(810) 347-0475

Meeting called to order at 7:32 p.m. by Chairperson Weddington

PRESENT: Members Bononi, Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Hoadley, Watza , Chairperson Weddington

ABSENT: Vrettas

ALSO PRESENT: Engineering Consultant David Bluhm, Assistant City Attorney Dennis Watson, Landscape Architect Eric Olson, Director of Planning & Community Development Jim Wahl, and Khanh Pham

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Chairperson Weddington asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Agenda? Seeing none she entertained a motion to approve the Agenda as presented.

PM-97-07-204 TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED

Moved by Churella, seconded by Capello, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the agenda as presented.

VOTE ON PM-97-07-204 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Yes: Bononi, Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Hoadley, Watza, Weddington

No: None

Laura Lorenzo, 45995 Galway, made the following comments in regard to the project:

• Meeting (Max -out) or exceeding Dwelling Unit capacity in Planning Area 6 as projected in 1993 Master Plan considering:

Projects to date - Harvest Lake

future projects - particularly if receive similar RUD deal

• Zoning/ Density Credits vs. Open Space

• 113 acres of Buildable open space (according to BMR report) represents 13% Open Space (out of 888 acres). Would actually be less if compared to "approvable" bonafide plan.
• 13% Open Space does not justify "rezoning" from R-A to R-2 and R-3. Could support 13% reduction in lot size (equal amount).
• Land grab/ Giveaway not in the best interest of Novi. Bad business decision.

Requests: Delete home sites within upland island in north - central area to provide additional preservation of upland woodlands. If road is necessary - no-load road.

• Waiver/ Variance from Lakefront Protection Ordinance

Do not support and waiver/ variance - Purpose of ordinance is to protect lake and lake environment whether 1 development or 21 developments. Disappointed that BMR would recommend waiver/ variance.

Requests: No waiver/ variance.

• Imperviousness - Watershed study

Recent study of Davis Creek Watershed indicated 12 % imperviousness in City of Novi Planning Area 6. Threshold level for destruction of natural stream qualities is between 10% - 15% - city already within danger zone.

Requests: Deeper setbacks for all home sites abutting any water body. Fertilizer/ Pesticide? Herbicide restrictions. Vegetative buffer strips.

Andrew Mutch, 24541 Hampton Ct., had questions about the project:

• Is the property at Northwest corner of Wixom and Ten Mile Road included in the RUD Area? If not, what does the developer intend to build there?
• Will Water and sewer lines be extended to Napier Road to allow:

1. The connection of the Mobile Home Parks to City water and sewer?

2. The extension of City water and sewer into Lyon Twp.?

• Is there a designated pedestrian path to the School and Park and will crosswalks and sidewalks be included?
• Does this plan provide for pedestrian access from the Mobile Home Parks to the City Park?
• Can the Planning Commission require side-entry garages on the detached homes?
• Do the entrances on Napier Road Correspond to potential entrances on the west side of Napier?
• In light of the potential access to Ten Mile and the current condition of Napier Road, is the southerly entrance onto Napier Road, through woodlands, really necessary to provide adequate traffic circulation?

CORRESPONDENCE

Foley Letter(see attached letter)

1. HARVEST LAKE OF NOVI, SP 97-06B

Property located north of Ten Mile Road, East of Napier Road for possible Residential Unit Development (RUD) Option Application recommendation to City Council.

Steve Weiner of Harvest Land Co. Introduced himself and gave an overview and history of the development.

Mary Jukuri of JJR made a presentation about the Harvest Lake development.

Moved by Churella, seconded by Watza, CARRIED (6-2): To send positive recommendation to City Council for Harvest Lake SP 97-06B for possible Residential Unit Development (RUD) Option Application subject upon all the Consultants’ review letters.

Commissioner Bononi’s comments and questions:

• Capital Improvements: The Planning Commission is mandated to plan capital improvements which align themselves with the Master Plan. (following questions addressed to City Engineer)

• Harvest Lake as a regional detention basin (following questions addressed to City Engineer)

• The attitude regarding impact appears casual. The 20 storm drain basin proposal does not take in consideration of the effect on wetlands, woodlands, and errosion and sedimentation.

• The density proposed in this application makes it a greedy development proposal. The City gets little in return.

City Engineer’s comments and responses:

Question: In response to Andrew Mutch’s question about water and sewer lines extending to Napier Road to connect to the Mobile Home Parks and into Lyon Twp.?

Answer: Yes, it would be able to serve the Mobile Home Parks and currently no plans for extending into Lyon Twp.

Question: In response to Commissioner Bononi’s question about capital improvement and the existence of all supporting infrastructure?

Answer: Water and sewer are under design by JCK to bring service to the proposed school. Watermain extension along 11 Mile Road from Beck Road to Wixom Road and north along Wixom Road from 11 Mile Road to Grand River Avenue.

Question: In response to Commissioner Bononi’s question about pressure problems caused by the distance to water services?

Answer: These utilities will be extended to a point which will make them available to extend into the Harvest Lake development. Off-site water improvements are currently being constructed bringing another water feed into this area across I-96 near Beck Road. Other off-site improvements may be necessary not only to provide capacity for Harvest Lake but to assure current service to existing residents.

Question: In response to Commissioner Bononi’s question about additional capacity requirements for sanitary services and who will pay for them?

Answer: Off-site improvements may also be necessary (i.e. reconstruction of existing downstream sewer segments) to provide service for Harvest Lake. These are currently being evaluated with JCK design for sewers being brought to school, but further evaluation may be necessary as individual site plans are submitted for Harvest Lake development. Off-site improvements determined to be necessary to service Harvest Lake will be developers responsibility.

Question: In response to Commissioner Bononi’s question about the Harvest Lake regional retention basin?

Answer: A request has not yet been submitted. Once the request is made an evaluation will be performed to determine its need as a regional basin. It was stated that approx. 75% or more of the drainage contributing to the basin is from the Harvest lake project. Single project watershed areas typically provide private site detention basins. The remaining areas contributing to the lake will need to be developed with private site basins. This is typical for all private development in areas where regional basins are not available. The land needed for private site basins will need to be provided with proposed private development as is typically the case as well as easements needed for ultimate conveyance of stormwater to and from these basins.

Commissioner Hoadley’s comments and questions:

• Is the pedestrian paths connected to service the school kids of the area?
• alignment of Wixom Rd. entrance that might be in conflict with the Birchwood subdivision entrance?
• stacking issue at Wixom Rd. and whether developer would alleviate situation if it was a recommended by the Traffic Consultant?
• paving of Napier if it was needed and recommended by the Traffic Consultant?
• what is the buildout cost of project and what kind of taxes would it generate for the city and the school system?
• if it’s necessary for the secondary access road on Napier Rd.?
• why was the 2.5 acre parcel at the northwest corner of Wixom and Ten Mile Rd. not included in the RUD calculations and what does the developer intend to develop on the property?

Commissioner Hoadley further stated that the Harvest Lake project is a world class project and that it would be a benefit to the City.

Question: In response to Commissioner Hoadley’s question about pedestrian paths to service school kids of the area?

Answer: Yes, Mary Jukuri showed the connectivity of the pedestrian paths and how it would be able service the school children of the area.

Question: In response to Commissioner Hoadley’s question about alignment of Wixom Rd. entrance that might be in conflict with the Birchwood subdivision entrance?

Answer: No, the two entrance ways are not going to align; there is a 200-300 feet offset.

Question: In response to Commissioner Hoadley’s question stacking issue at Wixom Rd.. and whether developer would alleviate situation if it was a recommended by the Traffic Consultant?

Answer: If it was recommended by the Traffic Consultant and if it was attributed to the project.

Question: In response to Commissioner Hoadley’s question about paving of Napier if it was needed and recommended by the Traffic Consultant?

Answer: If it was recommended by the Traffic Consultant and if it was attributed to the project.

Question: In response to Commissioner Hoadley’s question about what is the buildout value of project and what kind of taxes would it generate for the city and the school system?

Answer: Total value would be in the range of $400-$500 million; taxes generated for the City would approximately be $5 million and two (2) times that amount for the schools.

Question: In response to Commissioner Hoadley’s question about is it necessary for southerly Napier Rd. access?

Answer: Traffic capacity, engineering, and safety analysis indicates the second Napier Road access point is required. This is supported by City’s Consultants.

Question: In response to Commissioner Hoadley’s question about why was the 2.5 acre parcel at the northwest corner of Wixom and Ten Mile Rd. not included in the RUD calculations and what does the developer intend to develop on the property?

Answer: Property is physically segregated from remainder of site and has environmentally sensitive features, and is not a viable single family residential site. Therefore, not part of the RUD. Discussion with City on fire station location; however, currently no plan for the site.

Chairperson Weddington’s comments and questions:

• Positive aspects of the proposal include the introduction of open space planning concepts, preservation of natural features (wetlands, woodlands animal habitat and historic barn), provisions for a school and parks, use of sanitary sewer and city water instead of well and septic fields, comprehensive development of the area, and diversity in house types
• However, I have some serious concerns with the project proposed:
• Review process put the cart before the horse with the approval of the development plan before the RUD ordinance was fully discussed or finalized
• "Designer ordinance" drafted to match this particular development proposal, when the ordinance standards should stand alone and be appropriate for any and all users
• Rushed approval with undue pressure placed on commissioners and consultants
• Holding up the transfer of land to the school district pending approval
• "Double dipping" in the density calculations and use of school, park and lake area to generate bonus units and increased density
• Precedent set for increased density and potential misuse by other developers

• Excessive increase in density from RA to R-2 and R-3 levels and extensive use of multifamily, which was never contemplated by the current Master Plan for the area
• Relatively small number of detached single family homes
• Deferral of construction of most of the detached single family homes to the last phase
• Master Plan build out projections for Planning Area 6 (Section 17, 18, 19, 20) in 1993 identified unused capacity for 1,558 dwelling units, less Nottingham Woods of 31 and Harvest Lake’s 876, 270 potential units in the R-3 area north of 11 Mile and 264 RA units on the Bosco parcel and three other 40-acre parcels, the remaining capacity is reduced to only 117 dwelling units for the balance of the four sections. This level and rate of buildout was never contemplated by the Master Plan of the current and future residents who rely on the Master Plan.
• I am definitely opposed to the granting of a waiver of the Lakefront Protection Ordinance, which was adopted to protect and conserve lakes from overuse. The number of developers in the project is irrelevant.
• Under other existing ordinances, 40% of the Harvest Lake area is required to be protected [169 acre lake (19%), 68 acres of regulated woodlands (7.5%) and 122 acres of regulated wetlands (13.5%)]. The developer claims to be preserving 52% or 12% more than required by regulation. In exchange for the 12% of savings, they are obtaining 35% more units (876 units proposed less 651 maximum allowed by the underlying R-A/R-1 zoning equals 225 "bonus" units) The ratio of 1 to 3 is excessive, in giving the developer three times as many units in exchange for preserving 12% more of the natural features. I totally agree with the increased preservation, but think the exchange ratio is out of balance.
• I am strongly opposed to other taxpayers subsidizing developments such as this and would insist the city’s contract with the developer require the developer to pay for all water, sewer, storm water management and roadway improvements related to this development.

Yes: Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Hoadley, Watza

No: Bononi, Weddington

PM-97-07-206 TO ADJOURN THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT 9:22 P.M.

Moved by Churella, seconded by Hoadley, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To adjourn the Special Meeting of the Planning Commission at 9:22 P.M.

VOTE ON PM-97-07-206 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Yes: Bononi, Canup, Capello, Churella, Csordas, Hoadley, Watza, Weddington

No: None

_____________________________________

Khanh Pham - Recording Secretary

Transcribed by: Khanh Pham

July 24, 1997