailed permit approval, but that would be one of the things they would be looking at and could look at.

 

Councilman Mitzel asked on a more basic level, he questioned the concerns on how much of the meadow area is considered to be included in the Preservation credit and does it truly meet the four criteria in the Ordinance stating that it has to be unique and special habitat because Novi has a lot of meadow areas, and he wanted to be certain that this is meeting the criteria of those unique habitats and not just that the lots didnít fit quite right and this is going to be counted then.

 

Ms. Lemke said the Petitioner has made an attempt to answer those four criteria but he hasnít to her satisfaction addressed that specifically enough yet, but he is making an attempt to. She said from what she has observed out on the site for most of the areas, she would say 90% of them were adjacent to existing wetlands or woodlands and they function in consistency with those systems. She said that was one of the things they raised in Mr. Rogersí letters, which was that those four criteria per the Ordinance still need to be addressed.

 

Councilman Mitzel said so as of right now they have not and Ms. Lemke said they have made a good attempt at it, but it was not as detailed as she would like to see. Councilman Mitzel said because the letter he saw discussed woodlands and wetlands as opposed to those other areas.

 

Ms. Lemke said there was another letter that they submitted to her regarding some of the other areas as a general format, but she was still looking at each area, and there were quite a few small areas that were counted, specifically for those four reasons as to why they were unique and why they were valuable. She said from looking at them, there doesnít appear to be any left-over portion, parts of a larger whole and there just isnít one small area that they have counted and if there is such an area, it was so small it wouldnít make any difference in their count.

 

Councilman Mitzel said overall, were they talking the areas that were not woodland and not wetland buffer and not the unique small wetlands, and was it 10% of the area that is being credited and Ms. Lemke said she would say it was about 10-15% and the majority of it was woodlands and Councilman Mitzel said then that 10-15% is the area that they would have to further address clarifying how it meets the criteria.

 

Councilman Mitzel then asked Mr. Fried based on that, did he think the criteria of the Ordinance has been met and Mr. Fried said he really would not want to address that, and he couldnít tell them whether it has or has not been met, and he felt it was up to the Planning Department to make that recommendation as to whether the criteria has been met or not.

 

Councilman Mitzel said their Consultant just stated that the 10-15% still needed further addressing, and their criteria in their Ordinance states that has to be met before concept approval and he was just wondering if 10-15% is something that could be addressed later or does it have to be addressed up front, and Mr. Fried replied it should be addressed up front.

 

Councilman Mitzel also said that their Ordinance states that the preservation mechanism and maintenance mechanisms must be supplied at this time, and Mr. Fried replied the City Attorney has to approve it, and their process was ongoing in that regard and Councilman Mitzel thought the Ordinance stated they had to approve it prior to concept approval.

 

Mr. Fried replied it was an ongoing process and their submitting it does, and Councilman Mitzel said he was trying to follow their Ordinance, and Mr. Fried said he was absolutely right and that is what the Ordinance says, but they donít have that as yet, and they have not approved it as yet.

 

Councilman Mitzel asked if they could approve the concept plan and Mr. Fried said they could approve it in principle, but obviously it would have to come back to the Council to approve it, after the maintenance mechanism is in effect.

Councilman Mitzel said in either case, this would not be a final concept approval, and it would have to come back for further action and Mr. Fried said that was correct.

 

Councilman Mitzel said his other question or comment was concerning some of the language in the Planning Commission Minutes about the lake front and it sounded like there was some concern as to whether access, pedestrian access, would be allowed and whether people would be allowed to walk in there or they would be able to have a passive trail through that area. He asked would a Preservation Option exclude residents that own that property from walking within that area, and Mr. Fried said if it was truly a Preservation Option, then it would exclude those people from utilizing that area.

 

Councilman Mitzel asked how would that be different from many of the other subdivisions where they have Adjusted Lot Size where it had to be preserved open space, and even Robinís Nest recently, which went through this Preservation Option where the homeowners held in common to the homeowners, but yet it prohibited development, prohibited change in the natural area, but it did not prohibit access to their own land. Mr. Fried said he really couldnít give him an answer.

 

Mr. Gibbs explained one of the criteria for the preservation area to be counted is that it has to be accessible to all homeowners and they had to actually provide pedestrian ingresses and egresses from all areas. He said the Planning Commission and the Consultants and themselves infer by that and since they have to provide access for people to walk in there, it is okay to walk in those preservation areas and they think that was fine and no one has disputed that so far.

 

Councilman Mitzel said in reading the Minutes, it sounded like they had stated at the meeting that there would be no walking access and he just wanted to clarify that. Mr. Gibbs indicated they donít see a problem with people walking in the woods and was he suggesting that they not allow people to walk in the woods, and Councilman Mitzel said he was not suggesting that, but he was just trying to clarify what he thought was in Minutes.

 

Councilman Mitzel said he also wanted to clarify that not only were they talking about the woods, but they were talking about meadows and the lakeshore area and was that correct and Mr. Gibbs said yes and he didnít see a problem with people walking in the open space within reason.

 

Mr. Gibbs said also just to do some quick math, assuming that they were off, there was a 10% dispute in their area. He said they have shown 22% saved as open space, and they were only required to show 20% so they were about five acres over in their open space, which they thought could be reviewed in more detail at the site planning level. He said besides having the five acres almost extra, they havenít really reduced their lot areas by 20% and most of their lots were only reduced by about 15-16%, so if there is a dispute as to whether it was a valuable habitat or not, there is more than 10% for that to be studied, but he really felt it is and he felt it was an extremely unique habitat in the City, to have a quarter mile of lake frontage and over 400 feet of frontage on the Rouge River, and it was an extremely sensitive ecosystem and they have outlined it and the exhibit in front of him shows in green stripes, the areas that have been used in those credits.

 

Mr. Gibbs said if they were off by 10%, they have more than that to make adjustments during the more detailed level, but they were very confident that Ms. Lemke and others would agree that this is an extremely sensitive habitat and that is why the Planning Commission wanted him to stay out of it, but he was confident.

 

Councilman Mitzel said his questions were not directed at saying this plan did not have merits, but he just wished to make sure that they were meeting all of their technical requirements of their Ordinance, so they could approve it as the Ordinance requires and that was the intent of his questions. He said based on the City Attorneyís answer, it sounded like the mechanism for preservation would have to be ironed out prior to a final concept approval by Council.

 

Councilman Mitzel said further it sounded like the Planning Commission deferred any decision on preservation mechanisms to the City Council and if there was a discussion whether it should be City-owned outright or a preservation easement, his feeling was that it should be just a typical preservation easement, which has been used traditionally in the subdivisions such as the Adjusted Lot Size and the Preservation Option for Robins Nest, which he believed was Beckingham Estates now.

 

Councilman Mitzel said he didnít know if that needed to be included in the motion to give direction to the City Attorney and the developer so it could come back in a final form and if it does, he would make a motion to that.

 

Councilman Mitzel said there was one other question/comment he had, and this comes back to providing access to neighboring undeveloped residential areas and they had sent it to Ordinance Review Committee to change it from generally to required and that hasnít been finalized yet.

 

Councilman Mitzel said there was only one instance in this proposed subdivision where that would come to play, and that would be in the extreme southwest corner area where there should be a stub street providing future access to the R-A undeveloped area there for a future tie-in, so he would make a motion to amend.

 

 

AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION

 

It was,

 

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

 

To require that there be a stub street provided in the southwest corner, in the general vicinity to the undeveloped R-A properties.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

Councilman Toth said he was getting a bad feeling in two ways. He said one bad feeling was that perhaps the Planning Commission and the Planning Department did not meet all the criteria and therefore, perhaps it should go back. He said secondly, he was getting a bad feeling that they were now doing Planning Commission and Planning Department work, which he did not feel was the role of the Council.

 

Councilman Toth stated the Council is to say yea or nay to the project, but there are serious deficiencies with this project, and he felt it should be directed back to Administration and have them look at it.

 

Councilman Toth said this is a concept plan and as mentioned here, the recommendations they have received here are positive recommendations, therefore, he felt it should go back and it may go back with qualifications, and he didnít see the idea of putting in stub streets and that was getting into the details of the planning process and he didnít think the Council should be doing that. He said to direct the Planning Department and the Planning Commission to look at that and comply with that, he would accept an amendment like that, but he couldnít support an amendment where they were going to start to go in and change the drawings on this, because that he felt was the role of the Planning Commission and the Planning Department and not the role of the Council.

 

Councilwoman Mason said to Councilman Toth that Councilman Mitzel was trying to determine if they were following the Ordinances and he was not replanning this subdivision and he was asking if they were following the Ordinances and it doesnít look like they are and that is what this body is for and she did not feel they were redesigning anything.

 

Councilman Toth said that is what he was stating, and if they were not following it, send it back, but donít say put a stub street in a certain area. Councilwoman Mason said Councilman Mitzel said to follow the Ordinance, and she had said they put a stub street in when there is R-A next to another residential, and that is not redesigning.

 

Councilman Mitzel said he had felt the two issues he had raised, one which was the stub street and one which was the preservation and maintenance mechanisms, were of a minor nature that could be ironed out at the table without going back through the whole process and that is why he offered the first one as an amendment. He said the second one he thought Mr. Fried had stated that eventually they would have to approve it and he didnít know how they would phrase it, but basically it would have to come back here when the preservation and maintenance mechanisms were ironed out for Final concept approval prior to them going through the planning process and so those were the two and he didnít think that warranted all the way back to the Planning Commission for those two issues.

 

Mayor McLallen said at the moment, there is an amendment to the main motion to require the developer to put a stub street at the southwest corner of this project.

 

Councilman Schmid commended Councilman Mitzel for picking up the errors that would have been made in the wetlands/woodlands, etc., the possible errors, and for the stub street, he needed better clarification perhaps before he could vote on it.

 

Mr. Rod Arroyo was present and indicated he wanted to make a comment regarding the potential for a stub street to the south. He said the area that would be served by a stub street, directly south in the southwest corner of this particular property, was currently zoned R-A and most of the lots that were in that area were large parcel lots that front on West Road, and in fact, many of them, over half of that small area was currently developed.

 

Mr. Arroyo said by providing a stub street there, he saw that it would have a marginal benefit because most of the lots that were currently there already have access to West Road and it was a large lot subdivision area anyway and the zoning calls for one acre lots, and he didnít see that there would be a substantial benefit for providing that stub street and as they know, the Ordinance does state generally the stub street shall be provided and if this were a good location for stub streets, he would certainly support it.

Mr. Arroyo felt because of the fact that it was substantially split already into large parcels and the fact that many of those would not have the benefit of getting access to the stub street, this may not be the best situation to provide for a stub street.

 

Councilman Schmid said he would not support the motion because he didnít feel it would fit here. He said to Mr. Gibbs that he has been on the other side of Mr. Gibbsí programs at times, but he was impressed with the work that went into this particular plat of land and what came out of it, and the work of the Planning Commission, the work of the developers, etc., and they have done an excellent job in this case. He said assuming they work out some of those minor details, he would support it.

 

Councilman Mitzel said he had a different impression from Mr. Rogers concerning the stub street issue this morning when he had called to ask for clarification on his memo, and maybe he didnít have a chance to look at it in as much detail as Mr. Arroyo, but he had generally thought it was a good idea, so that was why he pursued it at the table that evening.

 

 

VOTE ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION

 

(Voice vote) (2) Yeas-Mitzel and Mason

(4) Nays

(1) Absent-Pope

 

MOTION FAILED

 

 

AMENDMENT TO MOTION

 

Councilman Mitzel said he would make another amendment but needed help with the wording from Mr. Fried and Mr. Fried stated to approve it in concept subject to the filing of the Preservation Agreement.

 

It was then,

 

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

 

To approve Lakewoods Preserve SP95-17 in principle subject to the provisions of the City Attorney and confirmation to City Council that the preservation and maintenance mechanisms are in proper order and that the four criteria of the meadow area are met per the discussion that evening.

 

 

VOTE ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION

 

(Voice Vote) Motion Carried Unanimously

 

Mayor McLallen then stated the main motion:

 

To approve the Concept Plan for the Proposed Lakewoods Preserve, SP95-17, in principle, pursuant to the discussion at the table that evening.

 

(Voice Vote) Motion Carried Unanimously

 

Mr. Ted Jacobson asked to clarify something. He said as he understood it, if they pass the Preservation Option, which they have done, it goes back to the Planning Commission, and at that point in time, they do the very detailed specific engineered plans and they in turn, will examine that in relation of the Preservation Option and make sure that everything complies with the Preservation Agreement. He said he was just afraid the way the motion was passed, that it doesnít make it clear that the Preservation Option is approved and now they go back and have to come back again and satisfy them on all the details. He felt there was a qualification with the approval, and he didnít think that was their intention.

 

Mayor McLallen believed the qualification was that the question to raise that night must be satisfied through the Attorney and the Consultants before they go back to the Planning Commission.

 

Councilman Mitzel explained the amendment was that in their Ordinance, there was criteria of the preservation and maintenance mechanism and also the criteria of the findings for unique and special habitat and their ordinance states those have to be met before this Council can grant concept plan approval and Mr. Fried suggested they could grant it in principle and they would provide those agreements to Mr. Fried and the proof of the unique habitat and he believed then it would be confirmed. Mr. Fried added it would not go back to the Planning Commission.

 

Mr. Jacobson then said he didnít understand. He said the Preservation Option they have to have in order to go back and do the work to show the Planning Commission that they met all the criteria that Councilman Mitzel is talking about, and they agreed wholeheartedly and that was their obligation.

Mr. Jacobson said but they to go back to the Planning Commission in order to do the field work, to get the plan in the condition where everyone sees the final working, so if they were objecting to them, that they have to come back to the Council with all those details worked out, and truly he wasnít trying to put his posture before them improperly, but he felt procedurally they have to get the Preservation Option approved and he said now the condition of presenting the final plan includes everything Mr. Mitzel has talked about.

 

Mayor McLallen said unfortunately, she felt the issue is obtaining the concept approval and that is not obtainable until those four criteria are clearly met to the satisfaction of this body and that the preservation issue is approved by the Attorney and those two issues were not met that night so this Council had only two options, to take the course that they were taking now or to turn you down.

 

Mr. Jacobson said his understanding at this point was in time that the written preservation option would fall in place before they got back to the Council and they would be working with the City Attorney to approve the plan, the Preservation Option, but before he could do the work, to create the legal descriptions, and have the final proposed plat, they have to know that they have the Preservation Option, and he didnít know which comes first and it seems difficult.

 

Mayor McLallen said it was Councilman Mitzelís issue and Councilman Mitzel said it was his understanding the way the language was written was the mechanism for preserving and maintaining had to be outlined, and he didnít think that had to include the specific legal description of every square foot and it was just how was it going to be preserved and what type of mechanism and what type of maintenance will be able to be over that to preserve.

 

Councilman Mitzel said he supported the concept plan and there was technicality in their Ordinance that states clearly that they couldnít approve it unless that mechanism of preserving and maintaining that area has been reviewed and approved by their City Attorney.

 

Mr. Jacobson asked if they could approve the concept plan subject to the written instrument being in their possession for approval at the time that they come back with their proposed plat, as long as they have it before they have the tentative approval on the plan. He felt they have everything they need to make a decision.

 

Mayor McLallen said that was a question that they need legal advice on and Mr. Fried explained the way the Ordinance was drawn, it couldnít be done that way and this has worked in the past and has not delayed the developer.

Mr. Jacobson said obviously that was his judgement based on his experience in the past and he was just led to believe that the actual physical draftsmanship could take place in the normal course of this and Mr. Fried indicated it could not.

 

Mr. Jacobson then asked if there was anything at this point after the passage of their motion, that they could go ahead and start refining all the work that has to be done for submission to the Planning Commission, and Mr. Fried replied that was why they approved it in principle, so he could proceed.

 

Mr. Gibbs said it was his understanding that they were not coming back in front of the City Council, but that their Consultants and Attorney have to be satisfied and Mr. Fried said they would bring it back to City Council and if they feel it was necessary for him to appear, then they would tell him to appear. He said as of this moment, it is up to the Consultants and City Attorney to come back to Council in accordance with the resolution. Mr. Gibbs said their concurrence has to occur before they go back to the Planning Commission and Mr. Fried said he would assume that there was a lot of work they have to do before they go back to the Planning Commission.

 

 

3. Final Plat Approval for Wintergreen Park Subdivision, SP92-38I.

 

Mayor McLallen indicated the Council packet included positive recommendations from the Consultants.

 

It was then,

 

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Mason

 

To grant Final Plat Approval to Wintergreen Park Subdivision, SP 92-38I subject to the Consultantsí letters of record, especially to the City Foresterís letter of October 11, 1995 which states under Landscaping that the requirement is non-transferrable.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

Councilman Toth asked Mr. Fried about the City Forester being concerned about the transferring of the landscaping requirement to individual property owners, and Mr. Pargoff is asking if the Council would make this requirement non-transferrable to the homeowners.

 

Councilman Toth indicated Mr. Pargoffís memorandum of October 11th indicates, "The plan also meets the numerical interior landscaping requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The transferring of the Landscape requirements by this developer to individual homeowners in another subdivision has caused considerable difficulty to individual homeowners in that subdivision. The City is continuing to hold the bond on that project until the landscaping is correctly installed. Therefore, we would ask Council to make this requirement non-transferrable."

 

Mr. Fried said Councilman Tothís question to him was could they do that, and Councilman Toth said that was going to be part of his motion and Mr. Fried replied obviously he could do that.

 

Mayor McLallen said to Councilman Toth that his motion was to approve this site plan subject to the Consultantsí letters, particularly Mr. Pargoffís memorandum of October 11, 1995.

 

(Voice vote) Motion Carried Unanimously

 

 

4. Proposed Zoning Map Amendment 18.534 - Requested by Marty Feldman - RM-1 to B-3 and PD-1 Districts - Property located south of Grand River and east of Novi Road.

 

Mayor McLallen indicated this was an existing automobile dealership and the parcel in question directly abuts the dealership.

 

Mr. Stanley Tkacz, architect of the AIT Design Group representing the Marty Feldman Chevrolet organization, was present. He said he was appearing before them that evening concerning this project that was first presented to them on June 5th, at which time this body tabled it for consideration of changing of the P-1 Ordinance to meet certain requirements that had been directed to the Council. to the Planning Commission, to the Planning Staff and Legal Consultants.

 

Mr. Tkacz indicated the program presented to you on June 5th was based on their presentation to the Planning Commission during their main meeting at which time approval was given for the project to proceed that was presented with the rezoning of the portion of the southern property of the site to the Feldman organization that is presently vacant and is listed as RM-1 to a B-3 zoning and use.

 

Mr. Tkacz said it was recommended by this Council that rather than the B-3 as approved by the Planning Commission, that the P-1 District be totally rewritten or adjusted to accommodate certain measures that would fit the situation or condition for the program that is presented. He said the intent of this program as presented to the Planning Commission, was to zone the southern part of the property for parking of new vehicles, and there was also a section in which they asked for the extension of approximately 43 feet for the addition to the present facilities. He said those requirements have been passed and approved by the Planning Commission as it related to the zoning book, as well as the Zoning Ordinance.

 

Mr. Tkacz said there were also a couple of restrictions that were added at the time and were incorporated into the documents that had to do with substantial landscaping, substantial screen walling as required, and elements to satisfy the condition. He said by the rewriting of the P-1 District for this particular use as recommended by this Council and suggested, all criteria still remains the same as presented within the plan except for one item.

 

Mr. Tkacz said that item has to do with the rear yard setback. He said The Planning Commission approved a 43 foot extension which gave them approximately 210 feet to the south property line. He said by changing to the P-1, this adds the requirement of an additional 20 feet so that no requirements have to go back to the ZBA seeking approval for no rear yard setback. He said this would still allow for a 190 foot setback from the residential property which is approximately 58.3% greater than the most stringent requirements of their zoning setbacks in all districts. He said so this program to them that evening is to request to have it removed from the table, and for their review and consideration to rezone this section of property to a P-1 use.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

Councilman Schmid said since Mr. Rogers wasnít present, he would ask Mr. Arroyo a question. He said to Mr. Arroyo that Mr. Rogers has recommended the P-1 District for the rear of the Feldman property and has not recommended the B-3. Mr. Arroyo said that was correct and Mr. Rogers has recommended that the entire area that is subject to this petition be rezoned to P-1, and his primary reason being that the P-1 Ordinance as recently amended, would allow for the continuous parking of vehicles that were offered for sale, but would be more restrictive than B-3 and then obviously the number of uses that could be put on that subject property would be severely restricted. He said obviously the number of uses that could be put on that subject property would be severely restricted and hence the potential impact to the adjacent residential area would be lessened.

Councilman Schmid said it was his impression that the P-1 zoning is probably a good move to allow Mr. Feldman to use that property and it has been sitting there for a number of years and no one is using it, and it has been zoned Multiple Family, so he felt it was a good use.

 

Councilman Schmid said his concern continues to be expanding the bump shop back another 46 feet towards the apartments, with rear garage doors open to the rear. He said he had expressed his concern the last time they were before the Council and he continued to have the same concern.

 

Councilman Schmid said they just talked earlier that evening about noise as it abuts residential areas, and he felt it would be a major mistake by this Council to allow an additional bump shop. He said for bump shops only, he thought you had to be in industrial zoning.

 

Mr. Arroyo indicated in this instance, the bump shop would have to be accessory to the dealership and by following the recommendation, which is to maintain P-1 zoning on all of the subject property that was part of this application, that bump shop could not be any closer than it currently would be today, because the B-3 would not be extended and by following the recommendation, it will not be any closer.

 

Councilman Schmid said he approved of that but he thought they had asked before whether there was any chance that they could extend this building and yet have their doors not facing to the rear of the building.

 

Mr. Tkacz said in their June 5th meeting, you asked them very strongly to look at the design layout as it relates to the floor plan in its present condition and they have been able to conclude that they could only expand the building to the south, but they would not put any doors on the south wall, and they have looked at that very hard as a requirement and any doors that would appear for the new addition would be on the east or west walls.

 

Councilman Schmid said so there would be no doors to the south, and Mr. Tkacz said correct. Councilman Schmid said the material the Council received he didnít feel said that. Mr. Tkacz indicated he was only there that night for the rezoning, and not site plan review and that question was not presented as part of the site plan design.

 

Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Friedís opinion. Mr. Fried said if he wanted to make it a condition of the rezoning, he could make it a condition of the rezoning.

Councilman Schmid said he would make a motion.

 

It was,

 

Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Toth

 

To allow the RM-1 to be changed to P-1 District, also the extension of B-3 an additional 63 feet, and subject to the condition that there be no rear doors facing south on the building extension.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

Councilman Toth said to Mr. Arroyo that this is a rather large parcel and a large parking lot and perhaps he has a tendency to look too far in the future, but suppose Mr. Feldman, due to the auto industry changing and being able to order cars up on a computer rather than visually looking at them, decides to sell this property, what could it be used for other than an auto dealership. He said the size of this is almost like a mini-military base and what could the City get in there with the present zoning and would they be talking about another shopping center.

 

Mr. Arroyo explained with an existing B-3 zoning, he could give him a quick overview. He said first of all, anything that is allowed in B-1 and B-2 would be permitted within B-3, such as an enclosed auto wash, a bus passenger station, new and used car sales and showroom, any uses that are similar, and then for special land uses, you have outdoor spaces for vehicle and recreational vehicle sales, a motel, a business with a drive-in character or open store front, a veterinary hospital or clinic, a retail plant nursery, lawn furniture, playground equipment or garden supply dealer. He said those were the potential uses within B-3 and it was the most permissive of the commercial districts and therefore the most intensive.

 

Councilman Mitzel asked Councilman Schmid about the condition, and he believed the condition was due to the apartments to the south, and what about the apartments to the west and he believed there were apartments to the west and he wanted to clarify his intent.

 

Mr. Tkacz said any doors that would appear on the west are into the commercial section and they do not go back into the apartment area.

 

Mayor McLallen said the motion is to grant the request for rezoning from RM-1 to PD-1 and B-3 with the requirement that any doors on the proposed building only open to the east and to the west and not the south. Councilman Mitzel said the depth of the B-3 was 63 feet and it was stated yes.

 

(Voice vote) (5) Yeas

(1) Nay-Mason

(1) Absent-Pope

 

MOTION CARRIED

 

 

4A. Revisit Issue of the North Novi Park - Request Proposal for the Parks & Recreation Commission to award a contract for the design and master planning of the Park property north of 12 Mile Road.

 

It was then,

 

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel

 

To revisit the Item of North Novi Park.

 

(Voice vote) Motion Carried Unanimously

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

Councilman Toth said the reason he brought this up was the fact that while he had some reservations about the golf course, he did think the rest of the property should be studied and looked at and considered. He believed at this time, that they should authorize the parks and recreation department to go with the lowest bidder on the development of this particular property, excluding the golf course, and he would recommend that they would go along with having a public hearing with regards to the golf course and seek public input before they do anything in that particular area.

 

Councilman Toth said he had basically two concerns and one concern was that the golf course was never proposed in the initial bond issue for the acquisition of the park property. He said second of all, the golf course would take a significant amount of land somewhere on the order of 150 -160 acres, so before they proceed in that direction, he felt it would be well for them to have a public hearing or the Parks & Rec Commission have a public hearing and receive all the public input on this and be aware of the fact that they were considering this item before they even expend any monies on studying possible locations of the golf course.

 

Councilman Toth said furthermore, he had a real concern that these meetings are not televised and he would like to see the Parks & Rec meetings be televised as they are treating some sensitive issues and there are people who have called him and have been concerned with the fact that they canít see this on television, and he believed their meetings, especially the public hearings should be televised because they were dealing with an awful lot of taxpayersí money and they were dealing with the future of parklands and he felt that was a serious consideration, so he was prepared to make a motion after the other members of Council have stated their opinions.

 

It was then,

 

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Mason

 

To authorize the Parks & Recreation Commission to go with the lowest bidder or development of the North Novi Park property excluding any activity with regards to a golf course and that a public hearing be set and established to review the idea of a golf course, secure public input, and return that data back to the City Council.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

Councilman Crawford still felt they did a disservice to the Parks and Recreation Commission in their whole process by not approving what was before them a few weeks ago. He said in that process would be to award the bid to the qualified bidder that could provide a plan for the park as a whole and the park with a golf course in it, and he still felt that was important information to gather. He said part of that process would be a public hearing after that information is gathered and he would offer that they would have a much more intelligent and well-presented public hearing and could answer many questions if all of that information was available on both of those alternatives including a golf course.

 

Councilman Crawford said it was a rather obvious controversial issue, but he felt they needed all the facts present. He felt to have a public hearing on that issue before the facts are available, is not the proper way to go so as much as he wanted the area master planned, he felt it was important to consider all options as they have advertised in the past, and as Council is well aware, they were to explore all options which would include a golf course, so he wouldnít vote for that because it was too limited and he felt they need to go as it was originally presented.

 

Councilman Mitzel said he had a question as to whether the motion was in order because the request for proposals that was sent out included that they would develop two plans, and he believed the prices were based on two plans, and now they were talking about only one plan and his question would be whether they would now be following the original request for proposals or if they would have to go out for a new request.

 

Mr. Fried said obviously the bid could not be awarded based upon this new motion because the original bid was on the two plans.

 

Councilman Mitzel said then the only appropriate motion at this time would be to direct the City Administration to prepare a new request for proposals, meeting the criteria of Councilman Toth if that was the direction that this motion were to pursue.

 

Mr. Fried said if this motion was adopted by the Council, then his proposed motion would go into effect, and they would have to have that motion. Councilman Mitzel said they would have to go that route as opposed to awarding the bid right now and Mr. Fried said correct.

 

Councilman Toth said if the two prices were separate in the proposal, they could go with it, and Mr. Fried said he would have to look at the bid proposal.

 

Mayor McLallen asked Mr. Davis to come forward and clarify those points for the Council and reiterate whose bid contained what.

 

Mr. Davis said based on what Councilman Toth had put forward in the form of that motion, based on how they worded the RFPís, he would agree with Mr. Fried that it wouldnít be appropriate for them to award based on that. He said when they bid the document out, they bid it as a package that included two plans and one with a park design that included the golf course and one without.

 

Mr. Davis said if they award it based on what Councilman Toth has indicated that night, they would be doing themselves a disservice because they could reject those bids and go back out and if it was just a recreational site plan they wanted without the golf course and have a substantially lower price than the low price that has already been submitted by Gold Associates in the amount of $10,400, he would even see a lower price.

 

Mr. Davis indicated the golf course component was a part of that $10,400, so if that was the direction to eliminate the golf course, which he strongly discouraged the Council from doing, he would further go on to recommend just the rejection of the bids and redo the RFP, just to plan it from a recreational site planning without the golf course option.

 

Mr. Davis said he would re-emphasize that is not the recommendation he would recommend to them.

 

Mayor McLallen said if she understood him correctly, they could not actually award the bid per the motion and Mr. Davis said based on how the RFP was read, it was his opinion no they could not, and he felt if Mr. Fried had a chance to look at it he would concur with that.

 

Mayor McLallen asked Councilman Toth to restate a motion.

 

Mr. Kriewall clarified Councilman Tothís motion which was for the low bidder and Parks & Rec did not recommend the low bidder and Mr. Davis said that was correct.

 

Councilman Toth said he would revise his motion. He said basically the low bidder was excluded because of the golf course aspect.

 

It was,

 

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

 

That Council return this to the Parks & Recreation Department and Parks & Recreation Commission to go out and seek bids for just a master plan for the property in the North Nevi Parkland area without the golf course design included and furthermore, that they set a public hearing and seek public input with regards to a possible golf course and return this data back to City Council for further action.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

Mayor McLallen said as a point of order, there was a supported motion on the floor and did Councilman Toth withdraw his motion by restating it, and Mr. Fried replied with consent of the seconder, he could withdraw his motion and substitute this one and Councilman Toth said his motion was withdrawn.

 

Mayor McLallen said the current motion was to direct the Parks & Recreation Department to seek bids to master plan the City-owned park property in the North 12 Mile area without a golf course and to rewrite the RFPís and come back with that on it. He said also to set a public hearing for public input on the golf course issue.

 

Councilman Schmid said Councilman Toth has a unique way of forgetting and then remembering things. He said number one, when this bonding issue was passed, there was discussions of golf courses and there was no discussion of ice arenas, which they were already proposing for that land, which he supported. He said the issue, which Councilman Crawford put it rather well, all this was doing was looking at the land and seeing if the golf course would fit on this land without great damage to the environment, to the land itself, and whether it would be a good concept. He said if at that time it comes back that it is determined, based on the plan, that it was a good concept and if Councilman Toth would like to go to the public hearing and generate probably several thousand golfers in this community to come forward, they could do that.

 

Councilman Schmid said regarding the golf course, Mr. Shaw made an excellent presentation and there has been a lot of rhetoric on golf courses, whether or not they pay for themselves and it was an absolute fact that contrary to what was said that evening, golf courses pay for themselves if they are run properly. He said in fact, they were money generators and this City has for years been trying to come up with some ideas for some money generating for the Parks & Rec Department and presently, everything that goes on in Parks & Rec, either has to be subsidized by the citizens themselves or has to be subsidized by all the taxpayers. He said golf courses can generate literally thousands of dollars, and an estimate of a couple hundred thousand dollars per year is not outlandish, in fact, it could go higher than that, once the course is paid off, so it was a money-generator.

 

Councilman Schmid said additionally, every major City that he knows of in Michigan or in any other community, has municipal golf courses and they have them for two purposes, and not just necessary to generate money, although that is an excellent side-benefit, but the reason they have them was they could allow for rates that were cheaper than the public courses for the citizens of those communities and they were designed to do that. He said if a citizen comes in from outside the community, they normally pay a different rate than the citizens of Novi and they provide excellent rates for senior citizens who play golf. He said someone mentioned that a person could play golf from ages 4-5 to 90.

 

Councilman Schmid said they provide excellent location for the high school teams, practice and play tournaments and right now the City of Novi has a difficult time in finding a course and some will dispute that, but he knows that they do.

 

Councilman Schmid said the other argument against the City-owned golf course is that it goes against private businesses and that is true in many instances, but golf courses are unique in fact, as he stated the other night at a meeting that was not televised, one of the owners of the Links of Novi golf Course encourages the City of Novi to build a golf course, and someone said there were three golf courses in the City of Novi, and there was one over in Maples, which is a 9-hole golf course and if anyone knows anything about golf courses, they know that course would not even support that subdivision, let alone anyone else in the community.

 

Councilman Schmid said there was also an 18-hole course over at the hospital that is not going to be there five years from now because the hospital is going to take over that space and continue to build their facility, so that golf course is gone, so they were down to a 9-hole golf course in the City of Novi, with the exception of Links of Novi, which is an excellent course and it was an expensive golf course and they could ask the senior citizens and ask some of the people who play that course how expensive it is, and they were competitive, but that is the price they could get and they were paying heavy taxes and paying heavy land costs and heavy construction costs, so they have to charge. He said all private courses have to charge substantial monies to make it pay, whereby, a municipal course gets some breaks in some of those areas and they could give that back to the citizens.

 

Councilman Schmid said Livonia has at least four golf courses and Southfield has four to five and Farmington Hills also has golf courses, but he didnít think Wixom has any, although they have a lot of industry. He stated the major cities, which Novi was going to be a major city and a quality community, have golf courses which are a benefit to the community and there were no taxes to them.

 

Councilman Schmid said the citizens will not have to vote on a tax issue and it will probably be sold as a revenue bond type funding whereby the revenues from the golf course will pay it off. He felt this Council would be making a major mistake if at least they donít look at this property and see if they could put an 18 hole golf course on it without causing great harm to the environment or to the land and then if it comes back that it is possible and if Councilman Toth wants to have a public hearing, he suspected they could have a public hearing and there was no doubt in his mind, if they have a public hearing, this room would not be big enough in support of a golf course, so he hoped this Council would generate four votes to go ahead with the original plan to look at this whole site.

 

Councilman Schmid said there has been a golf course planned in this City since the 1970's right on this property here and he hoped the Council would move to go ahead with the original plan to study this area and come up with all the alternatives, whatever they may be.

 

Councilwoman Mason said she wanted to address Councilman Schmidís right to have his golf course for himself. He said they did not vote in 9.9 million dollars worth of bonds to do a golf course and there are members of this Council that hide in the activities room just like they did last Monday, to pump and trump and get what they want for themselves. She said now they voted in 9.9 million dollars to put soccer fields in, to put in ballfields, and to do things for the children. She indicated she was very upset with Mr. Davis too.

 

Councilwoman Mason said she agreed with Councilman Toth that they did not do this for a golf course, and they did not do it so Councilman Schmid could golf and have it more reasonable, so letís get on with what they were suppose to be doing and this happens every time and they were not worried about it, but every time they were afraid, they sneak back to the activities room and it doesnít get telecast.

 

Mayor McLallen asked the Members to keep their remarks to the motion.

 

Councilwoman Mason said it was all right for Councilman Schmid to sit there and trump for his own golf course, but then she was telling her to stick to the issues. She then called the question.

 

Councilman Schmid commented he has heard this twice now that this golf course is going to be his golf course just for his use. He said he spends in excess of $500 a month to belong to a private club so he didnít need the City of Neviís golf course, and it is good for the community, and that is why he is supporting it and that is the only reason and for Councilwoman Mason to suggest he was trying to build it because he wanted to pay a lower rate, its absolutely as ludicrous as some of the other comments made that evening.

 

Mayor McLallen said there was a motion to authorize the Parks & Rec Department to go out for a new bid proposal which would exclude the exploration of a golf course and bring the RFP back to this Council, and to also to set a public hearing on the issue of a golf course.

(Voice vote) (3) Yeas - Toth, Mason, Mitzel

(3) Nays - Crawford, Schmid, McLallen

(1) Absent-Pope

 

MOTION FAILED - TIE VOTE.

 

Councilman Crawford said he would make a motion however he was confident as to how the vote was going to fall, but he would make a motion.

 

It was,

 

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

 

To approve Ferrand and Associates to provide Council a plan for a park in general and a park with a golf course plan for general uses and parking including a golf course use.

 

(Voice vote) (3) Yeas - Crawford, Schmid, McLallen

(3) Nays - Mason, Mitzel, Toth

(1) Absent - Pope

 

MOTION FAILED - TIE VOTE

 

 

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

 

Mr. Nick Wagner of 41300 Beacon Road, Novi, was present. He indicated he was not running for office and not campaigning for anyone, just a taxpayer. He said earlier that evening, they heard two people encourage the council to proceed with the project of acquiring the Fuerst Sisters Farm, and he has spoken here before in opposition to that and he would like to do it again.

 

Mr. Wagner said he really didnít believe is a grounds-swell of people in the community that were interested in buying that property and operating it as a historical site. These ladies had mentioned that they had a petition with 1200 signatures on it and he felt many of those signatures were from school kids and some of them signed the petitions twice and he didnít think they were actually from the taxpayers of this community.

 

Mr. Wagner said if it is the pleasure of the Council to go ahead and proceed with this, then at the next meeting someone on the Council specifically spell out where they would get the money to buy the property, renovate the property and then operate it as an ongoing project and where is that money coming from and what city department is going to be charged with the responsibility of maintaining it.

 

Mr. Wagner said he has heard proposals from Preservation Novi about using a portion of the Parks & Rec bond money to acquire the property in a trade with the school district, and there has been a lot of discussion here that evening about what was said at the public hearing relative to that bond issue, and he didnít think there was ever one word mentioned about using that money in this manner to acquire property like that. He knows these ladies have talked about different ways the property could be used to generate funds so that it pays for itself. One of the proposals was to possibly renting the renovated farmhouse to the Novi Chamber of Commerce and he asked did that put the City in the position of competing with local developers that develop business rental property and are you subsidizing your efforts by a non-taxable piece of property that is not on the tax rolls.

 

Mr. Wagner said he didnít feel that was a thing the City should get involved with. One last thing, he understood this Council needs five votes in order to acquire property and does that apply if you were going to trade land that you purchased with that bond money to acquire the land from the school district and did it still need five votes in order to make that transfer.

 

Mr. Fried explained to acquire any property it requires five votes.

 

THE COUNCIL TOOK A BREAK AT THIS TIME

 

 

MATTERS FOR COUNCIL ACTION - PART II

 

5. Schedule Special Joint City Council/School Board Meeting.

 

Mayor McLallen indicated the proposed date is November 13th and November 13th is a regularly scheduled City Council meeting night. She asked for comments or a motion.

 

Councilman Toth said looking at the Agenda items, Item #3 says more commercial development in Novi. He said as a supporter of the Master Plan, he didnít think they want to support any more commercial anywhere else in the City and perhaps Item #3 should be something more appropriate instead of promoting commercial development. He felt the City has enough commercial development and enough property that is zoned for commercial without adding some additional rezoning.

 

Mayor McLallen said perhaps better language there would be to promote an expansion of the tax base based on the existing Master Plan.

 

Councilman Mitzel felt the discussion has to be more than just this proposed Joint City Council School Board meeting because he was just talking with the City Clerk, and the currently scheduled regular meetings for the next month are November 6th which is the day before the election and November 20th. He said the City Charter requires that they have a regular meeting the Monday after the election, which is November 13th so if they keep to that already scheduled, they would end up having three regular meetings three weeks in a row.

 

Councilman Mitzel said one possibility would be to move November 6th or the 13th and then another possibility would be to keep all three. He said the other issue is they have never reached a consensus or adopted all the rules that they had talked about, but at one point, they had talked that the Monday after the election, at that regular meeting, where the new Council was sworn in, that would be an ideal meeting for an organizational type meeting and they had talked about setting aside that Monday as an organizational meeting for the new Council.

 

Councilman Mitzel said he would suggest that they do schedule a regular meeting for the 13th which is required by City Charter, and that the first part of that meeting be an organizational meeting for the new Council, and then the last half of the meeting could be a joint meeting with the School Board. He would make a motion.

 

It was,

 

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

 

To schedule a Regular City Council meeting on Monday, November 13, 1995, the first portion to be an organizational meeting for the new Council Members and then the second portion to be a Joint Meeting with the School Board.

 

Councilman Mitzel indicated his only question is the time and he didnít know if they were required to have a Regular Meeting at 8:00 and he didnít recall that being in the Charter and Ms. Bartholomew indicated that a time was not listed.

Councilman Mitzel said they could start at 7:00 and then have an hour and a half for the organizational portion, which would be about 8:30 and then at 8:30 meet with the School Board. Councilman Toth said all meetings were established at 8:00 and this was done a number of years ago unless they specify another time.

 

Councilman Mitzel said he was asking if it was in the Charter and he said he would look.

 

Councilwoman Mason then asked Councilman Mitzel if he was going to cancel the 6th or the 20th and Councilman Mitzel said that wasnít part of the motion, but they could make it part of the motion.

 

It was,

 

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

 

That the Regular Meeting for November 6th be moved to November 13th, the first part of it to be an organizational meeting, and the second part being joint with the School Board, starting at 7:00 P.M.

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

Mr. Kriewall stated he felt they couldnít wait until November 13th to have another meeting and he felt they needed to have one on November 6th.

 

Mayor McLallen asked if there were pressing issues for Council and Mr. Kriewall indicated there were matters they have already scheduled for that meeting, such as projects, developments, and he felt it was too long a time to go without a Council meeting.

 

Councilman Crawford said Mr. Kriewall has stated what he was going to say that if they limit the Agenda on the November 13th to only those two issues, then they donít have a meeting to conduct other business probably for a month, and he didnít know when their meeting was in October, but then they go all the way to November, so they probably need all three of those meetings.

 

Mr. Kriewall said there were two or three items that he knows he has scheduled for that meeting, such as a lot split, a sewer proposal, and there were a couple of other projects lined up for that night.

 

Ms. Bartholomew said there was another item, but she couldnít think of it, but there were several things that have come in that reports were on the way for.

 

Councilman Toth said one, the meetings on November 6th and November 20th were advertised as Regular business meeting and he for one, was not in favor of changing a Regular business meeting to accommodate the School Board for a Special Meeting and that technically is a Special Meeting when they were going to hold it with the School Board, and it was not a meeting at which you are going to conduct regular business, so they were still obligated by the Charter to hold two business meetings.

 

Councilman Toth said this was a Special Meeting, so this has to be scheduled at some other time or following a regular business meeting, so he couldnít support that motion of changing it.

 

Councilman Mitzel said technically then the regular meeting would be the part of the organizational and then it would be immediately followed by a Special Meeting with the School Board. Councilman Toth said it was not and Councilman Mitzel said by City Charter they must have a regular meeting November 13th so their choices were to either have three regular meetings next month or two and they could follow the November 13th regular meeting with a Special Joint Meeting with the School Board and that was basically the intent of his motion.

 

Councilman Mitzel said ideally if they would have looked ahead on their calendar, they would have made the October meetings, the October 16th and the October 23rd, and that way there would have been a smaller gap between the last meeting in October and the first one in November. He said if his motion fails, then he would suggest they then have three Regular Meetings, three Mondays in a row and the one on November 13th be followed with a Special Meeting with the School Board.

 

Mayor McLallen said the motion was to hold the Regular Meeting of the City Council on November 13th followed by a Special Joint Meeting with the School Board.

 

Member Mitzel said he was basically deleting the November 6th so there would only be two Regular City Council meetings for the month of November.

 

Councilman Schmid asked if there were going to be two Agenda meetings, one to introduce the new Members and then the School Board portion of the meeting and the Mayor indicated that was correct.

 

Councilman Mitzel said as Councilman Toth pointed out, technically they have to have a Regular Meeting and then a Special Meeting.

 

Councilman Schmid said his only concern was knowing this Council and even probably a new Council, they were not going to get done with the School Board and it would take awhile, especially when getting into the elements of City business, about the commercial, etc.

 

Mayor McLallen said they could always take a portion of Member Mitzel Ďs recommendation which is to have the meeting on November 13th be for organizational business and have normal business on November 20th and then come up with an entirely new date for the School Board. She said the School Board had just requested that they have a meeting soon and they had put it in writing.

 

Mr. Kriewall pointed out for even claims and accounts, he didnít think they could go much past November 6th.

 

Councilwoman Mason said she believed they could all come in and sign on the claims and accounts and wasnít that true and in the four years she has been here, they have done that.

 

Councilwoman Mason said she was interested to know what is so important for November 6th.

 

(Voice vote) (3) Yeas - Mason, Mitzel, McLallen

(3) Nays - Crawford, Schmid, Toth

(1) Absent - Pope

 

MOTION FAILED - LACK OF CONSENSUS

 

It was,

 

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

 

To schedule a Regular Meeting on November 13, 1995 starting at 7:00 for Council organization, and a Special Meeting on the same night at 8:30 for a Joint Meeting with the School Board.

 

(Voice vote) Motion Carried Unanimously

 

Councilman Mitzel asked that the City clerk so advertise because that would be a Regular Meeting in addition to their Calendar and he felt they have to advertise in the paper.

 

6. Schedule Executive Session for Property Acquisition - Ice Arena.

 

Mr. Kriewall said this would be following the Joint Meeting with the School Board. Mayor McLallen said so the date he was proposing for that is November 13, 1995.

 

It was,

 

Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

 

To schedule an Executive Session for property acquisition - Ice Arena - on November 13, 1995.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Councilman Mitzel said at their last meeting two weeks ago, it had been asked that they have this as soon as possible and he was wondering why they were not doing it on November 6th or even tonight.

 

Mr. Kriewall felt they could do it on November 6th.

 

Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Fried if the proposed site was on City parkland on Twelve Mile, which the City already owned, how is this Executive Session to be worded because he thought Mr. Fried had wanted to talk about the contract language.

 

Mr. Fried said that is correct and that will be in regard to his opinion, and Councilman Mitzel asked if it would be a written opinion, and Mr. Fried said yes and it wouldnít be in regard to acquisition of property and it would be regarding attorneyís opinion.

 

Mayor McLallen said so the request here is inaccurate and they were not scheduling a session for acquisition, but it was for legal opinion.

 

Mayor McLallen asked if the maker of the motion would note that, that the Special Meeting is for an attorneyís opinion.

 

Councilman Toth said he would not support the motion and he would prefer to see that type of discussion take place early in the evening, and they were already starting the November 13th meeting at 7:00 P.,M. and he would prefer to see an Executive Session at 7:00 P.M. on November 6th before the Regular Meeting at 8:00 P.M.

 

Mayor McLallen asked for further discussion on the motion on floor.

 

Councilman Schmid said he would remove his motion for November 13th and would make the motion for November 6th at 7:00 P.M.

 

It was,

 

Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

 

To schedule the Executive Session to hear the Attorneyís opinion at 7:00 P.M. on November 6, 1995 prior to a regularly scheduled City Council meeting.

 

(Voice vote) Motion Carried Unanimously

 

 

7. Claims and Accounts - Warrant No. 449.

 

It was,

 

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

 

To approve Warrant No. 449.

 

(Voice vote) (5) Yeas

(1) Nay-Toth

(1) Absent - Pope

 

 

MOTION CARRIED.

 

 

8. Request for Fireworks Permit on November 3, 1995.

 

Mr. Kriewall said a request was being brought forward by Rhonda Gage from the Michiganís Fifties Festival and apparently, the Michigan Association of Affairs and Exhibitors are holding their State Convention at the Nevi Hilton and some of the vendors are proposing to put on a Fire works display for this event to donate the display, in which case they would have to bring in a pyrotechnic company to Novi and put on a fireworks display.

 

Mr. Kriewall said they were proposing that the fireworks display be set off on the vacant development property west of Orchard Hill Place and West of the Novi Hilton and that site has recently been cleared for a new subdivision in that area. He said the name of the subdivision was Turnberry. He said that Mr.Wisne has indicated that he has no problem with a fireworks display on the site for this event and he would expect to be indemnified by the company that puts on the display, but he is going to fax the city clerk a letter of permission to put the display on in that location. He said he has discussed this with the fire Chief and he has no objections to that particular site and he has laid out a few conditions that would have to be met that the fire Department would have to be present throughout the event.

The weather, etc.

 

Mr. Kriewall said they would have to comply with our Ordinance in terms of assurance and various approvals. Since we do not know who the company might be at this time, and quite frankly, this might not materialize. He said the reason it was added at the last minute is that they were not aware that council was not meeting until November 6 so we had to add it this evening, but we are looking for approval by City Council to hold this event subject to the pyrotechnic company complying with all of our city rules and regulations, posting proper assurance and meeting with the fire chief and working out the details of this particular event.

 

It was,

 

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Toth

 

To approve the request for fireworks subject to the pyrotechnist meeting all of the requirements of the ordinances, meeting with the fire chief, and working out all of the details.

 

(Voice vote) (5) Yeas (1) Nay - Mason

 

MOTION CARRIED

 

 

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

 

Ms. Mutch said just revisiting the earlier comment made, she had a question. She asked if the Council indeed plans to meet with the School Board and if the Feurst property is part of the Agenda, she would expect to have some discussion on what the Agenda would be.

 

Ms. Mutch said what she needed to know to take back to Preservation Novi and to anyone else in the community that is interested, is what else does Council need from Preservation Novi to move in the direction that has been recommended, which is to enter into some sort of discussion about negotiating with the School Board because the Council hasnít publicly as a group said that they either favor doing that or not doing that.

 

Ms. Mutch said so what Preservation Novi was looking at is the City Council going into a meeting with the School Board on November 13th, with no other opportunity for this community to answer any questions that Council might have as to whether or not they should proceed toward acquiring that property. She said the Council hasnít indicated they donít want to, but they havenít committed to doing it either. She said their interest was in seeing that the Council has all the information they need to move in the direction they would like to see it go.

 

Ms. Mutch said she knows the Council doesnít usually respond to Audience Participation, but she didnít know how else to do this. She would say that the one disappointment to Preservation Novi as an organization being a community group of volunteers, is that every time there has been a meeting, Preservation Novi has had no direct official communication as to where that meeting is or what time it is, but Preservation Novi has been expected to be there to make the presentation. She said Preservation Novi has found out indirectly through the courtesy of individual Council members.

 

Ms. Mutch said she felt Preservation Novi has spent over $5,000 for professional studies so that the Council could have the information to make a decision on and Preservation Novi needs to know when these meetings are and what they can do to help. She said Preservation Novi wants to help, but they donít know what else to do and sitting here and looking at November 13th with nothing in between, was a bit scary.

 

Mayor McLallen indicated one thing that the Council could do is request that this be put on the Agenda of November 6th, if there is a meeting, and if the Council chooses to have a discussion of that issue or not.

 

Councilman Schmid felt it was a good idea to put it on November 6th so the Committee can get ready. He felt Ms. Mutch knows full well and has attended all the meetings. He felt the majority of Council has some inclination to acquire the property, however, she sat at those meetings and heard at those meetings and you heard exactly what went on and part of us said that when you buy a property, those buildings have to be immediately rehabilitated at least to some degree, and you brought back the report that says the house would take well over in excess of 100,000, or some figure, and the bonds were quite expensive to rehabilitate and at no time has your committee or anyone come forward with any idea.

 

Councilman Schmid said he talked to their president the other day and he suggested to him that he should get some ideas because we are no further ahead today than we were three months ago as far as how we are going to pay to rehabilitate these buildings and if you buy them and if someone goes there and gets badly injured you are in big trouble or we are in big trouble, so we canít and he was talking about himself, buy the buildings and not have any suggestions or ways or means to repair them, at least so they are safe and not even mentioned the fact that they are useable. He felt it was very difficult.

 

Mayor McLallen said if it was the consensus of the council, we will have this put on the agenda for the sixth for discussion item and at that time if members of Preservation Novi would respond to the issues and any other issues that Councilman Toth brought up, is it the consensus of Council to put this on November 6th and it was.

 

Mayor McLallen closed the Audience Participation.

 

 

COMMITTEE REPORTS

 

Councilman Toth said he had two reports. He said he did attend the MSPO Conference up north in Bellaire. He said there were several copies of the aerial view of the City of Novi that was used by MSPO and he talked to Mr. Mark Wykoff about that. He said it was a good conference and the weather was nice and colors were beautiful.

 

Councilman Toth said the other report he had was with regard to the StormWater Committee Minutes, and those were provided by the Chairman of the Committee and he was curious why they didnít get the nine pages of Minutes and why they received the abbreviated Minutes.

 

Councilman Mitzel explained when referring to the abbreviated Minutes, they were actually a summary of the meeting that Council directed all Boards and Commissions and Committees to provide them and which he didnít think they have been receiving for most of them and that was written by the Chair. He said the full Minutes were not approved as yet and they wouldnít be approved until the next meeting and after they are approved, they are submitted in the Council packet as approved Minutes, but they had the meeting summary within the two weeks time-frame that the Council asked for and that was the process that occurred there.

 

Councilman Toth asked where were the last Minutes then and Councilman Mitzel said the last minutes from June were in the packet of October 2, 1995 and they had approved them at the September 27, 1995 meeting and they were in the following weekís packet and then the meeting summary from September 27, 1995 was in this weekís packet..

 

There were no other committee Reports.

 

 

MAYOR AND COUNCIL ISSUES

 

Mayor McLallen said Councilman Toth moved to an action item.

 

 

MANAGERíS REPORT

 

Mr. Kriewall pointed out that RRRASOC received a major award from the National Council for public and private partnerships and they would be given that award in Chicago this week, and they were one of two recipients nation-wide from 25 that the city ever nominated for this kind of an effort. He said the approach to having Waste Management finance the facility through the fee that they collect with turning it over to the authority eventually, was very unique and it received some national attention.

 

Councilman Mitzel asked concerning the RRRASOC in the Monthly Report that he submitted, he noticed that the some of the items in the Recycling Center were listed as RRRASOC now as opposed to tonnage. He thought it was newspapers and plastic or some other items that they used to keep tabs of the total, and also received funds if the market was positive, or we would pay if the market was negative and he was just curious if the market was positive, if they were getting funds from RRRASOC for them picking it up or how that was working because there was concern in the Budget about the Recycling Center and this seems to be a new development. Mr. Kriewall said he would look into this matter.

 

Councilman Mitzel said back in the winter, we had asked the City Administration to look into the possibility of either vacating Iva Street or making a permanent barricade, and at the time it was postponed, and the City Administration came back to Council and said letís see what happens with the Veterinary Clinic and then come back. He said the foundation for the Veterinary Clinic is in place and it would probably be the time to address the fate of that street. Mr. Kriewall said he would bring it back. There were no other issues for the City Manager.

 

 

ATTORNEYíS REPORT

 

Mayor McLallen indicated the City Attorney had a request. Mr. Fried indicated he had a resolution that he had distributed to the Council which he would ask the Council to adopt that evening, and the basis for this resolution is several years ago, the City was involved in litigation with Paragon Properties and there was a substantial judgement entered against the City for the taking of the Paragon Properties, and that was appealed to the court of appeals and the court of appeals reversed that case and Paragon then filed an application to leave to the Michigan Supreme Court and at first, the Michigan Supreme Court denied that application for leave to appeal, then there was a brief submitted by the real estate section of the Michigan Bar to the Michigan Supreme Court, asking that leave be granted in this case and the reason the Michigan Bar asked that leave be granted was because they were concerned about the requirements for the constitutional taking of property that was set forth in the Paragon Case.

 

Mr. Fried said he then called a gentleman at the Michigan Municipal League because this is a case that has an interest by all municipalities as to the question of taking property, and he thought the Michigan Municipal League should file a brief on this case and Mr. Fried said he was told that in order to get the league to file on the case, the resolution must be adopted by the City requesting that, and he was asking the Council to adopt this resolution tonight. He said it was a simple resolution just asking the Michigan Municipal League to lend whatever aid it can in regards to this ligation. He said if you want, he would go into the substance of litigation, but it was a technical question on what has to be done by a private property owner before the courts will consider that there is a taking of this property in an unconstitutional method.

 

It was then,

 

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

 

To approve the following Resolution for MML.

 

 

WHEREAS, The City of Novi is currently involved in the following described litigation or controversy: PARAGON PROPERTIES COMPANY vs CITY OF NOVI, 206 Mich App 74 (1994). PARAGONís Application for Leave to Appeal was granted by the Michigan Supreme Court on September 20, 1995. The litigation involves the finality requirement in the unconstitutional taking of property; and

 

WHEREAS, The City of Novi believes that the issues involved in such litigation or controversy are such that the Michigan Municipal League Legal Defense Fund may wish to provide supportive aid in such litigation or controversy; and

 

 

WHEREAS, The City of Novi desires to receive the assistance of the Michigan Municipal League Legal Dense Fund in such matter.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Novi hereby authorizes the

appropriate municipal officials to request supportive aid from the Michigan Municipal League Legal Defense Fund in the litigation or controversy described above. It is agreed that acceptance of such support shall constitute an agreement by requesting municipality to abide by any conditions place upon the supportive aid offered by said Fund.

DISCUSSION

 

Councilman Mitzel asked if there was a fee that was associated with this and Mr. Fried said no, the league pays the fee.

 

(Voice vote) Motion Carried Unanimously

 

CONSENT AGENDA

 

Mayor McLallen said there was an item on the Consent Agenda that was pulled by Councilman Toth.

 

1. Approve Minutes of Regular Meeting of September 25, 1995.

 

Councilman Toth said he has two sets of Minutes for September 25 and both sets are incomplete if you look at the page numbers.

 

It was then,

 

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

 

To postpone the approval of the Minutes of September 25, 1995 to the next City Council meeting.

 

(Voice vote) Motion Carried Unanimously

 

 

COMMUNICATIONS

 

Councilwoman Mason asked a question about Ms. Kocanís letter that said she had a communication that she thought would be put into Communications so she wanted to clarify. She said she had thought that every time they received correspondence that said Mayor and Council, that it should go into the Communications Section and that they each should get a copy and Mayor McLallen said she has spoken to Ms. Kocan about this at the Agenda Meeting, and because her letter was so important to the discussion of the body, that they moved it into the packet so they would read it with discussion of the 24 Hour and not at the bottom of packet.

 

Councilman Mason felt something that was so important to a situation that was ongoing, could it also be in the packet and also listed under Communications and Mayor McLallen said it could be cross-referenced easily.

 

Councilman Mitzel said he didnít think they have a formally adopted policy on how they list their Communications and they should work on that.

 

Mayor McLallen said Ms. Kocan has been presently heading that issue and she didnít want her letter missed.

 

Councilman Toth said under Communications, Item #5, the letter from Fried, Watson & Bugbee regarding Copyright of City Plans. He said to Mr. Fried that he read both of his letters and he was of the opinion that they should perhaps draft an Ordinance for this and Mr. Fried said they donít need an Ordinance on this as it is the law and they own those plans.

 

Councilman Toth said but he had stated it should be copyrighted and Mr. Fried said he didnít state it should be copyrighted and that was why the matter was presented to him by Councilman Mitzel as to whether that copyright has any relationship to them and the answer is no because we own those plans.

 

 

Councilman Mitzel said at the Ten Mile presentation the plans that were presented at the table had Copy right JCK on them, and that is why he asked Mr. Fried and Mr. Fried had said it doesnít need anything because they were our plans and Member Mitzel said they were working for the City so they were public plans.

 

 

Councilman Toth said he would disagree with that and Mr. Fried asked if he thought they were the engineerís plans and Member Toth said if the copyright goes on , that is a copyright only and Mr. Fried said the copyright might be an illegal copyright and he didnít know really whether it was copyrighted or they just put it on as being copyrighted.

 

Councilman Toth said he copyrights things for companies he works for so it was protection for them even though he was creating it. He said he was just wondering why they donít do the same thing and when anyone creates something for the City of Novi, why it was not copyrighted for the City of Novi.

 

Mr. Fried said they could put that into our agreement . He said the normal procedure is you work for a company and the purpose of your employment is to develop material that is to be copyrighted and if you copy right it, it should be copyrighted in the companyís name.

 

Councilman Toth said he stated that for several reasons, and one is in his daily work he does that and in addition to that, the report he gave them, also states that municipalities should copyright the material and that is a point in there that he felt should be considered and perhaps they should have an Ordinance.

 

Mr. Fried said then the question to him was should they copyright our material and perhaps should it be in an Ordinance form and Mr. Fried indicated he would get back to them on that.

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

There being no further comments, Mayor McLallen stated that the meeting was now adjourned.

 

 

 

______________________________ __________________________________

MAYOR CITY CLERK

 

 

Date approved: _________________