ROLL CALL: Mayor Landry, Mayor Pro Tem Gatt, Council Members Fischer, Margolis, Mutch, Staudt, Wrobel

Mayor Landry recognized the Novi High School Varsity Hockey 2011 State Champions.

Coach Krygier thanked the Mayor and City Council for recognizing the hockey team. He said 22 teammates came together to accomplish something for the first time for Novi High School hockey which was an honor. He thanked the parents and supporters in the community.

Mayor Landry said when you accomplish a team effort like this, it not only reflects on you but also on your parents, coaches, and the community. He said it was a lot of hard work, which they knew better than anybody. He said Council honored them because they reflected on the City of Novi.

AUDIENCE COMMENT –

Mike Looney, Oakwood Drive resident, revisited the Nine Mile Pathway project covered at the April 4^th meeting. He said he understood that Council planned to discuss the matter further given the residents’ concerns expressed that day and City leadership discussions afterward. He said he was grateful that Mayor Pro Tem Gatt e-mailed him back on April 9^th stating that he would recommend a 5 foot sidewalk as opposed to the current 10 foot pathway project. He said a 5 foot sidewalk made more sense than a 10 foot pathway for the following reasons: durability, cement as opposed to asphalt; consistency, in addition to the existing stretch by the apartments it would even link up with the 5 foot sidewalk on the south side of Nine Mile past Haggerty; aesthetically pleasing, cement was clean looking and uniform; flexibility, in terms of being able to wind around foliage; environmental impact, far less impact on trees, shrubs, and bushes than with the asphalt pathway; less intrusive, people would be less inclined to erect fencing especially if the sidewalk was closer to Nine Mile. He said he was in favor of such a sidewalk if the project was a must have for the City, but he wanted to emphasize that they weren’t functioning in the best of financial times. He recommended that if 5 feet was deemed reasonable and agreeable that the project be tabled until the City was on firmer financial footing. He said right-of-ways weren’t going anywhere. He said the main argument for the 10 foot pathway was that Federal funding would be lost if it weren’t adopted since overall cost was critical. He said if it was that critical that the City was required by Federal guidelines to put in the widest pathway ever seen in Novi and tearing up the environment beyond repair in the process, then the whole project was flawed from the start. He said this time around let’s take our time and do it right so the cost wasn’t also an issue. He said to involve residents to jointly agree on a solution which made both sides happy and preserved and not unduly damaged the Nine Mile Road stretch. He said a 5 foot sidewalk addressed that matter.

Greg Seach, 46282 Cordoba Dr, made an appeal to change the PASER rating of Cordoba. He said in 2005 they watched Arcadia Drive in Walden Woods be repaired and they thought Cordoba would be next. He said they were currently rated with a PASER rating of 7 and after looking at the City of Novi’s website, the description said isolated transverse cracks and in an overall good condition. He brought with him pictures that showed 6 to 8 inch cracks that were the full length of the street in the first 75 feet of Cordoba Drive. He said he believed it should be a PASER rating of a 2 or a 3. He said the pictures were after asphalt was added earlier in the week. He wanted to bring to Council’s attention that the street had substantially deteriorated and he decided it would be important to look at what other PASER ratings looked like. He said there were 2 streets within a square mile with a PASER rating of 2, Picara and Sutherland; he took DVD video of all 3 roads. He said if Council reviewed the information, they would find that Cordoba was in worse shape than Picara and was equal to Sutherland. He asked City Council to reevaluate the PASER rating and move Cordoba up in the scale.

A. Approve Minutes of:

1. April 4, 2011 – Regular meeting

B. Enter Executive Session immediately following the regular meeting of April 18, 2011 in the Council Annex for the purpose of discussing pending litigation, labor negotiations, and privileged correspondence from legal counsel.

C. Approval to award the contract for the 2011 Spring Tree & Landscape Planting to RC Tuttle Refinishing, Co., the lowest bidder in the amount of $87,115.

D. Approval of Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 18.247 to include provisions to allow for additional height on properties adjacent to limited access freeways.　 Second Reading

E. Approval to participate in regional matching grant for $800 with the Western Wayne County Fire Department Mutual Aid Association from the 2010 Assistance to Firefighter Grant Program.

F. Approval of the first year renewal option of the Great Oaks Maintenance agreement with Meadowbrook Commons.

G. Approval to award a one-year renewal option of the Civil Engineering Field Services contract with Spalding DeDecker with no changes to the terms, conditions, or fees in the contract through May 1, 2012.

H. Approval to award one-year Aggregate Materials contract extensions to four aggregate suppliers for separate types of materials at an estimated total annual amount of $97,040.

I. Approval of Claims and Accounts – Warrant No. 842

Mr. Pearson thanked the property owners for the donation. He said they had a lot of cooperation in getting the easement for the project.

Member Margolis said she appreciated the tenor of the comments they received. She said one of the best examples of government was when Council could have an opinion and the residents could comment back to them in a civil and positive way. She said when she saw the measurement on the tape measure, it was a nice visual and as homeowners, it was a good checkpoint for Council. She said she called City Manager Pearson the next day to say that he did try to save Council from themselves when they brought up the pathway the first time. She said when it was brought up to Council the first time after the staff heard from residents, they told Council to think about the project and those who voted to move ahead with the large sidewalk blew the decision. She commended Mayor Landry, Member Fischer, and Member Staudt who disagreed and wanted to move ahead with the study. She said in the comments, they spoke of a 5 foot sidewalk and she wanted to discuss a 5 foot versus 6 foot sidewalk.

Mr. Hayes said the City generally went for an 8 foot wide multi-use pathway on one side of a major road and a 5 foot wide pedestrian sidewalk on the opposite side. He said the choices for a narrower path would be an 8 foot wide or a 6 foot wide path. He said the 6 foot wide pathway was consistent with what was in the non-motorized Master Plan for a major road. He said the 6 foot wide path would be concrete.

Member Margolis asked if they would have to have gravel on either side of the path or if it would strictly be the sidewalk.

Mr. Hayes said there wouldn’t be gravel on either side, there would be 2 feet of clearance, shy distance, so brush or a fire hydrant wouldn’t conflict with a user near the edge of the path. He said on a narrower pathway, it would be 1 foot minimum of shy distance on either side. He said they would like to see more if possible, he believed the ordinance listed 3 feet as the guidance but 1 foot was as narrow as they could go.

Member Margolis said she drove down Nine Mile and understood the concerns. She said she wanted to see the 6 foot because it would give a little more leeway to bikers on the path.

Mayor Pro Tem Gatt said the last time they voted it wasn’t about the size of the pathway; it was whether they should spend money on another study which was what he was against. He didn’t want to spend more money on a study to have it come back as a wasted study. He said the people who came to Council were professional, courteous, articulate, stayed on point, and were correct. He said no one wanted a runway in their backyard. He talked to a few residents and wanted to suggest a 5 foot path which there was a precedence for in Novi. He said one was put in a few years ago to appease the homeowners on Meadowbrook Road. He said it could be narrow at times if there was two way traffic on the path, but to his knowledge, no one had been hurt or complained, and it worked. He said right now on Nine Mile, there was a large stretch of 5 foot concrete already in place. He said 5 foot would be cheaper than 6 and the money they wouldn’t be getting from the Federal grant, they would save by making the pathway smaller. He said they wouldn’t have to take out hardly any trees with the 5 foot pathway.

Member Fischer said there was some sidewalk on the north and south sides of Nine Mile and asked Mr. Hayes if he knew the width of those pathways.

Mr. Hayes said there was an 8 foot multi-use pathway on the south side of Nine Mile from Novi to Meadowbrook and he believed every segment that existed on the north side of Nine Mile between Meadowbrook and Haggerty was 5 foot. He said between Eight Mile and Nine Mile on Meadowbrook was 5 foot.

Member Fischer said he was happy to support the study to look at alternatives a couple months ago. He said looking at the different size pathways he wasn’t sure that the environmental impact would be that much different. He said there would still be devastation to the trees which was unfortunate, but his main reason for supporting the study to look at the alternatives was because of the aesthetics of the area. He said he walked the resident’s property and if you were on someone’s property on Nine Mile and went from their lot line to where the 14 feet was required, you were almost in the ditch and anything between the pathway and the ditch would put you right onto the road. He said aesthetically it would be displeasing and he understood the concerns of the residents of that area. He said his preference, speaking of the Master Plan, was the 6 foot pathway with concrete. He said he echoed the sentiments of the previous speakers and said that everyone had been very cordial and professional which he appreciated.

Member Wrobel said he appreciated that the residents didn’t want a 14 foot wide pathway and it was really brought to light when the tape measure was brought out. He said he didn’t like giving away government money. He had the opportunity to walk the area where the path was proposed and the difference between 5 and 6 feet of sidewalk was not very significant. He said he would prefer to see a 6 foot sidewalk because it would meet the Non-Motorized Master Plan requirements and for safety reasons.

Mayor Landry said whether it was 5 feet or 6 feet there would have to be a foot of clear space on either side for people to step off onto if necessary, so no matter the size, it would be centered on the same center line. He asked if they would be saving any more trees with a 5 foot pathway instead of 6 feet.

Mr. Hayes said they couldn’t quantify that at this time.

Mayor Landry said the important thing to him was that it wouldn’t be 10 feet with 2 feet on either side totaling 14 feet. He said to go from 14 feet down to a 5 or 6 foot pathway was the way to go.

Member Staudt said they needed to provide clear guidance to the administration of their intentions.

Member Mutch said, in hindsight, it was a good thing they didn’t approve the study because the study was to design an 8 foot path which residents would have been upset with. He said they needed to work on communication during the front end of the project because people wanted to know what the impact of the pathways going through the properties that adjoin their properties would be. He said the engineers needed to design a pathway first before they could answer those questions but engineering couldn’t design a pathway until they were given specifications to follow. He said they also needed to work on better showing people how the impacts occur on the properties. He said he could look at a design plan and have a pretty good idea of how it would look in the real world but they couldn’t expect the residents to figure out what was going on. He said he was disappointed they had to spend more money but one of the reasons he was willing to support the motion for a 6 foot path was because of the Non-Motorized Master Plan. He said one of the concepts the plan talked about was developing a midpoint connection at 9 ½ Mile to the I-275 bikeway which wouldn’t be a 10 foot path through Village Oaks, but would utilize the existing roads and park properties and create a way for people to get from Meadowbrook Road to the 275 bike path in a safe manner. He said that was an alternative for someone who might have used the pathway on Nine Mile to get to the 275 pathway if they weren’t comfortable riding along a major road like Nine Mile. He wanted to look at doing additional planting where trees would be removed and the landscape changed to mitigate some of the buffer that was being removed. He said there were definitely some properties that no matter the size of the pathway would be impacted more than others and they wanted to do what they could to offset that. He said he stood on a property along Nine Mile when there wasn’t a lot of traffic and it was still quite noisy at times. He could only imagine what it was like during the work week. He said his house was 60 feet from the middle of Taft Road and he thought the traffic noise was kind of bad but Nine Mile must have a higher volume comparatively because it seemed more intense. He commended Mr. Hayes and his staff for their efforts in trying to mitigate the trees that would be removed.

Member Staudt said the memo mentioned there was an additional $7,000 needed to do the planning for the sidewalk and asked if that was correct.

Mr. Coburn said they gave a budgetary estimate of what they thought it would take to get the plans revised and out for construction.

Member Staudt asked if they needed approval for the $7,000.

Mr. Coburn said they would take the direction they were given and come back with a proposal on the Consent Agenda.

Mr. Pearson said they would need to bring back a contract with the engineers as well.

Member Staudt asked if this was a Capital improvement item from this year or if there was funding from previous years.

Mr. Pearson said the construction was budgeted in ’11-’12.

Mayor Landry echoed his thanks and appreciation to the residents who worked respectfully with City Council and contacted individual Council Members.

AUDIENCE COMMENT –

Rebecca Smith, Nine Mile Resident, thanked Council for listening and was pleasantly surprised at the response. She said she wanted to respond to Member Mutch’s comment on the noise on Nine Mile, one of the reasons it was louder was because of the berm on the south side. She said she would still rather see a sidewalk on the opposite side of the street where there weren’t as many entrances to subdivisions and there was already a berm in place protecting the homeowners. She said she was moving her saplings out of the easement and asked for Council to consider not running it as a straight-away and taking the 5 or 6 foot sidewalk and aesthetically weaving it through, she would be able to save her bushes so her property wouldn’t be completely wiped out. She also asked for her property to be surveyed so she knew exactly where her lot line was and not be charged for that so she could move her trees to a secure spot. She appreciated the comments about communication and would like to be notified before their trees were removed so they had time to do something with them and not just find the construction crew in the backyard one morning. She said she also liked the suggestion of planting and taking the time to plant once trees were taken out. She said as a resident who would probably end up taking care of the trees in the backyard, she would appreciate some input as to what was planted there and offered to serve on a committee or at least give input of feasible plantings that would make sense in the area. She said she would also consider a stipend where they would be able to plant something in their backyard and put in for reimbursement.

Naomi Wood, Nine Mile Resident, thanked Council for listening to the homeowners and hearing their concerns and making a decision that she was much more comfortable with. She said she wanted to reiterate that when the sidewalk goes through she wanted to ask if there would be a way to maneuver the path around any large trees. She said she would like it to be more along the lines of what was seen between Meadowbrook to Novi Road because that was what she envisioned as a more appealing look for a pathway. She said they wanted to see it consistent with the other sidewalks around them and she was grateful that cement was the consideration because it was important to them to have cement versus asphalt.

1. Nine Mile Pathway – Mayor Pro Tem Gatt

There being no further business to come before Council, the meeting was adjourned at 8:07 P.M.

________________________________ ________________________________

David Landry, Mayor                          Maryanne Cornelius, City Clerk

________________________________ Date approved: May 9, 2011

Transcribed by Natalie Laitinen