Mayor McLallen called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.

ROLL CALL: Mayor McLallen, Mayor ProTem Crawford, Council Members DeRoche, Kramer, Lorenzo, Mutch, Schmid

Mayor McLallen advised there has been a request to add Consideration of the approval for the renewal proposal to Time Warner for Cable TV Franchise as Item 1.a under Matters for Council Action – Part I

Mayor McLallen advised she would like to add Approval to Circulate a Petition by 4-H to Create a 100^th 4-H Commemorative Anniversary Stamp in the Year 2002 as Item 1 under Mayor and Council Issues

CM-99-02-044: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by DeRoche, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve Agenda as amended

PRESENTATIONS

1. Lou Martin – City’s 30^th Birthday

Mr. Martin invited the public and Council to attend the City’s 30^th Birthday celebration scheduled for Saturday, February 27, 1999 from 1:00 p.m. until 3:00 p.m. at the Novi Civic Center. Mr. Martin added they have created a historic display and refreshments will be served. Mr. Martin continued by stating that five of Novi’s previous mayors will be in attendance and the sixth will appear on video. Mr. Martin reported the members of the 30^th Birthday Committee were Maureen Malone, Hugh Crawford, Ed Kramer, Kathy Mutch and Brenda Evans.

Mr. Martin then ran the video cable presentation that presents a montage of photographs of Novi‘s history from 1969 through 1999.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

1. Establishment of a Downtown Development Authority District along Grand River Avenue between Beck and Meadowbrook

Mayor McLallen advised she has two letters before her. She explained one letter is from Monte Costello who is not in support of the establishment of a Downtown Development Authority District and another from Blair Bowman who is in support of the district.

Bob Melvin – has owned and developed property in Novi for over twenty-five years. In regard to the establishment of a DDA, Mr. Melvin reported he has several clients with property within the district and they all support the DDA. Mr. Melvin understands when a DDA is developed that there are usually some specific projects in mind and he has not yet seen them. Therefore, he would like to see more about the projects they have in mind and how the funds will be used. He also believes this would involve more businesses. Further, Mr. Melvin advised there is a section of I-1 along Taft Road in close proximity of Grand River and he would like to see that piece included in the DDA because he believes there is no question that it will be developed in the future.

Mayor McLallen understands the funds would be a part of the necessary financing to develop the streetscape and develop aesthetic improvements along the Grand River corridor.

John Bernard – on behalf of James Chen, advised they are in support of the development of a DDA. He continued by stating they believe the timing is perfect for an idea of this nature to take place. Mr. Bernard advised they placed an ad in the paper and took a survey of the businesses in the proposed DDA area (approximately 70% of businesses in the proximity of the Main Street area) and the majority favors the development of a DDA.

Jonathan Brateman – on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Brateman advised they are in support of any project that will develop the Grand River corridor in a way that it will be a showcase of the community. He added the Chamber would continue to work with the city to help facilitate this development and attempt to attract new business for Novi.

As a real estate developer, Mr. Brateman also lends his personal support for the development of a DDA in Novi.

Lisa Willard – Chamber of Commerce, advised over the last two years she has been with the Chamber she has seen their Legislative Affairs Committee and Economic Development Committee focus on different issues of great importance. She continued by stating that the Chamber will continue to lend it support to the development of a DDA.

Mayor McLallen asked that all questions regarding the establishment of a DDA be directed to Heidi Hannan in the city’s Planning and Community Development Department.

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION – None

CONSENT AGENDA (Approval/Removals)

Mayor McLallen advised there is a request by staff to remove Item U.

Councilwoman Lorenzo requested that Council remove Items A. 1, N and S.

Councilman Schmid requested that Council remove Item G.

CM-99-02-045: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by DeRoche, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve Consent Agenda as amended

1. Approve Minutes of:

2. Special Meeting of January 30, 1999

3. Regular Meeting of February 1, 1999

4. Special Meeting of February 1, 1999

5. Special Meeting of February 8, 1999

2. Schedule Executive Sessions:

1. Monday, March 1, 1999, at 6:30 P.M. for the purpose of Pending Litigation
2. Monday, March 15, 1999 at 6:30 P.M. for the purpose of Union Negotiations

1. Schedule Special Joint Meeting with EDC on Thursday, February 25, 1999 at 7:00 P.M. prior to City Council Interviews for Boards and Commissions - Cancelled
2. Approve Ordinance No. 99-23.17 – To amend the provisions pertaining to the offense of drawing a check without sufficient funds – II Reading & Final Adoption.
3. Approve Renewal of Arcade License – Mr. B’ s Farm, 24555 Novi Road
4. Approve adoption of Resolution and Agreement of Sale/Offer to Purchase Real Estate from Herbert and Hattie Fisher for the Beck Road Sanitary Sewer Project

H. Approve adoption of Authorizing Resolution and Interagency Agreement between Wayne County and the City of Novi for the Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Project (Novi Septic System and Illicit Discharge Data Development Project).

I. Approval of SCATS Traffic Signal Installation Agreement with the Road Commission for Oakland County for Novi Road/Thirteen Mile Road Intersection (RCOC Project No. 95121).

J. Approval of Right-of-Way License Agreement with Lee and Lisa McKenna for the installation of a brick paver driveway approach at 24440 Mill Stream in the Willowbrook Estates Subdivision.

K. Approval of Final Pay Estimate No. 10 and Final Balancing Change Order No. 3 for the Novi Ice Arena Access Road a/k/a Arena Drive Project.

L. Approval of Final Pay Estimate No. 9 and Final Balancing Change Order No. 5 for the 1997 Bituminous Paving Improvements Program.

M. Approval of Final Pay Estimate No. 4 and Final Balancing Change Order No. 1 for the Nine Mile Road/Beck Road Intersection Improvements project

O. Approval of award for the Munro Creek By-Pass Channel (a/k/a Yorkshire Basin Removal Project) to the low bidder, Ahern Contracting, in the amount of $37,570.50.

P. Approval of adoption of Resolution accepting sanitary sewer easements being granted by Providence Hospital for the Eleven Mile/Wixom Road Sanitary Sewer Extension Project.

Q. Approval of the Thompson Glass Company Relocation Claim and authorization of the $20,000 payment associated with the Crescent Boulevard Extension Project.

R. Approval of adoption of Resolution and acceptance of Water Main Easement from the Novi Group for the construction of the water main along the frontage of Bristol Corners West Nos. 2 & 3.

20. Award bid for Tree Trimming Program and the Tree Removal Program to Professional Tree Service based on unit pricing (Forestry).

U. Award bid for Tree Planting Program, Parts 1,2 & 3, to Michigan Turf, Inc., in the amount of $391,829 and Part 4 to Greenscape Turf, Inc., in the amount of $59,572.00 - Removed

V. Approval of Claims and Accounts:

1. Warrant 536
2. Warrant 537

REMOVALS

A. Approve Minutes of:

1. Regular Meeting of January 25, 1999

G. Approve adoption of Resolution and Agreement of Sale/Offer to Purchase Real Estate from Mary Jane Masters, J.R. Burgess, a/k/a Robert Burgess, Mary C. Bosco, a/k/a Catherine Bosco and Paul A. Bosco, Internal Revenue Service & Michigan Department of Treasury for the Beck Road Sanitary Sewer and the Beck Road/Eleven Mile Road Intersection Improvements Projects.

N. Approval of concept design for the Haggerty District Regional Detention Basin, authorization to prepare preliminary engineering plans and right-of-way/easement documents, as needed, and authorization to continue pursuit of a partnering concept for the basin construction.

S. Approval to reject bids for the Eubank Street Water Main (SAD #149), Austin Drive Water Main Phase I (SAD #151), Austin Drive Water Main Phase II, and Erma Street Improvements; authorization to delete the Austin Drive Water Main Phase II Project; authorization for the City Attorneys to modify contract language to provide for award by division; and authorization to solicit new construction proposals.

Nays: None

MATTERS FOR COUNCIL ACTION – Part I

For the benefit of the public, Councilman Schmid asked Caren Collins of SWOCCC to briefly explain the process involved in the renewal of this contract.

Caren Collins reported the South Western Oakland Cable Commission represents Novi, Farmington and Farmington Hills and the cities passed a resolution last year to institute the formal process in the renewal proceedings. She explained Time Warner’s contract expired in May, 1997 and according to FCC and Cable Act Guidelines, they entered into informal negotiations three years prior to the expiration of the contract.

In the formal process, Ms. Collins reported SWOCC adopted a Staff Report and Request for Renewal Approval on February 9 and are asking all of their cities to approve the document. She noted Farmington’s Council approved the proposal unanimously last week and it is before the City of Farmington Hills this evening.

Ms. Collins advised the proposal includes a model cable ordinance and franchise ordinance. She explained this constitutes all of the community’s cable related needs as ascertained by SWOCC through numerous studies. Ms. Collins continued by stating if this proposal is approved, Time Warner would have sixty days to respond with a proposal that would meet and satisfy the communities needs. Ms. Collins added once they receive Time Warner’s response, under federal guidelines there is four months for the cities to accept or preliminarily deny the renewal with Time Warner Cable.

Councilman Schmid stated his comments are based on discussions with SWOCC and their frustration with Time Warner. He said the contract expired in May 1997 and they have yet to reach an agreement with Time Warner. Based on what he has heard from the Committee, Councilman Schmid understands the committee has compromised and Time Warner has not cooperated in the process. He continued by stating it is very frustrating and he wishes they could bring in competition, but he understands it is difficult because of federal regulations. Although Councilman Schmid will sign the proposal, he does so regretfully because they are still a year or two away from an agreement and Time Warner will still continue to generate millions of dollars of revenue. Further, Councilman Schmid would like to make it clear that this is an issue that cannot be controlled by the City of Novi because Time Warner refuses to negotiate a fair contract and this is the only process the city can follow to force Time Warner to take a position on this matter.

Councilwoman Lorenzo is equally disappointed and enraged with Time Warner that they have had to come to this point. Further, she will be looking for a response from them within the next sixty days and if it is not an appropriate response, she believes it will set the tone for future actions to resolve this matter.

Councilman Kramer believes this action is necessary to bring Time Warner to the table to have them reply meaningfully and begin conversation that will lead to a beneficial agreement. He added he believes there is much work to be done, but if they have a meaningful document it will take them to the next step in this process.

Councilman DeRoche shares the frustration and has bought a satellite dish to have access to cable access not offered by Time Warner. However, added he does have basic cable ($10.50 per month) through Time Warner to get the local and public access channels. He added he understands he is paying the same amount for what is offered by Time Warner in their Tier 1 category and he has one hundred additional channels. Councilman DeRoche also believes they should look at technology in terms of reception and additional channels in addition to cost.

Councilwoman Mutch understands although there are limitations to what a city can do because of federal regulations, she also understands there are measures available to the citizens that would be more effective in the long term to change some of these conditions.

Ms. Collins advised it is important to note that the cities have no jurisdiction over rates or programming in this contract. She continued by stating these are two important aspects to citizens and their comments should be made to the federal government. She explained their representatives in Washington D.C. do have some impact through cable regulation. She advised residents can contact SWOCC at (248) 473-7266 and they are located at 24021 Research Drive - Farmington Hills, Michigan 48335. Ms. Collins advised SWOCC members will be meeting with Representative Knollenberg and Senators Levin and Abraham next week at the National League of Cities. She added they will also meet with Representative Dingle who is very instrumental in addressing communication issues in Washington D.C. She added SWOCC representatives will also present a copy of the RFP and Staff Report to the members so they can see what has been going on with this process.

Councilwoman Mutch believes the impact letters sent to representatives can have are underestimated. She explained one letter can represent forty thousand constituents and therefore, they can have a tremendous impact based on the influence a representative has on committees that will impact legislation. Therefore, Councilwoman Mutch would like to stress the necessity of a timely and vigorous response from the community to their representatives.

Mayor ProTem Crawford agrees with the suggestions made by fellow Council members. He added he is a member of the cable negotiating committee and he is also frustrated. He explained they been unable to come to an agreement informally. He continued by stating a formal process takes more time and money, but it does bring Time Warner to the table and has provided them with more input from staff, citizens, consultants and technical people that they may not have had before. Mayor ProTem Crawford is confident that this is the right direction to take at this time and he encourages swift action on this issue by all parties.

Mayor McLallen believes the most disappointing factor is that Time Warner has been a part of Novi’s community for a long time and they have established themselves in the community as a good corporate citizen. She continued by stating it is disappointing to now find that part of their corporate persona is masking their nonparticipation in this part of their business persona. Mayor McLallen further believes Time Warner benefits financially in this relationship and their disregard to Novi’s citizens is reprehensible to her.

1. Request for approval of final plat for Bristol Corners West #2 Subdivision, SP 95-17T & V, located in Section 4, north and south of South Lake Drive and east and west of West Road, proposed 68 lots on 46.6 acres

Arnold Serlin of Novi Group and the developer of Bristol Corners stated they are asking for approval for Phase 2 of their project and noted Phase 3 will come forward once they produce houses in Phase 2. Mr. Serlin continued by stating he believes they have met all the requirements of the city ordinance and have also met the recommendations made by the city’s consultants and staff, and therefore, they are asking for Council’s approval.

3. Request for approval of Preliminary Site Plan and Special Land Use Permit, for Epoch/Too Chez, SP 98-45A, subject to ZBA variances for side yard parking setbacks and number of parking spaces, located in Section 15, on the west side of Sheraton Drive near the northwest corner of the I-96/Novi Road Interchange

Richard Klees of Christian Brothers Construction & Maintenance advised they are before Council tonight requesting approval of their preliminary site plan. Mr. Klees added Kevin Aspinall of Epoch Enterprises is also present.

Mayor McLallen noted the Planning Commission is recommending approval subject to ZBA approval and the consultants are not recommending approval because of the need for these variances. The Mayor explained the issue is about existing buildings and the proposed secondary building is a block building located in the north part of the site. She added she understands the building is for catering and bakery services, and not intended for retail sales. Mr. Klees agreed.

Councilman Schmid asked whether patrons will visit the site to place their catering orders? Mr. Aspinall replied the public will be able to place their off site catering orders at the site.

Councilman Schmid understands that the building is constructed of cement block. Mr. Klees agreed and added that it will be painted to match the facade of the restaurant

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked whether the applicant has gone before the ZBA? Mr. Klees replied they are scheduled to appear before the ZBA on March 2, 1999.

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked whether the parking issue has been resolved? Mr. Arroyo replied this is an unusual use and is not specifically addressed in the ordinance. He explained the applicant has treated the catering component like an industrial use and is standard in terms of the type of parking demand and the restaurant will continue to be viewed as a restaurant. Consequently, Mr. Arroyo advised they will address the amount of parking under these two uses. Mr. Arroyo reported the plan actually shows that they just meet the needed parking spaces. However, he added they have identified possibly four spaces that will not be accessible and he noted two are actually consumed by the dumpster. Consequently, Mr. Arroyo reported that the applicant must go to the ZBA to seek a variance for a four space waiver.

In addition, Mr. Arroyo advised the applicant must also seek a waiver for the set back for parking along the south property line. He explained they are making substantial improvements and decreasing the amount of pavement, but because of the location of the existing structure the south side will not meet the rear yard set back requirement.

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked what is the amount of total parking spaces? Mr. Arroyo replied it would be a decrease of four spaces from 143 spaces.

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked whether Mr. Arroyo would support the project if the applicant receives ZBA approval? Mr. Arroyo replied he would support the project if the applicant receives ZBA approval.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands when the ordinance is silent about a particular land use that there is a general land use that the consultant references in terms of trip generation and parking guidelines. Mr. Arroyo replied that they generally refer to a use that is comparable and short of that, they would actually try to find other uses and study them. He advised they did not believe it was necessary in this case because they believe it will be similar to an industrial development.

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked if they believe the industrial use is more appropriate than a use that would be found in the conference district? Mr. Arroyo replied it will be one of the lowest parking and trip generators of any of the uses that are allowed in the conference district.

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked whether they consulted Planner Advisory Services to determine whether they had any information on catering usage? Mr. Arroyo replied they did not consult Planner Advisory Services, but they researched all their information from the Institute of Transportation Engineers on parking generation and they were unable to come up with any data.

Councilwoman Lorenzo would have appreciated seeing these numbers.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands the proposed landscaping is a great improvement for the site and asked whether it meets the landscaping requirements in Section 2509. Mr. Arroyo advised the landscaping will not meet the requirements of the ordinance to the south of the site and added Ms. Lemke has noted in her letter that a variance is required. Further, Mr. Arroyo understands there will be a landscaping deficiency adjacent to the building. He added with the exception of these two deficiencies, he understands there will be a substantial increase in the amount of landscaping for the entire site.

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked whether it appears that the proposed landscaping design will make up for the two deficiencies or should Council impose further conditions to add additional landscaping to the site? Mr. Arroyo believes the applicant is providing a substantial amount of additional landscaping (i.e., interior items, buffer) and is a significant improvement. However, he noted he is unable to speak to the variety because that is not addressed until final site plan approval. Mr. Arroyo restated the proposed landscaping will provide a substantial improvement to what is currently on the site.

Councilwoman Lorenzo would like to know how it meets the ordinance requirement and questions whether Council can ask for further landscaping improvements so that the site will comply with the ordinance more closely. Mr. Arroyo believes the applicant has already considered that and if additional landscaping is required, it will encroach on the parking.

Councilwoman Lorenzo is concerned about the block building façade and questions whether they would have the ability under the Façade Ordinance (Special Land Use – Reasonable Conditions) to require some type of appropriate façade treatment to bring the building more in line with what the restaurant is. She added she believes there is a variety of materials (i.e., panel brick, stone) on the market to enhance the façade’s appearance.

Mayor McLallen interjected, because the applicant is not changing the foot print the city does not have the legal ability to impose this kind of a condition.

Councilwoman Lorenzo referred to the language of the ordinance addressing Special Land use and read, "Reasonable conditions may be imposed in conjunction with the granting of a site plan approval including conditions necessary to insure that public services and facilities affected by the proposed use or activity will be capable of accommodating increased service to protect the natural and conserve natural resources and energy and to insure compatibility with adjacent uses of land and to promote the use of the land in a socially and economically desirable manner." Councilwoman Lorenzo would interpret this circumstance to fall under the section that reads "to insure compatibility with adjacent uses of land" because the building is becoming a part of the restaurant. Consequently, she would think in order to become compatible with the restaurant and the other nearby uses, that the city would have the ability to require the applicant to place some type of a more appropriate and compatible façade as a reasonable condition.

Mr. Watson believes the problem they have is specifically in the façade regulations. As pointed out by Mr. Necci, Mr. Watson explained there is something that accounts for this specific instance when they have a building that is not otherwise being altered.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands the ordinance is speaking to permitted uses in the zoning classifications, it is not speaking to a special land use. Mr. Watson replied it is pertaining to any façade application regardless of whether it is a permitted use or special use.

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked whether the ordinance specifically states that or are they are interpreting it to mean any façade application? Councilwoman Lorenzo continued by stating she would agree if that is only supposed to be applied to permitted uses in the zoning classification. However, she believes special land use is a new category and the advantage of a special land use is to have the ability to address the issues that they cannot address through the zoning ordinance.

Mr. Watson agreed, but noted the ordinance under Special Land Use lists the specific instances when they are permitted to do that.

Mr. Kriewall asked whether Council is aware that this building was the body shop for the Lincoln Mercury dealership that was never constructed. He pointed out that the building is unobtrusive because it is nestled in the back side of the DoubleTree Hotel and the other side has the transformer pad, the gas meter and concrete loading dock. Mr. Kriewall does not believe it makes much sense to try to further beautify this particular location.

Councilwoman Lorenzo appreciates Mr. Kriewall’s position, but because the public will come to this building she questions whether this is the kind of image they want to promote for the City of Novi.

Mr. Watson referred to the specific items listed in the ordinance under Special Land Use are: impact on thoroughfares, traffic impact, impact on public services, impact natural features (i.e., wetlands, wildlife) impact on the Master Plan, impact on the development of land in an economically desirable manner and so forth.

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked whether it addresses the assurance of compatibility? Mr. Watson replied it does, but that provision is not a Special Land Use enhancement. He explained it pertains to any site plan approval which is an indication that they would turn to the normal ordinance standards when imposing of those conditions.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands the review criteria under the Special Land Use provision does not speak to compatibility with adjacent land uses. Mr. Watson advised it speaks to compatibility generally for regular site plans as well as special land use.

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked what should they consider for special land use approval? Mr. Watson replied they are to consider all of the standards under the Conference District, as well as the additional standards in its subpart 2c of Section 2516. Mr. Watson continued by stating they are comparing it with a principal use permitted which is the same facade standards they would normally apply.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands it is Mr. Watson’s opinion that they could not impose as a reasonable condition that they somehow improve the facade to come into more compliance with the facade ordinance even if it is just a true facade improvement. Mr. Watson agreed and added it is based upon the fact that they have a provision in Section 2520 that deals with buildings that are not being altered.

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Based on the information before him, Councilman DeRoche does not think they could find a use for this building that would produce less activity or have a more acceptable use in that particular area. He noted this is a high rent area and he believes there are a lot of things someone would want to do with a 16,000 square foot building rather than have only fifteen employees loading food. Councilman DeRoche believes it is unfortunate when the use is not ambitious and if it were going to be a restaurant, the city would expect the applicant to provide a full plan to improve the façade and that the city would want it to be upscale. However, because of the use and because it is an existing building, he believes the applicant’s plan will work out for right now. Councilman DeRoche added although he understands Council does not influence ZBA decisions, he still does not support having to make approvals subject to the ZBA’s approval for variances.

Councilwoman Mutch understood this is a business that will service the existing restaurant, other restaurants, other larger groups and then only incidentally, they will service the public at large. However, she noted tonight it seems to sound more like a catering facility that the public would come to. Further, she understands that the larger groups would not come to the actual site, because it would be more likely that the catering service would come to them for their business. Mr. Aspinall agreed with Councilwoman Mutch’s understanding and that the public will occasionally come to their site to contract their services. He added that they intend to provide baking services to the three restaurants they currently own.

Councilman Kramer believes the site plan is an upgrade from what currently exists and therefore, he will support the motion. However, he would ask that the applicant consider enhancing the entryway.

Councilman Schmid shares Councilwoman Lorenzo’s concerns and asked whether Mr. Arroyo has considered who will patronize the facility and whether he agrees with Mr. Watson’s opinion? Mr. Arroyo replied he considers that factor when he reviews all plans and added that he agrees with Mr. Watson’s interpretation of the ordinance. He noted that the applicant does have plans to improve the façade (i.e., fill in holes, paint). He noted that Mr. Necci will evaluate the color of the paint the applicant plans to use to be certain that it blends in with the surrounding structures. In regard to the compliance with the façade ordinance, Mr. Arroyo believes in this particular situation the use is not bringing upon the need for a façade material that is different than what they might find in a principal permitted use in a district. He explained when they look at special land uses, they typically try to compare them with other uses and he does not think there is anything specifically unique about this that would justify treating it different than they would if they had a principal use. He added the situation is helped because the location is well hidden.

Councilman Schmid asked if the city would require the applicant to bring the building into compliance with the ordinance if it were proposed to be a restaurant? From a special land use standpoint and if it were more visible, Mr. Arroyo advised he would want to make some changes to enhance the visible architectural features and bring it into the character of the surrounding area.

Councilman Schmid added he concurs with the suggestion about having the entryway enhanced.

Councilman Schmid asked whether Mr. Arroyo is comfortable with the number of employees in terms of parking requirements? Mr. Arroyo replied if the applicant exceeded fifteen employees and there was a parking problem that would be an enforcement issue. Mr. Arroyo noted that most of the catering activity will occur during the portion of the day when the restaurant is not at its peak parking demand.

Mr. Aspinall advised they had looked at this issue closely and believe if they were to maximize the facility to the extent that they are planning to use it, then fifteen to twenty employees would be high.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands that a catering service is not technically permitted in this district. Mr. Arroyo disagreed and clarified that there was not a parking requirement for catering facilities in the parking section of the ordinance, but the use is permitted as a special land use.

Mr. Arroyo added he would like to correct something he stated earlier. Mr. Arroyo explained that since the last submittal of the plans, the applicant has added quite a bit of additional landscaping along the building so even that issue has improved substantially.

Councilwoman Lorenzo will reluctantly support the motion and she hopes that the information regarding the special land use is correct. She added although she agrees the plan is an obvious improvement over the current situation, she questions the extent to which they could improve it.

Nays: None

Nays: None

Absent: Mutch

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION - None

BREAK from 9:00 p.m. until 9:10 p.m.

CONSENT AGENDA REMOVALS FOR COUNCIL ACTION: (Consent Agenda items, which have been removed for discussion and/or action)

1. Regular Meeting of January 25, 1999

Councilwoman Lorenzo referred to the second line on Page 11 and asked the Clerk’s office to review the audio tape to verify whether the word was "consistent" instead of "inconsistent".

CM-99-02-050: Moved by Lorenzo, Seconded by Crawford, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve Minutes of Regular Meeting of January 25, 1999 subject to possible correction on Page 11

Nays: None

N. Approval of concept design for the Haggerty District Regional Detention Basin, authorization to prepare preliminary engineering plans and right-of-way/easement documents, as needed, and authorization to continue pursuit of a partnering concept for the basin construction

Councilwoman Lorenzo recalled this matter came before them In March 1998 as a Haggerty/Ingersoll Regional Detention Basin that the engineers were applying for a grant through the Rouge Program Office (RPO) under the National Wet Weather Demonstration Program Grant Applications on the city’s behalf. Councilwoman Lorenzo would like an explanation as to how they got to this from there. She also recalled that when this MDOT property was originally purchased that they did not have much information about it and they now know the property consists of mostly wooded wetlands that are both state and locally regulated. Councilwoman Lorenzo is concerned about impacts to those wetlands and questioned whether they have looked at reasonable and prudent alternatives to the basin as stipulated in the wetland ordinance. She asked whether the city definitely needs this basin? Councilwoman Lorenzo continued by asking what would be the ramifications if they did not build it and if the adjacent property owners had on site detention, would that alleviate the need for these basins. She then asked whether it is possible to make it smaller?

Dave Potter displayed a map of the City of Novi’s Storm Water Regional Detention Master Plan. Mr. Potter reported the blue represents the existing regional basins. Mr. Potter first heard of this basin when he reviewed it for Oakland County in 1992 when JCK, on behalf of the City of Novi, submitted what was known as the Francis Drain Study. Mr. Potter reported the purpose of the study was to identify ways to reduce flooding in certain parts of Novi and they are very excited about what has recently happened during the last six months on this project.

Mr. Potter reported Ingersoll Creek, which is upstream of Meadowbrook Lake and another creek were causing flooding in the area. However, Mr. Potter noted there was no location to construct a regional basin to try to intercept some of the existing flows and to try to reduce some of the flooding. Mr. Potter reported that the Francis Drain Study identified several sites upstream of this basic flooding area. Mr. Potter noted they were the Haggerty Basin, the Ingersoll Basin and further to the east (I-275 and I-96 interchange), they identified the Farmington Hills Basin. Through the past several years, Mr. Potter reported MDOT has moved away from permitting detention within those major interchanges because they attract wildlife and caused hazardous conditions to motorists. Consequently, the site further to the east does not appear to be feasible any longer.

Mr. Potter understands the city had tried to purchase the site that is before them tonight from MDOT for years and then MDOT suddenly approached the city to determine whether the city was interested in purchasing the property. Mr. Potter added he further understands the city was able to purchase the eight acre site for $12,000.00.

Mr. Potter referred to the map and noted that the green area represents the woodlands (Master Plan depicts area as dense woodland) and the existing wetlands are identified by the blue boundary. He continued by stating that according to their conceptual report in terms of the hydraulics, it is feasible to excavate and construct a regional basin at this location. He noted the lines show the limits of the excavation. Mr. Potter advised they propose to recreate the basin to restore the portion of the impacted wetland and they also propose to plant the bottom of the basin as additional wetlands. Consequently, Mr. Potter reported this will result in a little bit more wetland than they started with. Further, Mr. Potter advised although trees would be removed, fees would have to be paid as part of this construction in accordance with the woodland ordinance.

In regard to the location, Mr. Potter advised their preliminary estimates for a hundred year storm indicate that they can reduce that amount by half; from 400 cfs cubic feet per second to approximately 200.

Mr. Potter noted the site is also proposed as an off-line basin and he believes they are ready to introduce these kinds of revisions to the city’s Storm Water Master Plan that were delayed because of the many regulations that have been oncoming at the state and federal level. Mr. Potter then reported one of the biggest changes will be the introduction of off-line basins versus in-line basins. He explained an the water in an in-line basin flows in and ponds up, and flows back out. He reported the water in an off-line basin flows next to the basin and as flooding occurs, it basically spills into the basin and drains back out. Mr. Potter does not believe it is a controversial design and the type of design will depend upon who they speak with at the state level when they apply for the permits as to what design they prefer for a particular stream.

Mr. Potter advised they are proposing to bring flow through the site and take the existing drain (Ingersoll or Town Line Drain), and run that through. He noted the next phase of the design is to work out the mechanics of how they will be able to accomplish that. Mr. Potter further advised that they realize there will be an impact to the wetlands and woodlands, but they believe it is a good compromise because of the location. He added they also realize that to get a permit, they must convince the state that this is actually one of the only sites that the city can get to accomplish this goal.

Mr. Potter reminded Council that he had applied for grants on behalf of the City of Novi approximately four years ago for these two basins and he understands they have been awarded approximately $250,000.00 for one of these basins. In addition to the low cost to purchase the site, Mr. Potter noted there is another site west of M-5 and south of Twelve Mile that MDOT considers to be excess and they are looking to do a project with Novi. Mr. Potter noted they are currently developing on plans and the city may have a good opportunity to work on a multi-agency project involving the City of Novi, Oakland County Road Commission, MDOT, MDEQ, Wayne County, RPO and the Oakland County Drain Division. Mr. Potter noted this is historically an old wetland area and they are trying to restore the wetland. Further, he advised MDOT needs this site to mitigate their wetland impacts based on I-96 at Beck and Wixom Roads while at the same time the city needs it for a regional basin and both could save a large amount of money if they were to combine their efforts. He added because the Rouge River Office recognizes it as a good project, they will provide some grant money to help build it.

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked whether grant money has been approved for the Haggerty Basin. Mr. Potter replied grant money has been approved for the Haggerty Ingersoll Basin and they can use the grant money for either.

Mr. Potter added there is a property owner located to the south of the property that is in a situation that if the current basins are not on line they are required by ordinance to construct their own detention basins. He noted it is only a ten year basin and there clearly needs to be a hundred year basin at these locations. He understands the property owner is willing to provide ingress and egress to the site for maintenance and construction, and he is also willing to pay for the drainage fees to have the ability to discharge into the regional basin and not tie up his own property.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands that the Design Standards call for detaining a ten year storm and she asked whether there are situations where the city would require one hundred year capacity? Mr. Potter advised the only time the city would require additional detention would be if the downstream conveyance could not handle a ten year.

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked if they could require additional capacity if they are flooding downstream properties? Mr. Potter advised the difficulty is when they require off-site improvements. He understands communities cannot require off-site improvements and they can only require additional improvements on the site to mitigate the flooding.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understood that a requirement to detain more than a ten year storm can be required and appropriate if there were issues of health, safety and welfare. Mr. Watson would have to look more closely at that issue, but advised the basic requirement for on-site detention is that they cannot exacerbate the problem by what they are doing on their site.

Councilwoman Lorenzo believes it would be interesting to try to research that information.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands the area currently being flooded is a designated floodplain. Mr. Potter noted the correct term is "regulated" floodplains. Mr. Potter reported the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) agreed to conduct a Flood Insurance Study (FIS) and once a community agreed to have an FIS performed and floodplains identified, they still needed to determine which would be designated as regulated floodplains. Mr. Potter continued by stating they then identified them by creating Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) and these maps depict the limits of the floodplain at the time the hazard existed. He noted as time goes on, floodplains change because they are affected by development and the construction of detention basins, and that is why the maps are continually updated. He explained property can only be insured for a hazard that exists. Mr. Potter reported there are floodplains located at the Ingersoll Creek site and the downstream is identified as such on the maps.

Mr. Potter advised during construction of these basins they submit design calculations to FEMA and their intent is to get the maps revised to a point so that some residents will no longer have to pay flood insurance.

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked if the tap fees cover all of the costs associated with the construction of the basins? Mr. Potter advised the original fee schedule was set up so that it would cover the entire project cost (i.e., construction, hard costs, design, real estate costs, etc.) as a whole.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands it will not cover the costs and is concerned. She explained they have private interests developing property who are willing to contribute to the water, but she questioned whether they are willing to contribute to the costs. Mr. Potter views these basins in the same way he views water and sewer in terms of system charges. He referred to the situation on Twelve Mile Road where they are proposing a hospital and if the basin exists, they will pay their fee for the storm water which will go into the Storm Water Fund and is used to pay for these basins.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands this is done on an overall basis and not a case by case basis and that the basins are paid for by the Drain Fund. Mr. Potter agreed the fees go into the Storm Water Fund and is reallocated on a project by project basis.

Councilwoman Lorenzo believes there are other needs for the Drain Fund (i.e., capital improvements) and she thinks this request is premature. She believes a better time to propose this project would be during the budget process.

Mr. Potter advised there are three phases to the Storm Water Plan. He explained the location of the basin is important from a timing standpoint, the conveyance system to connect them is the next phase (right-of-way acquisition has been difficult) and finally, maintenance is the last phase. Mr. Potter advised once the basins are constructed they go through an intensive reevaluation on all of the hydraulics to determine which ones need adjustment.

Councilwoman Lorenzo is concerned about who is paying for the construction of the basins and who is going to pay for the sewer cleaner.

Mayor McLallen interjected, the issue before Council tonight is for the approval of the concept design for the basin and she noted there is money for this in the Storm Water Fund.

Councilwoman Lorenzo moved to postpone this item and bring it back during their budget discussions. Mayor McLallen advised there is no support for the motion and dies from lack of support.

Councilman Kramer believes the nature of this issue is preliminary and will provide information about whether they can get shared funding.

CM-99-02-051: Moved by Kramer, Seconded by DeRoche, CARRIED: To approve concept design for the Haggerty District Regional Detention Basin, authorization to prepare preliminary engineering plans and right-of-way/easement documents, as needed, and authorization to continue pursuit of a partnering concept for the basin construction as submitted

Nays: Lorenzo

S. Approval to reject bids for the Eubank Street Water Main (SAD #149), Austin Drive Water Main Phase I (SAD #151), Austin Drive Water Main Phase II, and Erma Street Improvements; authorization to delete the Austin Drive Water Main Phase II Project; authorization for the City Attorneys to modify contract language to provide for award by division; and authorization to solicit new construction proposals

Councilwoman Lorenzo referred to Ms. Gray’s letter and asked for further clarification about how this action would affect the residents participating in this district. Further, she understands the pre-bid meeting was mandatory after the process began.

Mr. Nowicki disagreed, and advised Council supported and put into motion the mandatory pre-bid prior to this. However, he added the official adoption did not occur until afterwards.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands they are rejecting the bid because of a technicality and that this bidder would have been recommended otherwise. Mr. Nowicki agreed.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands there is a large discrepancy in the amount for Erma Street according to Ms. Gray’s letter. Mr. Nowicki replied there is a difference in the amount in what would be the low bidders and what would be the low bidder had they gone through the process. Mr. Nowicki noted MVA was ultimately the low bidder ($11,330.00) that did not meet the mandatory pre-bid requirements and the second low bidder was Tony Anthony ($21,675.00). Mr. Nowicki noted this difference is a substantial amount of dollars for a small amount of work.

Councilwoman Lorenzo questions whether they should go through the process again because of the costs associated with rebidding or should they just stay with the low bidder because they were rejected only because of a technicality that was not yet in effect. She reminded Council about the critical need to move forward with this project.

Mr. Nowicki stated he addressed the issue of "critical need" in his memo and noted he spoken with a couple of a spokesperson for each project and there does not appear to be a critical need at this time. In regard to the Austin Drive situation, Mr. Nowicki reported that issue has been set aside and other arrangements have been made to put that person in a home with water service. He added he has also spoken directly with Ms. Gray and she agreed this is not a critical project. Consequently, he does not believe another month will make damage anybody.

Councilman Kramer believes a rebid would permit them to identify up front that the city reserves the right to select sub-elements from the bid. Mr. Nowicki agreed and added that some particular divisions of a bid may be weighted differently.

Councilman Kramer is satisfied that they will serve the needs of the citizens by rebidding this project. Further, Councilman Kramer would like the Austin Phase II to know the city is moving forward with this project and perhaps it will encourage them to move forward also once their neighbors have water.

Councilwoman Lorenzo reluctantly made the motion to reject the bids.

CM-99-02-052: Moved by Lorenzo, Seconded by Kramer, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the rejection of bids for the Eubank Street Water Main (SAD #149), Austin Drive Water Main Phase I (SAD #151), Austin Drive Water Main Phase II, and Erma Street Improvements; authorization to delete the Austin Drive Water Main Phase II Project; authorization for the City Attorneys to modify contract language to provide for award by division; and authorization to solicit new construction proposals

Nays: None

G. Approve adoption of Resolution and Agreement of Sale/Offer to Purchase Real Estate from Mary Jane Masters, J.R. Burgess, a/k/a Robert Burgess, Mary C. Bosco, a/k/a Catherine Bosco and Paul A. Bosco, Internal Revenue Service & Michigan Department of Treasury for the Beck Road Sanitary Sewer and the Beck Road/Eleven Mile Road Intersection Improvements Projects

Councilman Schmid understood Council had previously agreed to eliminate some of these areas because the city has not been able to purchase the easements and now they are going to condemn them. Mr. Nowicki believes the goal is to construct the intersection as it was originally conceived and they are trying to keep their options open. He explained they have the ability to proceed or the have the option of deleting them.

Councilman Schmid asked whether they are going to proceed with condemnation? Mr. Nowicki replied that is a Council decision.

Councilman Kramer advised that the 30^th Anniversary Committee continues their work and appreciates the community’s support. He then noted their first event will be held on Saturday, February 27.

Mayor McLallen reported there is a consensus of Council to circulate the Petition submitted by 4-H member to create a 100^th 4-H Commemorative Anniversary Stamp in the year 2002.

Councilwoman Mutch asked whether the development of the city parkland at the school site is underway? Mr. Kriewall replied the parkland is not being developed at this time and noted they have not set aside any funding for that development. However, Mr. Kriewall added he understands there is a mass grading of the site at this time by the schools according to the city’s specifications.

Councilwoman Mutch recalled that the school property was included as part of the area plan for Harvest Lake. She then asked when they sold the property to the school, she asked whether the purchase agreement required the school to abide to the area plan (i.e., sidewalks). Mr. Watson does not recall what the purchase agreement required in that regard and added he will look into that general issue. However, he advised the school is constructing the sidewalk.

MANAGER’S REPORTS

In regard to the Council joint meetings, Mr. Kriewall noted Mr. Klaver has submitted a revision to the March 18 meeting. He advised they are reversing the order of the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Historical Commission.

Further, Mr. Kriewall noted that the February 25 EDC joint meeting must be canceled because they are unable to attend the meeting.

Mr. Kriewall reported that Providence Hospital asked to reschedule their dinner meeting with Council to May 20; Council agreed.

Councilman DeRoche noted Fifth Avenue is now open and reported that the southbound "No Left Turn" sign was inadequate. Mr. Kriewall advised he will look into that matter.

Councilwoman Mutch noticed the White House restaurant on Nine Mile Road has not opened and asked what is the status of the White House liquor license transfer? Mayor McLallen reported that Mr. Arkin had advised her that the party that the liquor license was being held for has experienced severe health problems and has been unable to move forward with the schedule for opening the restaurant. Mr. Kriewall noted he will follow up on that issue.

Mr. Klaver advised they shot a cable program with the Mayor today about the Sandstone issue and the Senior Housing Project.

ATTORNEY’S REPORTS - None

COMMUNICATIONS

1. Letter from Hyman Lippitt P.C., Re: Opposition to Downtown Development Authority Proposal
2. Letter from Jack and Susan Couzens to City Council, Re: Beckenham entryway
3. Letter from Sarah Gray to City Council, Re: Proposed amendments for Ordinance Review Committee review
4. Letter from Sarah Gray to Nancy Reutter and reply, Re: Mandatory trash pick-up
5. Letter from James Korte to City Council, Re: Bruce Jerome
6. Letter from James Korte to Planning Department, Re: Lakeview Bar & Grill
7. Letter from James Korte to Tonni Bartholomew, Re: 2026 Austin condemnation
8. Letter from James Korte to Novi Police Department, Re: Sgt. Whitfield & Lt. McNamara
9. Letter from James Korte to Terry Morrone, Re: 2026 Austin water
10. Letter from James Korte to Detective Fanning, Re: Broken Glass-automotive
11. Letter from James Korte to Cindy Uglow, Re: Formal Complaint-2214 Austin.
12. Fax from Eda Weddington, Re: Topics for Joint Planning/Council Meeting
13. Letter from Cynthia Sheppard to Library Board, Re: Internet access
14. Letter from Lt. Johnson to Chief Lenaghan, Re: Fire Department Training Facility
15. Memo from Craig Klaver, Re: Joint meeting agenda for March 18, 1999
16. Proposed Road Improvements Projects Update with map, as requested by Council, from

Anthony Nowicki

17.Petitions requesting the City of Novi to provide proper facilities for the arts programs.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business before City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m.

Kathleen S. McLallen Tonni L. Bartholomew

Transcribed by:

Barbara Holmes