The meeting was called to order at or about 7:30 p.m.

Present: Members John Avdoulos, Victor Cassis, Lynn Kocan, Michael Meyer, Mark Pehrson, Wayne Wrobel

Absent: Members Andrew Gutman, David Lipski

Also Present: Barbara McBeth, Director of Planning; Tim Schmitt, Planner; Mark Spencer, Planner; Lance Shipman, Landscape Architect; Ben Croy, Civil Engineer; David Gillam, City Attorney; Dr. John Freeland, Wetland Consultant; Larry DeBrincat, Woodland Consultant

The meeting attendees recited the Pledge of Allegiance.

Moved by Member Pehrson, seconded by Member Wrobel:

Former Planning Commission Member Lowell Sprague, 24177 Westmont Court: Thanked the City for the opportunity to serve on the Planning Commission. He thanked the Planning Commission and citizens for their commitment to the community. Members of the Planning Commission thanked Mr. Sprague for his service.

There was no Correspondence to share.

Member Avdoulos said that the Master Plan and Zoning Committee met the previous meeting and gave positive recommendations on two projects: Twelve and West Road and the other location is Fourteen Mile and M-5. Both are in compliance with the Master Plan.

Director of Planning Barbara McBeth said that at the July 25, 2005 City Council meeting, the Grant proposal was approved for the "Roskelly" property. City Council reviewed the Uptown Park PRO, taking that property from RM-1 and OST to RM-2. She said it would come back before the Planning Commission in the near future. The Ten Mile "dentist properties" were rezoned to an office designation.

Ms. McBeth welcomed John Avdoulos and Victor Cassis back to the Planning Commission. She also welcomed Michael Meyer as a new Planning Commission member. He has been a teacher for thirty years, with degrees in philosophy, theology and a doctorate degree as a grief specialist. He has served on the school board (1983-1995), the ZBA (late 1990s) and many other boards and commissions.

Director of Planning Barbara McBeth introduced the Providence team back to the Planning Commission, this time at their request to give the members a preview of the hospital bed tower. She said that the ring road and utility plan is underway. The northeast parking lot was approved and will be underway soon.

Rob Casselou of Providence introduced Rich Abbott, Director of Facility Construction Design and lead on the project; Tim Fishking, Principal Architect from NBBJ; Carl Schatz, Project Architect; Gary Tressel, Senior Associate from Hubbell Roth and Clark. Mr. Casselou thanked the City for their collaboration on this project. He said their 200 acres will be the home of a world-class facility that will be used as a model in the future. He said that the campus should be more about wellness than illness. The building was designed for the land, and the materials were chosen to blend into the area.

Mr. Fishking also thanked the Planning Commission and the City. This site is an architect’s dream. It is 200 beautiful acres and they feel responsible in being good stewards for the City of Novi and for the site. One of the overriding concepts they considered prior to designing a 500,000 square foot building was to create something that was appealing. They developed a form that worked well with the natural contours. They are striving to create a facility that sits lightly on the land. In order to create an inviting environment, they tried to avoid the "big box" concept. They looked at a variety of materials and arrived at a pallet of materials that they feel are warm and comforting. They have a natural appearance that is indigenous to the site. They tried to highlight areas of the building that would aid in way finding. There is quite a bit of glass and curtain wall framing in the entry way. The material in the area is a composite panel that has a wood veneer coated in a phenolic resin using a base that would limit the amount of aging. The product is similar to car paint.

Mr. Fishking showed a view of the building that wraps around the existing pond, a prominent feature of the site. The building was designed so that the pond can be seen through the building, breaking down the barriers of exterior and interior space.

Mr. Fishking showed the walk-in emergency traffic area. As with the main entry, there is a canopy for drop-offs. There is a canopy for ambulance traffic, which is segregated from visitor and patient traffic. It is on the greensward side of the facility.

The first two levels house the clinical facility. The tower portion is for inpatient bed activity. The wood faced panel highlights the main entry and is used as an accent on some of the other façades. The curtain wall areas are integrated with a porcelain tile, in two tones of natural stone grey. The glass is transparent and will meet the energy codes. There are a couple of different tones of glass. Frosted glass will be used to limit visual access but will let light in. There is a green-tinted glass in the vision areas.

The penthouse and the stair towers will also have a horizontal metal siding. Images of the building were provided to the Planning Commission in order to give them a feel for the building. Mr. Fishking said that the intent was to design a building that felt light, warm and inviting, yet unique. Many of the materials chosen do not fit within the Façade Ordinance. Providence has met with the Façade Consultant, who embraced the concept and materials. He liked the pallet that was presented. He recommended that Providence request a Section Nine Waiver.

Ms. McBeth asked that the façade board be shown to the Planning Commission.

Chair Kocan asked if the percentage of materials was appropriate in this design. Ms. McBeth responded that two or three materials will have to be reviewed. The ratio of materials was reviewed with the Façade Consultant, and Mr. Fishking said that some modification of their plan has resulted. The use of metal panels met the code. The spandrel glass met code. The porcelain tile could fit into the ceramic tile category, and therefore NBBJ designed using that ratio. The material that does not fit within the code is the composite panel with the wood veneer face. It has a similar composition to an aluminum panel. Mr. Fishking said that the material comes with a ten year warranty. The material is used more in Europe, and applications of eight years indicate that the product holds up well. He said that Detroit has similar weather as the locations they have reviewed. The product is made in Spain and is used regularly in that country as well. The product has bakelite core with a phenol based veneer on the back for stability. There is a wood veneer on the face, which is coated with another phenol based product to protect it from impact. That phenol based transparent coating has the kinar resin component, which limits UV damage and fading. It is applied like a metal panel. The technology that Providence will use is a rain screen, open joint process that is a water barrier and is not seen. It is supported by aluminum struts similar to a curtain wall system. There is a hidden application but there is also an application with exposed fasteners.

Chair Kocan asked for clarification of the locations for the ambulance entry and the arrival garden. Mr. Fishking showed the plan, and located the main entry, the arrival garden, the emergency entry, and the ambulance entry.

Chair Kocan asked if the hospital would be built in one phase. Mr. Fishking said that it would be. Earthwork and foundation work would begin this fall.

Inpatients would use the Beck Road entrance as their main entry. Member Wrobel wondered about the traffic flow. Providence responded that the new Beck interchange would send most traffic down Beck Road, so this design is for ease of entrance.

Ms. McBeth said that the plan should be before the Planning Commission in September.

There was no Consent Agenda.

The Public Hearing was opened on the request of Northern Equities Group for Preliminary Site Plan, Wetland Permit, Woodland Permit, and Storm Water Management Plan approval. The subject property is located in Section 12 on Cabot Drive, north of Twelve Mile and south of Lewis Drive in the OST, Office Service Technology District. The subject property is approximately 10.73 acres and the Applicant is proposing a 51, 587 sq. ft., one-story building for speculative office use.

Planner Tim Schmitt located the project on a map. The property is located on the west side of Cabot Drive and east of the M-5 connector. To the north is the LaSalle North Technology site. Across the street are Cabot Technology North and South buildings. To the south are two long narrow parcels – one owned by Northern Equities and the other owned by MDOT and acts as the remaining right-of-way for the M-5 connector. The property and the surrounding properties are zoned OST and master planned for Office. There are five zoning exceptions in the corridor.

There are substantial woodlands on the site. There are items to address on the Final Site Plan submittal, but the Consultant recommends approval of the plan.

There are no regulated wetlands on the site, but there are areas of small wetlands that will be mitigated by the Applicant. The City’s Wetland Consultant has been working with the Applicant’s Wetland Consultant, Erin Kleckner, on mitigation issues. The buffer area is a concern. The mitigation is proposed at the Haggerty Corridor 3 site, just south of this property. This is the location of the Columbus mitigation as well. Wetland enhancements and detention basin modifications were made in the area, and it seemed appropriate for this area to house the mitigation. This is a former basin area, small in size, between a couple of wetlands.

Mr. Schmitt located the LaSalle sites and the Cabot Tech sites. He said this building is consistent with the other buildings in this portion of the park.

The Planning Review noted that the loading zone is located in the "U" shape, which is acceptable. This lot will have to be combined with the LaSalle North site, or a Master Deed Amendment will have to be made. Otherwise, a ZBA variance will be required for a lack of parking lot setback along the northern property line. Previously, Northern Equities has tended to these issues as their sites came forward.

The Landscape Review indicated that a waiver is necessary for a right-of-way berm along the M-5 connector. M-5 is rather low at this point. The Applicant is proposing to provide the landscaping.

The Traffic Review and Engineering Review both recommend approval; there are minor items to address at the time of Final Site Plan submittal.

This is one of the few remaining sites in this park. The next phase of the park is expected to follow the existing Road and Utilities Ordinance, which will identify the woodlands and wetlands ahead of time. The Applicant has proposed to mitigate all of their natural feature impacts in the appropriate fashion.

Matthew Sosin, Northern Equities, 39000 Country Club Drive, Farmington Hills, addressed the Planning Commission. He said that the response to their development has been very good. This is not really a speculative building.

There was no correspondence and no one from the audience wished to speak. Chair Kocan closed the Public Hearing.

Member Pehrson thanked the Applicant for a well designed project. He asked what the percentage of dead trees was on the site. Woodland Consultant Larry DeBrincat said that the Applicant had misidentified a number of trees that were dead. The Ordinance defines a dead tree as one with less than 15% living canopy. There are a number of trees (six) that the Consultant did not think were dead, and further, they said this was not an inclusive list. The Applicant has been asked to reassess the trees.

Member Pehrson asked about the displaced habitat. Mr. DeBrincat located a wetland area near the Cabot South parcel that was donated to the City as a preservation area. There is some upland area. There are steep slopes to the land. There is a knoll. There is a piece of land that is probably big enough for another development, but Mr. DeBrincat suggested that some of the area be placed in another preservation easement. It could be a means of compensation for clearing another site. Mr. Schmitt clarified that the Applicant does not own the MDOT property. The upland property closest to Cabot Drive is owned by the Applicant. The other property, closest to M-5, is MDOT, and may be disposed of since the continuation of M-5 is no longer planned. This Applicant is likely in line to get that right-of-way back, but without knowing the future, it would not be prudent to discuss an easement at this time. The natural features are cut in half between these two properties. The wetland on the Applicant’s property is two acres; the wetland on the MDOT property is ¾ acre. Mr. Sosin said he was not prepared to describe what is going to happen to the MDOT property at this time.

Member Pehrson asked about the drainage on the property. Mr. DeBrincat said that the site is a bowl – it drains toward the central easterly portion of the site. The parking area and the developed area are going to pick up water. Any water falling on the exterior of the site is going to drain in the same direction as it does now. The drainage impact on the off-site trees as a result of this development would be nil.

Member Pehrson asked about the berm issue. Landscape Architect Lance Shipman said that there will be a similar treatment applied to this property as the others. Things are done differently along a freeway. The Applicant has done a nice job along the freeway thus far, and the same is expected of him here. Mr. Sosin agreed and said he would do a job similar to his other projects.

Member Avdoulos asked about the wetland landscaping. John Freeland of ECT, the City’s Wetland Consultant, said that the Applicant proposed an emergent wetland to replace a forested wetland. The Applicant was asked to build a forested wetland, which would include red maples, silver maples, sycamores, swamp white oak and some other species that adapt to wetland conditions.

Member Avdoulos said that the Applicant has agreed to work with the City on a more equitable buffer. Dr. Freeland said that the Applicant proposed about 12,000 square feet of wetland buffer to replace 47,000 square feet of wetland buffer. Now the number is closer to 25,000 square feet. The enhancement of the buffer areas at the mitigation site and the replacement of the wooded wetland is an acceptable agreement to which the Applicant has agreed.

Member Avdoulos asked why the Façade Review did not approve the project. Mr. Schmitt explained that the Applicant did not submit a façade board, because he was proposing the same materials as the LaSalle North building. The Façade Consultant and the Applicant have now worked this issue out. Member Avdoulos approved of the plan and noted the continued cooperation of the Applicant.

Moved by Member Avdoulos, seconded by Member Pehrson:

In the matter of the request of Northern Equities for LaSalle Technology South, SP05-18, motion to grant approval of the Preliminary Site Plan, subject to: 1) A Planning Commission Waiver for the lack of a ROW berm along M-5 connector along the western property line; 2) The property combination or and/or Master Deed Amendment to combine the LaSalle North and the LaSalle South sites; and 3) The comments in the attached review letters being addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal; for the reason that the plan meets the intent of the Zoning Ordinance.

Chair Kocan was bothered by the clearing of all of the trees on this site. She did not hear anything about other considerations. She did not believe that the assumption should be that everything should be allowed to be cleared for development. She asked what preservation Mr. Sosin would propose.

Mr. Sosin said that only eight trees are classified as good trees. He understood that there are inconsistencies with the tree health survey, but he did not think that a revisit of that issue would yield a much different result. Mr. Sosin said that in this case, he is not maximizing the site. It is just a square lot and not much can be done with it. The site would yield another 12,000 – 15,000 square foot of building, but Northern Equities would prefer to have more green space. It is in their interest to make this a first class office park. There will be trees that stay, and there is incentive for Northern Equities to save as many trees as possible. He did not know whether any building will ever go up to the south; he did not know if they would ever procure the MDOT property. There are significant portions of this corporate park that will remain wetland and woodland. They did consider other options, but in the end, they are going to replace the trees that are being removed. Northern Equities has proposed preserving entire lots but none of their suggestions were well received by the City.

Chair Kocan asked for clarification on the building size versus the lot size. Mr. Sosin said that there are bump-outs that could have been left out of the building design. Mr. Shipman also responded, stating that the site is designed with landscape like a typical building meeting the Ordinance. With woodland replacements, the vacant land will be heavily landscaped. Mr. Sosin cited HCOC 4 and 5 as two buildings with ample landscaping.

Chair Kocan asked about the woodlands. Mr. DeBrincat said that the north half of the woodlands are of poorer quality than the south portion of the site. There are a number of dead trees. Many ash trees have been removed or have fallen. The south end is more of a hardwood variety – oak, hickory, maple, etc. The overall tree quality of Cabot South is similar to the south portion of this site.

Chair Kocan noted that the three access points are all to the north. She commented that the southerly property is owned by Northern Equities and wondered whether another access from the subject property would benefit that parcel. Mr. Schmitt responded that a similar issue happened with Cabot South; an administrative review updated those site plans to remove parking places to allow for a stub connection. With common parcel ownership, the City has less concern regarding cross access issues. Given Northern Equities’ track record, and the uncertainty of something happening with the MDOT parcel, the City is comfortable with this site plan’s omission of that cross access. It is up to the Planning Commission, if they wish enforce another access point. Then, Chair Kocan noted another access point on the plan. Mr. Sosin said that he was uncertain what would happen with the MDOT property and he preferred not to put in a stub at this time. The southerly property does have over 480 feet of frontage.

Member Cassis confirmed that the Applicant planned to plant many trees, both small and large. Member Cassis thanked the Applicant for the plan.

In the matter of the request of Northern Equities for LaSalle Technology South, SP05-18, motion to grant approval of the Preliminary Site Plan, subject to: 1) A Planning Commission Waiver for the lack of a ROW berm along M-5 connector along the western property line; 2) The property combination or and/or Master Deed Amendment to combine the LaSalle North and the LaSalle South sites; and 3) The comments in the attached review letters being addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal; for the reason that the plan meets the intent of the Zoning Ordinance.

Moved by Member Avdoulos, seconded by Member Pehrson:

Moved by Member Avdoulos, seconded by Member Wrobel:

Moved by Member Avdoulos, seconded by Member Wrobel:

The Public Hearing was opened on the request of Novi Meadow, LLC for Preliminary Site Plan, Wetland Permit and Storm Water Management Plan approval. The subject property is located in Section 14, west of Meadowbrook Road between I-96 and Twelve Mile, in the OST, Office Service Technology District. The entire site is 5.372 acres and the Applicant is proposing to construct a 21,840 sq. ft. office building.

Planner Tim Schmitt located the property on a map. He said that this property is located in front of the existing Trane facility on Meadowbrook Road. This property is in the OST corridor that was created in the 1990s. To the west is the Uptown Park project. To the south is vacant property. To the north is vacant property. The corridor is master planned for Office uses.

There is a wetland on the subject property, which will not be impacted. There is also a small wetland located south of the property. There was some question whether there was any impact to the wetland, but there is none, other than buffer impact. There are no woodlands on the property.

The Applicant has not split this property so the Planning Department treated this as two buildings on one site. The Applicant has not indicated whether he will apply for a split or a condominium.

The Planning Review noted that the loading zone requirements are not met, and the Applicant is seeking a waiver. All surrounding properties are zoned OST.

The Wetland Review indicates minor items to be addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal – regarding the southerly wetland.

The Landscape Review indicated that there are minor modifications necessary for their parking lot landscaping – they are shy of the requirement by about 200 square feet.

The Traffic, Engineering and Fire reviews indicated minor items to be addressed at the time of Final Site Plan submittal.

Chad McCormick of Quadrants, 49397 Schaefer Ave, Wixom, addressed the Planning Commission. He represented Mr. William Clark. He introduced Brian Williams of Quadrants.

Member Pehrson read the correspondence in to the record:

Joseph Marcucci, 27487 Meadowbrook: Northerly neighbor. He encountered easement and landscape problems with the Trane project. He requested that the slope of his driveway be restored, the landscaping be restored and four trees be re-established away from his septic field.

Chair Kocan closed the Public Hearing after determining no one from the audience wished to speak.

Member Avdoulos noted that the Quadrants building is shy of parking, but the Trane building has excess parking. With this property functioning as one parcel, this is acceptable. There would be many Ordinance issues if there is a future property split.

Member Avdoulos liked that the plan is off to the side and fronting Meadowbrook Road. He liked the greenspace in the front. He thought the property flowed well. Mr. Schmitt explained that the turning radius issue posed by the Fire Department has been resolved. Their only remaining issue is the naming of the project. Member Avdoulos questioned whether one portion of the design created a "dead end" and a fire truck would have to back out. Mr. Schmitt responded that the Fire Marshal has accepted the design with the combination of the eyebrow and the stub relocation.

Member Avdoulos wanted to ensure that the neighbor was not encroached upon. Mr. Schmitt said that the entrance to this property is not changing. Mr. Schmitt did not know the history of the paving of Meadowbrook Road. He said that the City can not do anything about the landscaping issue without a sanitary easement or something of that nature. There is a requirement of trees being planted every 35 feet around the perimeter of a parking lot.

Member Avdoulos noted that the Applicant provided a response letter that said they would comply with all of the review comments.

Member Cassis noted that Meadowbrook Road is now a nice north-south route. He wondered what would happen once this area was completely built up, when Meadowbrook is still just a two-lane road. Mr. Schmitt responded that each property is required to provide taper and decel lanes as necessary and as warranted. The City did resurface the road recently, and Mr. Schmitt noted that there is a dedicated left-hand turn lane. The City does anticipate in/out movements throughout the corridor. The City is acquiring right-of-ways as these projects come forward.

Member Cassis thought it seemed like the City is encouraging these developments, but only requiring something like an eight-to-ten foot taper. Then, once everything is built up, the City will be encouraged to spend the money to widen the road. Mr. Schmitt responded that the City has planned for this road to be three lanes, and there is no assumption that any larger road would be necessary. He said if Trinity Hospital came forward with a hospital plan for their 100 +/- acres, they would be required to make substantial road improvements. Tapers next to tapers become a through lane, and that is then projected throughout the corridor. Then, there may be a dedicated right-hand turning lane throughout the length of the corridor. Each project has its own improvements. The City does not anticipate having to spend great amounts of money to widen this road. With the completion of M-5 and Twelve Mile, the majority of the traffic will be on those roads.

Member Cassis questioned what would happen if Trinity did come forward. Mr. Schmitt said that would be considered a substantial project. Quadrants must provide a taper, based on their projected traffic.

Member Cassis understood that Quadrants has provided according to their legal obligations. He was concerned, however, about the narrow, two-lane design of Meadowbrook Road. He anticipated the City having to spend a great deal of money on this road in the future.

Member Wrobel confirmed with Mr. Schmitt that his prediction was most people will travel north on Meadowbrook Road to Twelve Mile. Member Wrobel was concerned about the southbound traffic on Meadowbrook. Between Twelve Mile and Grand River it backs up daily. This is a narrow road and a narrow bridge. Mr. Schmitt responded that the bridge determines how big the road will ultimately become. Member Wrobel asked again about the direction of the traffic flow. Civil Engineer Ben Croy responded that the traffic volumes of this project were considered, and it was determined that what the Applicant has provided is what is necessary. A City like Novi is expected to have road upgrades over time. Meadowbrook Road has three-lane sections, and someday it may be five, but this Applicant can not be expected to provide at that level.

Member Pehrson asked about the landscaping. Landscape Architect Lance Shipman responded that he has met with the Applicant and they understand the issue. They have not submitted a revised plan but he understood that they were working on a plan. The Applicant responded that they are confident they can meet the requirements.

Member Pehrson asked why there isn’t a secondary access onto Meadowbrook Road. Mr. Schmitt responded that from a practical standpoint, the Trane Applicant likely always planned for a secondary building, and the City was probably instrumental in discouraging multiple curb cuts onto Meadowbrook Road.

Member Pehrson asked whether there were any remedies available to Mr. Marcucci. He assumed that the slope of the neighbor’s property should have been taken care of with the Trane development. Mr. Shipman replied that there are no proposed alterations to this project’s entrance, and therefore it does not have an effect on the neighbor. Mr. Shipman thought that the landscaping issue is now resolved; the neighbor was just discussing his displeasure in the length of time it took for the resolution to occur. Mr. Shipman assumed that the neighbor’s septic is in the rear of the home, and again, is not affected by this project. Mr. Shipman recommended that the neighbor contact Neighborhood Services for resolution with Trane project issues.

Moved by Member Pehrson, seconded by Member Wrobel:

Chair Kocan asked why there was no berm between this project and the neighbor. Mr. Shipman responded that the home is on an OST parcel. The Ordinance refers to "zoning," not "use." Chair Kocan felt for the neighbor and appreciated anything that the Staff could do to be proactive to help resolve the neighbor’s issues.

Chair Kocan understood that this property could not be split because of the violations of the Ordinance a split would bring. Mr. McCormick agreed, and said any future change would have to be a condo.

Chair Kocan asked whether the secondary access was for emergency purposes. Mr. Schmitt said it was his understanding that it is an open secondary access point. He did not believe it was ever proposed to be a gate.

Chair Kocan said that there is a discrepancy on the landscape plans. One plan depicts an evergreen border, and another plan shows deciduous trees. Mr. Shipman explained that the landscape plan is what is reviewed for landscaping purposes. Oftentimes the other plans, e.g., engineering, may show landscape configurations to give their plan dimension, but they don’t match what the landscape architect has provided for the actual landscape plan. They are "illustrative interpretations." The LP-1 page takes precedence.

Chair Kocan asked about the building’s height. Mr. Schmitt replied that it is a standard two-story building (thirty feet from ground to roof deck) with a parapet wall that adds to the height and is for screening the rooftop units. Chair Kocan asked Mr. Schmitt to follow up with the Applicant to find out what the floor to ceiling height is.

Chair Kocan understood that there will not be runoff to the Trane property – this property will have underground storage. A small portion of the pavement drains to the north. Mr. Croy said that the underground storage will drain to Meadowbrook Road.

Chair Kocan recalled that the review of the reconstruction of Meadowbrook Road was contentious at the City Council level. Some thought that more planning should occur, which would include review of the road width. However, Meadowbrook Road was in such a state of disrepair, the project went forward. The three lanes should work, Chair Kocan thought.

Chair Kocan noted that the parking has been taken into consideration already, if in fact Trane comes forward with a warehouse addition. Mr. Schmitt said that the Planning Department will have discussions with that Applicant when the time comes.

Member Avdoulos stated his concern with Meadowbrook Road was, if something were in the works that would affect this Applicant or the neighbor now, he thought it should be on the table. As it stands, Member Avdoulos had no issues with the road. Member Avdoulos said that the design of the building is 15 feet – floor to floor. There is a ten-foot ceiling. It is 35 feet to the parapet. The design is well within the Ordinance. This building will complement the Trane Building.

Member Cassis noted that there are a number of projects on Meadowbrook, and many more commercial, industrial and offices will be forthcoming. There is a college. Grand River and Meadowbrook has a dealership. There is the Gateway project. There is the Brooktown project. Eleven Mile is used as a cross over from Novi Town Center and the movies. Additionally, there is a professional building coming to the old asphalt property. FedEx is on Meadowbrook. This road and its uses are far different than, say, Beck Road, which is more residential in nature. He wished to emphasize the true nature of this road and its potential need to be more than just a three-lane road. Chair Kocan suggested that this be part of the future review of the Thoroughfare Plan when the next Master Plan update occurs.

Moved by Member Pehrson, seconded by Member Wrobel:

Moved by Member Pehrson, seconded by Member Wrobel:

Chair Kocan called for a short break.

Consideration on the request of Jeffrey Scott Architects for Preliminary Site Plan and Stormwater Management Plan approval. The subject property is located in Section 15, south of Twelve Mile and east of Taft Road and the CSX railroad in the OST, Office Service Technology Center District. The subject property is 24.4 acres and the Applicant is proposing a second story 10,552 square foot addition and a 38,607 square foot office and molding hall addition.

Planner Mark Spencer located the property on a map. It is south of Twelve Mile between Taft Road and Cabaret Drive. Liberty Park is to the north. Vacant land is to the east, south and west. Further west are single family homes on large lots. The north is zoned R-1 - One Family Residential and R-A - Residential Acreage. The east is zoned OST - Planned Office Service Technology. The south and west are zoned R-A - Residential Acreage. The parcel is in a proposed office use area in the Master Plan for Land Use 2004.

The potential wetlands map indicates wetlands are located on the west side of the site adjacent to the Walled Lake Branch of the Rouge River. The site plan depicts wetlands located in a conservation easement in the northern portion of the site and a small wetland exists along the east property line that is not depicted on the site plan. The wetlands along the eastern boundary were not known at the time of the review.

The site contains medium cover regulated woodlands in the northern portion of the site. No natural features habitat areas are located on the site

The Applicant proposes two building additions to the existing Husky Injection Molding Systems building. Phase One is a 10,552 square foot second story office addition to the existing office portion of the building.

Phase Two is a 38,607 square foot addition, with 9,072 square feet of office space and 29,535 square feet of industrial space. The proposed Phase Two parking lot is designed to use "bio-swales" and porous pavers to reduce runoff.

Plans for the initial construction of the 90,000 square foot building were approved in 1998. The Zoning Board of Appeals approved a variance for the original building height exceeding the allowed height of 42 feet. The Ordinance has since been modified to allow a taller building height of up to 65 feet for this location. Significant areas of woodlands and wetlands were retained as a part of the initial approval, and no woodlands or wetlands are to be impacted by the proposed building addition. Expansion of the building is important to help retain this business in the City of Novi.

The Planning Department Staff cannot recommend approval due to the east side yard setback encroachment of 13.5 feet and the shortage of 26 parking spaces for Phase One. Staff would support approval if the Applicant obtained variances from the ZBA for the setback encroachment and the parking space shortage. The proposed Phase Two building has a height of 55.5 feet. Buildings are permitted up to 65 feet in height in the OST District, but all setbacks must be increased by 2 feet for every one-foot of building height over 46 feet, thus the required setbacks increase from 50 feet to 69 feet. The east side of the proposed Phase Two building is proposed to be located 55.5 feet from the property line an encroachment of 13.5 feet into the required setback. A variance must be obtained from the ZBA to permit this encroachment and the Applicant has stated a desire to pursue that variance. Staff supports a variance because there is no other practical way to build this type of addition onto the building and allow them to have an overhead crane within the building; any other design would be logistically inferior.

As depicted on the site plan, Phase One would be short 26 parking spaces. A variance would be required from the ZBA to permit this shortage. Staff supports granting a variance on the condition that the parking spaces are provided in Phase Two. Other minor corrections can be addressed on the Final Site Plan. It appears that there will be no encroachment into any regulated wetlands, but some wetland buffer encroachment is proposed along the east property line. A Wetland Permit is not required. The City’s Wetland Consultant is asking the Applicant to provide wetland and buffer information for the wetland located along the east property line and to avoid any wetland buffer impact if at all practical. Minor modifications may be practical that can address this request.

No Woodland Permit is required. The Site Plan meets Ordinance requirements with a few minor corrections to be corrected on the Final Site Plan.

The Landscaping Plan proposes evergreen trees in place of canopy trees for the parking lot perimeter. This would require the Planning Commission to approve a waiver of the canopy tree requirement. The landscape plan is recommended for approval subject to minor corrections and additions at the time of Final Site Plan submittal.

The City’s Traffic Consultant recommended approval of the preliminary site plan but asked if the Applicant could reduce some of the pavement along the proposed ring road. It is proposed at thirty feet, and there may be possibility to narrow the straight-a-way sections to 24 feet. An area by the cul-de-sac may be reconfigured to reduce pavement as well.

The Applicant is proposing porous pavers and bio swales in the Phase Two parking lot to reduce the amount of run-off from the site. The use of the pavers would require a City Council waiver of the parking lot paving requirements. Engineering recommends approval of the preliminary site plan contingent upon obtaining the City Council waiver and correcting minor items on the Final Site Plan.

The proposed façade meets the Ordinance requirements since it will match the existing building materials.

The Fire Department recommended approval of the site plan.

The Applicant did make minor modifications to the plan that was provided to the Planning Commission for review.

The Final Site Plan will incorporate the rest of the anticipated changes.

Jeff Scott, Scott Architects, 32316 Grand River, Farmington, represented the Applicant. Originally, only the second story addition was going to be proposed however, upon speaking with Staff, it was determined that a phased program would make better sense. Husky is comfortable with the number of parking spaces proposed for Phase One. The facility acts as a showroom for injection molding machines for the United States. The manufacturing area houses a lot of machinery void of human activity. The office personnel are oftentimes on the road. The parking needs will be met with the 124 spaces that are proposed with Phase One.

Mr. Scott said this is an environmentally friendly company and they do not wish to impact the environment any more than necessary. They plan to seek a variance for the Phase One parking spaces. They will be able to demonstrate on Phase Two that the parking can be placed on the site without impacting the neighboring parcels. The building was originally designed structurally to handle this addition.

One issue that does exist is the fact that the original plan was designed for a ten-year storm event. At the time the plan did provide for excess capacity. Now the design requirements are for 100-year events. Now the existing design falls short of the rim capacity for the system. They are part of an off-site detention system, but there is a sedimentation basin in place in the enhanced wetland. The plan is to leave that area untouched and maintain the current capacity. Now they are looking into different types of pavement design, which will be a lead type, environmentally friendly pavement design which minimizes the runoff. That would be the parking field for Phase Two. By going to that type of system Husky is able to reach the volumes necessary for the rim system for Phases One and Two under the current Novi Ordinance. Some number crunching will occur in order to satisfy the Engineering Department; preliminary numbers have already been provided. This is somewhat of a unique system.

Mr. Scott introduced John Florian of Husky and Jason Fochman of Scott Architects.

Mr. Scott said that they have also discussed narrowing the road. There are very large machines that come into the site on an annual basis. Large trailers will enter the site, carrying the large molds for the machines. Though it is not a common occurrence, nonetheless certain traffic movements must be maintained – along the drive and by the building near the point of the railroad spur. There is some likelihood of varying the width of the drive in some areas. There are wetlands offsite, and their buffers encroach this site. There are elevation issues, and therefore retaining walls are proposed for the easterly property line, in the buffer area. The road could be knocked down some in this area, but when a very large truck carrying a large mold comes through, Mr. Scott said that it was important to him to make sure that a narrower road does not cause any kind of gridlock. The thirty-foot wide road is accommodating. They would like address this on the Final Site Plan.

Mr. Scott said that the northerly wetland’s buffer area is more on their property. The southerly wetland’s buffer barely catches the edge. The retaining wall does intersect part of the buffer. This can possibly be minimized along the straight-a-way. Mr. Scott was confident that Husky would maximize the design.

Mr. Scott understood that there was concern for the amount of pavement near the three overhead doors. He pointed to locations where trucks need to have access. He did not see where there were options for reducing pavement in that area.

Mr. Scott said that the encroachment of the setback is a function of how the existing structure is continued on to where the Applicant needs to follow through. That bay is where the 250-ton crane is housed. It is necessary to get the full range of the crane. They must seek the 13’6" variance.

The building materials will match the existing building.

Mr. Scott said that they are requesting to continue the existing landscape theme – therefore evergreens are requested instead of canopy trees.

Member Avdoulos said that the Applicant has been sensitive to his site. The design is well thought out. The Applicant has tried to reason out all of the concerns. The height of the second story addition creates the setback issue, and Member Avdoulos agreed with Staff that this request was acceptable. The site is next to a railroad. It is keeping within the intent of the 65-foot height limitation. Chair Kocan said that the variance is for the east property line. Member Avdoulos said that for those same reasons, he could support their request.

Member Avdoulos asked about the retaining wall. Wetland Consultant, Dr. John Freeland, replied that the small wetlands on the east side did not show up on the Preliminary Site Plan or the revised Preliminary Site Plan. Now the plans have been revised. They are not high quality wetlands. They are close enough to the property line that they need to be inventoried and shown on the plan. He expected the wetland buffer impact. He said there might be some temporary wetland impact when the retaining wall is being built. He would like to continue that dialogue with the Applicant. The buffer is not a high quality habitat. It is an old field, early successional weedy species. If the width of the road were important for the safe operation of traffic, he thought that should be considered a higher priority. Member Avdoulos had no issue with the retaining wall or the width of the road.

Member Avdoulos looked at the Phase Two thirty-foot bays. To clip off the corner to pull the road back or to meander the road could create difficult situations. He sympathized with the Applicant’s plight.

Member Avdoulos asked about timing of the phases. Mr. Florian responded. His address was stated as 480 Queens Street, South Bolton, Ontario. Phase One would begin spring 2006. They may take two to three years to get from Phase One to Phase Two. They have three campuses. The others are in Shanghai and Luxembourg. These additions move the Novi campus to the forefront.

Member Avdoulos asked about Husky’s intent to be environmentally sensitive. Mr. Florian said that many parts of the building are already energy efficient. It is too late to bring them to LEED certification because they are at 110,000 square feet. Another 40,000 square feet will be added, and Mr. Florian did not see how he could mitigate what has previously been constructed.

Mr. Florian said that the porous pavers address two issues at once – the shortage of a sedimentation pond and they help the site be more environmentally friendly. Mr. Croy said that although the Applicant states that the design works, they will have to verify a few items, and more work will need to be done on the site. They might not need to account for the infiltration of the pavers. There are a few ways the Applicant can go, and there are back-up plans they can fall back on.

Member Avdoulos was comfortable with the parking being accommodated with Phase Two. He encouraged them to make the parking lot only the size they need it to be. He said that the Planning Commission has been encouraging the concept of landbanking.

Member Avdoulos was in concert with the request of the Applicant to continue with the original landscaping concept. Mr. Shipman said the evergreens will also serve as additional screening.

Member Avdoulos thought that the fire apparatus would have no problem navigating around the site. He also noted that the woodlands would not be impacted. He said that this was a nice facility that complements what is already there. Member Avdoulos said that the parking design displays a bit of European/Canadian technology, referencing Mr. Florian’s nationality.

Moved by Member Avdoulos, seconded by Member Pehrson:

Member Pehrson asked the size of the machines that must come to the property. Mr. Florian said that the machines come in pieces. He said a part of a clamp could weigh 180 tons. Sometimes the railroad spur is used to bring in these parts.

Member Pehrson asked again about the road. Mr. Florian responded that they were going to review that issue for the straight-a-way. Member Pehrson said that the road could be squeezed up a little bit and not harm or hamper the movement of the machinery.

Member Cassis said this was a great site. He was pleased with the design. He thought that the City and the State would be pleased to see this Canadian neighbor bringing jobs to the United States.

Chair Kocan thanked the Applicant for expanding their Novi operation and being environmentally sensitive. Chair Kocan recalled that the Applicant has approached the City regarding landbanking, though it is not allowed in the OST District. There will be new Ordinance language that should come forward on that subject sometime soon. She confirmed with the City Attorney that Husky would be able to take advantage of any Ordinance amendment regarding landbanking.

Chair Kocan asked if the motion should include, "The Applicant continuing to work with the Wetland Consultant regarding buffer impacts and/or restoration." The maker and seconder of the motion agreed.

Chair Kocan asked when the clock starts on a phasing project. Director of Planning Barbara McBeth responded that the City would expect that Phase One would begin, and beyond that certificate of occupancy, the City would expect the next phase to begin, or the Applicant could come back and ask for an extension. There are also stipulations in the performance guarantee Ordinance language.

Chair Kocan hoped that additional information would be available in the City Council packet for the paver request that would provide substantiation for the request. Mr. Croy said some of the information has already been received. The Applicant will likely narrow down their product choice and information on that product will be provided to City Council.

Chair Kocan hoped that there was a mechanism in the Ordinance language that will facilitate the ZBA request. Though she did not hear a hardship stated, perhaps it is the type of equipment within the building requires a building expansion in order to expand the business. She said that there must rationale to justify the request.

Member Meyer said that the ZBA may look at the issue from the point of view that the property has an odd lot size. Member Meyer has been on the site and said the site is extraordinary.

Moved by Member Avdoulos, seconded by Member Pehrson:

The Planning Commission members provided their grammatical corrections for incorporation into the minutes. Additionally, Chair Kocan noted that on page four, a friendly amendment was not included to the motion. She said that there should be a sixth stipulation that the site plan take into consideration the Stucky Vitale letter of June 16, 2005.

Moved by Member Pehrson, seconded by Member Cassis:

There were no Consent Agenda Removals for Commission Action.

There were no Matters for Discussion.

Chair Kocan said that officer and Committee appointments would be made at the next meeting. She said that the Planning Commission needs to review their budget, specifically the training aspect.

No one from the audience wished to speak.

Moved by Member Pehrson,

The meeting adjourned at 10:44 p.m.

TUE 08/02/05 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 7:30 PM

MON 08/08/05 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 PM

WED 08/10/05 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:30 PM

MON 08/15/05 IMPLEMENTATION MEETING 6:00 PM

MON 08/22/05 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 PM

WED 08/24/05 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:30 PM

MON 09/05/05 CITY OFFICES CLOSED

MON 09/12/05 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 PM

TUE 09/13/05 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 7:30 PM

WED 09/14/05 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:30 PM

MON 09/26/05 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 PM

WED 09/28/05 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 7:30 PM

Transcribed by Jane L. Schimpf, August 25, 2005 Signature on File

Date approved: September 15, 2005 Angela Pawlowski, Planning Assistant Date